Medical oncologists' attitudes and practice in cancer pain management: a national survey

A nationwide neurosurgical inter-disciplinary service for cancer-related refractory pain

PURPOSE

Neurosurgical ablative procedures, such as cordotomy and cingulotomy, are often considered irreversible and destructive but can provide an effective and individualized solution for cancer-related refractory pain, when all other approaches have been unsuccessful. This paper provides an in-depth exploration of a novel approach to managing refractory cancer pain. It involves an interdisciplinary team led by a neurosurgeon at a renowned national referral center.

METHODS

a retrospective analysis of the medical records of all sequential patients who underwent their initial evaluation at our interdisciplinary refractory cancer pain clinic from February 2017 to January 2023.

RESULTS

A total of 207 patients were examined in the clinic for a first visit during the study period. All patients were referred to the clinic due to severe pain that was deemed refractory by the referring physician. The mean age was 61 ± 12.3 years, with no significant sex difference (P = 0.58). The mean ECOG Performance Status score was 2.35. Conservative measures had not yet been exhausted in 28 patients (14%) and 9 patients were well controlled (4%). Neurosurgical ablative procedures were recommended for 151 (73%) of the patients. Sixty-six patients (32%) eventually underwent the procedure. 91 patients (44%) received a negative recommendation for surgery. Thirty-five patients (17%) were referred for further invasive procedures at the pain clinic.

CONCLUSION

An Interdisciplinary cooperation between palliative care specialists, pain specialists, and neurosurgeons ensures optimal patient selection and provides safe and effective neurosurgery for the treatment of refractory cancer-related pain.

Prevalence of Reluctance to Prescribe Opioids Among Physicians in Oncology Departments: A Descriptive Cross-Sectional Study From Turkey

Cancer-related pain (CrP) is a significant public health problem, and opioids are the mainstay of CrP treatment. Considering the persistent problem of inadequate treatment of cancer pain in Turkey, the study was conducted to determine the prevalence of reluctance to prescribe opioids among physicians in oncology departments. The descriptive cross-sectional study included oncology residents and residents without oncology specialization in oncology departments. One thousand physicians were invited by e-mail to the Google Forms survey platform. Two hundred and seventy-eight physicians completed the survey and were included, of which 50% (n: 139) were female. More than half (n: 166; 59.7%) of them were oncology subspecialists. The prevalence of reluctance to prescribe opioids was calculated to be 38.1% (n: 106). A significant positive association was found between the factor associated with reluctance to prescribe opioids and fear of opioid use disorder (β = 0.964; 95% CI = 0.362-1.566; p = .002). Reluctance to prescribe opioids was inversely related to the oncology subspecialty (β = -0.878; 95% CI = -1.54 to -0.213; p = 0.010) and education about CrP and opioid management (β = -1.707; 95% CI = -2.404 to -1.009; p = 0.01). Reluctance to prescribe opioids appears to be associated with a lack of knowledge and fear of opioid use disorder.

Knowledge, attitudes, and current practices toward lung cancer palliative care management in China: a national survey

Scope

The present investigation seeks to illuminate the current state and disparities in the knowledge, attitudes, and practices (KAP) among healthcare professionals regarding the management of lung cancer palliative care (LCPC) in China, while simultaneously assessing the prevalence and context of patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) usage in the management of cancer-related pain.

Methods

A total of 2093 healthcare practitioners from 706 hospitals across China completed a structured questionnaire that probed various facets of LCPC management. The questionnaire consisted of seven thematic sections, incorporating chi-square tests and Fisher's exact probabilities to statistically assess the discrepancies in KAP among healthcare professionals across different hospital grades. Ordered data distributions among hospital grades were compared using non-parametric Kruskal-Wallis H and Mann-Whitney U tests. Multiple-choice items were subjected to multiple-response cross-tabulation analysis, while the Spearman rank-order correlation coefficient was employed to gauge potential associations among variables.

Results

Around 84.2% of the respondents perceived anti-tumor therapy to be of equal importance to palliative care. Statistically significant differences (χ² = 27.402, P = 0.002) in satisfaction levels were observed, with participants from Tertiary hospitals demonstrating higher satisfaction compared to those from Secondary and Primary hospitals. Pain emerged as the most prevalent symptom necessitating LCPC. Major impediments to LCPC adoption included patients' and families' concerns about the safety of long-term palliative care-related drug use. 31.1% of the respondents cited the most frequent rationale for PCA use as cases involving patients who required systemic administration of large opioid doses or exhibited intolerable adverse reactions to opioids. The principal deterrents against the use of PCA for cancer pain management were (1): apprehension about adverse drug reactions due to overdose (2), concern about the potential for opioid addiction, and (3) the anticipated increase in patients' economic burdens. Over the preceding 24-month period, 33.9% of the surveyed healthcare practitioners reported no engagement in either online or offline LCPC-related training initiatives.

Conclusion

This study emphasizes the pressing need for comprehensive training in LCPC among Chinese health personnels, particularly focusing on the effective management of cancer pain symptoms.

Current Status of Cognition and Clinical Practice of Refractory Cancer Pain in Shanghai: A Questionnaire Survey

Purpose

This study aimed to assess the current status of clinical practice of refractory cancer pain (RCP) among a sample of physicians specializing in cancer pain management in Shanghai.

Methods

From 2019 to 2021, a questionnaire survey was conducted among physicians engaged in diagnosis and treatment of cancer pain through the questionnaire WJX network platform in Shanghai, China.

Results

A total of 238 responses participated in the survey. This survey reports physicians' understanding and incidence rate of breakthrough cancer pain (BTCP). The choice of analgesics and satisfaction of analgesic effect were investigated. We also investigated doctors' knowledge of the diagnostic criteria for RCP and their tendency to choose analgesics. Oral immediate-release morphine and intravenous or subcutaneous morphine injection have been the common treatment approach for transient cancer pain exacerbations. The main barriers to pain management are lack of standardized treatment methods for RCP, lack of knowledge related to RCP, and single drug dosage form. Doctors believe the most necessary measures to improve the current situation of poor cancer pain control include improving medical staff's understanding and treatment techniques for RCP, updating treatment techniques and methods, and improving the configuration of drug types in medical institutions. Clinicians expect to improve understanding and treatment techniques through systematic training.

Conclusion

Despite multiple available analgesic measures, the treatment of RCP remains challenging. Improving the understanding of medical staff towards RCP, improving treatment techniques, and increasing the accessibility of multiple drug types are important ways to improve the satisfaction of cancer pain management in the future.

Exploring health professionals' knowledge of cancer-related pain: a scoping review

BACKGROUND

Cancer-related pain is a complex multidimensional experience that affects all aspects of life. To support those impacted by cancer-related pain it is essential that health professionals have adequate knowledge in its assessment and management.

AIMS

To explore the knowledge of health professionals regarding cancer-related pain.

METHODS

A scoping review methodology was used to systematically search the literature published between 2010 and 2020. Databases CINAHL, Medline and PsycINFO were searched using terms 'cancer pain', 'healthcare professional', 'knowledge', 'attitudes' and 'barriers'.

FINDINGS

The search identified 38 articles. They focused on nursing knowledge with minimal involvement of allied health professionals. Knowledge levels were variable with the majority demonstrating poor knowledge. Common knowledge gaps included around fear of addiction, principles of cancer-related pain assessment and management, and interventional techniques.

CONCLUSION

Knowledge of cancer-related pain is variable with several knowledge gaps. More work is needed to ensure health professionals have adequate knowledge regarding the complexity of cancer-related pain.

Systematic Review on Barriers to Access Opioid Analgesics for Cancer Pain Management from the Health Worker Perspective

The increasing incidence of oncological diseases creates a corresponding need for effective cancer pain management (CPM). The lack of access to and availability of opioid analgesics in most countries leads to avoidable suffering. This systematic review aims to identify barriers to accessing opioids, as described in literature that reflects the perspective of health-care workers. A systematic literature search was performed in May 2018 and updated in December 2022, using search terms related to "cancer pain," "opioid analgesics," "access," and "health-care personnel." Medline, Embase, and PsycInfo were searched. Forty-two studies met the inclusion criteria. Principal barriers that have hindered licit access to medical opioids include regulatory, systemic, educational, patient-related, and societal. These barriers are rooted in a lack of adequate education about the importance and significance of appropriate CPM. Barriers were often mutually reinforcing. A interdisciplinary approach is required to overcome them. This research contributes to the important global health issue of unduly limited access to opioid analgesics. It provides interdisciplinary solutions in terms of guidelines to ensure that governments respect, protect, and fulfill the right to the highest attainable standard of health, which includes the relief of severe pain.

Daily pain and opioid administration in hospitalized patients with cancer: the importance of psychological factors, recent surgery, and current opioid use

ABSTRACT

Pain is common and variable in its severity among hospitalized patients with cancer. Although biopsychosocial factors are well established as modulators of chronic pain, less is known about what patient-level factors are associated with worse pain outcomes among hospitalized cancer patients. This prospective cohort study included patients with active cancer presenting to the emergency department (ED) with pain severity of ≥4/10 and followed pain outcomes longitudinally throughout hospital admission. Baseline demographic, clinical, and psychological factors were assessed on ED presentation, and daily average clinical pain ratings and opioid consumption during hospitalization were abstracted. Univariable and multivariable generalized estimating equation analyses examined associations of candidate biopsychosocial, demographic, and clinical predictors with average daily pain and opioid administration. Among 113 hospitalized patients, 73% reported pain as the primary reason for presenting to the ED, 43% took outpatient opioids, and 27% had chronic pain that predated their cancer. Higher pain catastrophizing ( B = 0.1, P ≤ 0.001), more recent surgery ( B = -0.2, P ≤ 0.05), outpatient opioid use ( B = 1.4, P ≤ 0.001), and history of chronic pain before cancer diagnosis ( B = 0.8, P ≤ 0.05) were independently associated with greater average daily pain while admitted to the hospital. Higher pain catastrophizing ( B = 1.6, P ≤ 0.05), higher anxiety ( B = 3.7, P ≤ 0.05), lower depression ( B = -4.9, P ≤ 0.05), metastatic disease ( B = 16.2, P ≤ 0.05), and outpatient opioid use ( B = 32.8, P ≤ 0.001) were independently associated with higher daily opioid administration. Greater psychological distress, especially pain catastrophizing, as well as pain and opioid use history, predicted greater difficulty with pain management among hospitalized cancer patients, suggesting that early assessment of patient-level characteristics may help direct consultation for more intensive pharmacologic and nonpharmacologic interventions.

The Stigma Surrounding Opioid Use as a Barrier to Cancer-Pain Management: An Overview of Experiences with Fear, Shame, and Poorly Controlled Pain in the Context of Advanced Cancer

Cancer-related pain affects a majority of patients with advanced cancer and is often undertreated. The treatment of this pain is largely reliant on the use of opioids, which are essential medicines for symptom management and the maintenance of quality of life (QoL) for patients with advanced cancer. While there are cancer-specific guidelines for the treatment of pain, widespread publication and policy changes in response to the opioid epidemic have drastically impacted perceptions of opioid use. This overview therefore aims to investigate how manifestations of opioid stigma impact pain management in cancer settings, with an emphasis on the experiences of patients with advanced cancer. Opioid use has been widely stigmatized in multiple domains, including public, healthcare, and patient populations. Physician hesitancy in prescribing and pharmacist vigilance in dispensing were identified as barriers to optimal pain management, and may contribute to stigma in the context of advanced cancer. Evidence in the literature suggests that opioid stigma may result in patient deviations from prescription instructions, which generally leads to pain undertreatment. Patients reflected on experiencing shame and fear surrounding their prescription opioid use and feeling uncomfortable communicating with their healthcare providers on these topics. Our findings indicate that future work is required to educate patients and providers in order to de-stigmatize opioid use. Through alleviating stigma, patients may be better able to make decisions regarding their pain management which lead to freedom from cancer-related pain and improved QoL.

Good practice recommendations to better coordinate the management of oncological pain: a Delphi survey

Treatment of oncological pain is complex and requires a multidisciplinary management approach between oncology services and pain units. Although significant improvements have been achieved in the treatment and overall survival of cancer patients, the management of oncological pain has not followed the same directions. Many patients are not referred to pain units even though they could benefit from it. The purpose of this Delphi survey was to map the current situation in the management of cancer pain, identify barriers and propose recommendations to improve its management by emphasizing the importance of collaboration and coordination between oncology services and pain units. A survey among members with recognized experience in the management of oncology patients and oncological pain was held based on the Delphi method principles. The experts were asked to vote preselected statements on cancer pain management in two rounds and conclusions and recommendations were formulated based on the consensus reached for each statement. Barriers and areas for improvement were identified: need of multidisciplinary management approach, effective communication between oncology services and pain units, timely referral of cancer patients to pain units, training of health care professionals dealing with cancer aspects and identification of those patients that could benefit from a multidisciplinary management of their oncological disease. The experts issued recommendations targeting the identified barriers and areas for improvement by defining the service requirements of hospital and units treating cancer pain patients, establishing referral pathways necessities and adopted measures to improve the care of cancer patients.

Cancer Pain Treatment Strategies in Patients with Cancer

Management of cancer pain is challenging. Despite the poor evidence, opioid therapy still remains the cornerstone for the management of cancer-related pain. Opioids should be given according to the clinical presentation in the different stages of disease. There is no drug of choice, as most opioids are effective. Thus, the choice should be based on the individual characteristics of patients. Optimization of opioid therapy may allow individual treatment according to the patient's characteristics and pain syndromes, providing timely alternatives in the different stages of disease. While most patients respond to an appropriate treatment associated with a comprehensive assessment and symptom control, a high level of experience and knowledge is necessary in determining conditions to maximize the analgesic response, eventually adding adjuvants in some specific circumstances. Alternative opioids may improve the balance between analgesia and adverse effects in the presence of a poor response to the first opioid in a large number of patients. Finally, a selected population can benefit from some interventional procedures.

Rapid-Onset Opioids for Management of Breakthrough Cancer Pain: Considerations for Daily Practice

Background and Objective

Rapid-onset opioids (ROOs) are effective treatments for breakthrough cancer pain (BTcP) given their rapid onset of action and relatively short duration of analgesia. The aim of this article is to describe specific considerations for the use of ROOs in daily practice, focusing on dose titration and treatment of specific populations.

Type of Review

We conducted a narrative review on the use of ROOs for BTcP. We selected papers according to the following search terms: “breakthrough cancer pain” and “rapid onset opioids”.

Results

ROOs may be considered as the most suitable drugs to treat BTcP and can be used “on-demand”. Several fentanyl formulations are available and have been associated with control of BTcP and with improvement in quality of life. Various titration schemes have been used to optimize ROO dosing; however, a dose-proportional scheme could be considered safe and effective in most patients. Specific formulations may be more suitable for specific patient subgroups; for example, patients with oral mucositis may prefer intranasal to oral formulations. Moreover, elderly patients or those without caregivers should be clearly educated on the use of these formulations. A key element in achieving successful treatment of BTcP is awareness of the barriers to pain management, including poor overall assessment, patient reluctance to take opioids or report pain, and physician reluctance to prescribe opioids.

Conclusion

A personalized approach is fundamental when prescribing a medication for BTcP, and careful attention should be given to drug choice and route of administration, and to the need for alternative therapeutic options.

Opioid Therapy in Cancer Patients and Survivors at Risk of Addiction, Misuse or Complex Dependency

A clinical conundrum can occur when a patient with active opioid use disorder (OUD) or at elevated risk for the condition presents with cancer and related painful symptoms. Despite earlier beliefs that cancer patients were relatively unaffected by opioid misuse, it appears that cancer patients have similar risks as the general population for OUD but are more likely to need and take opioids. Treating such patients requires an individualized approach, informed consent, and a shared decision-making model. Tools exist to help stratify patients for risk of OUD. While improved clinician education in pain control is needed, patients too need to be better informed about the risks and benefits of opioids. Patients may fear pain more than OUD, but opioids are not always the most effective pain reliever for a given patient and some patients do not tolerate or want to take opioids. The association of OUD with mental health disorders (dual diagnosis) can also complicate delivery of care as patients with mental health issues may be less adherent to treatment and may use opioids for “chemical coping” as much as for pain control.

Low-dose sublingual fentanyl improves quality of life in patients with breakthrough cancer pain in palliative care

Aim: This subanalysis of the CAVIDIOPAL study evaluated the impact of individualized management of breakthrough cancer pain (BTcP) with fentanyl on the quality of life (QoL) of advanced cancer patients in Spanish palliative care units. Patients & methods: This was a prospective, observational, multicenter study. The European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer's QLQ-C30 questionnaire was used at baseline (V0) and visit 28 (V28). Results: Ninety-five patients were mainly treated with 67-133 μg fentanyl, showing a notable reduction in intensity (visual analog scale: 8.0 [V0] to 4.6 [V28]), frequency and duration of BTcP episodes shortly after the first 1-2 weeks of treatment, with significantly improved QoL (global health status: 31.1 [V0] to 53.1 [V28]). Conclusion: Low-dose sublingual fentanyl effectively reduced BTcP in advanced cancer patients in palliative care units, significantly improving QoL. Clinical trial registration: NCT02840500 (ClinicalTrials.gov).

Framework for opioid stigma in cancer pain

ABSTRACT

Millions of patients with cancer pain are treated with prescription opioids each year. However, efforts to mitigate the ongoing opioid crisis result in unintended consequences with opioid pain management, including opioid stigma. Emerging research indicates that opioid stigma is problematic in patients with cancer, but few studies have examined contributors to and impacts of opioid stigma in this population. To guide future research in this area, we propose a conceptual framework-the opioid stigma framework (OSF)-with which to understand and improve opioid stigma in patients with cancer pain. Development of the OSF was guided by a literature review of stigma in health-related conditions, adaptation of the existing Health Stigma and Discrimination Framework, a topical review of challenges related to opioid cancer pain management, and author expertise in cancer, pain, and opioid prescribing. The proposed OSF highlights 5 domains: (1) contributors to opioid stigma, or factors that increase the likelihood that a patient will experience opioid stigma; (2) intersecting stigmas, or the convergence of multiple stigmatized identities within a patient; (3) stigma manifestations, or the ways opioid stigma is manifested in patients, clinicians, and the community; (4) proximal outcomes, or the immediate consequences of opioid stigma in patients; and (5) long-term impacts in patients. The OSF provides 2 main avenues to facilitate future research: (1) providing a framework to explore the mechanisms that underlie opioid stigma and its impact on cancer pain management and (2) supporting the development of targeted, tailored interventions to eliminate opioid stigma.

Knowledge, Practices, and Perceived Barriers in Cancer Pain Management at Oncology Units: A Cross-Sectional Survey of Medical Staff in China

Background

Patients and Methods

Results

Conclusion

Impact of Pain on Employment and Financial Outcomes Among Cancer Survivors

PURPOSE

Although pain is a frequently reported symptom among individuals with cancer, there is limited information on the impact of pain on employment or financial outcomes. This study used nationally representative data to examine the role of pain levels on employment and financial outcomes.

METHODS

We used data from the 2016-2017 Medical Expenditure Panel Survey Experiences with Cancer Survivorship Supplement to identify 1,213 adults diagnosed with cancer. Multivariable logistic regression analyses were used to examine association of pain levels and self-reported employment and financial outcomes.

RESULTS

Approximately 43% of adults with a cancer history reported no pain, 29% mild pain, 18% moderate pain, and 10% severe pain over the past 7 days. Compared with those reporting no pain, individuals reporting any pain had significantly increased likelihood of adverse employment outcomes including early retirement, feeling less productive, and staying at a job because of concerns about losing insurance. Individuals with any pain (compared with no pain) also had significantly increased likelihood of adverse financial outcomes including borrowing money or going into debt, inability to cover medical costs, and worrying about paying medical bills. For both employment and financial outcomes, there were dose-response relationships, with worse outcomes generally associated with greater pain levels.

CONCLUSION

Pain is frequently associated with adverse employment and financial outcomes among cancer survivors, and greater pain is associated with worse outcomes. Better assessment of pain severity among survivors and implementation of strategies to assist with employment and financial objectives may be important steps to enhance patient-centered care.

A Survey of Knowledge and Barriers of Healthcare Professionals toward Opioid Analgesics in Cancer Pain Management

PURPOSE

Pain is among the most frequent and troubling symptoms in cancer patients. Despite the availability of updated treatment guidelines and effective pharmacological therapies, undertreatment of cancer pain remains a global problem. Opioids are the mainstay analgesics to treat moderate-to-severe cancer pain. The goal of this study was to assess the knowledge and barriers towards opioid analgesics for cancer pain management among healthcare professionals in Oncology Units in Jordan.

METHODS

A structured questionnaire was administered to healthcare professionals (consultant doctors, resident doctors, pharmacists, and nurses) at three Oncology Units in a cross-sectional study design.

RESULTS

A total of 201 healthcare professionals completed the questionnaire. The average age was 34.8 ± 8.1 years (range 23-58) and 49.3% of respondents were nurses. The mean score for the knowledge of opioids was 12.5 ± 3.2 out of 24 points (range 2-20). An acceptable level of knowledge was observed in 50.7% of participants, while 49.3% had poor knowledge. Knowledge items mostly answered incorrectly were related to opioid administration, pharmacology, dosing, adverse events, rotation, and toxicity. Knowledge scores were significantly higher for consultant doctors compared to pharmacists and nurses (p=0.016 and p < 0.001, respectively). Healthcare professionals who handled opioid analgesics had significantly higher mean knowledge scores than those who did not (p=0.012). Linear regression analysis revealed that being a consultant physician has an independent, statistically significant association with higher knowledge scores. Among perceived barriers to using opioids, fear of addiction by patients was the most frequently reported barrier by respondents (79.6%). Other highly recognized barriers were fear of adverse effects by patients (67.2%) and lack of training programs on opioid dosing and monitoring (63.7%).

CONCLUSIONS

This study revealed major gaps in the knowledge of opioids and pain management among healthcare professionals. There is an urgent need for developing innovative interventions to improve the knowledge of opioid analgesics and the understanding of pain management guidelines among healthcare professionals in Jordan.

[Opioid prescriptions in bone metastatic cancer patients: A cross sectional nationwide pharmacoepidemiological study]

Oncological situations represent the majority of palliative situations. Labeling the palliative stage often comes too late in oncology. Pain comes first among discomfort symptoms with the greatest impact on quality of life. We wondered whether the evolutionary stage of the cancer was linked with the prescriptions of opioid analgesics. We observed the prescriptions of strong opioids in patients suffering from metastatic bone cancer 3 months before and after identifying the situation as palliative. This is a cross-sectional observational study performed between January 1, 2012 and December 31, 2016 using data from the French (nationwide claims database). We included 38,399 patients with cancer with at least one metastatic bone location in a palliative situation. Seventeen percent (n=6544) of patients had a prescription of opioid analgesics after palliative care labeling, 19.8 % (n=7606) had a prescription before, 31.1 % (n=11 949) had a prescription before and after and 32.0 % had no prescription of opioid analgesics. An increase in the dosage of opioid analgesics is observed between before and after labeling the stage of the disease as palliative with an average dosage ranging from 99.6 to 142.3mg per day. This study shows that labeling a situation as palliative affects prescriptions of strong opioid analgesics. An early identification of the situation as palliative is essential to provide appropriate care.

The Practice of Pain Assessment and Management in a Tertiary Oncology Center

Background Pain is one of the common and devastating symptoms that affects millions of cancer patients globally. Despite published guidelines and education on the assessment and management of cancer-related pain, underestimated or undertreated pain continues to be a considerable worldwide public health concern among cancer patients. In this study, we aimed to assess physicians' adherence to the World Health Organization (WHO) guidelines in the management and assessment of pain in oncology patients based on the available score of pain in the Princess Noorah Oncology Center (PNOC) at the King Abdulaziz Medical City in Jeddah. Methodology This cross-sectional, retrospective chart review study studied 451 patients (selected through computerized random sampling) who were admitted to the PNOC during the study period. Results The pain was assessed using the Brief Pain Inventory in almost all patients (n = 450, 99.8%). The pain was categorized as mild in 386 (85.6%) patients, moderate in 46 (10.2%) patients, and severe in 19 (4.2%) patients. Opioid prescriptions were significantly higher among patients with moderate (76.1%) and severe pain (89.5%) compared to those with mild pain (39.1%; p < 0.0001). Conclusions The practice of pain documentation for cancer patients was adequate as indicated by reporting the pain scores of 99.8% of inpatients. Patients with moderate and severe pain were more likely to receive opioids and a combination of opioids plus non-opioid analgesics, whereas the prescription of analgesics was predicted by experiencing moderate cancer pain.

Medical-Surgical Patients' and Registered Nurses' Satisfaction and Comprehensiveness of Patient Assessment Using the Clinically Aligned Pain Assessment Tool

BACKGROUND

The pain experience is complex, and nurses are challenged to objectively assess and document patients' subjective reports of pain. There is a clear need for an assessment tool that is easy to use and provides meaningful, actionable information for patients and nurses.

AIMS

This study explored nurses' and patients' satisfaction with the Clinically Aligned Pain Assessment (CAPA) as well as nurses' charting.

SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS

A convenience sample of adult patients and nurses on four medical-surgical units in one community hospital.

METHODS

A quantitative, two-group comparison design between patients and nurses using questionnaires to determine satisfaction and a retrospective chart review to determine comprehensiveness of nurse charting.

RESULTS

No significant differences existed between patients' and nurses' responses to seven of eight satisfaction questions The median score for seven of eight questions was 5 (using a 6-point Likert scale with 1 = strongly disagree and 6 = strongly agree), which demonstrated more than 80% agreement (somewhat agree, agree, strongly agree) among both groups that CAPA was superior to the NRS, based on individual responses. The one significant difference (p = 0.03) revealed patients were more likely to respond "agree or strongly agree" compared to nurses regarding the nurse thoroughly addressing patients' needs using CAPA. Inter-rater reliability using CAPA was determined to be 89.5%, and a panel of clinical experts determined CAPA had strong content validity of 88.33%. In addition, 70.41% of nurses charted comprehensively using CAPA.

CONCLUSION

As a result, CAPA was determined to be convenient, accurate, and valuable in guiding intervention decisions.

Practice, Knowledge, and Attitude of Health Care Providers regarding Cancer Pain Management: A National Survey

Background

A lack of knowledge and inadequate practices of health care providers (HCPs) are the main obstacles to effective cancer pain management (CPM). The main objective of the study was to evaluate the CPM knowledge, CPM practice, and attitudes towards pharmacists' participation and advanced methods in CPM of physicians, nurses, and pharmacists in China.

Methods

An open online survey was adopted using social media software (WeChat) as the platform to conduct a nationwide survey of HCPs involved in CPM in public medical institutions at all levels in China from March to June 2019.

Results

A total of 1279 physicians, 2267 nurses, and 1466 pharmacists participated in the survey. Among the three types of professionals, nurses had the highest level of practical ability (61.63 ± 28.99) and best attitudes towards pharmacists' participation and advanced methods in CPM (72.05 ± 33.71) and physicians had the best mastery of CPM-related knowledge (69.60 ± 28.45), while pharmacists performed the worst in these three aspects (50.04 ± 26.69, 61.49 ± 28.95, and 62.07 ± 36.46, respectively). Only 19.69% of the hospitals had a pharmacist to tumor patient ratio ≥1 : 50. Hierarchical analysis showed that passing a good pain management (GPM) ward program and participating in advanced training had positive impacts on the scores of all three parts in the three professions (ptrend <0.05).

Conclusions

HCPs' levels of practice, knowledge, and attitudes towards pharmacists and advanced methods of CPM were average in China; however, pharmacists had the worst performance, which demonstrates a need for further improvement. Furthermore, GPM ward programs and advanced trainings are helpful for improving CPM levels.

Compassion Inequities and Opioid Use Disorder: A Matched Case-Control Analysis Examining Inpatient Management of Cancer-Related Pain for Patients With Opioid Use Disorder

CONTEXT

The opioid epidemic spurred guidelines intended to reduce inappropriate prescribing. Although acute cancer-related pain was excluded from these recommendations, studies demonstrate reduced opioid prescribing for patients hospitalized with advanced cancer.

OBJECTIVES

We performed a matched case-control analysis to determine how a history of opioid use disorder (OUD) affects inpatient management of cancer pain.

METHODS

Charts of patients with OUD admitted for cancer pain from 2015-2020 were retrospectively reviewed. Hospitalizations were matched 1:1 by patient age and sex. Home milligram-morphine equivalent per day (MME/day) was calculated from the home medication list. Admission MME/day was the average MME/day administered during hospitalization.

RESULTS

A total of 80 hospitalizations (40:40) were matched for 25 patients with a history of OUD and 31 patients with no history of OUD. Cancer was metastatic/relapsed for 70% of admissions. The median overall survival was 2.3 months (95% CI 0-5.21, P = 0.13). Patients with OUD had a significantly lower change from Home to Admission MME/day (-3 vs. 37, P < 0.01) and were less likely to have any increase in Admission MME/day (OR 0.1, 95% CI 0.02-0.43, P < 0.01). When considering opioids administered after pain specialty consultation, there was no difference between groups.

CONCLUSION

Our results suggest that patients with OUD receive lower quality inpatient management of cancer-related pain. Provider education and early involvement of pain specialists are crucial in delivering equitable and compassionate end-of-life care for patients with OUD.

Philosophical Assumptions Used in Research on Barriers for Effective Cancer Pain Management: A Scoping Review

Cancer pain is one of the most common symptoms in cancer patients and often has a negative impact on patients' functional status and quality of life. Despite the available guidelines for effective pain management, factors such as barriers to cancer pain management still exist. The lens or philosophical assumptions used to guide cancer pain management research is a crucial but often overlooked component of high-quality research. Therefore, the purpose of this scoping review was to classify and map the available evidence and identify the knowledge gap regarding using a philosophical assumption to address the barriers of pain management among patients with cancer. Absence of clear philosophical assumptions in the qualitative research and generally a theoretical quantitative research may contribute to the slow progress in identifying and addressing barriers to cancer pain management. Therefore, the hermeneutic circle was suggested to address the main barriers of cancer pain management, focusing on the dialectic approach between the participants including researchers, cancer patients, and their family caregivers, health care providers, and policymakers. Understanding and possible solutions of the problem could be obtained through fusion of the horizons; in which the participants past and present horizons emerge. Then the collaborative efforts between the participants may yield effective strategies to overcome cancer pain barriers to improve the quality of cancer pain management.

Analysis of end-of-life treatment and physician perceptions at a university hospital in Germany

Purpose

Providing state-of-the-art palliative care is crucial in all areas of in- and outpatient settings. Studies on the implementation of palliative care standards for dying patients are rare.

Methods

N = 141 physicians from all internal departments were polled anonymously about the treatment of dying patients using a self-designed questionnaire. Furthermore, we evaluated the terminal care of n = 278 patients who died in internal medicine departments at University Hospital Mannheim between January and June, 2019 based on clinical data of the last 48 h of life. We defined mandatory criteria for good palliative practice both regarding treatment according to patients' records and answers in physicians' survey.

Results

Fifty-six physicians (40%) reported uncertainties in the treatment of dying patients (p < 0.05). Physicians caring for dying patients regularly stated to use sedatives more frequently and to administer less infusions (p < 0.05, respectively). In multivariate analysis, medical specialization was identified as an independent factor for good palliative practice (p < 0.05). Physicians working with cancer patients regularly were seven times more likely to use good palliative practice (p < 0.05) than physicians who did not. Cancer patients received good palliative practice more often than patients dying from non-malignant diseases (p < 0.05).

Conclusion

Guideline-based palliative care for dying patients was found to be implemented more likely and consistent within the oncology department. These results point to a potential lack of training of fellows in non-oncological departments in terms of good end-of-life care.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s00432-021-03652-0.

Practices and Hindrances in Cancer Pain Management: Results of a National Multi-Cancer Center Survey Among Healthcare Professionals in China

Background

Inadequate control of cancer-related pain in China is an ongoing problem. This study investigated the practices of cancer pain (CP) management at major cancer centers in China and perceived hindrances and knowledge of CP management among health professionals.

Methods

From September to October 2019, a survey was conducted using electronic questionnaires via the internet to investigate the practices, and perceived hindrances and knowledge in managing CP among healthcare professionals from 7 provincial cancer centers in China. The questionnaire included demographic data, the professionals' practices among their own patients, their opinions regarding hindrances to CP management, and knowledge of CP management.

Results

We gathered validated responses from 411 anonymous healthcare professionals, with 82.2% (411/500) of response rate. Based on the analysis of these 411 questionnaires, the results demonstrated that CP was prevalent among patients with cancer, while moderate-to-severe pain took a great proportion. CP management was inadequate for a significant proportion of the patients with CP. Pain assessment, analgesic treatment, attention to adverse effects of analgesic, and multidisciplinary management were usually ineffectual in many cases. The duration of work experience did not significantly affect CP management. The respondents considered that both patients and healthcare professionals were responsible for the undermanagement of CP. Only 26 (6.3%) respondents were able to answer correctly all 10 of the professional questions regarding CP.

Conclusion

CP is commonly undermanaged in China. Effective pain control requires the implementation of standards, and the sufficient attention and training of healthcare professionals.

How Patients and Providers Weigh the Risks and Benefits of Long-Term Opioid Therapy for Cancer Pain

PURPOSE

To understand how patients and providers weigh the risks and benefits of long-term opioid therapy (LTOT) for cancer pain.

METHODS

Researchers used VA approved audio-recording devices to record interviews. ATLAS t.i., a qualitative analysis software, was used for analysis of transcribed interview data. Participants included 20 Veteran patients and 20 interdisciplinary providers from primary care- and oncology-based practice settings. We conducted semistructured interviews and analyzed transcripts used thematic qualitative methods. Interviews explored factors that affect decision making about appropriateness of LTOT for cancer related pain. We saturated themes for providers and patients separately.

RESULTS

Factors affecting patient decision-making included influence from various information sources, persuasion from trusted providers, and sometimes deferral of the decision to their provider. Relative prioritization of pain management as the focal patient concern varied with some patients describing comparatively more fear of chemotherapy than opioid analgesics, comparatively more knowledge of opioids in relation to other drugs;patients expressed a preference to spend the limited time they have with their oncologist discussing cancer treatment rather than opioid use. Factors affecting provider decision making included prognosis, patient goals, patient characteristics, and provider experience and biases. Providers differed in how they weigh the relative importance of alleviating pain or avoiding opioids in the face of treating patients with cancer and histories of substance abuse.

CONCLUSION

Divergent perspectives on factors need to be considered when weighing risks and benefits. Policies and interventions should be designed to reduce variation in practice to promote equal access to adequate pain management. Improved shared decision-making initiatives will take advantage of patient decision-making factors and priorities.

Cancer pain management in the emergency department: a multicenter prospective observational trial of the Comprehensive Oncologic Emergencies Research Network (CONCERN)

PURPOSE

Many patients with cancer seek care for pain in the emergency department (ED). Prospective research on cancer pain in this setting has historically been insufficient. We conducted this study to describe the reported pain among cancer patients presenting to the ED, how pain is managed, and how pain may be associated with clinical outcomes.

METHODS

We conducted a multicenter cohort study on adult patients with active cancer presenting to 18 EDs in the USA. We reported pain scores, response to medication, and analgesic utilization. We estimated the associations between pain severity, medication utilization, and the following outcomes: 30-day mortality, 30-day hospital readmission, and ED disposition.

RESULTS

The study population included 1075 participants. Those who received an opioid in the ED were more likely to be admitted to the hospital and were more likely to be readmitted within 30 days (OR 1.4 (95% CI: 1.11, 1.88) and OR 1.56 (95% CI: 1.17, 2.07)), respectively. Severe pain at ED presentation was associated with increased 30-day mortality (OR 2.30, 95% CI: 1.05, 5.02), though this risk was attenuated when adjusting for clinical factors (most notably functional status).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with severe pain had a higher risk of mortality, which was attenuated when correcting for clinical characteristics. Those patients who required opioid analgesics in the ED were more likely to require admission and were more at risk of 30-day hospital readmission. Future efforts should focus on these at-risk groups, who may benefit from additional services including palliative care, hospice, or home-health services.

Health Care Provider Attitudes, Beliefs, and Perceived Confidence in Managing Patients With Cancer Pain and Nonmedical Opioid Use

CONTEXT

Health care provider education is an effective strategy to improve knowledge and competencies in opioid-prescribing practices. However, there are very few studies regarding this among providers of patients with cancer pain and nonmedical opioid use (NMOU). The aim of our study was to assess participants' attitudes, beliefs, and self-perceived confidence in caring for patients with cancer pain and NMOU before and after attending an opioid educational seminar on the use and nonmedical use of opioids in patients with cancer.

METHODS

An anonymous cross-sectional survey was conducted among health care providers who attended an opioid educational event in April 2018 and May 2019.

RESULTS

The overall response rate was 63% (129 of 206). Approximately 72% of participants had concerns about NMOU in patients with cancer, 69% felt that such patients are frequently underdetected, and 63% felt that cancer pain is frequently undertreated. At baseline, only 23% reported adequate knowledge and 35% reported confidence in caring for patients with cancer with NMOU-related issues. Among those who completed both the preseminar and postseminar surveys, these numbers improved significantly at the end of the seminar (26% vs. 71% and 43% vs. 84%, respectively; all P < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Most health care providers expressed concerns about underdetection of NMOU and undertreatment of pain among patients with cancer. Many self-reported knowledge and confidence deficits in caring for patients with cancer with NMOU. Seminar participation was associated with an increase in the number of participants with self-perceived knowledge and confidence. Future studies are needed to ascertain the impact of such opioid educational events on patient care practices.

Quality of life in patients with breakthrough cancer pain in radiation oncology departments in Spain: the CAVIDIOR study

Aim: The CAVIDIOR study evaluated quality of life (QoL) in patients with breakthrough cancer pain receiving palliative radiation therapy in radiation oncology departments (RODs) in Spain. Patients & methods: Prospective observational study at 11 Spanish RODs (July 2016-November 2017). QoL was assessed using Short Form Health Survey 12. Secondary end points were sleep quality, caregiver burden and patient/perception of improvement. Results: QoL improved according to the Short Form Health Survey 12 mental component. Sleep quality and caregivers' burden improved significantly. Conclusion: Breakthrough cancer pain is highly prevalent and can be substantially reduced with appropriate diagnosis and management in RODs. Along with the QoL questionnaire, sleep quality and caregiver burden provide a more comprehensive assessment of overall health status in patients receiving radiation therapy in RODs. Clinical trial registration: NCT02836379 (ClinicalTrials.gov).

Knowledge and Attitude of Ethiopian Oncology Nurses About Cancer Pain Management: National Survey

BACKGROUND

Cancer is becoming a leading cause of death worldwide. Pain is a common and devastating symptom of cancer patients that can significantly affect the patient's quality of life. Optimal cancer pain control requires adequate knowledge and positive attitudes of nurses. Little is known about the knowledge and attitudes of oncology nurses towards cancer pain management in Ethiopia. The current study aimed to assess the knowledge and attitude of nurses and determinants of cancer pain management in all oncology centers in Ethiopia.

METHODS

A nationwide cross-sectional survey was conducted on 138 nurses in all oncology centers in Ethiopia. Self-completed survey questionnaires were distributed using the 'Knowledge and Attitudes Survey Regarding Pain (KASRP)' tool. Both bivariable and multivariable logistic regression analyses were used. Both crude odds ratio and adjusted odds ratio with the corresponding 95% CI were calculated to show the strength of association. Variables with a p-value of <0.05 were considered as statistically significant.

RESULTS

Only 7.2% (95% CI: 2.9, 11.6) of oncology nurses had good knowledge and attitude about cancer pain management. Among 41 items, the mean number of correctly answered questions was 20.4 (SD = 5.13). Nurses who had a master's degree in nursing were positively associated with good knowledge and attitude about cancer pain management.

CONCLUSION

In this nationwide study, the overall knowledge and attitude level of oncology nurses towards cancer pain management were poor. Nurses who had a master's degree in nursing were significantly associated with good knowledge and attitude towards cancer pain management. Regular training and revision of the contents of pain management education in the academic curriculum of nursing education are recommended.

What if Acupuncture Were Covered by Insurance for Pain Management? A Cross-Sectional Study of Cancer Patients at One Academic Center and 11 Community Hospitals

OBJECTIVE

In response to the national opioid crisis, governmental and medical organizations have called for broader insurance coverage of acupuncture to improve access to nonpharmacologic pain therapies, especially in cancer populations, where undertreatment of pain is prevalent. We evaluated whether cancer patients would be willing to use insurance-covered acupuncture for pain.

DESIGN AND SETTING

We conducted a cross-sectional survey of cancer patients with pain at one academic center and 11 community hospitals.

METHODS

We used logistic regression models to examine factors associated with willingness to use insurance-covered acupuncture for pain.

RESULTS

Among 634 cancer patients, 304 (47.9%) reported willingness to use insurance-covered acupuncture for pain. In univariate analyses, patients were more likely to report willingness if they had severe pain (odds ratio [OR] = 1.59, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.03-2.45) but were less likely if they were nonwhite (OR = 0.59, 95% CI = 0.39-0.90) or had only received high school education or less (OR = 0.46, 95% CI = 0.32-0.65). After adjusting for attitudes and beliefs in multivariable analyses, willingness was no longer significantly associated with education (adjusted OR [aOR] = 0.78, 95% CI = 0.50-1.21) and was more negatively associated with nonwhite race (aOR = 0.49, 95% CI = 0.29-0.84).

CONCLUSIONS

Approximately one in two cancer patients was willing to use insurance-covered acupuncture for pain. Willingness was influenced by patients' attitudes and beliefs, which are potentially modifiable through counseling and education. Further research on racial disparities is needed to close the gap in utilization as acupuncture is integrated into insurance plans in response to the opioid crisis.

∗Surgical patients' and registered nurses' satisfaction and Perception of Using the Clinically Aligned Pain Assessment (CAPA©) Tool for Pain Assessment

Pain management is a significant issue in all health care systems. Pain is often mismanaged because of lack of a comprehensive pain assessment. This often leads to inappropriate medication administration, inadequate pain relief, negative patient outcomes, and delayed discharges. There is an opportunity for developing a more comprehensive pain assessment. The Clinically Aligned Pain Assessment (CAPA©) pain tool was developed by the University of Utah.. It assesses 5 dimensions of pain: comfort, change in pain, pain control, functioning, and sleep. The purpose of the study was to determine if the patients and nurses were more satisfied discussing pain with CAPA© or the numeric rating scale (NRS) and words to describe pain, intensity, location, duration, and aggravating and/or alleviating factors (WILDA) tool. This study had a 2-group comparison design with mixed methods approach. One group comprised patients and the other group comprised nurses. There were 63 nurses and 95 patients enrolled in the study at two perioperative hospitals. The results demonstrated that the patients and nurses were more satisfied with using the CAPA© tool than the NRS/WILDA. The CAPA© tool allows for a more comprehensive way to assess pain which has the potential to create more effective treatments for pain, improve discharge time, and positive patient outcomes.

Solving the deficit of cancer pain management skills by education programs

BACKGROUND

Suboptimal cancer pain management is a worldwide problem. We examined whether an educational program on cancer pain management implemented during training could benefit primary care physicians.

METHODS

We enrolled all the primary care physicians who visited the oncology ward at a medical center for the first time. Educational classes on cancer pain management were conducted. The participants' abilities in cancer pain management were measured in a pretest before the classes and approximately 2 weeks later in the first posttest. The second posttest was conducted on participants who visited the oncology ward again. All 3 tests had the same set of questions and were scored on a scale of 0 to 100.

RESULTS

In total, 247 participants were enrolled. Less than 10% of them considered their previous education on cancer pain management adequate. The test scores increased significantly from the pretest to the first posttest (mean 65.6 vs. 89.7, p < 0.001). The participants' self-reported cancer pain management abilities, on a scale of 0 to 100, also improved significantly (mean 57.8 vs. 75.5, p < 0.001). The pretest scores were not associated with the participants' self-reported abilities or their perceptions about the adequacy of previous training on cancer pain management. The mean score on the second posttest, conducted 234.5 days after the program, on an average, remained similar to that of the first posttest (p = 0.254).

CONCLUSION

A specific educational program on cancer pain management provided to primary care physicians improved their pain management skills substantially, with persistent effects.

Breakthrough cancer pain treatment in Spain: physicians' perception of current opioids utilization and prescription

Objectives: Multiple reasons for suboptimal treatment of breakthrough cancer pain (BTcP) have been reported in the literature. We aimed to ascertain the perception of physicians on the potential inappropriate use and prescription of rapid-onset opioids (ROOs) for breakthrough cancer pain (BTcP) and the causes thereof.Methods: Observational study based on an online survey addressed to doctors from different specialties (radiation oncology, medical oncology, anesthesia, palliative care and general practitioners) with experience in the management of BTcP in the Spanish public health setting.Results: A total of 114 eligible specialists mainly from radiation oncology (37.7%), medical oncology (24.6%) and pain units (18.4%) participated in the study. Most agreed on important aspects of BTcP management, such as their preference for ROOs or the need for early follow-up after treatment initiation. However, their answers revealed a lack of standardization of BTcP diagnosis. Half of respondents believed that their BTcP patients might misuse ROOs. Physicians polled believed that lack of training in pain management (71.9%) and inadequate BTcP diagnosis and evaluation (66.7%) were the greatest obstacles for prescribing opioids. Specialists also thought that they do not provide the necessary information to patients (51.8%) and caregivers (57.9%) to guarantee the correct use of these drugs.Conclusions: These results are of utmost importance as they highlight the need to increase physicians' awareness of BTcP and its management and the need to improve communication with patients and their caregivers. Our findings also indicate the need for future research on the possible misuse of opioids in BTcP patients and its causes.

Effect of the Standardized Management of Cancer Pain on Patients with Bone Metastasis of Lung Cancer in China

Objective

This study investigates the effect of the standardized management of cancer pain on patients with bone metastasis of lung cancer in China.

Patients and Methods

A total of 123 patients with bone metastasis of lung cancer were selected from the Respiratory Department of the Affiliated Hospital of North China University of Science and Technology. Among these patients, 62 patients who had not received standardized management of cancer pain from March 12, 2018, to September 11, 2018, were selected as the control group. In contrast, 61 patients who had received the standardized management of cancer pain from September 12, 2018, to March 11, 2019, were selected as the observation group. The former cohort accepted the conventional management of cancer pain, while the latter accepted the strict, standardized management of cancer pain. The demographic statistics, disease characteristics, and painkiller application of patients in these two groups were analyzed. Then, the analgesic effect and level of satisfaction were compared between these two groups.

Results

No significant differences were noticed between these two groups in terms of age, gender, smoking status, type of pathology, education level, previous treatment, and the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group score, as well as other demographic and disease characteristics. As for the use of painkillers, opioid analgesics accounted for a higher proportion in the observation group than in the control group. Compared with the control group, pain improvement and patient satisfaction after analgesic treatment were significantly higher in the observation group (p < 0.05).

Conclusion

The standardized management of cancer pain can considerably alleviate the pain of patients with bone metastasis of lung cancer and improve their quality of life. Furthermore, this type of management can increase satisfaction.

The perception of barriers concerning opioid medicines: A survey examining differences between policy makers, healthcare professionals and other stakeholders

BACKGROUND

In many countries, the consumption of opioid medicines is too low to meet population needs. Discussions within the Access To Opioid Medication in Europe project indicated that there may be significant differences in the perception of barriers for their adequate use, depending on the stakeholders.

AIM

The aim of this study was to examine the perception of barriers and their impact concerning opioid medicines, comparing policy makers, healthcare professionals working in the field of pain management, palliative care or harm reduction and other stakeholders.

DESIGN

Data were collected using a questionnaire partially constructed from existing surveys, reviewed for content validity by four experts and pilot-tested in Latvia.

SETTING/PARTICIPANTS

Participants of the Access to Opioid Medication in Europe national conferences were invited to complete the questionnaire. Stakeholder groups were compared using non-parametric rank-sum tests.

RESULTS

In total, 199 participants (54%) in seven countries completed the questionnaire. Most frequently rated major barriers included lack of financial resources and inadequate knowledge, skills and training among policy makers (55%-66%). Overall, policy makers perceived issues less often as major barriers or having major impact (29% barrier, 32% impact) compared to other stakeholders (36%-42% barrier, 39%-51% impact). Significant differences were seen on several aspects. For example, excessive regulation or bureaucracy for prescribing was rated as having major impact by 55%-57% of healthcare professionals in contrast to only 20% of the policy makers (p = 0.002).

CONCLUSION

Multiple barriers may play an important role, partly depending on the perspective of the stakeholder involved. Hence, when addressing perceived barriers, it is important to include all relevant stakeholder groups. Only then, effective and widely supported solutions can be implemented.

Managing Pain in People with Cancer-a Systematic Review of the Attitudes and Knowledge of Professionals, Patients, Caregivers and Public

Cancer pain is a common symptom experienced by patients, caused either by the disease or its treatment. Morphine remains the most effective and recommended treatment for cancer pain. However, cancer patients still do not receive appropriate management for their pain, and under-treatment is common. Lack of knowledge and negative attitudes towards cancer pain and analgesia among professionals, patients and family caregivers are reported as one of the most common barriers to effective cancer pain management (CPM). To systematically review research on the nature and impact of attitudes and knowledge towards CPM, a systematic literature search of 6 databases (the Cochrane library, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, CINAHL, Web of Science and EMBASE) was undertaken in July 2018. Additionally, hand-searching of Google, Google Scholar and reference lists was conducted. The inclusion criteria were adult (18-65 years of age), studies which included attitudes and knowledge towards CPM, studies written in English, published literature only and cross-sectional design. Included studies were critically appraised by two researchers independently using the Joanna Briggs Institute Analytical Cross Sectional Studies Assessment (JBI-ACSSA). A total of 36 studies met the inclusion criteria. The main finding was that among professionals, patients, caregivers and the public there were similar attitudinal barriers to effective CPM. The most commonly cited barriers were fear of drug addiction, tolerance of medication and side effects of opioids. We also found differences between professional groups (physicians versus nurses) and between different countries based on their potential exposure to palliative care training and services. There are still barriers to effective CPM, which might result in unrelieved cancer pain. Therefore, more educational programmes and training for professionals on CPM are needed. Furthermore, patients, caregivers, and the public need more general awareness and adequate level of knowledge about CPM.

Clinicians' attitudes to oncology clinical practice guidelines and the barriers and facilitators to adherence: a mixed methods study protocol

INTRODUCTION

Clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) are designed to reduce inappropriate clinical variation and improve the quality of care. Barriers to CPGs include a lack of awareness of CPGs, access to them, time pressures and concerns regarding the evidence underpinning CPG development, implementation and dissemination. The objectives of this study are to assess clinicians' attitudes to CPGs for cancer treatment and the perceived barriers to and facilitators of CPG adherence in order to inform the implementation of cancer treatment CPGs.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

A mixed methods study will be conducted using a three-phase, sequential design, with each phase informing the next. In phase 1, a qualitative study using recorded interviews will investigate clinicians' attitudes to CPGs for cancer treatment and perceptions of barriers and facilitators to CPG adherence (n=30); interview transcripts will be analysed thematically. In phase 2, a survey will quantify the frequency of attitudes, barriers and facilitators identified in phase 1, in a broader clinical sample (n=200). In phase 3, a workshop forum will be held to facilitate discussions examining the implications of phase 1 and 2 findings for cancer CPG implementation strategies (n=40) leading to recommendations for improvements to practice. The workshop discussion will be recorded, and the transcript will be analysed thematically.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

This study has received ethics approval in New South Wales, Australia (2019/ETH11722, #52019568810127). Study findings will be published in peer-reviewed journals and will form part of a doctoral thesis and be presented at national and international conferences.

Palliative Care and the Management of Common Distressing Symptoms in Advanced Cancer: Pain, Breathlessness, Nausea and Vomiting, and Fatigue

Good symptom management in oncology is associated with improved patient and family quality of life, greater treatment compliance, and may even offer survival advantages. With population growth and aging, the proportion of patients with multiple symptoms-both related and unrelated to their cancer-is anticipated to increase, supporting calls for a more routine and integrated approach to symptom management. This article presents a summary of the literature for the use of symptom assessment tools and reviews the management of four common and distressing symptoms commonly experienced by people with advanced cancer: pain, breathlessness, nausea and vomiting, and fatigue. We also discuss the role of palliative care in supporting a holistic approach to symptom management throughout the cancer trajectory.

Prescription Pattern of Drugs Used for Neuropathic Pain and Adherence to NeuPSIG Guidelines in Cancer

Objective

The objective of the present research was to evaluate the prescription pattern of the drugs used in the pharmacological treatment of cancer-related neuropathic pain (CRNP) and to assess the adherence of the physicians to the Neuropathic Pain Special Interest Group (NeuPSIG) Guidelines.

Materials and Methods

This was a cross-sectional, observational study where patients who presented to the pain and palliative care outpatient clinic of the tertiary care hospital with CRNP were prospectively recruited. Participants were screened for neuropathic pain using DN4 questionnaire. Demographic details, diagnosis, medication details, and adherence to NeuPSIG guidelines were assessed using a validated questionnaire.

Results

Of 300 patients screened, 64% were male and 36% were female, with a mean age of 48.26 ± 13.05 years. The predominant symptoms found were pin-and-needle sensation (99%) followed by tingling sensation (98.66%). The most common diagnosis was head-and-neck cancers (37.3%) followed by bone cancers (17.3%) and lung cancers (15.3%). Among the first-line drugs recommended in NeuPSIG for CRNP, pregabalin (78.7%) was the most common drug prescribed followed by amitriptyline (67%). The most common co-prescribed drugs were acid suppressants drugs (50.7%). Tapentadol, which is not part of the NeuPSIG guidelines, was prescribed on 51 occasions for neuropathic pain. Underdosing was observed in 272 prescriptions. Only 12 prescriptions completely adhered, while 275 had partial, and 13 prescriptions had poor adherence to NeuPSIG guidelines.

Conclusion

The most commonly used drugs in the treatment of CRNP were pregabalin and amitriptyline. Most physician partially or did not adhere to the NeuPSIG guideline in the management of CRNP.

Opioid Prescribing Patterns Before and After an Inpatient Palliative Care Consultation

BACKGROUND

To the best of our knowledge, the change in opioid prescription patterns upon referral to a palliative care team (PCT) was not previously investigated in the Middle East.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to explore the change in the pattern of opioid prescription and the pain scores before and after referring inpatients to a PCT.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective review of patients' records including all inpatients ≥15 years newly referred to the PCT over a period of 21 months at King Faisal Specialist Hospital and Research Center, Riyadh.

RESULTS

Of 631 patients, 52.3% were females, the median age was 54 years, and 96.7% had cancer. The proportion of patients on opioids before referral (83.4%) increased to 93.3% in the postreferral period, P < .0001. Patients receiving opioids on a regular basis increased from 31.9% before referral to 49.9% after referral to the PCT, P < .0001. Morphine was the most commonly prescribed opioid on a regular basis pre- and postreferral. Upon referral, the administration of opioids through the subcutaneous route increased from 3.7% to 10.9%, P < .0001. On average, pain scores were reduced by 1 point on a 0 to 10 numeric scale within 48 hours of seeing a patient by the PCT, P < .0001.

CONCLUSION

Patients referred to a PCT are likely to get their opioid prescription optimized and pain scores improved shortly after the PCT involvement. Patients with cancer-related pain requiring opioids should be referred to a PCT as early as possible.

Assessment of Factors Predicting Inadequate Pain Management in Chronic Pain Patients

Background

Inadequate pain management is highly prevalent and is associated with significant costs and socioeconomic problems, which can lead to disparities in patient care. Specific groups are at higher risk of this problem. A few studies have evaluated the predictive risk factors of inadequate pain management.

Objectives

This study evaluated the prevalence and predictive risk factors of inadequate pain management at the primary and secondary care centers with large sample size.

Methods

Patients who had been managed in primary and secondary care clinics were asked to report their personal characteristics, pain intensity, pain duration, and analgesics they were receiving in their first visit at our pain clinic. Zelman pain management index was calculated for each patient by analgesic potency minus mean pain intensity. The negative index showed incongruence between pain intensity and analgesic potency score (pain stronger than medication), indicating inadequate pain management.

Results

A negative pain management index was reported in 77% of the 511 recruited patients. Patients with more severe pain were more likely to experience inadequate pain management. A logistic model demonstrated women, people aged 45 - 65 years, illiterates, and obese patients were at higher risks of inadequate pain management. The pain management index was affected by sex and education (via higher pain intensities) and by age and BMI (via lower analgesic potency).

Conclusions

Age, sex, education, and BMI are predictive risk factors of inadequate pain management as a prevalent problem in chronic pain patients.

Cancer-Related Pain: A Longitudinal Study of Time to Stable Pain Control and Its Clinicodemographic Predictors

CONTEXT

Multidimensional assessment is pivotal in managing cancer-related pain.

OBJECTIVES

The objectives of this study were to determine time to stable pain control (SPC) and identify its baseline clinicodemographic predictors in patients with cancer pain.

METHODS

This is a prospective longitudinal study of patients attending a cancer pain clinic. Scheduled clinic attendances and weekly investigator-led phone calls enabled monitoring of patients' daily pain diary, opioid use, and other analgesic interventions. Baseline clinicodemographic variables were examined in survival analyses, which included the construction of accelerated failure time models with time ratios [TRs, (95% CIs)], based on time to SPC (pain intensity ≤3 and <3 breakthrough opioid doses over three consecutive days) for variable categories.

RESULTS

Of 319 participants, 22 died before achieving SPC and were censored in the survival analysis. The median survival time (95% CI) to SPC was 22 (19-25) days. In multivariable analysis, compared to their respective reference categories, female sex (P = 0.001), substance abuse (P < 0.001), a neuropathic pain component (P < 0.001), and use of ≥1 adjuvant analgesic (P = 0.022) each had TRs > 1 (1.03-2.54), whereas soft tissue pain (P < 0.001) had a TR = 0.71 (0.62-0.82), reflecting longer and shorter time to SPC, respectively.

CONCLUSION

SPC is achievable for most patients with cancer pain. Recognition of strong predictors of time to SPC, such as substance abuse, a neuropathic pain component, soft tissue pain, and current use of adjuvant analgesia, may help to triage care services based on therapeutic need and guide analgesic interventions.

A multicentre survey of pain management in cancer patients and physicians attending radiotherapy clinics in Shandong Province, China

Objective

To obtain a better understanding of the prevalence and management of pain in patients undergoing radiotherapy for cancer in Shandong Province, China.

Methods

This cross-sectional study used a questionnaire during face-to-face interviews to collect data from physicians and patients regarding the recognition, prevalence and treatment of pain during the waiting period before commencement of radiotherapy and during the radiotherapy period. Physicians and patients were recruited from 10 tertiary Class A hospitals across Shandong Province, China.

Results

A total of 184 patients and 87 physicians were recruited to the study. During the waiting period, pain was reported by the physicians according to their experience to affect 26.0% of patients, which almost agreed with the patients’ data (36.5%; 160 of 438). During the radiotherapy period, there was a significant difference in the reported prevalence of pain during the radiotherapy period between the physicians’ data (23.0%) based on their experience and the patients’ data (84.1%; 169 of 201 patients). The majority of physicians (98.9%; 86 of 87) agreed to the use opioids for pain management and 90.8% (79 of 87) were satisfied with the analgesic effect, but more than half of the patients who received pain treatment reported inadequate analgesia.

Conclusion

There was a high incidence of cancer pain, but insufficient assessment, inadequate treatment and inadequate education about pain in both the waiting and radiotherapy periods.

Changes in use of opioid therapy after colon cancer diagnosis: a population-based study

PURPOSE

To describe patterns of opioid use in cancer survivors.

METHODS

In a cohort study of colon cancer patients diagnosed during 1995-2014 and enrolled at two Kaiser Permanente regions, we constructed quarterly measures of opioid use from 1 year before cancer diagnosis through 5 years after diagnosis to examine changes in use. Measures included any use, incident use, regular use (use ≥ 45 days in a 91-day quarter), and average daily dose (converted to morphine milligram equivalent, MME). We also assessed temporal trends of opioid use.

RESULTS

Of 2,039 colon cancer patients, 11-15% received opioids in the four pre-diagnosis quarters, 68% in the first quarter after diagnosis, and 15-17% in each subsequent 19 quarters. Regular opioid use increased from 3 to 5% pre-diagnosis to 5-7% post diagnosis. Average dose increased from 15 to 17 MME/day pre-diagnosis to 14-22 MME/day post diagnosis (excluding the quarter in which cancer was diagnosed). Among post-diagnosis opioid users, 73-95% were on a low dose (< 20 MME/day). Over years, regular use of opioids increased in survivorship with no change in dosage.

CONCLUSION

Opioid use slightly increased following a colon cancer diagnosis, but high-dose use was rare. Research is needed to differentiate under- versus over-treatment of cancer pain.

Home Telemonitoring Improved Pain Registration in Patients With Cancer

INTRODUCTION

For adequate pain treatment in patients with cancer, it is important to monitor and evaluate pain regularly. Although the numeric rating scale (NRS) is implemented in hospitals in the Netherlands, pain is still not systematically registered during outpatient consultations. The aim of this study was to assess whether home telemonitoring increases pain registration in medical records of outpatients with cancer.

METHODS

Patients with cancer were included in the intervention group (IG) when they visited the outpatient clinic. They received a short message service and an interactive voice response on their mobile phones 3 times a week, asking them to provide their pain score (NRS). When the reported NRS pain score was ≥5, a specialized oncology nurse adapted the pain treatment when necessary. Outcomes were compared to a control group (CG) without home telemonitoring. In both groups, medical records were analyzed and data on pain and analgesics were collected.

RESULTS

In each group, the medical records of 54 patients were analyzed on 3 consecutive outpatient visits. In the CG, pain registration or its absence was described in 60 visits (37.0%). In the IG, pain registration or its absence was reported in 83 visits (51.2%). Patients in the IG received a prescription for analgesics significantly more often (36/54 patients [66.6%]) than did patients in the CG (18/54 patients [33.3%]), P < 0.01).

CONCLUSION

Home telemonitoring for patients with cancer significantly increases registration of pain and prescriptions of analgesics in outpatient medical records. Home telemonitoring helps to increase the awareness of pain and its management.

Working towards a consensus on the oncological approach of breakthrough pain: a Delphi survey of Spanish experts

Purpose

There is a lack of standards for the diagnosis, assessment and management of breakthrough cancer pain (BTcP). La Fundación ECO (the Foundation for Excellence and Quality in Oncology) commissioned a study to establish a consensus and lay the foundations for the appropriate management of BTcP in oncology patients.

Patients and methods

A modified Delphi survey comprising two rounds was used to gather and analyze data, which was conducted over the Internet. Each statement that reached a consensus with the respondents was defined as a median consensus score (MED) of ≥7, and agreement among panelists as an interquartile range (IQR) of ≤3.

Results

In total, 69 medical oncologists responded, with a broad consensus that BTcP implied exacerbations of high-intensity pain, as opposed to moderate pain. Furthermore, they concurred that appropriate diagnostic equipment is needed, and that rapid-onset fentanyl formulations should be the preferred treatment for BTcP management. The panelists agreed that a lack of appropriate information and training to attend to patients, as well as limited patient visitation rights, were barriers to effective BTcP management. Regarding gaps in detected knowledge, the panelists were unsure of the measures necessary to assess the burden of the disease on the patient’s quality of life and associated medication costs. Alongside this, there was a lack of awareness of the technical specifics of the different formulations of rapid-onset fentanyl.

Conclusion

These results represent the current status of BTcP management. They may inform recommendations and provide a framework for future research.

Something Must Be Wrong with the Implementation of Cancer-pain Treatment Guidelines. A Lesson from Referrals to a Pain Clinic

OBJECTIVE

The World Health Organization's (WHO) guidelines for cancer pain management were intentionally made simple in order to be widely implemented by all physicians treating cancer patients. Referrals to pain specialists are advised if pain does not improve within a short time. The present study examined whether or not a reasonable use of the WHO guideline was made by non-pain specialists prior to referral of patients with cancer-related pain to a pain clinic.

METHODS

Cancer patients referred to a pain specialist completed several questionnaires including demographics, medical history, and cancer-related pain; the short-form McGill Pain Questionnaire (SF-MPQ); and the Short Form Health Survey SF-12. Data from referral letters and medical records were obtained. Treatments recommended by pain specialists were recorded and categorized as "unjustified" if they were within the WHO ladder framework, or "justified" if they included additional treatments.

RESULTS

Seventy-three patients (44 women, 29 men) aged 55 years (range, 25-85) participated in the study. Their pain lasted for a mean of 6 (1-192) months. Mean pain intensity scores on a 0-10 numerical rating scale were 7 (2-10) at rest and 8 (3-10) upon movement. Most patients complied with their referring physician's recommendations and consumed opioids. Adverse events were frequent. No significant correlation was found between the WHO analgesic medication step used and mean pain levels reported. There were 63 patient referrals (85%) categorized as "unjustified," whereas only 11 patients (15%) required "justified" interventions.

CONCLUSIONS

These findings imply that analgesic treatment within the WHO framework was not reasonably utilized by non-pain specialists before referring patients to pain clinics.