Ability of the Pain Recognition and Treatment (PRT) Protocol to Reduce Expressions of Pain among Institutionalized Residents with Dementia: A Cluster Randomized Controlled Trial

Factors related to nurses' beliefs regarding pain assessment in people living with dementia

AIM

To evaluate registered nurses' beliefs and related factors regarding pain assessment in people living with dementia.

DESIGN

A descriptive cross-sectional survey was conducted between July 2022 and April 2023.

METHODS

An online survey comprised of demographics, knowledge scale, and beliefs scale relating to pain assessment in dementia was distributed to registered nurses (RNs) caring for people living with dementia in Australia.

RESULTS

RNs (N = 131) completed the survey. Most respondents were females (87.0%) and self-identified as Caucasian (60.3%). The mean beliefs score was 72.60 (±6.39) out of a maximum possible score of 95. RNs' beliefs about pain assessment varied based on their education, dementia pain assessment knowledge, nursing experience, and ethnicity. Hierarchical multiple regression analysis revealed factors significantly related to the beliefs score (i.e. education and dementia pain assessment knowledge).

CONCLUSION

The relationship between education and knowledge, and the beliefs score indicates the potential to improve RNs' knowledge and overcome their erroneous beliefs about pain assessment in dementia.

IMPLICATIONS FOR THE PROFESSION AND/OR PATIENT CARE

Education and training in assessing pain in people living with dementia should be tailored to overcome RNs' misconceived beliefs. These programmes should be integrated into continuous learning programmes.

IMPACT

Some RNs' beliefs about pain assessment in dementia were not evidence-based, and knowledge and educational status were the strongest factors related to RNs' beliefs. RNs' erroneous beliefs about pain assessment in dementia need to be addressed to improve pain assessment and management. Researchers should explore the potential of educational interventions to overcome RNs' misconceived beliefs about pain assessment in dementia.

REPORTING METHOD

This study was reported adhering to the Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology checklist.

PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION

RNs caring for people living with dementia participated as survey respondents. Additionally, RNs were involved in the pre-testing of the study's survey instrument.

Management of Chronic Pain in Long-Term Care: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

OBJECTIVES

Pain, a complex subjective experience, is common in care home residents. Despite advances in pain management, optimal pain control remains a challenge. In this updated systematic review, we examined effectiveness of interventions for treating chronic pain in care home residents.

DESIGN

A Cochrane-style systematic review and meta-analysis using PRISMA guidelines.

SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS

Randomized and nonrandomized controlled trials and intervention studies included care home residents aged ≥60 years receiving interventions to reduce chronic pain.

METHODS

Six databases were searched to identify relevant studies. After duplicate removal, articles were screened by title and abstract. Full-text articles were reviewed and included if they implemented a pain management intervention and measured pain with a standardized quantitative pain scale. Meta-analyses calculated standardized mean differences (SMDs) using random-effect models. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Risk-of-Bias Tool 2.0.

RESULTS

We included 42 trials in the meta-analysis and described 13 more studies narratively. Studies included 26 nondrug alternative treatments, 8 education interventions, 7 system modifications, 3 nonanalgesic drug treatments, 2 analgesic treatments, and 9 combined interventions. Pooled results at trial completion revealed that, except for nonanalgesic drugs and health system modification interventions, all interventions were at least moderately effective in reducing pain. Analgesic treatments (SMD -0.80; 95% CI -1.47 to -0.12; P = .02) showed the greatest treatment effect, followed by nondrug alternative treatments (SMD -0.70; 95% CI -0.95 to -0.45; P < .001), combined interventions (SMD -0.37; 95% CI -0.60 to -0.13; P = .002), and education interventions (SMD -0.31; 95% CI -0.48 to -0.15; P < .001).

CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS

Our findings suggest that analgesic drugs and nondrug alternative pain management strategies are the most effective in reducing pain among care home residents. Clinicians should also consider implementing nondrug alternative therapies in care homes, rather than relying solely on analgesic drug options.

Algorithm-based pain management for people with dementia in nursing homes

BACKGROUND

People with dementia in nursing homes often experience pain, but often do not receive adequate pain therapy. The experience of pain has a significant impact on quality of life in people with dementia, and is associated with negative health outcomes. Untreated pain is also considered to be one of the causes of challenging behaviour, such as agitation or aggression, in this population. One approach to reducing pain in people with dementia in nursing homes is an algorithm-based pain management strategy, i.e. the use of a structured protocol that involves pain assessment and a series of predefined treatment steps consisting of various non-pharmacological and pharmacological pain management interventions.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of algorithm-based pain management interventions to reduce pain and challenging behaviour in people with dementia living in nursing homes. To describe the components of the interventions and the content of the algorithms.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched ALOIS, the Cochrane Dementia and Cognitive Improvement Group's register, MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, CINAHL (Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature), Web of Science Core Collection (ISI Web of Science), LILACS (Latin American and Caribbean Health Science Information database), ClinicalTrials.gov and the World Health Organization's meta-register the International Clinical Trials Registry Portal on 30 June 2021.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials investigating the effects of algorithm-based pain management interventions for people with dementia living in nursing homes. All interventions had to include an initial pain assessment, a treatment algorithm (a treatment plan consisting of at least two different non-pharmacological or pharmacological treatment steps to reduce pain), and criteria to assess the success of each treatment step. The control groups could receive usual care or an active control intervention. Primary outcomes for this review were pain-related outcomes, e.g. the number of participants with pain (self- or proxy-rated), challenging behaviour (we used a broad definition that could also include agitation or behavioural and psychological symptoms assessed with any validated instrument), and serious adverse events.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently selected the articles for inclusion, extracted data and assessed the risk of bias of all included studies. We reported results narratively as there were too few studies for a meta-analysis. We used GRADE methods to rate the certainty of the results.

MAIN RESULTS

We included three cluster-randomised controlled trials with a total of 808 participants (mean age 82 to 89 years). In two studies, participants had severe cognitive impairment and in one study mild to moderate impairment. The algorithms used in the studies varied in the number of treatment steps. The comparator was pain education for nursing staff in two studies and usual care in one study. We judged the risk of detection bias to be high in one study. The risk of selection bias and performance bias was unclear in all studies. Self-rated pain (i.e. pain rated by participants themselves) was reported in two studies. In one study, all residents in the nursing homes were included, but fewer than half of the participants experienced pain at baseline, and the mean values of self-rated and proxy-rated pain at baseline and follow-up in both study groups were below the threshold of pain that may require treatment. We considered the evidence from this study to be very low-certainty and therefore are uncertain whether the algorithm-based pain management intervention had an effect on self-rated pain intensity compared with pain education (MD -0.27, 95% CI -0.49 to -0.05, 170 participants; Verbal Descriptor Scale, range 0 to 3). In the other study, all participants had mild to moderate pain at baseline. Here, we found low-certainty evidence that an algorithm-based pain management intervention may have little to no effect on self-rated pain intensity compared with pain education (MD 0.4, 95% CI -0.58 to 1.38, 246 participants; Iowa Pain Thermometer, range 0 to 12). Pain was rated by proxy in all three studies. Again, we considered the evidence from the study in which mean pain scores indicated no pain, or almost no pain, at baseline to be very low-certainty and were uncertain whether the algorithm-based pain management intervention had an effect on proxy-rated pain intensity compared with pain education. For participants with mild to moderate pain at baseline, we found low-certainty evidence that an algorithm-based pain management intervention may reduce proxy-rated pain intensity in comparison with usual care (MD -1.49, 95% CI -2.11 to -0.87, 1 study, 128 participants; Pain Assessment in Advanced Dementia Scale-Chinese version, range 0 to 10), but may not be more effective than pain education (MD -0.2, 95% CI -0.79 to 0.39, 1 study, 383 participants; Iowa Pain Thermometer, range 0 to 12). For challenging behaviour, we found very low-certainty evidence from one study in which mean pain scores indicated no pain, or almost no pain, at baseline. We were uncertain whether the algorithm-based pain management intervention had any more effect than education for nursing staff on challenging behaviour of participants (MD -0.21, 95% CI -1.88 to 1.46, 1 study, 170 participants; Cohen-Mansfield Agitation Inventory-Chinese version, range 7 to 203). None of the studies systematically assessed adverse effects or serious adverse effects and no study reported information about the occurrence of any adverse effect. None of the studies assessed any of the other outcomes of this review.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is no clear evidence for a benefit of an algorithm-based pain management intervention in comparison with pain education for reducing pain intensity or challenging behaviour in people with dementia in nursing homes. We found that the intervention may reduce proxy-rated pain compared with usual care. However, the certainty of evidence is low because of the small number of studies, small sample sizes, methodological limitations, and the clinical heterogeneity of the study populations (e.g. pain level and cognitive status). The results should be interpreted with caution. Future studies should also focus on the implementation of algorithms and their impact in clinical practice.

Effects of Nonpharmacological Interventions on Disruptive Vocalisation in Nursing Home Patients With Dementia—A Systematic Review

Background

Vocally disruptive behaviour is a common and difficult to treat condition in older residents with dementia. The aim of this systematic review is to evaluate the efficacy of nonpharmacological interventions in its management in persons with dementia residing in a nursing home.

Methodology

A systematic search was conducted using Ovid MEDLINE, CINAHL, and Cochrane databases and reference lists from relevant publications on various nonpharmacological approaches to manage vocally disruptive behaviour in nursing home residents. The method of appraisal was through the National Institutes of Health scoring for the Quality Assessment of controlled intervention studies. Inclusion criteria included residents of nursing homes over the age of 65 with dementia and disruptive vocalisation. Only randomised controlled trials published in English were included.

Results

A total of 5,606 articles were identified, which cover 501 trials, of which 23 were selected. There were fourteen studies observed to have an impact of clinical and statistical significance with interventions including (i) a multidimensional approach with different nonpharmacological interventions, (ii) multisensory stimulation, (iii) staff education and training, (iv) personalised bathing, and (v) pain recognition and appropriate management. Seven studies demonstrated no observable effect whereas two showed worsening in vocally disruptive behaviour.

Conclusions

Many aspects of vocally disruptive behaviour management are poorly understood. Limited empirical evidence supports the use of several nonpharmacological interventions to reduce it. There is more robust evidence to support the use of a tailored approach to management over the universal approach.

A Systematic Review of Interventions to Improve Analgesic Use and Appropriateness in Long-Term Care Facilities

OBJECTIVES

To systematically review the effectiveness of interventions to improve analgesic use and appropriateness in long-term care facilities (LTCFs).

DESIGN

Systematic review.

SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS

MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, and CINAHL Plus were searched from inception to June 2021. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs), controlled and uncontrolled prospective interventions that included analgesic optimization, and reported postintervention change in analgesic use or appropriateness in LTCFs were included.

METHODS

Screening, data extraction, and quality assessment were performed independently by 2 review authors.

RESULTS

Eight cluster RCTs, 2 controlled, and 6 uncontrolled studies comprising 9056 residents across 9 countries were included. The 16 interventions included education (n = 13), decision support (n = 7), system modifications (n = 6), and/or medication review (n = 3). Six interventions changed analgesic use or appropriateness, all of which included prescribers, 5 involved multidisciplinary collaboration, and 5 included a component of education. Education alone changed analgesic use and appropriateness in 1 study. Decision support was effective when combined with education in 3 interventions. Overall, 13 studies reported analgesic optimization as part of pain management interventions and 3 studies focused on medication optimization. Two pain management interventions reduced the percentage of residents reporting pain not receiving analgesics by 50% to 60% (P = .03 and P < .001, respectively), and 1 improved analgesic appropriateness (P = .03). One reduced nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) (P < .001) and another resulted in 3-fold higher odds of opioid prescription in advanced dementia [95% confidence interval (CI) 1.1-8.7]. One medication optimization intervention reduced NSAID prescription (P = .036), and another reduced as-needed opioid (95% CI 8.6-13.8) and NSAID prescription (95% CI 1.6-4.2).

CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS

Interventions involving prescribers and enhanced roles for pharmacists and nurses, with a component of education, are most effective at changing analgesic use or appropriateness. Interventions combining education and decision support are also promising. Medication review interventions can change analgesic prescription, although there is currently minimal evidence in relation to possible corresponding improvements in resident-related outcomes.

Pain assessment and management in care homes: understanding the context through a scoping review

Background

Internationally, 2–5% of people live in residential or nursing homes, many with multi-morbidities, including severe cognitive impairment. Pain is frequently considered an expected part of old age and morbidity, and may often be either under-reported by care home residents, or go unrecognized by care staff. We conducted a systematic scoping review to explore the complexity of pain recognition, assessment and treatment for residents living in care homes, and to understand the contexts that might influence its management.

Methods

Scoping review using the methodological framework of Levac and colleagues. Articles were included if they examined pain assessment and/or management, for care or nursing home residents. We searched Medline, CINAHL, ASSIA, PsycINFO, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and Google Scholar; reference lists were also screened, and website searches carried out of key organisations. Conversations with 16 local care home managers were included to gain an understanding of their perspective.

Results

Inclusion criteria were met by 109 studies. Three overarching themes were identified: Staff factors and beliefs - in relation to pain assessment and management (e.g. experience, qualifications) and beliefs and perceptions relating to pain. Pain assessment – including use of pain assessment tools and assessment/management for residents with cognitive impairment. Interventions - including efficacy/effects (pharmaceutical/non pharmaceutical), and pain training interventions and their outcomes.

Overall findings from the review indicated a lack of training and staff confidence in relation to pain assessment and management. This was particularly the case for residents with dementia.

Conclusions

Further training and detailed guidelines for the appropriate assessment and treatment of pain are required by care home staff. Professionals external to the care home environment need to be aware of the issues facing care homes staff and residents in order to target their input in the most appropriate way.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12877-021-02333-4.

The effectiveness of interventions to improve pain assessment and management in people living with dementia: A systematic review and meta-analyses

AIMS

To synthesize and evaluate the effectiveness of interventions for nurses to improve the assessment and management of pain in people living with dementia.

DESIGN

Systematic review and meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials.

DATA SOURCES

CINAHL, Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) EBP, Cochrane Library, PubMed, and Scopus databases were searched for all journal articles published between 2009 -2019.

REVIEW METHODS

Papers were included under population intervention comparator outcome (PICO) framework for: (a) people living with dementia aged 65 years and over; (b) interventions developed for nurses or other health professionals; (c) comparison group of standard care or control; and (d) outcome that measures the intervention effects on nurses and people living with dementia. Independent reviewers undertook critical appraisal, data abstraction, and synthesis. Meta-analyses were performed to determine the effectiveness of interventions.

RESULTS

Of 2099 titles and abstracts screened, six interventions with low-to-moderate risk of bias met inclusion criteria. Studies that implemented a routine pain assessment tool showed no effect on nurses' analgesic management. Studies that developed a comprehensive pain model involving multidisciplinary health professionals showed overall effects on pain assessment and management in dementia care. Physician involvement had an impact on analgesic management.

CONCLUSION

Comprehensive pain models improve nurses' pain assessment and management. A lack of balance between analgesia use and non-pharmacological pain management in dementia care is evident. Multidisciplinary health professionals' involvement is essential for effective intervention design for pain management in dementia.

IMPACT

Various pain assessment tools have been considered to assist identification and management of pain in people living with dementia. Nevertheless, challenges exist when caring for people living with dementia in pain. These findings support the development of a comprehensive pain model, which may be a more effective strategy than routine use of a pain tool alone for nurses to improve pain management in dementia care.

The challenge of pain identification, assessment, and management in people with dementia: a qualitative study

BACKGROUND

Painful conditions are common in older adults, including people with dementia. The symptoms associated with dementia (for example, diminished language capacity, memory impairment, and behavioural changes), however, may lead to the suboptimal identification, assessment, and management of pain. Research has yet to qualitatively explore pain management for community-dwelling people with dementia.

AIM

To explore pain identification, assessment, and management for community-dwelling people with dementia.

DESIGN & SETTING

A qualitative study was undertaken, set in England.

METHOD

Semi-structured interviews took place with people with dementia, family caregivers, GPs, and old-age psychiatrists. Data were analysed thematically.

RESULTS

Interviews were conducted with eight people with dementia, nine family caregivers, nine GPs, and five old-age psychiatrists. Three themes were identified that related to pain identification and assessment: gathering information to identify pain; the importance of knowing the person; and the use of pain assessment tools. A further three themes were identified that related to pain management: non-drug strategies; concerns related to analgesic medications; and responsibility of the caregiver to manage pain.

CONCLUSION

Identifying and assessing the pain experienced by people with dementia was challenging. Most people with dementia, family caregivers, and healthcare professionals supported non-drug strategies to manage pain. The minimal concerns associated with non-drug strategies contrasted the multifactorial concerns associated with analgesic treatment for people with dementia. Given the complexity of pain identification, assessment, and management, primary care should work together with family caregivers and community services, with case finding for pain being considered in all assessment and management plans.

Language therapy outcomes in deaf children with cochlear implant using a new developed program: A pilot study

BACKGROUND

Cochlear implanted (CI) children have problems in most aspects of language and in particular with regards to grammar. Considering the lack of studies in the field of grammar treatment in CI children and bearing in the mind that CI children have the potential to develop language, the aim of the present study was to investigate the effect of treating grammar in CI children using a treatment grammar program.

METHODOLOGY

first, the literature related to grammar were reviewed so as to extract different grammatical components for developing grammar treatment program and to make sentences for each element as well as to compile a manual for its implementation. Second, the validity of the sentences was examined using the Delphi method. Third, grammar treatment was performed on five CI children. Persian Developmental Sentence Scoring(PDSS) and Mean Length of Utterance(MLU) were used to evaluate them before and after treatment.

RESULTS

Five grammatical classes were extracted, and the grammatical elements were classified in each category according to age. For all of the grammatical items, 2076 sentences were constructed. After applying the Delphi method, a total of 1936 sentences with Kendall's coefficient of concordance (W) of 71%, remained. Using this program, grammar treatment was effective in all five children. The PDSS and MLU increased in all five children during the treatment phase, which was confirmed by Percentage of Non-overlapping Data (PND), Improvement Rate Difference (IRD). During the follow-up period, the children showed that they were able to maintain the trained components.

CONCLUSION

Cochlear implants have the potential to learn language skills, and the present study confirms their ability to learn grammar, using a comprehensive grammar treatment program.

Integrated Management of Pain in Advanced Dementia

AIM

Develop and evaluate the implementation of a protocol for comprehensive management of pain in advanced dementia.

METHOD

Quasi-experimental study carried out between September 2015 and May 2016 in an acute geriatric unit. Following development of the protocol and nurse training, 22 participants were recruited through consecutive sampling to form the intervention group (IG). Pain assessment was performed using the Pain Assessment in Advanced Dementia Spanish version (PAINAD-Sp) instrument and by nurse report-rating using the Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) and control group, with pain assessment through nurse-report using an NRS. Interventions carried out following perception of pain were done according to the actions algorithm created for this purpose. Follow-up was carried out daily during the hospital stay.

RESULTS

Some 98% of the actions were performed correctly following the protocol. All (100%) of patients had a scheduled prescription for analgesics. Significant differences between mean pain scores at admission and discharge were found through PAINAD-Sp using a Wilcoxon sign test of -2.9543 (p = .004). Analysis of pain perception scores revealed a statistically significant positive correlation between the number of nonpharmacological actions performed and the pain score values obtained in the IG (rho Spearman: 0.617, p < .001) and the control group (rho Spearman: 0.922, p < .001). A high correlation was also observed in the IG between assessments conducted using PAINAD-Sp and NRS (intraclass correlation coefficient: 0.921).

CONCLUSIONS

The implementation of an agreed-upon, standardized protocol for comprehensive pain management in advanced dementia, including nurse training, leads to systematic application of all the protocol stages, and therefore better pain management.

Correlation between biomarkers of pain in saliva and PAINAD scale in elderly people with cognitive impairment and inability to communicate: descriptive study protocol

INTRODUCTION

Pain is an under-diagnosed problem in elderly people, especially in those with cognitive impairment who are unable to verbalise their pain. Although the Pain assessment in advanced dementia scale (PAINAD) scale is a tool recognised for its clinical interest in this type of patients, its correlation with the saliva biomarkers reinforced its utility. The aim of this research will be to correlate the scores of this scale with the levels of biomarkers of pain found in saliva samples of patients with cognitive impairment and inability to communicate.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

This is an observational study. The level of pain will be evaluated using the PAINAD scale. Moreover, pain biomarkers, in particular secretory IgA and soluble tumour necrosis factor receptor type II, will be determined in saliva. Both assessments will be conducted in 75 patients aged over 65 years with advanced cognitive impairment and inability to communicate. The PAINAD scores will be correlated with the levels of these biomarkers of pain. A control group consisting of 75 healthy subjects aged over 65 years will be included in the study. Moreover, sociodemographic variables and variables related to pain, dementia and other clinical conditions will be recorded. The analysis will be performed with the statistical package SPSS V.22 and the software R.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

The study has been reviewed and approved by the Andalusian Human Research Ethics Committee. In addition, this study has been financed by the Junta de Andalucía through a regional health research fund (Research code: PI-0357-2017). The results will be actively disseminated trough a high-impact journal in our study area, conference presentations and social media.

[Assessing pain in patients with dementia]

The diagnostics of pain in older people with cognitive impairments should always consist of a subjective self-report of pain and a structured observation of pain behavior. It is important to note that the subjective self-report of pain becomes less valid with increasing cognitive decline (starting with a moderate degree of dementia). The external observation of pain behavior should include at least the three behavioral domains facial expressions, body movements and vocalization and should be performed during resting situations and during activities of daily living. Moreover, the patient should be observed for at least 3 min. Online forms of training have recently been developed and are freely available for training in external observation.

[Assessing pain in patients with dementia]

The diagnostics of pain in older people with cognitive impairments should always consist of a subjective self-report of pain and a structured observation of pain behavior. It is important to note that the subjective self-report of pain becomes less valid with increasing cognitive decline (starting with a moderate degree of dementia). The external observation of pain behavior should include at least the three behavioral domains facial expressions, body movements and vocalization and should be performed during resting situations and during activities of daily living. Moreover, the patient should be observed for at least 3 min. Online forms of training have recently been developed and are freely available for training in external observation.

Nursing people with intellectual disability and dementia experiencing pain: An integrative review

AIMS AND OBJECTIVES

To explore the current evidence of nurses caring for people with intellectual disability and dementia who experience pain.

BACKGROUND

People with intellectual disability are ageing and are experiencing age-related health conditions including dementia and conditions associated with pain, but at an earlier age. Addressing the needs of people with intellectual disability who develop dementia is a new challenge for nurses.

DESIGN

An integrative literature review.

METHODS

A systematic search of databases: CINAHL, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, Cochrane, EMBASE, Academic Search Complete, Scopus and Web of Science between 27 October 2017-7 November 2017. Hand searching and review of secondary references were also undertaken. Quality appraisal (Crowe Critical Appraisal Tool), thematic data analysis (Braun and Clarke, Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3, 2006, 77) and reporting using the PRISMA guidelines.

RESULTS

Seven papers met the inclusion criteria, and three themes emerged from this review: nurses knowledge of ageing, dementia and pain; recognising pain in people with intellectual disability and dementia; and the role of nurse education. People with intellectual disability and dementia have difficulty communicating their pain experience compounded by pre-existing communication difficulties.

CONCLUSIONS

A pain experience can present similar to behavioural and psychological symptoms of dementia, and diagnostic overshadowing often occurs whereby a pain need is misinterpreted as behavioural and psychological symptoms resulting in inappropriate treatment. Nurses need greater knowledge about the presence of pain and potential causes in people with intellectual disability and dementia, and education can be effective in addressing this knowledge deficit.

RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE

Pain assessment tools for people with intellectual disability and dementia need to include behavioural elements, and baseline assessments are required to identify changes in presentation. Nurses need to recognise and respond to pain based on the evidence in order to deliver quality care.

Efficacy and Safety of Analgesic Treatment for Depression in People with Advanced Dementia: Randomised, Multicentre, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Trial (DEP.PAIN.DEM)

Background

Chronic pain and depression often co-occur, and pain may exacerbate depression in people with dementia.

Objective

The objective of this study was to assess the efficacy and safety of analgesic treatment for depression in nursing home patients with advanced dementia and clinically significant depressive symptoms.

Methods

We conducted a multicentre, parallel-group, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial in 47 nursing homes, including 162 nursing home patients aged ≥ 60 years with dementia (Mini-Mental State Examination ≤ 20) and depression (Cornell Scale for Depression in Dementia ≥ 8). Patients were randomised to receive active analgesic treatment (paracetamol or buprenorphine transdermal system) or identical placebo for 13 weeks. The main outcome measure was the change in depression (Cornell Scale for Depression in Dementia) from baseline to 13 weeks, assessed using linear mixed models with fixed effects for time, intervention and their interaction in the models. Secondary outcomes were to assess whether any change in depression was secondary to change in pain (Mobilisation-Observation-Behaviour-Intensity-Dementia-2 Pain Scale) and adverse events.

Results

The mean depression change was − 0.66 (95% confidence interval − 2.27 to 0.94) in the active group (n = 80) and − 3.30 (− 4.68 to −1.92) in the placebo group (n = 82). The estimated treatment effect was 2.64 (0.55–4.72, p = 0.013), indicating that analgesic treatment had no effect on depressive symptoms from baseline to 13 weeks while placebo appeared to ameliorate depressive symptoms. There was no significant reduction in pain in the active treatment group (paracetamol and buprenorphine combined) vs. placebo; however, a subgroup analysis demonstrated a significant reduction in pain for paracetamol vs. placebo [by − 1.11 (− 2.16 to − 0.06, p = 0.037)] from week 6 to 13 without a change in depression. Buprenorphine did not have significant effects on depression [3.04 (− 0.11 to 6.19), p = 0.059] or pain [0.47 (− 0.77 to 1.71), p = 0.456] from 0 to 13 weeks. Thirty-five patients were withdrawn from the study because of adverse reactions, deterioration or death: 25 (31.3%) during active treatment [23 (52.3%) who received buprenorphine], and ten (12.2%) in the placebo group. The most frequently occurring adverse events were psychiatric (17 adverse reactions) and neurological (14 adverse reactions).

Conclusion

Analgesic treatment did not reduce depression while placebo appeared to improve depressive symptoms significantly by comparison, possibly owing to the adverse effects of active buprenorphine. The risk of adverse events warrants caution when prescribing buprenorphine for people with advanced dementia.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02267057 (registered 7 July, 2014) and Norwegian Medicines Agency EudraCT 2013-002226-23.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1007/s40266-018-0546-2) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Effects on pain of a stepwise multidisciplinary intervention (STA OP!) that targets pain and behavior in advanced dementia: A cluster randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Pain in nursing home residents with advanced dementia remains a major challenge; it is difficult to detect and may be expressed as challenging behavior. STA OP! aims to identify physical and other needs as causes of behavioral changes and uses a stepwise approach for psychosocial and pharmacological management which was effective in improving challenging behavior.

AIM

To assess whether implementation of the stepwise multidisciplinary intervention also reduces pain and improves pain management.

DESIGN

In a cluster randomized controlled trial (Netherlands National Trial Register NTR1967), healthcare professionals of intervention units received the stepwise training, while training of the control group focused on knowledge and skills without the stepwise component. Observed and estimated pain was assessed at baseline and at 3 and 6 months post-intervention. Logistic generalized estimating equations were used to test treatment and time effects.

SETTING/PARTICIPANTS

A total of 21 clusters (single nursing home units) in 12 Dutch nursing homes included 288 residents with advanced dementia (Global Deterioration Scale score 5, 6, or 7): 148 in the intervention and 140 in the control condition.

RESULTS

The multilevel modeling showed an overall effect of the intervention on observed pain but not on estimated pain; Pain Assessment Checklist for Seniors with Limited Ability to Communicate-Dutch version, mean difference: -1.21 points (95% confidence interval: -2.35 to -0.06); Minimum Dataset of the Resident Assessment Instrument pain scale, mean difference: -0.01 points (95% confidence interval: -0.36 to 0.35). Opioid use increased (odds ratio = 3.08; 95% confidence interval: 1.08-8.74); paracetamol use did not (odds ratio = 1.38; 95% confidence interval: 0.71-2.68).

CONCLUSION

STA OP! was found to decrease "observed" pain but not estimated pain. Observing pain-related behavior might help improve pain management in dementia.