Search

Die Vorgaben von Leitlinien erweisen sich haufig als nicht praxistauglich oder spiegeln nur ein verzerrtes Bild des Praxisalltags wider. „Klug entscheiden in der Schmerzmedizin“ bedeutet aber nicht nur, externe, sondern auch interne Evidenz sowie die Patientenpraferenz zu berucksichtigen. Eine Arbeitsgruppe der DGS hat sich intensiv mit der Frage beschaftigt, wie sich Leitlinien in der Versorgung von Patienten mit chronischen Schmerzen auswirken und auswirken durfen.

On behalf of the Medical/Psychological Pain Associations, Pain Patients Alliance and the Professional Association of Pain Physicians and Psychologists, the Joint Commission of Professional Societies and Organizations for Quality in Pain Medicine, working in close collaboration with the respective presidents, has developed verifiable structural and process-related criteria for the classification of medical and psychological pain treatment facilities in Germany. Based on the established system of graded care in Germany and on existing qualifications, these criteria also argue for the introduction of a basic qualification in pain medicine. In addition to the first-ever comprehensive description of psychological pain facilities, the criteria presented can be used to classify five different levels of pain facilities, from basic pain management facilities, to specialized institutions, to the Centre for Interdisciplinary Pain Medicine. The recommendations offer binding and verifiable criteria for quality assurance in pain medicine and improved pain treatment.

Der Deutsche Schmerz- und Palliativtag 2016 vom 2. bis 5. Marz 2016 im Congress Center Frankfurt am Main stand unter dem Motto „Patientenversorgung im Mittelpunkt“. Fast 2.000 Teilnehmer folgten der Einladung von DGS und DSL zu unserem wichtigen Versorgerkongress. Im Fokus standen akute und chronische Schmerzen sowie die Behandlung der damit verbundenen Erkrankungen.

Angesichts der bestehenden Herausforderungen in der schmerzmedizinischen Versorgung hat der DGS-Vorstand mit der DGS-Agenda 2020plus zahlreiche Aktivitaten zur Gestaltung der Zukunft beschlossen.

Following the recent introduction of hand-held computers to be used by patients instead of conventional pencil-and-paper questionnaires, a validation study under 'real-life' conditions was conducted, in order to compare these two clinical instruments when used by chronic pain patients to describe their pain using visual and numerical rating scales.Each of 200 chronic pain patients attending a single physician's practice was given two pain questionnaires to complete, one on paper and one on a hand-held computer; completion of these took place directly before and after consultation, in randomised order. The questions asked in the two questionnaires were identical: present pain, average pain, worst pain and those of the painDETECT questionnaire (the latter distinguishes characteristic symptoms of nociceptive pain). In accordance with standard practice, the paper questionnaire used numerical rating scales and the electronic one employed visual analogue scales, with or without a numerical indicator.Nearly all patients (99%) of the study population (58% female; aged 57+/-14 years) completed both questionnaires. In spite of the expected substantial intra-individual scatter, overall results from the two questionnaire types were highly consistent. Only a few differences of potential statistical significance (p5%) were observed, and none were found that would have led to different interpretations. No difference was seen between results from the electronic visual analogue scales with and without a numerical indicator.Under conditions of routine clinical practice, the hand-held computer questionnaire can give results equivalent to those obtained with the conventional paper questionnaire.