RESUMO
Interdisciplinary multimodal pain therapy (IMPT) is an established procedure in the treatment of chronic pain. In daily practice, many institutions regard so-called booster units as an integral part of IMPT. However, no consensual recommendations and evidence for booster concepts are available to date. This article uses the results of a discussion between clinical experts in the field of IMPT at the German Pain Congress in 2022 in order to show the status quo in care. It has been shown that currently applied booster offers vary greatly in terms of time intervals, intensities, therapy content and patient selection and that there is a need for structural and process parameters for the implementation of cross-sectoral booster treatments. In conclusion, the authors outline how the development of these parameters will be planned as an expert consensus with the participation of interested institutions and the inclusion of the patient perspective and offer opportunities for participation in this process.
Assuntos
Analgésicos Opioides/efeitos adversos , Analgésicos Opioides/uso terapêutico , Condução de Veículo , Dor/tratamento farmacológico , Segurança , Acidentes de Trânsito/legislação & jurisprudência , Acidentes de Trânsito/prevenção & controle , Alemanha , Humanos , Responsabilidade Legal , Assistência de Longa Duração , Detecção do Abuso de Substâncias/legislação & jurisprudênciaRESUMO
INTRODUCTION: Strong centrally acting analgesics, including tapentadol prolonged release (PR), have demonstrated efficacy for the management of non-malignant, chronic pain. Maintaining patient independence, including the ability to drive safely, is a key goal of long-term analgesic therapy. This multicenter, open-label, phase 3b trial evaluated the effects of tapentadol PR on driving ability. METHODS: This study included patients who had completed previous tapentadol PR trials for severe low back or osteoarthritis pain. After at least 6 weeks of dose stability, patients continued taking tapentadol PR (50-250 mg twice daily) and could take supplemental immediate-release tapentadol 50 mg, except on the day before or day of the driving test (before the test). Pain intensity was assessed using an 11-point numerical rating scale. The Vienna Test System-Traffic Plus was used to assess cognitive and psychomotor function. The key surrogate parameter for driving ability was a global judgment based on 6 battery tests. RESULTS: Thirty-eight patients enrolled and completed the trial, and 35 patients completed all 6 tests. Pain scores remained unchanged from enrollment to final visit [mean (standard deviation) change, -0.2 (1.0)]. Approximately two-thirds [65.7% (23/35)] of patients were classified as fit to drive based on the global judgment of driving-specific ability [34.3% (12/35) not fit to drive]. Total daily tapentadol PR dose (>200 vs. ≤200 mg/day) did not affect global judgment of driving ability (P = 0.4885). Two adverse events (considered unrelated to study drug) were reported. CONCLUSION: Results suggest that most patients receiving a stable dose of tapentadol PR for severe, chronic pain would be able to drive, consistent with earlier studies evaluating stable treatment with strong opioids. Study design limitations and needs for individual patient assessment must be considered in clinical practice.
RESUMO
INTRODUCTION: Since the response of spouses has been proven to be an important reinforcement of pain behaviour and disability it has been addressed in research and therapy. Fordyce suggested pain behaviour and well behaviour be considered in explaining suffering in chronic pain patients. Among existing instruments concerning spouse's responses the aspect of well behaviour has not been examined so far. The SRI (Spouse Response Inventory) tries to consider pain behaviour and well behaviour and appears to be acceptable because of its brevity and close proximity to daily language. The aim of the study is the translation into German, followed by evaluation and validation, of the SRI on a German sample of patients with chronic pain. METHODS AND ANALYSES: The study is comprehensively designed: initially, the focus will lie on the translation of the instrument following the guidelines for cross-cultural translation and adaptation and evaluation of the German version according to the source study. Subsequently, a validation referring to predictive, incremental and construct validation will be conducted using instruments based on similar or close but different constructs. Evaluation of the resulting SRI-G (SRI-German) will be conducted on a sample of at least 30 patients with chronic pain attending a comprehensive pain centre. For validation at least 120 patients with chronic headache, back pain, cancer related pain and somatoform pain disorder shall be included, for a total of 480 patients. Separate analyses according to specific pain diagnoses will be performed to ensure psychometric property, interpretability and control of diagnosis of specific limitations. Analyses will include comprehensive investigation of psychometric property of the scale by hierarchical regression analyses, correlation analyses, multivariate analysis of variance and exploratory factor analyses (SPSS). ETHICS: The study protocol was approved by the Ethics Committee of the University of Dresden (EK 335 122008) based on the Helsinki declaration.