Pain and Therapy最新文献

Since the COVID-19 pandemic, healthcare systems are facing extraordinary challenges. Our approaches to medicine have changed and created a whole new generation of people who have chronic pain. Various medical services were postponed. The pandemic significantly impacted the bio-psychosocial model of pain and the management of chronic pain. These new challenges affected millions of patients worldwide, with more burden on patients with chronic pain. Telemedicine and digital health rather than traditional office visits have become essential tools for communications, resulting in an unmatched surge in telehealth adoption. This new approach facilitated the remote treatment and follow-up of patients who have difficulty to access the healthcare services, particularly patients with chronic pain and those who were receiving regular controlled medications. An extensive computer search was conducted, during the period (from January 2014 to March 2024), and included literature from PubMed, Scopus, MEDLINE, and Google scholar. According to preset inclusion and exclusion criteria, a total of 38 articles have been included in this review article. This literature review focuses on the innovation of telemedicine and digital health in pain management, especially in the context of the challenges posed by the COVID-19 pandemic. The manuscript provides a comprehensive overview of telemedicine and digital communications, their evolution, and their significance in healthcare. It also emphasizes the benefits, challenges, limitations, and the ethical concerns of telemedicine in pain management after the COVID-19 pandemic. Furthermore, the document explores the different modes of the telecommunications and discusses the future directions of the digital health technology.

Introduction: Chronic neck pain (CNP) is a global public health problem, with high prevalence and absenteeism rates. Central sensitization (CS) as a basis for chronic pain may play an essential role in its development and progression. It is often comorbid with low conditioned pain modulation (CPM) effects, cognitions, and psychological problems.

Objectives: The purposes of this study were to (1) explore the relationship between pain-related cognitions and psychological factors, CPM effects, and the central sensitization inventory (CSI) scores; and (2) determine whether cognitions and psychological factors can predict CSI scores and CPM effects in individuals with CNP.

Methods: Fifty-four individuals with CNP were recruited for this cross-sectional study. The following outcome measures were evaluated: The CSI (screening tool) was compared with the cold pressor test (CPT), which was the psychophysical test used to assess the CPM; neck pain intensity using the visual analogue scale (VAS), as well as pain-related cognitions (including kinesiophobia and pain catastrophization) and psychological states (including anxiety and depression) using self-report questionnaires.

Results: CSI score was not associated with the CPM effect (r = 0.257, p > 0.05), and no cognitions or psychological factors were associated with CPM (p > 0.05), but CSI score was moderately positively correlated with kinesiophobia (r = 0.554, p < 0.01), lowly positively correlated with pain catastrophization (r = 0.332, p = 0.017) and anxiety (r = 0.492, p < 0.01), but not depression (r = 0.207, p = 0.132). Multiple linear regression analysis showed that kinesiophobia (B = 1.308, p < 0.01) and anxiety (B = 1.806, p = 0.02) were significant positive predictors of CSI score.

Conclusions: The findings confirm some of our hypotheses. Accordingly, the findings inferred that the CSI does not seem to respond to CPM effect in patients with CNP effectively. In addition, CSI score was associated with cognitions and psychological factors, of which kinesiophobia and anxiety were effective predictors. In clinical practice, pain-related cognitions and psychological factors should be fully considered to manage neck pain efficiently.

Introduction: Dexketoprofen/tramadol 25/75 mg (DKP/TRAM) is a fixed-dose combination of a cyclooxygenase inhibitor and opioid receptor agonist. To better understand the efficacy and safety of DKP/TRAM in the treatment of moderate to severe acute lower back pain (LBP) with or without radiculopathy, we carried out a large explorative phase IV international, multicenter, prospective, randomized, double-blind, parallel group, placebo-controlled study (DANTE).

Methods: A total of 538 patients with or without a history of LBP and experiencing acute LPB of moderate to severe intensity [Numerical Rating Scale-Pain Intensity (NRS-PI) score > 5] were randomized 4:4:1:1 to DKP/TRAM 25/75 mg every 8 h (n = 211), tramadol (TRAM) 100 mg (n = 207), placebo-matched DKP/TRAM (n = 59), or placebo-matched TRAM (n = 61).

Results: The proportion of patients achieving the primary endpoint, defined as the time to first achieve NRS-PI score < 4 or pain intensity reduction ≥ 30% from drug intake up to 8 h after the first dose, was higher in the DKP/TRAM arm than in the placebo group, but the difference was not statistically significant (46.1% vs. 42.6%, respectively; hazard ratio 1.11; 95% confidence interval 0.775, 1.595; p = 0.566). DKP/TRAM achieved superiority over TRAM in total pain relief at 4, 6, and 8 h (p < 0.05). Conversely, in relation to the secondary endpoints, a significantly greater reduction in NRS-PI score was seen with DKP/TRAM versus placebo starting from 1 h, and this reduction remained numerically lower throughout 8 h. Summed pain intensity difference values were also significantly lower at 4, 6, and 8 h with DKP/TRAM compared to TRAM (p < 0.05). Overall, DKP/TRAM was well tolerated.

Conclusion: Although the primary endpoint was not met, secondary efficacy analyses suggest the superiority of DKP/TRAM over placebo and TRAM alone in terms of total pain relief. DKP/TRAM can be considered to be an effective and safe option for the treatment of moderate to severe acute LBP.

Dante study registration: EudraCT number: 2019-003656-37; ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT05170841.

Introduction: Patients frequently suffer from debilitating chronic postsurgical pain (CPSP) subsequent to thoracoscopic surgery. The impact of postoperative dexmedetomidine infusion on CPSP remains elusive. This study aimed to scrutinize the effect of dexmedetomidine on both 1-year incidence of CPSP and the quality of recovery after thoracoscopic pulmonary nodule surgery.

Methods: This retrospective analysis encompassed clinical and follow-up data from 1148 patients undergoing thoracoscopic pulmonary nodule surgery at our institution between September 2021 and August 2022. Depending on whether dexmedetomidine was infused intravenously or not on the first night after surgery, patients were stratified into the dexmedetomidine group or the control group, with propensity score matching applied to harmonize baseline characteristics. Comparative analysis sought to delineate distinctions of CPSP and recovery quality 1 year after surgery.

Results: Following propensity score matching, a cohort of 258 patients in each group underwent analysis. Comparisons after matching revealed no statistically significant disparities in 1-year CPSP incidence [76/258 (29.5%) versus 78/258 (30.2%), P = 0.847], moderate-to-severe pain occurrence [17/76 (22.4%) versus 22/78 (28.2%), P = 0.405], neuropathic pain occurrence [11/76 (14.5%) versus 11/78 (14.1%), P = 0.948], and postoperative recovery quality assessed by 12-Item Short Form Health Survey (SF-12) score (113.1 [107.2, 116.0] versus 113.0 [107.4, 116.0], P = 0.328). Multivariate logistic regression analysis encompassing the entire cohort identified being female [odds ratio (OR) 2.10, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.59-2.79, P < 0.001) and postoperative rescue analgesia (OR 1.47, 95% CI 1.09-1.96, P = 0.010) as risk factors for CPSP, while intraoperative fentanyl dosage (OR 0.92, 95% CI 0.87-0.98, P = 0.006) emerged as a protective factor.

Conclusion: The prolonged administration of dexmedetomidine did not yield discernible amelioration in either 1-year CPSP or the recovery quality after thoracoscopic surgery. Noteworthy risk factors for CPSP encompassed female sex, postoperative rescue analgesia, and diminished fentanyl dosage intraoperatively.

Introduction: Chronic neck pain (cNP) is one of the leading causes of disability worldwide, often being refractory to conventional forms of treatment. Various forms of electrical stimulation have been proposed to decrease pain and improve function. Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) for treatment of cNP have rarely been published.

Methods: An independent retrospective statistical analysis of PROMs data for users of H-Wave^® device stimulation (HWDS), prospectively collected by the device manufacturer over a 4-year period, was conducted. Final surveys for 34,192 pain management patients were filtered for pain chronicity limited to 3-24 months and device use of 22-365 days, resulting in 11,503 patients with "all diagnoses"; this number was further reduced to 1482 patients with cNP, sprain, or strain.

Results: Neck pain was reduced by 3.13 points (0-10 pain scale), with significant (≥ 20%) relief in 86.6%. Function/activities of daily living (ADL) improved in 96.19%, while improved work performance was reported in 84.76%. Medication use decreased or stopped in 65.42% and sleep improved in 60.39%. Over 95% reported having expectations met or exceeded, service satisfaction, and confidence in device use, while no adverse events were reported. Subgroup analyses found positive benefit associations with longer duration of device use.

Conclusion: Near-equivalent outcomes were self-reported by cNP HWDS patients as for (previously published) chronic low back pain (cLBP) patients. HWDS provided effective and safe cNP relief, improvements in function and ADL, along with additional benefits including decreased medication use, better sleep, and improved work performance.

Introduction: The management of pain following a burn is extremely complex because of the multifactorial nature of burn pain (nociceptive and neuropathic). In the pre-hospital setting and emergency department (ED), the main goal of acute pain management is to reduce the patient's pain, allowing them to maintain function and to prevent the chronification of pain. Opioids are used as first-line treatment in management of burn pain. The aim of our study was to evaluate the efficacy and adverse effects of intravenous (IV) morphine for burn pain management in the ED and to evaluate pain management in the pre-hospital setting.

Methods: In this single-center observational study, patients presenting with second- and third-degree burns were enrolled in our ED. Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) and Burn Specific Pain Anxiety Scale (BSPAS) were performed at ED admission and after 1 h. Pain medications administered before arrival in the ED were reported by the rescue team. All patients received IV acetaminophen every 8 h and IV morphine according NRS.

Results: Thirty patients were included in this study. At the time of arrival to the ED, > 90% of the patients reported severe pain; 95.8% of them received IV morphine to achieve pain relief. After 1 h, > 65% of patients had NRS < 3. The total amount of IV morphine was 18.12 ± 4.26 mg in the first hour. No adverse events were recorded. The BSPAS on admission to the ED was 34.8 ± 5.6, indicating severe anxiety. After 1 h, BSPAS was 12.8 ± 4.8, indicating mild anxiety.

Conclusion: IV morphine used for burn pain management in the emergency setting significantly improves patient outcomes in terms of pain. IV morphine also reduced anxiety scores at 1 h.

Introduction: Further clinical validation is required to determine whether transcutaneous electrical acupoint stimulation (TEAS) can replace opioids and be used in combination with remimazolam for sedation during gastrointestinal endoscopy.

Methods: A total of 108 outpatients who underwent diagnostic gastrointestinal endoscopy were randomly divided into three groups: fentanyl plus remimazolam group (group C), TEAS plus remimazolam group (group E), and placebo-TEAS plus remimazolam group (group P). The assessments of patient satisfaction, physician satisfaction, and pain scale score during the examination constituted the primary endpoints of the study. The secondary endpoints were the time of recovery, recovery of normal behavioral function and discharge, incidence of adverse reactions, and dose of remimazolam.

Results: Compared with group C, group E had a greater median score for patient satisfaction at follow-up and a slightly lower median score for physician satisfaction. The pain score of group E was slightly greater than that of group C, but the difference was not significant. However, in group C, the incidence of hypoxemia, the rate of nausea and the severity of vertigo were greater, and the number of patients discharged and resuming normal behavioral function was greater than those in the other two groups. The dose of remimazolam in group C and group E was less than that in group P.

Conclusions: TEAS combined with moderate sedation of remimazolam can provide an ideal sedative effect, which preferably suppresses discomfort caused by gastrointestinal endoscopy and has fewer sedation-related complications.

Trial registration: ID: NCT05485064; First registration (29/07/2022); Last registration (02/11/2022) (Clinical Trials.gov).

Introduction: Postherpetic neuralgia (PHN), a complication of herpes zoster, significantly impacts the quality of life of affected patients. Research indicates that early intervention for pain can reduce the occurrence or severity of PHN. This study aims to develop a predictive model and scoring table to identify patients at risk of developing PHN following acute herpetic neuralgia, facilitating informed clinical decision-making.

Methods: We conducted a retrospective review of 524 hospitalized patients with herpes zoster at The First Affiliated Hospital of Zhejiang Chinese Medical University from December 2020 to December 2023 and classified them according to whether they had PHN, collecting a comprehensive set of 30 patient characteristics and disease-related indicators, 5 comorbidity indicators, 2 disease score values, and 10 serological indicators. Relevant features associated with PHN were identified using the least absolute shrinkage and selection operator (LASSO). Then, the patients were divided into a training set and a test set in a 4:1 ratio, with comparability tested using univariate analysis. Six models were established in the training set using machine learning methods: support vector machines, logistic regression, random forest, k-nearest neighbor, gradient boosting, and neural network. The performance of these models was evaluated in the test set, and a nomogram based on logistic regression was used to create a PHN prediction score table.

Results: Eight non-zero characteristic variables selected from the LASSO regression results were included in the model, including age [area under the curve (AUC) = 0.812, p < 0.001], Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) (AUC = 0.792, p < 0.001), receiving treatment time (AUC = 0.612, p < 0.001), rash recovery time (AUC = 0.680, p < 0.001), history of malignant tumor (AUC = 0.539, p < 0.001), history of diabetes (AUC = 0.638, p < 0.001), varicella-zoster virus immunoglobulin M (AUC = 0.620, p < 0.001), and serum nerve-specific enolase (AUC = 0.659, p < 0,001). The gradient boosting model outperformed other classifier models on the test set with an AUC of 0.931, 95% confidence interval (CI) (0.882-0.980), accuracy of 0.886 (95% CI 0.809-0.940). In the test set, our predictive scoring table achieved an AUC of 0.820 (95% CI 0.869-0.970) with accuracy of 0.790 (95% CI 0.700-0.864).

Conclusion: This study presents a methodology for predicting the development of postherpetic neuralgia in shingles patients by analyzing historical case data, employing various machine learning techniques, and selecting the optimal model through comparative analysis. In addition, a logistic regression model has been used to create a scoring table for predicting the postherpetic neuralgia.

Introduction: Pain is the most common reason for seeking medical treatment. Despite extensive research efforts and effective analgesics modulating pain, there is still a major therapeutic gap in addressing the root causes of pain. Pain is associated with tissue damage induced by oxidative stress and induction of inflammatory mediators following high consumption of antioxidants. The role of antioxidants in general, and the administration of L-ascorbate in particular, is still controversially discussed and underestimated in the daily clinical practice.

Methods: The current literature on the therapeutic effect of L-ascorbate, ascorbic acid, and vitamin C on various pain conditions was evaluated against the background of evidence-based medicine. Those articles, obtained from systematic search in PubMed, were critically assessed and rated in terms of evidence level and methodological quality by two independent experts. The primary purpose of this work was to establish specific pain therapy guidance for intravenous L-ascorbate.

Results: A PubMed search revealed 14 suitable articles comprising controlled clinical trials and meta-analyses. An additional ten publications could be identified via secondary literature. There is supporting evidence for the efficacy of ascorbate treatment in inflammatory pain conditions, in the complex regional pain syndrome, in post zoster neuralgia, in neuropathic pain, in post-operative pain conditions, and in tumor-related pain. However, the considered studies differ in the type of administration, in dosage, in duration of treatment, as well as in quality of research. Despite all study heterogeneity, it became evident that research of high scientific quality is in support of the efficacy of L-ascorbate in pain treatment.

Discussion: Oxidative stress is present in almost all pain conditions. Because oral administration of most magistral formulas of vitamin C does not provide biological availability, parenteral administration should be preferred and can be supported by an oral dose with high bioavailability on days without intravenous treatment. L-ascorbate should be preferred for parenteral high dosage, rather than ascorbic acid, as it does not release acid valences under physiological conditions.

Conclusions: L-ascorbate is an effective, safe, and economically favorable integrative treatment option for various pain conditions, addressing the root cause of tissue damage and inflammatory mediator burst.