Long-Term Efficacy of a Home-Care Hypnosis Program in Elderly Persons Suffering From Chronic Pain: A 12-Month Follow-Up.

BACKGROUND: Pain is a major public health concern in the aging population. However, medication brings about negative effects that compel healthcare professionals to seek alternative management techniques to alleviate pain. Hypnosis has been recognized as an effective technique to manage pain, but its long-term efficacy has yet to be examined in older adults. AIMS: The aim was to assess the effectiveness, over a 12-month period, of home-care hypnosis in elderly participants suffering from chronic pain. DESIGN: Real-life retrospective one-arm study with a 12-month follow-up. SETTINGS: Elderly Persons Suffering From Chronic Pain enrolled in a clinical health care program that offered home medical follow-up. PARTICIPANTS/SUBJECTS: Fourteen elderly women (mean age 81 years) with chronic pain participated in the home-care hypnosis program. All participants presented chronic pain (≥6 months) with average pain score >4/10. METHODS: Participants took part in seven 15-minute hypnosis sessions within 12 months. The Brief Pain Inventory questionnaire was used to evaluate pain perception and pain interference at baseline and at 3-, 6-, and 12-month follow-up period. RESULTS: Hypnosis home-care program significantly decreased pain perception and pain interference compared to baseline after 3 months (-29% and -40%, p < .001), and remained lower at 6 (-31% and -54%, p < .001) and 12 (-31% and -47%, p < .001) months. CONCLUSIONS: Seven sessions of 15 minutes allocated throughout a 12-month period produced clinically significant decreases in pain perception and pain interference. Hypnosis could be considered as an optimal additional way for health practitioners to manage chronic pain in an elderly population with long-term efficacy. This study offers a new long-term option to improve chronic pain management at home in elderly populations through a low-cost nonpharmacological intervention.

The Added Value of Intraoperative Hypnosis during Spinal Cord Stimulation Lead Implantation under Awake Anesthesia in Patients Presenting with Refractory Chronic Pain.

To improve pain relief for refractory pain condition, spinal cord stimulation (SCS) needs to target the dedicated neuronal fibers within the dorsal columns. Intraoperative feedback from the patient can optimize lead placement but requires "awake surgery", allowing interaction between patient and surgeon. This can produce negative effects like anxiety and stress. To better manage these aspects, we propose to combine intraoperative hypnosis with awake anesthesia. Seventy-four patients (35 females, 22-80 years) presenting with chronic refractory pain, were offered intraoperative hypnosis during awake SCS lead implantation. Interactive conversational hypnosis was used as well as interactive touch, which was enhanced during painful moments during the lead intraoperative programming. All patients participated actively during the intraoperative testing which helped to optimize the lead positioning. They kept an extremely positive memory of the surgery and of the hypnotic experience, despite some painful moments. Pain could be reduced in these patients by using interactions and touch, which works on Gate Control modulation. Positive memory was reinforced by congratulations to create self-confidence and to induce positive expectations, which could reinforce the Diffuse Noxious Inhibitory Controls at the spinal level. Cooperation was improved because the patient was actively participating and thus, much more alert when feedback was required. Combining intraoperative hypnosis with awake anesthesia appears helpful for SCS lead implantation. It enhances patient cooperation, allows optimization of lead positioning, and leads to better pain control, positive and resourceful memory.

Antidepressants for chronic non-cancer pain in children and adolescents.

BACKGROUND: Pain is a common feature of childhood and adolescence around the world, and for many young people, that pain is chronic. The World Health Organization guidelines for pharmacological treatments for children's persisting pain acknowledge that pain in children is a major public health concern of high significance in most parts of the world. While in the past pain was largely dismissed and was frequently left untreated, views on children's pain have changed over time and relief of pain is now seen as important.We designed a suite of seven reviews on chronic non-cancer pain and cancer pain (looking at antidepressants, antiepileptic drugs, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, opioids, and paracetamol) in order to review the evidence for children's pain utilising pharmacological interventions.As the leading cause of morbidity in the world today, chronic disease (and its associated pain) is a major health concern. Chronic pain (that is pain lasting three months or longer) can arise in the paediatric population in a variety of pathophysiological classifications (nociceptive, neuropathic, or idiopathic) from genetic conditions, nerve damage pain, chronic musculoskeletal pain, and chronic abdominal pain, as well as for other unknown reasons.Antidepressants have been used in adults for pain relief and pain management since the 1970s. The clinical impression from extended use over many years is that antidepressants are useful for some neuropathic pain symptoms, and that effects on pain relief are divorced and different from effects on depression; for example, the effects of tricyclic antidepressants on pain may occur at different, and often lower, doses than those on depression. Amitriptyline is one of the most commonly used drugs for treating neuropathic pain in the UK. OBJECTIVES: To assess the analgesic efficacy and adverse events of antidepressants used to treat chronic non-cancer pain in children and adolescents aged between birth and 17 years, in any setting. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) via the Cochrane Register of Studies Online, MEDLINE via Ovid, and Embase via Ovid from inception to 6 September 2016. We also searched the reference lists of retrieved studies and reviews, and searched online clinical trial registries. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials, with or without blinding, of any dose and any route, treating chronic non-cancer pain in children and adolescents, comparing any antidepressant with placebo or an active comparator. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently assessed studies for eligibility. We planned to use dichotomous data to calculate risk ratio and number needed to treat for one additional event, using standard methods. We assessed the evidence using GRADE and created three 'Summary of findings' tables. MAIN RESULTS: We included four studies with a total of 272 participants (6 to 18 years of age) who had either chronic neuropathic pain, complex regional pain syndrome type 1, irritable bowel syndrome, functional abdominal pain, or functional dyspepsia. All of the studies were small. One study investigated amitriptyline versus gabapentin (34 participants), two studies investigated amitriptyline versus placebo (123 participants), and one study investigated citalopram versus placebo (115 participants). Due to a lack of available data we were unable to complete any quantitative analysis.Risk of bias for the four included studies varied, due to issues with randomisation and allocation concealment (low to unclear risk); blinding of participants, personnel, and outcome assessors (low to unclear risk); reporting of results (low to unclear risk); and size of the study populations (high risk). We judged the remaining domains, attrition and other potential sources of bias, as low risk of bias. Primary outcomesNo studies reported our primary outcomes of participant-reported pain relief of 30% or greater or 50% or greater (very low-quality evidence).No studies reported on Patient Global Impression of Change (very low-quality evidence).We rated the overall quality of the evidence (GRADE rating) as very low. We downgraded the quality of the evidence by three levels to very low because there was no evidence to support or refute. Secondary outcomesAll studies measured adverse events, with very few reported (11 out of 272 participants). All but one adverse event occurred in the active treatment groups (amitriptyline, citalopram, and gabapentin). Adverse events in all studies, across active treatment and comparator groups, were considered to be a mild reaction, such as nausea, dizziness, drowsiness, tiredness, and abdominal discomfort (very low-quality evidence).There were also very few withdrawals due to adverse events, again all but one from the active treatment groups (very low-quality evidence).No serious adverse events were reported across any of the studies (very low-quality evidence).There were few or no data for our remaining secondary outcomes (very low-quality evidence).We rated the overall quality of the evidence (GRADE rating) for these secondary outcomes as very low. We downgraded the quality of the evidence by three levels to very low due to too few data and the fact that the number of events was too small to be meaningful. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: We identified only a small number of studies with small numbers of participants and insufficient data for analysis.As we could undertake no meta-analysis, we are unable to comment about efficacy or harm from the use of antidepressants to treat chronic non-cancer pain in children and adolescents. Similarly, we cannot comment on our remaining secondary outcomes: Carer Global Impression of Change; requirement for rescue analgesia; sleep duration and quality; acceptability of treatment; physical functioning; and quality of life.There is evidence from adult randomised controlled trials that some antidepressants, such as amitriptyline, can provide some pain relief in certain chronic non-cancer pain conditions.There is no evidence from randomised controlled trials to support or refute the use of antidepressants to treat chronic non-cancer pain in children or adolescents.

Antiepileptic drugs for chronic non-cancer pain in children and adolescents.

BACKGROUND: Pain is a common feature of childhood and adolescence around the world, and for many young people, that pain is chronic. The World Health Organization (WHO) guidelines for pharmacological treatments for children's persisting pain acknowledge that pain in children is a major public health concern of high significance in most parts of the world. While in the past, pain was largely dismissed and was frequently left untreated, views on children's pain have changed over time, and relief of pain is now seen as importantWe designed a suite of seven reviews on chronic non-cancer pain and cancer pain (looking at antidepressants, antiepileptic drugs, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, opioids, and paracetamol) in order to review the evidence for children's pain utilising pharmacological interventions in children and adolescents.As the leading cause of morbidity in the world today, chronic disease (and its associated pain) is a major health concern. Chronic pain (that is pain lasting three months or longer) can occur in the paediatric population in a variety of pathophysiological classifications (nociceptive, neuropathic, or idiopathic) relating to genetic conditions, nerve damage pain, chronic musculoskeletal pain, and chronic abdominal pain, and for other unknown reasons.Antiepileptic (anticonvulsant) drugs, which were originally developed to treat convulsions in people with epilepsy, have in recent years been used to provide pain relief in adults for many chronic painful conditions and are now recommended for the treatment of chronic pain in the WHO list of essential medicines. Known side effects of antiepileptic drugs range from sweating, headache, elevated temperature, nausea, and abdominal pain to more serious effects including mental or motor function impairment. OBJECTIVES: To assess the analgesic efficacy and adverse events of antiepileptic drugs used to treat chronic non-cancer pain in children and adolescents aged between birth and 17 years, in any setting. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) via the Cochrane Register of Studies Online, MEDLINE via Ovid, and Embase via Ovid from inception to 6 September 2016. We also searched the reference lists of retrieved studies and reviews as well as online clinical trial registries. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials, with or without blinding, by any route, treating chronic non-cancer pain in children and adolescents, comparing any antiepileptic drug with placebo or an active comparator. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently assessed studies for eligibility. We planned to use dichotomous data to calculate risk ratio and number needed to treat for one additional event, using standard methods if data were available. We assessed the evidence using GRADE and created two 'Summary of findings' tables. MAIN RESULTS: We included two studies with a total of 141 participants (aged 7 to 18 years) with chronic neuropathic pain, complex regional pain syndrome type 1 (CRPS-I), or fibromyalgia. One study investigated pregabalin versus placebo in participants with fibromyalgia (107 participants), and the other study investigated gabapentin versus amitriptyline in participants with CRPS-I or neuropathic pain (34 participants). We were unable to perform any quantitative analysis.Risk of bias for the two included studies varied, due to issues with randomisation (low to unclear risk), blinding of outcome assessors (low to unclear risk), reporting bias (low to unclear risk), the size of the study populations (high risk), and industry funding in the 'other' domain (low to unclear risk). We judged the remaining domains of sequence generation, blinding of participants and personnel, and attrition as low risk of bias. Primary outcomesOne study (gabapentin 900 mg/day versus amitriptyline 10 mg/day, 34 participants, for 6 weeks) did not report our primary outcomes (very low-quality evidence).The second study (pregabalin 75 to 450 mg/day versus placebo 75 to 450 mg/day, 107 participants, for 15 weeks) reported no significant change in pain scores for pain relief of 30% or greater between pregabalin 18/54 (33.3%), and placebo 16/51 (31.4%), P = 0.83 (very low-quality evidence). This study also reported Patient Global Impression of Change, with the percentage of participants feeling "much or very much improved" with pregabalin 53.1%, and placebo 29.5% (very low-quality evidence).We downgraded the evidence by three levels to very low for one of two reasons: due to the fact that there was no evidence to support or refute the use of the intervention, or that there were too few data and the number of events was too small to be meaningful. Secondary outcomesIn one small study, adverse events were uncommon: gabapentin 2 participants (2 adverse events); amitriptyline 1 participant (1 adverse event) (6-week trial). The second study reported a higher number of adverse events: pregabalin 38 participants (167 adverse events); placebo 34 participants (132 adverse events) (15-week trial) (very low-quality evidence).Withdrawals due to adverse events were infrequent in both studies: pregabalin (4 participants), placebo (4 participants), gabapentin (2 participants), and amitriptyline (1 participant) (very low-quality evidence).Serious adverse events were reported in both studies. One study reported only one serious adverse event (cholelithiasis and major depression resulting in hospitalisation in the pregabalin group) and the other study reported no serious adverse events (very low-quality evidence).There were few or no data for our remaining secondary outcomes (very low-quality evidence).We downgraded the evidence by three levels to very low due to too few data and the fact that the number of events was too small to be meaningful. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: This review identified only two small studies, with insufficient data for analysis.As we could undertake no meta-analysis, we were unable to comment about efficacy or harm from the use of antiepileptic drugs to treat chronic non-cancer pain in children and adolescents. Similarly, we could not comment on our remaining secondary outcomes: Carer Global Impression of Change; requirement for rescue analgesia; sleep duration and quality; acceptability of treatment; physical functioning; and quality of life.We know from adult randomised controlled trials that some antiepileptics, such as gabapentin and pregabalin, can be effective in certain chronic pain conditions.We found no evidence to support or refute the use of antiepileptic drugs to treat chronic non-cancer pain in children and adolescents.

[New analgesics in paediatrics]. / Actualités des antalgiques en pédiatrie.

There are a number of different types of analgesics in paediatrics. They must be used in accordance with the situation, the type of pain and the characteristics of the child. In all cases, strict compliance with the posology and the instructions for use is essential to avoid any risk of error. Finally, pharmacological, physical and psychological treatments are employed in a complementary manner, for the biopsychosocial management of the child's care.

[Chronic pain in children]. / La douleur chronique de L'Enfant.

Chronic pain affects 10 to 20% of children and teenagers. Apart from the physical consequences, it leads to psychological and social difficulties. These notions, still not well known, are often overlooked. It is essential to raise the awareness of professionals in order to identify these young patients as early as possible and offer them adapted multimodal treatment. The main aim is to develop their autonomy to enable them to gain better understanding of this pain and to treat the cause when it can be identified.

Discordance between pain specialists and patients on the perception of dependence on pain medication: A multi-centre cross-sectional study.

AIM: Patients with chronic non-cancer pain are referred to pain centres to improve their pain treatment. The discontinuation of pain medications in case of poor efficacy can be difficult to accept for patients, particularly opioid analgesics. Previous research has described that from the patients' perspective, the psychological relief of a negative effect of chronic pain and withdrawal symptoms of prescription opioids represent drivers of persistent use and first stage of opioid use disorder, despite insufficient pain relief. There is no validated tool to investigate this psychological dependence. This study aimed to assess discordance between patients and pain specialists in their perception of dependence on pain medication and investigate associations with characteristics of patients, type of pain and iatrogenic pharmacodependence. METHODS: Self-administered questionnaires (patients and physicians) were administered in six pain centres in France. A question on perceived dependence on pain medications was addressed to the patient and the physician in a matched pair. Discordance between them was evaluated by the Cohen kappa coefficient. Demographics, pain, anxiety and depression, pain medication withdrawal symptoms, diverted use, and craving represented variables studied in a multivariate model as potentially associated with patient-physician discordance. RESULTS: According to the 212 pairs of completed questionnaires, a perceived dependence was reported by the majority of patients (65.6%) and physicians (68.4%). However, the concordance was fair (kappa=0.38; CI [95%]: 0.25-0.51). Almost all patients (89.3%) were treated with an opioid analgesic. A higher likelihood of discordance was observed when patients suffered from nociplastic pain (odds ratio [OR]: 2.72, 95% [CI]: 1.29-5.84). CONCLUSION: Medical shared-decision for changing pain treatment could be improved by taking into account the perception of patient dependence on medications for pain relief and or psychoactive effects, particularly in nociplastic pain for which the treatment is challenging.

Triage of children with headache at the ED: a guideline implementation study.

UNLABELLED: We present a multicenter validation of a modified Manchester Triage System (MTS) flowchart for pediatric patients who present with headache to the emergency department. A prospective observational study was conducted across 5 European pediatric emergency departments. The standard MTS headache flowchart and a modified MTS headache flowchart were tested in the participating centers, and results were compared with triage categories identified by either the physician at the end of the clinical examination or the reference classification matrix (RCM). Fifty-three patients were enrolled in the preimplementation phase and 112 in the postimplementation phase. When compared with physician's triage and RCM, the modified MTS flowchart demonstrated good sensitivity (79% and 70%, respectively), specificity (77% and 76%, respectively), and a high positive likelihood ratio (9.14 and 16.75, respectively) for the identification of low-risk children. CONCLUSIONS: Our modified headache flowchart is safe and reliable in pediatric emergency settings, especially for lower classes of urgency.

Association between childhood migraine and history of infantile colic.

IMPORTANCE: Infantile colic is a common cause of inconsolable crying during the first months of life and has been thought to be a pain syndrome. Migraine is a common cause of headache pain in childhood. Whether there is an association between these 2 types of pain in unknown. OBJECTIVE: To investigate a possible association between infantile colic and migraines in childhood. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: A case-control study of 208 consecutive children aged 6 to 18 years presenting to the emergency department and diagnosed as having migraines in 3 European tertiary care hospitals between April 2012 and June 2012. The control group was composed of 471 children in the same age range who visited the emergency department of each participating center for minor trauma during the same period. A structured questionnaire identified personal history of infantile colic for case and control participants, confirmed by health booklets. A second study of 120 children diagnosed with tension-type headaches was done to test the specificity of the association. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Difference in the prevalence of infantile colic between children with and without a diagnosis of migraine. RESULTS: Children with migraine were more likely to have experienced infantile colic than those without migraine (72.6% vs 26.5%; odds ratio [OR], 6.61 [95% CI, 4.38-10.00]; P < .001), either migraine without aura (n = 142; 73.9% vs 26.5%; OR, 7.01 [95% CI, 4.43-11.09]; P < .001), or migraine with aura (n = 66; 69.7% vs 26.5%; OR, 5.73 [95% CI, 3.07-10.73]; P < .001). This association was not found for children with tension-type headache (35% vs 26.5%; OR, 1.46 [95% CI, 0.92-2.32]; P = .10). CONCLUSION AND RELEVANCE: The presence of migraine in children and adolescents aged 6 to 18 years was associated with a history of infantile colic. Additional longitudinal studies are required.

A meta-analysis of the use of nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs for pediatric postoperative pain.

BACKGROUND: Opioid side effects are a great concern during the postoperative period in children. Nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) have been shown to effectively decrease postoperative pain, but their opioid-sparing effect is still controversial. In this present meta-analysis, we investigated the postoperative opioid-sparing effect of NSAIDs in children. METHODS: A comprehensive literature search was conducted to identify clinical trials using NSAIDs and opioids as perioperative analgesic compounds in children and infants. Outcomes measured were opioid consumption, pain intensity, postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV), and urinary retention. All outcomes were studied during postanesthesia care unit (PACU) stay and the first 24 postoperative hours. Data from each trial were combined to calculate the pooled odds ratios (ORs) or standardized mean difference (SMD) and their 95% confidence interval. RESULTS: Twenty-seven randomized controlled studies were analyzed. Perioperative administration of NSAIDs decreased postoperative opioid requirement (both in the PACU and during the first 24 postoperative hours; SMD = -0.66 [-0.84, -0.48] and -0.83 [-1.11, -0.55], respectively), pain intensity in the PACU (SMD = -0.85 [-1.24, -0.47]), and PONV during the first 24 postoperative hours (OR = 0.75 [0.57-0.99]). NSAIDs did not decrease pain intensity during the first 24 postoperative hours (OR = 0.56 [0.26-1.2]) and PONV during PACU stay (OR = 1.02 [0.73-1.44]). Subgroup analysis according to the timing of NSAID administration (intraoperative versus postoperative), type of surgery, or coadministration of paracetamol did not show any influence of these factors on the studied outcomes except the reduction of pain intensity and the incidence of PONV during the first 24 postoperative hours, which were influenced by the coadministration of paracetamol and the type of surgery, respectively. CONCLUSION: This meta-analysis shows that perioperative NSAID administration reduces opioid consumption and PONV during the postoperative period in children.

[The pain of children suffering from rheumatic diseases]. / La douleur de l'enfant atteint de pathologie rhumatismale.

Articular diseases are manifestations frequently encountered as a result of inflammatory syndromes in children in paediatric rheumatology. They give rise to acute or chronic pain. The specific and complex treatment combines medication and complimentary therapies. The prevention of disability is an integral part of the work of multidisciplinary teams.

Hypnosis to manage musculoskeletal and neuropathic chronic pain: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

This systematic review and meta-analysis aims to identify and quantify the current available evidence of hypnosis efficacy to manage pain in patients with chronic musculoskeletal and neuropathic pain. Randomized Control Trials (RCTs) with hypnosis and/or self-hypnosis treatment used to manage musculoskeletal and/or neuropathic chronic pain in adults and assessing pain intensity were included. Reviews, meta-analyses, non-randomized clinical trials, case reports and meeting abstracts were excluded. Five databases, up until May 13th 2021, were used to search for RCTs using hypnosis to manage chronic musculoskeletal and/or neuropathic pain. The protocol is registered on PROSPERO register (CRD42020180298) and no specific funding was received for this review. The risk of bias asessement was conducted according to the revised Cochrane risk of bias tool for randomized control trials (RoB 2.0). Nine eligible RCTs including a total of 530 participants were considered. The main analyses showed a moderate decrease in pain intensity (Hedge's g: -0.42; p = 0.025 after intervention, Hedge's g: -0.37; p = 0.027 after short-term follow-up) and pain interference (Hedge's g: -0.39; p = 0.029) following hypnosis compared to control interventions. A significant moderate to large effect size of hypnosis compared to controls was found for at 8 sessions or more (Hedge's g: -0.555; p = 0.034), compared to a small and not statistically significant effect for fewer than 8 sessions (Hedge's g: -0.299; p = 0.19). These findings suggest that a hypnosis treatment lasting a minimum of 8 sessions could offer an effective complementary approach to manage chronic musculoskeletal and neuropathic pain. Future research is needed to delineate the relevance of hypnosis in practice and its most efficient prescription.

The Challenge of Converting "Failed Spinal Cord Stimulation Syndrome" Back to Clinical Success, Using SCS Reprogramming as Salvage Therapy, through Neurostimulation Adapters Combined with 3D-Computerized Pain Mapping Assessment: A Real Life Retrospective Study.

While paresthesia-based Spinal Cord Stimulation (SCS) has been proven effective as treatment for chronic neuropathic pain, its initial benefits may lead to the development of "Failed SCS Syndrome' (FSCSS) defined as decrease over time related to Loss of Efficacy (LoE) with or without Loss of Coverage (LoC). Development of technologies associating new paresthesia-free stimulation waveforms and implanted pulse generator adapters provide opportunities to manage patients with LoE. The main goal of our study was to investigate salvage procedures, through neurostimulation adapters, in patients already implanted with SCS and experiencing LoE. We retrospectively analyzed a cohort of patients who were offered new SCS programs/waveforms through an implanted adapter between 2018 and 2021. Patients were evaluated before and at 1-, 3-, 6- and 12-month follow-ups. Outcomes included pain intensity rating with a Visual Analog Scale (VAS), pain/coverage mappings and stimulation preferences. Last follow-up evaluations (N = 27) showed significant improvement in VAS (p = 0.0001), ODI (p = 0.021) and quality of life (p = 0.023). In the 11/27 patients with LoC, SCS efficacy on pain intensity (36.89%) was accompanied via paresthesia coverage recovery (55.57%) and pain surface decrease (47.01%). At 12-month follow-up, 81.3% preferred to keep tonic stimulation in their waveform portfolio. SCS conversion using adapters appears promising as a salvage solution, with an emphasis on paresthesia recapturing enabled via spatial retargeting. In light of these results, adapters could be integrated in SCS rescue algorithms or should be considered in SCS rescue.

Combining Awake Anesthesia with Minimal Invasive Surgery Optimizes Intraoperative Surgical Spinal Cord Stimulation Lead Placement.

Spinal cord stimulation (SCS) is an effective and validated treatment to address chronic refractory neuropathic pain in persistent spinal pain syndrome-type 2 (PSPS-T2) patients. Surgical SCS lead placement is traditionally performed under general anesthesia due to its invasiveness. In parallel, recent works have suggested that awake anesthesia (AA), consisting of target controlled intra-venous anesthesia (TCIVA), could be an interesting tool to optimize lead anatomical placement using patient intra-operative feedback. We hypothesized that combining AA with minimal invasive surgery (MIS) could improve SCS outcomes. The goal of this study was to evaluate SCS lead performance (defined by the area of pain adequately covered by paraesthesia generated via SCS), using an intraoperative objective quantitative mapping tool, and secondarily, to assess pain relief, functional improvement and change in quality of life with a composite score. We analyzed data from a prospective multicenter study (ESTIMET) to compare the outcomes of 115 patients implanted with MIS under AA (MISAA group) or general anesthesia (MISGA group), or by laminectomy under general anesthesia (LGA group). All in all, awake surgery appears to show significantly better performance than general anesthesia in terms of patient pain coverage (65% vs. 34-62%), pain surface (50-76% vs. 50-61%) and pain intensity (65% vs. 35-40%), as well as improved secondary outcomes (quality of life, functional disability and depression). One step further, our results suggest that MISAA combined with intra-operative hypnosis could potentialize patient intraoperative cooperation and could be proposed as a personalized package offered to PSPS-T2 patients eligible for SCS implantation in highly dedicated neuromodulation centers.

[Validation of the French version of the non-communicating children's pain checklist - postoperative version]. / Validation francophone de la grille d'évaluation de la douleur-déficience intellectuelle - version postopératoire.

PURPOSE: The aim of the study was to test the validity of a French language version of the Non-Communicating Children's Pain Checklist - Postoperative Version (NCCPC-PV): grille d'évaluation de la douleur-déficience intellectuelle (GED-DI). METHODS: We assessed the intensity of pain in 87 intellectually disabled surgical patients recruited in four Canadian and French hospitals in the pre- and post-operative settings using the GED-DI, a 100-mm visual analogue pain scale (VAS) and the Rosen sedation scale. The validity of the GED-DI was measured by the difference in scores between pre- and postoperative conditions. The checklist was made up of 30 items divided into seven subgroups. Items were rated from 0 to 3 for a total score ranging from 0 to 90 points. RESULTS: The mean (standard deviation) age of the patients was 17 (11) yr and the mean mental age 24.5 (24) months. The total GED-DI score was 6.1 (4.9) pre- and 13.4 (11.2) post-surgery (P < 0.001). All subgroups had a higher score after surgery (P < 0.001). The receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves, comparing the absence of pain to mild pain scores and moderate to severe pain scores, showed a cutoff at 6 (mild pain) and 11 (moderate to severe pain). CONCLUSION: The French version of the NCCPC-PV can be used to assess pain in non-communicating patients with intellectual disabilities in a postoperative setting. It has good content validity, as the total pre-surgery score for the GED-DI was significantly lower than the postoperative score, and showed a good concurrent validity when compared to the VAS.

Electronic and paper versions of a faces pain intensity scale: concordance and preference in hospitalized children.

BACKGROUND: Assessment of pain in children is an important aspect of pain management and can be performed by observational methods or by self-assessment. The Faces Pain Scale-Revised (FPS-R) is a self-report tool which has strong positive correlations with other well established self-report pain intensity measures. It has been recommended for measuring pain intensity in school-aged children (4 years and older). The objective of this study is to compare the concordance and the preference for two versions, electronic and paper, of the FPS-R, and to determine whether an electronic version of the FPS-R can be used by children aged 4 and older. METHODS: The study is an observational, multicenter, randomized, cross-over, controlled, open trial. Medical and surgical patients in two pediatric hospitals (N=202, age 4-12 years, mean age 8.3 years, 58% male) provided self-reports of their present pain using the FPS-R on a personal digital assistant (PDA) and on a paper version. Paper and electronic versions of the FPS-R were administered by a nurse in a randomized order: half the patients were given the PDA version first and the other half the paper version first. The time between the administrations was planned to be less than 30 minutes but not simultaneous. Two hundred and thirty-seven patients were enrolled; 35 were excluded from analysis because of misunderstanding of instructions or abnormal time between the two assessments. RESULTS: Final population for analysis comprised 202 children. The overall weighted Kappa was 0.846 (95%CI: 0.795; 0.896) and the Spearman correlation between scores on the two versions was rs=0.911 (p<0.0001). The mean difference of pain scores was less than 0.1 out of 10, which was neither statistically nor clinically significant; 83.2% of children chose the same face on both versions of the FPS-R. Preference was not modified by order, sex, age, hospitalization unit (medical or surgical units), or previous analgesics. The PDA was preferred by 87.4% of the children who expressed a preference. CONCLUSION: The electronic version of the FPS-R can be recommended for use with children aged 4 to 12, either in clinical trials or in hospitals to monitor pain intensity.

Ketamine for perioperative pain management in children: a meta-analysis of published studies.

INTRODUCTION: Balanced analgesia, using both opioid and nonopioids agents, has become the standard care for postoperative pain management. Ketamine, a compound with analgesic and antihyperalgesic properties, has been shown to decrease postoperative pain and opioid requirements in adults. The goal of the present meta-analysis was to investigate postoperative analgesic properties of ketamine in pediatric patients. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A comprehensive literature search was conducted to identify clinical trials that used ketamine as a perioperative analgesic compound in children and infants. Outcomes measured were postoperative analgesic consumption, pain intensity and duration of sensory block (when ketamine was used by caudal route) during the postoperative care unit (PACU) stay and the early postoperative period (6-24 h after leaving the operative room). The data from each trial were combined to calculate the pooled odds ratios or standard mean differences and their 95% confidence intervals. RESULTS: Thirty-five randomized, blinded controlled studies were retrieved from the literature. Systemic ketamine was effective in decreasing PACU pain intensity and analgesic requirement but failed to influence early (6-24 h) pain intensity and analgesic requirement. Ketamine administered locally during tonsillectomy, decreased PACU and early (6-24 h) pain intensity and PACU analgesic requirements. Used as an adjuvant for caudal analgesia, ketamine increased the duration of sensory block and PACU analgesic requirement without impacting PACU pain intensity. Ketamine failed to exhibit a postoperative opioid-sparing effect. CONCLUSIONS: This meta-analysis found that administration of ketamine was associated with decreased PACU postoperative pain intensity and nonopioid analgesic requirement. However, ketamine failed to exhibit a postoperative opioid-sparing effect.

[Verbal expression of pain in children: intermodal comparison between pain sensation and tactile manipulation]. / L'expression verbale de la douleur chez l'enfant : Comparaison intermodale entre sensation de douleur et manipulation tactile.

BACKGROUND: The present study was set in the context of verbal pain expression in children and concerns, more exactly, the qualitative dimension of painful sensations. OBJECTIVE: To identify the peculiarities of verbal expressions related to the qualitative aspect of pain. METHODS: Sixty patients presenting with pain at a university pediatric hospital were included in the study. Their ages ranged from four to 18 years. The origin of sensorial pain descriptors was confirmed, reflecting the past perceptive experiences of children that are not necessarily painful. These experiences are characterized as prototypes because, although they are related to various contexts of life, their type of interaction with the world does not vary. RESULTS: In such a context, pinching, tugging, palpitation, squashing and pressing, tingling and squeezing each convey particular sensorial and motor experiences whose basic structure does not change from one situation to another. The results also showed that from four years of age onward, children are able to compare and recognize an analogy between an exclusively tactile experience and their painful sensation. CONCLUSION: The results emphasize the central role of analogical reasoning in the verbal expression of pain, showing that the level of cognitive development is not an a priori determinant variable for qualifying pain.

[Hypnosis and touch-massage to relieve pain at the end of life]. / L'hypnose et le Toucher-Massage pour soulager la douleur en fin de vie.

The treatment of pain in palliative care requires specific expertise. "Complementary" methods, such as hypnosis or "Toucher-Massage", for example, not only have an effect on the prevention and treatment of pain, but also contribute to the overall support of the patient.

Machine Learning Algorithms Provide Greater Prediction of Response to SCS Than Lead Screening Trial: A Predictive AI-Based Multicenter Study.

Persistent pain after spinal surgery can be successfully addressed by spinal cord stimulation (SCS). International guidelines strongly recommend that a lead trial be performed before any permanent implantation. Recent clinical data highlight some major limitations of this approach. First, it appears that patient outco mes, with or without lead trial, are similar. In contrast, during trialing, infection rate drops drastically within time and can compromise the therapy. Using composite pain assessment experience and previous research, we hypothesized that machine learning models could be robust screening tools and reliable predictors of long-term SCS efficacy. We developed several algorithms including logistic regression, regularized logistic regression (RLR), naive Bayes classifier, artificial neural networks, random forest and gradient-boosted trees to test this hypothesis and to perform internal and external validations, the objective being to confront model predictions with lead trial results using a 1-year composite outcome from 103 patients. While almost all models have demonstrated superiority on lead trialing, the RLR model appears to represent the best compromise between complexity and interpretability in the prediction of SCS efficacy. These results underscore the need to use AI-based predictive medicine, as a synergistic mathematical approach, aimed at helping implanters to optimize their clinical choices on daily practice.