Articles: pain-management.
-
In 1986 the World Health Organisation (WHO) proposed an analgesic ladder for the effective therapy of cancer pain. The three standard analgesics making up this ladder are aspirin (non-opioid), codeine (weak opioid) and morphine (strong opioid). Adjuvant drugs may be added at any level. However, before 1986 step II analgesics (weak opioids) had never been tested in cancer pain relief. ⋯ The use of the WHO guidelines "by mouth, by the clock and by the ladder" is now the mainstay of cancer pain management. Because of the guidelines' simplicity they found general acceptance and helped to establish an international pain therapy standard for worldwide use. Nevertheless, there is no scientific validation of WHO step II. In the absence of prospective controlled randomized trials additional longterm results are necessary. We need more data on the use of WHO step II and an update of the published guidelines taking account of modern sustained-release drugs. Up to now, step II of the WHO guidelines for cancer pain is not a clinical reality but at best a didactic instrument.
-
Studies indicate that work disabled chronic back pain patients out of work for longer than three months have a reduced probability of returning to work. The escalating personal and economic costs (indemnity and health care) associated with such long term disability have facilitated efforts at multiple levels to prevent and more effectively manage work disability. Multidisciplinary rehabilitation (MDR) targeted at return to work represents one such approach. ⋯ Research on predictors of return to work outcome following MDR were identified and included variables in five categories: demographics, medical history, physical findings, pain and psychological characteristics. The literature provides support for the use of integrated approaches that target the medical, physical, ergonomic and psychosocial factors that can exacerbate and/or maintain work disability. Future research should address current methodological limitations in the literature and focus on: 1) identifying critical treatment components of such approaches, 2) developing innovative screening methods to identify high risk cases to facilitate earlier more targeted efforts to assist such individuals, and 3) consider variations in the staging of various combinations of interventions in an effort to develop more cost-effective variations in the multidisciplinary approach.
-
Review
Emergency pain management: a Canadian Association of Emergency Physicians (CAEP) consensus document.
Pain is the most common presenting complaint heard in Emergency Medicine, yet it is poorly controlled. Evaluation of this pain should be with use of objective pain scales completed by the patient, not relying on physician impression. Treatment modalities available in the Emergency Department, a review of medications and their dosing as well as specifics to pediatric pain management are presented. ⋯ At the writing of the consensus paper, however, no specific ideas were borrowed from any one article. The appended bibliography is suggested reading, selected from the larger literature review. There are to date few controlled multi centre trials in overall pain management that would allow guidelines to be produced.
-
Int J Obstet Anesth · Oct 1994
Parturients' assessment of water blocks, pethidine, nitrous oxide, paracervical and epidural blocks in labour.
This prospective study evaluated the extent to which the analgesic procedures available resulted in efficient pain relief in 833 Finnish parturients. Their pain ratings were recorded according to their own assessment of pain intensity during labour before and after pain management and according to their total pain experience recalled on the third day after delivery. Only regional blocks significantly diminished pain scores during labour and a striking decrease in pain level (P < 0.0001) was maintained until the second stage by epidural analgesia (EDA) alone. ⋯ After delivery 60% of parturients in this group recalled labour pain as being very severe or intolerable. This was partly due to delays in receiving epidural blockade and partly due to the parturient's reticence in requesting analgesia. Pain relief was rated as excellent or good by 94% of the EDA group but by only 50% of the remaining patients.