Consensus and controversies in the definition, assessment, treatment and monitoring of BTcP: results of a Delphi study
Clin. transl. oncol. (Print)
; 18(11): 1088-1097, nov. 2016. tab, graf
Article
in En
| IBECS
| ID: ibc-156874
Responsible library:
ES1.1
Localization: BNCS
ABSTRACT
Introduction. There is no unanimous consensus on the clinical features to define breakthrough cancer pain (BTcP). The current project aimed to investigate the opinion of a panel of experts on cancer pain on how to define, diagnose, assess, treat and monitor BTcP. Materials and methods. A two-round Spanish multi-centre exploratory Delphi study was conducted with medical experts (n = 90) previously selected from Medical Oncology Services, Radiation Oncology, Palliative Care/Home Care Teams, and Pain Units. The study intended to seek experts consensus and to define a set of recommendations for the management of BTcP. Results. It was generally agreed that, definition of BTcP implies that baseline pain should be controlled (84 %), although not necessarily with opioids (only 30 %); there must be exacerbations (98.9 %); the duration of each episode should last < 1 h (70 %); the intensity of pain ≥7 out of 10 (67.8 %); and the number of flares per day should not be less than four. All participants supported the use of the Davies algorithm for the diagnosis. The use of a Patient Diary was highly recommended. The optimal treatment should have a rapid onset, a short-acting analgesic effect (1-2 h) and transmucosal nasal or oral administration. It was considered very important to develop protocols for the management of cancer pain. Conclusions. The present Delphi study identified a set of recommendations to define, assess and monitor BTcP (AU)
RESUMEN
No disponible
Full text:
1
Collection:
06-national
/
ES
Database:
IBECS
Main subject:
Quality of Life
/
Pain Measurement
/
Consensus Development Conferences as Topic
/
Delphi Technique
/
Pain Management
Type of study:
Guideline
Aspects:
Patient_preference
Limits:
Female
/
Humans
/
Male
Language:
En
Journal:
Clin. transl. oncol. (Print)
Year:
2016
Document type:
Article