Managing Pain in Patients With Cancer: The Chinese Good Pain Management Experience.

Purpose: The number of cancer cases in China has increased rapidly from 2.1 million in 2000 to 4.3 million in 2015. As a consequence, pain management as an integral part of cancer treatment became an important health care issue. In March 2011, the Good Pain Management (GPM) program was launched to standardize the treatment of cancer pain and improve the quality of life for patients with cancer. With this work, we will describe the GPM program, its implementation experience, and highlight key lessons that can improve pain management for patients with cancer.
Methods: We describe procedures for the selection, implementation, and assessment procedures for model cancer wards. We analyzed published results in areas of staff training and patient education, pain management in practice, analgesic drugs administration, and patient follow-up and satisfaction.
Results: Pain management training enabled medical staff to accurately assess the level of pain and to provide effective pain relief through timely dispensation of medication. Patients with good knowledge of treatment of pain were able to overcome their aversion to opioid drugs and cooperate with nursing staff on pain assessment to achieve effective drug dose titration. Consumption of strong opioid drugs increased significantly; however, there was no change for weaker opioids. Higher pain remission rates were achieved for patients with moderate-to-severe pain levels. Proper patient follow-up after discharge enabled improved outcomes to be maintained.
Conclusion: The GPM program has instituted a consistent and high standard of care for pain management at cancer wards and improved the quality of life for patients with cancer.
Competing Interests: The following represents disclosure information provided by authors of this manuscript. All relationships are considered compensated. Relationships are self-held unless noted. I = Immediate Family Member, Inst = My Institution. Relationships may not relate to the subject matter of this manuscript. For more information about ASCO's conflict of interest policy, please refer to www.asco.org/rwc or ascopubs.org/jco/site/ifc. Shi-Ying YuNo relationship to discloseJie-Jun WangNo relationship to discloseYu-guang HuangNo relationship to discloseBing HuNo relationship to discloseKun WangNo relationship to disclosePing Ping LiNo relationship to discloseYi-Long WuHonoraria: AstraZeneca, Eli Lilly, Roche, Pierre Fabre, Pfizer, Sanofi Consulting or Advisory Role: AstraZeneca, Roche, Merck, Boehringer Ingelheim Research Funding: Boehringer Ingelheim (Inst), Roche (Inst)He-Long ZhangNo relationship to discloseLi ZhangResearch Funding: Eli Lilly, AstraZeneca, Novartis, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Boehringer IngelheimQing-Yuan ZhangNo relationship to discloseShu-Kui QinNo relationship to disclose