[Support of opioid rotation using online apps : Evaluation of applicability and comparison to the LONTS guidelines]. / Unterstützung der Opioidrotation mithilfe von Online-Apps : Evaluation der Anwendbarkeit und Vergleich mit der LONTS-Leitlinie.

BACKGROUND: Opioid rotation can be indicated due to drug side effects, drug interactions or inadequate effect of treatment with opioids. For the determination of the oral morphine equivalence, a practice tool has been published with the long-term use of opioids in chronic nontumor-related pain (LONTS) guidelines. In contrast, several apps are available that have not yet been evaluated. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Apps and web applications for opioid conversion were searched using Google Play Store®, iOS App Store® and the Google® search engine. German and English language apps with calculator functions were included. Using the apps, 16 test cases from clinical practice were calculated and the deviation from the recommendation of the LONTS guidelines was calculated. RESULTS: A total of 17 apps were identified, 11 named the origin of the algorithm and 3 of them defined the literature sources. None of the apps and web applications had a quality seal, and none could solve all cases. Deviations of the resulting oral morphine equivalents of up to 179% from the guideline-compliant conversion were identified and 4 apps warned for overdosing. CONCLUSION: Although the apps and web applications simplify conversion between opioids, there is high variance in conversion factors and sometimes a relevant deviation from evidence-based tables. Overall, there is a high risk of false opioid dosing.

Behaviour-based pain scales: Validity and interrater reliability of BPS-NI and PAINAD-G on general wards.

BACKGROUND: Measuring pain intensity in patients unable to communicate is a challenge on general wards. Observation-based pain scoring tools have been used for patients with dementia or in critically ill intensive care unit (ICU) patients. However, there is no established or validated assessment tool for non-ICU patients without dementia related cognitive deficiencies who cannot communicate. The "Behavioural Pain Scale Non-Intubated" (BPS-NI) and the "Pain Assessment In Advanced Dementia-German" (PAINAD-G) are potential tools to fill this gap. METHODS: This study was performed with verbal non-ICU patients on general wards at Charité Berlin. Two assessors independently rated pain intensity using the BPS-NI and the PAINAD-G along with patients' self-ratings on the Numeric Rating Scale (NRS). The interrater-reliability of BPS-NI and PAINAD-G was calculated and ROC-analyses were performed to identify cut-off values for medium and intense pain for each score. Effectiveness was calculated using percentage agreement. In total, 126 patients were included into analysis. RESULTS: The BPS-NI showed substantial congruence in interrater-reliability (Cohens-Kappa 0.71), whereas the PAINAD-G showed moderate congruence (Kappa 0.48). Based on ROC-analyses, for medium pain levels a cut-off 4 (BPS-NI) or 2 (PAINAD-G) and for severe pain levels cut-off 5 (BPS-NI) and 3 (PAINAD-G) would result in good accordance with self-reported NRS for pain. CONCLUSION: The BPS-NI shows a good validity in measuring pain intensity in patients on general wards and may possibly be used for patients unable to communicate. Using defined cut-off values for BPS-NI and PAINAD-G, clinically relevant pain intensities in patients can reliably be detected. SIGNIFICANCE: Measuring the pain intensity in patients unable to communicate is a common challenge on general wards. This study assessed reliability and applicability BPS-NI and the PAINAD-G in a general ward setting. Furthermore, it provides cut-off values in order to estimate pain intensity and support analgesic response.