Long-term outcome of multidisciplinary intervention of chronic non-cancer pain patients in a private setting

Improvement in pain interference and function by an allied health pain management program: Results of a randomized trial

BACKGROUND

Chronic pain is a significant health problem worldwide and requires a biopsychosocial treatment approach. Access to traditional pain medicine specialist services is limited and innovative treatment models are required to support patients in tertiary care. The study evaluated the clinical effectiveness and safety of the Treatment Access Pathway (TAP), an allied health expanded scope model of care which included innovative group assessment and collaboration with patients to create individualized treatment plans.

METHODS

One hundred and eighty-one patients referred to a tertiary level chronic pain service were randomly allocated to either the TAP or the waitlist study groups. Primary (pain interference) and secondary outcome measures were collected at recruitment and again at 6 months. Per-protocol analyses were utilized due to high participant attrition (46% across groups).

RESULTS

The TAP group reported greater reductions in pain interference at 6 months than waitlist group (0.9, 95% CI: 0.2-1.6), with more than half of the TAP group (52%) reporting clinically significant improvement. In addition, statistically significant differences between the TAP and waitlist groups were observed for objective measurements of walking endurance (5.4 m, 95% CI: 1.7-9.1); and global impressions of change (1.4 unit decrease, 95% CI: 1-1.9). Nil adverse events were recorded.

CONCLUSIONS

The study suggests that an expanded scope allied health model of care prioritizing patient choice and group-based interventions provides modest benefits for tertiary-referral chronic pain patients. TAP warrants further investigation as a potentially viable alternative for tertiary healthcare where traditional pain services are unavailable or have long waiting lists.

SIGNIFICANCE

The study tests effectiveness and safety of an expanded scope allied health-led chronic pain program. Despite a high attrition rate, the study showed reduced pain interference and increased physical function in those who completed the protocol. The results are promising and support introduction of this model as an adjunct to existing traditional chronic pain models of care, with a particular focus on improving participant retention in the program. Additionally, the model of care can be used as a standalone chronic pain model of care where no other pain management resources are available. The study was registered on ANZCTR (Trial ID: ACTRN12617001284358).

Relationships between physical therapy intervention and opioid use: A scoping review

OBJECTIVE

To synthesize available evidence that has examined the relationship between physical therapy (PT) and opioid use. TYPE: Scoping Review LITERATURE SURVEY: Data sources including Google Scholar, Embase, PubMed, Cochrane Library, and CINAHL were searched for English articles up to October 24, 2019 using terms ("physical therapy"[Title/Abstract] OR physiotherapy[Title/Abstract] OR rehabilitation[Title/Abstract]) AND (opiate*[Title/Abstract] OR opioid*[Title/Abstract]).

METHODOLOGY

Included studies evaluated a PT intervention and reported an opioid-use outcome. Data were extracted to describe the PT intervention, patient sample, opioid-use measurement, and results of any time or group comparisons. Study quality was evaluated with Joanna Briggs checklists based on study design.

SYNTHESIS

Thirty studies were included that evaluated PT in at least one of these seven categories: interdisciplinary program (n = 8), modalities (n = 3), treatment (n = 3), utilization (n = 2), content (n = 3), timing (n = 13), and location (n = 2). Mixed results were reported for reduced opioid-use after interdisciplinary care and after PT modalities. Utilizing PT was associated with lower odds (ranging from 0.2-0.8) of using opioid medication for persons with low back pain (LBP) and injured workers; however, guideline-adherent care did not further reduce opioid use for persons with LBP. Early PT utilization after index visit for spine or joint pain and after orthopedic surgery was also associated with lower odds of using opioid medications (ranging from 0.27-0.93). Emergency department PT care was not associated with fewer opioid prescriptions than standard emergency department care. PT in a rehabilitation center after total knee replacement was not associated with lower opioid use than inpatient PT.

CONCLUSIONS

The relationship between timing of PT and opioid use was evaluated in 13 of 30 studies for a variety of patient populations. Eight of these 13 studies reported a relationship between early PT and reduced subsequent opioid use, making the largest sample of studies in this scoping review with supporting evidence. There is limited and inconclusive evidence to establish whether the content and/or location of PT interventions improves outcomes because of heterogeneity between studies.

Feasibility of patient-focused behavioral interventions to support adults experiencing chronic noncancer pain during opioid tapering: a systematic literature review

Guidelines for chronic noncancer pain prioritize behavioral treatments. In clinical practice transition from opioids to behavioral treatments is often not endorsed by patients or providers. Feasible interventions to support opioid tapering are needed, particularly in primary care. The objectives of this paper is to review the feasibility of behavioral interventions to support opioid tapering. Electronic databases (MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, and CINAHL) were searched from inception to June 2019 to identify original studies reporting feasibility (consent rates; completion rates; patient-reported acceptability; integration into clinical practice; and adverse events) of opioid tapering and transition to behavioral treatments for adults experiencing chronic noncancer pain. Google scholar and contents tables of key journals were also searched. Two authors independently extracted data and assessed methodological quality using The Quality Assessment Tool for Quantitative Studies. Eleven publications met inclusion criteria, of which three were conducted in primary care. Consent rates ranged from 27% to 98% and completion rates from 6.6% to 100%. Four studies rated at least one component of patient acceptability: helpfulness from 50%-81%; satisfaction 71%-94%, and "recommend to others" 74%-91%. Three studies reported provider perspectives and two studies reported adverse events. Quality assessment indicated all 11 studies were moderate or weak, primarily due to selection bias and lack of assessor blinding. There was also considerable heterogeneity in study design. The limited available data suggest that attempts to translate opioid tapering interventions into practice are likely to encounter substantial feasibility challenges. One possible way to ameliorate this challenge may be a clear policy context, which facilitates and support opioid reduction.

Prevalence of Therapeutic use of Opioids in Chronic non-Cancer Pain Patients and Associated Factors: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Objectives: To determine the prevalence and factors associated with the use of opioids among patients with chronic non-cancer pain (CNCP).

Methods: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Comprehensive literature searches in Medline-PubMed, Embase and SCOPUS databases. Original studies published between 2009 and 2019 with a cross-sectional design were included. The quality of the studies was assessed with Critical Appraisal Checklist for Studies Reporting Prevalence Data from the Joanna Briggs Institute. Protocol registered in the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews with reference number: CRD42019137990.

Results: Out of the 1,310 potential studies found, 25 studies fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Most of the studies were of high quality. High levels of heterogeneity were found in the studies included. In the general population, the prevalence of long-term opioid use was 2.3% (95% CI: 1.5–3.6%), the prevalence of short-term opioid use was 8.1% (95% CI: 5.6–11.6%), and among people with chronic low back pain it was 5.8% (95% CI: 0.5–45.5%). The prevalence of opioid use among patients from the health records or medical surveys was 41% (95% CI: 23.3–61.3%). Finally, in patients with musculoskeletal pain, the prevalence was 20.5% (95% CI: 12.9–30.9%) and in patients with fibromyalgia, 24.5% (95% CI: 22.9–26.2%). A higher prevalence of opioid use was observed among men, younger people, patients receiving prescriptions of different types of drugs, smokers and patients without insurance or with noncommercial insurance. In addition, non-white and Asian patients were less likely to receive opioids than non-Hispanic white patients.

Conclusions: The prevalence of opioid use among patients with CNCP was higher in subjects with short or occasional use compared to those with long-term use. Men, younger people, more chronic pain conditions, and patients without insurance or with noncommercial insurance were most related to opioid use. However, non-white and Asian patients, and those treated by a physician trained in complementary medicine were less likely to use opioids.

Living with opioids: A qualitative study with patients with chronic low back pain

BACKGROUND

Opioids are one of the most prescribed treatments for chronic pain (CP). However, their long-term use (>3 months) has been surrounded by controversy, due to loss of beneficial effects.

OBJECTIVE

To explore the experiences of people with chronic non-malignant low back pain in Spain undergoing long-term treatment with opioids.

DESIGN

Qualitative study.

SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS

We conducted 15 semi-structured interviews at the Pain Clinic with persons taking opioid treatment.

METHODS

The interviews were analysed by qualitative content analysis as described by Graneheim and Lundman, and developed categories and themes discussed in light of a biomedicalization framework.

MAIN RESULTS

We developed one overarching theme-Living with opioids: dependence and autonomy while seeking relief-and three categories: The long pathway to opioids due to the invisibility of pain; Opioids: from blind date to a long-term relationship; and What opioids cannot fix.

DISCUSSION

The long and difficult road to find effective treatments was a fundamental part of coping with pain, involving long-term relationships with the health system. This study reflects the benefits, and drawbacks of opioids, along with struggles to maintain autonomy and make decisions while undergoing long-term treatment with opioids. The paper also highlights the consequences of pain in the economy, family and social life of patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients' experiences should be considered to a greater extent by health-care professionals when giving information about opioids and setting treatment goals. Greater consideration of the social determinants of health that affect CP experiences might lead to more effective solutions to CP.

"Understand your illness and your needs": Assessment-informed patient education for people with multiple functional somatic syndromes

OBJECTIVES

Patients suffering from multiple functional somatic syndromes (FSS) such as fibromyalgia, chronic fatigue syndrome, or irritable bowel syndrome, often lack both a clear diagnosis and tangible illness explanations, which is a barrier for treatment engagement. We tested a short-term intervention taking the unifying concept of Bodily Distress Syndrome (BDS) as a point of departure. The intervention consisted of a clinical assessment, group-based patient education, and one follow-up consultation.

METHODS

174 patients were included and received questionnaires at baseline, after clinical assessment, after patient education, and median 19 weeks after baseline. Data were analyzed using random effects models and simple t-tests. Qualitative data were thematically analyzed.

RESULTS

We found small reductions in symptom levels, considerable reductions in illness worry, and improvement of illness perceptions and illness-related behaviors. Overall, patients evaluated the intervention positively and expressed high expectations for further treatment. Qualitative results mainly supported these findings.

CONCLUSION

Targeting illness perceptions through patient education is crucial to obtain patient engagement in self-help management or further treatment. This may lead to improved outcomes.

PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS

Physicians in primary and secondary care should strive to give patients with multiple FSS a clear understanding that their various FSS diagnoses are related and provide tangible illness explanations.

Assessment of Adults Experiencing Chronic Non-Cancer Pain: A Randomized Trial of Group Versus Individual Format at an Australian Tertiary Pain Service

OBJECTIVE

To compare the outcomes of a new group assessment format with conventional individual assessment.

DESIGN

A randomized controlled trial.

SETTING

An Australian tertiary hospital multidisciplinary pain service.

PATIENTS

Adults referred with chronic non-cancer pain.

METHODS

Following attendance at an education and orientation group, 211 participants were randomized to either a group assessment format (focused on supported self-assessment) or individual assessment. Follow-up occurred 3 months post-assessment and prior to subsequent pain service intervention. Outcome measures were pain intensity, pain interference, self-efficacy, psychological distress, health care utilization beyond the pain service, waiting time, participant satisfaction, and implementation of self-management strategies.

RESULTS

Seventy-two participants undertook group assessment and 90 were assessed individually. Follow-up data were collected on 57 group and 72 individual assessment participants. Results revealed no significant differences between the two assessment formats in outcome with the exception of wait-times. Median wait-time to the first offer of assessment was 47 days for the group format and 144 days for individual.

CONCLUSIONS

Group assessment provides a viable alternative to conventional individual assessment. The group assessment reduced wait-times while delivering otherwise comparable outcomes.

Assessment and treatment at a pain clinic: A one-year follow-up of patients with chronic pain

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Pain is one of the most common reasons for patients to seek primary health care. Pain relief is likely to be achieved for patients suffering from acute pain, but for individuals with chronic pain it is more likely that the condition will persist. These patients have the option of being referred to specialised pain clinics. However, the complexity surrounding chronic pain patients is not well studied in these settings. This study aimed to describe patients with chronic pain referred to a pain clinic by using the information submitted during their first visit and one year later and also to identify associations between baseline characteristics and improvements in health-related quality of life in the follow-up.

METHODS

This was a longitudinal observational study of a sample consisting of 318 patients referred to a pain clinic. One group of patients containing 271 individuals (median age 48, 64% females) was assessed and received conventional pain treatment (CPT group) and a second group of 47 patients (median age 53, 64% females) was assessed by a pain specialist and referred back to their physician with a treatment recommendation (assessment only, AO group). Patient-reported outcome measures in health-related quality of life (EQ-5D), pain intensity (VAS), mental health (HADS), insomnia (ISI), pain-related disability (PDI), kinesiophobia (TSK) and sense of coherence (SOC) were collected at the first visit and one year later.

RESULTS

At baseline, the CPT group reported a low EQ-5D Index (median (md) 0.157) and EQ VAS (md 40) as well as considerable high, current pain intensity VAS (md 58), HADS anxiety (md 8), ISI (md 17), PDI (md 36) and TSK (md 39). The AO group showed similar problems (no significant differences compared to the CPT group), except for ISI, where the AO group reported less severe problems. At the one-year follow-up, the CPT group had a statistically significant improvement in EQ-5D, VAS, ISI, PDI and TSK. In the AO group no significant changes were observed. In the CPT group there was an association between a high ISI level at baseline and an improved EQ-5D Index in the follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

The study describes rarely explored groups of patients with chronic pain at a pain clinic. Severe pain problems were present in both groups at their first visit. A statistically significant improvement could be seen in the group that was conventionally treated while this was not the case among those subjects who were assessed and referred. The results imply, that relatively limited treatment strategies were helpful for the patients' health-related quality of life. Despite these improvements, the patients were not fully recovered, pointing to the chronicity of pain conditions and the need of support for many patients.

IMPLICATIONS

Increased knowledge about assessment, selection and treatment at pain clinics is important to improve the quality of the work performed at these clinics. Despite limited resources, further efforts should be made to collect comparable, valid data on a regular base from pain clinics in order to develop recommendation models.