RESUMO
BACKGROUND/IMPORTANCE: Chronic pain affects many people globally, requiring alternative management strategies. Psilocybin is gaining attention for its potential in chronic pain management despite being classified as Schedule I. OBJECTIVE: This systematic review critically evaluates the evidence for psilocybin, a Schedule I substance, in the treatment of chronic pain. The exact purpose of the review is to assess the impact of psilocybin on chronic pain relief, focusing on dosing protocols, treated conditions, and patient outcomes. EVIDENCE REVIEW: A comprehensive review of PubMed, CINAHL, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, and EMBASE was conducted up to January 2024. Eligibility criteria included studies evaluating psilocybin for chronic pain management. The risk of bias was assessed using the MASTER (MethodologicAl STandards for Epidemiological Research) scale, and the strength of evidence was graded using GRADE (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation). FINDINGS: The review identified 28 relevant studies focusing on dosing, treated conditions, and outcomes. The majority of the included studies (76.2%) were of low or very low quality. Several studies with moderate-to-low-quality evidence utilized a 0.14 mg/kg dosing protocol. The findings suggest promise for the use of psilocybin in chronic pain relief, though the quality of evidence is generally low. CONCLUSIONS: The current research shows potential for psilocybin as a treatment option for chronic pain relief. However, methodological issues and a lack of high-quality evidence underscore the need for further investigations with standardized protocols. Despite these limitations, the potential for psilocybin in chronic pain management is encouraging. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42023493823.
RESUMO
Spasticity is a potentially debilitating symptom of various acquired and congenital neurologic pathologies that, without adequate treatment, may lead to long-term disability, compromise functional independence, and negatively impact mental health. Several conservative as well as non-nerve targeted surgical strategies have been developed for the treatment of spasticity, but these may be associated with significant drawbacks, such as adverse side effects to medication, device dependence on intrathecal baclofen pumps, and inadequate relief with tendon-based procedures. In these circumstances, patients may benefit from nerve-targeted surgical interventions such as (i) selective dorsal rhizotomy, (ii) hyperselective neurectomy, and (iii) nerve transfer. When selecting the appropriate surgical approach, preoperative patient characteristics, as well as the risks and benefits of nerve-targeted surgical intervention, must be carefully evaluated. Here, we review the current evidence on the efficacy of these nerve-targeted surgical approaches for treating spasticity across various congenital and acquired neurologic pathologies.
Assuntos
Espasticidade Muscular , Rizotomia , Humanos , Espasticidade Muscular/cirurgia , Rizotomia/métodos , Procedimentos Neurocirúrgicos/métodos , Transferência de Nervo/métodosRESUMO
Objective: To examine the immediate effects of a comprehensive pain course on medical students' pre-existing perceptions and attitudes toward pain patients and opioid management. Methods: First-year medical students at a major academic medical center enrolled in a required pre-clerkship pain course in June 2020 and completed pre- and post-course online surveys with Likert-scale questions about their attitudes toward pain management and opioid-related issues. Additionally, the surveys included a free-text question where the students listed the first five words that came to mind when hearing the word "opioids". These words were categorized as "professional" or "lay" words and further as having "positive", "negative", or "neutral" connotations. Data analyses included descriptive statistics, as well as non-parametric and parametric tests. Results: Fifty-four of the 119 students responded to pretest and posttest surveys and were included in paired analyses. There was a significant difference between the number of professional words used before (M=1.21, SD=0.97) and after the course (M=2.40 SD=1.33); t(52)=-6.39, P<0.001. Students also used more lay-positive words after the course (M=0.81, SD=0.63) than they used pre-course (M=0.23, SD=0.43); t(51)=-5.98, P<0.001. Students' post-course responses to several key Likert-scale questions showed significant shifts toward more positive attitudes about caring for patients with pain. For example, students acknowledged greater comfort in providing opioids for chronic pain (P<0.001) where appropriate, and enhanced interest in handling complex pain cases (P<0.001). Conclusion: Results showed that a comprehensive, multi-disciplinary pain course could greatly enhance first-year medical students' attitudes toward pain management, chronic pain patients, and the complex issues surrounding opioids.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Opioid prescribing in the United States is decreasing, however, the opioid epidemic is continuing at an uncontrollable rate. Available data show a significant number of opioid deaths, primarily associated with illicit fentanyl use. It is interesting to also note that the data show no clear correlation between opioid prescribing (either number of prescriptions or morphine milligram equivalent [MME] per capita), opioid hospitalizations, and deaths. Furthermore, the data suggest that the 2016 guidelines from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) have resulted in notable problems including increased hospitalizations and mental health disorders due to the lack of appropriate opioid prescribing as well as inaptly rapid tapering or weaning processes. Consequently, when examined in light of other policies and complications caused by COVID-19, a fourth wave of the opioid epidemic has been emerging. OBJECTIVES: In light of this, we herein seek to provide guidance for the prescription of opioids for the management of chronic non-cancer pain. These clinical practice guidelines are based upon a systematic review of both clinical and epidemiological evidence and have been developed by a panel of multidisciplinary experts assessing the quality of the evidence and the strength of recommendations and offer a clear explanation of logical relationships between various care options and health outcomes. METHODS: The methods utilized included the development of objectives and key questions for the various facets of opioid prescribing practice. Also utilized were employment of trustworthy standards, and appropriate disclosures of conflicts of interest(s). The literature pertaining to opioid use, abuse, effectiveness, and adverse consequences was reviewed. The recommendations were developed after the appropriate review of text and questions by a panel of multidisciplinary subject matter experts, who tabulated comments, incorporated changes, and developed focal responses to questions posed. The multidisciplinary panel finalized 20 guideline recommendations for prescription of opioids for chronic non-cancer pain. Summary of the results showed over 90% agreement for the final 20 recommendations with strong consensus. The consensus guidelines included 4 sections specific to opioid therapy with 1) ten recommendations particular to initial steps of opioid therapy; 2) five recommendations for assessment of effectiveness of opioid therapy; 3) three recommendations regarding monitoring adherence and side effects; and 4) two general, final phase recommendations. LIMITATIONS: There is a continued paucity of literature of long-term opioid therapy addressing chronic non-cancer pain. Further, significant biases exist in the preparation of guidelines, which has led to highly variable rules and regulations across various states. CONCLUSION: These guidelines were developed based upon a comprehensive review of the literature, consensus among expert panelists, and in alignment with patient preferences, and shared decision-making so as to improve the long-term pain relief and function in patients with chronic non-cancer pain. Consequently, it was concluded - and herein recommended - that chronic opioid therapy should be provided in low doses with appropriate adherence monitoring and understanding of adverse events only to those patients with a proven medical necessity, and who exhibit stable improvement in both pain relief and activities of daily function, either independently or in conjunction with other modalities of treatments.
Assuntos
Dor Crônica , Humanos , Analgésicos Opioides/uso terapêutico , Dor Crônica/tratamento farmacológico , Fentanila , Padrões de Prática Médica , PrescriçõesRESUMO
Opioid prescribing in the United States is decreasing, however, the opioid epidemic is continuing at an uncontrollable rate. Available data show a significant number of opioid deaths, primarily associated with illicit fentanyl use. It is interesting to also note that the data show no clear correlation between opioid prescribing (either number of prescriptions or morphine milligram equivalent [MME] per capita), opioid hospitalizations, and deaths. Furthermore, the data suggest that the 2016 guidelines from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) have resulted in notable problems including increased hospitalizations and mental health disorders due to the lack of appropriate opioid prescribing as well as inaptly rapid tapering or weaning processes. Consequently, when examined in light of other policies and complications caused by COVID-19, a fourth wave of the opioid epidemic has been emerging. In light of this, we herein seek to provide guidance for the prescription of opioids for the management of chronic non-cancer pain. These clinical practice guidelines are based upon a systematic review of both clinical and epidemiological evidence and have been developed by a panel of multidisciplinary experts assessing the quality of the evidence and the strength of recommendations and offer a clear explanation of logical relationships between various care options and health outcomes. The methods utilized included the development of objectives and key questions for the various facets of opioid prescribing practice. Also utilized were employment of trustworthy standards, and appropriate disclosures of conflicts of interest(s). The literature pertaining to opioid use, abuse, effectiveness, and adverse consequences was reviewed. The recommendations were developed after the appropriate review of text and questions by a panel of multidisciplinary subject matter experts, who tabulated comments, incorporated changes, and developed focal responses to questions posed
Assuntos
Humanos , Transtornos Relacionados ao Uso de Substâncias/terapia , Dor Crônica/tratamento farmacológico , Programas de Monitoramento de Prescrição de MedicamentosAssuntos
Dor Lombar , Estimulação da Medula Espinal , Humanos , Dor Lombar/terapia , Medição da Dor , Medula EspinalRESUMO
This study reports the needs-based development, effectiveness and feasibility of a novel, comprehensive spinal cord stimulation (SCS) digital curriculum designed for pain medicine trainees. The curriculum aims to address the documented systematic variability in SCS education and empower physicians with SCS expertise, which has been linked to utilization patterns and patient outcomes. Following a needs assessment, the authors developed a three-part SCS e-learning video curriculum with baseline and postcourse knowledge tests. Best practices were used for educational video production and test-question development. The study period was from 1 February 2020 to 31 December 2020. A total of 202 US-based pain fellows across two cohorts (early-fellowship and late-fellowship) completed the baseline knowledge assessment, while 122, 96 and 88 participants completed all available post-tests for Part I (Fundamentals), Part II (Cadaver Lab) and Part III (Decision Making, The Literature and Critical Applications), respectively. Both cohorts significantly increased knowledge scores from baseline to immediate post-test in all curriculum parts (p<0.001). The early-fellowship cohort experienced a higher rate of knowledge gain for Parts I and II (p=0.045 and p=0.027, respectively). On average, participants viewed 6.4 out of 9.6 hours (67%) of video content. Self-reported prior SCS experience had low to moderate positive correlations with Part I and Part III pretest scores (r=0.25, p=0.006; r=0.37, p<0.001, respectively). Initial evidence suggests that Pain Rounds provides an innovative and effective solution to the SCS curriculum deficit. A future controlled study should examine this digital curriculum's long-term impact on SCS practice and treatment outcomes.