Multidisciplinary pain treatment - Which patients do benefit?

Which patients with chronic low back pain respond favorably to multidisciplinary rehabilitation? A secondary analysis of a randomized controlled trial

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to identify prognostic variables at baseline associated with being responding favorably to multidisciplinary rehabilitation in patients with chronic low back pain (CLBP).

METHODS

A responder analysis was conducted based on data from a randomized controlled trial with 26-week follow-up including 165 patients with CLBP treated at a Danish multidisciplinary rehabilitation center. Patients were dichotomized into responders and non-responders based on the outcome of a minimal clinically important difference of six points on the Oswestry Disability Index. The associations between prognostic variables and responders were analyzed using logistic regression.

RESULTS

A total of 139 patients completed the study, of which 42% were classified as responders. Sex and employment status were statistically significant, with a decreased odds ratio (OR) of being a responder found for males compared to females (OR = 0.09, 95% CI = 0.02-0.48) and for being on temporary or permanent social benefits (OR = 0.28, 95% CI = 0.10-0.75) compared to being self-supporting or receiving retirement benefits. Statistically significant interaction (OR = 8.84, 95% CI = 1.11-70.12) was found between males and being on temporary or permanent social benefits.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with CLBP, female patients as well as patients who were self-supporting or receiving retirement benefits were significantly more likely than male patients or patients on temporary or permanent social benefits to be a responder to multidisciplinary rehabilitation.

Resistance Training-Induced Acute Hypoalgesia in Women With Persistent Pain After Breast Cancer Treatment

ABSTRACT

Fogh Rasmussen, GH, Madeleine, P, Arroyo-Morales, M, Voigt, M, and Kristiansen, M. Resistance training-induced acute hypoalgesia in women with persistent pain after breast cancer treatment. J Strength Cond Res 37(3): e16-e24, 2023-The aim of this study was to determine whether a single bout of resistance training (RT) produces acute exercise-induced hypoalgesia (EIH) in breast cancer survivors (BCS) suffering from persistent pain ≥1.5 years after treatment. Twenty individuals with self-reported pain ≥3 on a 0-10 Numerical Rating Scale after treatment for breast cancer completed 3 experimental sessions, (a) familiarization; (b) 1 repetition maximum (1RM) normalization, and (c) training, consisting of 3 sets of 10 repetitions at 60% of 1 repetition maximum. Pressure pain thresholds (PPTs) were measured before and after training for the dorsal and ventral shoulder regions of the affected side. Movement-evoked pain (MEP) and rating of perceived exertion (RPE) were collected immediately after each set. A p -value less than 0.05 was considered statistically significant. The results demonstrated a significant increase in PPTs of the ventral shoulder region after a single bout of RT ( p ≤ 0.05), indicating a localized analgesic response for this area. By contrast, no change was detected in PPTs on the dorsal shoulder region. No significant differences were found in MEP between sessions despite a significant increase in load and RPE during 1RM assessment ( p ≤ 0.05), indicating that MEP was not affected by increase in absolute and relative intensity. In conclusion, a single bout of submaximal RT reduced PPTs for the ventral shoulder region of BCS with persistent pain after treatment and was well tolerated. Hence, RT may be a useful therapeutic tool for managing persistent pain after breast cancer treatment in clinical practice.

Prognostic Factors for Quality of Life After Interdisciplinary Pain Rehabilitation in Patients with Chronic Pain-A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

Health-related quality of life (hrQoL) is a core outcome in evaluating interdisciplinary pain rehabilitation (IPR). This systematic review aimed to identify prognostic factors for hrQoL at least six months after IPR in chronic pain patients.

METHODS

A systematic search was conducted in MEDLINE, PsycINFO, EMBASE, CINAHL, Web of Science and Cochrane CENTRAL until September 2020. Included were prognostic studies on the outcome hrQoL in adults aged 18 to 67 years with chronic pain (excluding malignancies, systemic-, inflammatory or degenerative joint diseases) who had undergone IPR. Studies were assessed with The Quality in Prognostic Studies-tool. Potential prognostic factors at baseline for the domains pain, psychological and physical functioning were qualitatively synthesized for hrQoL. Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation was used to evaluate the level of evidence.

RESULTS

Fourteen studies on 6,668 participants (mean age 37.4-52.8 y), with musculoskeletal pain/fibromyalgia and a pain duration ranging between 13.1 and 177.4 months were considered eligible. With a very low certainty of evidence, pain intensity, emotional distress, and physical functioning at baseline were inconsistent for prediction of hrQoL and pain duration was not predictive. With low certainty of evidence, fewer pain sites, lower levels of negative cognitive behavioral factors, and higher levels of positive cognitive behavioral factors predicted a better outcome.

CONCLUSIONS

The overall certainty of evidence was low to very low, making it difficult to reach definitive conclusions at present. Future studies with a predefined core set of predictors investigating hrQoL in patients with chronic pain after IPR are needed.

Alternative Pathway Involvement in Protoporphyria Patients Related to Sun Exposure

The homeostasis of tissues in a chronic disease is an essential function of the alternative pathway (AP) of the complement system (CS). However, if not controlled, it may also be detrimental to healthy cells with a consequent aggravation of symptoms. The protoporphyria (PP) is a rare chronic disease that causes phototoxicity in visible light with local skin pain and general malaise. In order to establish if there is a systemic involvement of the CS during sun exposure, we designed a non-invasive method with a serum collection in winter and summer from 19 PP and 13 controls to detect the levels of CS protein: Properdin, Factor H (FH), and C5. Moreover, the global radiation data were collected from the regional agency of environmental protection (ARPA). The results show growing values for every protein in patients with PP, compared to control, in both seasons, in particular in summer compared to winter. To reinforce the evidence, we have estimated the personal exposure of patients based on the global radiation data. The main factors of the AP increased over the season, confirming the involvement of the AP in relation to light exposure. The systemic response could justify the general malaise of patients after long light exposure and can be exploited to elucidate new therapeutic approaches.

The impact of chronic orofacial pain on health-related quality of life

Background and aims

Health-related quality of life (HRQoL) assessments have been widely used in pain medicine as they are able to reflect the subjective and multidimensional nature of chronic pain. Studies have shown a consistent impairment in HRQoL in different chronic pain conditions. However, it is not known whether HRQoL is impaired in chronic orofacial pain (OFP). The generic 15D HRQoL instrument has been shown to fare as well as or better than other generic HRQoL instruments in the study of chronic pain. The aim was to investigate HRQoL in patients with chronic OFP using the generic 15D HRQoL instrument. The validity of the instrument was tested by studying the association of the 15D data with pain interference.

Methods

One hundred fifty-one patients (mean age 50 years, SD 15 years, 119 females) were recruited from three tertiary facial pain clinics. HRQoL data of the participants were contrasted with that of an age- and gender- standardized sample of general population by comparing the mean 15D scores and profiles. The data for the general population came from the National Health 2011 Survey representing Finnish population aged 18 years and older. Pain interference was assessed using Brief Pain Inventory. Based on pain interference distribution the participants were divided into tertiles. Statistical comparison between patient and population HRQoL values were performed using Monte-Carlo-type simulations. Statistical significance for the hypothesis of linearity was evaluated by using generalized linear models.

Results

The mean 15D score of OFP patients (0.824, SD 0.113) was statistically significantly lower than that of the age- and gender-standardized general population (0.929, SD 0.019) (p < 0.001). The difference between the patients and the general population was also clinically important, i.e. over the minimum clinically important difference in the 15D score. All mean 15D dimension values were significantly lower compared with the general population values (p < 0.001 for all dimensions). The largest differences were seen in the dimensions of discomfort and symptoms (0.418, SD 0.222 vs. 0.816, SD 0.027), sleeping (0.693, SD 0.258 vs. 0.838, SD 0.029), and vitality (0.702, SD 0.221 vs. 0.884 SD 0.026). There was a statistically significant linear decrease in the 15D dimension values (p < 0.001) with increasing pain interference. The greatest differences were found on the dimensions of discomfort and symptoms, sleeping and vitality.

Conclusions

HRQoL is significantly impaired in patients with chronic OFP. A decrease in the 15D dimension values with increasing pain interference indicated convergent validity between 15D and pain interference.

Implications

The findings suggest that 15D is an appropriate instrument for use in the assessment of HRQoL in OFP patients. By showing the usefulness of the 15D, the present study may encourage further use of generic HRQoL assessments in the study of chronic OFP, and contribute e.g. to the implementation of HRQoL as one of the core outcome measures in future treatment studies on chronic OFP.

Identifying characteristics of the most severely impaired chronic pain patients treated at a specialized inpatient pain clinic

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Patients suffering from chronic nonmalignant pain constitute a heterogeneous population in terms of clinical presentation and treatment results. Few data are available about what distinguishes different groups in this huge population of patients with chronic persistent pain (CPP). A subgroup that is poorly studied, consists of the most severely impaired chronic pain patients. At the Uppsala University Hospital Pain Clinic, there is a specialized department accepting the most complex patients for rehabilitation. In the endeavour to improve and evaluate treatment for this subgroup, a better understanding of the complex nature of the illness is essential. This prospective study aimed to describe the characteristics of this subgroup of patients with CPP.

METHODS

Seventy-two consecutive patients enrolled in the Uppsala programme were evaluated. We collected data on demographics, type of pain and experienced symptoms other than pain using a checklist of 41 possible symptoms. Psychiatric comorbidity was assessed by a psychiatrist using a structured clinical interview. Quality of life (QoL), pain rating and medication/drug/alcohol usage were measured by validated questionnaires: SF-36, NRS, DUDIT and AUDIT. Concerning physical functioning and sick leave, a comparison was made with data from the Swedish Quality Register Registry for pain rehabilitation (SQRP).

RESULTS

The cohort consisted of 61% women and the average age was 45 (range 20-70) years. For this cohort, 74% reported being on sick leave or disability-pension. In the SQRP 59% were on sick leave at the time they entered the rehabilitation programmes [1]. On average, the study-population reported 22 symptoms other than pain, to be at a high rate of severity. Patients treated in conventional pain-rehabilitation programmes reported a mean of 10 symptoms in average. Symptoms reported with the highest frequency (>80%), were lethargy, tiredness, headache and difficulties concentrating. Seventy-six percent were diagnosed with a psychiatric disorder. Sixty-nine fulfilled the criteria for depression or depression/anxiety disorder despite that most (65%) were treated with psychotropic medication. Alcohol/drug abuse was minimal. Seventy-one percent were on opioids but the doses were moderate (<100mg) MEq. The pain rating was ≥7 (out of a maximum of 10) for 60% of the patients.

CONCLUSION

This study describes what makes the subgroup of pain patients most affected by their pain special according to associated factors and comorbidity We found that they were distinguished by a high degree of psychiatric comorbidity, low physical functioning and extreme levels of symptom preoccupation/hypervigilance. Many severe symptoms additional to pain (e.g. depression/anxiety, tiredness, disturbed sleep, lack of concentration, constipation) were reported. The group seems hypervigilant, overwhelmed with a multitude of different symptoms on a high severity level.

IMPLICATIONS

When treating this complex group, the expressions of the illness can act as obstacles to achieve successful treatment outcomes. The study provides evidence based information, for a better understanding of the needs concerning these pain patients. Our result indicates that parallel assessment and treatment of psychiatric comorbidities and sleep disorders combined with traditional rehabilitation, i.e. physical activation and cognitive reorganization are imperative for improved outcomes.

Weak outcome predictors of multimodal rehabilitation at one-year follow-up in patients with chronic pain-a practice based evidence study from two SQRP centres

BACKGROUND

For patients with chronic pain, the heterogeneity of clinical presentations makes it difficult to identify patients who would benefit from multimodal rehabilitation programs (MMRP). Yet, there is limited knowledge regarding the predictors of MMRP's outcomes. This study identifies predictors of outcome of MMRPs at a 12-month follow-up (FU-12) based on data from the Swedish Quality Registry for Pain Rehabilitation (SQRP).

METHODS

Patients with chronic pain from two clinical departments in Sweden completed the SQRP questionnaires-background, pain characteristics, psychological symptoms, function, activity/participation, health and quality of life-on three occasions: 1) during their first visit; 2) immediately after the completion of their MMRP; and 3) 12 months after completing the MMRP (n = 227). During the FU-12, the patients also retrospectively reported their global impressions of any changes in their perception of pain and their ability to handle their life situation in general.

RESULTS

Significant improvements were found for pain, psychological symptoms, activity/participation, health, and quality of life aspects with low/medium strong effects. A general pattern was observed from the analyses of the changes from baseline to FU-12; the largest improvements in outcomes were significantly associated with poor situations according to their respective baseline scores. Although significant regressors of the investigated outcomes were found, the significant predictors were weak and explained a minor part of the variation in outcomes (15-25%). At the FU-12, 53.6% of the patients reported that their pain had decreased and 80.1% reported that their life situation in general had improved. These improvements were associated with high education, low pain intensity, high health level, and work importance (only pain perception). The explained variations were low (9-11%).

CONCLUSIONS

Representing patients in real-world clinical settings, this study confirmed systematic reviews that outcomes of MMRP are associated with broad positive effects. A mix of background and baseline variables influenced the outcomes investigated, but the explained variations in outcomes were low. There is still a need to develop standardized and relatively simple outcomes that can be used to evaluate MMRP in trials, in clinical evaluations at group level, and for individual patients.

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.

Patients with chronic pain: One-year follow-up of a multimodal rehabilitation programme at a pain clinic

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Multimodal rehabilitation (MMR) programmes, including, physical training, educational and psychological interventions by an interdisciplinary team are found to be more successful for patients with disabling chronic pain compared with less comprehensive treatments. MMR programmes are based on the biopsychosocial model and the goal is usually to improve function, quality of life and facilitate and enable return to work. As pain clinics traditionally offer conventional medical pain treatment, there is limited knowledge about MMR given in this context. The aim of our study was to describe characteristics of patients with chronic pain, treated with a MMR programme at a conventional pain clinic, to evaluate patient-reported outcome measures (PROM) from start to one year after, and to study possibly associated factors for the improvement of health-related quality of life after one year.

METHODS

A prospective, observational study with a one-year follow-up was performed.

SUBJECTS

A total of 42 individuals (38 females, age 44.0±12.3 years and 4 men age 40±8.5 years) with different pain diagnoses were included. After a team assessment, the patients began a programme that lasted about three months. The MMR programme contained coordinated, individually adapted treatments administered individually or in groups, and was based on cognitive behavioural principles. Questionnaires regarding health-related quality of life (HRQoL) (EQ-5D), insomnia (ISI), mental health (HADS), pain-related disability (PDI), kinesiophobia (TSK), current pain intensity (VAS) and sense of coherence (SOC) were used at the start of the MMR and at follow-up. Demographic data were collected from the patient records.

RESULTS

The PROM at baseline showed substantial pain problems with low HRQoL (EQ-5D index of 0.1±0.282, and EQ VAS of 32.67±20.1), moderate insomnia (ISI 18.95±6.7), doubtful cases of depression and anxiety (HADS-depression 9.35±4.1 and HADS-anxiety 9.78±3.95), presence of pain-related disability (PDI 39.48 ±12.64), kinesiophobia (TSK 40.8±9.8), as well as moderate current pain (VAS 61.31±20.4). The sense of coherence was weak (SOC of 51.37±14). At one-year follow-up, significant (p≤0.05) improvement occurred on the EQ-5D index, EQ VAS, ISI, PDI and TSK. In the logistic regression analysis, no significant associations could be identified.

CONCLUSIONS

MMR for patients with complex pain problems can be a successful treatment alternative at conventional pain clinics.

IMPLICATIONS

Since access to rehabilitation clinics in Sweden may be limited, the availability of MMR can increase by providing this type of intervention in pain clinics. Increased knowledge of MMR in different settings can also contribute to increased understanding and collaboration between pain clinics and rehabilitation units.

Strategies for Coping with Chronic Lower Back Pain in Patients with Long Physiotherapy Wait Time

BACKGROUND Treatment efficacy for the increasing prevalence of back pain is a great challenge for both health care providers and individuals coping with this problem. This study aimed to evaluate pain coping strategies used by primary care patients with chronic lower back pain (CLBP) as a supplementation of medical diagnosis before a physiotherapy programme. MATERIAL AND METHODS A total of 88 people were divided into 3 age groups: young adults (21-40 years old), middle-aged adults (41-60 years old), and the elderly (over 60 years old). Data was gathered from rehabilitation centers and primary medical care facilities. A cross-sectional design was used. The Coping Strategies Questionnaire (CSQ) was completed before the physiotherapy course. RESULTS Patients complained of CLBP for 11.32±6.81 years on average. The most common strategies to cope with back pain included declaring that the pain is manageable, praying and hoping, as well as increased behavioral activity. Statistically significant differences in coping strategies were found between age groups. The elderly patients were more likely to "declare coping with pain" in comparison to the younger age groups (p<0.01). People over 60 years of age were more likely to declare active coping with pain, while young people reported catastrophizing. CONCLUSIONS Patients in different age groups had various difficulties in pain coping. Most of them required support in self-management of pain in addition to physiotherapy. The basic assessment of pain coping strategies should be consistently taken into account and included in rehabilitation protocols in chronic pain treatment.

Selected Aspects of Mental Health of Elderly Patients with Chronic Back Pain Treated in Primary Care Centers

BACKGROUND

Improvement of the effectiveness and efficiency of chronic back pain therapy is a continuing challenge on an international scale. The aim of the present study was to tentatively assess mental health of patients with chronic back pain treated in primary care centers.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

The study enrolled 100 persons over 50 years of age. The back pain group consisted of 53 patients with chronic back pain and the control group consisted of 47 pain-free persons. The assessment of mental health used a Polish version of the international Goldberger's General Health Questionnaire (GHQ-28). ANOVA (1- and 2-factor) analysis of variance, Tukey's test, and Pearson's simple correlation were used to analyze the significance of differences, with the significance level set at α=0.05.

RESULTS

All patients with chronic back pain, regardless of their age and gender, displayed poorer mental well-being compared to the control group: their overall score was higher by over 7 points than in persons without back pain (F1.96=14.8; p<0.001). Men with back pain were significantly more susceptible to depression than women (F2.96=5.5; p<0.05), compared to the control group. The duration of back pain also showed a significant (p<0.05) direct correlation with the overall mental health score from the questionnaire. Mental health was considerably poorer among patients occasionally (p<0.001) and regularly (p<0.05) consuming analgesics than among persons who did not do so.

CONCLUSIONS

The study revealed that mental health was markedly poorer in patients with chronic back pain than in healthy controls. A preliminary assessment of aspects of mental health should be given more attention in the rehabilitation of patients with chronic back pain treated in primary care center outpatient clinics.

A holistic approach to chronic pain management that involves all stakeholders: change is needed

Chronic pain affects a large proportion of the population, imposing significant individual distress and a considerable burden on society, yet treatment is not always instituted and/or adequate. Comprehensive multidisciplinary management based on the biopsychosocial model of pain has been shown to be clinically effective and cost-efficient, but is not widely available. A literature review of stakeholder groups revealed many reasons for this, including: i) many patients believe healthcare professionals lack relevant knowledge, and consultations are rushed, ii) general practitioners consider that pain management has a low priority and is under-resourced, iii) pain specialists cite non-adherence to evidence-based treatment, sub-optimal prescribing, and chronic pain not being regarded as a disease in its own right, iv) nurses', pharmacists' and physiotherapists' skills are not fully utilized, and v) psychological therapy is employed infrequently and often too late. Many of the issues relating to physicians could be addressed by improving medical training, both at undergraduate and postgraduate levels - for example, by making pain medicine a compulsory core subject of the undergraduate medical curriculum. This would improve physician/patient communication, increase the use of standardized pain assessment tools, and allow more patients to participate in treatment decisions. Patient care would also benefit from improved training for other multidisciplinary team members; for example, nurses could provide counseling and follow-up support, psychologists offer coping skills training, and physiotherapists have a greater role in rehabilitation. Equally important measures include the widespread adoption of a patient-centered approach, chronic pain being recognized as a disease in its own right, and the development of universal guidelines for managing chronic non-cancer pain. Perhaps the greatest barrier to improvement is lack of political will at both national and international level. Some powerful initiatives and collaborations are currently lobbying policy-making bodies to raise standards and reduce unnecessary pain - it is vital they continue.

Pain management discussion forum

A query and response address comparative chronic pain management in European countries and the availability of psychotherapy services in pain management. This report is adapted from paineurope 2013; Issue 2, ©Haymarket Medical Publications Ltd., and is presented with permission. paineurope is provided as a service to pain management by Mundipharma International LTD. and is distributed free of charge to healthcare professionals in Europe. Archival issues can be accessed via the website: http://www.paineurope.com at which European health professionals can register online to receive copies of the quarterly publication.

The individual and societal burden of chronic pain in Europe: the case for strategic prioritisation and action to improve knowledge and availability of appropriate care

BACKGROUND

Chronic pain is common in Europe and elsewhere and its under treatment confers a substantial burden on individuals, employers, healthcare systems and society in general. Indeed, the personal and socioeconomic impact of chronic pain is as great as, or greater, than that of other established healthcare priorities. In light of review of recently published data confirming its clinical and socioeconomic impact, this paper argues that chronic pain should be ranked alongside other conditions of established priority in Europe. We outline strategies to help overcome barriers to effective pain care resulting in particular from deficiencies in education and access to interdisciplinary pain management services. We also address the confusion that exists between proper clinical and scientific uses of opioid medications and their potential for misuse and diversion, as reflected in international variations in the access to, and availability of, these agents.

DISCUSSION

As the economic costs are driven in part by the costs of lost productivity, absenteeism and early retirement, pain management should aim to fully rehabilitate patients, rather than merely to relieve pain. Accredited education of physicians and allied health professionals regarding state-of-the-art pain management is crucial. Some progress has been made in this area, but further provision and incentivization is required. We support a tiered approach to pain management, whereby patients with pain uncontrolled by non-specialists are able to consult a physician with a pain competency or a specialist in pain medicine, who in turn can recruit the services of other professionals on a case-by-case basis. A fully integrated interdisciplinary pain service should ideally be available to patients with refractory pain. Governments and healthcare systems should ensure that their policies on controlled medications are balanced, safeguarding public health without undue restrictions that compromise patient care, and that physician education programmes support these aims.

SUMMARY

Strategic prioritization and co-ordinated actions are required nationally and internationally to address the unacceptable and unnecessary burden of uncontrolled chronic pain that plagues European communities and economies. An appreciation of the 'return on investment' in pain management services will require policymakers to adopt a long-term, cross-budgetary approach.

Effectiveness of multidisciplinary rehabilitation treatment for patients with chronic pain in a primary health care unit

Background In recent years, multidisciplinary rehabilitation (MDR) became an alternative treatment option for chronic non-cancer pain. MDR is mostly available in specialized pain units, usually at rehabilitation centers where the level of knowledge and therapeutically options to treat pain conditions are considered to be high. There is strong evidence that MDR in specialized pain units is affecting pain and improves the quality of life in a sustainable manner. There are few studies about MDR outcome in primary health care, especially in those units situated in rural areas and with a different population than that encountered in specialized hospitals. That, in spite of the fact that the prevalence of pain in the patients treated in primary care practice is about 30%. The aim of this study is to analyze the effectiveness of MDR for chronic non-cancer patients in a primary health care unit. Methods This study included a total of 51 patients with chronic pain conditions who were admitted and completed the local MDR-program at the primary health care unit in Arvika, Sweden. The major complaint categories were fibromyalgia (53%), pain from neck and shoulder (28%) or low back pain (12%). The inclusion criteria were age between 16 and 67 years and chronic non-cancer pain with at least 3 months duration. The multidisciplinary team consisted of a general practitioner, two physiotherapists, two psychologists and one occupational therapist. The 6-week treatment took place in group sessions with 6-8 members each and included cognitive-behavioral treatment, education on pain physiology, ergonomics, physical exercises and relaxation techniques. Primary outcomes included pain intensity, pain severity, anxiety and depression scores, social and physical activity, and secondary outcomes were sick leave, opioid consumption and health care utilization assessed in the beginning of the treatment and at one year follow-up. Data was taken from the Swedish Quality Register for Pain Rehabilitation (SQRP) and the patients' medical journal. Results One year after MDR treatment, sick leave decreased from 75.6% to 61.5% (p <0.05). Utilization of health-care during one year decreased significantly from 27.4 to 20.1 contacts (p = 0.02). There were significant improvements concerning social activity (p = 0.03) and depression (p <0.05), but not in anxiety (p = 0.1) and physical activity (p = 0.08). Although not statistically significant, some numerical decrease in the mean levels of pain intensity, pain severity and opioid consumption were reported one year after MDR (p > 0.05). Conclusions The results obtained one year after rehabilitation indicated that patients with chronic noncancer pain might benefit from MDR in primary health care settings. Implications This study suggests that MDR in primary care settings as well as MDR at specialized pain units may lead to better coping in chronic non-cancer pain conditions with lower depression scores and higher social activity, leading to lower sick leave. This study demonstrated that there is a place for MDR in primary health care units with the given advantage of local intervention in rural areas allowing the patients to achieve rehabilitation in their home environment.

Transforming pain medicine: adapting to science and society

The field of chronic pain medicine is currently facing enormous challenges. The incidence of chronic pain is increasing worldwide, particularly in the developed world. As a result, chronic pain is imposing a growing burden on Western societies in terms of cost of medical care and lost productivity. This burden is exacerbated by the fact that despite research efforts and a huge expenditure on treatment for chronic pain, clinicians have no highly effective treatments or definitive diagnostic measures for patients. The lack of an objective measure for pain impedes basic research into the biological and psychological mechanisms of chronic pain and clinical research into treatment efficacy. The development of objective measurements of pain and ability to predict treatment responses in the individual patient is critical to improving pain management. Finally, pain medicine must embrace the development of a new evidence-based therapeutic model that recognizes the highly individual nature of responsiveness to pain treatments, integrates bio-psycho-behavioural approaches, and requires proof of clinical effectiveness for the various treatments we offer our patients. In the long-term these approaches will contribute to providing better diagnoses and more effective treatments to lessen the current challenges in pain medicine.