The journal of pain : official journal of the American Pain Society
-
Few studies have examined the involvement of specific subregions of the prefrontal cortex in complex regional pain syndrome (CRPS). We analyzed cortical thickness to identify morphologic differences in local brain structures between patients with CRPS and healthy control subjects (HCs). Furthermore, we evaluated the correlation between cortical thickness and neurocognitive function. Cortical thickness was measured in 25 patients with CRPS and 25 HCs using the FreeSurfer method. Pain severity and psychiatric symptoms were assessed using the Short Form McGill Pain Questionnaire and the Beck Depression and Anxiety Inventories, respectively. Neurocognitive function was assessed via the Wisconsin Card Sorting Test and the stop-signal task. The right dorsolateral prefrontal cortex and left ventromedial prefrontal cortex were significantly thinner in CRPS patients than in HCs. CRPS patients made more perseveration errors on the Wisconsin Card Sorting Test and had longer stop-signal task reaction times than HCs. Although the Beck Depression Inventory and the Beck Anxiety Inventory differ significantly between the groups, they were not correlated with cortical thickness. Our study suggests that the pathophysiology of CRPS may be related to reduced cortical thickness in the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex and the ventromedial prefrontal cortex. The structural alterations in dorsolateral prefrontal cortex may explain executive dysfunction and disinhibited pain perception in CRPS. ⋯ The present study reports decreased cortical thickness in the prefrontal cortex and neurocognitive dysfunctions in patients with CRPS. These findings may contribute to the understanding of pain-related impairments in cognitive function and could help explain the symptoms or progression of CRPS.
-
The interaction of patient race, provider bias, and clinical ambiguity on pain management decisions.
Although racial disparities in pain care are widely reported, much remains to be known about the role of provider and contextual factors. We used computer-simulated patients to examine the influence of patient race, provider racial bias, and clinical ambiguity on pain decisions. One hundred twenty-nine medical residents/fellows made assessment (pain intensity) and treatment (opioid and nonopioid analgesics) decisions for 12 virtual patients with acute pain. Race (black/white) and clinical ambiguity (high/low) were manipulated across vignettes. Participants completed the Implicit Association Test and feeling thermometers, which assess implicit and explicit racial biases, respectively. Individual- and group-level analyses indicated that race and ambiguity had an interactive effect on providers' decisions, such that decisions varied as a function of ambiguity for white but not for black patients. Individual differences across providers were observed for the effect of race and ambiguity on decisions; however, providers' implicit and explicit biases did not account for this variability. These data highlight the complexity of racial disparities and suggest that differences in care between white and black patients are, in part, attributable to the nature (ie, ambiguity) of the clinical scenario. The current study suggests that interventions to reduce disparities should differentially target patient, provider, and contextual factors. ⋯ This study examined the unique and collective influence of patient race, provider racial bias, and clinical ambiguity on providers' pain management decisions. These results could inform the development of interventions aimed at reducing disparities and improving pain care.
-
Studies report that viewing the body or keeping one's arms crossed while receiving painful stimuli may have an analgesic effect. Interestingly, changes in ratings of pain are accompanied by a reduction of brain metabolism or of laser evoked potentials amplitude. What remains unknown is the link between visual analgesia and crossed-arms related analgesia. Here, we investigated pain perception and laser evoked potentials in 3 visual contexts while participants kept their arms in a crossed or uncrossed position during vision of 1) one's own hand, 2) a neutral object in the same spatial location, and 3) a fixation cross placed in front of the participant. We found that having vision of the affected body part in the crossed-arms position was associated with a significant reduction in pain reports. However, no analgesic effect of having vision of the hand in an uncrossed position or of crossing the arms alone was found. The increase of the late vertex laser evoked potential P2 amplitude indexed a general effect of vision of the hand. Our results hint at a complex interaction between cross-modal input and body representation in different spatial frames of reference and at the same time question the effect of visual analgesia and crossed-arms analgesia alone. ⋯ We found that nociceptive stimuli delivered to the hand in a crossed-arms position evoke less pain than in a canonical anatomic position. Yet we report no significant analgesic effect of vision or crossing the arms on their own. These findings foster the integration of visuospatial and proprioceptive information in rehabilitation protocols.
-
The Patient Global Impression of Change (PGIC) measure has frequently been used as an indicator of meaningful change in treatments for chronic pain. However, limited research has examined the validity of PGIC items despite their wide adoption in clinical trials for pain. Additionally, research has not yet examined predictors of PGIC ratings following psychologically based treatment for pain. The purpose of the present study was to examine the validity, factor structure, and predictors of PGIC ratings following an interdisciplinary psychologically based treatment for chronic pain. Patients with chronic pain (N = 476) completed standard assessments of pain, daily functioning, and depression before and after a 4-week treatment program based on the principles of acceptance and commitment therapy. Following the program, patients rated 1 item assessing their impression of change overall and several items assessing their impression of more specific changes: physical and social functioning, work-related activities, mood, and pain. Results indicated that the global and specific impression of change items represent a single component. In the context of the acceptance and commitment therapy-based treatment studied here, overall PGIC ratings appeared to be influenced to a greater degree by patients' experienced improvements in physical activities and mood than by improvements in pain. The findings suggest that in addition to a single overall PGIC rating, domain-specific items may be relevant for some treatment trials. ⋯ This article reports on the validity and predictors of patients' impression of change ratings following interdisciplinary psychologically based treatment for pain. In addition to a single overall PGIC rating, domain-specific items may be important for clinicians and researchers to consider depending on the focus of treatment.
-
Immediate-release (IR) hydrocodone/acetaminophen is the most prescribed opioid in the United States; however, patterns of use, including long-term treatment and dose, are not well described. Duration of use, including the percentage of patients on long-term treatment (>90 days of continuous use), was assessed for patients newly prescribed IR hydrocodone/acetaminophen compared to other opioid analgesics in a national commercial insurance database (January 2008-September 2013). Though only a small percentage of IR hydrocodone/acetaminophen patients continued treatment long-term (1.7%), the number was large (104,839) and was nearly 5 times the number receiving extended-release (ER) morphine (n = 22,338) and nearly 4 times the number receiving ER oxycodone (n = 26,946) long-term. Using a less conservative allowable gap in treatment increased the number of patients meeting the criteria for long-term use (approximately 160,000 for IR hydrocodone/acetaminophen vs <30,000 for ER morphine and ER oxycodone). Most patients meeting these criteria received IR hydrocodone doses between >20 and ≤60 mg/d (n = 56,220, 53.6%) in month 4; 5.5% (n = 5,743) received doses >60 mg/d. Moreover, approximately 15% of IR hydrocodone/acetaminophen patients (n > 900,000) were prescribed total daily acetaminophen doses exceeding 4 g (the limit recommended by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration) at their initial IR hydrocodone/acetaminophen prescription or any time during therapy. ⋯ Although most patients were prescribed IR hydrocodone/acetaminophen for acute pain, the number of patients prescribed long-term therapy exceeds the number of patients prescribed ER opioids. It is important to consider the benefits and risks inherent with long-term opioid therapy, whether with IR or ER opioids, to ensure safe use of these products.