[Control center team in interdisciplinary multimodal pain therapy]. / Schaltzentrale Team in der interdisziplinären multimodalen Schmerztherapie.

The topic of this article is the team in interdisciplinary multimodal pain therapy (IMPT) in the context of the development of the team concept. The starting points are historical developments, both social and scientific. After World War II numerous war victims continued to suffer from persistent pain. On the part of medicine, the consequences were the failure of the usual procedures for acute pain and the resulting helplessness. Both the concept of pain as a symptom of physical injury and also the previous treatment options were no longer adequate. Very early on an interdisciplinary approach to pain management was organized. This involved the communication of experts from various disciplines with very different competencies and opinions. Various medical disciplines and psychotherapy were the core subjects. Crucial for functioning teams is an effective cooperation and interaction. Related organizational issues, conflicts, peculiarities, and possibilities for solutions are presented. In the meantime, IMPT as a procedure has become a regular service provided in health care.

Developing a core outcome domain set to assessing effectiveness of interdisciplinary multimodal pain therapy: the VAPAIN consensus statement on core outcome domains.

Interdisciplinary multimodal pain therapy (IMPT) is a biopsychosocial treatment approach for patients with chronic pain that comprises at least psychological and physiotherapeutic interventions. Core outcome sets (COSs) are currently developed in different medical fields to standardize and improve the selection of outcome domains, and measurement instruments in clinical trials, to make trial results meaningful, to pool trial results, and to allow indirect comparison between interventions. The objective of this study was to develop a COS of patient-relevant outcome domains for chronic pain in IMPT clinical trials. An international, multiprofessional panel (patient representatives [n = 5], physicians specialized in pain medicine [n = 5], physiotherapists [n = 5], clinical psychologists [n = 5], and methodological researchers [n = 5]) was recruited for a 3-stage consensus study, which consisted of a mixed-method approach comprising an exploratory systematic review, a preparing online survey to identify important outcome domains, a face-to-face consensus meeting to agree on COS domains, and a second online survey (Delphi) establishing agreement on definitions for the domains included. The panel agreed on the following 8 domains to be included into the COS for IMPT: pain intensity, pain frequency, physical activity, emotional wellbeing, satisfaction with social roles and activities, productivity (paid and unpaid, at home and at work, inclusive presentism and absenteeism), health-related quality of life, and patient's perception of treatment goal achievement. The complexity of chronic pain in a biopsychosocial context is reflected in the current recommendation and includes physical, mental, and social outcomes. In a subsequent step, measurement instruments will be identified via systematic reviews.

Efficacy of multicomponent treatment in fibromyalgia syndrome: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled clinical trials.

OBJECTIVE: To systematically review the efficacy of multicomponent treatment of fibromyalgia syndrome (FMS). METHODS: We screened Medline, PsychINFO, Scopus, and the Cochrane Library (through December 2007), as well as reference sections of original studies, reviews, and evidence-based guidelines. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on the multicomponent treatment (at least 1 educational or other psychological therapy with at least 1 exercise therapy) of FMS were analyzed. RESULTS: We included 9 (of 14) RCTs with 1,119 subjects (median treatment time 24 hours) in the meta-analysis. Effects were summarized using standardized mean differences (SMDs) or weighted mean differences (WMDs). There was strong evidence that multicomponent treatment reduces pain (SMD -0.37; 95% confidence interval [95% CI] -0.62, -0.13), fatigue (WMD -0.85; 95% CI -1.50, -0.20), depressive symptoms (SMD -0.67; 95% CI -1.08, -0.26), and limitations to health-related quality of life (HRQOL) (SMD -0.59; 95% CI -0.90, -0.27) and improves self-efficacy pain (SMD 0.54; 95% CI 0.26, 0.82) and physical fitness (SMD 0.30; 95% CI 0.02, 0.57) at posttreatment. There was no evidence of its efficacy on pain, fatigue, sleep disturbances, depressive symptoms, HRQOL, or self-efficacy pain in the long term. There was strong evidence that positive effects on physical fitness (SMD 0.30; 95% CI 0.09, 0.51) can be maintained in the long term (median followup 7 months). CONCLUSIONS: There is strong evidence that multicomponent treatment has beneficial short-term effects on the key symptoms of FMS. Strategies to maintain the benefits of multicomponent treatment in the long term need to be developed.

Management of fibromyalgia syndrome--an interdisciplinary evidence-based guideline.

The prevalence of fibromyalgia syndrome (FMS) of 1-2% in the general population associated with high disease-related costs and the conflicting data on treatment effectiveness had led to the development of evidence-based guidelines designed to provide patients and physicians guidance in selecting among the alternatives. Until now no evidence-based interdisciplinary (including patients) guideline for the management of FMS was available in Europe. Therefore a guideline for the management of fibromyalgia syndrome (FMS) was developed by 13 German medical and psychological associations and two patient self-help organisations. The task was coordinated by two German scientific umbrella organisations, the Association of the Scientific Medical Societies in Germany AWMF and the German Interdisciplinary Association of Pain Therapy DIVS. A systematic search of the literature including all controlled studies, systematic reviews and meta-analyses of pharmacological and non-pharmacological treatments of FMS was performed in the Cochrane Library (1993-12/2006), Medline (1980-12/2006), PsychInfo (1966-12/2006) and Scopus (1980-12/ 2006). Levels of evidence were assigned according to the classification system of the Oxford-Centre for Evidence Based Medicine. Grading of the strengths of recommendations was done according to the German program for disease management guidelines. Standardized procedures were used to reach a consensus on recommendations. The guideline was reviewed and finally approved by the boards of the societies involved and published online by the AWMF on april 25, 2008: http://www.uni-duesseldorf.de/AWMF/ll/041-004.htm. A short version of the guideline for patients is available as well: http://www.uni-duesseldorf.de/AWMF/ll/041-004p.htm. The following procedures in the management of fms were strongly recommended: information on diagnosis and therapeutic options and patient-centered communication, aerobic exercise, cognitive and operant behavioural therapy, multicomponent treatment and amitriptyline. Based on expert opinion, a stepwise FMS-management was proposed. Step 1 comprises confirming the diagnosis and patient education and treatment of physical or mental comorbidities or aerobic exercise or cognitive behavioural therapy or amitriptyline. Step 2 includes multicomponent treatment. Step 3 comprises no further treatment or self-management (aerobic exercise, stress management) and/or booster multicomponent therapy and/or pharmacological therapy (duloxetine or fluoxetine or paroxetine or pregabalin or tramadol/aminoacetophen) and/or psychotherapy (hypnotherapy or written emotional disclosure) and/or physical therapy (balneotherapy or whole body heat therapy) and/or complementary therapies (homeopathy or vegetarian diet). The choice of treatment options should be based on informed decision-making and respect of the patients' preferences.