Quality indicators to assess quality of pain clinic care from the perspective of patients with chronic pain: development, usability, comprehensibility, and psychometric quality of the QiPPP questionnaire

Development, validation and feasibility of a Patient Satisfaction Questionnaire for evaluating the quality performance of a diagnostic small fibre neuropathy service: A qualitative study

INTRODUCTION AND AIM

Small fibre neuropathy (SFN) is a peripheral neuropathy, leading to neuropathic pain and autonomic dysfunction. An evidence-based standardized patient diagnostic SFN service has been implemented in the Netherlands for improving patient-centred SFN care. However, the quality of care of this diagnostic SFN service has never been assessed from a patient perspective. The aim of this study was to develop and validate an SFN-Patient Satisfaction Questionnaire (SFN-PSQ) to measure the quality performance of a standardized diagnostic SFN service.

METHODS

A descriptive qualitative study to create the SFN-PSQ was performed using the (COREQ (Consolidated Criteria for Reporting Qualitative Research) checklist. For item generation and content development, domains and/or items from validated PSQs were selected. The content development and content validity were performed using a Delphi method with SFN expert caregivers with different backgrounds. By using the three-step-test method in individual cognitive interviews, the content validity by patients was finalized.

RESULTS

In one online Delphi panel round, the content of the first concept of the SFN-PSQ was validated, which resulted in the second concept of the SFN-PSQ. From July 2019 till March 2020, nine patients consented to participate in the individual cognitive interviews. The most significant changes of the new questionnaire were adding domains and items concerning the waiting list, the diagnostic services and consultation by the hospital psychiatrist. Also, a differentiation was made for both an inpatient and outpatient diagnostic SFN service. Furthermore, the clarity and intelligibility of the domains/items were improved, resulting in an increased comprehension of the SFN-PSQ. Ultimately, the new developed SFN-PSQ consisted of 10 domains and 51 items, suitable for measuring patient satisfaction of the neurological analysis in patients with SFN.

CONCLUSION

Through item generation, expert opinions and interviews with patients, the SFN-PSQ was developed and validated, and feasibility was confirmed. The structure of the questionnaire, based on the logistic and diagnostic SFN pathway, could be used as a model in other hospitals to improve the quality, continuity and access of SFN care and other chronic diseases taking into account potential cross-cultural differences.

PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION

Caregivers were involved in the item generation and content development of the questionnaire. Patients were directly involved in testing the content validity and feasibility of the SFN-PSQ.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

Not applicable.

Expectations of treatment outcome in complex cases of patients with chronic pain: A study on the DATAPAIN cohort

BACKGROUND

A better insight in how the biopsychosocial factors influence patient outcome(s) may provide information that helps selecting the optimal pain management for a specific group.

METHODS

Categorization was made in the prospective DATAPAIN registry, in which patients with pain severity (Numeric Rating Scale [NRS]: 7-10), depression or anxiety (Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale: > 10), and pain catastrophizing (Pain Catastrophizing Scale: > 31) were identified as complex cases. Patient outcomes; treatment satisfaction on the Patient Global Impression of Change (PGIC), pain relief (NRS), pain interference on the Brief Pain Inventory (BPI) and quality of life indicator General Perceived Health (GPH) were evaluated. Logistic regression analyzed if belonging to the complex cases showed modification in the outcome of the PGIC and GPH. Linear regression was observed if complex cases differed in average reduction in pain relief and interference compared to non-complex cases.

RESULTS

1637 patients were included, of which 345 (21.08%) were considered complex cases. The changes in scores of pain relief and BPI active subscale were not significantly different between groups. The BPI affective subscale had a different change in score (-0.509; p: 0.002). The complex cases had an odds ratio (OR) of 0.59 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.36-0.77) on treatment satisfaction compared to non-complex cases, and an OR of 0.28 (95% CI: 0.11-0.56) on the GPH.

CONCLUSION

When treating patients with complex cases, desired treatment outcome(s) should be recognized by specialists and patients, as these may be less likely to occur.

[How to assess health outcomes in chronic non-cancer pain? Qualitative research]

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES

There is a lack of indicators that evaluate the health results of the non-cancer chronic pain (NCCP). The objective of this study was to agree on how to evaluate health outcomes in NCCP in Spain, as well as to propose lines of action to have an optimal evaluation framework not only for patients, but for healthcare professionals and managers as well.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

This was a qualitative research study through directed group interviews which followed a script based on structured questions using the PICO methodology.

RESULTS

More than the intensity of pain, the main points to be measured are pain-free time, improved rest/sleep, improved mood, recovery of daily activities and adherence to treatment, in addition to -in the scope of management- resource consumption. The therapeutic objective must be defined individually, based on the adjustment of expectations between the healthcare professional and the patients, taking into account their preferences and involving them in the therapeutic process. Patients and caregivers must be informed and trained with special emphasis on the psycho-emotional sphere of pain.

CONCLUSIONS

It is necessary to evaluate the health outcomes in NCCP in Spain. Lines of action are proposed that might provide an adequate assessment framework for the patient, the healthcare professionals and the health managers.

Patients Describe their Lived Experiences of Battling to Live with Complex Regional Pain Syndrome

Complex regional pain syndrome (CRPS) has never comprehensively been examined from a lived experience perspective. Patients generally have a poorer quality of life than people with other chronic pain conditions. This study aimed to understand the essence of living with CRPS. Data were collected from 17 patients via in-depth interviews. Hermeneutic discussions with four health professionals generated deeper insights. Internet blogs and a book containing patient stories were included for theme verification and triangulation. CRPS is seen as a war-like experience and five themes were identified within the battle: "dealing with the unknown enemy", "building an armoury against a moving target", "battles within the war", "developing battle plans with allies" and "warrior or prisoner of war". Patients live with a chronic pain condition and experience problems unique to CRPS such as fear of pain extending to other parts of their body. Use of the model generated by this research may assist patient/clinician interactions and guide therapeutic discussions. Support for people living with CRPS does not always exist, and some healthcare professionals require additional education about the condition. Better health outcomes are experienced by patients when their personal situation and experiences are heard and understood by health care professionals. PERSPECTIVE: This article presents the lived experience of CRPS. This information and the model generated can help clinicians to better understand their patients and deliver appropriate patient-centered care.

Biopsychosocial baseline values of 15 000 patients suffering from chronic pain: Dutch DataPain study

Background and objectives

Chronic pain affects many adults. To improve our daily practice, we need to understand multidisciplinary approaches, integrated treatment plans and the biopsychosocial context of these patients. To date, almost 15 000 chronic pain patients have been referred to the Maastricht University Pain Center in the Netherlands.

Methods

This study describes 11 214 of these patients suffering from chronic pain. Chronic pain was analyzed using relevant Initiative on Methods, Measurement, and Pain Assessment in Clinical Trials instruments.

Results

Most patients were female (59.3%). The prevalence of low education was 59%, and unemployment/disability was 35.9%. The mean age was 55.6 years. Severe pain (Numerical Rating Sale score 7–10) was reported by 71.9% of the patients; psychological and quality of life values deteriorated when pain severity increased. Approximately 36% of patients showed severe signs of depression or anxiety, and 39% displayed high pain catastrophizing. Of all patients, 17.8% reported high values for pain severity, catastrophizing and anxiety or depression.

Conclusions

Based on baseline biopsychosocial values, this study shows the complexity of patients referred to pain centers. Pain management with a biopsychosocial approach in an integrated multidisciplinary setting is indispensable. Above all, adjusted education on chronic pain and attention to its biopsychosocial aspects are deemed necessary.