How effective are patient-based educational interventions in the management of cancer pain? Systematic review and meta-analysis

A clinical approach to the management of cancer-related pain in emergency situations

PURPOSE

Most cancer patients experience many pain episodes depending on disruptive elements, leading them to the emergency room. The objective of the article is to describe common pitfalls that need to be avoided, as well as opportunities to be seized for repositioning patients back on their care pathway.

METHODS

Critical reflection based on literature analysis and clinical practice.

RESULTS

Most forms of cancer are now chronic, evolving diseases, and patients are treated with high-technology targeted therapies with iatrogenic effects. Moreover, the multimorphic nature of cancer-related pain requires dynamic, interdisciplinary assessments addressing its etiology, its pathophysiology, its dimensions (sensory-discriminatory, cognitive, emotional, and behavioral), and the patient's perception of it, in order to propose the most adapted therapies. However, for most patients, cancer pain remains underestimated, poorly assessed, and under-treated. In this context, the key steps in emergency cancer pain management are as follows: • Quick relief of uncontrolled cancer pain: after eliminating potential medical or surgical emergencies revealed by pain, a brief questioning will make the use of carefully titrated morphine in most situations possible. • Assessment and re-assessment of the pain and the patient, screening specific elements, to better understand the situation and its consequences. • Identification of disruptive elements leading to uncontrolled pain, with an interdisciplinary confrontation to find a mid to long-term approach, involving the appropriate pharmaceutical and/or non-pharmaceutical strategies, possibly including interventions.

CONCLUSIONS

Pain emergencies should be part of the cancer care pathway and, through supportive care, provide an opportunity to help cancer patients both maintain their physical, psychological, and social balance and anticipate further painful episodes.

Strategies of complementary and integrative therapies in cancer-related pain-attaining exhaustive cancer pain management

PURPOSE

Complementary integrative therapies (CITs) correspond to growing demand in patients with cancer-related pain. This demand needs to be considered alongside pharmaceutical and/or interventional therapies. CITs can be used to cover certain specific pain-related characteristics. The objective of this review is to present the options for CITs that could be used within dynamic, multidisciplinary, and personalized management, leading to an integrative oncology approach.

METHODS

Critical reflection based on literature analysis and clinical practice.

RESULTS

Most CITs only showed trends in efficacy as cancer pain was mainly a secondary endpoint, or populations were restricted. Physical therapy has demonstrated efficacy in motion and pain, in some specific cancers (head and neck or breast cancers) or in treatments sequelae (lymphedema). In cancer survivors, higher levels of physical activity decrease pain intensity. Due to the multimorphism of cancer pain, certain mind-body therapies acting on anxiety, stress, depression, or mood disturbances (such as massage, acupuncture, healing touch, hypnosis, and music therapy) are efficient on cancer pain. Other mind-body therapies have shown trends in reducing the severity of cancer pain and improving other parameters, and they include education (with coping skills training), yoga, tai chi/qigong, guided imagery, virtual reality, and cognitive-behavioral therapy alone or combined. The outcome sustainability of most CITs is still questioned.

CONCLUSIONS

High-quality clinical trials should be conducted with CITs, as their efficacy on pain is mainly based on efficacy trends in pain severity, professional judgment, and patient preferences. Finally, the implementation of CITs requires an interdisciplinary team approach to offer optimal, personalized, cancer pain management.

Factors That Hinder and Facilitate Cancer Patients' Knowledge About Pain Management-A Qualitative Study

CONTEXT

Pain management education may improve pain control for some patients, whereas individual differences exist.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate possible critical components, facilitators, and hindrances for improved knowledge about pain management, in not hospitalized adult oncology patients with pain from bone metastasis participating in a pain management intervention.

METHODS

This substudy is a qualitative evaluation of the PRO-SELF Pain Control Program, tested in a randomized controlled trial. During six weeks, 87 participants in the intervention group received tailored coaching encounters by a trained oncology nurse. Three encounters for each patient were audio recorded. The encounter between patient's with the largest (n = 12) and lowest (n = 8) change in knowledge about pain management from before to after the intervention was transcribed verbatim and analyzed with qualitative content analysis.

RESULTS

The critical components of the intervention were repetition of information, struggling with resistance, use of peer experiences, and keeping track of variations. Facilitators of improvement were patients' trust and preparedness to try new procedures, the patient's self-awareness and body awareness, and taking active role in own care. Difficulties in processing complex information, culturally conditioned behaviors, fear, and lack of knowledge were the most important barriers to the success of the intervention.

CONCLUSION

Education in pain management in cancer patients requires repeated information, allowing time for overcoming resistance related to dysfunctional beliefs and fear. To facilitate the patient's involvement in their pain management, tailored and person-centered education is needed.

Cost-Effectiveness of Pain Management Strategies in Advanced Cancer

OBJECTIVES

Uncontrolled pain in advanced cancer is a common problem and has significant impact on individuals' quality of life and use of healthcare resources. Interventions to help manage pain at the end of life are available, but there is limited economic evidence to support their wider implementation. We conducted a case study economic evaluation of two pain self-management interventions (PainCheck and Tackling Cancer Pain Toolkit [TCPT]) compared with usual care.

METHODS

We generated a decision-analytic model to facilitate the evaluation. This modelled the survival of individuals at the end of life as they moved through pain severity categories. Intervention effectiveness was based on published meta-analyses results. The evaluation was conducted from the perspective of the U.K. health service provider and reported cost per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY).

RESULTS

PainCheck and TCPT were cheaper (respective incremental costs -GBP148 [-EUR168.53] and -GBP474 [-EUR539.74]) and more effective (respective incremental QALYs of 0.010 and 0.013) than usual care. There was a 65 percent and 99.5 percent chance of cost-effectiveness for PainCheck and TCPT, respectively. Results were relatively robust to sensitivity analyses. The most important driver of cost-effectiveness was level of pain reduction (intervention effectiveness). Although cost savings were modest per patient, these were considerable when accounting for the number of potential intervention beneficiaries.

CONCLUSIONS

Educational and monitoring/feedback interventions have the potential to be cost-effective. Economic evaluations based on estimates of effectiveness from published meta-analyses and using a decision modeling approach can support commissioning decisions and implementation of pain management strategies.

Pharmacist educational interventions for cancer pain management: a systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVES

Educational interventions by pharmacists for patients with cancer pain aim to improve pain management, but little is known about the different components of interventions and their effectiveness. Our aim was to assess the benefit of pharmacist delivered educational interventions for patients with cancer pain. A systematic review and meta-analysis of experimental trials testing pharmacist delivered educational interventions for cancer pain was carried out to identify the components of interventions and effectiveness at improving pain-related outcomes for patients with cancer. A literature review was conducted in EMBASE, MEDLINE, CINAHL, PsycINFO, ASSIA, Web of Science and CENTRAL from inception until January 2018 searching for educational interventions involving a pharmacist for patients with cancer pain. Four studies were included involving 944 patients. Meta-analysis was carried out where possible.

KEY FINDINGS

Meta-analysis of three of the four studies found that mean pain intensity in the intervention group was reduced by 0.76 on a 0-10 scale (95% confidence interval), although only two of the studies used validated measures of pain. Improvements in knowledge, side effects and patient satisfaction were seen although with less reliable measures.

SUMMARY

Pharmacist educational interventions for patients with cancer pain have been found to show promise in reducing pain intensity. Studies were few and of varying quality. Further, good quality studies should be carried out in this area and these should be comprehensively reported. Trials measuring patient self-efficacy and patient satisfaction are needed before the impact of the pharmacist delivered interventions on these outcomes can be established.

Standards for the management of cancer-related pain across Europe-A position paper from the EFIC Task Force on Cancer Pain

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Pain is a common symptom in patients who survive cancer and in those who live with progressive advanced disease. Evidence from meta-analyses suggests that pain remains poorly controlled for a large proportion of patients; barriers to good management include poor assessment of pain, inadequate support for patient self-management and late or inadequate access to strong opioid analgesia in those with advanced disease.

METHODS

The European Pain Federation (EFIC) established a Task Force in 2017 which convened a European group of experts, drawn from a diverse range of relevant clinical disciplines, to prepare a position paper on appropriate standards for the management of cancer-related pain. The expert panel reviewed the available literature and made recommendations using the GRADE system to combine quality of evidence with strength of recommendation. The panel took into account the desirable and undesirable effects of the management recommendation, including the cost and inconvenience of each when deciding the recommendation.

RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS

The 10 standards presented are aimed to improve cancer pain management and reduce variation in practice across Europe. The Task Force believes that adoption of these standards by all 37 countries will promote the quality of care of patients with cancer-related pain and reduce unnecessary suffering.

SIGNIFICANCE

Pain affects up to 40% of cancer survivors and affects at least 66% of patients with advanced progressive disease, many of whom experience poor pain control. These 10 standards are aimed to improve cancer pain management, promote the quality of care of patients and reduce variation across Europe.

EduCan trial: study protocol for a randomised controlled trial on the effectiveness of pain neuroscience education after breast cancer surgery on pain, physical, emotional and work-related functioning

INTRODUCTION

Over the past decades, awareness on the importance of educational interventions in cancer pain management has increased. However, education is often restricted to biomedical pain management instructions. A more modern educational approach, also known as pain neuroscience education (PNE), explains pain from a biopsychosocial perspective. We hypothesise that this more comprehensive educational approach in the early treatment phase of breast cancer will lead to more beneficial effects for cancer pain management. Therefore, the aim of the present study is to investigate the effectiveness of this PNE intervention, in addition to best evidence physical therapy modalities for treatment and prevention of pain, physical, emotional and work-related functioning after breast cancer surgery, compared with a traditional biomedical educational intervention.

METHODS

A double-blinded randomised controlled trial has been started in November 2017 at the University Hospitals of Leuven. Immediately after breast cancer surgery, all participants (n=184) receive a 12-week intensive standard physical therapy programme. They receive three additional refresher sessions at 6, 8 and 12 months postsurgery. In addition, participants receive three educational sessions during the first-month postsurgery and three 'booster sessions' at 6, 8 and 12 months postsurgery. In the intervention group, the content of the education sessions is based on the modern PNE approach. Whereas in the control group, the education is based on the traditional biomedical approach. The primary outcome parameter is pain-related disability 1 year after surgery. Secondary outcomes related to other dimensions of pain, physical, emotional and work-related functioning at 1-week, 4, 6, 8, 12 and 18 months postsurgery.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

The study will be conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki. This protocol has been approved by the ethical committee of the University Hospitals of Leuven. Results will be disseminated via peer-reviewed scientific journals and presentations at congresses.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT03351075.

Testing a pain self-management intervention by exploring reduction of analgesics' side effects in cancer outpatients and the involvement of family caregivers: a study protocol (PEINCA-FAM)

Background

Pain is one of cancer patients’ most frequent and distressing symptoms; however, analgesics’ side effects often increase symptom burden. Further, with the home rapidly becoming the primary cancer care setting, family caregivers (FCs) commonly play central roles in patients’ pain self-management, but with little or no preparation. One US-tested intervention, the PRO-SELF© Plus Pain Control Program (PCP), designed to support cancer outpatients and their FCs in pain self-management, is currently being tested in the Swiss multi-centre PEINCA study. The current PEINCA-FAM study is a sub-study of PEINCA. The aims of PEINCA-FAM are: a) to test the efficacy of the adapted German PRO-SELF © Plus PCP to reduce side effects of analgesics; b) to enhance patients’/FCs’ knowledge regarding cancer pain; and c) to explore FCs’ involvement in patients’ pain self-management.

Methods

This mixed methods project combines a multi-centre randomized controlled clinical trial with qualitative data collection techniques and includes 210 patients recruited from three oncology outpatient clinics. FCs involved in patients’ pain self-management are also invited to participate. After baseline evaluation, eligible participants are randomized to a 6-week intervention group and a control group. Both groups complete a daily pain and symptom diary. Intervention group patients/FCs receive the weekly psychoeducational PRO-SELF© Plus PCP interventions; control group patients receive usual care. After completing the six-week study procedures, a subsample of 7–10 patients/FCs per group and hospital (N = 42–60) will be interviewed regarding their pain management experiences. Data collection will take place from April 2016 until December 2018. An intent-to-treat analysis and generalized linear mixed models will be applied. Qualitative data will be analysed by using interpretive description. Quantitative and qualitative results will be combined within a mixed method matrix.

Discussion

In clinical practice, specially trained oncology nurses in outpatient clinics could apply the intervention to reduce side effects and to enhance patients’/FCs’ self-efficacy and pain management knowledge.

Trial registration

The PEINCA study is registered in the Clinical Trials.gov site (code: NCT02713919, 08 March 2016).

Cancer pain: where are we now?

Increasing numbers of those living with and beyond cancer presents a clinical challenge for pain specialists. A large proportion of these patients experience pain secondary to their disease or its treatment, impeding rehabilitation and significantly impacting upon their quality of life. The successful management of this pain presents a considerable challenge. This review aims to outline current concepts and treatment options, while considering nuances within pain assessment and the use of large-scale data to help guide further advances.

[Elaboration and evaluation of a therapeutic education program in cancer pain management]

Pain, one of the most feared symptoms for patients with cancer, remains insufficiently alleviated and impairs quality of life. Therapeutic patient education (TPE) is a relevant approach to this problem while allowing patients to develop skills to better manage their pain. In the "Basse-Normandie" French region, the management of pain relies on two organized networks, thus allowing proximity and accessibility for all concerned. In this context, our team has begun a broad five-step research program that is part of a regional health policy: (1) training in TPE of 10 doctor/nurse pairs; (2) identification of educational expectations of patients and their relatives in the field of cancer pain; (3) design and optimization of a TPE program dedicated to cancer pain; (4) regional pilot study aiming to assess the feasibility, quality and transferability of the program; (5) evaluation of the TPE program by interventional comparative randomization at the national level. This article aims to present the program which originality and strengths are based on collaborative work between health stakeholders. Objectives, methodology and expected results of the research phase (stages 2, 4, 5) are notably developed. The main expected outcomes are to prove the effectiveness of the program in improving the knowledge and skills of patients in the field of pain cancer in order to promote their adherence to treatment and, consequently, to enable them to better manage it. The long-term objective is to disseminate the educational approach by modifying practices that provide a mutual benefit for caregivers and patients.

Self-management toolkit and delivery strategy for end-of-life pain: the mixed-methods feasibility study

BACKGROUND

Pain affects most people approaching the end of life and can be severe for some. Opioid analgesia is effective, but evidence is needed about how best to support patients in managing these medicines.

OBJECTIVES

To develop a self-management support toolkit (SMST) and delivery strategy and to test the feasibility of evaluating this intervention in a future definitive trial.

DESIGN

Phase I - evidence synthesis and qualitative interviews with patients and carers. Phase II - qualitative semistructured focus groups and interviews with patients, carers and specialist palliative care health professionals. Phase III - multicentre mixed-methods single-arm pre-post observational feasibility study.

PARTICIPANTS

Phase I - six patients and carers. Phase II - 15 patients, four carers and 19 professionals. Phase III - 19 patients recruited to intervention that experienced pain, living at home and were treated with strong opioid analgesia. Process evaluation interviews with 13 patients, seven carers and 11 study nurses.

INTERVENTION

Self-Management of Analgesia and Related Treatments at the end of life (SMART) intervention comprising a SMST and a four-step educational delivery approach by clinical nurse specialists in palliative care over 6 weeks.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Recruitment rate, treatment fidelity, treatment acceptability, patient-reported outcomes (such as scores on the Brief Pain Inventory, Self-Efficacy for Managing Chronic Disease Scale, Edmonton Symptom Assessment Scale, EuroQol-5 Dimensions, Satisfaction with Information about Medicines Scale, and feasibility of collecting data on health-care resource use for economic evaluation).

RESULTS

Phase I - key themes on supported self-management were identified from evidence synthesis and qualitative interviews. Phase II - the SMST was developed and refined. The delivery approach was nested within a nurse-patient consultation. Phase III - intervention was delivered to 17 (89%) patients, follow-up data at 6 weeks were available on 15 patients. Overall, the intervention was viewed as acceptable and valued. Descriptive analysis of patient-reported outcomes suggested that interference from pain and self-efficacy were likely to be candidates for primary outcomes in a future trial. No adverse events related to the intervention were reported. The health economic analysis suggested that SMART could be cost-effective. We identified key limitations and considerations for a future trial: improve recruitment through widening eligibility criteria, refine the SMST resources content, enhance fidelity of intervention delivery, secure research nurse support at recruiting sites, refine trial procedures (including withdrawal process and data collection frequency), and consider a cluster randomised design with nurse as cluster unit.

LIMITATIONS

(1) The recruitment rate was lower than anticipated. (2) The content of the intervention was focused on strong opioids only. (3) The fidelity of intervention delivery was limited by the need for ongoing training and support. (4) Recruitment sites where clinical research nurse support was not secured had lower recruitment rates. (5) The process for recording withdrawal was not sufficiently detailed. (6) The number of follow-up visits was considered burdensome for some participants. (7) The feasibility trial did not have a control arm or assess randomisation processes.

CONCLUSIONS

A future randomised controlled trial is feasible and acceptable.

STUDY AND TRIAL REGISTRATION

This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42014013572; Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN35327119; and National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Portfolio registration 162114.

FUNDING

The NIHR Health Technology Assessment programme.

How do patients with cancer pain view community pharmacy services? An interview study

Pain experienced by many patients with advanced cancer is often not well controlled and community pharmacists are potentially well placed to provide support. The study objective was to explore the views and experiences of patients with advanced cancer about community pharmacies, their services and attitudes towards having a community pharmacist pain medicines consultation. Purposive sampling of GP clinical information systems was used to recruit patients with advanced cancer, living in the community and receiving opioid analgesics in one area of England, UK between January 2015 and July 2016. Thirteen patients had a semi-structured interview which was audio-recorded and transcribed verbatim. Data were analysed deductively and inductively using Framework analysis and incorporating new themes as they emerged. The framework comprised Pain management, Experiences and expectations, Access to care and Communication. All patients reported using one regular community pharmacy citing convenience, service and staff friendliness as influential factors. The idea of a community pharmacy medicines consultation was acceptable to most patients. The idea of telephone consultations was positively received but electronic media such as Skype was not feasible or acceptable for most. Patients perceived a hierarchy of health professionals with specialist palliative care nurses at the top (due to their combined knowledge of their condition and medicines) followed by GPs then pharmacists. Patients receiving specialist palliative care described pain that was better controlled than those who were not. They thought medicines consultations with a pharmacist could be useful for patients before referral for palliative care. There is a need for pain medicines support for patients with advanced cancer, and unmet need appears greater for those not under the care of specialist services. Medicines consultations, in principle, are acceptable to patients both in person and by telephone, and the latter was perceived to be of particular benefit to patients less able to leave the house.

A Randomized, Single-Blind Study Evaluating the Effect of a Bone Pain Education Video on Reported Bone Pain in Patients with Breast Cancer Receiving Chemotherapy and Pegfilgrastim

BACKGROUND

Mild-to-moderate bone pain is the most commonly reported adverse event associated with pegfilgrastim.

AIMS

To investigate the effect of bone pain education on pegfilgrastim-related bone pain in patients with breast cancer receiving chemotherapy and pegfilgrastim.

DESIGN

Randomized, single-blind study.

SETTINGS

Forty-eight community oncology clinics throughout the United States.

PARTICIPANTS

Three hundred women ≥18 years of age with newly diagnosed stage I -III breast cancer, who were planning ≥4 cycles of neoadjuvant or adjuvant chemotherapy with pegfilgrastim support starting in cycle 1.

METHODS

Patients were randomized 1:1 to view a general education DVD on chemotherapy side effects (GE-DVD) or a DVD on bone pain following chemotherapy and pegfilgrastim (BP-DVD). Patients recorded severity of bone pain on a scale of 0-10, location of pain, and use of bone pain medications (i.e., analgesics, antihistamines, and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs) for 5 days, beginning on the day of pegfilgrastim administration, in each of the first four chemotherapy cycles.

RESULTS

Patient-reported maximum bone pain was similar in the two groups (GE-DVD vs BP-DVD: cycle 1, 3.2 vs. 3.5, p = .3479; across all cycles, 4.1 vs. 4.6, p = .2196). Other measures of bone pain were also similar between the groups. Bone pain was highest in cycle 1 but decreased and then remained stable in subsequent cycles. Bone pain medication use was similar in both groups and was highest in cycle 1.

CONCLUSIONS

The bone pain-specific education evaluated here did not improve perceptions of bone pain reported in this patient population.

Learning Needs of Gynecologic Cancer Survivors

To define the learning needs of patients with gynecological oncology. The study was performed as a descriptive study. A total of 92 patients were participated. Data were collected using Patient Learning Needs Scale (PLNS). The Pearson correlation test, independent sample t test, and analysis of one-way of variance (ANOVA) followed by Tukey's-B post hoc tests were used for statistical analyses by the SPSS 15.0 software package. The mean age of women's was 50.37 ± 12.20 years. The women's diagnoses were cervical (45.7 %), ovarian (27.2 %), and endometrial (19.6 %) cancers. The most frequently stated learning needs topics were coping with pain (47.8 %), daily living activities (46.2 %), and psychological support (44.6 %). The mean PLNS score of women was 212.56 ± 35.83. The mean subscales scores of PLNS were 34.06 ± 7.29 for medicines, 38.34 ± 6.74 for daily living activities, and 24.68 ± 5.41 for community subscales. Women who graduated from elementary school needed more education than the women with higher education (p < 0.001). Learning needs level of the women are high and related to increase quality of life, medicine usage, complications of treatment, skin problems, pain management, and supportive care. As a healthcare professional, we should plan and develop educational programs in order to adequately inform patients about their learning needs.

How family caregivers of cancer patients manage symptoms at home: A systematic review

INTRODUCTION

Cancer affects not only the patient, but also the whole family, especially when a member of the family assumes the role of the family caregiver. This puts an additional emotional, social and financial strain on the family caregivers. Family caregivers of cancer patients are actively involved in the care provided at the home setting through various ways including practical tasks, symptom management and care coordination. The focus of preceding studies on family caregivers and symptom management was either on pain or the patients' and family caregivers' experience of symptom management and coping. The aim of this review was to provide evidence on how family caregivers manage symptoms and side effects at home, in adult cancer patients throughout the disease trajectory.

METHODS

A systematic literature review was performed in PubMed, CINAHL, Web of Science and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials with a combination of keywords and MeSH terms for family caregivers, cancer, symptoms, side effects and management. Based on predetermined inclusion and exclusion criteria, a total of 1270 articles were screened and 20 studies were included in the analysis. A descriptive analysis was performed due to the heterogeneity of the findings.

RESULTS

The results showed that only a limited number of studies (3/20) explored how and what family caregivers do in symptom management as a primary outcome. Family caregivers provided psychosocial support, such as supporting and motivating the patient and maintaining social engagement. Caregivers provided physical support such as with the administration of medicine and tube feeding. As an integral part of managing the symptoms, family caregivers actively monitored and assessed symptoms to timely recognize any treatment related side effects, assess the response to therapeutic interventions and recognize possible deterioration in physical status. Furthermore, family caregivers were often the decision maker - being alert, watching and waiting and decided when to act and when not to act.

CONCLUSIONS

Family caregivers are doing work similar to healthcare professionals, when managing symptoms and side effects at home in patients with cancer. Advanced tasks such as assessing, monitoring and deciding when and how to act are included in the daily routine of family caregivers.

Nonpharmacologic Pain Interventions: A Review of Evidence-Based Practices for Reducing Chronic Cancer Pain

BACKGROUND

Pain is a common issue for patients with cancer and can be challenging to manage effectively. Healthcare professionals need to be knowledgeable about evidence-based nonpharmacologic interventions.
.

OBJECTIVES

This systematic review critically appraises the strength and quality of the empirical evidence for nonpharmacologic interventions in reducing chronic cancer pain.
.

METHODS

Intervention studies were critically appraised and summarized by an Oncology Nursing Society Putting Evidence Into Practice team of RNs, advanced practice nurses, and nurse scientists. A level of evidence and a practice recommendation was assigned to each intervention.
.

FINDINGS

Based on evidence, recommended interventions to reduce chronic cancer pain are celiac plexus block for pain related to pancreatic and abdominal cancers and radiation therapy for bone pain. Although psychoeducational interventions are considered likely to be effective, the effective components of these interventions and their dose and duration need to be determined through additional research.

Improving the management of pain from advanced cancer in the community: study protocol for a pragmatic multicentre randomised controlled trial

INTRODUCTION

For patients with advanced cancer, research shows that pain is frequent, burdensome and undertreated. Evidence-based approaches to support cancer pain management have been developed but have not been implemented within the context of the UK National Health Service. This protocol is for a pragmatic multicentre randomised controlled trial (RCT) to assess feasibility, acceptability, effectiveness and cost-effectiveness for a multicomponent intervention for pain management in patients with advanced cancer.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

This trial will assess the feasibility of implementation and uptake of evidence-based interventions, developed and piloted as part of the Improving the Management of Pain from Advanced Cancer in the Community Programme grant, into routine clinical practice and determine whether there are potential differences with respect to patient-rated pain, patient pain knowledge and experience, healthcare use, quality of life and cost-effectiveness. 160 patients will receive either the intervention (usual care plus supported self-management) delivered within the oncology clinic and palliative care services by locally assigned community palliative care nurses, consisting of a self-management educational intervention and eHealth intervention for routine pain assessment and monitoring; or usual care. The primary outcomes are to assess implementation and uptake of the interventions, and differences in terms of pain severity. Secondary outcomes include pain interference, participant pain knowledge and experience, and cost-effectiveness. Outcome assessment will be blinded and patient-reported outcome measures collected via post at 6 and 12 weeks following randomisation.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

This RCT has the potential to significantly influence National Health Service delivery to community-based patients with pain from advanced cancer. We aim to provide definitive evidence of whether two simple interventions delivered by community palliative care nurse in palliative care that support-self-management are clinically effective and cost-effective additions to standard community palliative care.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ISRCTN18281271; Pre-results.

[Not Available]

Zusammenfassung. Krebsbedingte Schmerzen sind häufig, für Betroffene sehr belastend und oft ungenügend behandelt. Krebs ist zur chronischen Krankheit geworden; viele Patienten sind gefordert zu Hause selber oder mit Unterstützung von Angehörigen mit Therapien und Auswirkungen der Erkrankung zurechtzukommen. Dazu gehört auch das Schmerz-Selbstmanagement. Dieses ist komplex und verlangt spezifisches Wissen und Können, um eine Schmerztherapie im Alltag erfolgreich umzusetzen. Oft gelingt dies nicht, weil patientenbezogene Barrieren wie Bedenken gegenüber Opiaten eine gute Schmerzkontrolle verhindern. Mit getesteten Interventionen konnten teilweise moderate Schmerzreduktionen erreicht werden. Wegen unterschiedlichen methodischen Ansätzen und Interventionen bleibt offen, wie eine Unterstützung von Patienten und pflegenden Angehörigen am wirksamsten erfolgt. Es empfiehlt sich, Patienten zu informieren, dabei bekannte Barrieren anzugehen, Können zu vermitteln und pflegende Angehörige einzubeziehen.

Talking about women's sexual health after cancer: Why is it so hard to move the needle?

Despite increasing calls to integrate sexual health into routine cancer care, the majority of women diagnosed with cancer do not receive information about how their cancer treatments will affect their sexual health. With the significant challenges that exist to clinical discussion of sexual health, efforts on multiple fronts are needed to close the gap in the care of women diagnosed with cancer.

Palliative Care for Cancer Survivors

The palliative care approach for survivors begins with comprehensive assessment of communication and advance care planning needs and the physical, psychological and psychiatric, social, spiritual and religious, and cultural domains. Communication and decision-making about difficult issues should include responding to emotions, planning for future communication needs, and considering reasons for miscommunication. Key palliative approaches to symptom management include addressing physical and psychosocial concerns, and using nonpharmacologic approaches first or together with medications. Physicians should address advance care planning in older cancer survivors and those at significant risk of recurrence and mortality, ideally through ongoing conversations in a longitudinal care relationship.

Patient-clinician relationship seems to affect adherence to analgesic use in cancer patients: a cross sectional study in a Taiwanese population

Objectives

Patient satisfaction can provide a measure of service quality and serve as a predictor of health-related behaviors. Little is known about how patients' satisfaction with clinician-patient interactions affects their adherence to taking analgesics. The purposes of this study were to (1) investigate the predictors of patients' satisfaction with clinicians, and (2) examine whether patients' satisfaction with their clinicians can improve adherence to analgesic use.

Design

A cross-sectional and descriptive design was used.

Setting

Outpatient oncology clinic at a medical center in Taiwan.

Participants

A convenience sample (N = 309) was recruited.

Main outcome measures

The Medical Interview Satisfaction Scale 21 - Chinese Version, Short Version of the Barriers Questionnaire - Taiwan Form, Taiwanese version of the Morisky Medication Adherence Measure, and Interpersonal Physician Trust Scale - Chinese version, and Brief Pain Inventory Chinese Version.

Results

Variables that could significantly predict patients' satisfaction were patient age and trust in clinicians, which together accounted for 33% of the total variance. Patients' satisfaction with their clinicians significantly predicted patients' adherence to medication use (OR = 3.10, P < 0.05). There was an interactive effect (OR = 0.12, P < 0.05) between patients' satisfaction and barriers to analgesic use. Correlation coefficients between barriers to analgesic use and patients' adherence are -0.52 (P < 0.001) and -0.13 (P = 0.20) in the higher satisfaction and lower satisfaction patients, respectively.

Conclusions

Patients' satisfaction with their clinicians can have a positive effect on changing analgesics adherence behaviors when patients hold incorrect beliefs about analgesics. Patients' satisfaction has an important role in enhancement of analgesics adherence behaviors.

Psychological factors and psychosocial interventions for cancer related pain

The present paper is aimed at briefly presenting psychological factors involved in cancer related pain and what psychosocial interventions are efficient in reducing it. Cancer related pain is a complex experience and the most integrative and recommended approach is the biopsychosocial model. It has been proved that chronic pain is more strongly related to psychological factors than to treatment or illness related factors. Psychological factors influencing pain experience can be intuitively grouped starting with awareness of pain (i.e., attentional factor), then with evaluation of pain (i.e., cognitive factors) which is leading to feelings (i.e., emotional factors), and behaviours (i.e., coping strategies) regarding pain. Psychosocial interventions (i.e., skill based and education based interventions) have strong evidence that is effective in reducing cancer related pain.

[Improving the quality of cancer pain management in palliative care unit: Targeted clinical audit]

Goal This study aims to assess the quality of the cancer pain management in Palliative care unit.

METHOD

The method used was the targeted clinical audit. The audit grid was built according to the recommendations of the pilot Committee, and tested until the final version with 19 items was obtained. In this retrospective study, 60 consecutive patients were studied on 2 periods of time. The first one (T1) shows the gap between the patient's chart and the expected standard, and proposes corrective measures. The second one (T2) re-assesses, using the same items list, the efficacy of these measures.

RESULTS

After the corrective measures, the patients' medical record documentation was significantly improved at T2 for: neuropathic pain assessment improved, from 3% (T1) to 67% (T2) (P<0.001), so did pain assessment during the titration, from 6.7% (T1) to 90% (T2) (P<0.001). The overdoses symptoms assessment improved from 17% at T1 to 93% at T2, (P=0.002) and breakthrough pain evaluation improved from 3% at T1 to 73% at T2, (P<0.001). The pain reassessment after the rescue doses improved from 10% at T1 to 73% at T2 (P<0.001). The other points improved but not significantly.

CONCLUSION

The quality of the pain cancer management was improved during the audit, but some points (patient education and in patient medical record documentation) can be improved. We need to continue to implement the improvement measures in our unit.

Modern pain neuroscience in clinical practice: applied to post-cancer, paediatric and sports-related pain

•

Generalized hypersensitivity in post-cancer, sports-related and pediatric pain.

•

Rationale for pain education, stress management and cognition targeted exercises.

•

Need to change from a biomedical or psychosocial to an integrated approach.

In the last decade, evidence regarding chronic pain has developed exponentially. Numerous studies show that many chronic pain populations show specific neuroplastic changes in the peripheral and central nervous system. These changes are reflected in clinical manifestations, like a generalized hypersensitivity of the somatosensory system. Besides a hypersensitivity of bottom-up nociceptive transmission, there is also evidence for top-down facilitation of pain due to malfunctioning of the endogenous descending nociceptive modulatory systems. These and other aspects of modern pain neuroscience are starting to be applied within daily clinical practice. However, currently the application of this knowledge is mostly limited to the general adult population with musculoskeletal problems, while evidence is getting stronger that also in other chronic pain populations these neuroplastic processes may contribute to the occurrence and persistence of the pain problem. Therefore, this masterclass article aims at giving an overview of the current modern pain neuroscience knowledge and its potential application in post-cancer, paediatric and sports-related pain problems.

Cancer pain: a review of epidemiology, clinical quality and value impact

Cancer-related pain, reported by more than 70% of patients, is one of the most common and troublesome symptoms affecting patients with cancer. Despite the availability of effective treatments, cancer-related pain may be inadequately controlled in up to 50% of patients. With the growing focus on ‘value’ (healthcare outcomes achieved per dollar spent) in healthcare, the management of cancer-related pain has assumed novel significance in recent years. Data from initiatives that assess the quality of pain management in clinical practice have shown that effective management of cancer-related pain improves patient-perceived value of cancer treatment. As a result, assessment and effective management of cancer-related pain are now recognized as important measures of value in cancer care.

Co-creative development of an eHealth nursing intervention: Self-management support for outpatients with cancer pain

INTRODUCTION

Co-creative methods, having an iterative character and including different perspectives, allow for the development of complex nursing interventions. Information about the development process is essential in providing justification for the ultimate intervention and crucial in interpreting the outcomes of subsequent evaluations. This paper describes a co-creative method directed towards the development of an eHealth intervention delivered by registered nurses to support self-management in outpatients with cancer pain.

METHODS

Intervention development was divided into three consecutive phases (exploration of context, specification of content, organisation of care). In each phase, researchers and technicians addressed five iterative steps: research, ideas, prototyping, evaluation, and documentation. Health professionals and patients were consulted during research and evaluation steps.

RESULTS

Collaboration of researchers, health professionals, patients and technicians was positive and valuable in optimising outcomes. The intervention includes a mobile application for patients and a web application for nurses. Patients are requested to monitor pain, adverse effects and medication intake, while being provided with graphical feedback, education and contact possibilities. Nurses monitor data, advise patients, and collaborate with the treating physician.

CONCLUSION

Integration of patient self-management and professional care by means of eHealth key into well-known barriers and seem promising in improving cancer pain follow-up. Nurses are able to make substantial contributions because of their expertise, focus on daily living, and their bridging function between patients and health professionals in different care settings. Insights from the intervention development as well as the intervention content give thought for applications in different patients and care settings.

Global disparities in cancer pain management and palliative care

Palliative care and pain management constitute an integral part of the multi-disciplinary approach to treating patients with cancer. There are major disparities in the global presence of sustainable palliative care models and universal availability of effective pain medications, especially in low and middle income countries with the highest predicted future burden of cancer. Active intervention is needed to improve the availability of palliative care and effective pain control worldwide.

Salient concerns in using analgesia for cancer pain among outpatients: A cluster analysis study

AIM

To identify unique clusters of patients based on their concerns in using analgesia for cancer pain and predictors of the cluster membership.

METHODS

This was a 3-mo prospective observational study (n = 207). Patients were included if they were adults (≥ 18 years), diagnosed with solid tumors or multiple myelomas, and had at least one prescription of around-the-clock pain medication for cancer or cancer-treatment-related pain. Patients were recruited from two outpatient medical oncology clinics within a large health system in Philadelphia. A choice-based conjoint (CBC) analysis experiment was used to elicit analgesic treatment preferences (utilities). Patients employed trade-offs based on five analgesic attributes (percent relief from analgesics, type of analgesic, type of side-effects, severity of side-effects, out of pocket cost). Patients were clustered based on CBC utilities using novel adaptive statistical methods. Multiple logistic regression was used to identify predictors of cluster membership.

RESULTS

The analyses found 4 unique clusters: Most patients made trade-offs based on the expectation of pain relief (cluster 1, 41%). For a subset, the main underlying concern was type of analgesic prescribed, i.e., opioid vs non-opioid (cluster 2, 11%) and type of analgesic side effects (cluster 4, 21%), respectively. About one in four made trade-offs based on multiple concerns simultaneously including pain relief, type of side effects, and severity of side effects (cluster 3, 28%). In multivariable analysis, to identify predictors of cluster membership, clinical and socioeconomic factors (education, health literacy, income, social support) rather than analgesic attitudes and beliefs were found important; only the belief, i.e., pain medications can mask changes in health or keep you from knowing what is going on in your body was found significant in predicting two of the four clusters [cluster 1 (-); cluster 4 (+)].

CONCLUSION

Most patients appear to be driven by a single salient concern in using analgesia for cancer pain. Addressing these concerns, perhaps through real time clinical assessments, may improve patients’ analgesic adherence patterns and cancer pain outcomes.

Pain and Opioids in Cancer Care: Benefits, Risks, and Alternatives

Pain remains common in the setting of malignancy, occurring as a consequence of cancer and its treatment. Several high-quality studies confirm that more than 50% of all patients with cancer experience moderate to severe pain. The prevalence of pain in cancer survivors is estimated to be 40%, while close to two-thirds of those with advanced disease live with pain. Progress has occurred in the management of cancer pain, yet undertreatment persists. Additionally, new challenges are threatening these advances. These challenges are numerous and include educational deficits, time restraints, and limited access to all types of care. New challenges to access are occurring as a result of interventions designed to combat the prescription drug abuse epidemic, with fewer clinicians willing to prescribe opioids, pharmacies reluctant to stock the medications, and payers placing strict limits on reimbursement. A related challenge is our evolving understanding of the risks of long-term adverse effects associated with opioids. And reflective of the opioid abuse epidemic affecting the general population, the potential for misuse or abuse exists in those with cancer. Guidelines have been developed to support oncologists when prescribing the long-term use of opioids for cancer survivors. The challenges surrounding the use of opioids, and the need for safe and effective alternative analgesics, are leading to intense interest in the potential benefits of cannabis for cancer-related pain. Oncologists are faced with questions regarding the types of cannabis available, differences between routes of administration, data concerning safety and efficacy, and legal and regulatory dynamics.

Efficacy of Sleep Tool Education During Hospitalization: A Randomized Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND

Patients are commonly provided tools in the hospital to overcome poor sleep. Whether education on use of sleep tools can impact health outcomes from a patient perspective is not known.

METHODS

We recruited 120 adults admitted to a nonintensive care unit cardiac-monitored floor. All patients received a set of sleep-enhancing tools (eye mask, ear plugs, and a white noise machine) and were randomized to receive direct education on use of and benefit of these sleep-enhancing tools (intervention), or an equal amount of time was spent discussing general benefits of sleep (control). Measurement of several symptom domains was assessed daily by health outcome survey responses, and change from baseline was assessed for differences between groups. Inpatient opioid use and length of stay were also measured.

RESULTS

Participants randomized to receive the education intervention had a significantly greater decrease in fatigue scores over the 3 days, compared with controls (5.30 ± 6.93 vs 1.81 ± 6.96, t = 2.32, P = .028). There was a trend toward improvements in multiple other sleep-related domains, including sleep disturbance, sleep-related impairment, physical functioning, pain severity, or pain interference (all P >.140). There was no difference in length of stay between intervention and control groups (7.40 ± 7.29 vs 7.71 ± 6.06 days, P = .996). The change in number of opioid equivalents taken did not differ use between the groups (P = .688).

CONCLUSION

In a randomized trial of education in the use of sleep-enhancing tools while hospitalized, patient fatigue was significantly improved, whereas several other patient-reported outcomes showed a trend toward improvements. Implementation of this very low-cost approach to improving sleep and well-being could substantially improve the patient care experience.

Patient-provider communication about sexual concerns in cancer: a systematic review

PURPOSE

Cancer survivors' needs around sexual concerns are often unmet. The primary objective of this systematic review was to examine the prevalence of and factors associated with patient-provider communication about sexual concerns in cancer.

METHODS

Using PRISMA guidelines, we searched PubMed/MEDLINE, PsychInfo, and CINAHL databases for peer-reviewed quantitative research papers (2000-2015) in cancer samples. Search terms across three linked categories were used (sexuality, communication, and cancer). The National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) Sexual Function Guidelines were used as a framework to categorize communication reported in each study.

RESULTS

Twenty-nine studies from 10 countries (29 % in USA) were included. Studies assessed patients only (21), providers only (4), and both (4). Communication measures differed across studies and many lacked validity data. When reported by patients or providers, the average prevalence of discussing potential treatment effects on sexual function was 50 (60 % for men and 28 % for women) and 88 %, respectively. As reported by patients or providers, respectively, assessing patients' sexual concerns (10 and 21 %) and offering treatments (22 and 17 %) were measured in fewer studies and were reported less frequently. Both patients and providers (28 and 32 %, respectively) reported a low prevalence of other non-specific communication. Greater prevalence of communication was associated with male patient gender and more years of provider experience.

CONCLUSIONS

Sexual issues go unaddressed for many cancer survivors, particularly women. Both patient and provider interventions are needed.

IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS

Enhancing patient-provider communication about sexual concerns through evidence-based interventions could improve patient sexual function and quality of life.

Supporting self-management of pain by patients with advanced cancer: views of palliative care professionals

PURPOSE

The aim of the study is to ascertain the views of specialist palliative care professionals on patient self-management of cancer pain in order to inform the development of a new educational intervention to support self-management.

METHODS

This is a qualitative research study using focus group interviews.

RESULTS

Participants viewed self-management of cancer pain as desirable and achievable but also as something that could be problematic. Challenges to self-management were perceived in patient attitudes and behaviours, professionals' own beliefs and actions and the wider social system. Practitioners showed awareness of potential tension between their espoused views (the desirability that patients manage pain autonomously) and their tacit views (the undesirability of patients managing pain in ways which conflict with professionals' knowledge and identity).

CONCLUSIONS

Practitioners espoused patient-centred professional practice which inclined them towards supporting self-management. They showed awareness of factors which might inhibit them from effectively incorporating education and support for self-management into routine practice.

Does a Brief Educational Session Produce Positive Change for Individuals Waiting for Tertiary Chronic Pain Services?

OBJECTIVES

To examine: 1) whether a single brief pre-clinic educational session improved the well-being and quality of life of individuals entering the wait-list for a tertiary chronic pain (CP) service; and 2) the impact of waiting for services on these outcomes.

METHODS

Participants were 346 adults, with basic English skills and non-urgent triage codes, who were recruited on referral to a tertiary Australian metropolitan CP unit. Participants were randomized across two conditions: "treatment as usual" (normal wait-list) and "experimental" (normal wait-list plus a 3-hour CP educational session). The educational session encouraged self-management and life engagement despite pain. Multiple outcomes (pain acceptance, pain-related interference, psychological distress, health care utilization [frequency, types], quality of life, health knowledge/beliefs), as well as pain severity and symptom exaggeration, were assessed at intake and again at 2 weeks and 6 months post-educational session (or equivalent for the wait-list group).

RESULTS

Satisfaction with the educational session was moderate-to-high, but attendance was not associated with improved outcomes. At 2 weeks, all study participants reported significant improvements in pain acceptance (willingness, overall acceptance), health care utilization (frequency) and quality of life (physical), which were maintained/enhanced at 6 months. Use of psychological and physical therapies increased significantly by 6 months. There was no functional deterioration while wait-listed.

CONCLUSIONS

Attending a brief pre-clinic education session did not improve function. There was no deterioration in wait-listed participants who agreed to be involved in research and who completed study measures at 2 and 6 months, but referral was associated with short-term functional improvements. This is the first study to link positive change with referral to, rather than treatment by, a tertiary CP service.

Pain following cancer treatment: Guidelines for the clinical classification of predominant neuropathic, nociceptive and central sensitization pain

BACKGROUND

In addition to fatigue, pain is the most frequent persistent symptom in cancer survivors. Clear guidelines for both the diagnosis and treatment of pain in cancer survivors are lacking. Classification of pain is important as it may facilitate more specific targeting of treatment. In this paper we present an overview of nociceptive, neuropathic and central sensitization pain following cancer treatment, as well as the rationale, criteria and process for stratifying pain classification.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Recently, a clinical method for classifying any pain as either predominant central sensitization pain, neuropathic or nociceptive pain was developed, based on a large body of research evidence and international expert opinion. We, a team of 15 authors from 13 different centers, four countries and two continents have applied this classification algorithm to the cancer survivor population.

RESULTS

The classification of pain following cancer treatment entails two steps: (1) examining the presence of neuropathic pain; and (2) using an algorithm for differentiating predominant nociceptive and central sensitization pain. Step 1 builds on the established criteria for neuropathic pain diagnosis, while Step 2 applies a recently developed clinical method for classifying any pain as either predominant central sensitization pain, neuropathic or nociceptive pain to the cancer survivor population.

CONCLUSION

The classification criteria allow identifying central sensitization pain following cancer treatment. The recognition of central sensitization pain in practice is an important development in the integration of pain neuroscience into the clinic, and one that is relevant for people undergoing and following cancer treatment.