Checklist for the preparation and review of pain clinical trial publications: a pain-specific supplement to CONSORT

Methods for pragmatic randomized clinical trials of pain therapies: IMMPACT statement

ABSTRACT

Pragmatic, randomized, controlled trials hold the potential to directly inform clinical decision making and health policy regarding the treatment of people experiencing pain. Pragmatic trials are designed to replicate or are embedded within routine clinical care and are increasingly valued to bridge the gap between trial research and clinical practice, especially in multidimensional conditions, such as pain and in nonpharmacological intervention research. To maximize the potential of pragmatic trials in pain research, the careful consideration of each methodological decision is required. Trials aligned with routine practice pose several challenges, such as determining and enrolling appropriate study participants, deciding on the appropriate level of flexibility in treatment delivery, integrating information on concomitant treatments and adherence, and choosing comparator conditions and outcome measures. Ensuring data quality in real-world clinical settings is another challenging goal. Furthermore, current trials in the field would benefit from analysis methods that allow for a differentiated understanding of effects across patient subgroups and improved reporting of methods and context, which is required to assess the generalizability of findings. At the same time, a range of novel methodological approaches provide opportunities for enhanced efficiency and relevance of pragmatic trials to stakeholders and clinical decision making. In this study, best-practice considerations for these and other concerns in pragmatic trials of pain treatments are offered and a number of promising solutions discussed. The basis of these recommendations was an Initiative on Methods, Measurement, and Pain Assessment in Clinical Trials (IMMPACT) meeting organized by the Analgesic, Anesthetic, and Addiction Clinical Trial Translations, Innovations, Opportunities, and Networks.

Effectiveness of the socioecological informed contextual treatment summary and care plan (TSSCP-P, Brazil) for breast cancer survivors: a randomized, controlled study

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to evaluate the impact of an intervention using the Treatment Summary and Survivorship Care Plan (TSSCP-P) on self-efficacy and quality of life (QoL) in breast cancer survivors.

METHOD

A clinical study, randomized and controlled, conducted to assess self-efficacy and QOL in breast cancer survivors. The participants were randomly assigned to either an intervention group or a control group. The intervention group received individualized nursing consultations guided by the TSSCP-P, while the control group received standard care. Self-efficacy and QoL were assessed at three evaluation moments using validated scales: Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Breast Plus Anm Morbidity (FACT B + 4) and Perceived General Self-Efficacy Scale. Statistical analyses, including regression analysis and hypothesis tests, were conducted to examine the effects of the intervention on self-efficacy and QoL.

RESULTS

Female breast cancer survivors (N = 101) were recruited. The intervention group demonstrated a significant improvement in self-efficacy over time compared to the control group (p = 0.01). However, no significant differences were observed in the overall QoL scores between the two groups. Subscale analysis revealed a significant improvement in physical well-being for the intervention group (p = 0.04), while emotional well-being showed a non-significant improvement (p = 0.07). The study suggests that individualized care plans and support strategies, such as the TSSCP-P, can positively influence breast cancer survivors' self-efficacy and certain aspects of their QoL.

CONCLUSION

These findings highlight the potential benefits of the TSSCP-P intervention in enhancing self-efficacy among breast cancer survivors. However, further research is needed to explore its impact on overall QoL and its effectiveness across different stages of breast cancer, as well as with longer follow-up periods.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

Brazilian Registry of Clinical Trials (ReBEC- RBR-2m7qkjy; UTN code: U1111-1257-3560), registered in April 19th, 2022.

Pain Neuroscience Education in elective surgery patients: study protocol for a randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Pain Neuroscience Education (PNE) consists of an educational strategy that seeks to understand the biological processes of pain and how to control it. The main objective of this study will be to evaluate the impact of PNE on outcomes related to the postoperative period. The hypothesis is that the intervention may positively influence postoperative recovery, contributing to pain control, clinical indications, acceptance and consumption of analgesics and other pharmacological drugs that contribute to its control, as well as psychological aspects, such as anxiety, depression and pain catastrophising.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

This will be an open, parallel, multicentre and randomised controlled clinical trial. A total of 100 participants aged between 18 and 59 years of age, of both genders, who are going to have elective general surgery will be evaluated. The intervention group will participate in a preoperative pain neuroscience educational session and also receive usual preoperative care, while the control group receives usual preoperative care as well. The educational session will last 30 min and consists of a video (5:20 min), a questionnaire about the content, time for participants to express their beliefs, thoughts and doubts. Participants will be evaluated preoperatively and there will be one postintervention evaluation. The intensity and characteristics of pain and anxiety are evaluated as primary outcomes. As secondary outcomes, pain catastrophising and depression are taken into account.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

The project was approved by the Research Ethics Committee of the Faculty of Ceilandia, the Research Ethics Committee of the Institute of Strategic Health Management of the Federal District and the Research Council of the Hospital of Brasília-Rede Dasa (CAAE: 28572420.3.0000.8093). Recruitment began in June of 2023. All participants were included in the study only after their written consent. All data obtained will be analysed and distributed through publication in journals and at scientific events.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

Brazilian Registry of Clinical Trials (ReBEC) (RBR-23mr7yy).

Conscious connected breathing with breath retention intervention in adults with chronic low back pain: protocol for a randomized controlled pilot study

BACKGROUND

Chronic pain is a major source of human suffering, and chronic low back pain (cLBP) is among the most prevalent, costly, and disabling of pain conditions. Due to the significant personal and societal burden and the complex and recurring nature of cLBP, self-management approaches that can be practiced at home are highly relevant to develop and test. The respiratory system is one of the most integrated systems of the body, and breathing is bidirectionally related with stress, emotion, and pain. Thus, the widespread physiological and psychological impact of breathing practices and breathwork interventions hold substantial promise as possible self-management strategies for chronic pain. The primary aim of the current randomized pilot study is to test the feasibility and acceptability of a conscious connected breathing with breath retention intervention compared to a sham control condition.

METHODS

The rationale and procedures for testing a 5-day conscious connected breathing with breath retention intervention, compared to a deep breathing sham control intervention, in 24 adults (18-65 years) with cLBP is described. Both interventions will be delivered using standardized audio recordings and practiced over 5 days (two times in-person and three times at-home), and both are described as Breathing and Attention Training to reduce possible expectancy and placebo effects common in pain research. The primary outcomes for this study are feasibility and acceptability. Feasibility will be evaluated by determining rates of participant recruitment, adherence, retention, and study assessment completion, and acceptability will be evaluated by assessing participants' satisfaction and helpfulness of the intervention. We will also measure other clinical pain, psychological, behavioral, and physiological variables that are planned to be included in a follow-up randomized controlled trial.

DISCUSSION

This will be the first study to examine the effects of a conscious connected breathing with breath retention intervention for individuals with chronic pain. The successful completion of this smaller-scale pilot study will provide data regarding the feasibility and acceptability to conduct a subsequent trial testing the efficacy of this breathing self-management practice for adults with cLBP.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Clinicaltrials.gov, identifier NCT04740710 . Registered on 5 February 2021.

Tolerability and Efficacy of a 10:25 Preparation of Δ9-Tetrahydrocannabinol and Cannabidiol for Treatment of Chronic Back or Neck Pain: A Multiple-Dose Escalation Study

Introduction

The aim was to demonstrate the safety and tolerability of cannabidiol (CBD) with Δ9-THC in patients with moderate to severe chronic back or neck pain unresponsive to over-the-counter non-opioid analgesics.

Methods

This was a non-randomized, single-arm, open-label study. Participants received escalating doses of an oromucosal-administered combination containing 10 mg/mL of Δ9-THC, 25 mg/mL of CBD. On day 1, patients received once-daily 0.5 mL Cybis® 10:25 (5 mg Δ9-THC plus 12.5 mg CBD daily), escalated at days 8, 15, and 22 to 0.5 mL twice-daily (bd) (10 mg Δ9-THC plus 25 mg CBD daily), 1.0 mL bd (20 mg Δ9-THC plus 50 mg CBD daily), and 1.5 mL bd (30 mg Δ9-THC plus 75 mg CBD daily), respectively. The primary outcome was safety and tolerability, with secondary objectives including pharmacokinetic and efficacy outcomes.

Results

28 patients were enrolled in the study. Their median age was 63.3 years, and half were female. The median history of neck/back pain was 10 years. The pharmacokinetics following single doses of 0.5 mL were variable; however, there were dose-dependent increases in trough levels of CBD and Δ9-THC. Cybis® 10:25 was well tolerated, with the majority of adverse events of mild severity. The most common adverse events were nausea, vomiting, fatigue, dizziness, headache, paresthesia, and anxiety. There were dose-dependent improvements in numerical pain rating scores (p < 0.001), with clinically significant reductions in pain at 1.0 mL bd and 1.5 mL bd doses (28.8% and 34.1% reductions, respectively, p < 0.001). Depressive symptoms and stress had dose-dependent reductions (p = 0.0182, p < 0.01, respectively).

Conclusion

In patients with chronic neck/back pain, CBD and Δ9-THC are well tolerated and doses of 1.0 mL bd and 1.5 mL bd showed clinically significant reductions in pain compared to baseline pain scores.

Profiles of Risk and Resilience in Chronic Pain: Loneliness, Social Support, Mindfulness, and Optimism Coming out of the First Pandemic Year

OBJECTIVE

Individuals experience chronic pain differently, not only because of different clinical diagnoses, but also because of differing degrees of influence from biopsychosocial pain modulators. We aimed to cluster patients with chronic pain into distinct subgroups based on psychosocial characteristics and pain intensity, and we subsequently examined group differences in pain-related interference approximately 1 year later.

METHODS

In this observational, longitudinal study, patients with chronic pain (n = 94) completed validated assessments of psychosocial characteristics and pain intensity at the beginning of COVID-19-related social distancing (April to June 2020). One year later (May to June 2021), patients completed a follow-up survey with assessments of pain interference, loneliness, social support, mindfulness, and optimism.

RESULTS

A cluster analysis, using psychosocial factors and pain intensity, empirically produced three patient groups: 1) psychosocial predominant (PSP), characterized by high psychosocial distress and average pain intensity; 2) pain intensity predominant (PIP), characterized by average psychosocial distress and high pain intensity; and 3) less elevated symptoms (LES), characterized by low psychosocial distress and low pain intensity. At the 1-year follow-up, patients in the PSP and PIP clusters suffered greater pain interference than patients in the LES cluster, while patients in the PSP cluster also reported greater loneliness and lower mindfulness and optimism.

CONCLUSIONS

An empirical psychosocial-based clustering of patients identified three distinct groups that differed in pain interference. Patients with high psychosocial modulation of pain at the onset of social distancing (the PSP cluster) suffered not only greater pain interference but also greater loneliness and lower levels of mindfulness and optimism, which suggests some potential behavioral targets for this group in the future.

Opioid versus opioid-free analgesia after surgical discharge: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised trials

BACKGROUND

Excessive opioid prescribing after surgery has contributed to the current opioid crisis; however, the value of prescribing opioids at surgical discharge remains uncertain. We aimed to estimate the extent to which opioid prescribing after discharge affects self-reported pain intensity and adverse events in comparison with an opioid-free analgesic regimen.

METHODS

In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we searched MEDLINE, Embase, the Cochrane Library, Scopus, AMED, Biosis, and CINAHL from Jan 1, 1990, until July 8, 2021. We included multidose randomised controlled trials comparing opioid versus opioid-free analgesia in patients aged 15 years or older, discharged after undergoing a surgical procedure according to the Physiological and Operative Severity Score for the Enumeration of Mortality and Morbidity definition (minor, moderate, major, and major complex). We screened articles, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias (Cochrane's risk-of-bias tool for randomised trials) in duplicate. The primary outcomes of interest were self-reported pain intensity on day 1 after discharge (standardised to 0-10 cm visual analogue scale) and vomiting up to 30 days. Pain intensity at further timepoints, pain interference, other adverse events, risk of dissatisfaction, and health-care reutilisation were also assessed. We did random-effects meta-analyses and appraised evidence certainty using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluations scoring system. The review was registered with PROSPERO (ID CRD42020153050).

FINDINGS

47 trials (n=6607 patients) were included. 30 (64%) trials involved elective minor procedures (63% dental procedures) and 17 (36%) trials involved procedures of moderate extent (47% orthopaedic and 29% general surgery procedures). Compared with opioid-free analgesia, opioid prescribing did not reduce pain on the first day after discharge (weighted mean difference 0·01cm, 95% CI -0·26 to 0·27; moderate certainty) or at other postoperative timepoints (moderate-to-very-low certainty). Opioid prescribing was associated with increased risk of vomiting (relative risk 4·50, 95% CI 1·93 to 10·51; high certainty) and other adverse events, including nausea, constipation, dizziness, and drowsiness (high-to-moderate certainty). Opioids did not affect other outcomes.

INTERPRETATION

Findings from this meta-analysis support that opioid prescribing at surgical discharge does not reduce pain intensity but does increase adverse events. Evidence relied on trials focused on elective surgeries of minor and moderate extent, suggesting that clinicians can consider prescribing opioid-free analgesia in these surgical settings. Data were largely derived from low-quality trials, and none involved patients having major or major-complex procedures. Given these limitations, there is a great need to advance the quality and scope of research in this field.

FUNDING

The Canadian Institutes of Health Research.

If the doors of perception were cleansed, would chronic pain be relieved? Evaluating the benefits and risks of psychedelics

Psychedelic substances have played important roles in diverse cultures, and ingesting various plant preparations to evoke altered states of consciousness has been described throughout recorded history. Accounts of the subjective effects of psychedelics typically focus on spiritual and mystical-type experiences, including feelings of unity, sacredness, and transcendence. Over the past two decades, there has been increasing interest in psychedelics as treatments for various medical disorders, including chronic pain. Although concerns about adverse medical and psychological effects contributed to their controlled status, contemporary knowledge of psychedelics suggests that risks are relatively rare when patients are carefully screened, prepared, and supervised. Clinical trial results have provided support for the effectiveness of psychedelics in different psychiatric conditions. However, there are only a small number of generally uncontrolled studies of psychedelics in patients with chronic pain (e.g., cancer pain, phantom limb pain, migraine, and cluster headache). Challenges in evaluating psychedelics as treatments for chronic pain include identifying neurobiologic and psychosocial mechanisms of action and determining which pain conditions to investigate. Truly informative proof-of-concept and confirmatory randomized clinical trials will require careful selection of control groups, efforts to minimize bias from unblinding, and attention to the roles of patient mental set and treatment setting. Perspective: There is considerable promise for the use of psychedelic therapy for pain, but evidence-based recommendations for the design of future studies are needed to ensure that the results of this research are truly informative.

Effectiveness of the eVISualisation of physical activity and pain intervention (eVIS) in Swedish Interdisciplinary Pain Rehabilitation Programmes: study protocol for a registry-based randomised controlled clinical trial

INTRODUCTION

Living with chronic pain often involves negative consequences. Interdisciplinary Pain Rehabilitation Programmes (IPRP) is considered superior to single-treatment measures in patients with chronic pain. Despite this, effects emerge suboptimal and more than 20% of patients deteriorate in patient-reported physical health outcomes after IPRP. A novel e-Health intervention, eVISualisation (eVIS) of physical activity and pain, was systematically developed to facilitate individualisation of physical activity levels. By adding elements of data collection, visualisation and communication of objectively measured physical activity and patient-reported outcomes (pain intensity, interference of pain, pharmaceutical consumption) to existing treatment modalities in IPRP, the IPRP team acquires prerequisites to adapt advice and physical activity prescriptions and to evaluate set activity goals. The overall aim is twofold. First, the aim is to evaluate the feasibility of the subsequent registry-based randomised controlled clinical trial (R-RCT). Second, the aim is to prospectively evaluate the effectiveness of the eVIS-intervention as a supplement to IPRP on our defined primary (physical health) and secondary outcomes.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

In the R-RCT, recruitment of 400 patients with chronic pain will be performed at 15 IPRP units. A random allocation to either IPRP + eVIS or to control group that will receive IPRP only will be performed. Data from the initial 30 participants completing the study period (6 months) will be included in a pilot study, where key feasibility outcomes (recruitment, randomisation, implementation, treatment integrity, data collection procedure, preliminary outcome measures) will be evaluated. Outcome variables will be extracted from the web application Pain And TRaining ON-line (PATRON) and from six national registries. Multivariate statistics and repeated measure analyses will be performed. Quality-adjusted life years and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio will be calculated for cost-effectiveness evaluation.

ETHICS/DISSEMINATION

The Swedish Ethics Review Board granted approval (Dnr 2021/02109). Results will be disseminated through peer-reviewed journals.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT05009459. Protocol V.1.

How Do Hip Exercises Improve Pain in Individuals With Patellofemoral Pain? Secondary Mediation Analysis of Strength and Psychological Factors as Mechanisms

OBJECTIVE

To determine whether the effect of hip exercise on patellofemoral pain is mediated through changes in hip muscle strength or psychological factors.

DESIGN

Secondary mediation analysis of a randomized clinical trial, in which 218 participants with patellofemoral pain were randomly assigned to receive foot orthoses or hip exercises.

METHODS

Pain (Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score pain subscale) and number of pain-free squats at 12 weeks were the outcomes for this mediation analysis, as they are pathognomonic of patellofemoral pain. Hip strength dynamometry (abduction, adduction, and external rotation) and psychological characteristics (pain catastrophizing, kinesiophobia, and anxiety) measured at 6 weeks were considered as potential mediators. We used mediation analysis to decompose the total effect of treatment on the outcome into (1) the "indirect effect" (ie, the portion acting through the mediator) and (2) the "direct effect."

RESULTS

The effect of hip exercise on pain and squats was not mediated by any of the strength or psychological mediators analyzed. All indirect effects were small and showed wide 95% confidence intervals (CIs) that contained zero (eg, for pain-free squats: abduction strength, -0.13; 95% CI: -0.49, 0.23; Tampa Scale of Kinesiophobia, -0.17; 95% CI: -0.64, 0.30).

CONCLUSION

Hip strength improved after hip exercise, yet strength did not mediate improvements in pain and pain-free squats, and alternative psychological mediators were not implicated. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2021;51(12):602-610. doi:10.2519/jospt.2021.10674.

“Garbage in, garbage out” revisited: What do machine learning application papers report about human-labeled training data?

Supervised machine learning, in which models are automatically derived from labeled training data, is only as good as the quality of that data. This study builds on prior work that investigated to what extent “best practices” around labeling training data were followed in applied ML publications within a single domain (social media platforms). In this paper, we expand by studying publications that apply supervised ML in a far broader spectrum of disciplines, focusing on human-labeled data. We report to what extent a random sample of ML application papers across disciplines give specific details about whether best practices were followed, while acknowledging that a greater range of application fields necessarily produces greater diversity of labeling and annotation methods. Because much of machine learning research and education only focuses on what is done once a “ground truth” or “gold standard” of training data is available, it is especially relevant to discuss issues around the equally important aspect of whether such data is reliable in the first place. This determination becomes increasingly complex when applied to a variety of specialized fields, as labeling can range from a task requiring little-to-no background knowledge to one that must be performed by someone with career expertise.

The Short Form of the Glasgow Composite Measure Pain Scale in Post-operative Analgesia Studies in Dogs: A Scoping Review

The measurement and treatment of acute pain in animals is essential from a welfare perspective. Valid pain-related outcome measures are also crucial for ensuring reliable and translatable findings in veterinary clinical trials. The short form of the Glasgow Composite Measure Pain Scale (CMPS-SF) is a multi-item behavioral pain assessment tool, developed and validated using a psychometric approach, to measure acute pain in the dog. Here we conduct a scoping review to identify prospective research studies that have used the CMPS-SF. We aim to describe the contexts in which it has been used, verify the correct use of the scale, and examine whether these studies are well-designed and adequately powered. We identify 114 eligible studies, indicating widespread use of the scale. We also document a limited number of modifications to the scale and intervention level, which would alter its validity. A variety of methods, with no consensus, were used to analyse data derived from the scale. However, we also find many deficiencies in reporting of experimental design in terms of the observers used, the underlying hypothesis of the research, the statement of primary outcome, and the use of a priori sample size calculations. These deficiencies may predispose to both type I and type II statistical errors in the small animal pain literature. We recommend more robust use of the scale and derived data to ensure success of future studies using the tool ensuring reliable and translatable outcomes.

Overall Reporting Descriptions of Acupuncture for Chronic Pain in Randomized Controlled Trials in English Journals

Background

Whether the clinical effect of acupuncture in chronic pain is effective has always been a hot topic of research, which has a great relationship with the overall reporting descriptions of acupuncture, especially the sham acupuncture intervention. To confirm the effectiveness of acupuncture, more clinical studies are often required. Therefore, it is necessary to report high-quality and complete descriptions of acupuncture in clinical trials. This study aims to assess the overall reporting quality of acupuncture for chronic pain in randomized controlled trials (RCTs).

Methods

Three databases from inception to March 2020 were searched, to assess the quality of acupuncture reports included the RCTs based on the pain-specific supplement to Consolidated Standards for Reporting Trials (CONSORT) and Standards for Reporting Interventions in Controlled Trials of Acupuncture (STRICTA) guidelines. The quality of sham acupuncture descriptions was evaluated based on the Template for Intervention Description and Replication (TIDieR)-placebo checklist. Descriptive statistics and analysis of the results were carried out according to the percentage of each item.

Results

A total of 74 RCTs were included which met the inclusion criteria. Based on the pain-specific CONSORT, the reporting rates of “Statistical methods”, “Participant flow”, and “Blinding” were “52.70%”, “70.27%”, and “77.03%”, respectively. The weakest reported items in STRICTA were related to the depth of insertion (Item 2c, 54.05%) and the setting and context of treatment (Item 4b, 0.00%). Based on the TIDieR-placebo checklist, the reporting rates of “Item 12”, “Item 11”, “Item 13”, “Item 3”, and “Item 4” were “8.11%”, “10.81%”, “29.73%”, “ 44.59% ”, and “47.30%”, respectively.

Conclusion

At present, the overall report quality of acupuncture treatment for chronic pain in English journals is acceptable, but the report rate in some aspects is still low. In the future, researchers should report RCTs of acupuncture following cleaner checklists and guidelines.

Effects of Wearable Transcutaneous Electrical Nerve Stimulation on Fibromyalgia: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Purpose

Fibromyalgia is a chronic condition characterized by widespread pain and interference with daily activities. The aim of this study is to assess the benefit of transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) for persons diagnosed with fibromyalgia.

Patients and Methods

Adults meeting diagnostic criteria for fibromyalgia were randomized in a double-blind trial to receive either an active (n=62) or sham (n=57) wearable TENS device for 3-months. Subjects were classified as having lower or higher pain sensitivity by Quantitative Sensory Testing (QST). Patient Global Impression of Change (PGIC, primary outcome) and secondary efficacy measures including Fibromyalgia Impact Questionnaire (FIQR), Brief Pain Inventory (BPI) and painDETECT questionnaire (PDQ) were assessed at baseline, 6-weeks and 3-months. Treatment effects were determined by a mixed model for repeated measures (MMRM) analysis of the intention-to-treat (ITT) population (N=119). A pre-specified subgroup analysis of pain sensitivity was conducted using an interaction term in the model.

Results

No differences were found between active and sham treatment on PGIC scores at 3-months (0.34, 95% CI [−0.37, 1.04], p=0.351) in the ITT population. However, in subjects with higher pain sensitivity (n=60), PGIC was significantly greater for active treatment compared to sham (1.19, 95% CI [0.24, 2.13], p=0.014). FIQR total score (−7.47, 95% CI [−12.46, −2.48], p=0.003), FIQR pain item (−0.62, 95% CI [−1.17, −0.06], p=0.029), BPI Interference (−0.70, 95% CI [−1.30, −0.11], p=0.021) and PDQ (−1.69, 95% CI [−3.20, −0.18], p=0.028) exhibited significant improvements for active treatment compared to sham in the ITT population. Analgesics use was stable and comparable in both groups.

Conclusion

This study demonstrated modest treatment effects of reduced disease impact, pain and functional impairment from wearable TENS in individuals with fibromyalgia. Subjects with higher pain sensitivity exhibited larger treatment effects than those with lower pain sensitivity. Wearable TENS may be a safe treatment option for people with fibromyalgia.

Clinicaltrials.gov Registration

NCT03714425.

Research design considerations for randomized controlled trials of spinal cord stimulation for pain: Initiative on Methods, Measurement, and Pain Assessment in Clinical Trials/Institute of Neuromodulation/International Neuromodulation Society recommendations

ABSTRACT

Spinal cord stimulation (SCS) is an interventional nonpharmacologic treatment used for chronic pain and other indications. Methods for evaluating the safety and efficacy of SCS have evolved from uncontrolled and retrospective studies to prospective randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Although randomization overcomes certain types of bias, additional challenges to the validity of RCTs of SCS include blinding, choice of control groups, nonspecific effects of treatment variables (eg, paresthesia, device programming and recharging, psychological support, and rehabilitative techniques), and safety considerations. To address these challenges, 3 professional societies (Initiative on Methods, Measurement, and Pain Assessment in Clinical Trials, Institute of Neuromodulation, and International Neuromodulation Society) convened a meeting to develop consensus recommendations on the design, conduct, analysis, and interpretation of RCTs of SCS for chronic pain. This article summarizes the results of this meeting. Highlights of our recommendations include disclosing all funding source and potential conflicts; incorporating mechanistic objectives when possible; avoiding noninferiority designs without internal demonstration of assay sensitivity; achieving and documenting double-blinding whenever possible; documenting investigator and site experience; keeping all information provided to patients balanced with respect to expectation of benefit; disclosing all information provided to patients, including verbal scripts; using placebo/sham controls when possible; capturing a complete set of outcome assessments; accounting for ancillary pharmacologic and nonpharmacologic treatments in a clear manner; providing a complete description of intended and actual programming interactions; making a prospective ascertainment of SCS-specific safety outcomes; training patients and researchers on appropriate expectations, outcome assessments, and other key aspects of study performance; and providing transparent and complete reporting of results according to applicable reporting guidelines.

Recommendations for Reporting on Rehabilitation Interventions

ABSTRACT

Clear reporting on rehabilitation treatments is critical for interpreting and replicating study results and for translating treatment research into clinical practice. This article reports the recommendations of a working group on improved reporting on rehabilitation treatments. These recommendations are intended to be combined with the efforts of other working groups, through a consensus process, to arrive at a reporting guideline for randomized controlled trials in physical medicine and rehabilitation (Randomized Controlled Trials Rehabilitation Checklist). The work group conducted a scoping review of 156 diverse guidelines for randomized controlled trial reporting, to identify themes that might be usefully applied to the field of rehabilitation. Themes were developed by identifying content that might improve or enhance existing items from the Template for Intervention Description and Replication. Guidelines addressing broad research domains tended to define reporting items generally, from the investigator's perspective of relevance, whereas those addressing more circumscribed domains provided more specific and operationalized items. Rehabilitation is a diverse field, but a clear description of the treatment's separable components, along with distinct treatment theories for each, can improve reporting of relevant information. Over time, expert consensus groups should develop more specific guideline extensions for circumscribed research domains, around coalescing bodies of treatment theory.

Clinical outcome assessment in clinical trials of chronic pain treatments

Clinical outcome assessments (COAs) measure outcomes that are meaningful to patients in clinical trials and are critical for determining whether a treatment is effective. The objectives of this study are to (1) describe the different types of COAs and provide an overview of key considerations for evaluating COAs, (2) review COAs and other outcome measures for chronic pain treatments that are recommended by the Initiative on Methods, Measurement, and Pain Assessment in Clinical Trials (IMMPACT) or other expert groups, and (3) review advances in understanding pain-related COAs that are relevant to clinical trials. The authors reviewed relevant articles, chapters, and guidance documents from the European Medicines Agency and U.S. Food and Drug Administration. Since the original core set of outcome measures were recommended by IMMPACT 14 years ago, several new advancements and publications relevant to the measurement or interpretation of COAs for chronic pain trials have emerged, presenting new research opportunities. Despite progress in the quality of measurement of several outcome domains for clinical trials of chronic pain, there remain some measurement challenges that require further methodological investigation.

The role of social isolation in physical and emotional outcomes among patients with chronic pain

OBJECTIVE

Social isolation negatively impacts early-disease processes and long-term health. Individuals with chronic pain are more vulnerable to social isolation, which exacerbates symptoms. It is currently unclear whether: 1. group-based programs for chronic pain improve social isolation, 2. improvements in social isolation account for improvements in outcomes. This study involved secondary data analysis of participants in a 10-week mind-body physical activity program. We examined whether social isolation improved during treatment, and whether such improvements accounted for improvements in emotional and physical functioning.

METHODS

Participants (N = 82) with chronic pain were randomized to a group-based mind-body physical activity intervention with (GetActive-Fitbit; n = 41) or without a Fitbit device (GetActive; n = 41). Participants completed self-reported measures of social isolation, emotional functioning (depression and anxiety symptoms), and multimodal physical functioning (self-report, performance-based, and objective). We used linear mixed effects modeling to examine pre-post treatment changes in social isolation and whether these changes accounted for improvements in emotional and physical functioning.

RESULTS

Both interventions were associated with significant and comparable improvements in social isolation from baseline to end of treatment, and improvements in social isolation accounted for significant improvements in self-reported emotional and physical functioning.

CONCLUSION

Interventions may target social isolation in chronic pain to optimize treatment outcomes.

Essential statistical principles of clinical trials of pain treatments

This article presents an overview of fundamental statistical principles of clinical trials of pain treatments. Statistical considerations relevant to phase 2 proof of concept and phase 3 confirmatory randomized trials investigating efficacy and safety are discussed, including (1) research design; (2) endpoints and analyses; (3) sample size determination and statistical power; (4) missing data and trial estimands; (5) data monitoring and interim analyses; and (6) interpretation of results. Although clinical trials of pharmacologic treatments are emphasized, the key issues raised by these trials are also directly applicable to clinical trials of other types of treatments, including biologics, devices, nonpharmacologic therapies (eg, physical therapy and cognitive-behavior therapy), and complementary and integrative health interventions.

The ACTTION Guide to Clinical Trials of Pain Treatments, part II: mitigating bias, maximizing value

Summaries of the articles included in part II of the ACTTION Guide to Clinical Trials of Pain Treatments are followed by brief overviews of methodologic considerations involving precision pain medicine, pragmatic clinical trials, real world evidence, and patient engagement in clinical trials.

Interpretation of chronic pain clinical trial outcomes: IMMPACT recommended considerations

Interpreting randomized clinical trials (RCTs) is crucial to making decisions regarding the use of analgesic treatments in clinical practice. In this article, we report on an Initiative on Methods, Measurement, and Pain Assessment in Clinical Trials (IMMPACT) consensus meeting organized by the Analgesic, Anesthetic, and Addiction Clinical Trial Translations, Innovations, Opportunities, and Networks, the purpose of which was to recommend approaches that facilitate interpretation of analgesic RCTs. We review issues to consider when drawing conclusions from RCTs, as well as common methods for reporting RCT results and the limitations of each method. These issues include the type of trial, study design, statistical analysis methods, magnitude of the estimated beneficial and harmful effects and associated precision, availability of alternative treatments and their benefit-risk profile, clinical importance of the change from baseline both within and between groups, presentation of the outcome data, and the limitations of the approaches used.

Pre-emptive digitally guided pudendal block after posterior vaginal repair

Introduction and hypothesis

The aim of this study was to establish if digitally guided pre-emptive pudendal block (PDB) reduces postoperative pain and facilitates recovery after posterior vaginal repair under local anesthesia and sedation.

Methods

We carried out a prospective, randomized, double-blind trial in an outpatient surgery facility. Forty-one women between 18 and 70 years of age, scheduled for primary posterior vaginal reconstructive outpatient surgery, completed the study. The surgery was performed using sedation and local anesthesia with bupivacaine/adrenaline. At the end of surgery, 20 ml of either ropivacaine 7.5 mg/ml or sodium chloride (placebo) was administered as a digitally guided PDB. The primary aim was to establish if PDB with ropivacaine compared with placebo reduced the maximal pain as reported by visual analog scale (VAS) during the first 24 h after surgery. Secondary aims were to compare the duration and experience of the hospital stay, nausea, need for additional opioids, and adverse events.

Results

PDB with ropivacaine after local infiltration with bupivacaine/adrenaline after outpatient posterior repair did not significantly reduce maximal postoperative pain, need for hospital admittance, nausea, or opioid use. Mild transient sensory loss occurred after ropivacaine in two women. Two women the placebo group were unable to void owing to severe postoperative pain, which was resolved by a rescue PDB.

Conclusions

When bupivacaine/adrenaline is used for anesthesia in posterior vaginal repair, PDB with ropivacaine gives no benefit regarding postoperative pain, recovery or length of hospital stay. Rescue PDB can be useful for postoperative pain relief.

Changes in hand grip strength and body weight after a dynamic exercise program and Mediterranean diet in women with rheumatoid arthritis: a randomized clinical trial

BACKGROUND

In patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) exercise improves muscle strength and decreases fat mass, whereas the consumption of a Mediterranean diet (MD) also has been associated with higher grip strength. Therefore, it is important to explore the combined effects of these interventions on hand grip strength and weight in RA.

OBJECTIVE

To determine the combined effect of an MD and a dynamic exercise program (DEP) on hand grip strength in women with RA.

METHOD

In a randomized clinical trial, 106 women with RA were included and assigned to the DEP-MD, DEP and MD groups. Weight, body circumferences, Disease Activity Score-28, Health Assessment Questionnaire Disability Index [HAQ-DI], and hand grip strength were measured at baseline and 24 weeks after the interventions.

RESULTS

After 24 weeks, hand grip strength showed a significant increase in the DEP group (median 2 kg) compared with DEP-MD (median 0.5 kg) and MD (median -0.5 kg) groups (p = 0.03). In the MD group weight and waist circumference showed a significant decrease (-2.2 kg and -4.3 cm) compared with DEP-MD (0.85 kg and 1.9 cm) and DEP (0.35 kg and 0.5 cm) groups (p < 0.01). Finally, a significant decrease was observed in the HAQ-DI after treatment in the DEP-MD group of -0.5 and the DEP group of -0.25 compared with the MD group with no change (p = 0.03).

CONCLUSION

In women with RA, in addition to pharmacological treatment, DEP increases hand grip strength and an MD decreases weight and waist circumferences, while the combination of DEP and MD improves disability.

Opioid versus opioid-free analgesia after surgical discharge: protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

Excessive prescribing after surgery has contributed to a public health crisis of opioid addiction and overdose in North America. However, the value of prescribing opioids to manage postoperative pain after surgical discharge remains unclear. We propose a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the extent to which opioid analgesia impact postoperative pain intensity and adverse events in comparison to opioid-free analgesia in patients discharged after surgery.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

Major electronic databases (MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Library, Scopus, AMED, BIOSIS, CINAHL and PsycINFO) will be searched for multi-dose randomised-trials examining the comparative effectiveness of opioid versus opioid-free analgesia after surgical discharge. Studies published from January 1990 to July 2019 will be targeted, with no language restrictions. The search will be re-run before manuscript submission to include most recent literature. We will consider studies involving patients undergoing minor and major surgery. Teams of reviewers will, independently and in duplicate, assess eligibility, extract data and evaluate risk of bias. Our main outcomes of interest are pain intensity and postoperative vomiting. Study results will be pooled using random effects models. When trials report outcomes for a common domain (eg, pain intensity) using different scales, we will convert effect sizes to a common standard metric (eg, Visual Analogue Scale). Minimally important clinical differences reported in previous literature will be considered when interpreting results. Subgroup analyses defined a priori will be conducted to explore heterogeneity. Risk of bias will be assessed according to the Cochrane Collaboration's Risk of Bias Tool 2.0. The quality of evidence for all outcomes will be evaluated using the GRADE rating system.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Ethical approval is not required since this is a systematic review of published studies. Our results will be published in a peer-reviewed journal and presented at relevant conferences. Further knowledge dissemination will be sought via public and patient organisations focussed on pain and opioid-related harms.

Design and Reporting Characteristics of Clinical Trials of Select Chronic and Recurrent Pediatric Pain Conditions: An Analgesic, Anesthetic, and Addiction Clinical Trial Translations, Innovations, Opportunities, and Networks Systematic Review

Fewer randomized clinical trials (RCTs) are conducted for chronic or recurrent pain in pediatric populations compared with adult populations; thus, data to support treatment efficacy in children are limited. This article evaluates the design features and reporting practices of RCTs for chronic and recurrent pain that are likely unique to, or particularly important in, a pediatric population to promote improvements in the evidence base for pediatric pain treatments. Areas covered include outcome measure selection and reporting and reporting of adverse events and challenges to recruitment and retention. A search of PubMed and EMBASE identified primary publications describing RCTs of treatments for select chronic and recurrent pain conditions in children or adolescents published between 2000 and 2017. Only 49% of articles identified a primary outcome measure. The primary outcome measure assessed pain intensity in 38% of the trials, specifically measure by verbal rating scale (13%), faces pain scale (11%), visual analogue scale (9%), or numeric rating scale (5%). All of the CONSORT harms reporting recommendations were fulfilled by <50% of the articles. Discussions of recruitment challenges occurred in 64% of articles that enrolled <90% of their target sample. However, discussions regarding retention challenges only occurred in 14% of trials in which withdrawal rates were >10%. The goal of this article is to promote comprehensive reporting of pediatric pain RCTs to improve the design of future trials, facilitate conduction of systematic reviews and meta-analyses, and better inform clinical practice. PERSPECTIVE: This review of chronic and recurrent pediatric pain trials demonstrates inadequacies in the reporting quality of key features specifically important to pediatric populations. It provides recommendations that address these shortcomings to promote continued efforts toward improving the quality of the design and publication of future pediatric clinical pain trials.

Critical components for designing and implementing randomized controlled trials

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are considered the first level of evidence to assess the efficacy of novel interventions/therapies. Proper design and implementation of an RCT can result in convincing causal inferences. RCTs often represent the gold standard for clinical trials when appropriately designed, conducted and reported. However, there are limitations in implementation of RCTs, including sufficiency of randomized allocation (especial for allocation concealment), implementing standard intervention, maintaining follow-up and statement of conflicting interests. Therefore, the basic principles of RCTs are outlined here so that pediatric investigators can further understand what is the best evidence based on RCTs. More importantly, the quality of pediatric RCTs may be improved by following challenges in pediatric clinical trials outlined here.