Involvement of relatives in chronic non-malignant pain rehabilitation at multidisciplinary pain centres: part one - the patient perspective

The Effect of Family Nursing Conversations as an Add-on to Multidisciplinary Treatment in Patients with Chronic Non-Cancer Pain: A Quasi-Experimental Trial

Introduction

Chronic non-cancer pain (CNCP) is a lifelong condition with radical consequences, calling for management involving patients' families. Interventions based on the family systems nursing framework by Wright and Leahey have proved beneficial in other populations but require investigation in a CNCP population. This trial assumed that family nursing conversations (FNCs) based on the family systems nursing framework would increase patients' and family members' self-efficacy concerning CNCP management.

Objective

To investigate whether an intervention with FNCs as an add-on to the usual multidisciplinary treatment of CNCP would have an effect on patients' and family members' self-efficacy. Additionally, to investigate any impact on family function, health-related quality of life, anxiety, and depression.

Methods

The trial applied a prospective non-blinded quasi-experimental design with two comparable groups of patients and family members: a historical control group (HCG) and an intervention group (IG). The intervention was executed by nurses employed at a multidisciplinary pain center in the Capital Region of Denmark. HCG data were collected before the nurses' intervention training. The primary outcome was self-efficacy. Secondary outcomes were family function, health-related quality of life, anxiety, and depression.

Results

In total, 58 patients and 85 family members were included. The primary outcome, self-efficacy, detected no statistically significant between-group differences in mean change for patients, p = .990, or family members, p = .765. A statistically significant effect in favor of the IG was found in between-group differences in mean change in patients' behavioral family function, p = .034, and anxiety, p = .031. No statistically significant between-group differences were detected in family members' secondary outcomes.

Conclusion

The intervention had no effect on patients' or family members' self-efficacy but a positive effect on patients' behavioral family function and anxiety. The intervention was deeply affected by the COVID-19 pandemic. Hence, any results should be interpreted with caution.

Patients' and Family Members' Experiences of a Novel Nurse-Led Intervention Using Family Conversations Targeting Families Afflicted by Chronic Non-Cancer Pain

Purpose

To explore patients' and family members' experiences of participating in an intervention using nurse-led family nursing conversations (NLFCs) targeting families affected by chronic non-cancer pain (CNCP), including the perceived impact of the intervention on the individual and the family. CNCP substantially impacts patients and families. Due to a lack of simple treatment solutions, the condition needs to be managed rather than cured. Family involvement seems a promising tool, but research evaluating specific approaches is limited. Interventions based on the family systems nursing framework by Wright and Leahey have been helpful in other populations. Nonetheless, the approach warrants further investigation and evaluation in patients with CNCP.

Patients and Methods

A phenomenological hermeneutical design was applied, and individual interviews were conducted with ten patients and ten family members who received the intervention. The analysis was inspired by Ricoeur's philosophy of text interpretation.

Findings

Three themes emerged during the analysis. "Taking part in the intervention while being affected by previous experiences" showed that patients and family members were affected by different experiences and burdens and therefore entered the intervention with varied starting points. "Being empowered through validation and understanding" showed that participants mainly viewed the intervention as beneficial, increasing patients' and family members' mutual understanding and underpinning acceptance of the chronic pain condition. "Being receptive to the intervention - mechanisms contributing to achieving benefit" identified contributing mechanisms influencing patients' and family members' experiences of the intervention. These mechanisms included confidence in the nurses' facilitation of the intervention, the timing of the intervention, the participant's level of acceptance, and readiness to engage in the intervention.

Conclusion and Relevance to Clinical Practice

The intervention was mainly experienced as helpful. Thus, healthcare settings treating CNCP should consider implementing NLFC in clinical practice with adjustments to meet the vulnerability of the CNCP population.

Barriers and Facilitators Influencing Nurses' Confidence in Managing Family Nursing Conversations in the Treatment of Chronic Noncancer Pain: A Longitudinal Qualitative Study

This mixed-methods research examined the translation of a family nursing conversation intervention to the multidisciplinary treatment of patients experiencing chronic noncancer pain. The intervention required educating nurses who offered family nursing interventions to these families. The research uncovered barriers and facilitators influencing the nurses' perceived self-efficacy related to the process of incorporating family nursing conversations in their nursing care. A qualitative, descriptive, longitudinal design with three focus group interviews was implemented. A template analysis, using a priori themes based on Bandura's self-efficacy theory, illuminated a process initially predominated by barriers. Learning how to offer family nursing conversations was initially overwhelming for nurses because they were concerned about harming the family. Over time, the nurses came to understand the usefulness of the therapeutic conversation with families. Significant facilitators were the project manager's role, a strong nursing community, and the positive influence of the family intervention on the nurses' professional identity.

Epidemiological Factors Associated with Prescription of Opioids for Chronic Non-Cancer Pain in Adults: A Country-Wide, Registry-Based Study in Denmark Spans 2004-2018

Purpose

Denmark has a high consumption of prescribed opioids, and many citizens with chronic non-cancer pain (CNCP). Therefore, we aimed to characterize and assess epidemiological risk factors associated with long-term non-cancer opioid use among Danish citizens.

Patients and Methods

We conducted a longitudinal, retrospective, observational, register-based study using nationwide databases containing essential medical, healthcare, and socio-economic information. Statistical analysis, including backward stepwise logistic regression analysis, was used to explain long-term opioid use by individuals filling at least one prescription for an opioid product N02AA01-N02AX06 during 01/01/2004-31/12/2017, follow-up until the end of 2018.

Results

The analyzed cohort contained N=1,683,713 non-cancer opioid users, of which 979,666 were classified with CNCP diagnosis using ICD-10 codes. Long-term opioid use was predicted by a mean of 1,583.30 and a median of 300 oral morphine equivalent mg (OMEQ) per day during the first year, together with divorced, age group 40-53 years, retirement, receiving social welfare or unemployment ≥6 months. In addition, living in Northern Jutland, co-medications such as beta-blockers, anti-diabetics, anti-rheumatics, and minor surgery ≤90 days before inclusion. Protective variables were an education level of secondary school or higher, children living at home, household income of middle or highest tertile, opioid doses in either the 2nd or 3rd quartile OMEQ, male, the oldest age group, living in the Capital Region or Zealand, co-medication lipid-lowering, one comorbidity, heart failure, surgeries ≤90 days before the index: lips/teeth/jaw/mouth/throat, heart/vessels, elbow/forearm, hip/thigh, knee/lower leg/ankle/foot.

Conclusion

Long-term opioid users differ epidemiologically from those using opioids for a shorter period. The study findings are essential for future recommendations revision in Denmark and comparable countries.