Search

INTRODUCTION: The fields of anesthesiology and pain medicine are experiencing significant changes driven by market forces and professional preferences. While demand for anesthesiologists is rising, pain medicine is facing a decline in fellowship applications. METHODS: This study analyzed data from the Electronic Residency Application Service (ERAS) and the National Resident Matching Program (NRMP) from 2019 to 2023, focusing on trends in fellowship applications to pain medicine programs. Additionally, preliminary data from the 2024 match cycle were examined. RESULTS: There has been a notable decrease in anesthesiology residents applying to pain medicine fellowships, with applications dropping from 351 in 2019 to 193 in 2023. The overall decline in anesthesia-based applicants to pain medicine fellowships was 45%, signaling the highest detriment among anesthesiology applicants compared to other specialties. Gender disparities have been prevalent, with the absolute number of female applicants decreasing every year since 2019. Additionally, the 2023 match saw a significant number of unfilled programs, with 35 out of 115 programs failing to fill all positions. Preliminary data from the 2024 match cycle suggest this downward trend is continuing. CONCLUSION: The decline in pain medicine fellowship applications, particularly among anesthesiology residents, signals potential future workforce shortages and challenges in patient care. Recruitment strategies should include early exposure to pain medicine during residency, enhanced mentorship programs, and robust recruitment efforts (including virtual options). Addressing these issues is essential to ensure enough trained specialists to meet the growing need for pain specialists nationally.

Pain Medicine, a field that was once considered primarily a specialty of opioid medication management, evolved into a multimodal care model with the goal of limiting reliance on pain medications. Now, we see another revolution-the advancement from percutaneous procedures to minimally invasive surgical procedures. Despite these changes, Pain Medicine fellowships have consistently been recognized as a competitive subspecialty with more applicants than the number of available positions - until now. The most recent pain fellowship match suggests an abrupt change to the popularity of the specialty (with over 61 unmatched positions and over 35 unfilled programs) for applicants expected to matriculate in the year 2024 [1]. Unfilled positions have risen from 5% to 15% in the past three years. Similarly, unfilled programs have risen from 10% to 30% in the past three years. Several reasons for this sudden change in popularity have been proposed, including a lucrative general anesthesiology market, increasing difficulties with insurance coverage and reimbursement for procedures, and a dearth of advanced pain procedures performed at academic medicine programs. The field is at a critical juncture, necessitating ongoing discussions and collaboration among stakeholders to ensure that trainees are attracted to this dynamic field and are ultimately equipped to meet the evolving needs of patients.

BackgroundThere is potential for adverse events from corticosteroid injections, including increase in blood glucose, decrease in bone mineral density and suppression of the hypothalamic-pituitary axis. Published studies note that doses lower than those commonly injected provide similar benefit.MethodsDevelopment of the practice guideline was approved by the Board of Directors of American Society of Regional Anesthesia and Pain Medicine with several other societies agreeing to participate. The scope of guidelines was agreed on to include safety of the injection technique (landmark-guided, ultrasound or radiology-aided injections); effect of the addition of the corticosteroid on the efficacy of the injectate (local anesthetic or saline); and adverse events related to the injection. Based on preliminary discussions, it was decided to structure the topics into three separate guidelines as follows: (1) sympathetic, peripheral nerve blocks and trigger point injections; (2) joints; and (3) neuraxial, facet, sacroiliac joints and related topics (vaccine and anticoagulants). Experts were assigned topics to perform a comprehensive review of the literature and to draft statements and recommendations, which were refined and voted for consensus (≥75% agreement) using a modified Delphi process. The United States Preventive Services Task Force grading of evidence and strength of recommendation was followed.ResultsThis guideline deals with the use and safety of corticosteroid injections for sympathetic, peripheral nerve blocks and trigger point injections for adult chronic pain conditions. All the statements and recommendations were approved by all participants after four rounds of discussion. The Practice Guidelines Committees and Board of Directors of the participating societies also approved all the statements and recommendations. The safety of some procedures, including stellate blocks, lower extremity peripheral nerve blocks and some sites of trigger point injections, is improved by imaging guidance. The addition of non-particulate corticosteroid to the local anesthetic is beneficial in cluster headaches but not in other types of headaches. Corticosteroid may provide additional benefit in transverse abdominal plane blocks and ilioinguinal/iliohypogastric nerve blocks in postherniorrhaphy pain but there is no evidence for pudendal nerve blocks. There is minimal benefit for the use of corticosteroids in trigger point injections.ConclusionsIn this practice guideline, we provided recommendations on the use of corticosteroids in sympathetic blocks, peripheral nerve blocks, and trigger point injections to assist clinicians in making informed decisions.

Giuliano Lo Bianco,1 Michael E Schatman,2,3 Silvia Natoli,4,5 Christopher L Robinson6 1Anesthesiology and Pain Department, Foundation G. Giglio Cefalù, Palermo, Italy; 2Department of Anesthesiology, Perioperative Care, and Pain Medicine, NYU Grossman School of Medicine, New York, NY, USA; 3Department of Population Health-Division of Medical Ethics, NYU Grossman School of Medicine, New York, NY, USA; 4Department of Clinical-Surgical, Diagnostic and Pediatric Sciences, University of Pavia, Pavia, Italy; 5IRCCS Policlinico San Matteo, Pavia, Italy; 6Department of Anesthesiology, Perioperative, and Pain Medicine, Harvard Medical School, Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Boston, MA, USACorrespondence: Giuliano Lo Bianco, Anesthesiology and Pain Department, Fondazione Istituto G. Giglio Cefalù, Via Pietrapollastra, Cefalù, Palermo, 90015, Italy, Email giulianolobianco@gmail.com

Sayed E Wahezi,1 Ugur Yener,1 Tahereh Naeimi,1 Heejung Choi,2 Yashar Eshraghi,3 Scott G Pritzlaff,4 Trent Emerick,5 Corey W Hunter,6 Moorice Caparo,1 Michael E Schatman,7 Farshad Ahadian,8 Charles Argoff,9 Timothy Deer,10 Dawood Sayed,11 Miles Day,12 Alaa Abd-Elsayed,13 Giuliano Lo Bianco14 1Department of Physical Medicine & Rehabilitation, Montefiore Medical Center, Bronx, NY, USA; 2Department of Anesthesiology, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, IL, USA; 3Department of Anesthesia, Ochsner Medical Health Center, New Orleans, LA, USA; 4Department of Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine, University of California, Davis, CA, USA; 5Division of Chronic Pain, Department of Anesthesiology, University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Pittsburgh, PA, USA; 6Ainsworth Institute of Pain Management, Department of Rehabilitation & Human Performance, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY, USA; 7Department of Anesthesiology, Perioperative Care and Pain Medicine, Department of Population Health - Division of Medical Ethics, NYU Grossman School of Medicine, New York, NY, USA; 8Department of Anesthesiology, Center for Pain and Palliative Medicine, University of California, San Diego Medical Center, San Diego, CA, USA; 9Department of Neurology, Albany Medical Center, Albany, NY, USA; 10The Spine and Nerve Center of the Virginias, West Virginia University Hospitals, Charleston, WV, USA; 11Department of Anesthesiology, University of Kansas Medical Center, Kansas City, KS, USA; 12Department of Anesthesiology, Texas Tech University Health Sciences Center, Lubbock, TX, USA; 13Department of Anesthesiology, University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI, USA; 14Anesthesiology and Pain Department, Fondazione Istituto G. Giglio Cefalù, Palermo, ItalyCorrespondence: Sayed E Wahezi, Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Montefiore Medical Center, 1250 Waters Place, Tower #2 8th Floor, Bronx, NY, 10461, USA, Tel +1 718-920 7246, Fax +1 929-263-3950, Email swahezi@montefiore.orgBackground: Pain medicine care has expanded to encompass a wider range of conditions, necessitating updated education and training for pain specialists to utilize emerging technologies effectively. A national survey was conducted through several verified Pain organizations regarding pain physician employers’ perspectives on pain medicine fellowship training and education. The survey aimed to gather insights from a diverse range of geographic locations, practice types (academic and private practice), and practice settings. The findings emphasize the need for educational programs to adapt to the evolving landscape of pain medicine.Methods: A survey was disseminated through several national professional pain societies, including the AAPM, ASIPP, NANS, and ASPN, and Pain DocMatters forum, an online verified pain physician forum to ensure a wide reach among potential respondents. The survey received responses from 196 participants, 39 from the Pain DocMatters forum and 157 through pain societies’ channels.Results: Most survey respondents reported a need for additional training and experience beyond what is offered during the one-year ACGME-approved fellowship. Professionalism and basic interventional skills were identified as the highest valued attributes of pain physician candidates by potential employers. Employers rated spinal cord stimulator (SCS) trials as the most important advanced procedure for trainees to learn. Other advanced procedures such as SCS implants, PNS implants, interspinous spacers, and percutaneous procedures involving the vertebral body were also rated as either very important or somewhat important by most respondents. A significant gap in training has been identified, with only 7% of respondents feeling that fellows were adequately prepared to independently practice in the current educational model. A vast majority of respondents stated that fellows need additional training following graduation from fellowship to practice independently.Conclusion: Training programs should provide more robust education to prepare their graduates for independent practice.Keywords: graduate medical education, fellowship training, analysis, multidisciplinary, independence

Pain is a prevalent symptom in patients with serious illness and often requires interventional approaches for adequate treatment. Little is known about referral patterns and collaborative attitudes of palliative physicians regarding pain management specialists. To evaluate referral rates, co-management strategies, and beliefs of palliative physicians about the value of Pain Medicine specialists in patients with serious illness. A 30-question survey with demographic, referral/practice, and attitudes/belief questions was mailed to 1000 AAHPM physician members. Responses were characterized with descriptive statistics and further analyzed for associations between training experiences, practice environment, and educational activities with collaborative practice patterns and beliefs. The response rate was 52.6%. Most survey respondents had initial board certification primarily in internal medicine (n = 286, 56%) or family medicine (n = 144, 28%). A minority of respondents had completed a formal ABMS Hospice and Palliative Medicine fellowship (n = 178, 34%). Respondents had been in practice for a median of nine years, (range 1-38 years) primarily in community hospitals (n = 249, 47%) or academic hospitals (n = 202, 38%). The variables best associated with collaborative practices and attitudes was practice in an academic hospital setting and participation in regular joint academic conferences with pain medicine clinicians. This study shows that Palliative Care physicians have highly positive attitudes toward Pain Medicine specialists, but referrals remain low. Facilitating professional collaboration via joint educational/clinical sessions is one possible solution to drive ongoing interprofessional care in patients with complex pain. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

BACKGROUND: Pain medicine care has expanded to encompass a wider range of conditions, necessitating updated education and training for pain specialists to utilize emerging technologies effectively. A national survey was conducted through several verified Pain organizations regarding pain physician employers perspectives on pain medicine fellowship training and education. The survey aimed to gather insights from a diverse range of geographic locations, practice types (academic and private practice), and practice settings. The findings emphasize the need for educational programs to adapt to the evolving landscape of pain medicine. METHODS: A survey was disseminated through several national professional pain societies, including the AAPM, ASIPP, NANS, and ASPN, and Pain DocMatters forum, an online verified pain physician forum to ensure a wide reach among potential respondents. The survey received responses from 196 participants, 39 from the Pain DocMatters forum and 157 through pain societies channels. RESULTS: Most survey respondents reported a need for additional training and experience beyond what is offered during the one-year ACGME-approved fellowship. Professionalism and basic interventional skills were identified as the highest valued attributes of pain physician candidates by potential employers. Employers rated spinal cord stimulator (SCS) trials as the most important advanced procedure for trainees to learn. Other advanced procedures such as SCS implants, PNS implants, interspinous spacers, and percutaneous procedures involving the vertebral body were also rated as either very important or somewhat important by most respondents. A significant gap in training has been identified, with only 7% of respondents feeling that fellows were adequately prepared to independently practice in the current educational model. A vast majority of respondents stated that fellows need additional training following graduation from fellowship to practice independently. CONCLUSION: Training programs should provide more robust education to prepare their graduates for independent practice.

IntroductionApplicants to chronic pain medicine fellowship programs often express confusion regarding the importance of various selection criteria. This study sought to elucidate program directors' considerations in applicant selection for fellowship interviews and ranking and to correlate these criteria with match statistics to provide a guide for prospective candidates.MethodsAn electronic survey was sent to all Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education-accredited chronic pain fellowship directors. The importance of various applicant characteristics were evaluated and compared with recent match data.ResultsFifty-seven program directors completed the survey. The most important factors involved in applicant interview selection were perceived commitment to the specialty, letters of recommendation from pain faculty, scholarly activities, and leadership experiences. Although completion of a pain rotation was valued highly, experience with procedures was of relatively low importance. There was no preference if rotations were completed within the responders' department. Variability was noted when considering internal applicants or the applicant's geographic location. When citing main factors in ranking applicants, interpersonal skills, interview impression and applicant's fit within the institution were highly ranked by most responders.DiscussionAssessment of an applicant's commitment to chronic pain is challenging. Most responders prioritize the applicant's commitment to chronic pain as a specialty, scholarly activity, participation in chronic pain rotations, pain-related conferences and letters of recommendation from pain faculty. Chronic pain medicine fellowship candidates should establish a progressive pattern of genuine interest and involvement within the specialty during residency training to optimize their fellowship match potential.

Background: The risk of spinal epidural hematoma (SEH) has been described in the literature but the impact in various patient populations has not been assessed in the same study. We identified the risk factors for SEH and calculated the OR for recovery in the pediatric, adult and obstetric (OB) patients based on the degree of neurological deficit before surgery. Methods: Adult non-OB cases were categorized whether they were on anticoagulants or not; SEH was related to neuraxial or pain procedure; or whether there was adherence to the American Society of Regional Anesthesia (ASRA) guidelines. Eligible cases were identified through PubMed and Embase searches in the English literature from 1954 to July 2022. Results: A total of 940 cases were evaluated. In the pediatric cases, SEH was typically spontaneous, related to coagulopathy or athletic trauma. OB cases were spontaneous or related to neuraxial injections. Among adults on anticoagulant(s), SEH was mostly spontaneous with no related etiology or related to neuraxial procedure. SEH occurred despite adherence to the ASRA guidelines. Among non-OB adults not on anticoagulants, SEH was due to trauma, neuraxial injections, surgery or other causes. Neurological recovery was related to the degree of neurological deficit before surgery. Conclusions: Our data show a preponderance of spontaneous SEH in all patient populations. SEH developed even though the ASRA guidelines were followed, especially in patients on multiple anticoagulants. Patients with less impairment prior to surgery had a higher likelihood of complete recovery, regardless of the interval between surgery and onset of symptoms. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The editorial discusses the current status of pain medicine training in Latin America, highlighting the shortage of certified pain physicians in the region. It emphasizes the importance of fellowship training for pain management specialists and the need for expanded education and training opportunities. The article also addresses the unique healthcare challenges and cultural diversity in Latin America that complicate pain management, advocating for the promotion of fellowship training to improve regional pain management practices. [Extracted from the article]

Jonathan M Hagedorn,1 Tony K George,2 Rohit Aiyer,3 Keith Schmidt,4 John Halamka,5 Ryan S D’Souza1 1Department of Anesthesiology and Perioperative Medicine, Division of Pain Medicine, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA; 2Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, University Orthopedic Associates, Somerset, NJ, USA; 3Integrative Sports & Spine, Long Beach, CA, USA; 4Comprehensive Pain Management Program, St. Alexius Medical Center, Hoffman Estates, IL, USA; 5Mayo Clinic Platform, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USACorrespondence: Jonathan M Hagedorn, Department of Anesthesiology and Perioperative Medicine, Division of Pain Medicine, Mayo Clinic, 200 First Street SW, Rochester, MN, 55905, USA, Tel +1-507-284-9696, Fax +1-507-266-7732, Email jonhagedornmd@yahoo.comAbstract: Artificial intelligence was introduced 60 years ago and has evolved immensely since that time. While artificial intelligence is found in nearly all aspects of our life, the use of artificial intelligence in the healthcare industry has only recently become apparent and more widely discussed. It is expected that artificial intelligence will allow improved disease recognition, treatment optimization, cost and time savings, product development, decision making, and marketing. For pain medicine specifically, these same benefits will be translatable and we can expect better disease recognition and treatment selection. As adoption occurs with this impressive technology, it will be imperative for the pain medicine community to be informed on proper definitions and expected use cases for artificial intelligence. Our objective was to provide pain medicine physicians an overview of artificial intelligence, including important definitions to aid understanding, and to offer potential clinical applications pertinent to the specialty.Keywords: artificial intelligence, pain medicine, chronic pain, education

Qian Chen Physical Education Institute of Jimei University, Xiamen, People’s Republic of ChinaCorrespondence: Qian Chen, Physical Education Institute of Jimei University, Xiamen, People’s Republic of China, Email qianchen202408@163.com

Over time, the focus of evidence-based acute pain medicine has shifted, from a focus on drugs and interventions (characterized by numbers needed to treat), to an appreciation of procedure-specific factors (characterized by guidelines and meta-analyses), and now anesthesiologists face the challenge to integrate our current approach with the concept of precision medicine. Psychometric and biopsychosocial markers can potentially guide clinicians on who may need more aggressive perioperative pain management, or who would respond particularly well to a given analgesic intervention. The challenge will be to identify an easily assessable set of parameters that will guide perioperative physicians in tailoring the analgesic strategy to procedure and patient. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Artificial intelligence (AI) tools are currently expanding their influence within healthcare. For pain clinics, unfettered introduction of AI may cause concern in both patients and healthcare teams. Much of the concern stems from the lack of community standards and understanding of how the tools and algorithms function. Data literacy and understanding can be challenging even for experienced healthcare providers as these topics are not incorporated into standard clinical education pathways. Another reasonable concern involves the potential for encoding bias in healthcare screening and treatment using faulty algorithms. And yet, the massive volume of data generated by healthcare encounters is increasingly challenging for healthcare teams to navigate and will require an intervention to make the medical record manageable in the future. AI approaches that lighten the workload and support clinical decision-making may provide a solution to the ever-increasing menial tasks involved in clinical care. The potential for pain providers to have higher-quality connections with their patients and manage multiple complex data sources might balance the understandable concerns around data quality and decision-making that accompany introduction of AI. As a specialty, pain medicine will need to establish thoughtful and intentionally integrated AI tools to help clinicians navigate the changing landscape of patient care.

Introduction Methods Results Conclusion The fields of anesthesiology and pain medicine are experiencing significant changes driven by market forces and professional preferences. While demand for anesthesiologists is rising, pain medicine is facing a decline in fellowship applications.This study analyzed data from the Electronic Residency Application Service (ERAS) and the National Resident Matching Program (NRMP) from 2019 to 2023, focusing on trends in fellowship applications to pain medicine programs. Additionally, preliminary data from the 2024 match cycle were examined.There has been a notable decrease in anesthesiology residents applying to pain medicine fellowships, with applications dropping from 351 in 2019 to 193 in 2023. The overall decline in anesthesia‐based applicants to pain medicine fellowships was 45%, signaling the highest detriment among anesthesiology applicants compared to other specialties. Gender disparities have been prevalent, with the absolute number of female applicants decreasing every year since 2019. Additionally, the 2023 match saw a significant number of unfilled programs, with 35 out of 115 programs failing to fill all positions. Preliminary data from the 2024 match cycle suggest this downward trend is continuing.The decline in pain medicine fellowship applications, particularly among anesthesiology residents, signals potential future workforce shortages and challenges in patient care. Recruitment strategies should include early exposure to pain medicine during residency, enhanced mentorship programs, and robust recruitment efforts (including virtual options). Addressing these issues is essential to ensure enough trained specialists to meet the growing need for pain specialists nationally. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In high-resource countries, health disparities exist in both treatment approaches and health outcomes. Race and ethnicity can serve as proxies for other socioeconomic factors and social determinants of health such as income, education, social support, and residential neighbourhood, which strongly influence health outcomes and disparities. In regional anaesthesia and pain medicine, disparities exist across several surgical specialties including obstetrics, paediatrics, and orthopaedic surgery. Understanding these disparities will facilitate development of solutions aimed at eliminating disparities at the patient, physician/provider, and healthcare system levels. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Matthew Slitzky,1 R Jason Yong,2 Giuliano Lo Bianco,3 Trent Emerick,4 Michael E Schatman,5,6 Christopher L Robinson2 1Burke Rehabilitation, Montefiore Health System, White Plains, NY, USA; 2Department of Anesthesiology, Perioperative, and Pain Medicine, Harvard Medical School, Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Boston, MA, USA; 3Anesthesiology and Pain Department, Fondazione Istituto G. Giglio Cefalù, Palermo, Italy; 4Department of Anesthesiology and Perioperative Medicine, Chronic Pain Division, University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Pittsburgh, PA, USA; 5Department of Anesthesiology, Perioperative Care, and Pain Medicine, NYU Grossman School of Medicine, New York, NY, USA; 6Department of Population Health-Division of Medical Ethics, NYU Grossman School of Medicine, New York, NY, USACorrespondence: Christopher L Robinson, Department of Anesthesiology, Perioperative, and Pain Medicine, Harvard Medical School, Brigham and Women’s Hospital, 75 Francis Street Boston, Boston, MA, 02118, USA, Email crobinson48@bwh.harvard.edu

Sayed E Wahezi,1 Corey W Hunter,2 Farshad M Ahadian,3 Charles E Argoff,4 Michael E Schatman5,6 1Department of Physical Medicine & Rehabilitation, Montefiore Medical Center, Bronx, NY, USA; 2Ainsworth Institute of Pain Management, New York, NY, USA; 3Department of Anesthesiology, Center for Pain and Palliative Medicine, University of California, San Diego Medical Center, San Diego, CA, USA; 4Department of Neurology, Albany Medical Center, Albany, NY, USA; 5Department of Anesthesiology, Perioperative Care and Pain Medicine, NYU Grossman School of Medicine, New York, NY, USA; 6Department of Population Health – Division of Medical Ethics, NYU Grossman School of Medicine, New York, NY, USACorrespondence: Sayed E Wahezi, Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Montefiore Medical Center, 1250 Waters Place, Tower #2 8th Floor, Bronx, NY, 10461, USA, Tel +1 718-920-7246, Fax +1 929-263-3950, Email swahezi@montefiore.orgAbstract: The last decade has seen a boom in pain medicine, basic science and interventional pain management. Concomitantly, there is a need to educate trainees, young attendings, and seasoned attendings on these innovations. There has been a growth in the number of societies that represent pain medicine physicians, each with its own philosophy and guiding principles. The variety of thought within pain management, within the various groups that practice this field, and amongst the societies which protect those missions inherently creates divergence and isolation within these different communities. There is the enormous opportunity for our field to grow, but we need the voices of all different specialties and sub-specialties which practice pain medicine to collectively design the future of our emerging field. The explosion of revolutionary percutaneous surgeries, medications, psychotherapy, and research and development in our field has outpaced the ability of payers to fully embrace them. There is an increased number of pain practitioners using novel therapies, postgraduate training programs do not adequately train users in these techniques thereby creating a potential for sub-optimal outcomes. In part, this is a reason why payers for many of our more novel treatments have decreased patient access or eliminated remuneration for some of them. We believe that society-based collaborative regulation of education, research, and treatment guidelines is needed to improve visibility for payers and end users who provide these treatments. Furthermore, postgraduate chronic pain fellowship education has been deemed by many to be insufficient to educate on all of the necessary requirements needed for the independent practice of pain medicine, especially the consummation of newer technologies. Here, we draw comparison with this tenuous stage in pain management history with the last United States recession to remind us of how poor institutional regulation and neglect for long-term growth hampers a community.Keywords: fellowship, training, future

OBJECTIVE: Diversity and equity in medicine remain pivotal to care delivery. Data analysis on sex and racial diversity of pain medicine fellowship trainees and faculty in the United States are scant. We sought to characterize demographic and retention patterns among pain medicine fellows and faculty, who represent the emerging chronic pain management workforce. DESIGN: cross-sectional retrospective analysis. METHOD: We conducted an analysis of data from the American Association of Medical Colleges (AAMC) and the United States Accreditation Council on Graduate Medical Education (ACGME)-approved residency and fellowship training-programs for each year from 2009 through 2019, inclusively. We compared changes in sex, racial/ethnicity composition and retention rates of fellows and faculty in the United States by practice setting. RESULTS: From 2009 to 2019, there was a 14% increase in the number of ACGME pain fellowship programs. From 2009 to 2019, the ratio of men to women pain fellows ranged from 5:1 to 3.7:1. Compared with their self-identified White peers, Asian (OR 0.44; 95% CI: 0.34-0.58), Black (OR 0.46; 95% CI: 0.30-0.72), and Native American/Alaskan Native (OR 0.26; 95% CI: 0.08-0.80) identifying individuals had significantly lower odds of being a pain fellow, P

Introduction: Epidural steroid injections and epidural blood patches commonly involve the injection of a small amount of radiocontrast media under fluoroscopy to properly identify the target tissue or anatomic space and prevent off-target or intravascular delivery of therapeutic or diagnostic drugs. Iodinated low osmolar non-ionic contrast media is the standard preparation used as it is considered safe and cost-effective, but gadolinium-based preparations have been used as an alternative for patients with an 'iodine'-related or radiocontrast media allergy label to prevent hypersensitivity reactions. The risk of neurotoxic events when gadolinium is inadvertently injected into the intrathecal space has been reported in recent years, raising concerns when gadolinium-based contrast media is used in lieu of iodinated low osmolar non-ionic contrast media. Methods: A retrospective review was conducted of patients who received gadolinium-based contrast media for procedures with risk of inadvertent intrathecal access from January 1, 2019 to May 1, 2022. Information on patient demographics, allergy label information, and procedure description was documented for all patients who received gadolinium-based contrast media for axial spine procedures (including epidural steroid injections, epidural blood patch procedures, and selective nerve root blocks), and all side effects reported within 1 month of the procedure were recorded. Saved fluoroscopy images of all procedures for which there was concern for possible gadolinium-based contrast media-related side effect were reviewed for evidence of inadvertent intrathecal gadolinium-based contrast media administration. Descriptive statistical analysis was performed using REDCap and IBM SPSS Statistics V.28. Results: We identified 508 patients who received gadolinium-based contrast media during a fluoroscopically guided axial spine procedure. These patients underwent 697 epidural procedures and 23 patients were identified as experiencing an adverse event that could be consistent with possible, probable, or clear signs of exposure to intrathecal gadolinium. Our calculated adverse event rate was 3.3%. Ten patients required additional medical evaluation or treatment. Discussion: Almost all patients in our cohort had an allergy label on their chart that guided the provider to switch to gadolinium-based contrast media, but most were incomplete, ill-defined, or related to allergy to iodine but not iodinated contrast media. Such practice is not recommended based on current guidelines. The current study raises concern regarding the use of gadolinium-based contrast media in axial spine procedures, with the risk of potential severe adverse events, without evidence-based need for avoiding iodinated contrast media. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Matthew Slitzky,1 R Jason Yong,2 Giuliano Lo Bianco,3 Trent Emerick,4 Michael E Schatman,5,6 Christopher L Robinson2 1Burke Rehabilitation, Montefiore Health System, White Plains, NY, USA; 2Department of Anesthesiology, Perioperative, and Pain Medicine, Harvard Medical School, Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Boston, MA, USA; 3Anesthesiology and Pain Department, Fondazione Istituto G. Giglio Cefalù, Palermo, Italy; 4Department of Anesthesiology and Perioperative Medicine, Chronic Pain Division, University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Pittsburgh, PA, USA; 5Department of Anesthesiology, Perioperative Care, and Pain Medicine, NYU Grossman School of Medicine, New York, NY, USA; 6Department of Population Health-Division of Medical Ethics, NYU Grossman School of Medicine, New York, NY, USACorrespondence: Christopher L Robinson, Brigham and Women’s Hospital, 75 Francis Street, Boston, MA, 02118, USA, Email crobinson48@bwh.harvard.edu

Mika M Rockholt,1 Gifty Addae,1 Alexander Chee,1 Wanda Chin,1 Germaine Cuff,1 Jing Wang,1,2 Uchenna O Umeh,1,3 Lisa V Doan1 1Department of Anesthesiology, Perioperative Care and Pain Management, New York University Grossman School of Medicine, New York, NY, 10016, USA; 2Department of Neuroscience & Physiology, Neuroscience Institute, New York University Grossman School of Medicine, New York, NY, 10016, USA; 3Department of Orthopedic Surgery, New York University Grossman School of Medicine, New York, NY, 10016, USACorrespondence: Mika M Rockholt, Department of Anesthesiology, Perioperative Care and Pain Medicine, New York University Grossman School of Medicine, New York, NY, 10016, USA, Tel +1 646-209-7590, Email Mika.Rockholt@nyulangone.orgPurpose: The COVID-19 pandemic led to a drastic expansion in utilizing telemedicine, circumventing some of the geographical barriers to accessing pain care. However, uncertainties around the impact of telemedicine across various sociodemographic groups still exist, prompting further exploration. Therefore, this study aimed to evaluate the impact of sociodemographic factors in telemedicine utilization during and after the COVID-19 pandemic.Patients and methods: All outpatient non-procedural visits at the pain medicine division of a large academic institution in the epicenter of the pandemic (New York, USA), between March 2019 and October 2021, were retrospectively included. Sociodemographic data including gender, age, ethnicity/race, postal code, and type of health insurance, across three time periods associated with the COVID-19 pandemic - pre-lockdown (in-office visits only), lockdown (telemedicine visits only) and post-lockdown (offering both in-office and telemedicine visits) – were analyzed and compared.Results: In total, 12,615 unique patients - The majority being women (58%) - were seen during the whole study period. In the post-lockdown period, telemedicine was utilized by 42% of all patients. Follow-up visits, younger patients, white patients, patients residing further away from the hospital, and privately insured patients were more likely to utilize telemedicine post-lockdown (p < 0.05). Older patients, minorities, Manhattan residents, and Medicare/Medicaid recipients, were more likely to use in-office visits post-lockdown (p < 0.05).Conclusion: We identified disparities in the utilization of telemedicine in Pain Medicine, which may be due to socioeconomic factors such as lack of access to reliable internet access, cost of devices, and technological know-how. This emphasizes the need for further studies to better understand the reasons for and barriers to telemedicine use. This could help inform policymaking to safeguard equitable access to telemedicine use for pain care.Keywords: telemedicine, pain medicine, health care access, covid-19, disparities

Objective:The aim of this study is to assess the factors affecting the preference for the Pain Medicine subspecialty and the fellowship training programs by the pain specialists who have completed or continued the Pain Medicine fellowship training program from 2014 to 2021 in Turkey.Methods:The study was conducted in October 2020 and March 2021. By reaching out to the pain specialists who completed their fellowship or had been continuing their training by getting the right to receive a Pain Medicine fellowship. Via e-mail or WhatsApp application, an e-questionnaire link was sent to the participants, and data were collected on demographics, factors affecting the choice of Pain Medicine subspecialty, level of realization of the expectations during the training course and the level of proficiency in the field of pain specialization. Data analysis was performed using IBM SPSS Statistics 20.0 software, and tests were considered statistically significant if P < 0.05.Results:Participants reported that the factors that most affected their preferences were personal interest (55.1%), more comfortable working conditions (43.6%), and interest in an academic career (38.5%). Seventy-six participants answered the level of realization of expectations about performing interventional pain procedures using ultrasound imaging, and 31.6% reported that their expectations were not met, and 25% reported that their expectations were partially realised.Conclusion:We hope that our findings will lead to improving Pain Medicine subspecialty training programs, upgrading standards, and more comprehensive studies on these issues.

Introduction Cancer-related pain is ubiquitous. Targeted procedural interventions may be an important and underutilized method for improving cancer-related pain and quality of life. The goal of this study was to determine the baseline educational experience and perceived post-graduation comfort of Pain Medicine fellows in performing procedures that can be used for cancer-related pain. Methods Using Qualtrics, a 16-question survey was distributed to graduating fellows at accredited Pain Medicine Fellowship programs in the USA in June 2022. The fellows' experience and comfort level performing eight procedures was analyzed using summary descriptive statistics and contingency table analysis with statistical significance determined by Pearson's χ² test. Results Survey respondents represented 30% of fellows among 44% of Pain Medicine programs during the 2021-2022 academic year. The majority of respondents reported no experience performing 7 of the 8 procedures for cancer-related pain (56.1%-90.6%). Graduating fellows reported overall comfort performing sympathetic neurolysis (65.7%), spinal cord stimulator trials (85.7%) and implantations (66.0%), but not intrathecal pump trials (36.9%) and implantations (31.3%), peripheral nerve stimulator implantations (41.7%), vertebral augmentations (31.3%), and vertebral body radiofrequency ablations (16.7%). Conclusions Experience performing 10 or more of the surveyed procedures, personal interest in treating cancer-related pain, and attendance of cancer-related pain lectures were found to significantly increase comfortability in performing cancer-related pain procedures post graduation, whereas cadaver-based learning did not. This study highlights the need for more robust procedural education for cancer-related pain and identifies procedural experience in non-cancer patients and lectures on cancer-related pain as ways to bridge this educational gap. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Substance use disorders (SUDs) are on the rise in children and young adults in the United States. According to reports, over 40 million people aged 12 and older had a diagnosed SUD in 2020.1 A recent report from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) found that overdose death in children aged 10 to 19 years old increased 109% from 2019 to 2021.2 Given the rapidly increasing prevalence of SUD, anesthesiologists will almost certainly encounter children, adolescents, and young adults with a history of recreational drug use or nonmedical use of prescription opioids in the perioperative period. Since the perioperative period can be a particularly challenging time for patients with SUD, anesthesiologists can tailor their perioperative care to reduce rates of relapse and can serve as both advocates and educators for this vulnerable patient population. This article examines the history of SUD and physiology of substance use in children, adolescents, and young adults, including reasons why young people are more susceptible to the addictive effects of many substances. The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic impacted many aspects of life, including increased social isolation and shifted dynamics at home, both thought to impact substance use.3 Substance use patterns in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic are explored. Although current literature is mostly on adults, the evidence-based medical treatments for patients with SUD are reviewed, and recommendations for perioperative considerations are suggested. The emphasis of this review is on opioid use disorder, cannabis, and vaping particularly because these have disproportionately affected the younger population. The article provides recommendations and resources for recognizing and treating adolescents and young adults at risk for SUD in the perioperative period. It also provides suggestions to reduce new persistent postoperative opioid use.