首页 > 最新文献

Clinical Journal of Pain最新文献

英文 中文
Effect of a Long-lasting Multidisciplinary Program on Disability and Fear-Avoidance Behaviors in Patients With Chronic Low Back Pain Results of a Randomized Controlled Trial: Retraction. 长期多学科项目对慢性腰痛患者残疾和恐惧规避行为的影响》,随机对照试验结果:撤回。
IF 2.9 3区 医学 Q1 Medicine Pub Date : 2024-04-01 DOI: 10.1097/AJP.0000000000001203
{"title":"Effect of a Long-lasting Multidisciplinary Program on Disability and Fear-Avoidance Behaviors in Patients With Chronic Low Back Pain Results of a Randomized Controlled Trial: Retraction.","authors":"","doi":"10.1097/AJP.0000000000001203","DOIUrl":"10.1097/AJP.0000000000001203","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":50678,"journal":{"name":"Clinical Journal of Pain","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.9,"publicationDate":"2024-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139934028","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Initiatives Targeting Patients: A Systematic Review of Knowledge Translation Pain Assessment and Management Studies Focusing on Older Adults. 针对患者的倡议:以老年人为重点的疼痛评估和管理研究的知识转化系统回顾。
IF 2.6 3区 医学 Q2 ANESTHESIOLOGY Pub Date : 2024-04-01 DOI: 10.1097/AJP.0000000000001192
Laney Yarycky, Louise I R Castillo, Michelle M Gagnon, Thomas Hadjistavropoulos

Objectives: Older adults frequently experience persistent pain but are often unaware of self-management and other strategies that can help improve their condition. In a related article, we reported on pain assessment and management knowledge translation initiatives related to older adults that were targeting health professionals. In this paper, we report on initiatives targeting older adults.

Materials and methods: Using systematic review methodology, the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), MEDLINE, PsycInfo, and Web of Science databases were searched from inception to June 2023. Pain-related knowledge translation programs targeted towards older adults, their informal caregivers, and health care professionals were examined.

Results: From an initial 21,669 search results, 172 studies met our inclusion criteria. Of these studies, 49 targeted older adults. These studies varied widely in focus and delivery format, but the majority were associated with a significant risk of bias. Older adults with musculoskeletal pain were the primary recipients of education. Most programs were classified as knowledge mobilization initiatives. The remainder were considered self-management programs. Knowledge users were satisfied with the suitability of the information presented, and patient outcomes were a primary concern across all studies. Behavioral changes and pain management outcomes, however, were underemphasized in the literature.

Conclusion: Knowledge acquisition outcomes are overrepresented in the current literature compared with behavioral outcomes changes. Nonetheless, older adults report benefitting from the guidance provided in self-management programs when applying knowledge to practice. Future research is needed to better understand the facilitators and barriers to pain management changes in this population.

目的:老年人经常受到疼痛的困扰,但他们往往不了解自我管理和其他有助于改善病情的策略。在一篇相关文章中,我们报道了针对医疗专业人员的老年人疼痛评估和管理知识转化计划。在本文中,我们将报告针对老年人的相关计划:采用系统综述方法,检索了从开始到 2023 年 6 月的《护理与专职医疗文献累积索引》(CINAHL)、MEDLINE、PsycInfo 和 Web of Science 数据库。研究对象为老年人、其非正式护理人员和医疗保健专业人员的疼痛相关 KT 项目:从最初的 21,669 项搜索结果中,有 172 项研究符合我们的纳入标准。在这些研究中,有 49 项针对老年人。这些研究在关注点和提供形式上差异很大,但大多数研究都存在严重的偏倚风险。患有肌肉骨骼疼痛的老年人是教育的主要接受者。大多数计划被归类为知识动员计划。其余的则被视为自我管理计划。知识使用者对所提供信息的适用性表示满意,而患者的治疗效果则是所有研究的主要关注点。然而,行为改变和疼痛管理结果在文献中并未得到足够重视:讨论:与行为结果变化相比,知识获取结果在目前的文献中占比过高。尽管如此,老年人在将知识应用于实践时,仍表示从自我管理计划提供的指导中受益匪浅。未来的研究需要更好地了解这一人群改变疼痛管理的促进因素和障碍。
{"title":"Initiatives Targeting Patients: A Systematic Review of Knowledge Translation Pain Assessment and Management Studies Focusing on Older Adults.","authors":"Laney Yarycky, Louise I R Castillo, Michelle M Gagnon, Thomas Hadjistavropoulos","doi":"10.1097/AJP.0000000000001192","DOIUrl":"10.1097/AJP.0000000000001192","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>Older adults frequently experience persistent pain but are often unaware of self-management and other strategies that can help improve their condition. In a related article, we reported on pain assessment and management knowledge translation initiatives related to older adults that were targeting health professionals. In this paper, we report on initiatives targeting older adults.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>Using systematic review methodology, the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), MEDLINE, PsycInfo, and Web of Science databases were searched from inception to June 2023. Pain-related knowledge translation programs targeted towards older adults, their informal caregivers, and health care professionals were examined.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>From an initial 21,669 search results, 172 studies met our inclusion criteria. Of these studies, 49 targeted older adults. These studies varied widely in focus and delivery format, but the majority were associated with a significant risk of bias. Older adults with musculoskeletal pain were the primary recipients of education. Most programs were classified as knowledge mobilization initiatives. The remainder were considered self-management programs. Knowledge users were satisfied with the suitability of the information presented, and patient outcomes were a primary concern across all studies. Behavioral changes and pain management outcomes, however, were underemphasized in the literature.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Knowledge acquisition outcomes are overrepresented in the current literature compared with behavioral outcomes changes. Nonetheless, older adults report benefitting from the guidance provided in self-management programs when applying knowledge to practice. Future research is needed to better understand the facilitators and barriers to pain management changes in this population.</p>","PeriodicalId":50678,"journal":{"name":"Clinical Journal of Pain","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.6,"publicationDate":"2024-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139418497","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Initiatives Targeting Health Care Professionals: A Systematic Review of Knowledge Translation Pain Assessment and Management Studies Focusing on Older Adults. 针对医疗保健专业人员的倡议:以老年人为重点的疼痛评估和管理研究的知识转化系统回顾。
IF 2.6 3区 医学 Q2 ANESTHESIOLOGY Pub Date : 2024-04-01 DOI: 10.1097/AJP.0000000000001190
Laney Yarycky, Louise I R Castillo, Michelle M Gagnon, Thomas Hadjistavropoulos

Objectives: Pain is often undertreated in older adult populations due to factors, such as insufficient continuing education and health care resources. Initiatives to increase knowledge about pain assessment and management are crucial for the incorporation of research evidence into practice. Knowledge translation (KT) studies on pain management for older adults and relevant knowledge users have been conducted; however, the wide variety of KT program formats and outcomes underscores a need to evaluate and systematically report on the relevant literature.

Materials and methods: Using a systematic review methodology, the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), MEDLINE, PsycInfo, and Web of Science databases were searched from inception to June 2023. Pain-related KT programs targeted towards older adults, their informal caregivers, and health care professionals were examined. Initiatives focusing on health care professionals are the focus of this review. Initiatives focusing on older adults are reported in a companion article.

Results: From an initial 21,669 search results, 172 studies met our inclusion criteria. These studies varied widely in focus and delivery format but the majority were associated with significant risk of bias. In this report, we are focusing on 124 studies targeting health care professionals; 48 studies involving initiatives targeting older adults are reported in a companion article. Moreover, most programs were classified as knowledge mobilization studies without an implementation component. Across all studies, knowledge user satisfaction with the initiative and the suitability of the material presented were most commonly assessed. Patient outcomes, however, were underemphasized in the literature.

Conclusion: Patient and clinical outcomes must be a focus of future research to fully conceptualize the success of KT programs for older adult individuals. Without implementation plans, disseminated knowledge does not tend to translate effectively into practice.

目的:由于继续教育和医疗资源不足等因素,老年人群中的疼痛治疗往往不足。增加疼痛评估和管理知识的举措对于将研究证据纳入实践至关重要。关于老年人疼痛管理和相关知识使用者的知识转化(KT)研究已经开展;然而,KT 项目的形式和结果多种多样,这突出表明有必要对相关文献进行评估和系统报告:方法:采用系统综述方法,检索了从开始到 2023 年 6 月的《护理与专职医疗文献累积索引》(CINAHL)、MEDLINE、PsycInfo 和 Web of Science 数据库。研究考察了针对老年人、其非正式照顾者和医疗保健专业人员的疼痛相关 KT 计划。本综述的重点是针对医护专业人员的计划。针对老年人的计划在其他地方进行了报告:从最初的 21,669 项搜索结果中,有 172 项研究符合我们的纳入标准。这些研究在关注点和实施形式上差异很大,但大多数研究都存在严重的偏差风险。在本报告中,我们重点讨论了 124 项针对医疗保健专业人员的研究;其他地方报告了 48 项针对老年人的研究。此外,大多数计划都被归类为知识动员研究,没有实施部分。在所有研究中,最常评估的是知识使用者对计划的满意度和所提供材料的适用性。然而,文献中对患者的治疗效果强调不够:讨论:患者和临床结果必须成为未来研究的重点,这样才能充分认识到针对老年患者的知识分享计划是否成功。如果没有实施计划,传播的知识往往不能有效地转化为实践。
{"title":"Initiatives Targeting Health Care Professionals: A Systematic Review of Knowledge Translation Pain Assessment and Management Studies Focusing on Older Adults.","authors":"Laney Yarycky, Louise I R Castillo, Michelle M Gagnon, Thomas Hadjistavropoulos","doi":"10.1097/AJP.0000000000001190","DOIUrl":"10.1097/AJP.0000000000001190","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>Pain is often undertreated in older adult populations due to factors, such as insufficient continuing education and health care resources. Initiatives to increase knowledge about pain assessment and management are crucial for the incorporation of research evidence into practice. Knowledge translation (KT) studies on pain management for older adults and relevant knowledge users have been conducted; however, the wide variety of KT program formats and outcomes underscores a need to evaluate and systematically report on the relevant literature.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>Using a systematic review methodology, the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), MEDLINE, PsycInfo, and Web of Science databases were searched from inception to June 2023. Pain-related KT programs targeted towards older adults, their informal caregivers, and health care professionals were examined. Initiatives focusing on health care professionals are the focus of this review. Initiatives focusing on older adults are reported in a companion article.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>From an initial 21,669 search results, 172 studies met our inclusion criteria. These studies varied widely in focus and delivery format but the majority were associated with significant risk of bias. In this report, we are focusing on 124 studies targeting health care professionals; 48 studies involving initiatives targeting older adults are reported in a companion article. Moreover, most programs were classified as knowledge mobilization studies without an implementation component. Across all studies, knowledge user satisfaction with the initiative and the suitability of the material presented were most commonly assessed. Patient outcomes, however, were underemphasized in the literature.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Patient and clinical outcomes must be a focus of future research to fully conceptualize the success of KT programs for older adult individuals. Without implementation plans, disseminated knowledge does not tend to translate effectively into practice.</p>","PeriodicalId":50678,"journal":{"name":"Clinical Journal of Pain","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.6,"publicationDate":"2024-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139405112","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Effect of Remifentanil on Acute and Chronic Postsurgical Pain in Patients Undergoing Cardiac Surgery: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. 瑞芬太尼对心脏手术患者急性和慢性术后疼痛的影响:系统回顾与元分析》。
IF 2.6 3区 医学 Q2 ANESTHESIOLOGY Pub Date : 2024-03-01 DOI: 10.1097/AJP.0000000000001183
Bi Zhang, Chang Cai, Zhihao Pan, Liye Zhuang, Yong Qi

Objectives: Our purpose was to explore the effect of remifentanil on acute and chronic postsurgical pain after cardiac surgery.

Materials and methods: Randomized controlled trials were retrieved from electronic databases, such as PubMed, Cochrane Library, China National Knowledge Internet databases, Scopus, and Web of Science. A systematic review, meta-analysis, and trial sequential analysis (TSA) were performed. Basic information and outcomes were extracted from the included studies. The primary outcome was chronic postsurgical pain. Secondary outcomes were scores of postsurgical pain and morphine consumption within 24 hours after cardiac surgery. Risk of bias (ROB) assessment was based on the Cochrane ROB tool version 2. The overall quality of the evidence was rated using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) system.

Results: Seven studies consisting of 658 patients were enrolled in the meta-analysis. A single study had a high ROB and 2 studies had a moderate ROB. The incidence of chronic postsurgical pain (4 studies [415 patients]; risk ratio: 1.02 [95% CI: 0.53 to 1.95]; P = 0.95; I2 = 59%; TSA-adjusted CI: 0.78 to 1.20) and the postsurgical pain score (2 studies [196 patients]; mean difference: 0.09 [95% CI: -0.36 to 0.55]; P = 0.69; I2 = 0%; TSA-adjusted CI: -0.36 to 0.55) were not statistically different between the 2 groups. However, morphine consumption (6 studies [569 patients]; mean difference: 6.94 [95% CI: 3.65 to 10.22]; P < 0.01; I2 = 0%; TSA-adjusted CI: 0.00 to 0.49) was higher in the remifentanil group than in the control group.

Conclusion: There was not enough evidence to prove that remifentanil can increase the incidence of chronic postsurgical pain after cardiac surgery, but interestingly, the results tended to support a trend toward increased complications in the intervention group. However, there was moderate certainty evidence that the use of remifentanil increases the consumption of morphine for analgesia, and more direct comparison trials are needed to inform clinical decision-making with greater confidence.

目的:我们的目的是探讨瑞芬太尼对心脏手术后急性和慢性术后疼痛的影响:我们的目的是探讨瑞芬太尼对心脏手术后急性和慢性术后疼痛的影响:在 PubMed、Cochrane Library、CNKI 数据库、Scopus 和 Web of Science 等电子数据库中检索随机对照试验 (RCT)。进行了系统综述、荟萃分析和试验序列分析(TSA)。从纳入的研究中提取了基本信息和结果。主要结果是慢性术后疼痛。次要结果是心脏手术后 24 小时内的手术后疼痛评分和吗啡消耗量。我们根据科克伦偏倚风险工具第二版(ROB 2.0)对偏倚风险进行了评估。证据的总体质量采用建议评估、发展和评价分级(GRADE)系统进行评定:荟萃分析共纳入了七项研究,包括 658 名患者。其中一项研究存在高偏倚风险,两项研究存在中度偏倚风险。慢性手术后疼痛的发生率(4 项研究 [415 名患者];RR,1.02 [95% CI,0.53-1.95];P =0.95;I2=59%;TSA 调整后的 CI,0.78-1.2020)和手术后疼痛评分(2 项研究 [196 名患者];MD 0.09 [95% CI, -0.36-0.55]; P =0.69; I2=0%; TSA 调整后的 CI, -0.36-0.55)在两组之间没有统计学差异。然而,吗啡消耗量(6 项研究 [569 例患者];MD 6.94 [95% CI, 3.65-10.22];PD 讨论:没有足够的证据证明瑞芬太尼会增加心脏手术后慢性术后疼痛的发生率,但有趣的是,研究结果倾向于支持干预组并发症增加的趋势。不过,有中度确定性证据表明,使用瑞芬太尼会增加吗啡镇痛的用量,因此需要进行更多的直接对比试验,以便为临床决策提供更有把握的信息。
{"title":"Effect of Remifentanil on Acute and Chronic Postsurgical Pain in Patients Undergoing Cardiac Surgery: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.","authors":"Bi Zhang, Chang Cai, Zhihao Pan, Liye Zhuang, Yong Qi","doi":"10.1097/AJP.0000000000001183","DOIUrl":"10.1097/AJP.0000000000001183","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>Our purpose was to explore the effect of remifentanil on acute and chronic postsurgical pain after cardiac surgery.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>Randomized controlled trials were retrieved from electronic databases, such as PubMed, Cochrane Library, China National Knowledge Internet databases, Scopus, and Web of Science. A systematic review, meta-analysis, and trial sequential analysis (TSA) were performed. Basic information and outcomes were extracted from the included studies. The primary outcome was chronic postsurgical pain. Secondary outcomes were scores of postsurgical pain and morphine consumption within 24 hours after cardiac surgery. Risk of bias (ROB) assessment was based on the Cochrane ROB tool version 2. The overall quality of the evidence was rated using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) system.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Seven studies consisting of 658 patients were enrolled in the meta-analysis. A single study had a high ROB and 2 studies had a moderate ROB. The incidence of chronic postsurgical pain (4 studies [415 patients]; risk ratio: 1.02 [95% CI: 0.53 to 1.95]; P = 0.95; I2 = 59%; TSA-adjusted CI: 0.78 to 1.20) and the postsurgical pain score (2 studies [196 patients]; mean difference: 0.09 [95% CI: -0.36 to 0.55]; P = 0.69; I2 = 0%; TSA-adjusted CI: -0.36 to 0.55) were not statistically different between the 2 groups. However, morphine consumption (6 studies [569 patients]; mean difference: 6.94 [95% CI: 3.65 to 10.22]; P < 0.01; I2 = 0%; TSA-adjusted CI: 0.00 to 0.49) was higher in the remifentanil group than in the control group.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>There was not enough evidence to prove that remifentanil can increase the incidence of chronic postsurgical pain after cardiac surgery, but interestingly, the results tended to support a trend toward increased complications in the intervention group. However, there was moderate certainty evidence that the use of remifentanil increases the consumption of morphine for analgesia, and more direct comparison trials are needed to inform clinical decision-making with greater confidence.</p>","PeriodicalId":50678,"journal":{"name":"Clinical Journal of Pain","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.6,"publicationDate":"2024-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"138488975","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Association of Neighborhood Characteristics and Chronic Pain in Children and Adolescents in the United States. 邻里特征和慢性疼痛在美国儿童和青少年的协会。
IF 2.9 3区 医学 Q1 Medicine Pub Date : 2024-03-01 DOI: 10.1097/AJP.0000000000001179
Daron M Vandeleur, Maia M Cunningham, Tonya M Palermo, Cornelius B Groenewald

Objective: To determine the associations between neighborhood characteristics and chronic pain during childhood and adolescence in the United States, 2020-2021.

Methods: Cross-sectional analysis of the 2020 and 2021 National Survey of Children's Health. National Survey of Children's Health grouped parents' responses to questions about neighborhood characteristics into 5 categories: neighborhood support, neighborhood safety, school support, neighborhood amenities, and the presence of detracting neighborhood elements. Chronic pain was defined as parents reporting their children had "frequent or chronic difficulty with repeated or chronic physical pain, including headache or other back or body pain during the past 12 months." Multivariable Poisson regression analyses estimated associations between neighborhood characteristics and chronic pain, adjusted for sociodemographic characteristics.

Results: The sample contained 55,387 children (6 to 17 years), weighted to represent 44 million nationally. Children had significantly increased rates of chronic pain if they lived in neighborhoods that were unsupportive, unsafe, had unsafe schools, fewer amenities, and greater numbers of detracting elements ( P <0.0001). After adjusting for covariates, children had significantly increased chronic pain if they lived in neighborhoods that were not supportive (adjusted prevalence rate ratio=1.7 (95% CI: 1.5-1.9, P <0.0001), with similar patterns observed for living in neighborhoods characterized as not safe, that did not have safe schools, with fewer amenities, and/or more detracting elements.

Discussion: Disadvantageous neighborhood characteristics are associated with pediatric chronic pain prevalence. Future research should investigate the underlying mechanisms of this association and guide neighborhood interventions aimed at preventing and decreasing childhood chronic pain and its associated burdens.

目的:确定2020-2021年美国儿童和青少年时期社区特征与慢性疼痛之间的关系。方法:对2020年和2021年全国儿童健康调查(NSCH)进行横断面分析。NSCH将家长对社区特征问题的回答分为五类:社区支持、社区安全、学校支持、社区便利设施和减值社区元素的存在。慢性疼痛被定义为父母报告他们的孩子“在过去12个月里经常或长期出现反复或慢性身体疼痛,包括头痛或其他背部或身体疼痛。”多变量泊松回归分析估计了社区特征与慢性疼痛之间的关联,并根据社会人口统计学特征进行了调整。结果:样本包含55,387名儿童(6-17岁),加权代表全国4400万。如果儿童生活在不支持的、不安全的、不安全的学校、更少的设施和更多的不利因素的社区,儿童的慢性疼痛率会显著增加(p讨论:不利的社区特征与儿童慢性疼痛患病率有关。未来的研究应探讨这种关联的潜在机制,并指导社区干预措施,旨在预防和减少儿童慢性疼痛及其相关负担。
{"title":"Association of Neighborhood Characteristics and Chronic Pain in Children and Adolescents in the United States.","authors":"Daron M Vandeleur, Maia M Cunningham, Tonya M Palermo, Cornelius B Groenewald","doi":"10.1097/AJP.0000000000001179","DOIUrl":"10.1097/AJP.0000000000001179","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To determine the associations between neighborhood characteristics and chronic pain during childhood and adolescence in the United States, 2020-2021.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Cross-sectional analysis of the 2020 and 2021 National Survey of Children's Health. National Survey of Children's Health grouped parents' responses to questions about neighborhood characteristics into 5 categories: neighborhood support, neighborhood safety, school support, neighborhood amenities, and the presence of detracting neighborhood elements. Chronic pain was defined as parents reporting their children had \"frequent or chronic difficulty with repeated or chronic physical pain, including headache or other back or body pain during the past 12 months.\" Multivariable Poisson regression analyses estimated associations between neighborhood characteristics and chronic pain, adjusted for sociodemographic characteristics.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The sample contained 55,387 children (6 to 17 years), weighted to represent 44 million nationally. Children had significantly increased rates of chronic pain if they lived in neighborhoods that were unsupportive, unsafe, had unsafe schools, fewer amenities, and greater numbers of detracting elements ( P <0.0001). After adjusting for covariates, children had significantly increased chronic pain if they lived in neighborhoods that were not supportive (adjusted prevalence rate ratio=1.7 (95% CI: 1.5-1.9, P <0.0001), with similar patterns observed for living in neighborhoods characterized as not safe, that did not have safe schools, with fewer amenities, and/or more detracting elements.</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>Disadvantageous neighborhood characteristics are associated with pediatric chronic pain prevalence. Future research should investigate the underlying mechanisms of this association and guide neighborhood interventions aimed at preventing and decreasing childhood chronic pain and its associated burdens.</p>","PeriodicalId":50678,"journal":{"name":"Clinical Journal of Pain","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.9,"publicationDate":"2024-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10922713/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"138446911","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Factors Associated With Interest in Engaging in Psychological Interventions for Pain Management. 与参与疼痛管理心理干预的兴趣相关的因素。
IF 2.9 3区 医学 Q1 Medicine Pub Date : 2024-02-01 DOI: 10.1097/AJP.0000000000001165
Lisa R Miller-Matero, Marissa Yaldo, Sikander Chohan, Celeste Zabel, Shivali Patel, Timothy Chrusciel, Joanne Salas, Lauren Wilson, Mark D Sullivan, Brian K Ahmedani, Patrick J Lustman, Jeffrey F Scherrer

Objective: Engagement in evidence-based psychological interventions for pain management is low. Identifying characteristics associated with interest in interventions can inform approaches to increase uptake and engagement. The purpose of this study was to examine factors associated with interest in psychological interventions among persons with chronic noncancer pain receiving prescription opioids.

Methods: Participants with chronic noncancer pain and a new 30 to 90 day opioid prescription were recruited from 2 health systems. Participants (N=845) completed measures regarding pain, opioid use, psychiatric symptoms, emotional support, and interest in psychological interventions for pain management.

Results: There were 245 (29.0%) participants who reported a high interest in psychological interventions for pain management. In bivariate analyses, variables associated with interest included younger age, female sex, greater pain severity, greater pain interference, greater number of pain sites, lower emotional support, depression, anxiety, and post-traumatic stress disorder ( P <0.05). In a multivariate model, greater pain severity (odds ratio [OR]=1.17; CI: 1.04-1.32), depression (OR=2.10; CI: 1.39-3.16), post-traumatic stress disorder (OR=1.85; CI: 1.19-2.95), and lower emotional support (OR=0.69; CI: 0.5-0.97) remained statistically significant.

Discussion: The rate of interest in psychological interventions for pain management was low, which may indicate that patients initiating opioid treatment of chronic noncancer pain have low interest in psychological interventions. Greater pain severity and psychiatric distress were related to interest, and patients with these characteristics may especially benefit from psychological interventions. Providers may want to refer to psychological interventions before or when opioids are initiated. Additional work is needed to determine whether this would reduce long-term opioid use.

目的:疼痛管理的循证心理干预参与度较低。识别与对干预措施的兴趣相关的特征可以为提高接受和参与的方法提供信息。本研究的目的是检查接受处方阿片类药物治疗的非癌症疼痛患者对心理干预感兴趣的相关因素。方法参与者:从两个卫生系统招募非癌症疼痛和新的30-90天阿片类药物处方。参与者(N=845)完成了关于疼痛、阿片类药物使用、精神症状、情绪支持和对疼痛管理心理干预的兴趣的测量。结果:有245名(29.0%)参与者报告对疼痛管理的心理干预非常感兴趣。在双变量分析中,与兴趣相关的变量包括更年轻、女性、更严重的疼痛、更大的疼痛干扰、更多的疼痛部位、更低的情绪支持、抑郁、焦虑,和创伤后应激障碍(P讨论:对疼痛管理的心理干预的兴趣率较低,这可能表明开始阿片类药物治疗慢性疼痛的患者对心理干预兴趣较低。更大的疼痛严重程度和精神痛苦与兴趣有关,具有这些特征的患者可能特别受益于心理干预rs可能希望提及在阿片类药物开始使用之前或使用时的心理干预。还需要做更多的工作来确定这是否会减少阿片类药物的长期使用。
{"title":"Factors Associated With Interest in Engaging in Psychological Interventions for Pain Management.","authors":"Lisa R Miller-Matero, Marissa Yaldo, Sikander Chohan, Celeste Zabel, Shivali Patel, Timothy Chrusciel, Joanne Salas, Lauren Wilson, Mark D Sullivan, Brian K Ahmedani, Patrick J Lustman, Jeffrey F Scherrer","doi":"10.1097/AJP.0000000000001165","DOIUrl":"10.1097/AJP.0000000000001165","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Engagement in evidence-based psychological interventions for pain management is low. Identifying characteristics associated with interest in interventions can inform approaches to increase uptake and engagement. The purpose of this study was to examine factors associated with interest in psychological interventions among persons with chronic noncancer pain receiving prescription opioids.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Participants with chronic noncancer pain and a new 30 to 90 day opioid prescription were recruited from 2 health systems. Participants (N=845) completed measures regarding pain, opioid use, psychiatric symptoms, emotional support, and interest in psychological interventions for pain management.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>There were 245 (29.0%) participants who reported a high interest in psychological interventions for pain management. In bivariate analyses, variables associated with interest included younger age, female sex, greater pain severity, greater pain interference, greater number of pain sites, lower emotional support, depression, anxiety, and post-traumatic stress disorder ( P <0.05). In a multivariate model, greater pain severity (odds ratio [OR]=1.17; CI: 1.04-1.32), depression (OR=2.10; CI: 1.39-3.16), post-traumatic stress disorder (OR=1.85; CI: 1.19-2.95), and lower emotional support (OR=0.69; CI: 0.5-0.97) remained statistically significant.</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>The rate of interest in psychological interventions for pain management was low, which may indicate that patients initiating opioid treatment of chronic noncancer pain have low interest in psychological interventions. Greater pain severity and psychiatric distress were related to interest, and patients with these characteristics may especially benefit from psychological interventions. Providers may want to refer to psychological interventions before or when opioids are initiated. Additional work is needed to determine whether this would reduce long-term opioid use.</p>","PeriodicalId":50678,"journal":{"name":"Clinical Journal of Pain","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.9,"publicationDate":"2024-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10842945/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41219296","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Efficacy of Serratus Anterior Plane Block Versus Paravertebral and Intercostal Blocks for Pain Control After Surgery:: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. 锯肌前平面阻滞与椎旁和肋间阻滞对术后疼痛控制的疗效:系统回顾和荟萃分析。
IF 2.9 3区 医学 Q1 Medicine Pub Date : 2024-02-01 DOI: 10.1097/AJP.0000000000001175
Ping Qian, Xiaoyu Zheng, Huaying Wei, Kemin Ji

Objective: Our study aimed to compare the analgesic efficacy of serratus anterior plane block (SAB) with the paravertebral block (PVB) and intercostal block (ICB) for patients undergoing surgical procedures.

Materials and methods: A literature search was performed on the databases of ScienceDirect, Google Scholar, PubMed, and Embase from inception to October 24, 2021. Only randomized controlled trials comparing SAB with either PVB or ICB and reporting pain outcomes were included.

Results: A total of 16 randomized controlled trials were included. Thirteen compared SAB with PVB and 3 with ICB. Comparing SAB with PVB, we noted no difference in 24-hour morphine consumption between the groups (mean difference: 1.37; 95% CI: -0.33, 3.08; I2 = 96%; P = 0.11). However, the exclusion of 1 study indicated significantly increased analgesic consumption with the SAB. No difference was found in pain scores between SAB and PVB at 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, and 24 hours. Meta-analysis failed to demonstrate any statistically significant difference in time to the first analgesic request between the two groups (mean difference: -0.79; 95% CI: -0.17, 1.75; I2 = 94%; P = 0.11). We also noted no statistically significant difference in the incidence of nausea/vomiting with SAB or PVB (odds ratio: 0.79; 95% CI: 0.41, 1.51; I2 = 0%; P = 0.47).

Conclusions: Evidence on the analgesic efficacy of the SAB versus the PVB is conflicting. Twenty-four-hour total analgesic consumption may be higher with the SAB as compared with PVB but with no difference in pain scores and time to the first analgesic request. Data on the comparison of the SAB with the ICB is insufficient to draw strong conclusions.

目的:比较锯肌前平面阻滞(SAB)与椎旁阻滞(PVB)和肋间阻滞(ICB)对外科手术患者的镇痛效果。材料和方法:在ScienceDirect、谷歌Scholar、PubMed和Embase数据库中进行了广泛的文献检索,检索时间为成立至2021年10月24日。仅纳入比较SAB与PVB或ICB并报告疼痛结果的随机对照试验(rct)。结果:共纳入16项rct。SAB与PVB比较13例,与ICB比较3例。比较SAB组与PVB组,我们发现两组24小时吗啡用量无差异(MD: 1.37, 95% CI: -0.33, 3.08 I2=96%, P=0.11)。然而,一项研究的排除表明SAB显著增加了镇痛药的使用。SAB和PVB在2、4、6、8、12和24小时的疼痛评分无差异。meta分析未显示两组患者在首次镇痛要求时间(TFAR)上有统计学差异(MD: -0.79, 95% CI: -0.17, 1.75 I2=94%, P=0.11)。我们还注意到SAB或PVB患者恶心/呕吐的发生率无统计学差异(or: 0.79, 95% CI: 0.41, 1.51 I2=0%, P=0.47)。结论:关于SAB和PVB镇痛效果的证据是相互矛盾的。与PVB相比,SAB组的24小时总镇痛消耗(TAC)可能更高,但疼痛评分和TFAR没有差异。关于SAB与ICB比较的数据很少,无法得出强有力的结论。
{"title":"Efficacy of Serratus Anterior Plane Block Versus Paravertebral and Intercostal Blocks for Pain Control After Surgery:: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.","authors":"Ping Qian, Xiaoyu Zheng, Huaying Wei, Kemin Ji","doi":"10.1097/AJP.0000000000001175","DOIUrl":"10.1097/AJP.0000000000001175","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Our study aimed to compare the analgesic efficacy of serratus anterior plane block (SAB) with the paravertebral block (PVB) and intercostal block (ICB) for patients undergoing surgical procedures.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>A literature search was performed on the databases of ScienceDirect, Google Scholar, PubMed, and Embase from inception to October 24, 2021. Only randomized controlled trials comparing SAB with either PVB or ICB and reporting pain outcomes were included.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 16 randomized controlled trials were included. Thirteen compared SAB with PVB and 3 with ICB. Comparing SAB with PVB, we noted no difference in 24-hour morphine consumption between the groups (mean difference: 1.37; 95% CI: -0.33, 3.08; I2 = 96%; P = 0.11). However, the exclusion of 1 study indicated significantly increased analgesic consumption with the SAB. No difference was found in pain scores between SAB and PVB at 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, and 24 hours. Meta-analysis failed to demonstrate any statistically significant difference in time to the first analgesic request between the two groups (mean difference: -0.79; 95% CI: -0.17, 1.75; I2 = 94%; P = 0.11). We also noted no statistically significant difference in the incidence of nausea/vomiting with SAB or PVB (odds ratio: 0.79; 95% CI: 0.41, 1.51; I2 = 0%; P = 0.47).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Evidence on the analgesic efficacy of the SAB versus the PVB is conflicting. Twenty-four-hour total analgesic consumption may be higher with the SAB as compared with PVB but with no difference in pain scores and time to the first analgesic request. Data on the comparison of the SAB with the ICB is insufficient to draw strong conclusions.</p>","PeriodicalId":50678,"journal":{"name":"Clinical Journal of Pain","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.9,"publicationDate":"2024-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"138048417","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Mindfulness-based Interventions for Chronic Low Back Pain: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. 基于正念的慢性腰痛干预:系统综述和荟萃分析。
IF 2.9 3区 医学 Q1 Medicine Pub Date : 2024-02-01 DOI: 10.1097/AJP.0000000000001173
Myrella Paschali, Asimina Lazaridou, Jason Sadora, Lauren Papianou, Eric L Garland, Aleksandra E Zgierska, Robert R Edwards

Objective: This systematic review aimed to compile existing evidence examining the effects of mindfulness-based interventions (MBIs) for chronic low back pain (CLBP). CLBP leads to millions of disabled individuals in the United States each year. Current pharmacologic treatments are only modestly effective and may present long-term safety issues. MBIs, which have an excellent safety profile, have been shown in prior studies to be effective in treating CLBP yet remained underutilized.

Design: Ovid/Medline, PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs), pilot RCTs, and single-arm studies that explored the effectiveness of MBIs in CLBP.

Methods: Separate searches were conducted to identify trials that evaluated MBIs in reducing pain intensity in individuals with CLBP. A meta-analysis was then performed using R v3.2.2, Metafor package v 1.9-7.

Results: Eighteen studies used validated patient-reported pain outcome measures and were therefore included in the meta-analysis. The MBIs included mindfulness meditation, mindfulness-based stress reduction, mindfulness-based cognitive therapy, mindfulness-oriented recovery enhancement, acceptance and commitment therapy, dialectical behavioral therapy, meditation-cognitive behavioral therapy, mindfulness-based care for chronic pain, self-compassion course, and loving-kindness course. Pain intensity scores were reported using a numerical rating scale (0 to 10) or an equivalent scale. The meta-analysis revealed that MBIs have a beneficial effect on pain intensity with a large-sized effect in adults with CLBP.

Conclusions: MBIs seem to be beneficial in reducing pain intensity. Although these results were informative, findings should be carefully interpreted due to the limited data the high variability in study methodologies, small sample sizes, inclusion of studies with high risk of bias, and reliance on pre-post treatment differences with no attention to maintenance of effects. More large-scale RCTs are needed to provide reliable effect size estimates for MBIs in persons with CLBP.

目的:本系统综述旨在收集现有证据,检验基于正念的干预措施(MBI)对慢性腰痛(CLBP)的影响。CLBP每年在美国导致数百万残疾人。目前的药物治疗只是适度有效,可能存在长期安全问题。MBI具有良好的安全性,在先前的研究中已显示其对治疗CLBP有效,但仍未得到充分利用。设计:检索Ovid/Medline、PubMed、Embase和Cochrane图书馆、随机对照试验(RCT)、先导性随机对照试验和单臂研究,探讨MBI在CLBP中的有效性。方法:进行单独检索,以确定评估MBI在降低CLBP患者疼痛强度方面的试验。然后使用R v3.2.2,Metafor软件包v 1.9-7进行荟萃分析。结果:18项研究使用了经验证的患者报告的疼痛结果指标,因此被纳入荟萃分析。MBI包括正念冥想、正念减压、正念认知治疗、正念康复增强、接受和承诺治疗、辩证行为治疗、冥想CBT、正念慢性疼痛护理、自我同情课程和爱心课程。使用数值评定量表(0-10)或等效量表报告疼痛强度评分。荟萃分析显示,MBI对CLBP患者的疼痛强度有有益影响,对成人CLBP患者有较大影响。结论:MBI似乎有助于降低疼痛强度。尽管这些结果提供了信息,但由于数据有限和研究方法的高度可变性,应仔细解释研究结果。需要进行更大规模的随机对照试验,以提供CLBP患者MBI的可靠影响大小估计。
{"title":"Mindfulness-based Interventions for Chronic Low Back Pain: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.","authors":"Myrella Paschali, Asimina Lazaridou, Jason Sadora, Lauren Papianou, Eric L Garland, Aleksandra E Zgierska, Robert R Edwards","doi":"10.1097/AJP.0000000000001173","DOIUrl":"10.1097/AJP.0000000000001173","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>This systematic review aimed to compile existing evidence examining the effects of mindfulness-based interventions (MBIs) for chronic low back pain (CLBP). CLBP leads to millions of disabled individuals in the United States each year. Current pharmacologic treatments are only modestly effective and may present long-term safety issues. MBIs, which have an excellent safety profile, have been shown in prior studies to be effective in treating CLBP yet remained underutilized.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>Ovid/Medline, PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs), pilot RCTs, and single-arm studies that explored the effectiveness of MBIs in CLBP.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Separate searches were conducted to identify trials that evaluated MBIs in reducing pain intensity in individuals with CLBP. A meta-analysis was then performed using R v3.2.2, Metafor package v 1.9-7.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Eighteen studies used validated patient-reported pain outcome measures and were therefore included in the meta-analysis. The MBIs included mindfulness meditation, mindfulness-based stress reduction, mindfulness-based cognitive therapy, mindfulness-oriented recovery enhancement, acceptance and commitment therapy, dialectical behavioral therapy, meditation-cognitive behavioral therapy, mindfulness-based care for chronic pain, self-compassion course, and loving-kindness course. Pain intensity scores were reported using a numerical rating scale (0 to 10) or an equivalent scale. The meta-analysis revealed that MBIs have a beneficial effect on pain intensity with a large-sized effect in adults with CLBP.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>MBIs seem to be beneficial in reducing pain intensity. Although these results were informative, findings should be carefully interpreted due to the limited data the high variability in study methodologies, small sample sizes, inclusion of studies with high risk of bias, and reliance on pre-post treatment differences with no attention to maintenance of effects. More large-scale RCTs are needed to provide reliable effect size estimates for MBIs in persons with CLBP.</p>","PeriodicalId":50678,"journal":{"name":"Clinical Journal of Pain","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.9,"publicationDate":"2024-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"71523268","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Efficacy and Safety of Erector Spinae Plane Block Versus Thoracolumbar Interfascial Plane Block in Patients Undergoing Spine Surgery: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. 脊柱手术患者应用竖脊肌平面阻滞与胸腰椎筋膜间平面阻滞的疗效和安全性:一项系统综述和meta分析。
IF 2.9 3区 医学 Q1 Medicine Pub Date : 2024-02-01 DOI: 10.1097/AJP.0000000000001177
Qing Peng, Bo Meng, Sheng Yang, Zhenghu Ban, Yu Zhang, Man Hu, Wenjie Zhao, Haisheng Wu, Yuping Tao, Liang Zhang

Objectives: As 2 novel peripheral nerve blocks, the erector spinae plane block (ESPB) and thoracolumbar interfascial plane (TLIP) block can relieve postoperative pain in spinal surgery. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to determine the efficacy and safety of ESPB versus TLIP block in patients undergoing spine surgery.

Methods: An extensive search of English online databases, including PubMed, Web of Sciences, Embase, Medline, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Chinese online databases like Wanfang Data, CNKI, and CQVIP until March 31, 2023, with no language restrictions, was performed. This systematic review and meta-analysis are based on the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses statement and have been registered on PROSPERO (International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews) with registered ID: CRD42023420987.

Results: Five studies involving 457 patients were eligible for inclusion in this study. Compared with TLIP block, ESPB had lower postoperative opioid consumption at postoperative 48 hours (standard mean difference =-1.31, 95% CI:-2.54 to -0.08, P =0.04, I2 =80%) and postoperative pain score at postoperative 24 hours (standard mean difference =-0.72, 95% CI=-1.43 to -0.02, P =0.04, I2 =95%) in patients undergoing spine surgery. Complications associated with ESPB and TLIP block were not reported in the included studies.

Discussion: ESPB and TLIP block are 2 novel and effective block methods. Patients receiving ESPB had lower postoperative opioid consumption and postoperative pain scores compared with patients receiving TLIP block; there was no statistically significant difference's between the 2 groups in intraoperative opioid consumption, adverse events, and rescue analgesia.

目的:直立脊柱平面阻滞(ESPB)和胸腰椎筋膜间平面阻滞(lip)作为两种新型的周围神经阻滞,可以缓解脊柱手术术后疼痛。本系统综述和荟萃分析旨在确定ESPB与TLIP阻滞在脊柱手术患者中的疗效和安全性。方法:截至2023年3月31日,广泛检索PubMed、Web of Sciences、Embase、Medline、Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials等英文在线数据库和万方数据、CNKI、CQVIP等中文在线数据库,无语言限制。该系统评价和荟萃分析基于PRISMA声明,并已在PROSPERO(国际前瞻性系统评价注册系统)上注册,注册ID: CRD42023420987。结果:5项研究纳入457例患者。与TLIP阻滞相比,ESPB术后48小时阿片类药物消耗(SMD=-1.31, 95% CI=-2.54 ~ -0.08, P=0.04, I2=80%)和术后24小时疼痛评分(SMD=-0.72, 95% CI=-1.43 ~ -0.02, P=0.04, I2=95%)较脊柱手术患者低。在纳入的研究中未报告ESPB和TLIP阻滞相关的并发症。讨论:ESPB和lip封块是两种新颖有效的封块方法。与TLIP阻滞组相比,ESPB组患者术后阿片类药物消耗和术后疼痛评分较低,两组在术中阿片类药物消耗、不良事件和抢救镇痛方面差异无统计学意义。
{"title":"Efficacy and Safety of Erector Spinae Plane Block Versus Thoracolumbar Interfascial Plane Block in Patients Undergoing Spine Surgery: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.","authors":"Qing Peng, Bo Meng, Sheng Yang, Zhenghu Ban, Yu Zhang, Man Hu, Wenjie Zhao, Haisheng Wu, Yuping Tao, Liang Zhang","doi":"10.1097/AJP.0000000000001177","DOIUrl":"10.1097/AJP.0000000000001177","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>As 2 novel peripheral nerve blocks, the erector spinae plane block (ESPB) and thoracolumbar interfascial plane (TLIP) block can relieve postoperative pain in spinal surgery. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to determine the efficacy and safety of ESPB versus TLIP block in patients undergoing spine surgery.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>An extensive search of English online databases, including PubMed, Web of Sciences, Embase, Medline, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Chinese online databases like Wanfang Data, CNKI, and CQVIP until March 31, 2023, with no language restrictions, was performed. This systematic review and meta-analysis are based on the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses statement and have been registered on PROSPERO (International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews) with registered ID: CRD42023420987.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Five studies involving 457 patients were eligible for inclusion in this study. Compared with TLIP block, ESPB had lower postoperative opioid consumption at postoperative 48 hours (standard mean difference =-1.31, 95% CI:-2.54 to -0.08, P =0.04, I2 =80%) and postoperative pain score at postoperative 24 hours (standard mean difference =-0.72, 95% CI=-1.43 to -0.02, P =0.04, I2 =95%) in patients undergoing spine surgery. Complications associated with ESPB and TLIP block were not reported in the included studies.</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>ESPB and TLIP block are 2 novel and effective block methods. Patients receiving ESPB had lower postoperative opioid consumption and postoperative pain scores compared with patients receiving TLIP block; there was no statistically significant difference's between the 2 groups in intraoperative opioid consumption, adverse events, and rescue analgesia.</p>","PeriodicalId":50678,"journal":{"name":"Clinical Journal of Pain","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.9,"publicationDate":"2024-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"138048416","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Patient Motivation to Reduce or Discontinue Opioids for Chronic Pain: Self-efficacy, Barriers, and Readiness to Change. 患者减少或停用阿片类药物治疗慢性疼痛的动机:自我效能、障碍和改变的准备状态。
IF 2.9 3区 医学 Q1 Medicine Pub Date : 2024-01-01 DOI: 10.1097/AJP.0000000000001167
Taylor B Crouch, Emily Donovan, Wally R Smith, Kelly Barth, William C Becker, Dace Svikis

Objectives: This study aimed to assess levels and predictors of self-efficacy and motivation to change opioid use among a community sample of patients using opioids for chronic pain, as well as patient-reported barriers to pursuing opioid discontinuation.

Methods: Participants with a variety of chronic pain conditions, recruited from ResearchMatch.org , completed a battery of electronic, self-report questionnaires assessing demographic and medical characteristics, pain treatment history, and levels of readiness, self-efficacy, and other attitudes toward reducing or discontinuing opioid use. Multiple regression analyses and analyses of variance were conducted to examine predictors of readiness and self-efficacy to change opioid use. A modified version of rapid qualitative analysis was utilized to analyze themes in participant responses to an open-ended item about "what it would take" to consider opioid discontinuation.

Results: The final sample included N=119 participants, the majority of whom were female (78.2%), Caucasian (77.3%), and well-educated. Readiness and self-efficacy to decrease or stop opioid use were fairly low on a 0 to 10 Visual Analog Scale (2.6 to 3.8) and significantly higher to decrease than stop ( P <0.01). Higher readiness to change was predicted by lower pain severity and higher concern about opioids, whereas higher self-efficacy was predicted by shorter pain duration. Results from the qualitative analyses revealed that the availability of an alternative treatment option was the most commonly cited requirement to consider opioid discontinuation.

Discussion: Patients with lower pain severity, shorter duration of pain, and higher concerns about opioids may be a prime target from a motivation standpoint for interventions addressing opioid tapering and discontinuation.

目的:本研究旨在评估社区样本中使用阿片类药物治疗CP的患者的自我效能和改变阿片类药使用动机的水平和预测因素,以及患者报告的寻求阿片类物质停用的障碍。方法:从ResearchMatch.org招募的患有各种慢性疼痛疾病的参与者完成了一系列电子自我报告问卷,评估人口统计学和医学特征、疼痛治疗史、准备程度、自我效能感以及对减少或停止阿片类药物使用的其他态度。进行多元回归分析和方差分析,以检验改变阿片类药物使用的准备程度和自我效能的预测因素。快速定性分析的修改版本被用于分析参与者对一个关于“需要什么”才能考虑阿片类药物停用的开放式项目的反应中的主题。结果:最终样本包括119名参与者,其中大多数是女性(78.2%)、高加索人(77.3%)和受过良好教育的人。在0-10视觉模拟量表(2.6-3.8)中,减少或停止阿片类药物使用的准备程度和自我效能感相当低,减少或停药的准备程度明显高于停药(P讨论:从动机的角度来看,疼痛严重程度较低、疼痛持续时间较短、对阿片类物质的担忧较高的患者可能是解决阿片类逐渐减少和停药的干预措施的主要目标。
{"title":"Patient Motivation to Reduce or Discontinue Opioids for Chronic Pain: Self-efficacy, Barriers, and Readiness to Change.","authors":"Taylor B Crouch, Emily Donovan, Wally R Smith, Kelly Barth, William C Becker, Dace Svikis","doi":"10.1097/AJP.0000000000001167","DOIUrl":"10.1097/AJP.0000000000001167","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>This study aimed to assess levels and predictors of self-efficacy and motivation to change opioid use among a community sample of patients using opioids for chronic pain, as well as patient-reported barriers to pursuing opioid discontinuation.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Participants with a variety of chronic pain conditions, recruited from ResearchMatch.org , completed a battery of electronic, self-report questionnaires assessing demographic and medical characteristics, pain treatment history, and levels of readiness, self-efficacy, and other attitudes toward reducing or discontinuing opioid use. Multiple regression analyses and analyses of variance were conducted to examine predictors of readiness and self-efficacy to change opioid use. A modified version of rapid qualitative analysis was utilized to analyze themes in participant responses to an open-ended item about \"what it would take\" to consider opioid discontinuation.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The final sample included N=119 participants, the majority of whom were female (78.2%), Caucasian (77.3%), and well-educated. Readiness and self-efficacy to decrease or stop opioid use were fairly low on a 0 to 10 Visual Analog Scale (2.6 to 3.8) and significantly higher to decrease than stop ( P <0.01). Higher readiness to change was predicted by lower pain severity and higher concern about opioids, whereas higher self-efficacy was predicted by shorter pain duration. Results from the qualitative analyses revealed that the availability of an alternative treatment option was the most commonly cited requirement to consider opioid discontinuation.</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>Patients with lower pain severity, shorter duration of pain, and higher concerns about opioids may be a prime target from a motivation standpoint for interventions addressing opioid tapering and discontinuation.</p>","PeriodicalId":50678,"journal":{"name":"Clinical Journal of Pain","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.9,"publicationDate":"2024-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10841444/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49684579","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
期刊
Clinical Journal of Pain
全部 Acc. Chem. Res. ACS Applied Bio Materials ACS Appl. Electron. Mater. ACS Appl. Energy Mater. ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces ACS Appl. Nano Mater. ACS Appl. Polym. Mater. ACS BIOMATER-SCI ENG ACS Catal. ACS Cent. Sci. ACS Chem. Biol. ACS Chemical Health & Safety ACS Chem. Neurosci. ACS Comb. Sci. ACS Earth Space Chem. ACS Energy Lett. ACS Infect. Dis. ACS Macro Lett. ACS Mater. Lett. ACS Med. Chem. Lett. ACS Nano ACS Omega ACS Photonics ACS Sens. ACS Sustainable Chem. Eng. ACS Synth. Biol. Anal. Chem. BIOCHEMISTRY-US Bioconjugate Chem. BIOMACROMOLECULES Chem. Res. Toxicol. Chem. Rev. Chem. Mater. CRYST GROWTH DES ENERG FUEL Environ. Sci. Technol. Environ. Sci. Technol. Lett. Eur. J. Inorg. Chem. IND ENG CHEM RES Inorg. Chem. J. Agric. Food. Chem. J. Chem. Eng. Data J. Chem. Educ. J. Chem. Inf. Model. J. Chem. Theory Comput. J. Med. Chem. J. Nat. Prod. J PROTEOME RES J. Am. Chem. Soc. LANGMUIR MACROMOLECULES Mol. Pharmaceutics Nano Lett. Org. Lett. ORG PROCESS RES DEV ORGANOMETALLICS J. Org. Chem. J. Phys. Chem. J. Phys. Chem. A J. Phys. Chem. B J. Phys. Chem. C J. Phys. Chem. Lett. Analyst Anal. Methods Biomater. Sci. Catal. Sci. Technol. Chem. Commun. Chem. Soc. Rev. CHEM EDUC RES PRACT CRYSTENGCOMM Dalton Trans. Energy Environ. Sci. ENVIRON SCI-NANO ENVIRON SCI-PROC IMP ENVIRON SCI-WAT RES Faraday Discuss. Food Funct. Green Chem. Inorg. Chem. Front. Integr. Biol. J. Anal. At. Spectrom. J. Mater. Chem. A J. Mater. Chem. B J. Mater. Chem. C Lab Chip Mater. Chem. Front. Mater. Horiz. MEDCHEMCOMM Metallomics Mol. Biosyst. Mol. Syst. Des. Eng. Nanoscale Nanoscale Horiz. Nat. Prod. Rep. New J. Chem. Org. Biomol. Chem. Org. Chem. Front. PHOTOCH PHOTOBIO SCI PCCP Polym. Chem.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
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
×
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
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