Search

Background: Although the widespread use of factor VIII/IX replacement therapy has significantly reduced the severity of arthropathy in persons with haemophilia (PWH), some develop degenerative joint changes, associated with significant pain. The aim of this survey was to investigate the management and perception of pain among Italian physicians who treat PWH., Materials and Methods: Between September and October 2017, a questionnaire was distributed to 35 Italian haemophilia treatment centres (60 physicians)., Results: Fifty-three haemophilia specialists completed the survey. We found that there was good agreement (98.1%) on the need to investigate pain at each clinical visit, but there was heterogeneity in the opinions of haemophilia specialists with regards to the availability of validated guidelines (35.8%) and whether pain specialists should be a part of the comprehensive care team in daily clinical practice (58.5%). Haemophilia specialists also agreed pain should be evaluated using a rating scale validated in PWH (88.7%). Pain was mainly managed by the haemophilia specialists themselves, supported by a physiatrist and physiotherapist, while a pain specialist was only involved in 26.4% of cases. The combination of paracetamol with tramadol or codeine was the most common first-line treatment, while cyclo-oxygenase-2 inhibitors, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, and opioids were less commonly used., Discussion: There are some unmet needs in Italy regarding pain management for PWH and the management of pain in these patients by haemophilia specialists. There is a lack of evidence-based guidelines for these specialists to use, as well as a reluctance to involve pain specialists. The lack of spontaneous reporting of pain by PWH, despite using pain relief, highlights the need for clinicians to actively ask patients about any pain they may be experiencing.

The aim of the study is to propose a multidimensional second-level diagnostic assessment to allow follow- up in the event physicians observe the presence of risk factors and/or active co-morbidities in HIV-infected patients. To develop our proposal, we chose the Delphi method that has been used for about 30 years in the healthcare field. The CISAI Group (Coordinamento Italiano per lo Studio dell'Allergia in Infezione da HIV) conducted this study. The first phase of the study provided identification of the questionnaire for second-level diagnostic assessment of HIV-infected patients. From March to July 2018 the questionnaire was submitted to 48 experts from 10 Italian HIV-dedicated sites. The questionnaire consisted of 102 items divided into 7 survey areas. The results can be summarized as follows: infectious disease diagnostics, 18 items reached agreement in 9 cases; osteoporosis diagnostics 12 items with 3 agreements; metabolic and cardiovascular diagnostics 13 items with 4 agreements; nephrology diagnostics 19 items with 8 agreements; hepatology diagnostics 12 items with 9 agreements; CNS diagnostics: 18 items with 7 agreements; psychological diagnostics and quality of life assessment (QoL) 10 items with no agreement. If these considerations are confirmed in required discussions and in-depth analyses, they will be able to produce an important indication in the drafting of national guidelines.

We propose a multidimensional first-level diagnostic assessment easy to use in routine clinical practice to allow infectious disease specialists to have a general and complete overview of persons living with HIV. Following the Delphi method, articles published from January 1, 2011 on controlled trials, clinical reports and observational studies dealing specifically with HIV and its co-morbidities were selected for review by the authors. Participants in the poll were selected among clinicians and infectious diseases specialists, working in 38 different dedicated HIV centres in Italy. The participants were given access to a website dedicated to the project and received a standardized information package containing a synopsis of the study and a description of the Delphi process and the selected literature. A total of 131 Items were divided into 10 first-level survey areas: anamnesis, objective examination, infectious diseases, osteoporosis diagnosis, metabolic pathologies diagnosis, cardiovascular diagnosis, nephrologic diagnosis, hepatological diagnosis, central nervous system diagnosis, evaluation of quality of life (QoL). This simple and concise first level tool identifies a few areas of multi-organ diagnostic assessment beyond the infectivity area. The identification of these areas will allow us to find shared and validated evaluation procedures with the intent to increase the likelihood of early recognition of patients at risk of comorbidity development, in order to facilitate more effective prevention, thereby reducing the overall impact on the quality of life of patients affected by this chronic illness.