Search

Background: Chronic pain management multi/interdisciplinary programs attempt to address all elements of the biopsychosocial model. The primary objective of this retrospective study (based on practice-based audit) was to determine the effectiveness of a patient-centered, comprehensive and intense interdisciplinary pain management program in a publicly funded community-based pain clinic in the Greater Toronto Area. Method: This retrospective longitudinal study was conducted on 218 carefully selected sequential chronic pain patients, with 158 completing a 3–4-month interdisciplinary program between January 2016 and December 2018. Data collected upon exit, at 6 months and 12 months post-discharge included demographic information, pain characteristics, emotional/functional status obtained by validated instruments and global impression of change (GIC). Additionally, social health outcomes (return to work or school) were retrieved through retrospective chart review. Means of pre-and post-program variables were compared to assess changes of each patient's "journey". Results: Physical and mental/ emotional health outcomes at exit, 6 months and 12 months post-discharge, showed initial and sustained, statistically and clinically significant improvement from pre-treatment levels, with GIC (much/very much improved) reported as 77%, 58% and 76%, respectively. Additionally, a substantial positive change in social health outcomes was noted particularly in patients on disability (29%), part time workers gaining full time employment (55%), and students (71%) who improved their level of schooling. Conclusion: The study showed that careful patient selection in a community-based publicly funded interdisciplinary pain management program can produce significant improvement in pain, physical, mental/emotional health and social function, with sustained long-term outcomes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective The aim of this study was to describe the characteristics of patients referred with complex regional pain syndrome ( CRPS) diagnosis to a tertiary care pain center. Method Descriptive chart review study of all patients referred by family physicians or community specialists as having CRPS (2006-2010). Data extraction included demographics, pain ratings, and diagnosis utilizing the Budapest CRPS criteria. Results The study population consisted of 54 subjects (male [ M] = 7, female [ F] = 47). Only 27.7% were classified as CRPS by the clinical expert. Four additional subjects carrying other diagnoses but found to have CRPS were added to the analysis. The non- CRPS group consisted of 39 subjects ( M = 8, F = 31) and the CRPS group of 19 ( M = 2, F = 17). CRPS patients were statistically significantly more likely to 1) have suffered a fracture; 2) report symptoms in each of the four symptom categories, as well as signs in three or four categories collectively; and 3) have allodynia/hyperalgesia alone or in combination (85/90%) as compared with the non- CRPS group (23/25%, respectively). The non- CRPS group was much more likely to report no symptoms or signs at all in the different symptom and sign categories. Of the 39 non- CRPS patients, 74% had other diagnosable entities (1/3 suffering from specific neuropathic pain conditions, e.g., radiculopathy, diabetic neuropathy, etc. and 2/3 from discreet musculoskeletal entities), while 18% were diagnosed with psychogenic pain disorders including conversion reaction associated with immobility or paralysis. Discussion Besides fulfilling the Budapest CRPS diagnostic criteria, the most important other factor for diagnosing CRPS is the exclusion of a neuropathic, musculoskeletal, or non-biomedical condition accounting for the presentation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background. The Opioid Risk Tool (ORT) is a screening instrument for assessing the risk of opioid-related aberrant behavior in chronic noncancer pain (CNCP) patients. Objective. This study aims to compare patient characteristics documented in the original ORT study with those identified in CNCP patients assessed using a physician-administered ORT in a tertiary care pain clinic in Toronto, Canada. Methodology. This was a descriptive crosssectional study of 322 consecutive new patients referred over 12 months. Data extraction included ORT scores, demographics, pain ratings, opioid, and other medication use at point of entry, diagnosis, and other variables. Characteristics were compared with those described in the original ORT study. Results. The total mean ORT scores of patients in this study were related to several demographic (gender, age, marital status, and country of birth) and nondemographic variables (employment status, cigarette smoking, and contribution of biomedical and/or psychological factors to presentation). Prevalence of characteristics noted in this patient sample differed substantially from that found in Webster and Webster as the basis for ORT scores. Conclusion. Significant differences existed between this study population and the patient sample from which the ORT was derived. Limitations of this study are discussed. We concur with the authors of the original study that the ORT may not be applicable in different pain populations and settings. Based on our findings, we encourage caution in interpreting the ORT in general CNCP settings until further studies are performed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: We investigated patients with chronic pain seeking medical cannabis. We assessed their demographics, patterns of cannabis use, and the long-term effectiveness of cannabis on their pain and functional domains., Methods: This observational study enrolled patients between 8 September 2015 and 31 July 2018 from community-based cannabis clinics in Ontario, Canada. In addition to collecting demographic information, the primary outcomes studied were pain intensity and pain-related interference scores assessed at baseline, three, six, and 12 months. Using validated questionnaires, we also assessed anxiety, depression, quality of life (QoL), general health symptoms, neuropathic pain, self-reported opioid consumption, and adverse events., Results: Of the 1,000 patients consented, 757 (76%) participated at one or more of the study time points. At six and 12 months, 230 (30.4%) and 104 (13.7%) of participants were followed up, respectively. Most participants were female (62%), Caucasian (91%), and sought cannabis for pain relief (88%). Time was a significant factor associated with improvement in pain intensity (P < 0.001), pain-related interference scores (P < 0.001), QoL (P < 0.001), and general health symptoms (P < 0.001). Female sex was significantly associated with worse outcomes than male sex including pain intensity (P < 0.001) and pain-related interference (P < 0.001). The proportion of individuals who reported using opioids decreased by half, from 40.8% at baseline to 23.9% at 12 months., Conclusion: Despite significant challenges to collecting long-term observational data on patients who attempted a trial of cannabis products, approximately one-third of patients in the cohort remained on medical cannabis for six months. In this cohort, pain intensity and pain-related interference scores were reduced and QoL and general health symptoms scores were improved compared with baseline.

Objective: To describe the characteristics of patients with chronic noncancer pain (CNCP) prescribed opioids by community physicians and referred to a tertiary pain clinic., Design: Cross-sectional, descriptive study., Setting: A tertiary care, hospital-based pain clinic in Toronto, Ont., Participants: A total of 455 consecutive patients newly referred to the pain clinic by community physicians., Main Outcome Measures: Data on demographic characteristics, pain ratings, and medication intake were obtained using standardized collection forms and retrospective chart review. Patients were classified by diagnosis: group 1 patients had biomedical disorders only, group 2 patients had biomedical disorders and psychological factors, and group 3 patients had psychological factors only. Patients were also categorized based on opioid use: no opioid use (NOU); low opioid use (LOU), with a daily morphine-equivalent dosage (MED) of 200 mg or less; or high opioid use (HOU), with a daily MED of more than 200 mg., Results: In the general study population, 63% of patients were taking opioids, with 1 in 5 exceeding an MED of 200 mg daily. In group 1, 59% of patients used opioids and 10% had HOU; 66% of patients in groups 2 and 3 were taking opioids, with 21% and 26% classified as having HOU. The mean (SD) daily MED for groups 2 and 3 HOU patients combined was significantly higher than that of group 1 HOU patients: 575.7 (472.9) mg/d versus 284.9 (74.6) mg/d, respectively. Men were twice as likely as women to have HOU; Canadian-born patients were 3 times as likely as foreign-born patients to have HOU. Psychoactive drugs were coprescribed in 61% of LOU patients and 76% of HOU patients. Greater opioid use was associated with group 2 and 3 diagnoses, male sex, Canadian-born origin, and high pain scores., Conclusion: Our results indicate that male, Canadian-born CNCP patients presenting with psychological morbidity or comorbidity and reporting higher pain severity ratings were more likely to receive opioids. Additionally, many CNCP patients referred to our tertiary care pain clinic were receiving opioids in excess of a 200-mg/d MED. More studies are needed to determine which factors lead to high-dose opioid prescribing in a subset of this CNCP population.