A qualitative evaluation of the oncologists', neurologists', and pain specialists' views on the management and care of chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy in The Netherlands.

PURPOSE: In treating cancer, different chemotherapy regimens cause chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy (CIPN). Despite recent international guidelines, a gold standard for diagnosis, treatment, and care is lacking. To identify the current clinical practice and the physicians' point of view and ideas for improvement, we evaluated CIPN care by interviewing different specialists involved. METHODS: We performed semi-structured, audio-recorded, transcribed, and coded interviews with a purposive sample of oncologists, pain specialists, and neurologists involved in CIPN patients' care. Data is analyzed by a constant comparative method for content analysis, using ATLAS.ti software. Codes, categories, and themes are extracted, generating common denominators and conclusions. RESULTS: With oncologists, pain specialists, and neurologists, nine, nine, and eight interviews were taken respectively (including three, two, and two interviews after thematic saturation occurred). While useful preventive measures and predictors are lacking, patient education (e.g., on symptoms and timely reporting) is deemed pivotal, as is low-threshold screening (e.g., anamnesis and questionnaires). Diagnosis focusses on a temporal relationship to chemotherapy, with adjuvant testing (e.g., EMG) used in severe or atypical cases. Symptomatic antineuropathic and topical medication are often prescribed, but personalized and multidimensional care based on individual symptoms and preferences is highly valued. The limited efficacy of existing treatments, and the lack of standardized protocols, interdisciplinary coordination, and awareness among healthcare providers pose significant challenges. CONCLUSION: Besides the obvious need for better therapeutic options, and multidisciplinary exploration of patients' perspectives, a structured and collaborative approach towards diagnosis, treatment, referral, and follow-up, nurtured by improving knowledge and use of existing CIPN guidelines, could enhance care.

Skin temperature measured by infrared thermography after ultrasound-guided blockade of the sciatic nerve.

BACKGROUND: In the present study, we assessed the relationship between subgluteal sciatic nerve blocking and skin temperature by infrared thermography in the lower extremity. We hypothesized that blocking the sciatic nerve will lead to an increase in temperature, and that this will correlate with existing sensory block tests. METHODS: We studied 18 healthy individuals undergoing orthopaedic surgery of the foot under ultrasound-guided subgluteal blockade of the sciatic nerve with 30 ml ropivacaine 7.5 mg/ml. Skin temperature was measured on the toes, the dorsal and plantar side of the foot, the malleoli, and the lateral side of the lower leg, just before sciatic nerve blockade and at 10-min intervals thereafter. RESULTS: Baseline skin temperatures showed a significant distal-to-proximal gradient. After sciatic block, temperatures on the blocked side increased significantly in the toes and foot. When comparing pinprick to skin temperature in a receiver operating curve, there was an AUC of 85.9% (95% confidence interval = 83.7-88.2%, P < 0.001). The medial malleolus (not being innervated by the sciatic nerve) showed no significant difference to the lateral. CONCLUSIONS: After sciatic nerve block, temperatures of the foot increased significantly. There was a good correlation between pinprick testing and infrared temperature measurement. This makes infrared skin temperature measuring a good test in determining block success when sensory testing is impossible.

The relation between skin temperature increase and sensory block height in spinal anaesthesia using infrared thermography.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the feasibility of determining the extent of sympathetic blockade by skin temperature measurement with infrared thermography and relate the cranial extent of the temperature increase to that of the sensory block after spinal anaesthesia. METHODS: Before and 5, 10 and 20 min after the administration of spinal anaesthesia, skin temperatures were measured with infrared thermography at the dermatomes T2-L3, in 12 male patients scheduled for lower limb surgery. The most cephalad dermatome at which sensory blockade occurred was related to the dermatome at which the largest temperature jump (corrected for baseline temperature) occurred. RESULTS: The baseline temperatures showed considerable variation across the dermatomes, being lower below T12 than at the thoracic dermatomes. The mean difference between the level of the cephalad skin temperature elevation front (mean 1.03 °C, SD 0.8 °C) and cranial sensory block height was 0.10 dermatomes (SD 1.16), correlation coefficient (0.88, P<0.001). CONCLUSION: The varying baseline temperatures across the trunk, the limited sympathetic block-induced increase in skin temperature at the trunk and the difficult control of influences from the surroundings partly obscured the extent of the skin temperature increase and its correlation to sensory block height. These factors have to be controlled to improve the use of infrared cameras as an easy bedside tool for predicting the cranial extent of (sympathetic blockade during) spinal anaesthesia.