Neuropathic Pain in Cancer: What Are the Current Guidelines?

OPINION STATEMENT: Neuropathic cancer pain is experienced by 30-40% of patients with cancer. It significantly reduces quality of life and overall wellbeing for patients living with and beyond cancer. The underlying mechanisms of neuropathic pain in patients with cancer are complex and involve direct tumour involvement, nerve compression or infiltration, chemotherapy and/or radiotherapy-induced nerve damage, or post-surgical complications. It is crucial for healthcare professionals to assess and manage neuropathic cancer pain effectively. There is increasing recognition that standardisation of neuropathic pain assessment leads to tailored management and improved patient outcomes. Pain management strategies, including medication, interventional analgesia, physical and complementary therapy, can help alleviate neuropathic pain and improve the patient's comfort and quality of life.

Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) in cancer pain: A database analysis to determine recruitment feasibility for a clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: Insufficient evidence exists to support or refute use of NSAIDs for managing cancer pain. Palliative physicians support a placebo-controlled trial of NSAIDs as strong opioid adjuncts for cancer-induced bone pain as the most pragmatic design to benefit clinical practice. AIM: We aimed to determine patient numbers receiving palliative radiotherapy for cancer-induced bone pain, estimate the suitability of NSAID prescription and determine survival, guiding future trial feasibility. DESIGN: A retrospective observational database analysis was undertaken using 5 years of routinely collected regional radiotherapy and healthcare data, filtered to achieve a cohort with cancer-induced bone pain. Demographics and survival were linked to available serology and co-morbidity data. SETTING/PARTICIPANTS: Data was sourced from the regional Leeds Cancer Centre, a tertiary care setting. Patients who underwent palliative single fraction 8 gray (Gy) radiotherapy treatment for cancer-induced bone pain were included, totalling 2411 over 5 years. RESULTS: A mean of 478 patients received palliative radiotherapy for cancer-induced bone pain annually. Median age (IQR) was 70 (62-77); negatively skewed (-0.69). 65.3% died within 1 year of radiotherapy; 48.0% within 6 months. Age was not associated with survival on univariable analysis (HR 0.999 (95% CI 0.996-1.003)). Serology from 1063 patients (44.2%) were available; eGFR was ⩾60 mL/min/1.73 m2 in 83.0%. From available data (1352 pts; 51.6% of sample), 20.2% had a coded co-morbidity contra-indicating NSAIDs. Combining serology and co-morbidities, 68.5% could be considered for NSAID prescription. CONCLUSIONS: Patient numbers at a regional radiotherapy centre support the feasibility of trial recruitment. Available serology and co-morbidity data suggest two-thirds may be suitable for NSAID prescription.

Characterising the Features of 381 Clinical Studies Evaluating Transcutaneous Electrical Nerve Stimulation (TENS) for Pain Relief: A Secondary Analysis of the Meta-TENS Study to Improve Future Research.

Background and Objectives: Characterising the features of methodologies, clinical attributes and intervention protocols, of studies is valuable to advise directions for research and practice. This article reports the findings of a secondary analysis of the features from studies screened as part of a large systematic review of TENS (the meta-TENS study). Materials and Methods: A descriptive analysis was performed on information associated with methodology, sample populations and intervention protocols from 381 randomised controlled trials (24,532 participants) evaluating TENS delivered at a strong comfortable intensity at the painful site in adults with pain, irrespective of diagnosis. Results: Studies were conducted in 43 countries commonly using parallel group design (n = 334) and one comparator group (n = 231). Mean ± standard deviation (SD) study sample size (64.05 ± 58.29 participants) and TENS group size (27.67 ± 21.90 participants) were small, with only 13 of 381 studies having 100 participants or more in the TENS group. Most TENS interventions were 'high frequency' (>10 pps, n = 276) and using 100 Hz (109/353 reports that stated a pulse frequency value). Of 476 comparator groups, 54.2% were active treatments (i.e., analgesic medication(s), exercise, manual therapies and electrophysical agents). Of 202 placebo comparator groups, 155 used a TENS device that did not deliver currents. At least 216 of 383 study groups were able to access other treatments whilst receiving TENS. Only 136 out of 381 reports included a statement about adverse events. Conclusions: Clinical studies on TENS are dominated by small parallel group evaluations of high frequency TENS that are often contaminated by concurrent treatment(s). Study reports tended focus on physiological and clinical implications rather than the veracity of methodology and findings. Previously published criteria for designing and reporting TENS studies were neglected and this should be corrected in future research using insights gleaned from this analysis.

Practice review: Evidence-based and effective management of pain in patients with advanced cancer.

BACKGROUND: Pain of a moderate or severe intensity affects over half of patients with advanced cancer and remains undertreated in at least one-third of these patients. AIM: The aim of this study was to provide a pragmatic overview of the evidence supporting the use of interventions in pain management in advanced cancer and to identify where encouraging preliminary results are demonstrated but further research is required. DESIGN: A scoping review approach was used to examine the evidence supporting the use of guideline-recommended interventions in pain management practice. DATA SOURCES: National or international guidelines were selected if they described pain management in adult cancer patients and were written within the last 5 years in English. The Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (January 2014 to January 2019) was searched for 'cancer' AND 'pain' in the title, abstract or keywords. A MEDLINE search was also made. RESULTS: A strong opioid remains the drug of choice for treating moderate or severe pain. Bisphosphonates and radiotherapy are also effective for cancer-related bone pain. Optimal management requires a tailored approach, support for self-management and review of treatment outcomes. There is likely a role for non-pharmacological approaches. Paracetamol should not be used in patients taking a strong opioid to treat pain. Cannabis-based medicines are not recommended. Weak opioids, ketamine and lidocaine are indicated in specific situations only. CONCLUSION: Interventions commonly recommended by guidelines are not always supported by a robust evidence base. Research is required to evaluate the efficacy of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, anti-convulsants, anti-depressants, corticosteroids, some invasive anaesthetic techniques, complementary therapies and transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation.

Opioids combined with antidepressants or antiepileptic drugs for cancer pain: Systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Combining antidepressant or antiepileptic drugs with opioids has resulted in increased pain relief when used for neuropathic pain in non-cancer conditions. However, evidence to support their effectiveness in cancer pain is lacking. AIM: To determine if there is additional benefit when opioids are combined with antidepressant or antiepileptic drugs for cancer pain. DESIGN: Systematic review and meta-analysis. Randomised control trials comparing opioid analgesia in combination with antidepressant or antiepileptic drugs versus opioid monotherapy were sought. Data on pain and adverse events were extracted. Data were pooled using DerSimonian-Laird random-effects meta-analyses, and heterogeneity was assessed. RESULTS: Seven randomised controlled trials that randomised 605 patients were included in the review. Patients' pain was described as neuropathic cancer pain, cancer bone pain and non-specific cancer pain. Four randomised controlled trials were included in the meta-analysis in which opioid in combination with either gabapentin or pregabalin was compared with opioid monotherapy. The pooled standardised mean difference was 0.16 (95% confidence interval, -0.19, 0.51) showing no significant difference in pain relief between the groups. Adverse events were more frequent in the combination arms. Data on amitriptyline, fluvoxamine and phenytoin were inconclusive. CONCLUSION: Combining opioid analgesia with gabapentinoids did not significantly improve pain relief in patients with tumour-related cancer pain compared with opioid monotherapy. Due to the heterogeneity of patient samples, benefit in patients with definite neuropathic cancer pain cannot be excluded. Clinicians should balance the small likelihood of benefit in patients with tumour-related cancer pain against the increased risk of adverse effects of combination therapy.

Duration and determinants of hospice-based specialist palliative care: A national retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Understanding service provision for patients with advanced disease is a research priority, with a need to identify barriers that limit widespread integration of palliative care. AIM: To identify patient and organisational factors that influence the duration of hospice-based palliative care in the United Kingdom prior to death. DESIGN: This is a retrospective cohort study. SETTING/PARTICIPANTS: A total of 64 UK hospices providing specialist palliative care inpatient beds and community services extracted data for all adult decedents (aged over 17 years) with progressive, advanced disease, with a prior referral (e.g. inpatient, community teams, and outpatient) who died between 1 January 2015 and 31 December 2015. Data were requested for factors relating to both the patient and hospice site. RESULTS: Across 42,758 decedents, the median time from referral to death was 48 days. Significant differences in referral to death days were found for those with cancer (53 days) and non-cancer (27 days) ( p < 0.0001). As age increases, the median days from referral to death decreases: for those under 50 years (78 days), 50-74 years (59 days), and 75 years and over (39 days) ( p = 0.0001). An adjusted multivariable negative binomial model demonstrated increasing age persisting as a significant predictor of fewer days of hospice care, as did being male, having a missing ethnicity classification and having a non-cancer diagnosis ( p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Despite increasing rhetoric around early referral, patients with advanced disease are receiving referrals to hospice specialist palliative care very late in their illness trajectory. Age and diagnosis persist as determinants of duration of hospice specialist palliative care before death.

Transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) for phantom pain and stump pain following amputation in adults.

BACKGROUND: This is the first update of a Cochrane review published in Issue 5, 2010 on transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) for phantom pain and stump pain following amputation in adults. Pain may present in a body part that has been amputated (phantom pain) or at the site of amputation (stump pain), or both. Phantom pain and stump pain are complex and multidimensional and the underlying pathophysiology remains unclear. The condition remains a severe burden for those who are affected by it. The mainstay treatments are predominately pharmacological, with increasing acknowledgement of the need for non-drug interventions. TENS has been recommended as a treatment option but there has been no systematic review of available evidence. Hence, the effectiveness of TENS for phantom pain and stump pain is currently unknown. OBJECTIVES: To assess the analgesic effectiveness of TENS for the treatment of phantom pain and stump pain following amputation in adults. SEARCH METHODS: For the original version of the review we searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, AMED, CINAHL, PEDRO and SPORTDiscus (February 2010). For this update, we searched the same databases for relevant randomised controlled trials (RCTs) from 2010 to 25 March 2015. SELECTION CRITERIA: We only included RCTs investigating the use of TENS for the management of phantom pain and stump pain following an amputation in adults. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently assessed trial quality and extracted data. We planned that where available and appropriate, data from outcome measures were to be pooled and presented as an overall estimate of the effectiveness of TENS. MAIN RESULTS: In the original review there were no RCTs that examined the effectiveness of TENS for the treatment of phantom pain and stump pain in adults. For this update, we did not identify any additional RCTs for inclusion. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There were no RCTs to judge the effectiveness of TENS for the management of phantom pain and stump pain. The published literature on TENS for phantom pain and stump pain lacks the methodological rigour and robust reporting needed to confidently assess its effectiveness. Further RCT evidence is required before an assessment can be made. Since publication of the original version of this review, we have found no new studies and our conclusions remain unchanged.

An Investigation of the Effects of Different Pulse Patterns of Transcutaneous Electrical Nerve Stimulation (TENS) on Perceptual Embodiment of a Rubber Hand in Healthy Human Participants With Intact Limbs.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to investigate the strength of perceptual embodiment achieved during an adapted version of the rubber hand illusion (RHI) in response to a series of modified transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) pulse patterns with dynamic temporal and spatial characteristics which are more akin to the mechanical brush stroke in the original RHI. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A repeated-measures counterbalanced experimental study was conducted where each participant was exposed to four TENS interventions: continuous pattern TENS; burst pattern TENS (fixed frequency of 2 bursts per second of 100 pulses per second); amplitude-modulated pattern TENS (intensity increasing from zero to a preset level, then back to zero again in a cyclical fashion); and sham (no current) TENS. Participants rated the intensity of the RHI using a three-item numerical rating scale (each item was ranked from 0 to 10). Friedman's analysis of ranks (one-factor repeated measure) was used to test the differences in perceptual embodiment between TENS innervations; alpha was set at p ≤ 0.05. RESULTS: There were statistically significant differences in the intensity of misattribution and perceptual embodiment between sham and active TENS interventions, but no significant differences between the three active TENS conditions (amplitude-modulated TENS, burst TENS, and continuous TENS). Amplitude-modulated and burst TENS produced significantly higher intensity scores for misattribution sensation and perceptual embodiment compared with sham (no current) TENS, whereas continuous TENS did not. CONCLUSION: The findings provide tentative, but not definitive, evidence that TENS parameters with dynamic spatial and temporal characteristics may produce more intense misattribution sensations and intense perceptual embodiment than parameters with static characteristics (e.g., continuous pulse patterns).

Transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation for phantom pain and stump pain in adult amputees.

Following amputation, 50% to 90% of individuals experience phantom and/or stump pain. Transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) may prove to be a useful adjunct analgesic intervention, although a recent systematic review was unable to judge effectiveness owing to lack of quality evidence. The aim of this pilot study was to gather data on the effect of TENS on phantom pain and stump pain at rest and on movement. Ten individuals with a transtibial amputation and persistent moderate-to-severe phantom and/or stump pain were recruited. Inclusion criteria was a baseline pain score of ≥3 using 0 to 10 numerical rating scale (NRS). TENS was applied for 60 minutes to generate a strong but comfortable TENS sensation at the site of stump pain or projected into the site of phantom pain. Outcomes at rest and on movement before and during TENS at 30 minutes and 60 minutes were changes in the intensities of pain, nonpainful phantom sensation, and prosthesis embodiment. Mean (SD) pain intensity scores were reduced by 1.8 (1.6) at rest (P < 0.05) and 3.9 (1.9) on movement (P < 0.05) after 60 minutes of TENS. For five participants, it was possible to project TENS sensation into the phantom limb by placing the electrodes over transected afferent nerves. Nonpainful phantom sensations and prosthesis embodiment remained unchanged. This study has demonstrated that TENS has potential for reducing phantom pain and stump pain at rest and on movement. Projecting TENS sensation into the phantom limb might facilitate perceptual embodiment of prosthetic limbs. The findings support the delivery of a feasibility trial.

Designing a clinical trial of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs for cancer pain: a survey of UK palliative care physicians.

OBJECTIVES: Insufficient quality evidence exists to support or refute the use of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) in the management of cancer pain. We aimed to determine the most clinically pragmatic design of a future randominsed controlled trial (RCT), based on how NSAIDs are currently used and perceived efficacy. METHODS: An online survey was distributed to members of the Association for Palliative Medicine of Great Britain and Ireland examining NSAID use, indications and perceived efficacy, as well as duration of respondents' experience in palliative medicine. RESULTS: 23% of 968 members responded. A placebo-controlled trial of NSAIDs as a strong opioid adjunct in cancer-related bone pain was considered the most clinically pragmatic design. Concerning current practice, oral administration was the preferential route (79.4%), dosed regularly (79.5%). Selective cyclooxygenase-2 (COX-2) inhibitors and non-selective COX-2 inhibitors were considered similarly effective by 45% in cancer pain; ibuprofen being the first line oral NSAID of choice (42.6%). Treatment efficacy is generally determined within 1 week (94.3%). On a Likert scale, most physicians consider NSAIDs improve cancer pain either 'sometimes' (57.7%) or 'often' (40%). Years of specialist palliative care experience did not affect perception of efficacy (p=0.353). CONCLUSIONS: A randomised controlled trial of NSAIDs as opioid adjuncts for cancer-related bone pain would be the most pragmatic design supported by palliative care clinicians to benefit clinical practice.

A systematic review of subcutaneous versus intramuscular or intravenous routes of opioid administration on pain outcomes in cancer and post-surgical clinical populations - challenging current assumptions in palliative care practice.

Objective: The objective of this review is to investigate the use of the subcutaneous route of administration of analgesics, common practice within palliative medicine. Design: Systematic review using consensus approach, direct comparison of subcutaneous route with intravenous and intramuscular routes. Results: The limited available evidence demonstrates non-inferiority of the subcutaneous route in both cancer patients and those post-surgery. Pain management is comparable to other routes. Route-related side effects are rare and systemic side effects are comparable. Conclusion: Pain management is a critical role of palliative medicine. The subcutaneous route of administration offers a viable option for the delivery of parenteral analgesia within all settings, including the community. This review supports current practice, demonstrating equivalence with more invasive routes of administration.

Experience of an NIHR Clinical Lectureship (medical/dental) and the determining factors for a clinical academic career post lectureship: a mixed-method evaluation.

OBJECTIVES: The objective of this study is to investigate early-to-late postdoctoral clinical academic progression and the experiences of NIHR Clinical Lectureship (CL) fellows, considering enablers and barriers to success, and identifying the factors associated with immediate progression to a clinical academic role following completion of the award. SETTING: Datasets of CL awardees across the UK. PARTICIPANTS: For semistructured interviews, n=40 CL awardees that had finished their award within the previous 5 years. For quantitative analysis, n=1226 completed or currently active CL awardees. OUTCOME MEASURES: The responses from the semistructured interviews to the defined questions on experiences during the award, postaward progression, and enablers and barriers to academic progression. Other primary outcome measures were quantitative data on first destinations postaward, demographic data, and whether an awardee had previously held an NIHR Academic Clinical Fellowship (ACF) or was a recipient of the Academy of Medical Sciences (AMS) Starter Grant. RESULTS: CL awardees identified numerous benefits to the award, with the majority achieving their aims. Most awardees progressed to a clinical academic role; however, some returned to a clinical only position, citing concerns around the time pressure associated with balancing clinical and academic responsibilities, and the competition to attain further postdoctoral awards. The region of the award partnership, year of award end and success in applying for an AMS Starter Grant were associated with progression to a clinical academic role. Gender, holding an ACF and having a craft or non-craft specialty had no independent statistical association with clinical academic progression. CONCLUSIONS: The CL is a valued element of the Integrated Academic Pathway. By addressing issues around later postdoctoral progression opportunities, responding to challenges experienced by CLs, and by understanding the factors identified in this study associated with clinical academic progression, it should be possible to increase the proportion of CLs that become fully independent clinical academic research leaders. PARTICIPANTS: 1226 NIHR CLs active or completed on the award between 2006 and 2020.

Exploration of pain assessment and management processes in oncology outpatient services with healthcare professionals: a qualitative study.

OBJECTIVES: This study explored cancer pain management practices and clinical care pathways used by healthcare professionals (HCPs) to understand the barriers and facilitators for standardised pain management in oncology outpatient services (OS). DESIGN: Data were collected using semistructured interviews that were audio-recorded and transcribed. The data were analysed using thematic analysis. SETTING: Three NHS trusts with oncology OS in Northern England. PARTICIPANTS: Twenty HCPs with varied roles (eg, oncologist and nurse) and experiences (eg, registrar and consultant) from different cancer site clinics (eg, breast and lung). Data were analysed using thematic analysis. RESULTS: HCPs discussed cancer pain management practices during consultation and supporting continuity of care beyond consultation. Key findings included : (1) HCPs' level of clinical experience influenced pain assessments; (2) remote consulting impeded experienced HCPs to do detailed pain assessments; (3) diffusion of HCP responsibility to manage cancer pain; (4) nurses facilitated pain management support with patients and (5) continuity of care for pain management was constrained by the integration of multidisciplinary teams. CONCLUSIONS: These data demonstrate HCP cancer pain management practices varied and were unstructured. Recommendations are made for a standardised cancer pain management intervention: (1) detailed evaluation of pain with a tailored self-management strategy; (2) implementation of a structured pain assessment that supports remote consultations, (3) pain assessment tool that can support both experienced and less experienced clinicians. These findings will inform the development of a cancer pain management tool to integrate within routine oncology OS.

Perceptual embodiment of prosthetic limbs by transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation.

OBJECTIVES: In able-bodied participants, it is possible to induce a sense of perceptual embodiment in an artificial hand using a visual-tactile illusion. In amputee patients, electrical stimulation of sensory afferents using transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) has been shown to generate somatic sensations in an amputee's phantom limb(s). However, the effects of TENS on the perceptual embodiment of an artificial limb are not known. Our objective was to investigate the effects of TENS on the perceptual embodiment of an artificial limb in fully intact able-bodied participants. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We used a modified version of the rubber hand illusion presented to 30 able-bodied participants (16 women, 14 men) to convey TENS paresthesia to an artificial hand. TENS electrodes were located over superficial radial nerve on the lateral aspect of the right forearm (1 cm proximal to the wrist), which was hidden from view. TENS intensity was increased to a strong non-painful TENS sensation (electrical paresthesia) was felt beneath the electrodes and projecting into the fingers of the hand. The electrical characteristics of TENS were asymmetric biphasic electrical pulsed waves, continuous pulse pattern, 120 Hz pulse frequency (rate), and 80 µs pulse duration (width). RESULTS: Participants reported significantly higher intensities of the rubber hand illusion during the two TENS conditions (mean = 5.8, standard deviation = 1.9) compared with the two non-TENS conditions (mean = 4.9, standard deviation = 1.7), p < 0.0005. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings provide initial evidence that TENS paresthesia can be projected into an artificial limb, and this can enhance the sense of perceptual embodiment of an artificial hand. Further exploratory studies involving an amputee population are warranted.

Efficacy and safety of transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) for acute and chronic pain in adults: a systematic review and meta-analysis of 381 studies (the meta-TENS study).

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the efficacy and safety of transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) for relief of pain in adults. DESIGN: Systematic review and meta-analysis. DATA SOURCES: Medline, Cochrane Central, Embase (and others) from inception to July 2019 and updated on 17 May 2020. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR STUDY SELECTION: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing strong non-painful TENS at or close to the site of pain versus placebo or other treatments in adults with pain, irrespective of diagnosis. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: Reviewers independently screened, extracted data and assessed risk of bias (RoB, Cochrane tool) and certainty of evidence (Grading and Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation). Mean pain intensity and proportions of participants achieving reductions of pain intensity (≥30% or >50%) during or immediately after TENS. Random effect models were used to calculate standardised mean differences (SMD) and risk ratios. Subgroup analyses were related to trial methodology and characteristics of pain. RESULTS: The review included 381 RCTs (24 532 participants). Pain intensity was lower during or immediately after TENS compared with placebo (91 RCTs, 92 samples, n=4841, SMD=-0·96 (95% CI -1·14 to -0·78), moderate-certainty evidence). Methodological (eg, RoB, sample size) and pain characteristics (eg, acute vs chronic, diagnosis) did not modify the effect. Pain intensity was lower during or immediately after TENS compared with pharmacological and non-pharmacological treatments used as part of standard of care (61 RCTs, 61 samples, n=3155, SMD = -0·72 (95% CI -0·95 to -0·50], low-certainty evidence). Levels of evidence were downgraded because of small-sized trials contributing to imprecision in magnitude estimates. Data were limited for other outcomes including adverse events which were poorly reported, generally mild and not different to comparators. CONCLUSION: There was moderate-certainty evidence that pain intensity is lower during or immediately after TENS compared with placebo and without serious adverse events. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42019125054.

Ten years of NIHR research training: who got an award? A retrospective cohort study.

OBJECTIVE: In 2017, the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) academy produced a strategic review of training, which reported the variation in application characteristics associated with success rates. It was noted that variation in applicant characteristic was not independent of one another. Therefore, the aim of this secondary analysis was to investigate the inter-relationships in order to identify factors (or groups of factors) most associated with application numbers and success rates. DESIGN: Retrospective data were gathered from 4388 applications to NIHR Academy between 2007 and 2016. Multinominal logistic regression models quantified the likelihood of success depending on changes in the explanatory factors; relative risk ratios with 95% CIs. A classification tree analysis was built using exhaustive χ2 automatic interaction detection to better understand the effect of interactions between explanatory variables on application success rates. RESULTS: 936 (21.3%) applications were awarded. Applications from males and females were equally likely to be successful (p=0.71). There was an overall reduction in numbers of applications from females as award seniority increased from predoctoral to professorship. Applications from institutions with a medical school had a 2.6-fold increase in likelihood of success (p<0.001). Classification tree analysis revealed key predictors of application success: award level, type of programme, previous NIHR award experience and applying form a medical school. CONCLUSION: Success rates did not differ according to gender, and doctors were not more likely to be successful than applications from other professions. Taken together, these findings suggest an essential fairness in how the quality of a submitted application is assessed, but they also raise questions about variation in the opportunity to submit a high-quality application. The companion qualitative study (Burkshaw et al. (2021) BMJ Open) provides valuable insight into potential candidate mechanisms and discusses how research capacity development initiatives might be targeted in the future.

Ten years of NIHR research training: perceptions of the programmes: a qualitative interview study.

OBJECTIVES: The UK National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) training programmes were created to build and sustain research capacity in healthcare. Following the training programme 10-year strategic review, this qualitative study aimed to deepen understanding of facilitators and barriers for those progressing through NIHR-supported research careers. DESIGN: Semistructured qualitative study. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Telephone interviews conducted between May and August 2017 were digitally recorded, transcribed and analysed using Framework Approach. SETTING: UK National Health Service (NHS) Trusts, university medical schools, District General Hospitals, Integrated Academic Training Programme centres and Research Design Services across the North East, North West, South East and South West of England, London and the Midlands. PARTICIPANTS: Fourteen women and eight men, of whom, 14 were previous or current NIHR personal awardees (seven doctors and seven allied health professionals (AHPs) or nurses) and eight were managers (staff within clinical or university training-related roles). RESULTS: (1) NIHR awards were viewed as transformative for research careers; (2) however, there were perceptions of a biased 'playing field'. (3) Inequalities were perceived for AHPs and nurses, those outside of established research institutes and those in 'unfashionable' specialisms. (4) While support for NIHR awards contributed to a healthy research culture, (5) short-term awards were perceived as a barrier to continuing an independent research career. CONCLUSIONS: Participants perceived many strengths of the NIHR training programmes in terms of developing individual careers and research capacity. Areas in which improvement could enhance the ability to attract, develop and retain researcher were identified. Our findings are of relevance to schemes in other countries, where healthcare researchers experience similar challenges. Further work is needed to overcome barriers and ensure equity of access to, and success within, clinical research training schemes to sustain the research workforce needed to address future global health challenges.

A national survey of hospice pharmacists and a comparison with international models.

BACKGROUND: Pharmacists can contribute to improved patient outcomes, improve medicine knowledge, reduce drug costs and minimise errors. However, their role within hospice-based services is not well described. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this paper was to explore the role of pharmacists within UK hospices. METHODS: Methods include an online survey and follow-up telephone contact of pharmacists working in UK hospices assessing pharmacist provision, duties, communication, medicine sourcing and training. RESULTS: Eighty-nine responses were received from 82 hospices (response rate 50%). Pharmacists had a role in 75% of hospices providing between 6.6 min and 5.5 hrs of pharmacist support per bed per week. The most frequent duty reported was provision of medicines information to the clinical team. Access to patient records varied considerably: 13% had full read and write access to GP records while 29% had no access. Job-specific training had not been received by 36% of the respondents and 47% reported training needs including basic training in palliative care. CONCLUSIONS: Three-quarters of UK hospices have pharmacy provision, although this falls below the recommended levels in the majority. Hospice pharmacists lack access to training and records. Medicines sourcing for hospices is variable and could provide opportunities for efficiencies with further research.

Transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) for phantom pain and stump pain following amputation in adults.

BACKGROUND: Amputee pain may present in a body part that has been amputated (phantom pain) or at the site of amputation (stump pain), or both. Phantom pain and stump pain are complex and multidimensional and the underlying pathophysiology remains unclear. The mainstay treatments for phantom pain and stump pain are predominately pharmacological. The condition remains a severe burden for those who are affected by it. There is increasing acknowledgement of the need for non-drug interventions and Transcutaneous Electrical Nerve Stimulation (TENS) may have an important role to play. TENS has been recommended as a treatment option for phantom pain and stump pain. To date there has been no systematic review of available evidence and the effectiveness of TENS for phantom pain and stump pain is currently unknown. OBJECTIVES: To assess the analgesic effectiveness of TENS for the treatment of phantom pain and stump pain following amputation in adults. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched MEDLINE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), EMBASE, PsycINFO, AMED, CINAHL, PEDRO and SPORTDiscus (February 2010). SELECTION CRITERIA: Only randomised controlled trials (RCTs) investigating the use of TENS for the management of phantom pain and stump pain following an amputation in adults were included. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently assessed trial quality and extracted data. It was planned that where available and appropriate, data from outcome measures were to be pooled and presented as an overall estimate of the effectiveness of TENS. MAIN RESULTS: No RCTs that examined the effectiveness of TENS for the treatment of phantom pain and stump pain in adults were identified by the searches. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There were no RCTs on which to judge the effectiveness of TENS for the management of phantom pain and stump pain. The published literature on TENS for phantom pain and stump pain lacks the methodological rigour and robust reporting needed to confidently assess its effectiveness. Further RCT evidence is required before such a judgement can be made.