[Multimodal pain therapy: principles and indications]

[Interdisciplinary multimodal pain therapy: does the dose make a difference? : A comparison from routine clinical care]

BACKGROUND

Interdisciplinary multimodal pain therapy (IMPT) is an established treatment for patients with severe chronic pain. Little evidence is available on the role of treatment dosage and, in particular, on the association between the duration of IMPT and treatment outcome.

AIM

The aim of this retrospective study was to compare the medium-term treatment success of a short inpatient (SIT, 1 week) and a long outpatient (LOT, 4 weeks) IMPT with a comparable treatment concept and comparable therapy intensity (20 h/week) in patients with severe chronic pain.

METHODS

Patients in both groups completed the German Pain Questionnaire at the beginning and end of IMPT as well as after 3 months. Primary outcome measures included pain-related impairment and average pain intensity at follow-up in patients of comparable sex, age as well as pain intensity and impairment at the beginning of the therapy.

RESULTS

While both groups initially showed significant treatment effects in pain-related impairment and average pain intensity, LOT patients (n = 32) reported significantly better values in both variables at 3‑month follow-up compared with SIT patients (n = 32). This was due to sustained positive effects in LOT patients and worsening in the SIT group.

CONCLUSION

The results indicate that initial treatment effects can be observed in both treatment settings, but a longer duration of therapy seems to favour the long-term stability of treatment effects.

Avoidance and Endurance Responses to Pain Before and with Advanced Chronification: Preliminary Results from a Questionnaire Survey in Adult Patients with Non-Cancer Pain Conditions

Purpose

The Avoidance-Endurance Model postulates fear-avoidance responses and endurance responses as important psychological mechanisms in the development and maintenance of chronic pain. The present study aims to investigate potential differences in avoidance and endurance responses to pain before and with advanced chronification.

Patients and Methods

Two samples of adults with non-cancer pain at two different stages of chronicity were compared: One with pain and risk factors for chronicity (n=26, part of the PAIN2020 project) and one with chronic pain (n=33 from a pain day care clinic). The German Pain Questionnaire, the Graded Chronic Pain Scale (GCPS) and medical reports were used to measure duration and severity of pain. Responses to pain were assessed with the Avoidance-Endurance Questionnaire (AEQ) and psychological strain with the Depression, Anxiety and Stress Scales (DASS).

Results

Both groups were primarily affected by musculoskeletal pain. Although not yet chronified, the risk group reported comparable GCPS levels of pain intensity and disability. Depression and stress ratings were also similar, except for anxiety, which was significantly elevated in the chronic pain sample (p<.001). The AEQ scales did not differ between groups, neither on any of the fear-avoidance- nor endurance-related dimensions. A post-hoc regression analysis revealed a significant prediction of fear-avoidance by pain-related disability (p<.001). The regression model for endurance responses was not significant.

Conclusion

Patients with risk factors of chronification experience substantial pain-related burden. Responses to pain in the realm of the Avoidance-Endurance model do not appear to vary as a function of chronification. While fear-avoidance and pain-related disability correlate positively, endurance could not be associated to any of our variables.

[Interdisciplinary multimodal pain therapy in postviral syndromes and ME/CFS : Features, pitfalls and model concept]

BACKGROUND

Multimodal pain therapy usually take place in the context of group therapy lasting several weeks and is based on a generally activating approach. Due to the specificity of stress intolerance with postexertional malaise (PEM) in patients with postviral syndromes, physical as well as psychological overload must be urgently avoided in these cases; however, these aspects can only be insufficiently considered in current medical pain therapy concepts.

METHODS

Summary of the current literature and presentation of clinical characteristics as well as presentation of a model project for a multimodal pain therapy in postviral syndromes with PEM.

MODEL CONCEPT

The presented model project describes a day clinic treatment setting for interdisciplinary multimodal pain therapy adapted to the individual resilience with minimization of the risk of strain-induced deterioration of the condition.

[Booster treatments in interdisciplinary multimodal pain therapy : Preparing structural and process parameters for the implementation of cross-sectoral booster treatments]

Interdisciplinary multimodal pain therapy (IMPT) is an established procedure in the treatment of chronic pain. In daily practice, many institutions regard so-called booster units as an integral part of IMPT. However, no consensual recommendations and evidence for booster concepts are available to date. This article uses the results of a discussion between clinical experts in the field of IMPT at the German Pain Congress in 2022 in order to show the status quo in care. It has been shown that currently applied booster offers vary greatly in terms of time intervals, intensities, therapy content and patient selection and that there is a need for structural and process parameters for the implementation of cross-sectoral booster treatments. In conclusion, the authors outline how the development of these parameters will be planned as an expert consensus with the participation of interested institutions and the inclusion of the patient perspective and offer opportunities for participation in this process.

[Feasibility of the interdisciplinary multimodal assessment-The team perspective]

BACKGROUND

Secondary preventive outpatient diagnostic services for patients with pain and risk factors for chronification have not yet been sufficiently established. In the PAIN2020 project (Innovation Fund, 01NVF17049) an outpatient interdisciplinary multimodal assessment (IMA) was introduced for the first time early in the course of the disease.

OBJECTIVE

For the implementation of the IMA procedures for team cooperation and decision criteria were developed, which were implemented by a team of medical, physiotherapeutic and psychological therapists. These procedures and decision criteria are to be discussed against the background of clinical experience and examined with respect to their feasibility (qualitative).

METHODS

In PAIN2020 a workshop on IMA was held in September 2021 to jointly reflect on the findings and experiences gained in the process so far through monitoring and structuring documentation in the implementation with staff or teams of PAIN2020 centers on the feasibility of implementing a structured interdisciplinary multimodal assessment. In three work phases, occupational group-specific and cross-occupational group topics were addressed.

RESULTS

In the decision-making processes of the occupational groups, in addition to profession-specific focal points within the framework of the assessment of findings (somatic, functional or psychosocial core criteria), overarching core criteria within the professions as well as complementary patient-related aspects are evident, which are included in the integrative team process. With respect to team collaboration, the implementation of the team meeting and the final discussion can be used to identify structural and process parameters that promote or inhibit implementation, which are also accompanied by interactional factors.

DISCUSSION

For the implementation of the IMA, there were (1) adaptations of the IMA, which is currently implemented as A‑IMA in the selective agreement with BARMER and (2) new dimensions or task fields and ideas for evidence-based concepts for the content design of integrative diagnostics as well as for the feedback of the results to the patients, which should be discussed in the future.

Personality systems interactions theory: an integrative framework complementing the study of the motivational and volitional dynamics underlying adjustment to chronic pain

In the endeavor to advance our understanding of interindividual differences in dealing with chronic pain, numerous motivational theories have been invoked in the past decade. As they focus on relevant, yet different aspects of the dynamic, multilevel processes involved in human voluntary action control, research findings seem fragmented and inconsistent. Here we present Personality Systems Interactions theory as an integrative meta-framework elucidating how different motivational and volitional processes work in concert under varying contextual conditions. PSI theory explains experience and behavior by the relative activation of four cognitive systems that take over different psychological functions during goal pursuit. In this way, it may complement existing content-related explanations of clinical phenomena by introducing a functional, third-person perspective on flexible goal management, pain acceptance and goal maintenance despite pain. In line with emerging evidence on the central role of emotion regulation in chronic pain, PSI theory delineates how the self-regulation of positive and negative affect impacts whether behavior is determined by rigid stimulus-response associations (i.e., habits) or by more abstract motives and values which afford more behavioral flexibility. Along with testable hypotheses, multimodal interventions expected to address intuitive emotion regulation as a central process mediating successful adaptation to chronic pain are discussed.

[Interdisciplinary multimodal assessment : Interprofessional interaction in team meetings and final talks]

BACKGROUND

In PAIN2020 (Innovation Fund, 01NVF17049), an outpatient interdisciplinary multimodal assessment (IMA) was introduced early in the course of the disease. The central quality feature is the close interdisciplinary collaboration of pain medicine, physiotherapy and psychology, which requires a complex organizational and coordination process, especially in team meetings and final discussions.

OBJECTIVES

The (different) views of the professional groups involved are brought together in the team process as a common consensus. The process of shaping the interaction of the professional groups among each other in the team meeting and final discussion as well as with the patients is examined (qualitatively) and discussed.

METHODS

In PAIN2020, a workshop on IMA was held to jointly reflect on the insights and experiences gained in the process so far through monitoring with staff or teams of the PAIN2020 centers. In one of three work phases, interprofessionally composed groups gathered statements from participants on the design of the interaction in team meeting and final discussion in three rotating rounds within the framework of a World Café.

RESULTS

It was possible to identify conducive and obstructive factors for the design of interdisciplinary collaboration in team meetings and final discussions, which were brought together in a superordinate framework model.

DISCUSSION

The provision of the new care service as an interdisciplinary task in a team goes beyond existing structural and process parameters in the definition of framework conditions in interdisciplinary multimodal pain therapy and should therefore also take personal competencies and professional competencies into account. Therefore, new dimensions arise for the implementation of the IMA, which should be discussed in the future.

[Control center team in interdisciplinary multimodal pain therapy]

The topic of this article is the team in interdisciplinary multimodal pain therapy (IMPT) in the context of the development of the team concept. The starting points are historical developments, both social and scientific. After World War II numerous war victims continued to suffer from persistent pain. On the part of medicine, the consequences were the failure of the usual procedures for acute pain and the resulting helplessness. Both the concept of pain as a symptom of physical injury and also the previous treatment options were no longer adequate. Very early on an interdisciplinary approach to pain management was organized. This involved the communication of experts from various disciplines with very different competencies and opinions. Various medical disciplines and psychotherapy were the core subjects. Crucial for functioning teams is an effective cooperation and interaction. Related organizational issues, conflicts, peculiarities, and possibilities for solutions are presented. In the meantime, IMPT as a procedure has become a regular service provided in health care.

[Self-efficacy expectation as a central concept in interdisciplinary multimodal pain therapy : Conceptual horizon, implementation, recording and limits]

The concept of self-efficacy expectation shows high relevance for interdisciplinary multimodal pain therapy (IMST) aimed at activity and self-regulation due to its theoretical embedding and empirical correlations to the experience of pain. Several issues limit this potential: At the level of the construct definition, there are ambiguities and overlaps with other concepts. A pain-specific transfer to IMST has not yet been performed. With the help of existing instruments, only a small part of what an IMST can achieve in terms of increasing pain-specific competence seems to be detectable. In perspective, a clarification of terms by including patients and the conception of a questionnaire based on this is indicated.

PAIN2.0: study protocol for a multicentre randomised controlled trial to evaluate the efficacy of a 10-week outpatient interdisciplinary multimodal pain therapy to manage recurrent pain for patients with risk factors of developing chronic pain in Germany

BACKGROUND

Up to 27% of the German population suffers from recurrent or persistent pain (lasting more than three months). Therefore, prevention of chronic pain is one major object of pain management interventions. The aim of this nationwide, multicentre, randomised controlled trial is to evaluate the efficacy of a 10-week ambulatory (outpatient) interdisciplinary multimodal pain therapy (A-IMPT) for patients with recurrent pain and at risk of developing chronic pain. This project was initiated by the German Pain Society (Deutsche Schmerzgesellschaft e.V.) and the public health insurance provider BARMER. It is currently funded by the German Innovation Fund (01NVF20023). The study PAIN2.0 focuses on reducing pain intensity and pain-related disability and investigates whether this intervention can improve physical activity, psychological well-being, and health literacy.

METHODS

PAIN2.0 is designed as a multicentre 1:1 randomised controlled trial with two parallel groups (randomisation at the patient level, planned N = 1094, duration of study participation 12 months, implemented by 22 health care facilities nationwide). After 6 months, patients within the control group also receive the intervention. The primary outcomes are pain intensity and pain-related impairment, measured as Characteristic Pain Intensity (PI) and Disability Score (DS) (Von Korff), as well as patient-related satisfaction with the intervention. Secondary outcomes are the number of sick leave days, sickness allowance, treatment costs, psychological distress, health-related quality of life, and catastrophizing. The effects of the intervention will be analysed by a parallel-group comparison between the intervention and control groups. In addition, the long-term effects within the intervention group will be observed and a pre-post comparison of the control group before and after the intervention will be performed.

DISCUSSION

Recurrent or persistent pain is common in the German population and causes high costs for patients and society. The A-IMPT aims to improve pain and pain-related impairments in pain patients at risk of chronification, thereby reducing the risk of developing chronic pain with its high socioeconomic burden. This new therapy could easily be integrated into existing therapy programs if positively evaluated.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

The trial PAIN2.0 has been registered in the German Clinical Trials Register (DRKS) since 21/11/2022 with the ID DRKS00030773 .

[Concept for integrative pain treatment of osteoarthritis of the knee based on the evidence for conservative and complementary therapies]

BACKGROUND

Osteoarthritis of the knee (gonarthritis) represents a medical challenge.

RESEARCH QUESTION

What is the evidence with respect to approaches of complementary medicine and their integration into multimodal pain management concepts?

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Qualitative nonsystematic literature search on the epidemiology and pathophysiology as well as informative clinical trials, meta-analyses and clinical guidelines about conservative treatment including complementary therapy for gonarthritis.

RESULTS

Osteoarthritis of the knee is a frequent condition with biopsychosocial risks factors for chronification. The German S2k clinical guideline (k = consensus-based, not based on scientific systematic literature searches) published by the Association of the Scientific Medical Societies in Germany (AWMF) in 2017 has not yet been updated. The current guidelines of the American College of Rheumatology (ACR) date from 2020. Both guidelines recommend exercise therapy, weight reduction, short-term analgesics, topical therapy, intra-articular corticoid injections and acupuncture with variable strengths. Furthermore, transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS), laser and other electrophysical therapies, shock waves, traction treatment, ergotherapy, comfrey poultices and mudpacks can also be used. Current research supports the benefits of tai chi/qigong and medicinal leaches.

CONCLUSION

Complementary treatment approaches, such as acupuncture, tai chi/qigong, topical naturopathic self-treatment and leeches (with limitations) can, in addition to behavioral changes, exercise therapy and short-term pharmacological treatment, be important evidence-based components of integrative pain management concepts, e.g. in terms of an interdisciplinary multimodal pain treatment (IMPT). Besides pain reduction and functional improvement they promote the internal control conviction through the possibility of self-treatment and self-exercise.

[Emotions in chronic pain : Changes in the course of day clinic interdisciplinary multimodal pain therapy]

RESEARCH QUESTION

The present study examined the extent to which emotional experience and emotional competence (EC) change in people with chronic pain during interdisciplinary multimodal pain treatment (IMPT).

METHODS

The study included N = 184 adult German-speaking individuals with non-cancer-related chronic pain. They completed a day clinic IMPT. The frequency of specific emotions (anger, etc.) and EC was assessed at three measurement time points using the Questionnaire for Emotion-Specific Self-Assessment of Emotional Competencies (ERSQ-ES) and the Emotional Competency Questionnaire (ECQ). The course results were analyzed descriptively, inferentially, and using linear regression.

RESULTS

Positive emotions were experienced more frequently (effect size r = 0.40; p < 0.001) and negative emotions less frequently (r = 0.39, p < 0.001) at end of therapy. The experience of anger decreased particularly strongly (r = 0.52; p < 0.001). Self-assessed EC did not change during the IMPT (χ2ECQ_total (2) = 0.09; p = 0.956). EC largely explained the variance in the frequency experience of positive (R2 = 0.468) and negative emotions (R2 = 0.390).

DISCUSSION

Improvements in patient-reported frequencies of positive and negative emotions during IMPT were demonstrated. Further research should validate these results using a control group. Even though no explicit increase in competence was perceivable for the studied subjects, EC had a high predictive value for emotion frequency. Future therapy designs and evaluations should focus more on changes of emotional experience.

Chronic Primary Pelvic Pain Syndrome in Men

BACKGROUND

Chronic primary pelvic pain syndrome in men (CPPPSm) can be associated with urogenital pain, urinary symptoms, sexual dysfunction, and emotional disturbance. Its clinical heterogeneity and incompletely understood pathogenesis make it more difficult to treat. This article is intended to familiarize the reader with basic aspects of the manifestations, pathophysiology, diagnostic evaluation, differential diagnosis, and treatment of this condition.

METHODS

This article is based on relevant publications retrieved by a selective search of the literature, including the current guidelines of the European Association of Urology. The features of this disease pertaining to urology, psychosomatic medicine, and pain medicine are illuminated from an interdisciplinary perspective.

RESULTS

Chronic pelvic pain appears to arise through a complex interaction of inflammatory, infectious, neurological, musculoskeletal, and psychosomatic factors. A comprehensive diagnostic work-up should be carried out to evaluate and exclude the numerous differential diagnoses. Treatment strategies are based on the clinical phenotype. Randomized controlled trials have shown that significant relief can be achieved with a variety of drugs and non-pharmacological treatments, selected according to the manifestations of the condition in the individual case. Attention must be paid to treatment-specific adverse effects.

CONCLUSION

The management of patients with CPPPSm should consist of a comprehensive differential diagnostic evaluation and an individually oriented treatment strategy.

Evaluation of a multimodal pain therapy approach with relapse prophylaxis for back pain (MMS-RFP study): a study protocol for a cluster randomised controlled trial

INTRODUCTION

The need for an interdisciplinary multimodal approach to the treatment of back pain has already been demonstrated by various studies. However, when considering the periods of incapacity to work in the longitudinal course after the multimodal pain therapy (MPT), limits in terms of its sustainable effect become clear. Patients who receive MPT subsequently return to standard outpatient care, which is associated with a risk of relapse. A 12-month relapse prophylaxis (RP) programme, intended to follow a 4-week MPT, was developed to help patients make the transition to health-conscious and physically active behaviour in everyday life and to identify and prevent impending relapses at an early stage. The evaluation, based on a cluster randomised controlled trial, seeks to provide information on the benefits of early and intensive RP as part of MPT, examine whether it is cost effective, reduces the days of incapacity to work and increases functional capacity, as well as to examine other parameters.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

The study population comprises members of a regional statutory health insurance fund in Germany, who are ≤62 years old, gainfully employed and have been incapacitated for work for at least 21 days due to a diagnosis of back pain. Over a recruitment period of 24 months, a maximum of 368 individuals can potentially be included in the MPT. The intervention group (IG) and control group (CG) will both receive MPT, after randomisation IG will receive RP and CG will receive no further therapy or support as part of the trial. The evaluation is carried out on the following levels: structural, process and results quality. Cost effectiveness is also assessed by means of a health economic evaluation. In addition to the collection of qualitative and quantitative primary data, claims data from the regional health insurance fund are also included in the analysis.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

This study has received approval by the ethics committee of the Hannover Medical School (reference number: 8548_BO_S_2019). The study results will be disseminated in national and international journals and conference presentations.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

DRKS00017654.

[Expected areas of impact of the disciplines medicine, psychology and physiotherapy in pain treatment : A survey among members of the professions]

BACKGROUND

Interdisciplinary multimodal pain treatment (IMPT) is an essential element in the treatment of people with chronic pain. Although IMST is defined in terms of content, it is evident that its practical design is very heterogeneous. This refers not only to the composition of the contents of the treatment but also to the concrete distribution of tasks among the professions involved. This article deals with the attribution of the effect of the activities of the three professional groups involved in IMPT: medicine, psychology and physiotherapy. The aim of this work is to examine how the professions of medicine, psychology and physiotherapy assess the effectiveness of their work and the effectiveness of the other two disciplines in the care of chronic pain patients.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A newly designed questionnaire with 19 items was used. Each item describes a possible effect that treatment by the professions of medicine, psychology and physiotherapy can have. Based on factor analysis, items were combined for which the three effect attributions had the same items. The restriction to factor analysis areas was intended to avoid redundancies in the presentation and interpretation of results. The evaluation was carried out by means of a variance analysis for the impact areas with the factors "profession" and "attribution of impact".

RESULTS

A total of 233 participants from the 3 disciplines (medicine, n = 78; psychology, n = 76; physiotherapy, n = 79) answered the questionnaire. The three areas of effect "pain reduction", "strength and movement" and "functional pain coping" could be identified by factor analysis. The impact areas attributed to the different professions are largely reflected in the participants' answers. The variance analysis revealed significant main effects for the two factors "profession" and "attribution of impact" and for their interactions.

CONCLUSION

Professionals in medicine, psychology and physiotherapy have clear expectations of their own and the other professions mentioned here with respect to their effectiveness in certain areas of change. Overall, the three professions agree in their assessment of the contribution of medicine, psychology and physiotherapy to the areas of pain reduction, gain in strength and movement and functional pain coping.

Supplementing transcranial direct current stimulation to local infiltration series for refractory neuropathic craniocephalic pain: A randomized controlled pilot trial

Background

Some patients with neuralgia of cranial nerves with otherwise therapy-refractory pain respond to invasive therapy with local anesthetics. Unfortunately, pain regularly relapses despite multimodal pain management. Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) may prolong pain response due to neuro-modulatory effects.

Methods

This controlled clinical pilot trial randomized patients to receive anodal, cathodal or sham-tDCS stimulation prior to local anesthetic infiltration. Pain attenuation, quality-of-life and side effects were assessed and compared with historic controls to estimate effects of tDCS stimulation setting.

Results

Altogether, 17 patients were randomized into three groups with different stimulation protocols. Relative reduction of pain intensity in per protocol treated patients were median 73%, 50% and 69% in anodal, cathodal and sham group, respectively (p = 0.726). Compared with a historic control group, a lower rate of responders with 50% reduction of pain intensity indicates probable placebo effects (OR 3.41 stimulation vs. non-stimulation setting, NNT 3.63). 76.9% (n = 10) of tDCS patients reported mild side-effects. Of all initially included 17 patients, 23.5% (n = 4) withdrew their study participation with highest proportion in the cathodal group (n = 3). A sample size calculation for a confirmatory trial revealed 120 patients using conservative estimations.

Discussion

This pilot trial does not support series of anodal tDCS as neuro-modulatory treatment to enhance pain alleviation of local anesthetic infiltration series. Notably, results may indicate placebo effects of tDCS settings. Feasibility of studies in this population was limited due to relevant drop-out rates. Anodal tDCS warrants further confirmation as neuro-modulatory pain treatment option.

[Development of two outpatient interdisciplinary group modules in the treatment of patients with pain and risk of chronification]

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

An early treatment of patients who suffer from pain and show risk factors for chronification is meaningful as these patients can benefit from an early interdisciplinary multimodal pain treatment (IMST). In view of the insufficient treatment, two outpatient treatment modules for the secondary prevention of pain chronification are developed within the framework of PAIN2020: the educative and accompanying IMST (E‑IMST and B‑IMST).

MATERIAL AND METHODS

The developmental process of both IMSTs is presented. In this context two target groups of patients were defined for which 1 session (E‑IMST) or 10 intervention appointments (B‑IMST) were planned, depending on the chronification, impairment and complexity of the disorder. The conception was carried out in five steps: development of the objectives, development of the main contents, workshop on the content and conceptional design (contents, mediation, exercises), preparation of a time schedule and processing of the results (manual, presentations, worksheets, handbook). The B‑IMST was initially developed from which the contents for the E‑IMST were subsequently extracted. Additionally, a concept for testing the feasibility and a working model for a pilot study were developed.

RESULTS

The objectives for both forms of IMST are improvement of the understanding of pain and contributing factors, the increase of the experience of control and self-efficacy and the increase in self-responsibility with respect to strategies to reduce pain. Differences between the two treatment modules arise from the needs and framework conditions. Medical, physiotherapeutic and psychotherapeutic contents and schedules were organized for both IMST modules. The B‑IMST consists of five modules each with two sessions as group interventions (biopsychosocial model, activation planning, regulation of needs, sleep and medication, routine transfer). The 3‑h E‑IMST group intervention mainly intends to mediate knowledge on pain and the biopsychosocial pain model. Theoretical and practical interventions, empirical knowledge and experience-oriented methods are employed.

CONCLUSION

There are now two interdisciplinary structured manuals for the secondary preventive treatment of patients with recurrent pain and a risk profile for chronification. These approaches must now prove themselves with respect to feasibility and effectiveness.

Mental disorders are no predictors to determine the duration of cannabis-based treatment for chronic pain

Background

Chronic pain (CP), a complex biopsychosocial disorder with a global prevalence of up to 33%, can be treated by following multidisciplinary approaches that may include cannabis-based medicine (CBM). However, because CBM continues to be a new treatment, questions remain regarding the ideal duration for CBM and its psychosocial determinants, including mental comorbidities.

Methods

In a retrospective cross-sectional study involving 46 patients with CP (ICD-10 code F45.4-), three validated instruments-the German Pain Questionnaire, the Depression Anxiety Stress Scale (DASS), and the Marburg Questionnaire of Habitual WellBeing-were used to identify pain-specific psychosocial determinants and mental disorders. Descriptive analyses, a group differences analysis, and a logistic regression analysis were performed using SPSS.

Results

The patients most frequently reported low back pain as the primary location of their CP, and in attributing the condition to tissue damage, most had largely adopted a somatic orientation in conceptualizing their illness. Most had experienced CP for more than 5 years (M = 5.13 years, SD = 1.41) and, as a consequence, faced significant restrictions in their everyday life and exhibited low subjective wellbeing (MFHW median = 4.00, N = 43, Q1: 2.00, Q3: 9.00, range: 0-20). Comorbidities among the patients included depression, (DASS-Depression, median: 11.50, Q1: 7.00, Q3: 16.25), anxiety (DASS-Anxiety, median: 4.50, Q1: 2.75, Q3: 8.00), and stress (DASS-Stress, median: 11.00, Q1: 7.00, Q3: 15.00). Between the two cannabis-based treatments with a course lasting either less or more than a year, the duration of treatment showed no between-group differences in terms of sociodemographic factors, pain-specific factors, conceptualizations of the illness, or mental disorders. Psychosocial determinants such as subjective wellbeing and mental comorbidities were not significant predictors of the duration of cannabis-based treatment.

Conclusion

We found no evidence indicating that the benefits of short-term vs. long-term cannabis-based treatment can be predicted by mental comorbidities or psychosocial factors. However, because CBM may be included in approaches to treat CP, questions about the ideal duration of such treatment remain to be answered.

Multimodal pain therapy for persistent idiopathic facial pain - a pilot study

OBJECTIVE

Persistent Idiopathic Facial Pain (PIFP) is a pain syndrome with missing evidence-based therapy recommendations. According to the biopsychosocial pain model, multidisciplinary pain treatment (MPT) offers a promising therapeutic option for chronic pain syndromes. MPT is an interprofessional treatment procedure, consisting of medical, physiotherapeutic and psychotherapeutic treatment units, which has not yet been studied in PIFP.

METHODS

This retrospective study included 25 patients with PIFP, who had been treated with MPT. Pain intensity on the numerical rating scale (NRS), perceived disability, habitual well-being, as well as anxiety/depression and stress scales were recorded. Moreover, the patients evaluated the efficacy of each type of the single therapeutic interventions.

RESULTS

There was a highly significant decrease in the characteristic pain intensity. Also habitual well-being improved significantly, as did anxiety and depression. The perceived disability and stress also improved, but without statistical significance. Physiotherapy was rated as the most effective therapeutic unit. Among the medical measures, consultations took first place (40% of the participants). Nearly three-fourths of the patients (72%) would recommend MPT.

CONCLUSION

The present study shows beneficial outcomes in patients with PIFP following MPT. Patients evaluate physiotherapeutic treatment as particularly efficacious. Therefore, MPT can be considered as a therapeutic option in patients with PIFP.

[Low back pain from an orthopedic and pain medical point of view]

Low back pain is not a diagnosis but a symptom of various causes. The differentiation between specific and non-specific low back pain is diagnostically difficult and only of limited help with regard to the further therapeutic procedure. A large proportion of the causes of low back pain are functional disorders that can be detected on the basis of clinical findings and not (or only insufficiently) by imaging procedures. Early recognition and timely adequate therapy are crucial for the prognosis of chronic low back pain. Low back pain at risk of chronicity or chronic low back pain requires early assessment and the initiation of an interdisciplinary multimodal pain therapy program (IMPT).

[Psychosocial factors in pain and pain management : A statement]

Although psychosocial factors have a profound impact on the experience of pain and pain recovery, the transfer to clinical application has so far been insufficient. With this article, a task force of the special interest group "Psychosocial Aspects of Pain" of the German Pain Society (Deutsche Schmerzgesellschaft e. V.) would like to draw attention to the considerable discrepancy between existing scientific evidence on the importance of psychosocial factors in the development of chronic pain disorders and the translation of these findings into the care of pain patients. Our objective is a stronger integration of psychological and psychosomatic expertise in pain treatment and research, as well as the improvement of structural and institutional conditions, to achieve an increased consideration of psychosocial aspects. In this way, modern, integrative and complex pain concepts can reach the patient. Based on these fundamental findings on the importance of psychosocial factors in pain and pain treatment, implications for the transfer to clinic and further research will be shown.

Functional connectivity and neurotransmitter impairments of the salience brain network in chronic low back pain patients: a combined resting state functional MRI and 1H-MRS study

ABSTRACT

Functional re-organisation of the salience network (SN) has been proposed as one of the key pathomechanisms associated with central nociceptive processing in the chronic pain state. Being associated with an altered functional connectivity within the SN, these processes have been hypothesized to result from a loss of inhibitory function leading to node hyperexcitability and spontaneous pain. Combined resting-state (rs) BOLD fMRI and 1H-MR spectroscopy was applied to chronic back pain (CBP) patients and healthy subjects (HS) to assess deviations from functional integrity (weighted closeness centrality, wCC, derived from rs-fMRI), oscillatory BOLD characteristics (spectral power, SP), and neurotransmitter levels (GABA+, glutamate+glutamine) in two key SN nodes, anterior insular (aInsR) and anterior mid-cingulate (aMCC) cortices. In addition, examinations were repeated in CBP patients after a four week interdisciplinary multimodal pain treatment and in HS after four weeks to explore longitudinal, treatment-mediated changes in target variables. The aInsR and, to a lesser extent, the aMCC of patients exhibited significantly reduced wCC accompanied by a SP shift from a lower to a higher frequency band, indicating a desynchronization of their neuronal activity within the SN, possibly due to increased spontaneous activations. Without revealing neurotransmitter differences, patients alone showed significant positive associations between local GABA+ levels and wCC in aInsR, suggesting a stronger dependence of node synchronization on the inhibitory tone in the chronic pain state. However, this needs to be explored in future using MRS techniques that are more sensitive to detecting subtle neurotransmitter changes and also allow multifocal characterization of neurotransmitter tone.

The descending pain modulation system predicts short term efficacy of multimodal pain therapy - an observational prospective cohort study

OBJECTIVES

Treating chronic pain patients with multimodal pain therapy (MMPT) alters perception, awareness, and processing of pain at multiple therapeutic levels. Several clinical observations suggest that the effects of therapy may go beyond the possible sum of each level of therapy and may be due to a central descending inhibitory effect measurable by conditioned pain modulation (CPM). Thus, we investigated whether CPM is able to identify a group of patients that benefit particularly from MMPT.

METHODS

This was an observational prospective cohort study. Patients were hospitalized on a special pain medicine ward with specially trained staff for 10 days. The patients were questioned and had investigations before and shortly after MMPT and were followed-up on 3 months post discharge. Before and after treatment, subjects were investigated via CPM and quantitative sensory testing (QST) as well as completing questionnaires. The study was registered in the German Clinical Trials Register (DRKS00006850).

RESULTS

During the study period of 24 months, 224 chronic pain patients were recruited. 51 percent of patients completed the study period. There was an improvement in overall groups regarding all domains assessed, lasting beyond the end of the intervention. Patients with a sufficient CPM effect, defined as a reduction in pain during the conditioning stimulus, at baseline did show a more pronounced reduction in mean pain ratings than those without. This was not the case 3 months after therapy. Furthermore, sufficient CPM was identified as a predictor for pain reduction using a linear regression model.

CONCLUSION

In conclusion, this study shows that while a heterogeneous group of patients with chronic pain disorders does sustainably benefit from MMPT in general, patients with a sufficient CPM effect do show a more pronounced decrease in pain ratings directly after therapy in comparison to those without.

[Results of a pilot study on the role of therapy expectation in interdisciplinary multimodal pain therapy for chronic back pain]

Hintergrund

Chronische Rückenschmerzen sind eine schwerwiegende und global sehr häufig auftretende Erkrankung mit enormen persönlichen sowie sozioökonomischen Auswirkungen. Die interdisziplinäre multimodale Schmerztherapie (IMST) ist eines der wenigen evidenzbasierten Behandlungsverfahren für chronische Schmerzen. Obwohl bekannt ist, dass Schmerzen sowie deren Chronifizierung und Behandlung von den persönlichen Erwartungen der Patienten beeinflusst werden, gibt es wenige etablierte Interventionen oder Richtlinien für eine aktive Modulation dieses Effekts.

Ziel der Arbeit

Wir möchten mit dieser Arbeit die Rolle der Erwartung als Prädiktor für Schmerzen sowie schmerzbezogene Beeinträchtigung in der klinischen Praxis verdeutlichen und präsentieren hierzu beispielhaft explorative Pilotdaten einer Beobachtungskohorte unserer Klinik.

Material und Methoden

Die Untersuchung zeigt erste Daten einer prospektiven longitudinalen Beobachtungsstudie bestehend aus bis zu 41 Patienten mit chronischen Rückenschmerzen, die im Setting einer IMST am Essener Rückenschmerz-Zentrum behandelt wurden. Es wurden Daten zum Zeitpunkt der Aufnahme (T0) und der Entlassung (T1) sowie drei Monate nach Therapieende (T2) erhoben. Primäre Endpunkte waren die Schmerzintensität und die Schmerzbeeinträchtigung. Zusätzlich erfassten wir die Therapieerwartung zum Zeitpunkt der Aufnahme als möglichen Prädiktor. Die Bedeutung der vor der Therapie erhobenen Therapieerwartung wurde mittels linearer Regression erfasst.

Ergebnisse

Die IMST führte zu einer signifikanten Besserung in Bezug auf die Schmerzintensität und -beeinträchtigung. Der Effekt auf die Schmerzintensität war über den Zeitraum von drei Monaten nach Therapieende anhaltend und die Beeinträchtigung sank in diesem Zeitraum weiter signifikant.

Diskussion

Erwartung war ein signifikanter Prädiktor für die Abnahme der Schmerzintensität und erklärte ca. 15 % der Varianz. In der klinischen Praxis sollten daher valide Methoden etabliert werden, negative Erwartungen zu reduzieren und positive Erwartungen zu fördern.

[The judgment of the Federal Social Court on the involvement of psychological psychotherapists in interdisciplinary multimodal pain therapy : A critical comment]

In the context of their offer of interdisciplinary multimodal pain therapy (day-patient and inpatient), hospitals repeatedly have to contend with strict detailed checks of the procedure codes (OPS 8-918.xx; 8-91c) by health insurers and the medical service. The necessity of day-patient or inpatient treatment in the respective sector, documented therapy components, and the qualifications of the therapists are regularly reviewed. On 27 October 2020, the Federal Social Court ruled on the specific qualification of psychological psychotherapists (BSG, 27 October 2020, Ref.: B 1 KR 25/19 R). The ruling and its potential impact are explained and discussed in this overview.

[Evaluation of an early interdisciplinary multimodal assessment for patients with pain : Protocol of a randomized controlled study (PAIN2020)]

Health care provision for patients with pain and risk factors for chronicity is still insufficient and characterized in particular by over-, under- and misuse of existing approaches. The PAIN2020 project is funded by the German Federal Ministry of Health Care (Innovationsfonds 01NVF17049) and aims to improve health care delivery for this group of patients by implementing an early ambulatory diagnostic approach by a pain specialist, resulting in an improvement in pain and restored or maintained function. A randomized clinical trial in 31 facilities Germany-wide will identify eligible patients and guide them into early specialized pain diagnostics. The interventional arm provides an interdisciplinary multimodal assessment, delivered by pain medicine specialists, physiotherapists and clinical psychologists. The control arm contains a single assessment by a pain specialist. Patients and caregivers receive detailed recommendations for evidence-based interventions tailored to the needs of the individual patient. Two evaluation approaches will be merged. The first requires a net sample size of 3840 patients, assessed (admission) and followed-up (3 and 6 months) by clinical data (German Pain Questionnaire, additional scales) and analyzed by a multi-level approach. In a second evaluation arm the clinical data of the included patients will be supplemented by secondary data from a statutory health insurance (BARMER) and compared to a sample of policyholders not addressed by the study. Data analyses will be performed by an external evaluation institute. The project started in April 2018.

[Prevention of chronic pain in the German healthcare system : Current state and perspective]

The current healthcare provision in Germany is established, in particular, for the diagnostics and treatment of chronic pain conditions; however, the current aim is to initiate the diagnostic and therapeutic approaches oriented towards the biopsychosocial pain model in the early stages of pain, i.e. before the onset of chronification, for patients with pain and a risk of chronification in order to actively avoid chronification processes. In this context, multiple risk factors play an important role for the diagnostic and therapeutic approaches as well as for the interdisciplinary multimodal pain therapy developed for this purpose. The Global Year of the International Association for the Study of Pain (IASP) 2020 addressed the prevention of (chronic) pain, a welcome opportunity to provide a short review of the evidence for and clinical experiences with timely diagnostic and therapeutic options and to summarize the current framework conditions and scientific recommendations for Germany. At the end of this article the implications for future research are summarized, particularly for the treatment of patients with pain and risk of chronification.

Do Chronic Pain Patients Wish Spiritual Aspects to Be Integrated in Their Medical Treatment? A Cross-Sectional Study of Multiple Facilities

Background: Chronic pain is a complex, multidimensional experience. Spirituality is hypothesized to impact pain experience in various ways. Nevertheless, the role that spirituality plays in multimodal pain therapy remains controversial and, to date, quantitative data on whether and for which patients spiritual aspects should be considered in the treatment of chronic pain is lacking. The aim of this study was thus to investigate the proportion and characteristics of patients with chronic pain who wish spiritual aspects to be integrated in their treatment. Methods: Two hundred nine patients with chronic pain were recruited from five inpatient departments and outpatient clinics in the German-speaking part of Switzerland. Patients filled out validated questionnaires, such as the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS), the Resilience Scale (RS-11), the Spiritual and Religious Attitudes in Dealing with Illness (SpREUK), and the 12-item Spiritual Well-Being Scale (FACIT-Sp-12). Results: More than 60% (CI_95%: 55.5-67.9%) of the patients wanted to address spiritual aspects in their treatment. These patients were significantly younger, had higher levels of education, and suffered from more frequent and more severe pain than patients who did not wish to address spiritual aspects. Furthermore, there were high correlations with existing spiritual resources and higher scores of spirituality. Conclusions: These results confirm that the majority of chronic pain patients wish spiritual aspects to be considered in their treatment. Additionally, the finding that these patients had more spiritual resources underlines the importance of integrating spiritual aspects in a resource-oriented, patient-centered care approach for this condition.

[Interdisciplinary multimodal pain therapy under the protective measures of the COVID-19 pandemic : Analysis and progress report]

Aufgrund der COVID-19-Pandemie mussten elektive medizinische Leistungen auf ein Minimum reduziert werden, wovon auch die schmerzmedizinische Versorgung betroffen war. Nach diesen drastischen Einschnitten steht nun eine vorsichtige Wiederaufnahme der elektiven Versorgungen an. Dies betrifft auch die Durchführung von stationären und teilstationären interdisziplinären multimodalen Schmerztherapien (IMST). Nachdem bis dato der Großteil der schmerzmedizinischen Einrichtungen geschlossen hat, stellte sich die Frage, ob unter den geforderten Schutzmaßnahmen eine Wiederaufnahme des Regelbetriebs problemlos umsetzbar ist. Um diese Fragestellung zu beantworten führten wir eine Patientenbefragung bei Patienten durch, die einen direkten Vergleich ziehen konnten zwischen einer IMST unter Normalbedingungen und unter den aktuell benötigten Schutzmaßnahmen. Die Umfrage erfasste dabei den Beeinträchtigungsgrad der unterschiedlichen Schutzmaßnahmen bei den verschiedenen Therapiebausteinen. Die Auswertung der Fragebögen von zwei Patientengruppen sowie aller beteiligten Therapeuten ergab, dass eine interdisziplinäre multimodale Schmerztherapie auch unter den benötigten Schutzmaßnahmen ohne größere Einschränkungen möglich ist. Insbesondere das Tragen einer Mund-Nasen-Schutzmaske erwies sich als die am stärksten beeinträchtigende Schutzmaßnahme. Durch Optionen wie die Verwendung einer Schutzscheibe oder die Verlegung der Therapiebausteine ins Freie stehen aber praktikable Schutzalternativen zur Verfügung. Die Zufriedenheit sowohl von Patienten als auch von Therapeuten war trotz dieser Einschränkungen groß und die persönliche Sorge vor einer möglichen Infektion gering.

Retrospective Study on Ganglionic and Nerve Block Series as Therapeutic Option for Chronic Pain Patients with Refractory Neuropathic Pain

Objective

Current recommendations controversially discuss local infiltration techniques as specific treatment for refractory pain syndromes. Evidence of effectiveness remains inconclusive and local infiltration series are discussed as a therapeutic option in patients not responding to standard therapy. The aim of this study was to investigate the effectiveness of infiltration series with techniques such as sphenopalatine ganglion (SPG) block and ganglionic local opioid analgesia (GLOA) for the treatment of neuropathic pain in the head and neck area in a selected patient group.

Methods

In a retrospective clinical study, 4960 cases presenting to our university hospital outpatient pain clinic between 2009 and 2016 were screened. Altogether, 83 patients with neuropathic pain syndromes receiving local infiltration series were included. Numeric rating scale (NRS) scores before, during, and after infiltration series, comorbidity, and psychological assessment were evaluated.

Results

Maximum NRS before infiltration series was median 9 (IQR 8–10). During infiltration series, maximum NRS was reduced by mean 3.2 points (SD 3.3, p < 0.001) equaling a pain reduction of 41.0% (SD 40.4%). With infiltration series, mean pain reduction of at least 30% or 50% NRS was achieved in 54.2% or 44.6% of cases, respectively. In six percent of patients, increased pain intensity was noted. Initial improvement after the first infiltration was strongly associated with overall improvement throughout the series.

Conclusion

This study suggests a beneficial effect of local infiltration series as a treatment option for refractory neuropathic pain syndromes in the context of a multimodal approach. This effect is both significant and clinically relevant and therefore highlights the need for further randomized controlled trials.

[Is interdisciplinary multimodal pain therapy threatened? : Increasing controversy on the necessity for inpatient treatment]

Interdisciplinary multimodal pain therapy (IMST) is recognized as a scientifically founded form of therapy for inpatient treatment of chronic pain conditions. The indications are assessed by private practitioners and must be confirmed by physicians at the inpatient institution. The health insurance companies are obliged to remunerate this treatment but are allowed to test the conditions in individual cases. Recently, reports from members of the German Pain Society on a drastic increase in testing and rejection quotas have become more frequent. Therefore, this article discusses the legal foundations of the treatment of patients with chronic pain in the inpatient sector. Hard criteria for treatment in a certain sector could not be established. A decision in individual cases will depend on the complexity of the disease in the individual patient. A treatment in hospital is principally only necessary when the treatment corresponds to the generally recognized state of medical knowledge and treatment options in daycase units have not been successful. Important guidance can be found in the treatment guidelines of the medical specialist societies. The transfer to a more intensive treatment sector must be made dependent on the severity and complexity of the symptoms and the insufficient effectiveness of the treatment in the previous sector. Simple ICD-10 diagnoses are not suitable as decision-making criteria and therefore, also not as testing criteria for the indications for inpatient treatment. Decompensated and acutely exacerbated chronic pain conditions must as a rule be treated in hospital, also due to the mental component of the pain disease.

[Diagnostics and therapy of back pain: what is advisable? What should be avoided and why is it still done?]

Diagnostic and therapeutic procedures are popular and frequently performed for low back pain. This narrative review presents and discusses the myths and evidence related to these procedures.In most cases it is nonspecific pain, for which no underlying disease can be named. Image diagnostics using X‑rays and MRI are rarely helpful in the case of new nonspecific back pain.Evidence for chirotherapy is doubtful. Also, evidence is lacking for invasive and surgical procedures in local and regional low back pain. These procedures show superiority in radicular pain only: extraction of disc herniation in acute and subacute leg pain and segmental lumbar fusion in chronic leg pain. Nevertheless, these and other invasive methods are being used to an increasing extent. Spontaneous healing and the possibilities of the patient to become pain-relieving for themselves are neglected and increased risks are accepted.Therapeutic approaches fostering self-efficacy by reconditioning physical and mental capability and improving positive self-perception ("interdisciplinary multimodal pain therapy") effect superior and sustainable results in subacute and chronic nonspecific back pain. Patients and physicians, however, tend to prefer passive and invasive therapy strategies. The underlying mechanisms should be understood. New thinking is necessary.

[Management of patients with chronic pain in acute and perioperative medicine : An interdisciplinary challenge]

Chronic pain is a frequent comorbidity of patients in hospitals and has an influence on the clinical course and the duration of hospitalization. There is a need to have a better understanding of chronic pain as a comorbidity and it should be considered to a greater extent in understanding diseases, in treatment concepts and hospital structures to ensure a resource-oriented and high-quality care. This begins on admission by identifying pre-existing pain and related risk factors with the medical history and taking these into account in the treatment regimen. A multimodal treatment approach that involves medicinal, educational, psychological and physiotherapeutic expertise is required in these patients. A unimodal approach in the treatment is not effective. A pain physician should be involved in the treatment team as early as possible. Furthermore, psychological joint supervision should be available for these patients as several studies have demonstrated positive perioperative effects of psychological approaches on the treatment in this patient group.

[Guideline for the planning of personalized, interdisciplinary multimodal pain treatment]

Interdisciplinary multimodal pain therapy (IMPT) should be delivered in a personalized, mechanism- and goal-oriented manner on the basis of an individual case conception. To the authors' knowledge, a practical instrument for planning IMPT does not exist. The model and guideline presented here for treatment should help practitioners to optimize the planning of IMPT and execute it efficiently. Based on the relevant interference mechanisms, goals for change and treatment are set and possible interventions are proposed. This involves explicitly including the patient's existing resources.

[Implementation of interdisciplinary multimodal pain therapy according to OPS 8‑918 : Recommendations of the ad hoc commission for interdisciplinary multimodal pain therapy of the German Pain Association]

With the implementation of the German diagnosis-related groups (DRG) reimbursement system in hospitals, interdisciplinary multimodal pain therapy was incorporated into the associated catalogue of procedures (OPS 8‑918). Yet, the presented criteria describing the procedure of interdisciplinary multimodal pain therapy are neither precise nor unambiguous. This has led to discrepancies in the interpretation regarding the handling of the procedure-making it difficult for medical services of health insurance companies to evaluate the accordance between the delivered therapy and the required criteria. Since the number of pain units has increased in recent years, the number of examinations by the medical service of health insurance companies has increased. This article, published by the ad hoc commission for interdisciplinary multimodal pain therapy of the German Pain Association, provides specific recommendations for correct implementation of interdisciplinary multimodal pain therapy in routine care. The aim is to achieve a maximum level of accordance between health care providers and the requirements of the medical examiners from health insurance companies. More extensive criteria regarding interdisciplinary multimodal pain treatment in an in-patient setting, especially for patients with chronic and complex pain, are obviously needed. Thus, the authors further discuss specific aspects towards further development of the OPS-code. However, the application of the OPS-code still leaves room regarding treatment intensity and process quality. Therefore, the delivery of pain management in sufficient quantity and quality still remains the responsibility of each health care provider.

Access to Pain Management Programs: A Multifactorial Analysis of the Pathways of Care for Chronic Pain Patients in the University Clinic Erlangen

BACKGROUND

Different treatment options are offered for patients suffering from chronic pain, which differ in intensity and costs: 1) monodisciplinary treatment, mostly in outpatient care and 2) interdisciplinary treatment with the option of participating in pain management programs as outpatients or inpatients. The present work investigates how patients at the University Clinic Erlangen receiving monodisciplinary treatment differ from those receiving interdisciplinary treatment (research question I) as well as how patients participating in a pain management program differ from those who do not (research question II). The aim is to generate insights into whether the differences between the patient groups under various treatment modalities reflect the officially defined criteria for the indication of chronic pain management programs.

METHODS

Routine data of 1,833 patients treated from January 2008 to March 2013 at the University Clinic Erlangen were analyzed. After univariate preanalyses and checks for multicollinearity, the remaining variables were used for the final multivariate model (multiple binary logistic regression) for research question I and II.

RESULTS

Research question I: Patients getting interdisciplinary treatment were more often employed, had higher affective experience of pain, more often regarded their pain as treatable, had more often participated in at least one pain-associated rehabilitation treatment in the past, were younger and rarely had application for retirement in consideration. Research question II: Patients who participated in a pain management program were more often female, more often employed, described their pain as mainly located at the upper part of the body, had more concomitant symptoms, were more often diagnosed with musculoskeletal pain and rarely had a retirement request pending.

CONCLUSIONS

It could be shown that patients in the analyzed pathways of care mainly differed in demographic variables, and regarding pain management programs, also in the type of pain. Differences between patients in different treatment paths reflecting the officially defined indication criteria for chronic pain management programs were detectable only to a minor extent. Clearer and operational practical guidance should help support the clinical decision to assign patients to different treatment options and close the gap between theory and practice.

[Patient perspectives in outcome research : Development of a focus group concept for collating patient perspectives on determination of effectiveness of multimodal pain therapy - A pilot study]

BACKGROUND

To assess the efficacy of multimodal pain therapy for chronic pain patients it is necessary to use suitable outcome domains as well as reliable and valid measurement instruments. Using pain intensity as an example, however, it is shown that there are critical issues with respect to suitability for chronic pain patients and the quality (e.g. content validity, feasibility and interpretability) of commonly used measurement instruments.

METHOD

A focus group concept was designed to discuss the construct of pain intensity and common measurement instruments with chronic pain patients who underwent multimodal pain therapy. The focus group concept was tested in two pilot groups (N = 10) where eight issues previously established in guidelines were discussed.

RESULTS

The results of the pilot studies affirmed that the construct of pain intensity as well as the measurement instruments must be critically considered when applied to chronic pain patients and the effectiveness of multimodal pain therapy. The concept of patient focus groups proved to be a suitable method for patient participation. Integrating patients should be considered not only in discussions of existing pain scales but also in developing new measurement instruments.

Acute Lumbar Back Pain

BACKGROUND

Back pain has many causes. In Germany, about 70% of adults have at least one episode of back pain per year.

METHODS

This review is based on a selective literature search and on the German National Disease Management Guideline for Low Back Pain.

RESULTS

The physician taking the history from a patient with back pain should ask about the nature, onset, course, localization, and radiation of the pain and its dependence on physical activity and/or emotional stress. In the differential diagnosis, neurologic deficits and any "red flags" suggesting dangerous conditions such as spinal fracture, bacterial infection, and tumors must be ruled out. If no specific cause of the pain can be identified, no imaging studies are indicated on initial presentation. The treatment of acute, nonspecific low back pain focuses on pain relief and functional improvement. Adequate patient education and counseling are essential. Exercise therapy is no more effective than the continuation of normal daily activities. Restriction of activity, including bed rest, is of no benefit and merely prolongs recovery and the resumption of normal activity. Further diagnostic testing is indicated if there is any suspicion of a fracture, infection, or tumor.

CONCLUSION

After dangerous conditions have been ruled out, low back pain can be pragmatically classified as either nonspecific or specific. More research is needed so that the diagnostic assessment and individualized treatment of acute lower back pain can be further refined.

[Clinical studies on multimodal pain therapy : Standardized measurement of therapy outcomes with a core outcome set]

Decision making in evidence-based medicine is based on general data on therapy outcomes as well as the effectiveness and safety in specific patient populations. Typically, findings concerning therapy outcomes from different studies are aggregated for a final conclusion. In this context a comparison of results is hampered by studies in which therapy outcomes are heterogeneously measured. Such methodological challenges exist for almost all areas of medical treatment, as well as for multimodal pain therapy (MMPT). Through establishing core outcome sets (COS) the required standardization of measurement of therapy outcomes in clinical research can be achieved. A COS is an evidence-based and consented minimum set consisting of outcome domains (i.e. partial aspects of the medical condition to be investigated, which have to be measured in order to give the best possible demonstration of therapy outcome of an intervention) accomplished by valid, reliable and sensitive measurement instruments which should be applied in each clinical trial. No such COS has so far been found for MMPT. The aim of this article is to give an overview about currently recommended methodological approaches to develop a COS accompanied by a brief introduction about existing COS initiatives focusing on chronic pain. The existing COS recommendations are discussed and conclusions are drawn on whether existing recommendations could also be applied for MMPT. Finally, the impact of healthcare research in Germany on a standardized assessment of therapy outcome in MMPT is outlined.

[Physiotherapy in pain medicine. Further treatment after a multimodal pain therapy program]

BACKGROUND

Chronic pain is a global health challenge for both the individual patient and the healthcare community. Multimodal Pain Management, as one of the possible therapies for patients with chronic pain, provides a comprehensive tool that places equally high demands on therapists and patients and is consistently recommended.

METHOD

In a monocentric cross-sectional study, patients who had previously participated in a multi-modal pain therapy program lasting several weeks were asked about the follow-up recommendations of the interdisciplinary team of the Pain Management Clinic. Using a structured questionnaire, patients should indicate whether they were treated on an outpatient basis after discharge, or for what reasons they were not.

RESULTS

80 patients were randomized to the survey, 47 of whom participated in the survey (33 women, mean age 60 ± 14.5 years, 14 men, 56 ± 11.9 years). The follow-up recommendations of the interdisciplinary team were implemented by 70% of the participants. Pain management strategies (68%), relaxation methods (53%) and moderate endurance sports (32%) were the most frequently used. 28 patients (60%) continued to receive physiotherapy after the pain therapy program. 19 patients (40%) did not continue physiotherapy after discharge. The reasons for this were lack of medical prescription (32%), dissatisfaction with treatment (17%) and inadequate treatment (15%). Lack of time due to caring for a family member or childcare (working and single mothers) was reported by 10% of patients.

CONCLUSIONS

There is currently no adequate, outpatient, continuing care in the sense of a multimodal treatment concept for chronic pain patients. The needs of patient preferences are not sufficiently considered. Deficits lie in the practice organization and health care structures, which continue the multimodal idea.

[Patient first - The impact of characteristics of target populations on decisions about therapy effectiveness of complex interventions: Psychological variables to assess effectiveness in interdisciplinary multimodal pain therapy]

INTRODUCTION

The assessment of treatment effectiveness in public health settings is ensured by indicators that reflect the changes caused by specific interventions. These indicators are also applied in benchmarking systems. The selection of constructs should be guided by their relevance for affected patients (patient reported outcomes). The interdisciplinary multimodal pain therapy (IMPT) is a complex intervention based on a biopsychosocial understanding of chronic pain. For quality assurance purposes, psychological parameters (depression, general anxiety, health-related quality of life) are included in standardized therapy assessment in pain medicine (KEDOQ), which can also be used for comparative analyses in a benchmarking system. The aim of the present study was to investigate the relevance of depressive symptoms, general anxiety and mental quality of life in patients undergoing IMPT under real life conditions.

METHODS

In this retrospective, one-armed and exploratory observational study we used secondary data of a routine documentation of IMST in routine care, applying several variables of the German Pain Questionnaire and the facility's comprehensive basic documentation. 352 participants with IMPT (from 2006 to 2010) were included, and the follow-up was performed over two years with six assessments. Because of statistically heterogeneous characteristics a complex analysis consisting of factor and cluster analyses was applied to build subgroups. These subgroups were explored to identify differences in depressive symptoms (HADS-D), general anxiety (HADS-A), and mental quality of life (SF 36 PSK) at the time of therapy admission and their development estimated by means of effect sizes. Analyses were performed using SPSS 21.0®.

RESULTS

Six subgroups were derived and mainly proved to be clinically and psychologically normal, with the exception of one subgroup that consistently showed psychological impairment for all three parameters. The follow-up of the total study population revealed medium or large effects; changes in the subgroups were consistently caused by two subgroups, while the other four showed little or no change. In summary, only a small proportion of the target population (20 %) demonstrated clinically relevant scores in the psychological parameters applied.

DISCUSSION

When selecting indicators for quality assurance, the heterogeneity of the target populations as well as conceptual and methodological aspects should be considered. The characteristics of the parameters intended, along with clinical and personal relevance of indicators for patients, should be investigated by specific procedures such as patient surveys and statistical analyses.