Efficacy, Tolerability, and Dose-Dependent Effects of Opioid Analgesics for Low Back Pain: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Predictors of Outcome in Conservative and Minimally Invasive Surgical Management of Pain Originating From the Sacroiliac Joint: A Pooled Analysis

STUDY DESIGN

A pooled patient-level analysis of two multicenter randomized controlled trials and one multicenter single-arm prospective trial.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to identify predictors of outcome of conservative and minimally invasive surgical management of pain originating from the sacroiliac joint (SIJ).

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Three recently published prospective trials have shown that minimally invasive SIJ fusion (SIJF) using triangular titanium implants produces better outcomes than conservative management for patients with pain originating from the SIJ. Due to limitations in individual trial sample size, analyses of predictors of treatment outcome were not conducted.

METHODS

We pooled individual patient data from the three trials and used random effects models with multivariate regression analysis to identify predictors for treatment outcome separately for conservative and minimally invasive surgical treatment. Outcome was measured using visual analogue scale (VAS), Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), and EuroQOL-5D (EQ-5D).

RESULTS

We included 423 patients assigned to either nonsurgical management (NSM, n = 97) or SIJF (n = 326) between 2013 and 2015. The reduction in SIJ pain was 37.9 points larger [95% confidence interval (95% CI) 32.5-43.4, P < 0.0001] in the SIJF group than in the NSM group. Similarly, the improvement in ODI was 18.3 points larger (95% CI 14.3-22.4), P < 0.0001). In NSM, we found no predictors of outcome. In SIJF, a reduced improvement in outcome was predicted by smoking (P = 0.030), opioid use (P = 0.017), lower patient age (P = 0.008), and lower duration of SIJ pain (P = 0.028).

CONCLUSIONS

Our results support the view that SIJF leads to better treatment outcome than conservative management of SIJ pain and that a higher margin of improvement can be predicted in nonsmokers, nonopioid users, and patients of increased age and with longer pain duration.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

1.

Prolonged Preoperative Opioid Therapy in Patients With Degenerative Lumbar Stenosis in a Workers' Compensation Setting

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study.

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the impact of prolonged opioid use in the preoperative treatment plan of degenerative lumbar stenosis (DLS).

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Patients undergoing operative treatment for DLS with concomitant opioid use represent a clinically challenging population. The relative paucity of data on the relationship between preoperative opioid use and clinical outcomes in the workers' compensation (WC) population necessitates further study of this unique population.

METHODS

We identified 140 Ohio WC patients who underwent lumbar decompression and had received preoperative opioid prescriptions between 1993 and 2013. Our study cohorts were formed based on opioid use duration, which included short-term use (<3 months) and long-term use (>3 months). Our primary outcome was if patients were able to make a stable return to work (RTW). A multivariate regression analysis was used to determine the impact of the duration of preoperative opioid use on return to work rates. We also compared many secondary outcomes after surgery between both groups.

RESULTS

Patients on opioids less than 3 months had a significantly higher RTW rate compared with those who used opioids longer than 3 months [25/60 (42%) vs. 18/80 (23%); P = 0.01]. A logistic regression was performed to examine the effect of preoperative opioid therapy duration on RTW status. Our regression model showed that opioid use greater than 3 months remained a significant negative predictor of RTW (OR: 0.35, 95% CI: 0.13-0.89; P = 0.02). Patients who remained on opioid therapy longer than 3 months cost the Ohio Bureau of Workers' Compensation $70,979 more than patients who were on opioid therapy for less than 3 months (P < 0.01).

CONCLUSION

Prolonged preoperative opioid use was associated with poor clinical outcomes after lumbar decompression. These results suggest that a shorter course of opioid therapy and earlier surgical intervention may improve outcomes and lower postoperative morbidity in patients with DLS.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

3.

Design, recruitment outcomes, and sample characteristics of the Strategies for Prescribing Analgesics Comparative Effectiveness (SPACE) trial

This manuscript describes the study protocol, recruitment outcomes, and baseline participant characteristics for the Strategies for Prescribing Analgesics Comparative Effectiveness (SPACE) trial. SPACE is a pragmatic randomized comparative effectiveness trial conducted in multiple VA primary care clinics within one VA health care system. The objective was to compare benefits and harms of opioid therapy versus non-opioid medication therapy over 12months among patients with moderate-to-severe chronic back pain or hip/knee osteoarthritis pain despite analgesic therapy; patients already receiving regular opioid therapy were excluded. Key design features include comparing two clinically-relevant medication interventions, pragmatic eligibility criteria, and flexible treat-to-target interventions. Screening, recruitment and study enrollment were conducted over 31months. A total of 4491 patients were contacted for eligibility screening; 53.1% were ineligible, 41.0% refused, and 5.9% enrolled. The most common reasons for ineligibility were not meeting pain location and severity criteria. The most common study-specific reasons for refusal were preference for no opioid use and preference for no pain medications. Of 265 enrolled patients, 25 withdrew before randomization. Of 240 randomized patients, 87.9% were male, 84.1% were white, and age range was 21-80years. Past-year mental health diagnoses were 28.3% depression, 17% anxiety, 9.4% PTSD, 7.9% alcohol use disorder, and 2.6% drug use disorder. In conclusion, although recruitment for this trial was challenging, characteristics of enrolled participants suggest we were successful in recruiting patients similar to those prescribed opioid therapy in usual care.

The Challenges of Treating Sciatica Pain in Older Adults

Sciatica is a debilitating condition affecting approximately 25 % of the population. Typically, the patient will complain of lower limb pain that is more severe than pain in the lower back, usually accompanied by numbness and motor weakness. Most international guidelines recommend pharmacological management for the pain relief of sciatica, including paracetamol, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, opioid analgesics, anticonvulsants, and corticosteroids, among others. However, the evidence for most of these pharmacological options is scarce, and the majority of clinical trials exclude older patients. There is overall very limited information on the efficacy, safety, and tolerability of these medicines in older patients with sciatica. This review presents a critical appraisal of the existing evidence for the pharmacological treatment of sciatica, with a special focus on the older adult. The age-related changes in the health of older patients, as well as their impact on the response to pharmacological treatment, including polypharmacy, drug interactions, and drug-disease interactions, is also discussed.

Comparison of effect sizes between enriched and nonenriched trials of analgesics for chronic musculoskeletal pain: a systematic review

AIMS

To investigate the use of an enriched study design on the estimates of treatment effect in analgesic trials for chronic musculoskeletal pain.

METHODS

Database searches were conducted from 2004 to 2014. We included randomized placebo-controlled trials evaluating pain medications for chronic musculoskeletal pain. Methodological quality was assessed using the PEDro scale. The estimates of treatment effect on pain and adverse events were compared between enriched and nonenriched designs. Metaregression was used to assess the association between the effect size estimate and the study design controlling for analgesic dose and methodological quality.

RESULTS

We included 108 trials, of which 99 were included in the meta-analysis (n = 44 171). There were no overall differences in effect sizes between enriched and nonenriched designs for pain intensity. There was a significant difference for a reduction in any adverse events favouring enriched designs for opioids, but not for other analgesics or the outcome serious adverse events. There was an association between effect size and methodological quality, with failure to blind the outcome assessor and failure to use intention-to-treat analysis being associated with larger effect sizes.

CONCLUSIONS

There is no evidence that the use of an enriched study design changes the treatment effect size estimate for pain. There is some evidence that clinical trials that employ enriched designs report a reduced risk of adverse events in trials for chronic musculoskeletal pain, but it is unclear whether enriched designs influence estimates of serious adverse events. Features of trial design and study quality were associated with treatment effect estimates.

CYP2D6 phenotypes are associated with adverse outcomes related to opioid medications

BACKGROUND

Variation in the CYP2D6 gene may affect response to opioids in both poor and ultrarapid metabolizers, but data demonstrating such associations have been mixed, and the impact of variants on toxicity-related symptoms (e.g., nausea) is unclear. Therefore, we examined the association between CYP2D6 phenotype and poor pain control or other adverse symptoms related to the use of opioids in a sample of primary care patients.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We identified all patients in the Mayo Clinic RIGHT Protocol who were prescribed an opioid medication between July 01, 2013 and June 30, 2015, and categorized patients into three phenotypes: poor, intermediate to extensive, or ultrarapid CYP2D6 metabolizers. We reviewed the electronic health record of these patients for indications of poor pain control or adverse symptoms related to medication use. Associations between phenotype and outcomes were assessed using Chi-square tests and logistic regression.

RESULTS

Overall, 257 (25% of RIGHT Protocol participants) patients received at least one opioid prescription; of these, 40 (15%) were poor metabolizers, 146 (57%) were intermediate to extensive metabolizers, and 71 (28%) were ultrarapid metabolizers. We removed patients that were prescribed a CYP2D6 inhibitor medication (n=38). After adjusting for age and sex, patients with a poor or ultrarapid phenotype were 2.7 times more likely to experience either poor pain control or an adverse symptom related to the prescription compared to patients with an intermediate to extensive phenotype (odds ratio: 2.68; 95% CI: 1.39, 5.17; p=0.003).

CONCLUSION

Our results suggest that >30% of patients with a poor or ultrarapid CYP2D6 phenotype may experience an adverse outcome after being prescribed codeine, tramadol, oxycodone, or hydrocodone. These medications are frequently prescribed for pain relief, and ~39% of the US population is expected to carry one of these phenotypes, suggesting that the population-level impact of these gene-drug interactions could be substantial.

CYP2D6 phenotypes are associated with adverse outcomes related to opioid medications

Background

Variation in the CYP2D6 gene may affect response to opioids in both poor and ultrarapid metabolizers, but data demonstrating such associations have been mixed, and the impact of variants on toxicity-related symptoms (e.g., nausea) is unclear. Therefore, we examined the association between CYP2D6 phenotype and poor pain control or other adverse symptoms related to the use of opioids in a sample of primary care patients.

Materials and methods

We identified all patients in the Mayo Clinic RIGHT Protocol who were prescribed an opioid medication between July 01, 2013 and June 30, 2015, and categorized patients into three phenotypes: poor, intermediate to extensive, or ultrarapid CYP2D6 metabolizers. We reviewed the electronic health record of these patients for indications of poor pain control or adverse symptoms related to medication use. Associations between phenotype and outcomes were assessed using Chi-square tests and logistic regression.

Results

Overall, 257 (25% of RIGHT Protocol participants) patients received at least one opioid prescription; of these, 40 (15%) were poor metabolizers, 146 (57%) were intermediate to extensive metabolizers, and 71 (28%) were ultrarapid metabolizers. We removed patients that were prescribed a CYP2D6 inhibitor medication (n=38). After adjusting for age and sex, patients with a poor or ultrarapid phenotype were 2.7 times more likely to experience either poor pain control or an adverse symptom related to the prescription compared to patients with an intermediate to extensive phenotype (odds ratio: 2.68; 95% CI: 1.39, 5.17; p=0.003).

Conclusion

Our results suggest that >30% of patients with a poor or ultrarapid CYP2D6 phenotype may experience an adverse outcome after being prescribed codeine, tramadol, oxycodone, or hydrocodone. These medications are frequently prescribed for pain relief, and ~39% of the US population is expected to carry one of these phenotypes, suggesting that the population-level impact of these gene–drug interactions could be substantial.

Trial Design and Endpoint Evaluation in Clinical Studies Addressing Chronic Back Pain

STUDY DESIGN

A review of the literature evaluating clinical trials of chronic back pain.

OBJECTIVE

To assist physicians in assessing the quality of clinical trial data to make the most informed treatment decisions.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Chronic pain is a tremendous public health issue, affecting close to 100 million adults in the United States, and costs the American people billions of dollars. One traditional treatment approach, the long-term use of opiate medications, has recently come under intense scrutiny for problems with complications, diversion, abuse, addiction, and lack of efficacy. In addition, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has recognized that overprescribing opiates has enabled an overdose crisis, and written guidelines that are intended to limit their use. It is for this reason that physicians must have a comprehensive understanding of the range of drug-free alternative therapies available and have the tools needed to rigorously evaluate the chronic pain literature so they can make appropriate treatment decisions.

METHODS

An evaluation of how clinical trials are designed and ranked, outcome measures, and costs for a variety of therapies is necessary to determine which treatment option is the most efficacious for an individual patient.

RESULTS

Clinical trial data demonstrate that spinal cord stimulation (SCS) is a safe and effective treatment option for many types of chronic pain, including back pain. The last 10 years has brought tremendous advances in the field of neuromodulation. Today, several treatment modalities exist for SCS requiring the physician to be able to critically evaluate and interpret the literature and determine which modality has the strongest evidence. When evaluating clinical trial data of patients with chronic back pain, emphasis must be placed on well designed, randomized controlled trials with long-term follow-up producing level I evidence. These data are obtained in a rigorous manner and are likely to have less bias when compared with lower level studies.

CONCLUSION

The level I studies performed to date have provided evidence that treatment with SCS results in sustainable pain reduction and improvements in scores measuring quality of life and patient functioning in those patients with chronic intractable back pain.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

5.

McKenzie Method of Mechanical Diagnosis and Therapy was slightly more effective than placebo for pain, but not for disability, in patients with chronic non-specific low back pain: a randomised placebo controlled trial with short and longer term follow-up

Background

The McKenzie Method of Mechanical Diagnosis and Therapy (MDT) is one of the exercise approaches recommended by low back pain (LBP) guidelines. We investigated the efficacy of MDT compared with placebo in patients with chronic LBP.

Methods

This was a prospectively registered, two-arm randomised placebo controlled trial, with a blinded assessor. A total of 148 patients seeking care for chronic LBP were randomly allocated to either MDT (n=74) or placebo (n=74). Patients from both groups received 10 treatment sessions over 5 weeks. Patients from both groups also received an educational booklet. Clinical outcomes were obtained at the end of treatment (5 weeks) and 3, 6 and 12 months after randomisation. Primary outcomes were pain intensity and disability at the end of treatment (5 weeks). We also conducted a subgroup analysis to identify potential treatment effect modifiers that could predict a better response to MDT treatment.

Results

The MDT group had greater improvements in pain intensity at the end of treatment (mean difference (MD) −1.00, 95% CI −2.09 to −0.01) but not for disability (MD −0.84, 95% CI −2.62 to 0.93). We did not detect between-group differences for any secondary outcomes, nor were any treatment effect modifiers identified. Patients did not report any adverse events.

Conclusion

We found a small and likely not clinically relevant difference in pain intensity favouring the MDT method immediately at the end of 5 weeks of treatment but not for disability. No other difference was found for any of the primary or secondary outcomes at any follow-up times.

Trial registration number

ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02123394)

An Integrative Review of Scientific Evidence for Reconnective Healing

Background: Biofield therapies offer a novel, non-invasive approach to treating chronic diseases based on assessing and adjusting an individual's physiological and emotional responses through their bio-energetic field. Reconnective Healing^™ (RH) is defined as: “…not just energy healing, but instead a more comprehensive spectrum of healing composed of energy, light, and information.”

Objectives: Several biofield therapies, such as Reiki, Therapeutic Touch and Johrei, have already been reviewed in the literature but RH has received little attention even though it is taught and practiced worldwide. This review provides a critical assessment of RH as a healing modality.

Methods: Scientific research articles published in peer-reviewed journals addressing RH were identified using relevant databases and archives. Information was extracted from each article that met selection criteria for evaluation of quality of reporting and design. This review summarizes and critically evaluates the five currently published peer-reviewed research papers involving RH and assesses whether RH provides consistent physiological outcomes between the studies.

Results: These results, taken together, suggest: (i) exposure of a healer or healee to RH, either directly or indirectly, amplifies their degree of autonomic arousal and energy, (ii) RH can reduce pain and improve range of motion in people with shoulder limitations, and (iii) when individuals experience RH as a group, their autonomic nervous systems simultaneously show sudden similar responses consistent with the idea that RH is mitigated by entrainment of biofields.

Conclusions: Since these studies are extremely varied in design it is not possible at this point to reach conclusions about the general effectiveness of RH. More clinical and physiological research performed on different populations under a range of conditions is needed in order to support this healthcare approach.

Predictive mechanisms linking brain opioids to chronic pain vulnerability and resilience

Chronic pain is a major global healthcare problem that is currently inadequately treated. In addition, the current use of opioids for treatment has reached far beyond the paucity of evidence for long-term benefits relative to risks. Benefit-risk models for opioid and non-opioid treatments would benefit from a rational, mechanism-based understanding of neuroplastic and neurochemical contributions to chronic pain. Here, we evaluate the findings and limitations of representative research investigating brain neuroplasticity and neurochemistry in chronic pain. In sum, the mechanisms of pain-related neuroplasticity in the brain remain poorly understood because neuroimaging studies have been largely descriptive. We argue that definition is needed of optimal (pain-resilient) and suboptimal (pain-vulnerable) functioning of the endogenous opioid system in order to identify neurochemical contributions to aberrant neuroplasticity in chronic pain. We outline the potential benefits of computational approaches that utilize evolutionary and statistical optimality principles, illustrating this approach with mechanistic hypotheses on opioid function. In particular, we discuss the role of predictive mechanisms in perceptual and associative plasticity and evidence for their modulation by endogenous opioids. Future research should attempt to utilize formal computational models to provide evidence for the clinical validity of this approach, thereby providing a rational basis for future treatment and, ideally, prevention.

LINKED ARTICLES

This article is part of a themed section on Emerging Areas of Opioid Pharmacology. To view the other articles in this section visit http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/bph.v175.14/issuetoc.

Pain, hedonic regulation, and opioid misuse: Modulation of momentary experience by Mindfulness-Oriented Recovery Enhancement in opioid-treated chronic pain patients

BACKGROUND

Given the risk of opioid misuse among chronic pain patients being treated with long-term opioid pharmacotherapy, non-pharmacological treatments are needed. Further, in light of hedonic deficits in this population, therapies that enhance positive affect may be useful. The purpose of this study was to examine effects of a Mindfulness-Oriented Recovery Enhancement (MORE) intervention on ecological momentary assessments (EMA) of pain and positive affective experience, and to determine if changes in pain, affect, and their interaction were associated with opioid misuse at post-treatment.

METHODS

This study examined unpublished EMA data from a subset of participants (N=55) in a previously published RCT (NCT01505101) of MORE versus a support group (SG) control. Across 8 weeks of treatment, patients completed up to 224 EMA measures of pain and affect. Multilevel models and generalized estimating equations examined effects of treatment on momentary pain and positive affect, and generalized linear models examined associations between pain and affect and changes in opioid misuse by post-treatment.

RESULTS

Patients in MORE reported significantly greater improvements in momentary pain (p=0.01) and positive affect (p=0.004) than patients in the SG. Further, over the entire course of treatment, patients in MORE were significantly more likely to exhibit positive affect regulation (OR=2.75) than patients in the SG. Finally, improvements in positive affect (but not pain) over the course of intervention were associated with reduced risk of misusing opioids by post-treatment (p=0.02).

CONCLUSION

MORE may be a useful non-pharmacological treatment for pain and hedonic deficits among chronic pain patients at risk for opioid misuse.

Non-specific low back pain

Non-specific low back pain affects people of all ages and is a leading contributor to disease burden worldwide. Management guidelines endorse triage to identify the rare cases of low back pain that are caused by medically serious pathology, and so require diagnostic work-up or specialist referral, or both. Because non-specific low back pain does not have a known pathoanatomical cause, treatment focuses on reducing pain and its consequences. Management consists of education and reassurance, analgesic medicines, non-pharmacological therapies, and timely review. The clinical course of low back pain is often favourable, thus many patients require little if any formal medical care. Two treatment strategies are currently used, a stepped approach beginning with more simple care that is progressed if the patient does not respond, and the use of simple risk prediction methods to individualise the amount and type of care provided. The overuse of imaging, opioids, and surgery remains a widespread problem.

Medication Overuse in Chronic Pain

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Chronic pain is usually managed by various pharmacotherapies after exhausting the conservative modalities such as over-the-counter choices. The goal of this review is to investigate current state of opioids and non-opioid medication overuse that includes NSAIDs, skeletal muscle relaxants, antidepressants, membrane stabilization agents, and benzodiazepine. How to minimize medication overuse and achieve better outcome in chronic pain management?

RECENT FINDINGS

Although antidepressants and membrane stabilization agents contribute to the crucial components for neuromodulation, opioids were frequently designated as a rescue remedy in chronic pain since adjunct analgesics usually do not provide instantaneous relief. The updated CDC guideline for prescribing opioids has gained widespread attention via media exposure. Both patients and prescribers are alerted to respond to the opioid epidemic and numerous complications. However, there has been overuse of non-opioid adjunct analgesics that caused significant adverse effects in addition to concurrent opioid consumption. It is a common practice to extrapolate the WHO three-step analgesic ladder for cancer pain to apply in non-cancer pain that emphasizes solely on pharmacologic therapy which may result in overuse and escalation of opioids in non-cancer pain. There has been promising progress in non-pharmacologic therapies such as biofeedback, complementary, and alternative medicine to facilitate pain control instead of dependency on pharmacologic therapies. This review article presents the current state of medication overuse in chronic pain and proposes precaution to balance the risk and benefit ratio. It may serve as a premier for future study on clinical pathway for comprehensive chronic pain management and reduce medication overuse.

Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs for spinal pain: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

While it is now clear that paracetamol is ineffective for spinal pain, there is not consensus on the efficacy of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) for this condition. We performed a systematic review with meta-analysis to determine the efficacy and safety of NSAIDs for spinal pain.

METHODS

We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, CENTRAL and LILACS for randomised controlled trials comparing the efficacy and safety of NSAIDs with placebo for spinal pain. Reviewers extracted data, assessed risk of bias and evaluated the quality of evidence using the Grade of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach. A between-group difference of 10 points (on a 0-100 scale) was used for pain and disability as the smallest worthwhile effect, as well as to calculate numbers needed to treat. Random-effects models were used to calculate mean differences or risk ratios with 95% CIs.

RESULTS

We included 35 randomised placebo-controlled trials. NSAIDs reduced pain and disability, but provided clinically unimportant effects over placebo. Six participants (95% CI 4 to 10) needed to be treated with NSAIDs, rather than placebo, for one additional participant to achieve clinically important pain reduction. When looking at different types of spinal pain, outcomes or time points, in only 3 of the 14 analyses were the pooled treatment effects marginally above our threshold for clinical importance. NSAIDs increased the risk of gastrointestinal reactions by 2.5 times (95% CI 1.2 to 5.2), although the median duration of included trials was 7 days.

CONCLUSIONS

NSAIDs are effective for spinal pain, but the magnitude of the difference in outcomes between the intervention and placebo groups is not clinically important. At present, there are no simple analgesics that provide clinically important effects for spinal pain over placebo. There is an urgent need to develop new drug therapies for this condition.

Multimodal Chiropractic Care for Pain and Disability in a Patient Diagnosed With Ehlers-Danlos Syndrome-Hypermobility Type: A Case Report

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this article is to describe the clinical response to multimodal chiropractic treatment of a patient diagnosed with Ehlers-Danlos syndrome, hypermobility type (EDS-HT), and chronic pain.

CLINICAL FEATURES

A 22-year-old woman presented with severe chronic neck and low back pain, headaches, and bilateral hand pain and stiffness. In addition to these pain complaints, the patient had a family history of EDS, weekly or daily recurring joint dislocations, and upper and lower extremity joint hypermobility. As a result of her significant history and examination findings, which met the Brighton and Villefranche criteria, she was diagnosed with EDS-HT.

INTERVENTIONS AND OUTCOMES

Treatment primarily consisted of low force joint manipulative therapy and soft tissue therapy intermittently over 21 months concurrently with conventional and complementary medical care. Multiple outcome questionnaires were administered pragmatically at follow-up intervals of 3, 5½, 8½, 19, and 21 months, including but not limited to the Headache and Neck Disability Indices and the Oswestry Low Back Questionnaire. The patient had clinically meaningful improvements on the Neck Disability Index, the Headache Disability Index, and the Revised Oswestry after 3, 5½, 8½, and 21 months from baseline.

CONCLUSION

This patient with EDS-HT had clinically meaningful decreases in disability, headache, and spine pain after a course of multimodal chiropractic care combined with conventional and complementary medical care.

Pharmacological Approaches for the Management of Persistent Pain in Older Adults: What Nurses Need to Know

HOW TO OBTAIN CONTACT HOURS BY READING THIS ARTICLE INSTRUCTIONS 1.4 contact hours will be awarded by Villanova University College of Nursing upon successful completion of this activity. A contact hour is a unit of measurement that denotes 60 minutes of an organized learning activity. This is a learner-based activity. Villanova University College of Nursing does not require submission of your answers to the quiz. A contact hour certificate will be awarded once you register, pay the registration fee, and complete the evaluation form online at http://goo.gl/gMfXaf. To obtain contact hours you must: 1. Read the article, "Pharmacological Approaches for the Management of Persistent Pain in Older Adults: What Nurses Need to Know" found on pages 49-57, carefully noting any tables and other illustrative materials that are included to enhance your knowledge and understanding of the content. Be sure to keep track of the amount of time (number of minutes) you spend reading the article and completing the quiz. 2. Read and answer each question on the quiz. After completing all of the questions, compare your answers to those provided within this issue. If you have incorrect answers, return to the article for further study. 3. Go to the Villanova website listed above to register for contact hour credit. You will be asked to provide your name; contact information; and a VISA, MasterCard, or Discover card number for payment of the $20.00 fee. Once you complete the online evaluation, a certificate will be automatically generated. This activity is valid for continuing education credit until November 30, 2019. CONTACT HOURS This activity is co-provided by Villanova University College of Nursing and SLACK Incorporated. Villanova University College of Nursing is accredited as a provider of continuing nursing education by the American Nurses Credentialing Center's Commission on Accreditation. ACTIVITY OBJECTIVES 1. Describe age-related barriers to pain assessment and key aspects of the assessment process. 2. Identify benefits and risks associated with commonly prescribed analgesic medications for the treatment of later life pain. DISCLOSURE STATEMENT Neither the planners nor the authors have any conflicts of interest to disclose. The current article addresses pharmacological treatment issues regarding the management of persistent pain in later life, which is a worldwide problem associated with substantial disability. Recommendations from guidelines were reviewed and data are presented regarding the benefits and risks of commonly prescribed analgesic medications. The evidence base supports a stepwise approach with acetaminophen as first-line therapy for mild-to-moderate pain. Oral nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs are not recommended for long-term use. In properly selected older patients, opioid drugs should be considered if pain is not adequately controlled. Careful surveillance to monitor for benefits and harms of therapy is critical, given that advancing age increases risk for adverse effects. Key aspects of the pain care process that nurses routinely engage in are covered, including conducting pain assessments prior to initiating therapy, addressing barriers to effective pain care, educating patients and family members about the importance of reducing pain, discussing treatment-related risks and benefits, and formulating strategies to monitor for treatment outcomes. Finally, a case is presented to illustrate issues that arise in the care of affected patients. [Journal of Gerontological Nursing, 42(12), 49-57.].