Search

Background: Breakthrough pain is common in life-limiting conditions and at end-of-life. Despite over 30 years of study, there is little consensus regarding the definition and characteristics of breakthrough pain. Objective: This study aims to update and expand a 2010 systematic review by Haugen and colleagues to identify (1) all definitions of breakthrough pain and (2) all descriptions and classifications of breakthrough pain reported by patients, caregivers, clinicians, and experts. Design: This rapid systematic review followed the Cochrane Rapid Review Methods Group guidelines. A protocol is published on PROSPERO (CRD42019155583). Data sources: CINAHL, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, and the Web of Science were searched for breakthrough pain terms from the inception dates of each database to 26th August 2022. Results: We identified 65 studies that included data on breakthrough pain definitions, descriptions, or classifications from patients (n = 30), clinicians (n = 6), and experts (n = 29), but none with data from caregivers. Most experts proposed that breakthrough pain was a sudden, severe, brief pain occurring in patients with adequately controlled mild-moderate background pain. However, definitions varied and there was no consensus. Pain characteristics were broadly similar across studies though temporal factors varied widely. Experts classified breakthrough pain into nociceptive, neuropathic, visceral, somatic, or mixed types. Patients with breakthrough pain commonly experienced depression, anxiety, and interference with daily life. Conclusions: Despite ongoing efforts, there is still no consensus on the definition of breakthrough pain. A compromise is needed on breakthrough pain nomenclature to collect reliable incidence and prevalence data and to inform further refinement of the construct. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Priority setting for healthcare research is as important as conducting the research itself because rigorous and systematic processes of priority setting can make an important contribution to the quality of research. This project aimed to prioritise clinical therapeutic uncertainties in paediatric pain and palliative care in order to encourage and inform the future research agenda and raise the profile of paediatric pain and palliative care in the United Kingdom. Clinical therapeutic uncertainties were identified and transformed into patient, intervention, comparison and outcome (PICO) format and prioritised using a modified Nominal Group Technique. Members of the Clinical Studies Group in Pain and Palliative Care within National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Clinical Research Network (CRN)-Children took part in the prioritisation exercise. There were 11 clinically active professionals spanning across a wide range of paediatric disciplines and one parent representative. The top three research priorities related to establishing the safety and efficacy of (1) gabapentin in the management of chronic pain with neuropathic characteristics, (2) intravenous non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs in the management of post-operative pain in pre-schoolers and (3) different opioid formulations in the management of acute pain in children while at home. Questions about the long-term effect of psychological interventions in the management of chronic pain and various pharmacological interventions to improve pain and symptom management in palliative care were among the 'top 10' priorities. The results of prioritisation were included in the UK Database of Uncertainties about the Effects of Treatments (DUETS) database. Increased awareness of priorities and priority-setting processes should encourage clinicians and other stakeholders to engage in such exercises in the future. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]