Articles: pain-clinics.
-
Children are at times asked by clinicians or researchers to rate their pain associated with their past, future, or hypothetical experiences. However, little consideration is typically given to the cognitive-developmental requirements of such pain reports. Consequently, these pain assessment tasks may exceed the abilities of some children, potentially resulting in biased or random responses. ⋯ Hypothetical pain reports are sometimes used in the development and validation of pain assessment scales, as a tool in assessing cognitive-developmental and social-developmental aspects of children's reports of pain, and for the purposes of training children to use self-report scales. Rating pain associated with hypothetical pain scenarios requires the ability to recognize pain in another person and depends on the child's experience with pain. Enhanced understanding of cognitive-developmental requirements of young children's pain reports could lead to improved understanding, assessment, and treatment of pediatric pain.
-
Adults with mood disorders frequently use prescription opioids. The factors associated with this increased use remain unclear. We used the Medical Expenditure Panel Surveys from 2005 to 2011 to measure the association of mood disorders with new opioid use and the transition to longer-term opioid use for a variety of pain conditions before and after controlling for patient characteristics and clinical disability. ⋯ After adjusting for sociodemographics and clinical disability, there was no association between mood disorders and new opioid use for likely acute (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 1.05 [0.92-1.20]) or potentially chronic pain (aOR 0.91 [0.80-1.03]). However, there remained a strong association between mood disorders and the transition to longer-term opioid use for likely acute (aOR 1.77 [1.15-2.72]) and potentially chronic pain (aOR 1.95 [1.42-2.68]). Targeting the transition to longer-term opioid use may help clinicians reduce potentially inappropriate opioid prescriptions in this high-risk population.
-
Cross-over trials are typically more efficient than parallel group trials in that the sample size required to yield a desired power is substantially smaller. It is important, however, to consider some issues specific to cross-over trials when designing and reporting them, and when evaluating the published results of such trials. This systematic review evaluated the quality of reporting and its evolution over time in articles of cross-over clinical trials of pharmacologic treatments for chronic pain published between 1993 and 2013. ⋯ These results and others presented in this article demonstrate deficiencies in reporting of cross-over trials for analgesic treatments. Clearer reporting in future trials could improve readers' ability to critically evaluate the results, use these data in meta-analyses, and plan future trials. Recommendations for proper reporting of cross-over trials that apply to any condition are provided.
-
Regrettably, the list of unique analgesic tools has expanded very slowly during the past few decades. Many very promising drugs have failed once tested in clinical populations, and the associated costs of these translational failures have been extremely high. Part of this problem can be traced to the ways we select and use preclinical tools and perhaps to the way we report our findings. ⋯ In addition, many journals now require a clear statement of the experimental hypothesis, the details of the experimental methods, a description of the statistical approach to analyzing the data, and the disclosure of conflicts of interest. These new practices pose challenges to laboratory-based research groups. However, a more rigorous approach to preclinical investigations may be necessary for the successful development of new analgesics.