Sektorenübergreifende interdisziplinäre multimodale Schmerztherapie

[Retrospective evaluation of electronically recorded patient questionnaires of a university outpatient pain clinic with the painDETECT® questionnaire]

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Psychometric tests can provide important information for diagnostics and progression in chronic pain patients. Between 2008 and 2018, the electronic system painDETECT® was used in the outpatient pain clinic of the Hannover Medical School (MHH). The aim of this retrospective study was to evaluate the pain symptomatology data recorded using painDETECT® and the treatment procedures used in the patient cohort examined over a period of 15 months.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A statistical analysis of baseline and follow-up data was performed. The analysis comprised pain-related parameters recorded by use of the painDETECT® system as well as outpatient records.

RESULTS

Baseline data of 459 patients (66% women) could be evaluated. The most common clinical pictures were spinal pain, headache, facial pain, and somatoform disorders, mostly with many years of previous treatment. Approximately 40% showed evidence of neuropathic pain components or central sensitization. With a mean pain intensity of VAS 6 (0-10), a predominantly high degree of chronicity was present. Approximately one third showed a high degree of pain-related functional impairment. Slightly more than half showed evidence of clinically relevant depression. Approximately 80% showed clinically relevant sleep disturbances. Follow-up data were available for 145 patients (31.6%). The proportion of patients receiving a nonpharmacological form of treatment increased by 44.1% (physical therapy) and by 24.1% (psychotherapeutic procedures) during the observation period. The use of co-analgesics increased by approximately 30% over the course.

CONCLUSION

In the outpatient setting, an extension of treatment can be successful for high-grade chronic pain patients. Close structural networking with the clinics for rehabilitation medicine and for psychosomatics and psychotherapy at the MHH can be a favorable prerequisite for this.

[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.

[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.

[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 .

[Do pain therapy patients benefit from their fellow patients? : A retrospective observational study on the influence of the stage of pain management and therapy experience of fellow patients on the individual therapy success in an inpatient interdisciplinary multimodal pain therapy (IMPT)]

BACKGROUND

Interdisciplinary multimodal pain therapy (IMPT) is mostly run in a group setting to encourage the exchange of experiences between patients and thus facilitate the change of pain-related attitudes and behavior. As is known from psychotherapy research, the fellow patients in a therapy group have a relevant influence on the success of the therapy for the individual patient.

OBJECTIVE

We examined the extent to which therapy success in an IMST group is influenced by individual co-patient characteristics, such as cognitive behavioral pain management, the difference to their own pain management and the proportion of co-patients who repeat therapy.

METHOD

In a retrospectively planned investigation of the psychometric tests of all patients in an inpatient IMST between January 2013 and February 2020, the influence of fellow patient characteristics on clinically relevant changes with respect to various parameters of the severity of chronic pain disorders was analyzed using binary logistic regression analyses.

RESULTS

We examined 636 treatment cases of which 540 were first-time stays. On each day of treatment, 5 fellow patients were present, 15% of whom had repeated the therapy. We were able to show that the proportion of fellow patients who repeat the therapy (p < 0.001; odds ratio, OR = 1.032) and the cognitive behavioral pain management of the fellow patients (p < 0.001; OR = 2.885) significantly increase the probability of achieving success in at least one of the parameters examined. An influence of a specific parameter on the success of therapy could not be proven.

CONCLUSION

Despite methodological limitations our results suggest that in patient groups of an IMST, patients with therapy experience and those with advanced cognitive behavioral methods for pain management should be combined with novices and patients who are still at the beginning of coping with the chronic pain disorder.

Personality disorders and outcome after multidisciplinary pain therapy

OBJECTIVES

Interdisciplinary treatment programmes are the gold standard for patients suffering from chronic pain. However, several patient-related factors seem to influence the patients' outcome. The aim of our study was to inquire whether patients with personality disorders (PD) might benefit less from an interdisciplinary treatment programme compared to patients without PD.

METHODS

A prospective, observational study with chronic pain patients attending a 5-week interdisciplinary treatment programme was performed. Main outcome parameters were psychological stabilization and pain intensity before and after the programme.

RESULTS

Out of the 104 included patients, 71 (68.3%) showed personality accentuations and 16 (15.4%) were diagnosed with PDs. PDs were mostly classified as histrionic, followed by borderline and narcistic personality. Patients diagnosed with histrionic accentuation showed a significantly better treatment response in terms of pain. Reduction in ADS (Allgemeine Depressionsskala - depression scale) was 3.4 in patients with PD and 11.1 in those without PD. Borderline patients showed a significant increase of ADS (by 2.0; p < 0.05) after programme completion.

DISCUSSION

Patients with chronic pain and personality accentuations or disorder only showed a slightly different outcome after interdisciplinary treatment programme and should therefore not be excluded from these programmes. Registered at German Clinical Trials Register (DRKS-ID: DRKS00015141).

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.

[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.

Pain-coping types among older community-dwelling care receivers with chronic pain

OBJECTIVES

There is a lack of knowledge on coping with pain and sub-group specific pain-coping profiles among older home care receivers with chronic pain. To describe pain-coping strategies, identify subgroups based on cognitive and behavioral pain-coping strategies and pain-related psychological impairment and to compare these groups with regard to socio-demographic, medical, pharmacological and psychological characteristics.

METHOD

Data of 212 care receivers were examined using the German pain-coping questionnaire (FESV) to determine how they cope with pain. Subgroups were identified using hierarchic agglomerative cluster analysis, using Ward's algorithm and squared Euclidean distance, and characterized using socio-demographic, medical, pharmacological and psychological parameters. Multinomial logistic regression was used to identify variables associated with the subgroups.

RESULTS

Older care receivers apply cognitive and behavioral strategies to manage pain. Three subgroups were identified: Cluster 1 (25.9%) with good coping competences and little psychological impairment, Cluster 2 (40.1%) with poor coping competences and high psychological impairment, and Cluster 3 (34%) with good coping competences and high psychological impairment. Significant differences between the clusters were observed for age, pain intensity, pain-related interference, daily activities, depression and resilience. Logistic regression demonstrated that belonging to Cluster 2 was associated with the number of pain-reducing medications, depression and resilience. Belonging to Cluster 3 was significantly linked to daily activities, the number of pain medications, depression and the level of care required.

CONCLUSION

Differentiating between pain-coping profiles in the group of older care receivers with chronic pain necessitates target group-specific pain-oriented psychotherapeutic interventions, which can result in improved pain management.

[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.

[Presentation of an innovative interdisciplinary and cross-sector therapeutic concept for pain patients as part of a regional selective contract]

Hintergrund

Eine gestufte Versorgung in der Behandlung chronisch schmerzkranker Patient*innen ist in Deutschland nur in Ansätzen vorhanden. Vor dem Hintergrund der aktuellen Pandemiebedingungen hat sich eine Unter- und Fehlversorgung weiter verschärft.

Ziel

Entwicklung und Aufbau eines sektorenübergreifenden Behandlungskonzepts für schmerzkranke Patient*innen im Rahmen eines Selektivvertrags.

Methoden

Eingebettet in bereits vorhandene Versorgungsstrukturen wurden nach vorbezeichneten Kriterien sieben Versorgungspfade (Clinical Pathways, CP) definiert, in die eingeschriebene Patient*innen nach einem interdisziplinären Assessment geleitet werden.

Aufbau

Im CP I verbleiben die Patient*innen in der Regelversorgung. Im CP II wird zusätzlich eine einmalige interprofessionelle Edukation von 3 h zur Prophylaxe weiterer Chronifizierung angeboten. Im CP III gehen die Patient*innen für sechs Monate in eine fachärztlich spezialisierte ambulante Schmerzbehandlung. Das CP IV ist eine teilstationäre multimodale Therapie, bei der viele Präsenztage durch telemedizinische Inhalte mit Unterstützung einer Reha-App ersetzt werden. CP V und VI sind vollstationäre multimodale Behandlungen über acht und 15 Tage. In CP VII kann bei ambulantem psychotherapeutischen Behandlungsbedarf für Patient*innen nach vollstationärer Behandlung zur Überbrückung des Wartezeitraums über sechs Monate eine niederfrequente Psychotherapie erfolgen.

Qualitätssicherung und Evaluation

Die wissenschaftliche Begleitung erfolgt mittels ausgewählter Fragebögen und psychometrischer Testverfahren jeweils drei, sechs und zwölf Monate nach erfolgtem Assessment, um die Inhalte des Vertrags zu evaluieren.

[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.

[Effectiveness of inpatient interdisciplinary multimodal pain therapy (IMPT) in patients with complex regional pain syndrome (CRPS) : A retrospective study]

BACKGROUND

The primary symptom of complex regional pain syndrome (CRPS) is pain. Interdisciplinary multimodal pain therapy (IMPT) is the gold standard of treatment. The purpose of this study was to identify the beneficial effect of inpatient IMPT on pain level, sensation, perception and impairment in patients with CRPS.

QUESTION

The aim of the present study was to examine the effect of full-term IMPT on pain intensity, pain perception, pain processing, and pain impairment in patients with CRPS.

METHODS

In 265 patients with CRPS, pain level was retrospectively assessed by the numeric rating scale for pain (NRS), the Pain Perception Scale (SES) and the Pain Management Questionnaire (FESV) at the beginning and end of IMPT.

RESULTS

There was a significant reduction in the average and highest pain level on the NRS, a significant improvement in the affective experience of pain and cognitive pain management, as well as pain-related mental impairment. All patients improved significantly in resting and relaxation techniques. With regard to pain-related helplessness and depression, patients with mental comorbidity benefitted most. Patients undergoing invasive procedures in the form of peripheral nerve blockage showed no significantly improved outcome with regard to the tested parameters.

DISCUSSION

The current study demonstrated that IMPT has a highly beneficial effect on the level, experience and processing of pain in patients with CRPS.

Recommendations for a Pediatric Pain Education Curriculum for Physical and Occupational Therapists: Scoping Review and Survey

Specialization training for physiotherapists, occupational therapists, and sports therapists involved in pediatric pain is scarce and curricula are rarely published. The objectives of this study are twofold: firstly, to perform a scoping review to derive important contents for a pediatric pain education curriculum for specialized pain therapists. Secondly, to conduct a survey on specific contents in curricula currently used by pain experts and to obtain their evaluation regarding the importance of such contents for a specialized curriculum. The review substantiated the importance of a specific curriculum in pediatric pain education, but provided little information on adequate contents. In the survey, 45 experts in pediatric pain education confirmed that specific curricula and specialized contents for pediatric pain education are missing. Their answers give a well-defined picture of the specifics needed in the interaction with a pediatric population. The most important items they classified were e.g., the biopsychosocial framework and the impact of pediatric pain on daily life. Those expert ratings were in line with the recommendations of pediatric pain management guidelines. Further curriculum work in an interdisciplinary, international network is highly recommended.

[Evaluation of outpatient medical pain management in Germany : Results of an internet-based cross-sectional survey among pain specialists in outpatient departments]

Hintergrund

Nach den Kriterien der Qualitätssicherungsvereinbarung Schmerztherapie (QSV) nahmen zum Stichtag 31.12.2016 1206 Ärztinnen und Ärzte an der ambulanten Versorgung chronischer Schmerzpatienten teil. Bei in weiten Teilen bestehender Unterversorgung chronischer Schmerzpatienten fehlen Daten zur Einschätzung der ambulanten Schmerztherapie durch die Schmerztherapeuten selbst.

Methoden

In einem Hybrid-Delphi-Verfahren wurde ein Fragebogen zur inhaltlichen, strukturellen und persönlichen Bewertung der ambulanten Schmerztherapie in Deutschland entwickelt.

Mit diesem Instrument wurde eine internetbasierte Querschnittsbefragung von 281 QSV-Schmerzmedizinern aus vier Bundesländern (Berlin, Niedersachsen, Sachsen, Baden-Württemberg) und aller universitären Schmerzambulanzleiter (n = 36) in Deutschland durchgeführt.

Ergebnisse

Die Befragung erzielte eine bereinigte Rücklaufquote von insgesamt 35,9 %. Bei den Schmerzambulanzleitern antworteten 66,7 %. Bei 91 % der Befragten lag der Anteil an chronisch Schmerzkranken in der Praxis bei über 70 %. 67,3 % geben an, mit ihrer Praxissituation zufrieden zu sein, auf der anderen Seite äußern 63,4 % ihre Unzufriedenheit mit der aktuellen Organisation der Schmerzmedizin in Deutschland insgesamt. Diese Unzufriedenheit zeigt sich vor allem in Bezug auf die Budgetregelungen (69,3 %), die Kooperation mit Psychotherapeuten (69,3 %) und die interdisziplinäre Vernetzung (50,5 %). Als gute Vorbereitung für den späteren Beruf werden die einjährige Weiterbildung bei einem Weiterbildungsbefugten (87,1 %) und die Teilnahme an dem Kurs „Psychosomatische Grundversorgung“ (90,1 %) bewertet. Vielfältige Freitextkommentare weisen darauf hin, dass die Ausbildung zu kurz und nicht ausreichend sei. Die Mehrheit der Befragten hält es sowohl aus Arztsicht (61,4 %) wie auch aus Patientensicht (54,5 %) für sinnvoll, einen Facharzt für Schmerzmedizin als Versorgungsmodell zu etablieren. 70,8 % der Schmerzambulanzleiter sprechen sich für eigenständige Strukturen mit eigenem Budget aus, 75,0 % geben an, dass ihre Ambulanz unter den aktuellen Bedingungen nicht kostendeckend arbeitet. In Bezug auf die aktuelle Ausbildungssituation berichten nur 39,7 % der QSV-Schmerztherapeuten in der Niederlassung, dass sie auch Ärzte ausbilden, 57,6 % von ihnen planen zudem, ihre Tätigkeit innerhalb der nächsten 10 Jahre aufzugeben.

Schlussfolgerungen

Die mangelnde Eigenständigkeit der Schmerzmedizin und die unzureichend ausgebauten ambulanten Versorgungsnetzwerke tragen dazu bei, dass Schmerztherapeuten mit vielen Aspekten ihrer Tätigkeit unzufrieden sind. Die Etablierung eines Facharztes für Schmerztherapie wird als eine gute Lösung für eine bessere schmerzmedizinische Versorgung und für die Nachwuchsproblematik gesehen.

[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.

Therapeutic Drug Monitoring of Antidepressants for the Treatment of Chronic Musculoskeletal Pain With and Without Depression

BACKGROUND

Antidepressants are recommended for the treatment of chronic musculoskeletal pain; however, target serum concentrations based on therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) have not been established. Therefore, the authors analyzed routine care TDM data of antidepressants in patients with chronic pain with and without depression in terms of treatment outcomes in an interdisciplinary multimodal pain treatment (IMPT) program.

METHODS

Patients with chronic musculoskeletal pain and TDM for amitriptyline (n = 45) or duloxetine (n = 30) were retrospectively included. The German pain questionnaire for pain intensity and the Depression Anxiety Stress scale were applied at T0 and at the end of the IMPT program (T1). A relief of pain intensity score ≥2 was considered as a positive outcome. Comorbid depression was diagnosed based on ICD-10 criteria. Serum concentrations of antidepressants were measured for routine clinical care TDM.

RESULTS

After IMPT, stress improved in all subgroups, and depressive symptoms improved only in the duloxetine group. Overall, 40% and 27% of patients in the amitriptyline and duloxetine subgroup, respectively, were responders in terms of maximum pain score relief. Responders with comorbid depression were treated with a dose that led to a 1.7-fold higher serum concentration of the active moiety of amitriptyline (amitriptyline + nortriptyline) compared with nonresponders. Similarly, a 2.3-fold higher serum concentration was observed in depressed responders than in nondepressed responders (at minimum 131.5 ng/mL).

CONCLUSIONS

Dosing of antidepressants for chronic pain relief should specifically take comorbid depression into account. TDM may provide better outcomes of pain relief in an IMPT setting in patients with comorbid depression.

[Pain therapy care in Germany-Do patients receiving day care differ from those receiving outpatient or inpatient care at the start of treatment? : A further evaluation based on the KEDOQ-pain data set]

The direct comparison of day care pain patients with patients from other treatment sectors with respect to sociodemographic, pain-related and psychological characteristics has not yet been the subject of systematic analyses. The project core documentation and quality assurance in pain therapy (KEDOQ-pain) of the German Pain Society (Deutsche Schmerzgesellschaft e.V.) makes this comparison possible. This second analysis of the available KEDOQ data was intended to show how patients receiving day care treatment can be characterized using the core data set and whether and to what extent they differ from patients receiving outpatient or inpatient treatment. This is a continuation of the first publication, which showed remarkably small differences between outpatients and inpatients but did not include day care patients.The KEDOQ-pain data from 25 centers with a total of 8953 patients were evaluated. Patients had completed the German pain questionnaire (DSF) between January 2012 and March 2017 and received day care (n = 1264), outpatient (n = 4082) or inpatient (n = 3607) pain therapy treatment. Sociodemographic, pain-related and psychometric data of the DSF reported by patients were evaluated as well as physician information on the pain chronification stage and pain localization. The evaluation was descriptive and compared groups using univariate and multivariate procedures.Day care treated patients were significantly younger, had a higher level of education, were more frequently employed, reported higher impairment values and showed a higher severity index according to von Korff than inpatients and outpatients treated for pain. In addition, they described a shorter pain duration as well as worse habitual well-being (Marburg questionnaire on habitual well-being, MFHW). These predictors explained roughly half of the variance in the prediction of the day care treatment setting. The comparison of outpatients and inpatients showed significant group differences for some variables; however, the effects were very small.The evaluations suggest that pain therapy day care facilities treat a special group of pain patients that significantly differ from patients in other treatment sectors. Cautious conclusions are drawn regarding the systematic allocation of patients to care appropriate to their treatment needs.

Frühes interdisziplinäres Assessment zur Sekundärprävention chronischer Schmerzen

Schmerz ist ein multikausales biopsychosoziales Phänomen. Das bedeutet für eine angemessene Versorgung ein entsprechendes interdisziplinäres Vorgehen in Diagnostik und Therapie. Faktoren, die bei bestehenden Schmerzen zu einer Chronifizierung beitragen können, sollten frühzeitig im Versorgungsalltag berücksichtigt werden. Dafür sind sektorenübergreifende Vernetzungen sowie interdisziplinäre Versorgungsangebote von großer Bedeutung.

[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.

[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.

[Clinical application of the Bregma test : Point prevalence in healthy, pain-free and chronic pain patients and change of test results during interdisciplinary multimodal pain therapy]

BACKGROUND

The Bregma test as an investigation of sensorimotor deficits has not yet been broadly applied. It is considered to be a test for the presentation of general sensorimotor abilities in a standing position. Pain patients often show disorders in physical perception and movement.

OBJECTIVE

Are there differences in the point prevalence of the Bregma test in patients (with and without diagnosis F45.41) or healthy persons? In a second part the development of pathological Bregma test values was observed in the context of an interdisciplinary multimodal pain therapy (IMST).

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Point prevalence of pathological test results in 3 groups, total n = 218. Monitoring of the course of an IMST at the beginning and end of a day clinic setting, n = 60.

RESULTS

Healthy and "non-F45.41" patients showed a <15% frequency of pathological Bregma test results. In "F45.41 patients" the frequency was >50%. Within the framework of an IMST the pathological movements could be reduced to approximately 33%.

CONCLUSION

Increased body perception disorders are known in chronic pain patients. The Bregma test is able to detect at least some of the patients with sensorimotor deficits. Chronic pain patients significantly differ from healthy or other patient groups. The deficits in the controllability of myofascial tissue (coordination) can also be improved during a 4-week IMST.