Timely identification of patients in need of palliative care using the Double Surprise Question: A prospective study on outpatients with cancer

BACKGROUND

The Surprise Question ("Would I be surprised if this patient were to die within the next 12 months?") is widely used to identify palliative patients, though with low predictive value. To improve timely identification of palliative care needs, we propose an additional Surprise Question ("Would I be surprised if this patient is still alive after 12 months?") if the original Surprise Question is answered with "no." The combination of the two questions is called the Double Surprise Question.

AIM

To examine the prognostic accuracy of the Double Surprise Question in outpatients with cancer.

DESIGN

A prospective study.

PARTICIPANTS

Twelve medical oncologists completed the Double Surprise Question for 379 patients.

RESULTS

In group 1 (original Surprise Question "yes": surprised if dead) 92.1% (176/191) of the patients were still alive after 1 year, in group 2a (original and additional Surprise Question "no": not surprised if dead and not surprised if alive) 60.0% (63/105), and in group 2b (original Surprise Question "no," additional Surprise Question "yes": surprised if alive) 26.5% (22/83) (p < 0.0001). The positive predictive value increased by using the Double Surprise Question; 74% (61/83) vs 55% (103/188). Anticipatory palliative care provision and Advance Care Planning items were most often documented in group 2b.

CONCLUSIONS

The Double Surprise Question is a promising tool to more accurately identify outpatients with cancer at risk of dying within 1 year, and therefore, those in need of palliative care. Studies should reveal whether the implementation of the Double Surprise Question leads to more timely palliative care.

Pulsed radiofrequency treatment for trigeminal neuralgia

Background:

Pulsed radiofrequency (PRF) treatment is defined as the delivery of short pulses of radiofrequency via a needle tip, which does not result in an actual thermal lesions. There are mixed views regarding the use of PRF for trigeminal neuralgia (TN). In our opinion, one of the main reasons for the contrasting views is the insufficient PRF dose employed in previous studies. In a recent study on the effects of PRF on resiniferatoxin-induced neuropathic pain in an animal model, the anti-allodynic effects of PRF were significantly greater when the PRF exposure duration was increased from 2 to 6 minutes.

Objectives:

The primary objective of this retrospective study is to report the results for 36 consecutive patients who underwent PRF treatment for TN, for 6 minutes at 45 V at a pulsed frequency of 4 Hz and a pulse width of 10 ms.

Patients and Methods:

For the study, we obtained procedural records of 36 consecutive patients. Their current state of pain was evaluated over a telephonic survey and the post-procedural data at 2, 6, and 12 months were retrieved thereafter from the patient records. The main outcome measure was excellent pain relief (more than 80%), which was assessed at 2, 6, and 12 months.

Results:

The percentages of patients who showed excellent pain relief (> 80% pain relief) at 2, 6, and 12 months were 73.5% (25/34), 61.8% (21/34), and 55.9% (19/34), respectively. The percentages of patients showing satisfactory pain relief (50–80% pain relief) at 2, 6, and 12 months were 14.7% (5/34), 17.6% (6/34), and 17.6% (6/34), respectively, and those of patients showing less than satisfactory pain relief (< 50% pain relief) at 2, 6, and 12 months were 11.8% (4/34), 20.6% (7/34), and 23.5% (8/34), respectively. No complications were reported, and none of the patients required hospitalization.

Conclusions:

PRF of the trigeminal ganglion should be further evaluated as an alternative treatment method for TN.

Whiplash patients with cervicogenic headache after lateral atlanto-axial joint pulsed radiofrequency treatment

Background:

Whiplash patients regard cervicogenic headache (CEH) as the most burdensome symptom of their condition. Sufferers experience a significant degree of disability from headache, associated neck pain and disability, and sleep disturbance. Lateral C1/2 joint pulsed radiofrequency (PRF) treatment has been shown to produce significant relief from headache in patients with CEH.

Objectives:

The objective of this retrospective questionnaire study of 45 consecutive whiplash patients with CEH who had undergone antero-lateral atlantoaxial joint pulsed radiofrequency treatment (AA PRF) was to evaluate the treatment’s long-term effects on pain-related disability and health-related quality of life.

Patients and Methods:

Four questionnaires were sent to all 45 patients who had undergone AA PRF: 1) The short form-36 (SF-36); 2) The neck disability index (NDI); 3) The medical outcome scale-sleep scale (MOS-SS); 4) The headache impact test-6 (HIT-6). All 45 patients received AA PRF under fluoroscopic guidance. PRF treatment was conducted at 45 V with a pulsed frequency of 4 Hz and a pulsed width of 10 ms for 4 minutes .

Results:

Patients who responded to the procedure reported lower pain scores at 2, 6, and 12 months of follow-up compared to nonresponders. More important, patients reported marked improvements in headache impact (P < 0.01), neck-disability scores (P < 0.01), awakening due to headache (P < 0.01), and sleep problems (9-item; P < 0.05) on the MOS-SS. Responders to the procedure also reported a significantly higher health-related quality of life in terms of bodily pain (P < 0.05) and health change (P < 0.01) on the SF-36.

Conclusions:

In light of the inherent limitations of our retrospective study, AA PRF treatment can only be tentatively viewed as a promising treatment modality for whiplash patients with CEH and is subject to validation in future studies.

Intraarticular sufentanil administration facilitates recovery after day-case knee arthroscopy

We evaluated the efficacy of intraarticular sufentanil in the prevention of postoperative pain after day-case arthroscopic procedures. Sixty patients were randomly assigned to receive either intraarticular sufentanil, 5 or 10 microg, and saline IV, or intraarticular saline and sufentanil 5 microg IV (control). All study medication was administered in a double-blinded fashion. Postoperatively and the day after surgery, pain levels at rest and during movement (i.e., active flexion of the knee), measured by a visual analog scale, were significantly lower in the Sufentanil groups compared with the Control group. Moreover, intraarticular sufentanil significantly reduced the postoperative consumption of analgesics. The time until discharge from the postanesthesia care unit (assessed by the Aldrete score) was significantly shorter in the patients receiving sufentanil intraarticularly. There were no significant differences between the two Sufentanil groups either in the intensity of postoperative pain or in discharge times from the postanesthesia care unit. We conclude that intraarticular sufentanil in arthroscopic knee procedures is a simple, effective, safe and well-tolerated analgesic technique for outpatients undergoing arthroscopic procedures. Increasing the dose sufentanil from 5 to 10 microg intraarticularly offered no additional advantage. Intraarticular sufentanil (5-10 microg) administration improves postoperative management after day-case diagnostic arthroscopic knee procedures.

IMPLICATIONS

Intraarticular sufentanil (5-10 microg) administration improves postoperative management after day-case diagnostic arthroscopic knee procedures.