Efficacy and Safety of Low Dose Naltrexone for Chronic Pain.

IF 0.9 Q3 ANESTHESIOLOGY Journal of Pain & Palliative Care Pharmacotherapy Pub Date : 2024-03-01 Epub Date: 2024-02-01 DOI:10.1080/15360288.2024.2302550
Madison N Irwin, David A Cooke, Daniel Berland, Vincent D Marshall, Michael A Smith
{"title":"Efficacy and Safety of Low Dose Naltrexone for Chronic Pain.","authors":"Madison N Irwin, David A Cooke, Daniel Berland, Vincent D Marshall, Michael A Smith","doi":"10.1080/15360288.2024.2302550","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Naltrexone is a mu-opioid receptor antagonist increasingly used as an analgesic for chronic pain at low doses. This retrospective, observational cohort study was conducted at an academic medical center to evaluate low-dose naltrexone (LDN) efficacy and describe its use in routine clinical practice. Adults receiving LDN, doses <10 mg for ≥1 month, seen at an outpatient pain clinic from January 1, 2014 to April 1, 2022 were included. The primary outcome was change in the Pain, Enjoyment of Life, and General Activity (PEG) score after LDN. Thirty-one patients were included. Median age was 50 years and 71% were female. Median duration of pain at baseline was 5 years. Mean PEG scores were 7.27 ± 1.39 and 6.62 ± 2.04 at baseline and follow-up, respectively. Mean difference was 0.66 (95% CI [0.10-1.21], <i>p</i> = 0.022). Eighty-seven percent (27) of patients discontinued LDN, 52% (16) for lack of benefit, 23% (7) for loss of benefit, 10% (3) for side effects, and 3% (1) for other reasons. Seven (23%) reported side effects. LDN was associated with a statistically significant reduction in PEG in adult chronic pain patients, however the clinical significance is unclear as over 75% of patients discontinued LDN due to lack of benefit.</p>","PeriodicalId":16645,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Pain & Palliative Care Pharmacotherapy","volume":" ","pages":"13-19"},"PeriodicalIF":0.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Pain & Palliative Care Pharmacotherapy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/15360288.2024.2302550","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/2/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ANESTHESIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Naltrexone is a mu-opioid receptor antagonist increasingly used as an analgesic for chronic pain at low doses. This retrospective, observational cohort study was conducted at an academic medical center to evaluate low-dose naltrexone (LDN) efficacy and describe its use in routine clinical practice. Adults receiving LDN, doses <10 mg for ≥1 month, seen at an outpatient pain clinic from January 1, 2014 to April 1, 2022 were included. The primary outcome was change in the Pain, Enjoyment of Life, and General Activity (PEG) score after LDN. Thirty-one patients were included. Median age was 50 years and 71% were female. Median duration of pain at baseline was 5 years. Mean PEG scores were 7.27 ± 1.39 and 6.62 ± 2.04 at baseline and follow-up, respectively. Mean difference was 0.66 (95% CI [0.10-1.21], p = 0.022). Eighty-seven percent (27) of patients discontinued LDN, 52% (16) for lack of benefit, 23% (7) for loss of benefit, 10% (3) for side effects, and 3% (1) for other reasons. Seven (23%) reported side effects. LDN was associated with a statistically significant reduction in PEG in adult chronic pain patients, however the clinical significance is unclear as over 75% of patients discontinued LDN due to lack of benefit.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
小剂量纳曲酮治疗慢性疼痛的有效性和安全性。
纳曲酮是一种μ-阿片受体拮抗剂,越来越多地被用作低剂量慢性疼痛的镇痛剂。这项回顾性观察队列研究是在一家学术医疗中心进行的,目的是评估低剂量纳曲酮(LDN)的疗效,并描述其在常规临床实践中的应用。接受低剂量纳曲酮(LDN)治疗的成人,剂量 p = 0.022)。87%(27 人)的患者停用了 LDN,其中 52%(16 人)是因为缺乏疗效,23%(7 人)是因为失去疗效,10%(3 人)是因为副作用,3%(1 人)是因为其他原因。7人(23%)报告了副作用。从统计学角度看,LDN 可显著减少成年慢性疼痛患者的 PEG,但临床意义尚不明确,因为超过 75% 的患者因缺乏益处而停用 LDN。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.60
自引率
9.10%
发文量
40
期刊最新文献
Implementation of Pharmacist Driven Gabapentinoid Titration for Diabetic Peripheral Neuropathy in a Primary Care Setting. Longitudinal Evaluation of the Risk Index for Overdose or Serious Opioid-Induced Respiratory Depression in Patients with Cancer. Evaluating the Impact of Buprenorphine on Depressive Symptoms Among Veterans with Chronic Pain. Cannabis-Based Treatments for Fibromyalgia: Implications for the Philippines' Medical Cannabis Legalization. Pain Neuroscience Education: Teaching People About Pain.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1