Pain
-
Several different reporting biases cited in scientific literature have raised concerns about the overestimation of effects and the subsequent potential impact on the practice of evidence-based medicine and human health. Up to 7% to 8% of the population experiences neuropathic pain (NP), and established treatment guidelines are based predominantly on published clinical trial results. Therefore, we examined published randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of first-line drugs for NP and assessed the relative proportions with statistically significant (ie, positive) and nonsignificant (ie, negative) results and their rates of citation. ⋯ The time to publication, journal impact factor, and conflict of interest did not differ statistically between positive and negative studies. Our observations that negative and positive RCTs were published in journals with similar impact at comparable time-lags after study completion are encouraging. However, the citation bias for positive studies could affect the validity and generalization of conclusions in literature and potentially influence clinical practice.
-
Multicenter Study Observational Study
Ketamine for refractory chronic pain: a one-year follow-up study.
Ketamine is often used in pain clinics for refractory chronic pain, but its long-term efficacy is poorly reported. The main objective was to assess the long-term effect of ketamine on pain and health variables in patients with refractory chronic pain. A prospective, multicenter, 1-year follow-up observational study (NCT03319238) was conducted in 30 French pain clinics where ketamine is commonly prescribed. ⋯ Adverse events occurred at 1 week in 108/218 [50%] patients, and this rate gradually decreased throughout the follow-up. This real-life study in chronic pain identified distinct pain trajectories and predictive variables of ketamine efficacy. It is now pivotal to further study and optimize the subtyping of patients to provide the most effective and safe ketamine treatment in this vulnerable population.
-
Research on intersectionality and chronic pain disparities is very limited. Intersectionality explores the interconnections between multiple aspects of identity and provides a more accurate image of disparities. This study applied a relatively novel statistical approach (ie, Latent Class Analysis) to examine chronic pain disparities with an intersectional identity approach. ⋯ The younger adults group also had higher pain catastrophizing than the older adults group (P < 0.005). Results highlighted the importance of the interactions between the multiple factors of socioeconomic status, age, and race in the experience of chronic pain. The intersectional identity theory approach through Latent Class Analysis provided an integrated image of chronic pain disparities in a highly understudied and underserved population.
-
Purpose of this study was to examine the discriminative properties of the 3-item Pain (P), Enjoyment (E), and General activity (G) (PEG) questionnaire for grading impact of nondental orofacial pain. Two hundred eighty-six consecutive patients with orofacial pain of nondental origin filled out the PEG questionnaire and Graded Chronic Pain Scale (GCPS, version 2). Correlation between the PEG and GCPS scores, internal consistency of the PEG, and differences between groups were examined statistically (level of significance: P ≤ 0.05). ⋯ Analysis of the receiver operating characteristic curve showed that a single cutoff value of 3.8 points in the PEG score yields adequate validity (sensitivity = 0.91 and specificity = 0.78). The proposed 2 cutoff points (upper = 7 and lower = 4) yield low sensitivity for the upper threshold. The 3-item PEG questionnaire is suitable for grading impact of nondental orofacial pain.