Search

Rationale: The continuous infusion of fentanyl or morphine is often prescribed to assist with analgesia and sedation (analgosedation) during mechanical ventilation. Objectives: To compare the effect of fentanyl versus morphine on patient-centered outcomes in ventilated patients. Methods: We conducted a cluster-randomized, cluster-crossover trial between July 2019 and August 2020 in two adult ICUs. We compared two continuous infusion regimens (fentanyl versus morphine). One ICU was randomized to the fentanyl-morphine sequence and the other to the morphine-fentanyl sequence. The primary outcome was the number of ventilator-free days at Day 28. Secondary outcomes included, among others, duration of mechanical ventilation in survivors and ICU-free days at Day 28. Measurements and Main Results: Via cluster allocation, we randomized 737 patients. Of these, 56 were excluded because of the opt-out consent process, leaving 681 (344 to fentanyl and 337 to morphine) for primary analysis (median [interquartile range] age, 59 [44-69] years). Median ventilator-free days at Day 28 were 26.1 (20.7-27.3) in the fentanyl versus 25.3 (19.1-27.2) in the morphine group (median difference, 0.79 [95% confidence interval, 0.31 to 1.28], P  = 0.001). ICU-free days were greater (P < 0.001) and length of stay in the ICU for survivors shorter (P < 0.001) in the fentanyl group. All other secondary outcomes were not statistically different by treatment group. Conclusions: Among adult patients requiring mechanical ventilation, compared with morphine, fentanyl infusion significantly increased the median number of ventilator-free days at Day 28. The choice of opioid infusion agent may affect clinical outcomes and requires further investigation.

Objective: Previous research demonstrated that administration of Morphine Sulfate Immediate Release (MSIR) results in similar analgesic efficacy to Oxycodone but with significantly lesser degrees of euphoria and reward. The purpose of this study sit to investigate if MSIR combined with Acetaminophen can serve as an opioid analgesic alternative to Oxycodone combined with acetaminophen (Percocet) for acute pain in the Emergency Department (ED)., Methods: A prospective, randomized, double-blind trial of ED patients aged 18 to 64 years presenting with moderate to severe acute pain as defined by an 11-point numeric rating scale (NRS) with an initial score of ≥5 (0 = no pain and 10 = very severe pain). Patients were randomized to receive either 15 mg MSIR combined with 650 mg of Acetaminophen or 10 mg Oxycodone combined with 650 mg Acetaminophen. Patients were assessed at baseline, 30, 45 and 60 min. The primary outcome was reduction in pain at 60 min. Secondary outcomes include drug likeability and adverse events., Results: 80 patients were enrolled in the study (40 per group). Demographic characteristics were similar between the groups (P > 0.05). Mean NRS pain scores at baseline were 8.44 for the MSIR group and 8.53 for the Percocet group (P = 0.788). Mean pain scores decreased over time but remained similar between the groups: 30 min (6.03 vs. 6.43; P = 0.453), 45 min (5.31 vs. 5.48; P = 0.779), and 60 min (4.22 vs. 4.87; P = 0.346). Reduction in mean NRS pain scores were statistically significant from baseline to 30, 45 and 60 min within each group (P < 0.0001 at each time point for both groups). The largest NRS mean difference was from baseline to 60 min: 4.2 (95% CI: 3.43 to 5.01) for MSIR group and 3.61 (95% CI: 2.79 to 4.43) for Percocet group. No clinically significant changes or any serious adverse events were observed in either group., Conclusion: MSIR provides similar analgesic efficacy as Percocet for short-term pain relief in the ED, similar rates of nausea/vomiting, and lower rates of likeability of the drug., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest All authors have completed and submitted the ICMJE Form for Disclosure of Potential Conflicts of Interest. The authors have no independent disclosures or conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Lung cancer (LC) is the malignant tumor with the highest incidence in the world, and treatment methods include surgery, radiotherapy, chemotherapy, and immunotherapy. Cancer pain is a common symptom in patients with LC, and the clinical treatment is to relieve it with analgesics. Acupuncture can relieve cancer pain. This study aims to systematically study the efficacy and safety of acupuncture combined with analgesics on cancer pain in patients with LC., Methods: From the beginning to April 2021, search Medline, Embase, Cochrane Central Controlled Trials Register (Central), China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), Wanfang Database, China Biomedical Literature Database (CBM), and Chinese Science Journal Database (VIP database). Search the international clinical trial registration platform and the Chinese clinical trial registration platform to find ongoing or unpublished trials. The main outcome indicator is the total effective rate of analgesia, and the secondary outcome indicator is pain intensity score and adverse reactions. The RevMan 5.4 software will be used for statistical analysis., Results: This study will provide the latest evidence for acupuncture combined with analgesics to relieve LC pain., Conclusion: The conclusion of this study is to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of acupuncture combined with analgesics in alleviating LC pain., Inplasy Registration Number: INPLASY202150051., Competing Interests: The authors report no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2021 the Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc.)

Background: The aim of this study was to assess the analgesic efficacy of sufentanil in dressings after surgical treatment of burn wounds., Patients and Methods: Twenty adult patients, who underwent surgical treatment of third-degree burn wounds under general anesthesia, were included. Two of the patients underwent surgery twice. During surgery, patients received 50-100 μg fentanyl every 20-30 min and, after surgery, patients received 100 mg ketoprofen twice daily. Additionally, ten patients (group 1) received 50 μg sufentanil added to the burn wound dressings soaked in octenidine and phenoxyethanol while 10 patients (group 2) received 25 μg sufentanil added to the same dressings. The rescue analgesic, which was administered when pain intensified, was 5 mg subcutaneous morphine. Plasma sufentanil concentrations were assayed at 1, 2, 3, and 6 h after surgery completion and when pain was reported, along with pain intensity evaluation., Results: Sufentanil was not detected in the serum of any patients. Rescue morphine was given during the postoperative period (24 h) in one patient in group 1 (who underwent surgery twice) and three patients in group 2. The mean sufentanil concentration in dressings was higher in group 1 (0.13 ± 0.03) than group 2 (0.06 ± 0.03 μg/mL; p < 0.001). The group 1 patient who received rescue morphine had a sufentanil concentration of 0.10 μg/mL, which was the lowest concentration in group 1. Group 2 patients who received rescue morphine had sufentanil concentrations of at least two-fold lower (0.03-0.05 μg/mL). No adverse effects were observed., Conclusions: Sufentanil in dressings after burn wound surgery provides effective and safe analgesia and the sufentanil concentration in dressings should be ≥0.10 μg/mL in a solution of octenidine and phenoxyethanol., (Copyright © 2020. Published by Elsevier Ltd.)

Purpose of Review: The use of cannabis for the treatment of migraine has become an area of interest with the legalization of medical cannabis in the USA. Understanding the mechanisms of cannabinoids, available studies, and best clinical recommendations is crucial for headache providers to best serve patients., Recent Findings: Patients utilizing medical cannabis for migraine have reported improvement in migraine profile and common comorbidities. Reduction in prescription medication is also common, especially opioids. Side effects exist, with the majority being mild. Not enough data is available for specific dose recommendations, but THC and CBD appear to mediate these observed effects. The purpose of this article is twofold: review the limited research surrounding cannabis for migraine disease and reflect on clinical management experiences to provide recommendations that best capture the potential use of cannabis for migraine.

Background: Magnesium sulfate (MgSO4) is widely used in analgesia for different conditions. Recent randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have evaluated the effects of MgSO4 on renal colic; however, this new evidence has not been synthesized. Thus, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the efficacy and safety of MgSO4 in comparison with control for renal colic., Methods: PubMed, EMBASE, and Scopus databases were searched from inception to February 2020. We included RCTs that evaluated MgSO4 vs control for patients with renal colic. Data were independently extracted by 2 reviewers and synthesized using a random-effects model., Results: Four studies with a total of 373 patients were analyzed. Intravenous MgSO4 15 to 50 mg/kg did not significantly reduce renal colic pain severity at 15 minutes (mean difference [MD] = 0.35, 95% confidence interval [CI] -0.51 to 1.21; 2 RCTs), 30 minutes (MD = 0.19, 95% CI -0.74 to 1.13; 4 RCTs), and 60 minutes (MD = -0.28, 95% CI -0.72 to 0.16; 3 RCTs) in comparison with controls. In patients who failed to respond to initial analgesics, intravenous MgSO4 15 mg/kg or 2 ml of 50% solution provided similar pain relief to ketorolac or morphine at 30 minutes (P = .90) and 60 minutes (P = .57). No significant hemodynamic changes were observed with short-term use of MgSO4 in these studies., Conclusion: MgSO4 provides no superior therapeutic benefits in comparison with control treatments. MgSO4 may be used as a rescue medication in patients not responding to initial analgesics. The short-term use of MgSO4 did not affect hemodynamic values.

Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest Authors report no conflict of interest.

Objective: This study aimed to compare the analgesic efficacy of topical ibuprofen and topical piroxicam for acute musculoskeletal injuries., Methods: In this prospective, randomized, controlled, double-blinded study, geriatric patients were assigned to groups to receive either topical ibuprofen (n = 70) or topical piroxicam (n = 69). The first dose of gel was applied in the emergency department and the remaining doses were self-administered at home by the patients thrice daily for 72 h. For each patient, the initial baseline visual analog scale (VAS) score (V 0) was compared with the VAS scores at the 60 min (V1), 120 min (V2), 24 h (V3) and 72 h (V4) time points. The decreases in VAS scores, clinical effectiveness of the treatments, and incidence of adverse events were evaluated., Results: In the topical ibuprofen group, the VAS scores were significantly lower at each measurement time point compared to baseline (p < .001). The results were as follows: V0 -V: 1.08, 95% CI: 0.56-1.61; V0 -V2: 1.09, 95% CI: 0.49-1.69; V0 -V3: 1.44, 95% CI: 0.81-2.07; V0 -V4: 1.59, 95% CI: 0.91-2.26. The mean percentage decrease in the VAS scores in the topical ibuprofen group was significantly higher than that in the topical piroxicam group (p < .001). The clinical effect of treatment was found to be significantly higher for the ibuprofen gel group (p < .001). There was no substantial difference in treatment-related adverse events between the groups (p > .05)., Conclusion: Ibuprofen gel, which is a safe treatment option for geriatric patients, is more clinically effective than piroxicam gel. Response to Reviewers., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest The authors declare no competing interests to disclose., (Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: We aim to perform a network meta-analysis (NMA) to quantify and rank-order the efficacy and safety of analgesic medications for ambulatory surgery., Methods: We will search MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Google Scholar databases to identify all randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of analgesics, beginning from their inception to February 2020. The primary endpoints will be pain score measured using a visual analog scale (VAS) or a numerical rating scale (NRS) at 3 different time points: Phase I recovery, phase II recovery, and recovery at home. Adverse events, including nausea, vomiting, headache, dizziness, arrhythmia, and respiratory depression, will be also assessed.We will conduct NMA and use surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) values and rankograms to present the hierarchy of analgesic medication. A comparison-adjusted funnel plot will be used to assess the presence of small study effects. The quality of the included studies will be assessed using the risk of bias tool 2.0. All statistical analyses will be performed using Stata SE version 15.0., Results: The results of this systematic review and NMA will be published in a peer-reviewed journal., Conclusion: This systematic review and NMA will provide comprehensive and convincing evidence regarding analgesic medication for pain after ambulatory surgery., Trial Registration Number: CRD42018100000.

Background: Despite the long-term consequences of poorly controlled postoperative pain, inadequate pain control remains a problem., Aims: To improve the quality of postoperative pain management, the study site, an acute care hospital in Denmark, introduced electronic prescribing with standard order-sets, and allowed patients to self-administer analgesia. This study aimed to describe analgesic prescribing, prescriptions for multimodal analgesia, analgesic administration, and patients' pain experience, in this context., Design: Point-prevalence survey., Settings: One Danish regional hospital., Participants: Consecutive sample of 286 surgical inpatients comprising 65 orthopaedic, 41 gynaecological, 57 urology and 123 gastrointestinal patients., Methods: We evaluated the quality of postoperative pain management on four postoperative surgical wards using: (1) the Revised American Pain Society Patient Outcome Questionnaire; and (2) patient chart audit., Results: Overall, 89.2% of patients were prescribed a fixed analgesic and 71.7% were prescribed fixed analgesics in multimodal combination. Patterns of multimodal prescribing and administration varied significantly across surgical groups. Patients received 87.7% of available fixed prescriptions and 22.5% of available analgesics prescribed 'as needed'. However, patients' worst pain intensity was high (mean = 5.8/10, SD = 2) and 73.4% reported moderate-to-severe worst pain during the previous 24-hours. Patients who self-administered medications used significantly more fixed-schedule paracetamol (p = .018), non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (p = .001), weak (p = .035) and strong (p < .001) opioids., Conclusions: The availability of multimodal analgesia was high following the introduction of electronic prescribing. However, gaps remain in the administration of both fixed and 'as needed' analgesics for postoperative patients. Findings suggested that allowing patients to self-administer analgesia may increase compliance with fixed schedule prescriptions., (Copyright © 2020 American Society for Pain Management Nursing. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

In the pharmaceutical industry, cleaning criteria are required for multipurpose manufacturing facilities. These Health Based Exposure Limits (HBELs), also called permitted daily exposures (PDEs) values, are derived from toxicological and pharmacological evaluation of the active pharmaceutical ingredients (APIs). The purpose of this publication is to show an example of how authors from different companies evaluate a generic drug, paracetamol, and discuss different approaches and relevance of the nonclinical studies for deriving PDEs. PDE limits of 25 mg/day for the oral route, and 20 mg/day for the intravenous (i.v.) and inhalation (inhal.) routes, respectively, were established herein. However, it has been already recognised that there are acceptable differences in the PDE calculations, which may be based on data accessibility, company-specific science-policy decisions or expert judgments. These differences can cause up to a 3-fold lower or higher values. If unnecessarily high factors are applied, this would result in a very conservative PDE value and unneeded additional cleaning and higher manufacturing costs. The PDE values presented are considered to be protective against adverse and pharmacological effects observed in clinical trials and in this case, a very long postmarketing period of paracetamol., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Importance: Sickle cell disease (SCD) is characterized by chronic pain and episodic acute pain caused by vasoocclusive crises, often requiring high doses of opioids for prolonged periods. In humanized mouse models of SCD, a synthetic cannabinoid has been found to attenuate both chronic and acute hyperalgesia. The effect of cannabis on chronic pain in adults with SCD is unknown., Objective: To determine whether inhaled cannabis is more effective than inhaled placebo in relieving chronic pain in adults with SCD., Design, Setting, and Participants: This pilot randomized clinical trial included participants with SCD with chronic pain admitted to a single inpatient clinical research center for 2 separate 5-day stays from August 2014 to April 2017. Participants inhaled either vaporized cannabis (4.4% Δ-9-tetrahydrocannabinol to 4.9% cannabidiol) 3 times daily or vaporized placebo cannabis. Pain and pain interference ratings using the Brief Pain Inventory were assessed throughout each 5-day period. Participants with SCD and chronic pain on stable analgesics were eligible to enroll. A total of 90 participants were assessed for eligibility; 56 participants were deemed ineligible, and 34 participants were enrolled. Of these, 7 participants dropped out before randomization. Of 27 randomized participants, 23 completed both treatment arms of the crossover study and were included in the final per protocol analysis. Data analysis was completed in June 2019, with the sensitivity analysis conducted in April 2020., Interventions: Inhalation of vaporized cannabis plant (4.4% Δ-9-tetrahydrocannbinol to 4.9% cannabidiol) or placebo cannabis plant using a vaporizer 3 times daily for 5 days., Main Outcomes and Measures: Daily pain assessed with visual analog scale and Brief Pain Inventory., Results: A total of 23 participants (mean [SD] age, 37.6 [11.4] years; 13 [56%] women) completed the trial. The mean (SD) difference in pain rating assessment between the cannabis and placebo groups was -5.3 (8.1) for day 1, -10.9 (7.0) for day 2, -16.5 (9.2) for day 3, -8.9 (6.7) for day 4, and -8.2 (8.1) for day 5; however, none of these differences were statistically significant. There was no statistically significant mean (SD) difference in pain interference ratings between cannabis and placebo between days 1 and 5 for interference in general activities (day 1: 0.27 [0.35]; day 5: -1.0 [0.5]), walking (day 1: 0.14 [0.73]; day 5: -0.87 [0.63]), sleep (day 1: 0.59 [0.74]; day 5: -1.3 [0.8]), or enjoyment (day 1: 0.23 [0.69]; day 5: -0.91 [0.48]), but there was a statistically significant mean (SD) difference in decrease in interference with mood (day 1: 0.96 [0.59]; day 5: -1.4 [0.6]; P = .02). No differences in treatment-related adverse effects were observed. Use of concomitant opioids was similar during both treatment periods., Conclusions and Relevance: This randomized clinical trial found that, compared with vaporized placebo, vaporized cannabis did not statistically significantly reduce pain and associated symptoms, except interference in mood, in patients with SCD with chronic pain., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01771731.

Purpose: Many patients with cancer pain deviate from prescribed analgesic regimens. Our aim was to elicit the trade-offs patients make based on their beliefs about analgesic use and rank utilities (importance scores) using maximum difference (MaxDiff) scaling. We also investigated if there were unique clusters of patients based on their analgesic beliefs., Methods: This was a secondary analysis of a three-month, prospective observational study. Patients (N = 207) were self-identified African Americans and Whites, >18 years, diagnosed with multiple myeloma or solid tumor, and were prescribed at least one around-the-clock analgesic for cancer pain. MaxDiff analysis allowed us to identify patients utilities. Second, a cluster analysis assisted in ranking how analgesic beliefs differed by groups. Third, clusters were described by comparing key sociodemographic and clinical variables., Results: Participants' beliefs were a significant factor in choices related to analgesic use (chi-square = 498.145, p < .0001). The belief, 'Pain meds keep you from knowing what is going on in your body', had the highest patient endorsement. Two distinct clusters of patients based on analgesic beliefs were identified; 'knowing body' was ranked as top priority for both clusters. The belief that cancer patients become addicted to analgesics was moderately important for both clusters. Severity of side effects was the only key variable significantly different between clusters (p = .043)., Conclusions: Our findings support tailored pain management interventions that attend to individual beliefs about cancer pain and analgesic use. Future research should explore the relationship between analgesic utilities, actual analgesic taking behaviors, and how they impact patients' cancer pain outcomes., (Copyright © 2019 American Society for Pain Management Nursing. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: The objective of this study was to describe the occurrence of neonatal procedural pain and explore the factors that influence the frequency of painful procedures., Design: A descriptive prospective epidemiologic study., Setting: NICU at a general hospital in China., Methods: A demographic and diagnosis or illness information questionnaire and an occurrence of procedural pain questionnaire specifically designed for this study were used to record the current status of neonatal procedural pain. The neonatal infant pain scale (NIPS) was used to measure pain intensity. A multiple linear regression model was used to explore the factors influencing the frequency of painful procedures., Results: One hundred and twenty neonates experienced a total of 16,840 painful procedures. Each neonate was exposed to a median (IQR) of 66.5(27,154.75) painful procedures during hospitalization and a median (IQR) of 13(11, 19) painful procedures. All 27 different procedures were considered painful, and 70.37% (19/27) of these procedures caused severe pain. Overall, the mean NIPS score of the 27 procedures was 5.04 ± 1.52 with a range from 0 to 7. Respiratory support, age, and length of hospital stay were factors influencing the frequency of painful procedures., Conclusions: NICU neonates experience pain at a high frequency and intensity during hospitalization. Respiratory support, age, and length of hospital stay were factors influencing the frequency of painful procedures. Strategies are needed to bridge the gap between practice and the evidence-based guidelines., (© 2019 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.)

Study Objective: To compare analgesic efficacy and safety of intravenous lidocaine and ketorolac combination to each analgesic alone for ED patients with suspected renal colic., Methods: We conducted a randomized, double-blind trial comparing analgesic efficacy of a combination of intravenous lidocaine (1.5 mg/kg) and ketorolac (30 mg), to ketorolac (30 mg), and to lidocaine (1.5 mg/kg) in patients aged 18-64 presenting to the ED with suspected renal colic. Primary outcome included difference in pain scores between the groups at 30 min. Secondary outcomes included a comparative reduction in pain scores in each group from baseline to 30 and 60 min as well as rates of adverse events and need for rescue analgesia at 30 and 60 min., Results: We enrolled 150 subjects (50 per group). The difference in mean pain scores at 30 min between Lidocaine and Lidocaine/Ketorolac groups was -2.89 (95% CI: -4.39 to -1.39); between Ketorolac and Lidocaine/Ketorolac group was -0.92 (95% CI: -2.44 to 0.61); and between Ketorolac and Lidocaine was -1.98 (95% CI: -3.69 to -0.27). A comparative percentage of subjects in each group required rescue analgesia at 30 and 60 min. No clinically concerning changes in vital signs were observed. No serious adverse events occurred in either group. Commonly reported adverse effects were dizziness, nausea, and headache., Conclusion: The administration of intravenous lidocaine/ketorolac combination to ED patients with suspected renal colic results in better analgesia in comparison to lidocaine alone but provides no analgesic advantages over ketorolac alone. Clinicaltrials.gov Registration: NCT02902770., (Copyright © 2019 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background and Objectives : Currently, few studies have reported the effects of opioids during continuous epidural infusion (CEI) to control pain owing to herpes zoster (HZ). This study aimed to retrospectively compare the effectiveness of epidural opioids in the treatment of acute HZ pain. Materials and Methods : We reviewed medical records of 105 patients who were divided into two groups: R group (CEI with ropivacaine) and RF group (CEI with ropivacaine and fentanyl). Clinical efficacy was evaluated using the numeric rating scale (NRS) score for 6 months after the procedures. We compared the percentage of patients with complete remission in each group. We investigated the complication rates during CEI. Results : No significant differences in the NRS scores were observed between the two groups in the 6-month period. The adjusted odds ratio (OR) for patients included in the complete remission was 0.6 times lower in the RF group than in the R group (95% confidence interval: 0.22-1.71, p = 0.35). The OR for complications during CEI was higher in the RF group than in the R group. However, the difference was not statistically significant. Conclusions : No difference was observed in the management of HZ pain and the prevention of postherpetic neuralgia between the two groups. The incidence of complications tended to be higher in the RF group than in the R group.

Background: Pain, agitation, and thermal discomfort are common symptoms of older adults residing in nursing homes. Nonpharmacologic interventions are recognized as a best practice strategy for people living in nursing homes because of their low adverse effect profile and increased evidence of effectiveness. Warmed blankets have not been empirically tested for use in long-term care., Aims: The purpose of this quality improvement project was to describe the use of warmed blankets in a nursing home setting and determine if use was associated with changes in pain, agitation, mood, or analgesic use., Design: A pretest posttest design was used along with a comparison of intact groups., Settings: The setting was one 160-bed skilled long-term care facility., Participants/subjects: There were 141 residents eligible since they did not have a condition that could be worsened by superficial heat., Methods: Warmed blankets were unfolded and placed over residents with pain, agitation, or thermal discomfort. Short-term pain measures included use of the Revised FACES Pain Scale, the PAINAD (Pain Assessment in Advanced Dementia) scale, and the Brief Agitation Rating Scale. Long-term measures were taken from the electronic medical record., Results: Of the 141 eligible residents, 24.1% (n = 34) received a warmed blanket over the 1- month study period. There were statistically significant decreases in both pain level and agitation among baseline, 20 minutes after application, and the subsequent shift assessments (p < .001). There were also long-term changes in the number of pain complaints (p = .040), severity of pain complaints (p = .009), and as-needed analgesic use (p = .011). There were no statistically significant differences between the treated group and comparison group on any long-term measures., Conclusions: Warmed blankets are a low-cost intervention with a high potential for bringing comfort to nursing home residents., (Copyright © 2019 American Society for Pain Management Nursing. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: The practice guidelines for the management of pain, agitation, and delirium (PAD) from the Society of Critical Care Medicine shifted from primarily focusing on the treatment of anxiety in 2002 to the treatment of pain in 2013., Objective: This prospective, observational, multicenter study aimed to assess the degree of practice adherence to the PAD guidelines for ventilated patients in New Jersey intensive care units (ICUs)., Methods: Pharmacist investigators at 8 centers designated 4 days at least 10 days apart to evaluate all patients on mechanical ventilation. The primary outcomes included adherence to 4 guideline recommendations: treatment of pain before sedation, use of nonnarcotic analgesic medications, use of nonbenzodiazepine sedative medications, and use of goal-directed sedation., Results: Of 138 patients evaluated, 50% had a primary medical diagnosis (as opposed to surgical, cardiac, or neurological diagnosis), and the median Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score was 7. Pain was treated prior to administration of sedatives in 55.4% of subjects, with fentanyl being the primary analgesic used. In addition, 19% received no analgesia, and 11.5% received nonopioid analgesia. Sedative agents were administered to 87 subjects (48 nonbenzodiazepine and 39 benzodiazepine). Of those receiving benzodiazepines, 22 received intermittent bolus regimens and 16 received continuous infusions, of which 5 were for another indication besides sedation. Validated scales measuring the degree of sedation were completed at least once in 56 (81.6%) patients receiving sedatives., Conclusions: Current sedation practices suggest that integration of evidence-based PAD guidelines across New Jersey adult ICUs is inconsistent despite pharmacist involvement.

Insufficient analgesia affects around 50% of emergency department patients. The use of a protocol helps to reduce the risk of oligoanalgesia in this context. Our objective was to describe the feasibility and efficacy of a multimodal analgesia protocol (combining paracetamol, oxycodone, and inhaled methoxyflurane) initiated by triage nurse. We performed a prospective, observational study in an emergency department (Grenoble Alpes University Hospital, France) between December 2017 and April 2018. Adult non-severe trauma patients with a numerical pain rating scale (NRS) score ≥ 4 were included. The primary efficacy criterion was the proportion of patients with an NRS score ≤ 3 at 15 min. Pain intensity was measured for 60 min and during radiography. Data on adverse events and satisfaction were recorded. A total of 200 adult patients were included (median [interquartile range (IQR)] age: 32 [23-49] years; 126 men (63%)). Sixty-six patients (33%) reported an NRS score ≤ 3 at 15 min. The time required to achieve a decrease of at least 2 points in the NRS score was 10 (5-20) min. The median [IQR] pain intensity was 4 [2-5] before radiography and 4 [2-6] during radiography. Adverse events were frequent (n = 128, 64%). No serious adverse events were reported. The patients and caregivers reported good levels of satisfaction. The administration of a nurse-driven multimodal analgesia protocol (combining paracetamol, oxycodone, and methoxyflurane) was feasible on admission to the emergency department. It rapidly produced long-lasting analgesia in adult trauma patients.Trial registration: NCT03380247.

Background: Acute pain is the most common complaint in Emergency Department (ED) admissions, and options for analgesia are limited. Nitrous oxide/oxygen possesses many properties showing it may be an ideal analgesic in the ED., Objectives: The aim of this study is to evaluate the safety and analgesic effect of the fixed nitrous oxide/oxygen mixture for trauma patients in the ED., Methods: We enrolled 60 patients in this double-blind, randomized study. The treatment group received conventional pain treatment plus a mixture of 65% nitrous oxide/oxygen. The control group received the conventional pain treatment plus oxygen. Primary outcome was the reduction in pain intensity at 5 and 15 min after the start of intervention. Secondary outcomes include adverse events, physiological parameters, and satisfaction from both patients and health care professionals., Results: Initial pain scores for the nitrous oxide/oxygen group (6.0 [5.0-8.0]) and the oxygen group (6.75 [5.0-9.0]) were comparable (p = 0.57). The mean numerical rating scale scores at 5 min were 3.4 ± 1.8 and 7.0 ± 1.8 for nitrous oxide/oxygen and oxygen, respectively (p < 0.01). The mean pain intensity at 15 min in the treatment group was 3.0 ± 1.9, compared with 6.3 ± 2.2 in the control group (p < 0.01). Both patients' (8.0 [7.0-9.0] vs. 4.0 [2.0-6.0], p < 0.01) and physicians' (8.5 [8.0-9.0] vs. 4.0 [3.0-6.0], p < 0.01) satisfaction scores in the treatment group were significantly higher than the oxygen group. No serious adverse events were observed., Conclusions: This study gives supporting evidence for the safety and effectiveness of using self-administered nitrous oxide/oxygen mixture in the ED for moderate-to-severe traumatic pain., (Copyright © 2019. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

A short-cut review of the literature was carried out to establish whether inhaled methoxyflurane (Penthrox) is comparable or superior with a standard inhalational analgesia for the management of acute pain. Only two papers were identified as suitable for inclusion using the reported search strategy. The author, date and country of publication, patient group studied, study type, relevant outcomes, results and study weaknesses of the best papers are tabulated. It is concluded that both methods of inhaled analgesia appear to be useful options for acute pain in the ED when compared with placebo. No evidence was found to suggest superiority of methoxypenflurane. International studies directly comparing the use of both drugs for in acute trauma are ongoing and will develop the evidence base., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2019. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Objectives: Pain treatment in acute musculoskeletal injuries usually consists of paracetamol, non-steroidal antiinflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) or opioids. It would be beneficial to determine whether paracetamol is as effective as other analgesics. The objective of this study was to evaluate available evidence regarding efficacy of paracetamol in these patients., Methods: Embase, MEDLINE, Cochrane and relevant trial registers were searched from inception to 14 February 2018 by two independent reviewers to detect all randomised studies with adult patients with acute minor musculoskeletal injuries treated with paracetamol as compared with other analgesics. There were no language or date restrictions. Two independent reviewers evaluated risk of bias and quality of evidence. Primary outcome was decrease in pain scores during the first 24 hours, and secondary outcomes included pain decrease beyond 24 hours, need for additional analgesia and occurrence of adverse events., Results: Seven trials were included, evaluating 2100 patients who were treated with paracetamol or NSAIDs or the combination of both as comparisons, of which only four studies addressed the primary outcome. No studies were found comparing paracetamol with opioids. There were no differences in analgesic effectiveness within and beyond 24 hours, nor in need for additional analgesia and occurrence of adverse events. Overall, quality of evidence was low. Because of methodological inconsistencies, a meta-analysis was not possible., Conclusions: Based on available evidence, paracetamol is as effective as NSAIDs or the combination of both in treating pain in adult patients with minor musculoskeletal injuries in the acute setting. The quality of evidence is low., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2019. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

The goal of our study was to determine if an intranasal (IN) dose of sufentanil delivered in the ED triage zone would improve the management of severely painful patients. We performed a randomized, double blind and placebo-controlled trial on adult patients suffering from an acute severe pain (≥ 6/10) consecutive to an isolated limb injury. We compared 2 analgesic strategies: the usual pain treatment with IV-only multimodal analgesics (IVMA) including IV opioids if needed (control group) and another strategy (active group) based on a single dose of IN sufentanil (0.4 μg/kg) given at triage and followed by IV multimodal analgesia. Our primary outcome was the proportion of patients reaching pain-relief (≤ 3/10) 30 min after IN injection at triage. Secondary outcomes were rates of adverse events, frequency of clinical interventions required by these events, and satisfaction of patients. A total of 144 adult participants completed the study, 72 in each group. Compared with usual IV-only pain management, the analgesic strategy initiated in triage zone with a dose of IN sufentanil increased the proportion of patients reaching pain relief in 30 min: 72.2% versus 51.4%, in our trial (p = 0.01 and number needed to treat of 5). There was no serious adverse event (AE) in both groups. Patients who received IN sufentanil experienced more frequently minor opiate side effects. Proportion of respiratory AEs was higher in the active group (12.5% of bradypnea < 10 cycles per minute versus 1.4%) but these events were of mild severity, as only 2 participants (one in each group) received temporary low dose oxygen therapy, and none required naloxone. Lengths of stay in the ED were similar in both groups, as well as satisfaction of patients (above 9/10) and pain scores at discharge (< 2/10). We found that a single dose of IN sufentanil delivered in the ED triage zone significantly increases the proportion of severely painful patients reaching painrelief in 30 min, compared to usual analgesia with IV-only multimodal analgesia.

Background: Ureter muscles contraction movements caused pain in renal colic. Magnesium sulphate could influence the pain by reducing acetylcholine in the nerve terminals. We have aimed to evaluate the analgesic effects of magnesium sulphate on acute renal colic pain., Method: In this double-blind clinical trial study, the patients with renal colic pain were randomly divided into 2 groups; Group I received an intravenous infusion of 30 mg of Ketorolac and normal saline as placebo, Group II 50 mg/kg magnesium sulphate 50%/100 ml normal plus 30 mg of Ketorolac. The pain severity of patients was assessed using the visual analog scale (VAS) at baseline, and 15 and 30 min after intervention., Results: Baseline pain score and demographic characteristics did not significantly different between the groups. After 30 min the pain score significantly reduced in both groups. While, at 15 and 30 min, mean pain score did not show statistically significant differences., Conclusion: Our findings indicated that Magnesium sulphate did not influence renal colic pain relief., (Copyright © 2018 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Pain impacts the lives of millions of community-dwelling older adults. An important characteristic of pain is "pain interference" which describes the influence of pain on function. A description of pain interference is limited in rural settings where the number of older adults is expected to increase, and health disparities exist., Aims: The purpose of this study was to describe pain interference and analgesic medication use, highlighting those that may be potentially inappropriate in a sample of rural community-dwelling older adults., Design: This secondary analysis was from a cross sectional study., Sample and Settings: Data were analyzed from a sample of 138 rural community-dwelling older adults., Methods: Statistical analyses were performed on demographics, health characteristics, pain interference, and potentially inappropriate analgesic medication data., Results: Pain interference with work activity was reported by 76% of older adults overall, with 23% reporting moderate and 4% extreme interference, and 41% reported sleep difficulty due to pain. Higher pain interference was significantly associated with higher body mass index, more health providers, and the daily use of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs). Older women experienced more sleep difficulties due to pain. Over-the-counter analgesics were used most frequently by rural older adults to manage pain. Of most risk was the daily use of NSAIDs, in which only 30% used medications to protect the gastrointestinal system., Conclusions: Older adults in rural settings experience pain interference and participate in independent-medicating behaviors that may impact safety., (Copyright © 2019 American Society for Pain Management Nursing. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Pain is one of the most feared symptoms experienced by patients at the end of life and one of the most difficult to manage. Families identify patient comfort as a priority in hospice, yet many have concerns regarding pain management and medication side effects. Timely, open, and ongoing communication with hospice teams can assuage concerns to improve care and outcomes relevant to pain medication use in hospice. A pilot project was undertaken to improve the patient and family/caregiver experience in end-of-life care relevant to communication regarding pain medication side effects and management within an inpatient hospice. A 5% improvement in the Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers & Services (CAHPS) Hospice quality indicator 18 (Understanding Side Effects) was sought. An evidence-based, interprofessional educational protocol and tool were designed and implemented to guide pertinent conversations. A 6.6% increase in favorable responses to the CAHPS Hospice target indicator occurred over the course of the pilot. Feedback from staff revealed positive responses to the tool with recommended expansion of use across hospice settings. Educational programming holds promise to support communication with hospice patients and families regarding pain medication side effects and management to improve experiential care quality as reflected in CAHPS Hospice surveys.

Background: Effective acute pain management following injury is critical to improve short-and long-term patient outcomes. Analgesics can effectively reduce pain intensity, yet half of injury patients report moderate to severe pain during hospitalization., Purpose: The primary aim of this study was to identify the analgesic, different analgesic combinations, or analgesic and adjuvant analgesic combination that generated the largest percent change from pre- to post-analgesic pain score., Design: This was a descriptive retrospective cohort study of 129 adults admitted with lower extremity fractures to a trauma center., Methods: Name, dose, and frequency of analgesics and adjuvant analgesics administered from admission to discharge were collected from medical records. Percent change was calculated from pain scores documented on the 0-10 numeric rating scale., Results: The analgesic with largest percent change from pre- to post-administration pain score was hydromorphone 2 mg IV (53%) for the emergency department and morphine 4 mg IV (54%) for the in-patient unit. All analgesics administered in the emergency department and ∼50% administered on the in-patient unit produced a minimal (15%) decrease in pain score., Conclusions: This study revealed that few analgesics administered in the emergency department and the in-patient unit to patients with lower extremity fractures provide adequate pain relief. In the emergency department, all analgesics administered resulted in at least minimal improvement of pain. On the in-patient unit 13 analgesic doses resulted at least minimal improvement in pain while nine doses did not even reach 20% change in pain. Findings from this study can be used guide the treatment of fracture pain in the hospital., (Copyright © 2019 American Society for Pain Management Nursing. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Aim: The aim was to assess the methodological quality and describe recommendations for pain management in local clinical practice guidelines about induced second-trimester medical abortions at Swedish university and county hospitals., Methods: In 2017, Swedish university and county hospitals that provided abortion care in the second trimester of pregnancy were contacted (n = 29), and guidelines from 25 were received (university: n = 6, county: n = 19). Guideline quality was assessed according to two systematic instruments. Recommendations were systematically assessed regarding frequency and tools for pain measurement, prophylactic pharmacologic treatment, as needed pharmacologic treatment and nonpharmacologic treatment., Results: Overall methodological quality was poor across both instruments, as the majority of the guidelines did not fulfil the investigated quality criteria. For pain measurements, no guideline recommended measurement frequency and four recommended specific measurement tools. Prophylactic pharmacologic treatment, described in 23 (92%) guidelines, included paracetamol (n = 23, 92%), anti-inflammatory drugs (n = 23, 92%) and opioids (n = 18, 72%). As needed pharmacologic treatment, described in 23 (92%) guidelines, included anaesthetics (n = 21, 84%), opioids (n = 21, 84%) and paracetamol (n = 1, 4%). Recommendations for as needed anaesthetics included paracervical block (n = 21, 84%), epidural analgesia (n = 16, 64%) and inhalation of nitrous oxide (n = 5, 20%). Nonpharmacologic treatments were recommended in nine (36%) guidelines., Conclusions: The findings indicate that local clinical practice guidelines about induced second-trimester medical abortions are of inadequate methodological quality and that a large majority lack recommendations concerning systematic pain measurements. Although most recommend prophylactic and as needed pharmacologic management, national inconsistencies exist in Sweden with regard to recommendations of epidural analgesia, nitrous oxide and nonpharmacologic methods. In Sweden, there is room for improvement in the development of these guidelines., (© 2018 Nordic College of Caring Science.)

It is estimated that there are over 310 million surgeries performed in the world every year. Appropriate analgesic management in the perioperative period constitutes a fundamental right of every patient, significantly reducing the number of postoperative complications and the time and costs of hospitalization, particularly in the high-risk group of patients (ASA III-V) subject to extensive surgical procedures and hospitalized in intensive care units. Despite such significant arguments speaking for the conduct of effective analgesia in the perioperative period, nearly 79% of patients operated in hospitalization settings and 71% of patients operated in outpatient settings (so-called first day surgery) experienced postoperative pain of moderate, strong or extreme intensity. Hence, effective relief of postoperative pain should constitute one of the priorities of integrated, modern perioperative management, the components of which apart from adequate analgesia involve early nutrition through the alimentary canal, early patient activation and active physiotherapy. In the currently published "Guidelines", a team of authors has updated the previous "Recommendations" primarily in terms of methods for optimizing postoperative pain relief and new techniques and drugs introduced for postoperative pain therapy in recent years. The algorithms of postoperative pain management in different treatment categories were also updated.

Since publication of the European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) recommendations for management of hand osteoarthritis (OA) in 2007 new evidence has emerged. The aim was to update these recommendations. EULAR standardised operating procedures were followed. A systematic literature review was performed, collecting the evidence regarding all non-pharmacological, pharmacological and surgical treatment options for hand OA published to date. Based on the evidence and expert opinion from an international task force of 19 physicians, healthcare professionals and patients from 10 European countries formulated overarching principles and recommendations. Level of evidence, grade of recommendation and level of agreement were allocated to each statement. Five overarching principles and 10 recommendations were agreed on. The overarching principles cover treatment goals, information provision, individualisation of treatment, shared decision-making and the need to consider multidisciplinary and multimodal (non-pharmacological, pharmacological, surgical) treatment approaches. Recommendations 1-3 cover different non-pharmacological treatment options (education, assistive devices, exercises and orthoses). Recommendations 4-8 describe the role of different pharmacological treatments, including topical treatments (preferred over systemic treatments, topical non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) being first-line choice), oral analgesics (particularly NSAIDs to be considered for symptom relief for a limited duration), chondroitin sulfate (for symptom relief), intra-articular glucocorticoids (generally not recommended, consider for painful interphalangeal OA) and conventional/biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (discouraged). Considerations for surgery are described in recommendation 9. The last recommendation relates to follow-up. The presented EULAR recommendations provide up-to-date guidance on the management of hand OA, based on expert opinion and research evidence., Competing Interests: Competing interests: The individual declaration of conflicts of interest is available on demand at the EULAR secretariat and is summarised below: MK has received consultancy fees/fee as local investigator of industry driven trials from AbbVie, GlaxoSmithKline, Merck, Levicept (all through institution) and has received research funding (through the institution) from Pfizer and APPROACH-IMI. FJB has received honoraria from Boehringer Ingelheim España, SA, Boehringer Ingelheim International GmbH, Fundación Española de Reumatología (FER), Janssen Cilag International NV, Pfizer Inc, Sanofi-Aventis Recherche & Developpement, Bristol-Myers Squibb International Corporation, Bristol Myers Squibb Research and Development, Hospira Inc., Grunenthal GmbH, Bioiberica, UCB, Gebro and research funding (all through institution) from Novartis Farmacéutica, SA, Bristol, Menarini International Operations Luxembourg SA, AbbVie Deutschland GmbH & Co KG, Boehringer Ingelheim España, SA, Boehringer Ingelheim International GmbH, Fundación Española de Reumatología (FER), Janssen Cilag International NV, Gedeon Richter Plc, Pfizer Inc, Glaxosmithkline Research & Development Limited, YL Biologics Limited, Amgen, Inc, Sanofi-Aventis Recherche & Developpement, Gilead Sciences, Inc, Eli Lilly and Company, Ablynx NV, Bristol-Myers Squibb International Corporation, Bristol-Myers Squibb Research and Development, Hospira Inc, Astellas Pharma Europe BV, TRB Chemedica International SA, Archigen Biotech Limited, ONO Pharma UK Ltd, UCB Biosciences GMBH, Nichi-Iko Pharmaceutical Co, Ltd, Genentech Inc Grunenthal GmbH, Celgene Corporation. MD has received research funding from AstraZeneca for a PI-led ’sons of gout' study and honoraria for advisory boards on osteoarthritis and gout from AstraZeneca, Grunenthal, Mallinckrodt and Roche. KSD is part-funded by a Knowledge Mobilisation Research Fellowship (KMRF-2014-03-002) from the NIHR Collaborations for Leadership in Applied Health Research and Care West Midlands. GHB has received honoraria from Pfizer, AstraZeneca, Roche, Glaxo, Expanscience and research funding (all through institution) from Pfizer and Roche. EM has received honoraria from Celgène, Expanscience, Fidia, Genevrier, Ibsa, LCA, Rottapharm-Meda-Mylan-France, Rottapharm Biotech-Italy, TRB Chemedica. RR has received honoraria from AbbVie, MSD, Celgene, Janssen, Pfizer, UCB and research funding from HORIZON 2020 (going through the institution). JSS has received honoraria from AbbVie, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Astro, BMS, Celgene, Celltrion, Chugai, Gilead, Glaxo, ILTOO, Janssen, Lilly, Medimmune, MSD, Novartis-Sandoz, Pfizer, Roche, Samsung, Sanofi, UCB and research funding from AbbVie, AstraZeneca, Janssen, Lilly, MSD, Pfizer, Roche. JSS is Editor-in-Chief of ARD and Editor of Rheumatology (Textbook). TS has received honoraria from AbbVie, Janssen, MSD, Novartis and Roche and grant support from AbbVie (going through the institution). ZS has received honoraria from AbbVie, Roche, Pfizer, Berlin Chemie, UCB, Bristol-Myers. RW has received honoraria from AbbVie, UCB, Bristol-Meyers Squibb, MSD, Janssen-Cilag, Menarini. LC has received research funding (through the institution) from Pharmaceutical laboratories (AbbVie Spain, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celgene, Eisai Farmacéutica, Gebro Pharma, Grünenthal Pharma, LEO Pharma, Merck Sharp & Dohme España, Novartis Farmaceutica, Pfizer, Roche Farma, Sanofi Aventis, UCB Pharma), Scientific societies (Academia de Dermatología y Venereología, Asociación Emeritense de Reumatología, Eular, Italian Society of Rheumatology, Sociedad Castellano-Manchega, SORCOM, SEDISA, SEIO, Sociedad Española de Neumología y Cirugía Torácica, SERPE, Societat Catalana de Reumatología), Contract Research organisations (Scientia Salus, Continuing Medical Communication, Mediaevents AA, Congresos Eventos y Azafatas, Meed Comunicación, Proyectos Incentivos y Congresos), Research groups and Foundations (AIRE-MB, FISABIO, Fundació Parc Taulí, Fundación Asturcor , Fundación Clínic, Fundación de Investigación Sanitaria Illes Balears, Fundación Española de Reumatología, Fundación para la Investigación Biomédica del Hospital Universitario de La Princesa, Fundación para la Investigación Biomédica del Hospital Universitario 12 de Octubre, Fundación Pública Andaluza para la Investigación de Málaga en Biomedicina y Salud, Hospital Universitario Fundación Alcorcón, Reumacare), Individual researchers (Dr Ramón Mazzuchelli, Dr Xavier Juanola, Dr Afnan Abdelkader) and is director of Instituto de Salud Musculoesquelética., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2019. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Palliative care patients are predisposed to complex pain, including refractory pain, neuropathic pain, opioid-induced hyperalgesia, and opioid-induced neurotoxicity. Palliative care complex pain management can include use of subanesthetic parenteral ketamine. Support for subanesthetic ketamine exists from anecdotal experiences and nonrandomized studies, but there is a lack of statistically significant evidence to support or dismiss its use. Ketamine is sought for illegal, nonmedical purposes, so the lack of evidence coupled with potential for exploitation makes judicious and knowledgeable use critical. Palliative care nurse practitioners, as experts in symptom management, should evaluate and consider all potentially beneficial treatment strategies for complex pain, including novel strategies such as subanesthetic ketamine treatment. Several databases and clinical guideline repositories, along with inspection of germane articles' reference lists, were utilized to collect original research, retrospective studies, literature reviews, and case reports pertinent to the management of palliative care complex pain with parenteral ketamine. In conclusion, the evidence-based clinical decision-making process is engaged to outline a method to weigh the risks versus benefits of subanesthetic ketamine for this population of patients.

A quantitative, model-based risk assessment process was evaluated using Bayesian parameter estimation to determine the posterior distribution of the probability of a model tablet formulation's (gabapentin) ability to meet end-of-expiry stability criteria-based manufacturing controls. Experimental data was obtained from an FDA-supported, multi-year project that involved researchers at nine universities working collaboratively with industrial and governmental scientists under the leadership of the National Institute for Pharmaceutical Technology and Education (NITPE). The risk assessment process involved the development of a design space manufacturing model and shelf life stability model that shared stability-related critical quality attributes (CQAs). Monte Carlo simulations of the design space and shelf life models that uses model parameter uncertainty to estimate the probability of shelf life failure as a function of manufacturing control. The resultant linked design space and shelf life stability models were tested by comparing model predicted and observed long-term stability data generated under a variety of pilot scale production conditions.

Background: Painful medical procedures are common. Topical anesthetics are easily applied, rapid onset, inexpensive, and avoid injection pain and needlestick injury. The aims of this study, using patient and health care provider questionnaires, were to answer the following questions: (1) Does vapocoolant spray decrease venipuncture pain? (2) Would patients be satisfied with and use a vapocoolant spray in the future? (3) Would providers be satisfied with and use a vapocoolant spray in the future?, Design: Adults (18-80 years) in a hospital emergency department (ED) were randomly assigned to sterile water placebo spray (S) (N = 50) or vapocoolant spray (V) (N = 50) before venipuncture. Questionnaires were completed by patients undergoing venipuncture (N = 100) and the health care providers (N = 100) who performed the venipuncture (total questionnaires = 200) as part of a prospective, double-blind, randomized controlled trial comparing the efficacy and safety of vapocoolant spray compared with placebo spray in patients undergoing venipuncture in the ED., Results: Patient and venipuncture variables were not significantly different for the two groups (S vs. V). Responses to the questionnaires were significantly different for the S versus V groups for both the patients and the health care providers. Patient questionnaires: Did you have less pain with spray? S 14%, V 76% (p < .001). Compared with previous blood draws, the spray was much more painful/more painful: S 10%, V 6%; same: S 76%, V 16%; less painful/much less painful: S 14%, V 78% (p < .001). How satisfied were you with the spray? Satisfied/very satisfied: S 20%, V 74% (p < .001). Would you use this spray in future? Yes S 20%, V 80% (p < .001). Provider results: The patient had less pain with the use of the spray: S 14%, V 78% (p < .001). How satisfied were you with the use of the spray? Satisfied/very satisfied: S 12%, V 82% (p < .001). Would you use this spray in the future? Yes S 24%, V 84% (p < .001)., Conclusions: The use of a vapocoolant spray in adult ED patients undergoing venipuncture significantly decreased venipuncture pain, was associated with high patient and provider satisfaction, and both patients and providers would use a vapocoolant spray in the future for venipuncture and other painful procedures., (Copyright © 2017 American Society for Pain Management Nursing. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

This summary reviews 18 key articles published in 2016 which have significant practice implications for the perioperative medical care of surgical patients. Due to the multi-disciplinary nature of the practice of perioperative medicine, important new evidence is published in journals representing a variety of medical and surgical specialties. Keeping current with the evidence that drives best practice in perioperative medicine is therefore challenging. We set out to identify, critically review, and summarize key evidence which has the most potential for practice change. We integrated the new evidence into the existing body of medical knowledge and identified practical implications for real world patient care. The articles address issues related to anticoagulation, transfusion threshold, immunosuppressive medications, postoperative delirium, myocardial injury after noncardiac surgery, postoperative pain management, perioperative management of antihypertensives, perioperative fasting, and perioperative diabetic control.

Pain is a common problem among elite athletes and is frequently associated with sport injury. Both pain and injury interfere with the performance of elite athletes. There are currently no evidence-based or consensus-based guidelines for the management of pain in elite athletes. Typically, pain management consists of the provision of analgesics, rest and physical therapy. More appropriately, a treatment strategy should address all contributors to pain including underlying pathophysiology, biomechanical abnormalities and psychosocial issues, and should employ therapies providing optimal benefit and minimal harm. To advance the development of a more standardised, evidence-informed approach to pain management in elite athletes, an IOC Consensus Group critically evaluated the current state of the science and practice of pain management in sport and prepared recommendations for a more unified approach to this important topic., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Article author(s) (or their employer(s) unless otherwise stated in the text of the article) 2017. All rights reserved. No commercial use is permitted unless otherwise expressly granted.)

Perioperative surgical care is undergoing a paradigm shift. Traditional practices such as prolonged preoperative fasting (nil by mouth from midnight), bowel cleaning, and reintroduction of oral nutrition 3-5 days after surgery are being shunned. These and other similar changes have been formulated into a protocol called Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) pathway. It is a multimodal perioperative care pathway designed to achieve early recovery after surgical procedures by maintaining preoperative organ function and reducing the profound stress response following surgery. The key elements of an ERAS protocol include preoperative counseling, optimization of nutrition, standardized analgesic and anesthetic regimes, and early mobilization. The recent literature is heavily influenced by colorectal surgery, but the principles are now being applied to a wide range of disciplines. As they challenge traditional surgical doctrine, the implementation of ERAS guidelines has been slow, despite the significant body of evidence indicating that ERAS guidelines may lead to improved outcomes., (© 2015 American Society for Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition.)

Fibromyalgia syndrome (FMS), one of the most common rheumatic disorders, is estimated to affect up to 15 million people in the United States, 80% to 90% of whom are women. The syndrome is characterized by the presence of chronic widespread pain and various concurrent symptoms, which may include fatigue, cognitive disturbances (memory problems, difficulty concentrating, confusion), distressed mood (anxiety, depression), nonrestorative sleep, and muscular stiffness. Symptom management appears to be best addressed using a multimodal approach, with treatment strategies tailored to the individual. While medication may provide adequate symptom relief for some patients, experts generally recommend integrating both pharmacologic and nonpharmacologic approaches. Some patients may benefit from the adjunctive use of complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) modalities. Because symptom remission is rare and medication adverse effects can complicate symptom management, well-informed nursing care practices and patient education are essential. This article describes the existing treatment guidelines, discusses pharmacologic and nonpharmacologic approaches (including CAM-based modalities), and outlines nursing approaches aimed at enhancing patient self-management.

The International Association for the Study of Pain neuropathic pain guidelines are presented. Nursing considerations, including neuropathic pain assessment and medication efficacy, are reported to explain medications' primary mechanisms of action and provide a nursing reference for patient education.

Purpose: Pain can be debilitating, and it is often inadequately treated, particularly among patients with chronic low back pain (CLBP). CLBP has a substantial economic impact, as it affects an individual's ability to perform activities of daily living and maintain employment. This study aims to review original studies related to the evidence-based management of patients with CLBP to develop an algorithm for prescribing medications and recommending other treatment modalities for patients with CLBP., Data Sources: An electronic search of PubMed, CINAHL, and the Cochrane Database was conducted to identify studies related to the evidence-based management of CLBP that were performed between 2003 and 2012. The following keywords were used: low back pain, back pain, chronic back pain, medication management, and adjunct therapy. The selected articles were specific to CLBP, medication-based management, and additional treatment options, such as adjunct therapies., Conclusions: The collected data revealed that there are a number of approaches to the management of CLBP. Medication regimens are frequently used and widely available, but alternative treatment modalities can also be effective., Implications for Practice: Providers should encourage patients to explore a variety of treatment modalities that can provide pain relief and improve functionality and overall well-being., (©2014 American Association of Nurse Practitioners.)

Background: The management of acute traumatic pain is a crucial component of prehospital care and yet the assessment and administration of analgesia is highly variable, frequently suboptimal, and often determined by consensus-based regional protocols., Objective: To develop an evidence-based guideline (EBG) for the clinical management of acute traumatic pain in adults and children by advanced life support (ALS) providers in the prehospital setting. Methods. We recruited a multi-stakeholder panel with expertise in acute pain management, guideline development, health informatics, and emergency medical services (EMS) outcomes research. Representatives of the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (sponsoring agency) and a major children's research center (investigative team) also contributed to the process. The panel used the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology to guide the process of question formulation, evidence retrieval, appraisal/synthesis, and formulation of recommendations. The process also adhered to the National Prehospital Evidence-Based Guideline (EBG) model process approved by the Federal Interagency Council for EMS and the National EMS Advisory Council., Results: Four strong and three weak recommendations emerged from the process; two of the strong recommendations were linked to high- and moderate-quality evidence, respectively. The panel recommended that all patients be considered candidates for analgesia, regardless of transport interval, and that opioid medications should be considered for patients in moderate to severe pain. The panel also recommended that all patients should be reassessed at frequent intervals using a standardized pain scale and that patients should be re-dosed if pain persists. The panel suggested the use of specific age-appropriate pain scales., Conclusion: GRADE methodology was used to develop an evidence-based guideline for prehospital analgesia in trauma. The panel issued four strong recommendations regarding patient assessment and narcotic medication dosing. Future research should define optimal approaches for implementation of the guideline as well as the impact of the protocol on safety and effectiveness metrics.

Objectives: Primary dysmenorrhea is a common gynecologic disorder, but is often inappropriately managed due to ignorance and misunderstanding of its pharmacotherapy in many young women. The aim of this study was to assess the effectiveness of an educational intervention on proper analgesic use for dysmenorrhea among Korean female university students., Study Design: In March 2008, an educational intervention, a 10-min lecture using supplementary educational printed materials, was given to the intervention group (n=98). Two months later, changes and differences in knowledge, actual medication behavior, coping strategies, dysmenorrhea severity (VAS score), and Korean health-related quality of life (KQOLS) were assessed between the intervention and control (n=105) groups., Results: The prevalence of dysmenorrhea in the intervention and control groups was 75.1% and 77.1%, respectively. After the educational intervention, the medication rate of the intervention group was significantly increased (from 36.1% to 51.0%, P=0.007), and the knowledge of and actual behavior relating to the proper analgesic use were also significantly improved in this group. The VAS scores were significantly decreased among participants with dysmenorrhea in the intervention group (from 48.6 ± 22.0 to 37.8 ± 22.5, P<0.001). In addition, significant improvements in two domains of the KQOLS, physical function (from 89.3 ± 11.1 to 93.1 ± 8.8, P=0.007) and pain (from 80.4 ± 19.9 to 87.4 ± 14.3, P=0.001), were observed in the intervention group., Conclusions: The findings of this prospective study suggest that a brief educational intervention can improve the severity of dysmenorrhea and the quality of life by enhancing medication knowledge and actual analgesic behavior in Korean female university students., (Copyright © 2013 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.)

The medication assessment tool for cancer pain management (MAT-CP) measures the quality of medication use in relation to guidelines. The original MAT-CP was reviewed, modified and tested at a comprehensive cancer center in Jordan. The tool comprised 30 criteria covering six different aspects of pain management. Seventy patients were included, males 41 (59%), females 29 (41%), mean age 49 (range, 20-79) years. The overall level of adherence to guidelines was 78% with good inter-rater reliability (κ= 0.899). The tool's implementation showed opportunities for improvement in pain management at our institution. The MAT-CP was revised and validated for the first time outside Europe. This tool can be routinely used to assess and compare the quality of pain management in different institutions.

Background: Chronic or persistent pain is a common problem in older adults and is often associated with significant physical disability and psychosocial problems. The potential benefits, risks, and costs of pharmacotherapy as a mainstay in the treatment of moderate to severe pain in this population must be well-understood and weighed accordingly. Recent treatment guidelines have been introduced that can guide decision making to optimize pain-related treatment outcomes in older individuals, Objectives and Results: This review article describes and summarizes key evidence-based recommendations that were derived by a committee convened by the American Geriatrics Society in order to provide guidance to optimize pharmacotherapy in the management of persistent pain in older individuals., Conclusions: It is postulated that ongoing education of clinicians who treat older patients with persistent moderate to severe pain will lead to improved outcomes in this vulnerable population., (Wiley Periodicals, Inc.)