Diagnosis and management of breakthrough cancer pain: Have all the questions been resolved? A Delphi-based consensus assessment (DOIRON)

A rapid systematic review of breakthrough pain definitions and descriptions

Background

Breakthrough pain is common in life-limiting conditions and at end-of-life. Despite over 30 years of study, there is little consensus regarding the definition and characteristics of breakthrough pain.

Objective

This study aims to update and expand a 2010 systematic review by Haugen and colleagues to identify (1) all definitions of breakthrough pain and (2) all descriptions and classifications of breakthrough pain reported by patients, caregivers, clinicians, and experts.

Design

This rapid systematic review followed the Cochrane Rapid Review Methods Group guidelines. A protocol is published on PROSPERO (CRD42019155583).

Data sources

CINAHL, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, and the Web of Science were searched for breakthrough pain terms from the inception dates of each database to 26th August 2022.

Results

We identified 65 studies that included data on breakthrough pain definitions, descriptions, or classifications from patients (n = 30), clinicians (n = 6), and experts (n = 29), but none with data from caregivers. Most experts proposed that breakthrough pain was a sudden, severe, brief pain occurring in patients with adequately controlled mild-moderate background pain. However, definitions varied and there was no consensus. Pain characteristics were broadly similar across studies though temporal factors varied widely. Experts classified breakthrough pain into nociceptive, neuropathic, visceral, somatic, or mixed types. Patients with breakthrough pain commonly experienced depression, anxiety, and interference with daily life.

Conclusions

Despite ongoing efforts, there is still no consensus on the definition of breakthrough pain. A compromise is needed on breakthrough pain nomenclature to collect reliable incidence and prevalence data and to inform further refinement of the construct.

Clinical Practice Guidelines in the Management of Breakthrough Cancer Pain: A Systematic Review using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE II) Instrument

BACKGROUND

Several clinical practice guidelines (CPGs), consensus statements, and recommendations currently exist for the diagnosis and management of breakthrough cancer pain (BTcP). These documents have considerable variability amongst them, and to date, their quality and methodologic rigor have not been appraised.

AIM

We aim to identify and perform a quality appraisal of CPGs for the diagnosis and management of BTcP using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE II) tool.

METHODS

A comprehensive literature search was performed in MEDLINE (via PubMed), EMBASE, and SCOPUS databases up until January 1, 2021. Four reviewers independently evaluated each guideline using the AGREE II instrument. Scaled domain scores were generated and the threshold used for satisfactory quality was >60%. Additionally, intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC) were calculated to determine level of agreement between reviewers.

RESULTS

Eleven guidelines were selected for final evaluation based on inclusion/exclusion criteria. Only one guideline was classified of "average" quality while the rest were classified as "low" quality. The "Editorial Independence" (70.46 ± 35.7) and "Scope and Purpose" (64.78 ± 12.5) domains received the highest mean scores, while the "Applicability" (32.58 ± 13.5) and "Rigor of Development" (35.04 ± 9.0) domains received the lowest mean scores. ICC statistical analysis showed high magnitude of agreement between reviewers with a range of (0.790-0.988).

CONCLUSIONS

Reflecting upon our quality appraisal, it is evident that the quality and methodologic rigor of BTcP guidelines can be improved upon in the future. Our findings also elucidate the existing variability/discrepancies among guidelines in diagnostic criteria and management of BTcP.

Validation of the Muscle Tightness Measurement Tool

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

For nurses, muscle tightness is an important aspect of patient care, but no bedside tool is available that allows them to measure it. Therefore, a standardized tool that measures muscle tightness is needed. The purpose of this study was to validate a tool to measure muscle tightness.

METHODS

Using Delphi technique and quantitative design, the tool was validated in two phases. The phase 1 included 20 expert clinicians who established content validity with Lawshe's rating. In phase 2, divergent validity was established by administering the tool to one group that had muscle tightness (n = 26) and one group that did not (n = 20).

RESULTS

Findings indicate that the muscle tightness measurement tool has content and divergent validity.

CONCLUSIONS

Further tool refinement with validity and reliability studies are recommended for clinical practice.

Effect of a theory-driven educational intervention on the level of knowledge, attitudes, and assessment practices regarding breakthrough cancer pain (BTCP) management among medical nurses in Hong Kong

PURPOSE

To examine the effect of an educational intervention intended to improve medical nurses' adherence to breakthrough cancer pain (BTCP) assessment practices and their level of knowledge, attitudes and perceived assessment practices regarding BTCP management.

METHODS

Nurses working in a regional hospital were recruited to this quasi-experimental study. The intervention group received a 3-h educational workshop and one session of individual clinical instruction, whilst the control group did not receive any intervention. Chart audits were performed to examine adherence to BTCP assessment practices as the primary outcome. A self-developed questionnaire was used to measure nurses' knowledge, attitudes and perceived assessment practices regarding BTCP management as the secondary outcomes. The chi-square or Fisher's exact test was used to compare the rate of adherence to BTCP assessment practices between groups. A generalised estimating equation was used to compare changes in knowledge, attitudes, and perceived assessment practices between groups over time.

RESULTS

One hundred and five nurses completed the study. The chart audits revealed a significantly higher rate of adherence to BTCP assessment practices in the intervention group after the intervention (p < .05). The intervention group exhibited significant positive changes in scores for knowledge (β = 25.49, p < .001), attitude (β = 0.98 to 2.81, p < .01), and their perceived assessment practices (β = 1.33 to 3.14, p < .002) when compared with the control group.

CONCLUSIONS

This theory-driven educational intervention significantly improved the medical nurses' adherence to BTCP assessment practices and their level of knowledge attitudes and perceived assessment practices regarding BTCP management.

Breakthrough cancer pain treatment in Spain: physicians' perception of current opioids utilization and prescription

Objectives: Multiple reasons for suboptimal treatment of breakthrough cancer pain (BTcP) have been reported in the literature. We aimed to ascertain the perception of physicians on the potential inappropriate use and prescription of rapid-onset opioids (ROOs) for breakthrough cancer pain (BTcP) and the causes thereof.Methods: Observational study based on an online survey addressed to doctors from different specialties (radiation oncology, medical oncology, anesthesia, palliative care and general practitioners) with experience in the management of BTcP in the Spanish public health setting.Results: A total of 114 eligible specialists mainly from radiation oncology (37.7%), medical oncology (24.6%) and pain units (18.4%) participated in the study. Most agreed on important aspects of BTcP management, such as their preference for ROOs or the need for early follow-up after treatment initiation. However, their answers revealed a lack of standardization of BTcP diagnosis. Half of respondents believed that their BTcP patients might misuse ROOs. Physicians polled believed that lack of training in pain management (71.9%) and inadequate BTcP diagnosis and evaluation (66.7%) were the greatest obstacles for prescribing opioids. Specialists also thought that they do not provide the necessary information to patients (51.8%) and caregivers (57.9%) to guarantee the correct use of these drugs.Conclusions: These results are of utmost importance as they highlight the need to increase physicians' awareness of BTcP and its management and the need to improve communication with patients and their caregivers. Our findings also indicate the need for future research on the possible misuse of opioids in BTcP patients and its causes.

Attributes of analgesics for emergency pain relief: results of the Consensus on Management of Pain Caused by Trauma Delphi initiative

OBJECTIVES

Management of pain is suboptimal in many prehospital and emergency department settings, and European guidelines are lacking. We carried out the Consensus On Management of PAin Caused by Trauma (COMPACT) Delphi initiative to gain insights into the factors physicians consider important when selecting analgesics for trauma pain.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A pan-European panel of experts in emergency medicine or pain (N = 31) was recruited to participate in the COMPACT Delphi initiative. In round 1, panelists supplied free-text responses to an open question about the attributes of analgesics for emergency pain relief favored by physicians. Common themes were consolidated into factors. In round 2, factors rated important by more than 75% of the panel were taken forward into round 3. In round 3, the point at which the consensus was achieved was defined a priori as at least 75% of panelists agreeing or strongly agreeing that a factor was important.

RESULTS

Twenty-nine experts participated, representing 12 European countries and with a mean (SD) of 20 (8.6) years of clinical experience. Most worked in an emergency department (79.3%). The consensus was achieved for 10 factors that were important to consider when selecting analgesics for trauma pain relief. The highest level of consensus was achieved for 'efficacy' (100%), followed by 'safety and tolerability' (96.6%), and 'ease of use' (93.1%).

CONCLUSION

These findings may facilitate the development of evidence-based guidelines supporting the provision of pain management in prehospital, emergency department, and critical care settings.

Prevalence and characterization of breakthrough pain in patients with cancer in Spain: the CARPE-DIO study

We aimed to evaluate the prevalence, characteristics and impact of breakthrough pain (BTP) in patients with cancer attending the main specialties involved in the diagnosis and management of BTP in Spain using a multicenter, observational, cross-sectional, multidisciplinary study. Investigators had to record all patients seen at the clinic during 1 month, determine whether the patients had cancer pain, and apply the Davies algorithm to ascertain whether the patients were suffering from BTP. Of the 3,765 patients with cancer, 1,117 (30%) had cancer-related pain, and of these patients, 539 had BTP (48%, 95%CI:45–51). The highest prevalence was found in patients from palliative care (61%, 95%CI:54–68), and the lowest was found in those from hematology (25%, 95%CI:20–31). Prevalence varied also according to sex and type of tumor. According to the Alberta Breakthrough Pain Assessment Tool duration, timing, frequency, location, severity, quality, causes, and predictability of the BTP varied greatly among these patients. BTP was moderate (Brief Pain Inventory [BPI]-severity median score = 5.3), and pain interference was moderate (BPI-interference median score = 6.1) with a greater interference with normal work, general activity, and enjoyment of life. Patients with BTP showed a mean ± standard deviation score of 28.5 ± 8.0 and 36.9 ± 9.5 in the physical and mental component, respectively, of the SF-12 questionnaire. In conclusion, prevalence of BTP among patients exhibiting cancer-related pain is high. Clinical presentation is heterogeneous, and therefore, BTP cannot be considered as a single entity. However, uniformly BTP has an important impact on a patient’s functionality, which supports the need for early detection and treatment.

Working towards a consensus on the oncological approach of breakthrough pain: a Delphi survey of Spanish experts

Purpose

There is a lack of standards for the diagnosis, assessment and management of breakthrough cancer pain (BTcP). La Fundación ECO (the Foundation for Excellence and Quality in Oncology) commissioned a study to establish a consensus and lay the foundations for the appropriate management of BTcP in oncology patients.

Patients and methods

A modified Delphi survey comprising two rounds was used to gather and analyze data, which was conducted over the Internet. Each statement that reached a consensus with the respondents was defined as a median consensus score (MED) of ≥7, and agreement among panelists as an interquartile range (IQR) of ≤3.

Results

In total, 69 medical oncologists responded, with a broad consensus that BTcP implied exacerbations of high-intensity pain, as opposed to moderate pain. Furthermore, they concurred that appropriate diagnostic equipment is needed, and that rapid-onset fentanyl formulations should be the preferred treatment for BTcP management. The panelists agreed that a lack of appropriate information and training to attend to patients, as well as limited patient visitation rights, were barriers to effective BTcP management. Regarding gaps in detected knowledge, the panelists were unsure of the measures necessary to assess the burden of the disease on the patient’s quality of life and associated medication costs. Alongside this, there was a lack of awareness of the technical specifics of the different formulations of rapid-onset fentanyl.

Conclusion

These results represent the current status of BTcP management. They may inform recommendations and provide a framework for future research.

Expert consensus on the management of breakthrough cancer pain in older patients. A Delphi study

OBJECTIVES

We aimed to generate expert-based recommendations on the management of breakthrough cancer pain (BTcP) in older patients with cancer.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A two-round multidisciplinary Delphi study. Specialists rated their agreement with a set of statements using a nine-point Likert scale (one = totally disagree and nine = totally agree). Statements were classified as appropriate (median ranged from seven to nine), irrelevant (median ranged from four to six) or inappropriate (median ranged from one to three). Consensus was established when at least two thirds of the panel scored within any of the ranges.

RESULTS

A total of 64 specialists from pain units (44.4%), palliative care units (25.4%), medical oncology (19.1%), geriatric medicine (7.9%) and others (3.2%), participated in two consultation rounds. Specialists agreed that effective coordination between the different specialties and levels of care is essential for proper management of BTcP. Most participants (81.3%) supported the assessment of frailty and resolved (96.8%) that frailty status is a better indicator of patient needs than biological age. Participants agreed (75.8%) in the application of the Davies algorithm for diagnosis of BTcP in older patients. A strong consensus was achieved regarding which pharmacological treatment (transmucosal fentanyl) and dosing method (start low and go slow) are the most suitable for the older population. No agreement was reached on how interventionist techniques should be integrated into the therapeutic strategy for BTcP.

CONCLUSIONS

The present Delphi has generated a set of recommendations that will help healthcare professionals in the management of BTcP in older patients.

Current management of breakthrough cancer pain according to physicians from pain units in Spain

PURPOSE

Current evidence suggests the need to improve the management of breakthrough cancer pain (BTcP). For this reason, we aimed to assess the opinion of a panel of experts composed exclusively of physicians from pain units, who play a major role in BTcP diagnosis and treatment, regarding the key aspects of BTcP management.

METHODS

An ad hoc questionnaire was developed to collect real-world data on the management of BTcP. The questionnaire had 5 parts: (a) organizational aspects of pain units (n = 12), (b) definition and diagnosis (n = 3), (c) screening (n = 3), (d) treatment (n = 8), and (e) follow-up (n = 7).

RESULTS

A total of 89 pain-unit physicians from 13 different Spanish regions were polled. Most of them agreed on the traditional definition of BTcP (78.9%) and the key features of BTcP (92.1%). However, only 30.3% of participants used the Davies' algorithm for BTcP diagnosis. Respondents preferred to prescribe rapid-onset opioids [mean 77.0% (SD 26.7%)], and most recommended transmucosal fentanyl formulations as the first option for BTcP. There was also considerable agreement (77.5%) on the need for early follow-up (48-72 h) after treatment initiation. Finally, 65.2% of participants believed that more than 10% of their patients underused rapid-onset opioids.

CONCLUSIONS

There was broad agreement among pain experts on many important areas of BTcP management, except for the diagnostic method. Pain-unit physicians suggest that rapid-onset opioids may be underused by BTcP patients in Spain, an important issue that need to be evaluated in future studies.

Breakthrough cancer pain (BTcP) management: a review of international and national guidelines

OBJECTIVE

Breakthrough cancer pain (BTcP) is common and has a significant impact on the quality of life of patients with cancer. This review compares current national/international BTcP guidelines in order to identify disparities and priorities for further research.

METHODS

Relevant guidelines were identified using searches of PubMed, the National Guideline Clearinghouse, the internet (commercial search engines), and correspondence with key opinion leaders and relevant pharmaceutical companies. Identified guidelines were compared, using the Association for Palliative Medicine of Great Britain and Ireland recommendations as the 'reference' guideline.

RESULTS

Ten specific BTcP guidelines were identified/reviewed, as well as major international generic cancer pain guidelines. In general, there was good agreement between the specific BTcP guidelines, although there remain some differences in terms of definition, diagnostic criteria and treatment of BTcP. Disparities between the different BTcP guidelines invariably reflect personal opinion rather than research evidence. Generic cancer pain guidelines continue to support the use of oral opioids as rescue medication, while specific BTcP guidelines invariably endorse the use of transmucosal opioids as rescue medication.

CONCLUSION

Current guidelines agree on many aspects of the management of BTcP. However, the evidence to support current guidelines remains low grade, and so more research is needed in this area of care. Moreover, there needs to be an international consensus on the definition and diagnosis criteria of BTcP.

Prevalence and characteristics of breakthrough cancer pain in an outpatient clinic in a Catalan teaching hospital: incorporation of the Edmonton Classification System for Cancer pain into the diagnostic algorithm

BACKGROUND

Breakthrough cancer pain (BTcP) is defined according to its principal characteristics: high intensity, short time interval between onset and peak intensity, short duration, potential recurrence over 24 h and non-responsiveness to standard analgesic regimes. The Edmonton Classification System for Cancer Pain (ECS-CP) is a classification tool that evaluates different dimensions of pain. The aim of this study was to measure prevalence and the main characteristics of BTcP in a sample of advanced cancer patients and to explore the complexity observed when ECS-CP is incorporated into BTcP diagnostics algorithm.

METHODS

Descriptive prevalence study (Retrospective chart review). Davies' algorithm was used to identify BTcP and ECS-CP was used to recognize appropriate dimensions of pain. The study was conducted in a sample of advanced cancer patients attending hospital outpatient clinic in Lleida, Spain. 277 patients were included from 01/01/2014 to 31/12/2015. No direct contact was made with participants. The following information was extracted from the palliative care outpatient clinic database: age, gender, civil status, cognitive impairment status, functional performance status and variables related to tumour. Only BTcP cases were included.

RESULTS

Prevalence of BTcP was 39.34% (63.9% men). Mean of age was 68.2 years. Main diagnosis was lung cancer (n = 154; 31.6%). Metastases were diagnosed in 83% of the sample. 138 patients (49.8%) were diagnosed with 1 type of BTcP and 139 (50.2%) were diagnosed with more than one type of BTcP. In total, 488 different types of BTcP were recorded (mean 1.75 ± 0, 9), 244 of these types (50%) presented a component of neuropathic pain. Addictive behaviour, measured through CAGE test, was present in 29.2% (N = 81) of the patients and psychological distress was present in 40.8% (n = 113).

CONCLUSIONS

Prevalence of BTcP (39.34%) is similar to the one reflected in the existing literature. Study results indicate that the routine use of ECS-CP in a clinical setting allows us to detect more than one type of BTcP as well as additional complexity associated with pain (neuropathic, addictive behavior and psychological distress).

Outcomes That Define Successful Advance Care Planning: A Delphi Panel Consensus

CONTEXT

Standardized outcomes that define successful advance care planning (ACP) are lacking.

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to create an Organizing Framework of ACP outcome constructs and rate the importance of these outcomes.

METHODS

This study convened a Delphi panel consisting of 52 multidisciplinary, international ACP experts including clinicians, researchers, and policy leaders from four countries. We conducted literature reviews and solicited attendee input from five international ACP conferences to identify initial ACP outcome constructs. In five Delphi rounds, we asked panelists to rate patient-centered outcomes on a seven-point "not-at-all" to "extremely important" scale. We calculated means and analyzed panelists' input to finalize an Organizing Framework and outcome rankings.

RESULTS

Organizing Framework outcome domains included process (e.g., attitudes), actions (e.g., discussions), quality of care (e.g., satisfaction), and health care (e.g., utilization). The top five outcomes included 1) care consistent with goals, mean 6.71 (±SD 0.04); 2) surrogate designation, 6.55 (0.45); 3) surrogate documentation, 6.50 (0.11); 4) discussions with surrogates, 6.40 (0.19); and 5) documents and recorded wishes are accessible when needed 6.27 (0.11). Advance directive documentation was ranked 10th, 6.01 (0.21). Panelists raised caution about whether "care consistent with goals" can be reliably measured.

CONCLUSION

A large, multidisciplinary Delphi panel developed an Organizing Framework and rated the importance of ACP outcome constructs. Top rated outcomes should be used to evaluate the success of ACP initiatives. More research is needed to create reliable and valid measurement tools for the highest rated outcomes, particularly "care consistent with goals."