Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 20 de 10.576
Filtrar
1.
Medicine (Baltimore) ; 99(41): e22693, 2020 Oct 09.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33031340

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Compared with open lumbar microdiscectomy, percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy (PELD) has the advantages of remarkable preservation of paravertebral structures, less bleeding, shorter operation time and fewer complications, it is a common method for the treatment of lumbar disc herniation (LDH). Local anesthesia is recommended during PELD. However, intraoperative pain is sometimes difficult to control satisfactorily. The efficacy of bilateral intervertebral foramen block (IFB) for pain management in PELD remains unclear. Therefore, this regimen is utilized in a randomized controlled trial for the assessment the safety and effectiveness of bilateral IFB for PELD pain control. METHOD: This is a single center and randomized controlled trial which will be implemented from September 2020 to September 2021. This research protocol is in accordance with the items of the Standard Protocol for Randomized Trials, which was authorized through the Ethics Committee of Huzhou Central Hospital & Affiliated Centre Hospital of Huzhou University (HZCH0465-0864). 100 participants who undergo PELD will be analyzed. Inclusion criteria containsThe exclusion criteria contains:Patients will be randomly divided into bilateral IFB group (with 50 patients) and local infiltration analgesia group (with 50 patients). Primary outcomes are pain score at different time points. The secondary outcomes are the operative time, radiation exposure time, length of hospital stay and postoperative complications. All the analysis is implemented through applying the IBM SPSS Statistics for Windows, version 20 (IBM Corp., Armonk, NY, USA). RESULTS: The clinical outcome variables between groups are illustrated in the Table 1. CONCLUSION: This investigation can offer a reliable basis for the effectiveness and safety of IFB in treating the PELD pain. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This study protocol is registered in Research Registry (researchregistry5985).


Assuntos
Raquianestesia/métodos , Discotomia , Vértebras Lombares/cirurgia , Manejo da Dor/métodos , Humanos , Ensaios Clínicos Controlados Aleatórios como Assunto
2.
Medicine (Baltimore) ; 99(44): e22674, 2020 Oct 30.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33126306

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Inconsistent results have been obtained regarding postoperative pain control using local infiltration and epidural analgesia for patients after total knee or hip arthroplasty (TKA and THA). We therefore conducted a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to assess the efficacy and safety of local infiltration vs epidural analgesia for TKA and THA. METHODS: Electronic searches were conducted on PubMed, EmBase, and the Cochrane library to identify eligible RCTs conducted up to February 2020. Weighted mean difference (WMD) and relative risk with 95% confidence interval (95%CI) were applied to calculate pooled effect estimates between local infiltration and epidural analgesia using the random-effects model. RESULTS: Seven RCTs including a total of 412 TKA patients, and three RCTs including a total of 200 THA patients were selected for this meta-analysis. We noted that local infiltration was associated with lower visual analog scale (VAS) scores at rest after 48 hours (WMD: -1.31; 95%CI: -2.44 to -0.18; P = .024) and 72 hours (WMD: -0.95; 95%CI: -1.39 to -0.52; P < .001) for patients with TKA, while local infiltration significantly reduced VAS scores at rest after 12 hours for patients with THA (WMD: -1.00; 95%CI: -1.49 to -0.51; P < .001). Moreover, local infiltration was associated with lower VAS scores during movement after 48 hours in TKA patients (WMD: -1.08; 95%CI: -1.86 to -0.29; P = .007), while there were higher VAS scores during movement after 24 hours for patients with THA (WMD: 1.06; 95%CI: 0.67 to 1.45; P < .001). Furthermore, we noted that local infiltration was associated with higher flexion angles compared with epidural analgesia after 24 hours (WMD: 7.11; 95%CI: 2.30-11.93; P = .004), 48 hours (WMD: 6.69; 95%CI: 3.78 to 9.59; P < .001), and 72 hours (WMD: 5.19; 95%CI: 0.95-9.44; P = .016). There were no significant differences between local infiltration and epidural analgesia for the length of hospital stay, nausea, or wound infection. CONCLUSIONS: Local infiltration is superior to epidural analgesia for postoperative pain control after TKA, whereas for THA patients inconsistent results were obtained at various times.


Assuntos
Analgesia Epidural/estatística & dados numéricos , Analgésicos/administração & dosagem , Artroplastia de Quadril/efeitos adversos , Artroplastia do Joelho/efeitos adversos , Manejo da Dor/métodos , Dor Pós-Operatória/tratamento farmacológico , Idoso , Feminino , Articulação do Quadril/efeitos dos fármacos , Humanos , Articulação do Joelho/efeitos dos fármacos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Medição da Dor , Dor Pós-Operatória/etiologia , Ensaios Clínicos Controlados Aleatórios como Assunto , Resultado do Tratamento
3.
Medicine (Baltimore) ; 99(44): e22919, 2020 Oct 30.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33126353

RESUMO

RATIONALE: Pain is the fifth vital sign of human beings. Morphine is the first choice for relieving moderate to severe cancer pain. Most of the previous studies merely focused on the analgesic effect of high-dose or ultra-high-dose morphine in patients with advanced cancers but did not report any cases related to successful morphine withdrawal. PATIENT CONCERNS: A 42-year-old woman was admitted to our hospital in March 2019. DIAGNOSIS: She was diagnosed with progressive aggravation of headache for 1 month, which was meningeal metastasis of lung cancer. INTERVENTIONS: Symptomatic treatments like dehydration, hormone, intrathecal injection chemotherapy and an increased dose of osimertinib to 160 mg/day were applied but showed poor curative effects. The patient refused whole-brain radiotherapy. Pain intensity level was re-evaluated and the patient scored 9 based on numerical rating scale, which suggested that the patient suffered from severer cancerous pain. Thus, the patient started to receive morphine for treating headache. OUTCOMES: The patient's headache was alleviated after receiving high-dose morphine treatment, and she continued to undergo anti-cancer treatment. After tumor remission, the patient's morphine dose gradually decreased and eventually stopped, without any withdrawal symptoms. In addition, the quality of life of the patient was greatly improved with performance status scored 2 and limb muscle strength increased from Grade 2 to Grade 5. LESSONS: For patients with advanced cancers, the application of ultra-high-dose morphine may significantly relieve cancerous pain, improve survival and quality of life, and overcome their fear for death and desperation, which contributes to the establishment of a basis for subsequent anticancer treatments. Thus, timely effective pain management and routine anticancer treatments are the key to addressing the cancer pain problem.


Assuntos
Adenocarcinoma de Pulmão , Dor do Câncer , Cefaleia , Neoplasias Pulmonares , Neoplasias Meníngeas , Manejo da Dor/métodos , Adenocarcinoma de Pulmão/patologia , Adenocarcinoma de Pulmão/terapia , Administração Intravenosa , Adulto , Analgésicos Opioides/administração & dosagem , Dor do Câncer/diagnóstico , Dor do Câncer/tratamento farmacológico , Relação Dose-Resposta a Droga , Feminino , Cefaleia/diagnóstico , Cefaleia/tratamento farmacológico , Cefaleia/etiologia , Humanos , Neoplasias Pulmonares/patologia , Neoplasias Pulmonares/terapia , Neoplasias Meníngeas/fisiopatologia , Neoplasias Meníngeas/secundário , Neoplasias Meníngeas/terapia , Morfina/administração & dosagem , Medição da Dor , Resultado do Tratamento
4.
Medicine (Baltimore) ; 99(44): e22871, 2020 Oct 30.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33126334

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Neck pain is a common complaint in the general population. Despite the consistent ongoing pain and the resulting economic burden on affected individuals, there have only been a few studies investigating the treatment of acute neck pain. This study aims to evaluate the effectiveness, safety, and cost-effectiveness of the motion style acupuncture treatment (MSAT) and acupuncture treatment for acute neck pain. METHODS: This 2-armed, parallel, multi-centered randomized controlled trial will be conducted at 4 community-based hospitals in Korea. A total of 128 subjects will be randomly assigned, at a 1:1 ratio, to the MSAT and the acupuncture treatment groups. Treatment will be administered 2 to 3 times a week for 2 weeks. The primary outcome will be the visual analog scale of neck pain on movement. The secondary outcomes will be the numeric rating scale of the neck, neck disability index, Northwick Park questionnaire, patient global impression of change, range of motion of the neck, 5-level EuroQol-5 dimension, 12-item Short-Form Health Survey, and EuroQol visual analogue scale. This protocol has been registered at the Clinicaltrials.gov (NCT04539184). DISCUSSION: To our knowledge, this study is the first well-designed multi-centered randomized controlled trial to evaluate the effectiveness, safety, and cost-effectiveness of MSAT on acute neck pain. The results of this study will be useful for clinicians in primary medical institutions that frequently treat acute neck pain patients and for policymakers working with national health insurance.


Assuntos
Terapia por Acupuntura/métodos , Cervicalgia/terapia , Manejo da Dor/economia , Manejo da Dor/normas , Resultado do Tratamento , Terapia por Acupuntura/economia , Terapia por Acupuntura/normas , Dor Aguda/psicologia , Dor Aguda/terapia , Adulto , Idoso , Análise Custo-Benefício , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Cervicalgia/psicologia , Manejo da Dor/métodos , Medição da Dor/métodos , República da Coreia , Inquéritos e Questionários
5.
Medicine (Baltimore) ; 99(43): e22667, 2020 Oct 23.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33120758

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Total knee arthroplasty is accompanied by moderate to severe postoperative pain. Postoperative pain hampers the functional recovery and lowers patient satisfaction with the surgery. Recently, the adductor canal block (ACB) has been widely used in total knee arthroplasty. However, there is no definite answer as to the location of a continuous block within the ACBs. METHOD: Randomized controlled trials about relevant studies were searched in PubMed (1996 to Oct 2019), Embase (1996 to Oct 2019), and Cochrane Library (CENTRAL, Oct 2019). RESULTS: Five studies involving 348 patients met the inclusion criteria. Pooled data indicated that the proximal ACB was as effective as the distal ACB in terms of total opioid consumption (P = .54), average visual analog scale (VAS) score (P = .35), worst VAS score (P = .19), block success rate (P = .86), and time of catheter insertion (P = .54). CONCLUSIONS: Compared with the distal ACB, the proximal ACB showed similar analgesic efficacy for total opioid consumption, average VAS score, worst VAS score, block success rate, and time of catheter insertion. However, because of the limited number of involved studies, more high-quality studies are needed to further identify the optimal location of the ACB.


Assuntos
Artroplastia do Joelho/métodos , Bloqueio Nervoso/métodos , Manejo da Dor/métodos , Dor Pós-Operatória/prevenção & controle , Idoso , Analgésicos Opioides/administração & dosagem , Feminino , Nervo Femoral , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Medição da Dor , Ensaios Clínicos Controlados Aleatórios como Assunto
6.
PLoS One ; 15(10): e0237783, 2020.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33017397

RESUMO

A systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted to explore the effect of a eutectic mixture of local anaesthetics (EMLA) on pain reduction during extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy (ESWL). PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, EBSCO, and Cochrane library databases (updated March 2020) were searched for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) assessing the effect of EMLA for patients that underwent ESWL. The search strategy and study selection process were managed according to the PRISMA statement. Six RCTs were included in the meta-analysis. Overall, the results indicated that EMLA significantly reduced pain compared to the control group (RR = -2.98, 95% CI = -5.82 to -0.13, P = 0.04) with a heterogeneity of I2 = 57% (P = 0.04). Subgroup analysis showed that EMLA did not significantly reduce pain when the patients took an analgesic premedication (RR = -1.46, 95% CI = -5.89 to 2.98, P = 0.52) with a heterogeneity of I2 = 38% (P = 0.52). Conversely, studies without premedication showed a significant pain relief effect (RR = -4.08, 95% CI = -7.36 to -0.65, P = -0.80) with a heterogeneity of I2 = 48% (P = 0.14). Most studies showed there was no difference in the patient's need for analgesics. EMLA was effective for reducing pain during EWSL. However, this analgesic effect was limited and did not reduce the need for analgesics.


Assuntos
Anestésicos Combinados/administração & dosagem , Anestésicos Locais/administração & dosagem , Combinação Lidocaína e Prilocaína/administração & dosagem , Litotripsia/métodos , Manejo da Dor/métodos , Administração Cutânea , Analgesia/métodos , Anestesia Local/métodos , Humanos , Litotripsia/efeitos adversos , Dor Pós-Operatória/tratamento farmacológico
7.
PLoS One ; 15(10): e0237363, 2020.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33017425

RESUMO

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the analgesic efficacy and safety of paravertebral block (PVB) versus intercostal nerve block (INB) in thoracic surgery and breast surgery. METHODS: The PubMed, Web of Science, Embase and the Cochrane Library were searched up to February 2020 for all available randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that evaluated the analgesic efficacy and safety of PVB compared with INB after thoracic surgery and breast surgery. For binary variables, odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) was used. For continuous variables, weighted mean difference (WMD) and 95% confidence interval (CI) were used. RevMan5. 3 and Stata/MP 14.0 were used for performing the meta-analysis. RESULTS: A total of 9 trials including 440 patients (PVB block:222 patients; INB: 218 patients) met the inclusion criteria. In the primary outcome, there was no significant differences between the two groups with respect to postoperative visual analogue scale (VAS) at 1h (Std. MD = -0. 20; 95% CI = -1. 11to 0. 71; P = 0. 66), 2h (Std. MD = -0. 71; 95% CI = -2. 32to 0. 91; P = 0. 39), 24h (Std. MD = -0. 36; 95% CI = -0. 73 to -0. 00; P = 0. 05) and 48h (Std. MD = -0. 04; 95% CI = -0. 20 to 0. 11; P = 0. 57). However, there was significant difference in VAS of non Chinese subgroup at 1h (Std. MD = 0. 33; 95% CI = 0. 25to 0. 41; P<0. 00001) and VAS of Chinese subgroup at 24h (Std. MD = -0.32; 95% CI = -0.49 to-0.14; P = 0.0003). In the secondary outcome, the analysis also showed no significant difference between the groups according to the rates of postoperative nausea and vomit (OR = 0. 63; 95% CI = 0. 38 to 1. 03; P = 0. 06) and the rates of postoperative additional analgesia (OR = 0. 57; 95% CI = 0. 21 to 1. 55; P = 0. 27). There was significant difference in postoperative consumption of morphine (Std. MD = -14. 57; 95% CI = -26. 63 to -0.25; P = 0. 02). CONCLUSION: Compared with INB, PVB can provide better analgesia efficacy and cause lower consumption of morphine after thoracic surgery and breast surgery.


Assuntos
Mama/cirurgia , Bloqueio Nervoso/métodos , Procedimentos Cirúrgicos Torácicos/métodos , Analgesia/métodos , Feminino , Humanos , Nervos Intercostais , Masculino , Mastectomia , Manejo da Dor/métodos , Dor Pós-Operatória/prevenção & controle , Segurança , Coluna Vertebral/inervação , Toracoscopia , Toracotomia , Resultado do Tratamento
8.
Curr Opin Anaesthesiol ; 33(6): 841-546, 2020 Dec.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33060386

RESUMO

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Cannabis products have been used for various ailments since ancient times. But their use diminished in the medical community due to the legal and social concerns of substance abuse. With evolving evidence of their use in alleviating various symptoms, resurgence of interest in their medicinal use is seen in the past decade. RECENT FINDINGS: Clinical evidence for cannabis products in treating various ailments has been far from robust. Their use is based on anecdotal and low-quality evidence. This review attempts to revisit the recent medical literature available on the merits and demerits of cannabinoid use in palliative medicine. SUMMARY: A few symptoms in palliative care setting can be difficult to treat in a few patients with the available treatment measures. Anecdotal reports and early clinical data have proved cannabinoids to be a promising pharmacological option in managing this subset of patients. However, absence of robust clinical data in proving that cannabinoids have definitely favorable risk-benefit ratio, precludes the inclusion of cannabinoids in the routine recommendation for palliative symptom management. Before cannabinoids enter the broader market with patient-driven and industry-driven hype, high-quality clinical evidence is emergently needed.


Assuntos
Canabinoides/farmacologia , Canabinoides/uso terapêutico , Cannabis/química , Manejo da Dor/métodos , Cuidados Paliativos/métodos , Analgésicos , Canabinoides/efeitos adversos , Humanos , Medicina Paliativa , Resultado do Tratamento
9.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev ; 10: CD006304, 2020 10 09.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33034900

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Perineal trauma is common during childbirth and may be painful. Contemporary maternity practice includes offering women numerous forms of pain relief, including the local application of cooling treatments. This Cochrane Review is an update of a review last updated in 2012. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the effectiveness of localised cooling treatments compared with no treatment, placebo, or other cooling treatments applied to the perineum for pain relief following perineal trauma sustained during childbirth. SEARCH METHODS: We searched Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth's Trials Register, ClinicalTrials.gov, the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) (7 October 2019) and reference lists of retrieved studies. SELECTION CRITERIA: Published and unpublished randomised and quasi-randomised trials (RCTs) that compared a localised cooling treatment applied to the perineum with no treatment, placebo, or another cooling treatment applied to relieve pain related to perineal trauma sustained during childbirth. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently assessed study eligibility, extracted data and assessed the risk of bias of included studies. Data were double checked for accuracy. The certainty of the evidence was assessed using the GRADE approach. MAIN RESULTS: We included 10 RCTs that enrolled 1233 women randomised to the use of one cooling treatment (ice, cold gel pad, cooling plus compression, cooling plus compression plus (being) horizontal) compared with another cooling treatment, no treatment, or placebo (water pack, compression). The included trials were at low or uncertain risk of bias overall, with the exception that the inability to blind participants and personnel to group allocation meant that we rated all trials at unclear or high risk for this domain. We undertook a number of comparisons to evaluate the different treatments. Cooling treatment (ice pack or cold gel pad) versus no treatment There was limited very low-certainty evidence that cooling treatment may reduce women's self-reported perineal pain within four to six hours (mean difference (MD) -4.46, 95% confidence interval (CI) -5.07 to -3.85 on a 10-point scale; 1 study, 100 participants) or between 24 and 48 hours of giving birth (risk ratio (RR) 0.73, 95% CI 0.57 to 0.94; 1 study, 316 participants). The evidence is very uncertain about the various measures of wound healing, for example, wound edges gaping when inspected five days after giving birth (RR 2.56, 95% CI 0.58 to 11.33; 1 study, 315 participants). Women generally rated their satisfaction with perineal care similarly following cooling or no treatment. The potential exception was that there may be a trivially lower mean difference of -0.1 on a five-point scale of psychospiritual comfort with cooling treatment, that is unlikely to be of clinical importance. Cooling treatment (cold gel pad) + compression versus placebo (gel pad + compression) There was limited low-certainty evidence that there may be a trivial MD of -0.43 in pain on a 10-point scale at 24 to 48 hours after giving birth (95% CI -0.73 to -0.13; 1 study, 250 participants) when a cooling treatment plus compression from a well-secured perineal pad was compared with the placebo. Levels of perineal oedema may be similar for the two groups (low-certainty evidence) and perineal bruising was not observed. There was low-certainty evidence that women may rate their satisfaction as being slightly higher with perineal care in the cold gel pad and compression group (MD 0.88, 95% CI 0.38 to 1.38; 1 trial, 250 participants). Cooling treatment (ice pack) versus placebo (water pack) One study reported that no women reported pain after using an ice pack or a water pack when asked within 24 hours of giving birth. There was low-certainty evidence that oedema may be similar for the two groups when assessed at four to six hours (RR 0.96, 95% CI 0.50 to 1.86; 1 study, 63 participants) or within 24 hours of giving birth (RR 0.36, 95% CI 0.08 to 1.59). No women were observed to have perineal bruising at these times. The trialists reported that no women in either group experienced any adverse effects on wound healing. There was very low-certainty evidence that women may rate their views and experiences with the treatments similarly (for example, satisfied with treatment: RR 0.91, 95% CI 0.77 to 1.08; 63 participants). Cooling treatment (ice pack) versus cooling treatment (cold gel pad) The evidence is very uncertain about the effects of using ice packs or cold gel pads on women's self-rated perineal pain, on perineal bruising, or on perineal oedema at four to six hours or within 24 hours of giving birth. Perineal oedema may persist 24 to 48 hours after giving birth in women using the ice packs (RR 1.69, 95% CI 1.03 to 2.7; 2 trials, 264 participants; very low-certainty). The risk of gaping wound edges five days after giving birth may be decreased in women who had used ice packs (RR 0.22, 95% CI 0.05 to 1.01; 215 participants; very low-certainty). However, this did not appear to persist to day 10 (RR 3.06, 95% CI 0.63 to 14.81; 214 participants). Women may rate their opinion of treatment less favourably following the use of ice packs five days after giving birth (RR 0.33, 95% CI 0.17 to 0.68; 1 study, 49 participants) and when assessed on day 10 (RR 0.82, 95% CI 0.73 to 0.92; 1 study, 208 participants), both very low-certainty. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There is limited very low-certainty evidence that may support the use of cooling treatments, in the form or ice packs or cold gel pads, for the relief of perineal pain in the first two days following childbirth. It is likely that concurrent use of several treatments is required to adequately address this issue, including prescription and non-prescription analgesia. Studies included in this review involved the use of cooling treatments for 10 to 20 minutes, and although no adverse effects were noted, these findings came from studies of relatively small numbers of women, or were not reported at all. The continued lack of high-certainty evidence of the benefits of cooling treatments should be viewed with caution, and further well-designed trials should be conducted.


Assuntos
Hipotermia Induzida/métodos , Manejo da Dor/métodos , Períneo/lesões , Terapia Combinada/métodos , Episiotomia/efeitos adversos , Feminino , Humanos , Hipotermia Induzida/efeitos adversos , Manejo da Dor/efeitos adversos , Parto , Gravidez , Ensaios Clínicos Controlados Aleatórios como Assunto
10.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev ; 10: CD010686, 2020 Oct 22.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33089901

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Virtual reality (VR) computer technology creates a simulated environment, perceived as comparable to the real world, with which users can actively interact. The effectiveness of VR distraction on acute pain intensity in children is uncertain. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effectiveness and adverse effects of virtual reality (VR) distraction interventions for children (0 to 18 years) with acute pain in any healthcare setting. SEARCH METHODS: We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO and four trial registries to October 2019. We also searched reference lists of eligible studies, handsearched relevant journals and contacted study authors. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs), including cross-over and cluster-RCTs, comparing VR distraction to no distraction, non-VR distraction or other VR distraction. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used standard Cochrane methodological processes. Two reviewers assessed risk of bias and extracted data independently. The primary outcome was acute pain intensity (during procedure, and up to one hour post-procedure). Secondary outcomes were adverse effects, child satisfaction with VR, pain-related distress, parent anxiety, rescue analgesia and cost. We used GRADE and created 'Summary of findings' tables. MAIN RESULTS: We included 17 RCTs (1008 participants aged four to 18 years) undergoing various procedures in healthcare settings. We did not pool data because the heterogeneity in population (i.e. diverse ages and developmental stages of children and their different perceptions and reactions to pain) and variations in procedural conditions (e.g. phlebotomy, burn wound dressings, physical therapy sessions), and consequent level of pain experienced, made statistical pooling of data impossible. We narratively describe results. We judged most studies to be at unclear risk of selection bias, high risk of performance and detection bias, and high risk of bias for small sample sizes. Across all comparisons and outcomes, we downgraded the certainty of evidence to low or very low due to serious study limitations and serious or very serious indirectness. We also downgraded some of the evidence for very serious imprecision. 1: VR distraction versus no distraction Acute pain intensity: during procedure Self-report: one study (42 participants) found no beneficial effect of non-immersive VR (very low-certainty evidence). Observer-report: no data. Behavioural measurements (observer-report): two studies, 62 participants; low-certainty evidence. One study (n = 42) found no beneficial effect of non-immersive VR. One study (n = 20) found a beneficial effect favouring immersive VR. Acute pain intensity: post-procedure Self-report: 10 studies, 461 participants; very low-certainty evidence. Four studies (n = 95) found no beneficial effect of immersive and semi-immersive or non-immersive VR. Five studies (n = 357) found a beneficial effect favouring immersive VR. Another study (n = 9) reported less pain in the VR group. Observer-report: two studies (216 participants; low-certainty evidence) found a beneficial effect of immersive VR, as reported by primary caregiver/parents or nurses. One study (n = 80) found a beneficial effect of immersive VR, as reported by researchers. Behavioural measurements (observer-report): one study (42 participants) found no beneficial effect of non-immersive VR (very low-certainty evidence). Adverse effects: five studies, 154 participants; very low-certainty evidence. Three studies (n = 53) reported no adverse effects. Two studies (n = 101) reported mild adverse effects (e.g. nausea) in the VR group. 2: VR distraction versus other non-VR distraction Acute pain intensity: during procedure Self-report, observer-report and behavioural measurements (observer-report): two studies, 106 participants: Self-report: one study (n = 65) found a beneficial effect favouring immersive VR and one (n = 41) found no evidence of a difference in mean pain change scores (very low-certainty evidence). Observer-report: one study (n = 65) found a beneficial effect favouring immersive VR and one (n = 41) found no evidence of a difference in mean pain change scores (low-certainty evidence). Behavioural measurements (observer-report): one study (n = 65) found a beneficial effect favouring immersive VR and one (n = 41) reported a difference in mean pain change scores with fewer pain behaviours in VR group (low-certainty evidence). Acute pain intensity: post-procedure Self-report: eight studies, 575 participants; very low-certainty evidence. Two studies (n = 146) found a beneficial effect favouring immersive VR. Two studies (n = 252) reported a between-group difference favouring immersive VR. One study (n = 59) found no beneficial effect of immersive VR versus television and Child Life non-VR distraction. One study (n = 18) found no beneficial effect of semi-immersive VR. Two studies (n = 100) reported no between-group difference. Observer-report: three studies, 187 participants; low-certainty evidence. One study (n = 81) found a beneficial effect favouring immersive VR for parent, nurse and researcher reports. One study (n = 65) found a beneficial effect favouring immersive VR for caregiver reports. Another study (n = 41) reported no evidence of a difference in mean pain change scores. Behavioural measurements (observer-report): two studies, 106 participants; low-certainty evidence. One study (n = 65) found a beneficial effect favouring immersive VR. Another study (n = 41) reported no evidence of a difference in mean pain change scores. Adverse effects: six studies, 429 participants; very low-certainty evidence. Three studies (n = 229) found no evidence of a difference between groups. Two studies (n = 141) reported no adverse effects in VR group. One study (n = 59) reported no beneficial effect in reducing estimated cyber-sickness before and after VR immersion. 3: VR distraction versus other VR distraction We did not identify any studies for this comparison. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: We found low-certainty and very low-certainty evidence of the effectiveness of VR distraction compared to no distraction or other non-VR distraction in reducing acute pain intensity in children in any healthcare setting. This level of uncertainty makes it difficult to interpret the benefits or lack of benefits of VR distraction for acute pain in children. Most of the review primary outcomes were assessed by only two or three small studies. We found limited data for adverse effects and other secondary outcomes. Future well-designed, large, high-quality trials may have an important impact on our confidence in the results.


Assuntos
Dor Aguda/prevenção & controle , Dor Processual/prevenção & controle , Realidade Virtual , Dor Aguda/diagnóstico , Adolescente , Atenção , Viés , Criança , Pré-Escolar , Humanos , Manejo da Dor/métodos , Medição da Dor , Percepção da Dor , Dor Processual/diagnóstico , Ensaios Clínicos Controlados Aleatórios como Assunto
11.
Best Pract Res Clin Anaesthesiol ; 34(3): 529-537, 2020 Sep.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33004164

RESUMO

Although pain treatment has been described as a fundamental human right, the Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic forced healthcare systems worldwide to redistribute healthcare resources toward intensive care units and other COVID-19 dedicated sites. As most chronic pain services were subsequently deemed non-urgent, all outpatient and elective interventional procedures have been reduced or interrupted during the COVID-19 pandemic in order to reduce the risk of viral spread. The shutdown of pain services jointly to the home lockdown imposed by governments has affected chronic pain management worldwide with additional impact on patients' psychological health. Therefore, the aim of this review is to analyze the impact of COVID-19 pandemic on chronic pain treatment and to address what types of strategies can be implemented or supported in order to overcome imposed limitations in delivery of chronic pain patient care.


Assuntos
Betacoronavirus , Dor Crônica/terapia , Infecções por Coronavirus/prevenção & controle , Manejo da Dor/métodos , Pandemias/prevenção & controle , Pneumonia Viral/prevenção & controle , Humanos
12.
Ann Emerg Med ; 76(3S): S6-S11, 2020 09.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32928464

RESUMO

STUDY OBJECTIVE: The National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute evidence-based guidelines for timeliness of opioid administration for sickle cell disease (SCD) pain crises recommend an initial opioid within 1 hour of arrival, with subsequent dosing every 30 minutes until pain is controlled. No multisite studies have evaluated guideline adherence, to our knowledge. Our objective was to determine guideline adherence across a multicenter network. METHODS: We conducted a multiyear cross-sectional analysis of children with SCD who presented between January 1, 2016, and December 31, 2018, to 7 emergency departments (EDs) within the Pediatric Emergency Care Applied Research Network. Visits for uncomplicated pain crisis were included, defined with an International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision (ICD-9) and ICD-10 code for SCD crisis and receipt of an opioid, excluding visits with other SCD complications or temperature exceeding 38.5°C (101.3°F). Times were extracted from the electronic record. Guideline adherence was assessed across sites and calendar years. RESULTS: A total of 4,578 visits were included. The median time to first opioid receipt was 62 minutes (interquartile range 42 to 93 minutes); between the first and second opioid receipt, 60 minutes (interquartile range 39 to 93 minutes). Overall, 48% of visits (95% confidence interval 47% to 50%) were guideline adherent for first opioid. Of 3,538 visits with a second opioid, 15% (95% confidence interval 14% to 16%) were guideline adherent. Site variation in adherence existed for time to first opioid (range 22% to 70%) and time between first and second opioid (range 2% to 36%; both P<.001). There was no change in timeliness to first dose or time between doses across years (P>.05 for both). CONCLUSION: Guideline adherence for timeliness of SCD treatment is poor, with half of visits adherent for time to first opioid and one seventh adherent for second dose. Dissemination and implementation research/quality improvement efforts are critical to improve care across EDs.


Assuntos
Analgésicos Opioides/uso terapêutico , Anemia Falciforme/terapia , Fidelidade a Diretrizes/estatística & dados numéricos , Manejo da Dor/métodos , Dor Aguda/tratamento farmacológico , Dor Aguda/etiologia , Adolescente , Analgésicos Opioides/administração & dosagem , Anemia Falciforme/complicações , Estudos Transversais , Serviço Hospitalar de Emergência/normas , Serviço Hospitalar de Emergência/estatística & dados numéricos , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Manejo da Dor/normas , Sistema de Registros , Fatores de Tempo , Estados Unidos
13.
Pain Physician ; 23(4S): S183-204, 2020 08.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32942785

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has worsened the pain and suffering of chronic pain patients due to stoppage of "elective" interventional pain management and office visits across the United States. The reopening of America and restarting of interventional techniques and elective surgical procedures has started. Unfortunately, with resurgence in some states, restrictions are once again being imposed. In addition, even during the Phase II and III of reopening, chronic pain patients and interventional pain physicians have faced difficulties because of the priority selection of elective surgical procedures.Chronic pain patients require high intensity care, specifically during a pandemic such as COVID-19. Consequently, it has become necessary to provide guidance for triaging interventional pain procedures, or related elective surgery restrictions during a pandemic. OBJECTIVES: The aim of these guidelines is to provide education and guidance for physicians, healthcare administrators, the public and patients during the COVID-19 pandemic. Our goal is to restore the opportunity to receive appropriate care for our patients who may benefit from interventional techniques. METHODS: The American Society of Interventional Pain Physicians (ASIPP) has created the COVID-19 Task Force in order to provide guidance for triaging interventional pain procedures or related elective surgery restrictions to provide appropriate access to interventional pain management (IPM) procedures in par with other elective surgical procedures. In developing the guidance, trustworthy standards and appropriate disclosures of conflicts of interest were applied with a section of a panel of experts from various regions, specialties, types of practices (private practice, community hospital and academic institutes) and groups. The literature pertaining to all aspects of COVID-19, specifically related to epidemiology, risk factors, complications, morbidity and mortality, and literature related to risk mitigation and stratification was reviewed. The evidence -- informed with the incorporation of the best available research and practice knowledge was utilized, instead of a simplified evidence-based approach. Consequently, these guidelines are considered evidence-informed with the incorporation of the best available research and practice knowledge. RESULTS: The Task Force defined the medical urgency of a case and developed an IPM acuity scale for elective IPM procedures with 3 tiers. These included urgent, emergency, and elective procedures. Examples of urgent and emergency procedures included new onset or exacerbation of complex regional pain syndrome (CRPS), acute trauma or acute exacerbation of degenerative or neurological disease resulting in impaired mobility and inability to perform activities of daily living. Examples include painful rib fractures affecting oxygenation and post-dural puncture headaches limiting the ability to sit upright, stand and walk. In addition, emergency procedures include procedures to treat any severe or debilitating disease that prevents the patient from carrying out activities of daily living. Elective procedures were considered as any condition that is stable and can be safely managed with alternatives. LIMITATIONS: COVID-19 continues to be an ongoing pandemic. When these recommendations were developed, different stages of reopening based on geographical regulations were in process. The pandemic continues to be dynamic creating every changing evidence-based guidance. Consequently, we provided evidence-informed guidance. CONCLUSION: The COVID-19 pandemic has created unprecedented challenges in IPM creating needless suffering for pain patients. Many IPM procedures cannot be indefinitely postponed without adverse consequences. Chronic pain exacerbations are associated with marked functional declines and risks with alternative treatment modalities. They must be treated with the concern that they deserve. Clinicians must assess patients, local healthcare resources, and weigh the risks and benefits of a procedure against the risks of suffering from disabling pain and exposure to the COVID-19 virus.


Assuntos
Dor Crônica/cirurgia , Infecções por Coronavirus , Manejo da Dor/métodos , Pandemias , Pneumonia Viral , Triagem/métodos , Betacoronavirus , Dor Crônica/classificação , Procedimentos Cirúrgicos Eletivos/classificação , Humanos , Estados Unidos
15.
Ann Emerg Med ; 76(3S): S12-S20, 2020 09.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32928457

RESUMO

STUDY OBJECTIVE: This was a prospective, pre-post, 13-year observational study documenting the multiyear implementation of an observation unit sickle cell pathway for patients with uncomplicated vaso-occlusive events. METHODS: The sickle cell pathway begins with rapid triage to identify patients with uncomplicated vaso-occlusive events for immediate transfer to the observation unit and initiation of patient-controlled analgesia followed by repeated evaluations of pain and identification of other complications. Data were abstracted from the electronic medical record or observation unit database. The sickle cell pathway was initiated in April 2006. Major revisions of it were carried out in June 2009 (physician evaluation occurs in sickle cell pathway and only patient-controlled analgesia administration of medications) and October 2010 (multidisciplinary management and individual dosing). RESULTS: Annual ED visits ranged between 287 and 528. The preimplementation hospital admission rate was 33% (123/368), 3-day return rate 16% (60/368), and 30-day return rate 67% (248/368). Refinements to the sickle cell pathway have resulted in a decrease in admission rate to 20% (258/1276); 3-day return rate, to 3.6% (46/1,276); and 30-day return rate, to 41% (525/1,276) for the past 3 years. CONCLUSION: The use of a sickle cell pathway for the treatment of uncomplicated vaso-occlusive events has been effective in providing rapid treatment and reducing hospital admissions. However, it was not only the intervention and its refinement that made the sickle cell pathway successful. With the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research, it was discerned that outer setting factors of organizational commitment to the care of patients with SCD, inner setting factors of learning climate and leadership engagement, individuals, and process contributed to the success of the sickle cell pathway.


Assuntos
Analgesia Controlada pelo Paciente/métodos , Anemia Falciforme/terapia , Unidades de Observação Clínica , Serviço Hospitalar de Emergência , Dor Aguda/tratamento farmacológico , Dor Aguda/etiologia , Adolescente , Adulto , Idoso , Anemia Falciforme/complicações , Estudos Controlados Antes e Depois , Procedimentos Clínicos , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Manejo da Dor/métodos , Estudos Prospectivos , Triagem , Doenças Vasculares/etiologia , Adulto Jovem
16.
Ann Emerg Med ; 76(3S): S21-S27, 2020 09.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32928458

RESUMO

STUDY OBJECTIVE: Sickle cell disease (SCD) is an inherited hematologic disorder that affects approximately 100,000 US individuals and results in greater than 200,000 emergency department (ED) visits annually in the United States, with pain being the most common complaint. The objective of this retrospective study is to determine the effect of implementing individualized pain plans in the treatment of patients with SCD in the ED on time to first opioid, length of stay, and disposition. METHODS: At The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center, a multidisciplinary group including hematologists and ED physicians was formed and enacted a protocol for using individualized pain plans, with the goal of decreasing time to treatment for patients with SCD who presented to the ED with chief complaint of pain. In this retrospective study, data from the year before through the year of implementation were gathered. Generalized linear models were fit to compare time to first opioid, length of stay, and disposition before and after protocol implementation. RESULTS: Data showed a 48% decrease in time to first opioid and a 22% decrease in length of ED stay after protocol implementation. No significant change was found in disposition or length of inpatient admission before and after protocol initiation. CONCLUSION: The use of individualized pain plans in the treatment of patients with SCD in the ED is a useful method of not only ensuring rapid and adequate treatment but also decreasing use of health care resources.


Assuntos
Dor Aguda/terapia , Anemia Falciforme/terapia , Serviço Hospitalar de Emergência , Manejo da Dor/métodos , Medicina de Precisão/métodos , Dor Aguda/etiologia , Adulto , Idoso , Analgésicos Opioides/administração & dosagem , Analgésicos Opioides/uso terapêutico , Anemia Falciforme/complicações , Estudos Controlados Antes e Depois , Feminino , Humanos , Tempo de Internação , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Ohio , Estudos Retrospectivos , Fatores de Tempo , Resultado do Tratamento , Adulto Jovem
17.
PLoS One ; 15(9): e0239896, 2020.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32986770

RESUMO

INTRODUCTION: Pain management is the pillar of caring for patients with traumatic rib fractures. Intravenous lidocaine (IVL) is a well-established non-opioid analgesic for post-operative pain, yet its efficacy has yet to be investigated in trauma patients. We hypothesized that IVL is associated with decreased inpatient opioid requirements among patients with rib fractures. METHODS: We retrospectively evaluated adult patients presenting to our Level 1 trauma center with isolated chest wall injuries. After 1:1 propensity score matching patients who received vs did not receive IVL, we compared the two groups' average daily opioid use, opioid use in the last 24 hours of admission, and pain scores during admissions hours 24-48. We performed multivariable linear regression for these outcomes (with sensitivity analysis for the opioid use outcomes), adjusting for age as a moderating factor and controlling for hospital length of stay and injury severity. RESULTS: We identified 534 patients, among whom 226 received IVL. Those who received IVL were older and had more serious injury. Compared to propensity-score matched patients who did not receive IVL, patients who received IVL had similar average daily opioid use and pain scores, but 40% lower opioid use during the last 24 hours of admission (p = 0.002). Multivariable regression-with and without sensitivity analysis-did not show an effect of IVL on any outcomes. CONCLUSION: IVL was crudely associated with decreased opioid requirements in the last 24 hours of admission, the time period associated with opioid use at 90 days post-discharge. However, we did not observe beneficial effects of IVL on multivariable adjusted analyses; we are conducting a randomized control trial to further evaluate IVL's opioid-sparing effects for patients with rib fractures.


Assuntos
Administração Intravenosa , Assistência ao Convalescente/métodos , Analgésicos não Entorpecentes/uso terapêutico , Lidocaína/uso terapêutico , Manejo da Dor/métodos , Dor Pós-Operatória/tratamento farmacológico , Fraturas das Costelas/cirurgia , Administração Oral , Adulto , Idoso , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais , Analgésicos não Entorpecentes/administração & dosagem , Analgésicos Opioides/administração & dosagem , Analgésicos Opioides/uso terapêutico , Feminino , Humanos , Escala de Gravidade do Ferimento , Lidocaína/administração & dosagem , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Morfina/administração & dosagem , Morfina/uso terapêutico , Pontuação de Propensão , Estudos Retrospectivos , Resultado do Tratamento
18.
Sports Health ; 12(6): 540-546, 2020.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32936058

RESUMO

CONTEXT: With increased use of cannabis-based products by the public for both recreational and medical use, sports medicine clinicians should be informed of historical context, current legal considerations, and existing evidence with regard to efficacy, safety, and risks in the athletic community. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: A review of ClinicalTrials.gov, MEDLINE, and CINAHL from 2015 to present was conducted with emphasis on the most recent literature using search terms, cannabis, nabiximols, cannabinoids, pain management, THC, CBD, and marijuana. Bibliographies based on original search were utilized to pursue further literature search. STUDY DESIGN: Clinical review. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level 3. RESULTS: At present, limited high-quality studies exist for use of cannabinoids for acute pain, chronic pain, or concussion. None of the trials involving cannabinoids included the athletic population. Thus, results from this clinical review are extrapolated to conditions of the sports medicine population. For acute pain, 2 small-randomized double-blinded crossover trials concluded no immediate effect of cannabinoid therapy. More robust evidence exists for treatment of chronic pain conditions through meta-analysis and systemic reviews. Cannabinoid therapy exhibits moderate efficacy as a treatment for some chronic pain conditions. Investigations included a broad spectrum of chronic pain conditions, including neuropathic, musculoskeletal, inflammatory, and central pain conditions, and reveal reduction in pain and improvement of quality of life with limited adverse effects. For concussion, evidence is based on preclinical in vitro and animal models revealing possible neuroprotective effects as well as 2 clinical studies involving the presence of cannabinoids for concussion (some sports-related), but there are no high-quality trials evaluating efficacy for treatment with cannabinoids at this time. CONCLUSION: Although various biochemical explanations exist on the use of cannabinoid therapy through modulation of the endocannabinoid system for several medical issues affecting athletes, recommendations from clinicians must be extrapolated from a majority of research done in the nonathletic population. Lack of strong-quality clinical evidence, coupled with inconsistent federal and state law as well as purity issues with cannabis-based products, make it difficult for the sports medicine clinician to widely recommend cannabinoid therapeutics at present. Future larger, higher quality clinical research studies with standardized pure extracts will better guide appropriate medical use going forward. At present, evidence for a multitude of therapeutic applications is emerging for cannabinoid treatment approaches. With emphasis placed on patient-centered clinical decisions, cannabinoids hold promise of treatment for athletes with chronic pain conditions. Clinicians who treat the athletic community must consider legal and ethical issues when discussing and recommending the use of cannabinoids, with acknowledgment of inconsistencies in purity of various formulations and concerns of drug testing.


Assuntos
Traumatismos em Atletas/complicações , Canabinoides/uso terapêutico , Maconha Medicinal/uso terapêutico , Manejo da Dor/métodos , Dor Aguda/tratamento farmacológico , Traumatismos em Atletas/tratamento farmacológico , Concussão Encefálica/tratamento farmacológico , Canabinoides/efeitos adversos , Dor Crônica/tratamento farmacológico , Medicina Baseada em Evidências/normas , Humanos , Uso da Maconha/legislação & jurisprudência , Maconha Medicinal/efeitos adversos , Estados Unidos
20.
Medicine (Baltimore) ; 99(35): e21672, 2020 Aug 28.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32871881

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Total knee arthroplasty (TKA) is known to be a painful orthopedic procedure and moderate to severe pain is common, especially immediately postoperatively and during active motion. The aim of the present study was to compare epidural analgesia (EA) and adductor canal block (ACB) techniques with regard to early period pain levels, need for additional opioids, and ambulation and functional scores in patients who had undergone primary TKA. METHODS: Approval for the study was granted by the Changji Branch of the First Affiliated Hospital of Xinjiang Medical University. Written informed consent will be obtained from all of the participants. Inclusion criteria included the following: planned unilateral TKA; spinal anesthesia; American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status classification score of I to III. Prospective assessment will be done for 100 patients who are scheduled for unilateral primary TKA surgery in our academic hospital by a single senior surgeon between August 2020 and December 2021. Patients were randomized to ACB treatment or EA treatment by a computer random number generator. The primary outcome was visual analog scale pain scores in the immediate postoperative period. Secondary outcomes included postoperative opioid use, length of hospital stay, activity level during physical therapy, and knee range of motion. Results were evaluated in a confidence interval of 95% and at a significance level of P < .05. CONCLUSIONS: We hypothesized that standard ACB would be as effective as EA for postoperative pain management following TKA. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This study protocol was registered in Research Registry (researchregistry5775).


Assuntos
Analgesia Epidural , Artroplastia do Joelho/efeitos adversos , Bloqueio Nervoso/métodos , Manejo da Dor/métodos , Dor Pós-Operatória/prevenção & controle , Humanos , Articulação do Joelho/fisiopatologia , Medição da Dor , Dor Pós-Operatória/etiologia , Amplitude de Movimento Articular
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA