Search

Background: Differential diagnosis of low back pain (LBP) is complex and a prominent issue at all health-care levels; guidance may come from patients’ history cues and clinical examination signs. Human and animal studies report that diagnosis of lumbar radicular pain (LRP) may come from evaluating subjective responses of injured lumbar nerves to a strain applied at the buttock. The Buttock Applied Strain (BUAS-test) test may guide the differential diagnosis of LBP. Following an ex-adiuvantibus criterion, clinical improvement of LRP, diagnosed with the BUAS-test and congruently treated, may support this test diagnostic ability. Methods: Among 258 LRP patients, who, upon first visit (V1), tested positive on the BUAS-test (with/without positive Straight Leg Raising Test, SLRT), the effect of gabapentin prescription on painDETECT (PD) questionnaire and Brief Pain Inventory (BPI) outcomes was quantified in the follow-up visit (V2). To support BUAS-test diagnostic ability, we hypothesized that, at V2, >50% of the sample would present negative PD outcome, significant ( t-test) and ⩾2 points V2-V1 differences for each of the BPI-item’s score. We used multinomial logistic regression (MLR) and χ2 analyses to evaluate the PD-V2 outcomes’ dependence upon independent variables. Results: Of the sample, 77% reported a negative PD-V2 outcome. V2-V1 differences of all BPI items were significant and >2 points. PD-V2 outcomes showed significant associations with SLRT-V1 and PD-V1, respectively, but not with gender, age group or pain site. MLR showed a significant relationship between SLRT-V1 and PD-V2 outcomes. Conclusion: Among LRP patients, diagnosed by the BUAS-test and treated with gabapentin, all prespecified endpoints were reached. These results may be considered a piece of ex-adiuvantibus evidence for the BUAS-test ability to diagnose LRP. While positive BUAS-test implies potential LRP, the co-presence with positive SLRT may imply a severer LRP condition. Further prospective research, in different settings and direct clinical measures, is needed.

Thank you for the opportunity to respond to the authors of the letter "Regarding Samolsky Dekel et al. Reliability of the Buttock Applied Strain Test to Diagnose Radicular Pain in Patients with Low Back Pain." We appreciate the comments of the authors and congratulate their interest in our work; a fruitful exchange of opinion is always welcome.

Background Low-back pain (LBP) pathophysiological conditions include nociceptive back pain, somatic referred pain, radicular pain (RP), and radiculopathy. Differential diagnosis is challenging; guidance may come from patients' thorough clinical history and physical examination and, particularly for lumbar RP, from the evaluation of subjective responses of injured lumbar nerves to a strain applied at the buttock (buttock applied strain [BUAS] test). Methods In a sample of 395 consecutive patients with LBP, sensitivity, specificity, and prior probability (positive predictive values [PPVs] and negative predictive values [NPVs]) of the BUAS test were evaluated against 2 reference tests: the straight leg raising test (SLRT) and the painDETECT (PD) questionnaire. Multinomial logistic regression (MLR) and χ2 analyses were used to evaluate the BUAS test outcomes' dependence upon independent variables (gender, age group, pain localization, SLRT outcomes, and PD outcomes). Cohen's kappa statistic was used to assess inter-rater agreement. Results Compared with the PD questionnaire, the BUAS test showed a sensitivity of 92%, specificity of 100%, PPV of 100%, and NPV of 82%; compared with the SLRT, the BUAS test showed a sensitivity of 82%, NPV of 82%, specificity of 40%, and PPV of 40%. Inter-rater agreement of Cohen's kappa was 0.911. Significant associations were found between BUAS test outcomes and pain localization, SLRT outcomes, and PD outcomes, but not with the predictors gender or age group. MLR showed significant congruent relationships between BUAS test and PD outcomes. Conclusion Among patients with LBP, the BUAS test showed satisfactory sensitivity, specificity, prior probability, and inter-rater reliability; thus, it may be considered a useful adjunctive tool to diagnose RP in patients with LBP. For more generalized results, more research, in clinical settings other than pain clinics, is needed.

Objectives: Assessment of opioid-induced constipation (OIC) prevalence and relationship with demographic, clinical, and drug predictors in our daily practice. Design: Observational and retrospective study. Setting: Chronic pain (CP) center of Bologna’s Teaching Hospital, Italy. Subjects: Mixed consecutive CP opioid-user outpatients (n = 128). Main outcome measure(s): OIC was assessed with the Bowel Function Index (BFI) in three consecutive visits. Absolute difference and Student’s t-test were used to compare BFI scores. Predictors (opioid compound and type, morphine-equivalent daily-dose [MEDD], and laxatives) were retrieved from the patients’ charts. BFI and predictors relationships were checked by multinomial logistic regression (MLR); independent predictors of BFI scores were assessed with χ 2 analysis. Results: Of the 384 evaluations, 85 percent were on strong opioids with a MEDD range of 11-50 mg per day in the majority (60 percent) and 64 percent showed moderate constipation; 42 percent did not use laxatives while 24 percent used macrogol with significant decrease in the BFI. MLR showed that oxycodone was associated with a risk for moderate constipation. Lactulose and glycerin suppositories were associated with severe constipation. Non-opioid users and cancer patients were associated with normal bowel function and severe constipation, respectively. Conclusions: OIC was found in almost all evaluations of weak or strong opioid users (97 percent); moderate to severe OIC was found in 72 percent of the evaluations. Cancer patients were associated with severe constipation. Macrogol was superior to other laxatives. In our experience, macrogol relieved constipation in those on the combination of oxycodone and naloxone and in those on fentanyl patches. Lactulose and glycerol suppositories were associated with severe constipation.

INTRODUCTION: Despite opioids' recognized role in the treatment of moderate/severe musculoskeletal chronic pain, their long-term benefits need investigation. We explored the lasting analgesic efficacy, tolerability, influence on life quality, and chronicity stage of the novel prolonged release (PR) opioid, tapentadol, in 30 outpatients. METHODS: We evaluated patients' pain intensity and relief (Numerical Rating Scale; NRS), adverse effects, sleep quality, treatment satisfaction, health status (12-questions Health-Survey; SF-12), chronicity stage (Italian Mainz Pain-Staging System; I-MPSS) at 10, 30, 60, and 90 days after tapentadol prescription. RESULTS: At follow-ups, the investigated outcomes showed an overall statistically significant (Wilcoxon signed-rank test) improvement and remained stable over time, as did the health status and chronicity stage. Adverse effects were limited, transitory, and tolerable. CONCLUSIONS: Twelve weeks of PR tapentadol in outpatients with moderate/severe chronic musculoskeletal pain showed satisfactory analgesic efficacy and tolerability, and had a positive influence on life quality and chronicity stage. The results are robust enough to warrant a subsequent study with a larger sample and a longer observation period. PMID:25558866

Objectives Opioids are the preferred analgesic drugs to treat severe chronic pain conditions among dialysis patients; however, knowledge about their dialyzability features is limited. Oxycodone is increasingly used for the treatment of chronic pain conditions as oral controlled release (CR) tablets; however, evidence about this drug and its metabolites’ dialyzability is lacking. Methods We assessed, during 4-hour dialysis sessions, the effect of standard hemodialysis (HD) and online hemodiafiltration (HDF) methods on the plasma concentration of oxycodone and its metabolites in n = 20 chronic pain patients with end-stage renal disease who were stably treated with oral CR oxycodone. Chromatographic techniques were used to evaluate the studied compounds’ plasma concentrations at three different time points during dialysis. Results Mean plasma concentrations of oxycodone and noroxycodone in the sample showed an overall reduction trend over time, but it was less enhanced for noroxycodone. Mean reduction in oxycodone and noroxycodone arterial concentrations was significant and higher with HDF (54% and 27%, respectively) than with HD (22% and 17%, respectively). Analysis of the regression of these compounds’ clearance on their increasing arterial concentration showed a more stable and linear clearance prediction with HDF (roughly 85 mL/min); with HD, for increasing arterial concentration, clearance of oxycodone decreased while noroxycodone clearance increased. Discussion While no oxymorphone or noroxymorphone metabolites were detected, limited dialyzability of oxycodone and noroxycodone was documented along with insignificant postdialysis pain increment. This evidence will contribute toward considerations as to the safety of the use of oxycodone in dialysis patients in the future.

Biased pain evaluation due to automated heuristics driven by symptom uncertainty may undermine pain treatment; medical evidence moderators are thought to play a role in such circumstances. We explored, in this cross-sectional survey, the effect of such moderators (e.g., nurse awareness of patients’ pain experience and treatment) on the agreement betweenn=862inpatients’ self-reported pain andn=115nurses’ pain ratings using a numerical rating scale. We assessed the mean of absolute difference, agreement (κ-statistics), and correlation (Spearman rank) of inpatients and nurses’ pain ratings and analyzed congruence categories’ (CCs: underestimation, congruence, and overestimation) proportions and dependence upon pain categories for each medical evidence moderator (χ2analysis). Pain ratings agreement and correlation were limited; the CCs proportions were further modulated by the studied moderators. Medical evidence promoted in nurses overestimation of low and underestimation of high inpatients’ self-reported pain. Knowledge of the negative influence of automated heuristics driven by symptoms uncertainty and medical-evidence moderators on pain evaluation may render pain assessment more accurate.

Objectives: Opioid titration is the first challenging stage for rapid control of moderate/severe cancer pain. Evidence shows that sustained-release formulations may be used for opioid titration. We set a pilot assessment of the efficacy and tolerability of our in-house protocol (continuous and on demand opioids [CoDem]) of the association of sustained-release oxycodone and immediate-release morphine as rescue dose for opioid titration/rotation in opioid-naive (NAOP, n = 13), tolerant to weak (WOP, n = 20), or strong opioids (STOP, n = 44) in-patients with moderate/severe cancer pain. Methods: Observational and retrospective analysis of cancer in-patients treated for ≥ 7 days with the CoDem protocol. Outcome measures: Pain intensity (patients self-reported pain with numerical rating scale [NRS] under static [NRSs] and dynamic [NRSd] conditions), amount of drug consumption, opioid adverse effects, and patient satisfaction. Efficacy endpoints: In more than 50 percent of the patients and in