Pain in clinical oncology: patient satisfaction with management of cancer pain

Patients' satisfaction with cancer pain treatment at adult oncologic centers in Northern Ethiopia; a multi-center cross-sectional study

BACKGROUND

Patient satisfaction is an important indicator of the quality of healthcare. Pain is one of the most common symptoms among cancer patients that needs optimal treatment; rather, it compromises the quality of life of patients.

OBJECTIVE

To assess the levels and associated factors of satisfaction with cancer pain treatment among adult patients at cancer centers found in Northern Ethiopia in 2023.

METHODS

After obtaining ethical approval, a multi-center cross-sectional study was conducted at four cancer care centers in northern Ethiopia. The data were collected using an interviewer-administered structured questionnaire that included the Lubeck Medication Satisfaction Questionnaire (LMSQ). The severity of pain was assessed by a numerical rating scale from 0 to 10 with a pain score of 0 = no pain, 1-3 = mild pain, 4-6 = moderate pain, and 7-10 = severe pain Binary logistic regression analysis was employed, and the strength of association was described in an adjusted odds ratio with a 95% confidence interval.

RESULT

A total of 397 cancer patients participated in this study, with a response rate of 98.3%. We found that 70.3% of patients were satisfied with their cancer pain treatment. Being married (AOR = 5.6, CI = 2.6-12, P < 0.001) and being single (never married) (AOR = 3.5, CI = 1.3-9.7, P = 0.017) as compared to divorced, receiving adequate pain management (AOR = 2.4, CI = 1.1-5.3, P = 0.03) as compared to those who didn't receive it, and having lower pain severity (AOR = 2.6, CI = 1.5-4.8, P < 0.001) as compared to those who had higher level of pain severity were found to be associated with satisfaction with cancer pain treatment.

CONCLUSION

The majority of cancer patients were satisfied with cancer pain treatment. Being married, being single (never married), lower pain severity, and receiving adequate pain management were found to be associated with satisfaction with cancer pain treatment. It would be better to enhance the use of multimodal analgesia in combination with strong opioids to ensure adequate pain management and lower pain severity scores.

Cancer-related post-treatment pain and its impact on treatment satisfaction with medication in women with breast cancer: a cross-sectional study from Palestine

BACKGROUND

Pain after therapy is an important clinical problem in patients with breast cancer. Unfortunately, cancer patients have a lower quality of life due to inadequate treatment of posttreatment pain; therefore, improving medication management plans and palliative care has become one of the most important targets of cancer therapy. Therefore, the current study aimed to examine the impact of posttreatment pain on medication satisfaction in patients with various stages of breast cancer in Palestine.

METHODS

A cross-sectional analytical study was conducted et al.-Watani Hospital and An-Najah National University Hospital in the Nablus area. Using the Brief Pain Inventory (BPI), the intensity and interference of pain were evaluated. In addition, patients' satisfaction with cancer management medications was measured using the Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire for Medication (TSQM).

RESULTS

Two hundred fifty-four patients were included in this study. All were women, with a mean ± SD age of 53.1 ± 10.7 years. The median score for pain severity was 7.0. Pain in the lower extremities was the most reported location. There was a negative association between the global satisfaction domain and the presence of posttreatment pain (p < 0.001). Furthermore, significant differences and negative correlations were found between global satisfaction and posttreatment pain on the day of the interview (p = 0.001), pain medication (p < 0.001), paracetamol use (p < 0.001), and the presence of side effects (p = 0.003). There were significant negative correlations (p < 0.05) between pain severity and interference with effectiveness (r = -0.258, -0.319, respectively), side effects (r = -0.414, -0.514, respectively), convenience (r = -0.274, -0.307, respectively), and global satisfaction domain scores (r = -0.293, -0.287, respectively). Exposure to chemotherapy was the only significant positive correlation with global satisfaction (p = 0.007). The regression analysis results indicated an independent association between chemotherapy use and a higher global satisfaction score (p = 0.011).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with posttreatment pain, side effects, and greater interference of pain with their functioning had lower satisfaction scores. Therefore, better management of their treatment medications, side effects, and pain medications is recommended to enhance their satisfaction and quality of life. Several aspects of palliative care should be organized to improve the patient's satisfaction and quality of life in addition to conducting longitudinal studies to evaluate the pain and satisfaction of different types of cancers.

Examining how physician factors influence patient satisfaction during clinical consultations about cancer prognosis and pain

Objective

Patient-physician communication affects cancer patients' satisfaction, health outcomes, and reimbursement for physician services. Our objective is to use machine learning to comprehensively examine the association between patient satisfaction and physician factors in clinical consultations about cancer prognosis and pain.

Methods

We used data from audio-recorded, transcribed communications between physicians and standardized patients (SPs). We analyzed the data using logistic regression (LR) and random forests (RF).

Results

The LR models suggested that lower patient satisfaction was associated with more in-depth prognosis discussion; and higher patient satisfaction was associated with a greater extent of shared decision making, patient being black, and doctor being young. Conversely, the RF models suggested the opposite association with the same set of variables.

Conclusion

Somewhat contradicting results from distinct machine learning models suggested possible confounding factors (hidden variables) in prognosis discussion, shared decision-making, and doctor age, on the modeling of patient satisfaction. Practitioners should not make inferences with one single data-modeling method and enlarge the study cohort to help deal with population heterogeneity.

Innovation

Comparing diverse machine learning models (both parametric and non-parametric types) and carefully applying variable selection methods prior to regression modeling, can enrich the examination of physician factors in characterizing patient-physician communication outcomes.

Patients' Satisfaction with Breakthrough Cancer Pain Therapy: A Secondary Analysis of IOPS-MS Study

Background

Cancer pain is one of the most important symptoms for patients. Pharmacological control is central for clinical management and to ensure well-being. In cancer patients, the management of breakthrough cancer pain (BTcP) is also crucial. This study aims to identify factors that can predict patients' satisfaction with pain relief for BTcP.

Methods

This was a secondary analysis of the IOPS-MS study, a large, observational, multicenter, national study where thirty-two Italian centers were involved to explore BTcP management. Clinical and pathologic features were recorded, as well as the patients' degree of satisfaction with BTcP medications classified as dissatisfied (not or indifferent satisfied) versus satisfied (or very satisfied). Frequency distributions and the chi-squared test of independence were performed. A multivariate model was carried out by selecting significant variables upon univariate analysis using logistic regression.

Results

From the original 4016 patients enrolled, 3840 were available for the study purpose. Seventy-one per cent of patients declared satisfaction with BTcP medications. Young age [odds ratio (OR) 1.29 (95% confidence interval, CI: 1.12-1.50)], non-metastatic cancer stage [OR 1.53 (95% CI: 1.22-1.91)], high Karnofsky performance status [OR 1.63 (95% CI:1.33-1.99)], the absence of anticancer treatment [OR 1.42 (95% CI: 1.19-1.69)], the NSAIDs/paracetamol use for background pain [OR 1.56 (95% CI: 1.34-1.82)] and a high BTcP interference in activities of daily living [OR 2.34 (95% CI: 1.81-3.01)] resulted positively correlated with dissatisfaction in the multivariate analyses. Also, the setting of care was related to difference in BTcP therapy satisfaction.

Conclusion

This study proposes several key points to be considered in the pharmacological management of BTcP, useful to ensure patients' satisfaction and optimal quality of life.

What to Do and What Not to Do in the Management of Cancer Pain: A Physician Survey and Expert Recommendations

BACKGROUND

Despite the prevalence of pain among patients with cancer and the availability of pertinent guidelines, the clinical management of oncological pain is decisively insufficient. To address this issue, we evaluated current trends in clinical practice and subsequently generated a list of ten corrective actions-five things to do and five things not to do-for the diagnosis, management, and monitoring of cancer pain.

METHODS

The survey included 18 questions about clinical practice surrounding background pain and breakthrough cancer pain (BTcP). Survey questions were developed by a scientific board of 10 physician experts and communicated via email to an expanded panel of physicians in Italy. Responses were tabulated descriptively for analysis.

RESULTS

Of 51 invited physicians, 32 (63%) provided complete survey responses. The responses revealed several incongruencies with current guideline recommendations: physicians did not always diagnose or monitor pain using diagnostically validated or disease-specific instruments; frequently based clinical decision-making on time availability or convenience; and pharmacological therapy was often inappropriate (eg, prescribing NSAIDs or corticosteroids for BTcP). The list of corrective actions generated by the scientific board favored a guideline-oriented approach that systematically characterizes oncological pain and implements treatment based on pain characteristics (eg, fast-acting transmucosal opioids for BTcP) and evidence-based recommendations.

CONCLUSION

Oncologists require better education and training about the diagnosis, treatment, and monitoring of oncological pain. Physicians should be aware of current guideline recommendations as well as available pharmacological tools for BTcP.

Home Telemonitoring Improved Pain Registration in Patients With Cancer

INTRODUCTION

For adequate pain treatment in patients with cancer, it is important to monitor and evaluate pain regularly. Although the numeric rating scale (NRS) is implemented in hospitals in the Netherlands, pain is still not systematically registered during outpatient consultations. The aim of this study was to assess whether home telemonitoring increases pain registration in medical records of outpatients with cancer.

METHODS

Patients with cancer were included in the intervention group (IG) when they visited the outpatient clinic. They received a short message service and an interactive voice response on their mobile phones 3 times a week, asking them to provide their pain score (NRS). When the reported NRS pain score was ≥5, a specialized oncology nurse adapted the pain treatment when necessary. Outcomes were compared to a control group (CG) without home telemonitoring. In both groups, medical records were analyzed and data on pain and analgesics were collected.

RESULTS

In each group, the medical records of 54 patients were analyzed on 3 consecutive outpatient visits. In the CG, pain registration or its absence was described in 60 visits (37.0%). In the IG, pain registration or its absence was reported in 83 visits (51.2%). Patients in the IG received a prescription for analgesics significantly more often (36/54 patients [66.6%]) than did patients in the CG (18/54 patients [33.3%]), P < 0.01).

CONCLUSION

Home telemonitoring for patients with cancer significantly increases registration of pain and prescriptions of analgesics in outpatient medical records. Home telemonitoring helps to increase the awareness of pain and its management.

A survey of perceptions, attitudes, knowledge and practices of medical oncologists about cancer pain management in Spain

PURPOSE

To monitor oncologists' perspective on cancer pain management.

METHODS

An anonymized survey was conducted in two waves. First, over a convenience sample of oncologists known to be particularly concerned with the management of pain. Second, using a random sample of oncologists.

RESULTS

In total, 73 and 82 oncologists participated in the first and second wave, respectively. Many oncologists reported to have good knowledge of analgesic drugs (95.9%), the mechanism of action of opioids (79.5%), and good skills to manage opioid-related bowel dysfunction (76.7%). Appropriate adjustment of background medication to manage breakthrough pain was reported by 95.5% of oncologists. Additionally, 87.7% (68.3% in the second wave, p = 0.035) of oncologists reported suitable opioid titration practices, and 90.4% reported to use co-adjuvant medications for neuropathic pain confidently. On the other hand, just 9.6% of oncologists participated in multidisciplinary pain management teams, and merely 30.3 and 27.1% reported to routinely collaborate with the Pain Clinics or involve other staff, respectively. Only 26.4% of the oncologists of the second wave gave priority to pain pathophysiology to decide therapies, and up to 75.6% reported difficulties in treating neuropathic pain. Significantly less oncologists of the second wave (82.9 vs. 94.5%, p = 0.001) used opioid rotation routinely.

CONCLUSIONS

Unlike in previous surveys, medical oncologists reported in general good knowledge and few perceived limitations and barriers for pain management. However, multi-disciplinary management and collaboration with other specialists are still uncommon. Oncologists' commitment to optimize pain management seems important to improve and maintain good practices.

Patient and Physician Satisfaction with Analgesic Treatment: Findings from the Analgesic Treatment for Cancer Pain in Southeast Asia (ACE) Study

Aim

The aim of this study was to examine patients' and physicians' satisfaction, and concordance of patient-physician satisfaction with patients' pain control status.

Methods

This cross-sectional observational study involved 465 adults prescribed analgesics for cancer-related pain from 22 sites across Indonesia, Malaysia, Philippines, Singapore, Thailand, and Vietnam. Pain intensity, pain control satisfaction, and adequacy of analgesics for pain control were documented using questionnaires.

Results

Most patients (84.4%) had stage III or IV cancer. On a scale of 0 (no pain) to 10 (worse pain), patients' mean worst pain intensity over 24 hours was 4.76 (SD 2.47). More physicians (19.0%) than patients (8.0%) reported dissatisfaction with patient's pain control. Concordance of patient-physician satisfaction was low (weighted kappa 0.36; 95% CI 0.03–0.24). Most physicians (71.2%) found analgesics to be adequate for pain control. Patients' and physicians' satisfaction with pain control and physician-assessed analgesic adequacy were significantly different across countries (P < 0.001 for all).

Conclusions

Despite pain-related problems with sleep and quality of life, patients were generally satisfied with their pain control status. Interestingly, physicians were more likely to be dissatisfied with patients' pain control. Enhanced patient-physician communication, physicians' proactivity in managing opioid-induced adverse effects, and accessibility of analgesics have been identified to be crucial for successful cancer pain management. This study was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (identifier NCT02664987).

The Influence of Pain Severity and Interference on Satisfaction with Pain Management among Middle-Aged and Older Adults

Background. Health outcomes are often contingent on how effective the individual is able to manage existent illness-related symptoms. This is all the more relevant among chronic pain patients. Objective. This study aimed to identify indicators of pain treatment satisfaction among middle-aged and older adults (N = 150) receiving outpatient treatment from a comprehensive cancer center. Methods. Patients were surveyed on questions assessing pain treatment satisfaction, pain severity, and additional social characteristics. Results. Descriptive data showed that middle-aged adults reported more pain locations, greater pain severity, and less satisfaction with pain treatment. A multivariate model was specified, showing older adults being more satisfied with their pain treatment. For the middle-aged adults, treatment satisfaction was generally lower with greater pain severity. This counters that for the older adults, where treatment satisfaction remained consistent despite increased levels of pain severity. Conclusion. These findings address an important issue regarding how pain is experienced across the life course. This suggests that general assumptions cannot be made about the health outcomes of older adults. Beyond the descriptive definitions of pain, there remains the need to develop models that account for determinants that may account for the pain experience among a diverse adult population.

Early pain detection and management after esophageal metal stent placement in incurable cancer patients: A prospective observational cohort study

BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIMS

Studies of esophageal self-expandable metal stents (SEMS) mainly focus on efficacy and recurrent dysphagia. Retrosternal pain has been described in up to 14 % of these patients, however, prospective daily pain assessment has not yet been performed. We conducted a prospective study to evaluate the occurrence and management of pain after esophageal SEMS deployment.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A total of 65 patients who underwent SEMS placement for incurable malignant esophageal stenosis were included. Patients used a diary to record intensity of pain twice daily for 2 weeks, according to the Numeric Rating Scale (NRS). A pain score ≥ 4 was used to determine whether patients experienced significant pain. If pain occurred, acetaminophen was used and, in cases of ongoing pain, an opiate was prescribed. Dose, duration, and kind of analgesic were noted.

RESULTS

The rate of significant pain increased from 0 % at baseline to 60 % on Day 1 (P < 0.001), followed by 37 % and 25 % on Days 7 and 14, respectively. The rate of analgesics use increased from 20 % at baseline to 78 % on Day 1 (P < 0.001), followed by 72 % and 62 % on Days 7 and 14, respectively. The use of opiates increased from 14 % at baseline to 42 % on Day 1 (P < 0.001). No variables associated with SEMS related pain were found.

CONCLUSIONS

Two-thirds of patients experience significant pain after esophageal SEMS insertion and analgesics, including opiates, are frequently required. Patients need to be informed and preventive prescription of analgesia should be considered in order to improve quality of life.

Adaptation of an evidence-based clinical practice guideline in cancer pain management by medical oncologists: a case vignette study

PURPOSE

Pain is a major problem in all cancer stages. Cancer pain guidelines are developed to improve management of pain. It is unclear whether these recommendations are applied in daily practice. Therefore, the objective of this study was to assess medical oncologists' adherence to an evidence-based clinical practice guideline in cancer pain management and their confidence in treatment choices.

METHODS

A cross-sectional case vignette survey describing a patient with intractable pancreatic cancer and pain was sent to all 268 medical oncologists registered at the Netherlands Association of Internal Medicine. Descriptive statistics were conducted.

RESULTS

Sixty-three of 268 medical oncologists (24 %) completed the survey. Adherence to the different recommendations of the guideline ranged from 18 to 100 %. Confidence for treatment choice ranged from 5.6 to 9.5 on a Numeric Rating Scale (0-10). Most of the responding oncologists (94 %) adhered to prescribing paracetamol as first-line pain treatment, and all prescribed a laxative in combination with opioids to prevent constipation. However, only 24 % of the respondents adhered to the guideline when first-line treatment had insufficient effect. Additionally, only 35 % adhered to the recommendation for insomnia treatment providing psychosocial support or using a multidimensional pain questionnaire besides pharmacological treatment. Finally, only 18 % adhered to the recommendation to perform a multidimensional pain assessment when disease worsens and pain increases.

CONCLUSIONS

The recommendations of the guideline have been partly adopted in cancer pain practice by medical oncologists. Particularly, pain assessment is not applied in the recommended manner. Therefore, implementation strategies should focus on adequate pain assessment in patients with cancer.

Patient-reported quality of care and pain severity in cancer

OBJECTIVE

Despite treatment availability, many cancer patients experience severe pain. Although patient assessments of care are increasingly employed to evaluate quality of care, little is known about its association with cancer symptom burden. The objective of our study was to examine the association between patient-reported quality of care and pain severity in a nationally representative cohort of cancer patients.

METHOD

Quality of care was measured in three domains: physician communication, care coordination/responsiveness, and nursing care. Quality scores were dichotomized as optimal versus nonoptimal. Pain was measured on a scale of 0 (least) to 100 (worst). We utilized multivariable linear regression to examine the association between patient-reported quality of care and pain severity.

RESULTS

The analytic sample included 2,746 individuals. Fifty and 54% of patients, respectively, rated physician communication and care coordination/responsiveness as nonoptimal; 28% rated nursing care as nonoptimal. In adjusted models, rating physician communication as nonoptimal (versus optimal) was associated with a 1.8-point higher pain severity (p = 0.018), and rating care coordination/responsiveness as nonoptimal was associated with a 2.2-point higher pain severity (p = 0.006).

SIGNIFICANCE OF RESULTS

Patient-reported quality of care was significantly associated with pain severity, although the differences were small. Interventions targeting physician communication and care coordination/responsiveness may result in improved pain control for some patients.

Pain is not systematically registered in Dutch medical oncology outpatients

BACKGROUND

Systematic pain registration and assessment with a visual analog scale (VAS) or numeric rating scale (NRS) at each visit are key recommendations in one of the most recent guidelines on cancer pain management. It is unclear whether this recommendation is applied.

OBJECTIVES

The aim was to explore registration of pain in medical records of patients visiting the medical oncology outpatient clinic.

METHODS

In a multicenter study in six Dutch hospitals, data were extracted from medical records of 380 outpatients with cancer. Data of the first three visits at the outpatient clinic were studied. Descriptive statistics were conducted.

RESULTS

In 23% of all 987 visits at the outpatient clinic, pain or absence of pain was registered, and in an additional 15%, a nonspecific symptom description was given. Regarding all other visits, (62%) pain or absence of pain was not documented at all. Pain measurement using a VAS or NRS was documented in only one visit. Pain was more often registered in medical records of patients with metastasis, as well as in those of patients with urogenital tumors.

CONCLUSION

Pain in medical oncology outpatients is not systematically registered in their medical records. With one exception, pain was not registered with a VAS or NRS. Yet, registration and assessment of pain to monitor pain are essential to evaluate and adapt pain treatment over time. Pain registration has not improved since 2001 and therefore implementing the recommendations regarding systematic monitoring of pain is needed.

Satisfaction with pain treatment in older cancer patients: Identifying variants of discrimination, trust, communication, and self-efficacy

How satisfied a patient is with their medical treatment may influence compliance and adherence to medical regimens. While a number of studies have examined patient satisfaction among younger populations, few have determined the impact social factors have on satisfaction with pain treatment among older adults. This study aimed to determine the influence discrimination, trust, communication, and other health characteristics have on satisfaction with pain treatment among older adults receiving outpatient services from a comprehensive cancer center. Participants were surveyed on questions assessing pain symptomatology, and identified social (discrimination, trust, and communication), physical (comorbidities, pain interference), behavioral (self-efficacy), and demographic characteristics. Analyses were calculated to determine the total and indirect effects of trust, communication, and self-efficacy as mediators on the perceived discrimination-patient satisfaction with pain treatment relationship. Data showed a significant relationship of communication and discrimination on patient satisfaction. However, none of the mediating effects were significant. It must be recognized that patient satisfaction is contingent upon a myriad of social factors that are not exclusive, but rather coexisting determinants of health. Particularly among the elderly, perceived discrimination and incidences of poor communication may be significant influences on health and the lived day-to-day experiences of this adult population.