Search

Lyne Lalonde,1–4 Manon Choinière,3,5 Elisabeth Martin,3 Lise Lévesque,3 Éveline Hudon,2,3,6 Danielle Bélanger,2 Sylvie Perreault,1,7 Anaïs Lacasse,8 Marie-Claude Laliberté1,9 1Faculty of Pharmacy, Université de Montréal, Montreal, QC, Canada; 2Équipe de recherche en soins de première ligne, Centre de santé et de services sociaux de Laval, Laval, QC, Canada; 3Centre de recherche, Centre hospitalier de l'Université de Montréal (CRCHUM), Montreal, QC, Canada; 4Sanofi Aventis Endowment Chair in Ambulatory Pharmaceutical Care, Faculty of Pharmacy, Université de Montréal and Centre de santé et de services sociaux de Laval, QC, Canada; 5Department of Anesthesiology, Faculty of Medicine, Université de Montréal, Montreal, QC, Canada; 6Department of Family Medicine and Emergency, Faculty of Medicine, Université de Montréal, Montreal, QC, Canada; 7Sanofi Aventis Endowment Chair in Drug Utilization, Faculty of Pharmacy, Université de Montréal, Montreal, QC, Canada; 8Département des sciences de la santé, Université du Québec en Abitibi-Témiscamingue, Rouyn-Noranda, QC, Canada; 9AbbVie Corporation, St-Laurent, QC, Canada Purpose: There is evidence that the management of chronic non-cancer pain (CNCP) in primary care is far from being optimal. A 1-day workshop was held to explore the perceptions of key actors regarding the challenges and priority interventions to improve CNCP management in primary care. Methods: Using the Chronic Care Model as a conceptual framework, physicians (n=6), pharmacists (n=6), nurses (n=6), physiotherapists (n=6), psychologists (n=6), pain specialists (n=6), patients (n=3), family members (n=3), decision makers and managers (n=4), and pain researchers (n=7) took part in seven focus groups and five nominal groups. Results: Challenges identified in focus group discussions were related to five dimensions: knowledge gap, “work in silos”, lack of awareness that CNCP represents an important clinical problem, difficulties in access to health professionals and services, and patient empowerment needs. Based on the nominal group discussions, the following priority interventions were identified: interdisciplinary continuing education, interdisciplinary treatment approach, regional expert leadership, creation and definition of care paths, and patient education programs. Conclusion: Barriers to optimal management of CNCP in primary care are numerous. Improving its management cannot be envisioned without considering multifaceted interventions targeting several dimensions of the Chronic Care Model and focusing on both clinicians and patients. Keywords: chronic pain, community-based participatory research, health service accessibility, patient-centered care, primary health care

Lyne Lalonde,1–4 Manon Choinière,3,5 Élisabeth Martin,2,3 Djamal Berbiche,2,3 Sylvie Perreault,1,6 David Lussier7–91Faculty of Pharmacy, Université de Montréal, Montreal, QC, Canada; 2Équipe de recherche en soins de première ligne, Centre de santé et de services sociaux de Laval, Laval, QC, Canada; 3Centre de recherche du Centre hospitalier de l'Université de Montréal (CRCHUM), Montreal, QC, Canada; 4Sanofi Aventis Endowment Chair in Ambulatory Pharmaceutical Care, Université de Montréal and Centre de santé et de services sociaux de Laval, QC, Canada; 5Department of Anesthesiology, Faculty of Medicine, Université de Montréal, Montreal, QC, Canada; 6Sanofi Aventis Endowment Research Chair in Optimal Drug Use, Université de Montréal, Montreal, QC, Canada; 7Institut universitaire de gériatrie de Montréal, Montreal, QC, Canada; 8Division of Geriatric Medicine and Alan-Edwards Centre for Research on Pain, McGill University, Montreal, QC, Canada; 9Department of Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Université de Montréal, Montreal, QC, CanadaBackground: The economic burden of chronic noncancer pain (CNCP) remains insufficiently documented in primary care.Purpose: To evaluate the annual direct health care costs and productivity costs associated with moderate to severe CNCP in primary care patients taking into account their pain disability.Materials and methods: Patients reporting noncancer pain for at least 6 months, at a pain intensity of 4 or more on a 0 (no pain) to 10 (worst possible pain) intensity scale, and at a frequency of at least 2 days a week, were recruited from community pharmacies. Patients' characteristics, health care utilization, and productivity losses (absenteeism and presenteeism) were documented using administrative databases, pharmacies' renewal charts, telephone, and self-administered questionnaires. Patients were stratified by tertile of pain disability measured by the Brief Pain Inventory questionnaire.Results: Patients (number =483) were, on average, 59 years old, mainly women (67.5%), and suffered from CNCP for a mean of 12 years at an average pain intensity of 6.5±1.9. The annual direct health care costs and productivity costs averaged CAD $9,565 (±$13,993) and CAD $7,072 (±$11,716), respectively. The use of complementary health care services accounted for almost 50% of the direct health care costs. The mean adjusted total direct health care costs (considering pain-related hospitalizations only) and productivity costs increased with more pain disability: low disability, CAD $12,118; moderate, CAD $18,278; and severe, CAD $19,216; P=0.001.Conclusion: The economic burden of CNCP is substantial and increases with the level of pain disability, which suggests the need for and potential benefits of improving CNCP management through specific and adapted treatment plans targeting the impact of pain on daily functioning.Keywords: noncancer chronic pain, primary care, cohort study, direct health care costs, productivity costs, Brief Pain Inventory

Ghaya Jouini,1–3 Manon Choinière,3,4 Elisabeth Martin,2,3 Sylvie Perreault,1,5 Djamal Berbiche,2,3 David Lussier,6–8 Eveline Hudon,2,3,9 Lyne Lalonde1–3,101Faculty of Pharmacy, Université de Montréal, Montreal, Quebec, Canada; 2Équipe de recherche en soins de première ligne, Centre de santé et de services sociaux de Laval, Laval, Quebec, Canada; 3Centre de recherche du Centre hospitalier de l'Université de Montréal (CRCHUM), Montreal, Quebec, Canada; 4Department of Anesthesiology, Faculty of Medicine, Université de Montréal, Montreal, Quebec, Canada; 5Sanofi-Aventis Endowment Research Chair in Optimal Drug Use, Université de Montréal, Montreal, Quebec, Canada; 6Institut universitaire de gériatrie de Montréal, Montreal, Quebec, Canada; 7Division of Geriatric Medicine and Alan-Edwards Center for Research on Pain, McGill University, Montreal, Quebec, Canada; 8Department of Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Université de Montréal, Montreal, Quebec, Canada; 9Department of Family Medicine and Emergency, Faculty of Medicine, Université de Montréal, Montreal, Quebec, Canada; 10Sanofi-Aventis Endowment Research Chair in Ambulatory Pharmaceutical Care, Université de Montréal and Centre de santé et de services sociaux de Laval, Quebec, CanadaPurpose: Describe the pharmacotherapeutic management of primary-care patients with chronic noncancer pain, assess their satisfaction with pain treatment, and identify the determinants of their satisfaction.Methods: A cohort study was conducted in Quebec (Canada). Patients reporting chronic noncancer pain with an average pain intensity of at least 4 on a 0–10 scale (10= worst possible pain) and having an active analgesic prescription from a primary-care physician were recruited. They completed a telephone interview and a self-administered questionnaire to document their pain, emotional well-being, satisfaction with treatment, and barriers/beliefs/attitudes about pain and its treatment. Information on pharmacotherapy was based on an administrative provincial database and pharmacies' charts. Determinants of patients' satisfaction were identified using multivariate linear regression models.Results: Four hundred and eighty six patients participated. Their mean age was 58.4 years and they had had pain for a mean of 11.7 years (standard deviation, ±11.1) at an average pain intensity of 6.5 in the past week. Although 90% reported adverse gastrointestinal effects, 36.4% and 54.4% of these patients took no over-the-counter or prescribed medication for constipation or nausea, respectively. On a scale from 0–100, the mean overall satisfaction score was 64.7 (95% confidence interval [CI] =63.5–65.9). Patient satisfaction was low, particularly regarding the “information about pain and its treatment” (mean 50.6; 95% CI =47.6–53.7) and “treatment efficacy” (mean 53.6; 95% CI =51.5–55.6) subscales. The overall treatment satisfaction score decreased with more pain disability, probable depression and anxiety, more barriers to pain treatment, higher incidence of nausea, and use of over-the-counter analgesics.Conclusion: In primary care, patients’ level of satisfaction with their pain treatment is not optimal. This study underlines how the expanded scope of practice of community pharmacists may allow them to play a pivotal role in providing information, discussing barriers to pain treatment, and monitoring pain disability, and by appropriately managing pharmacotherapy to optimize effectiveness while minimizing adverse effects.Keywords: noncancer chronic pain, primary care, pharmacotherapy, analgesic, adverse effects, cohort study

In recent years, risk stratification has sparked interest as an innovative approach to disease screening and prevention. The approach effectively personalizes individual risk, opening the way to screening and prevention interventions that are adapted to subpopulations. The international perspective project, which is developing risk stratification for breast cancer, aims to support the integration of its screening approach into clinical practice through comprehensive tool-building. Policies and guidelines for risk stratification--unlike those for population screening programs, which are currently well regulated--are still under development. Indeed, the development of guidelines for risk stratification reflects the translational aspects of perspective. Here, we describe the risk stratification process that was devised in the context of perspective, and we then explain the consensus-based method used to develop recommendations for breast cancer screening and prevention in a risk-stratification approach. Lastly, we discuss how the recommendations might affect current screening policies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]