Search

BackgroundThere is considerable public interest in whether Europe is facing an opioid crisis comparable to the one in the United States and the contribution of opioid prescriptions for pain to a potential opioid crisis.MethodsA task force of the European Pain Federation (EFIC) conducted a survey with its national chapter representatives on trends of opioid prescriptions and of drug-related emergency departments and substance use disorder treatment admissions and of deaths as proxies of opioid-related harms over the last 20 years.ResultsData from 25 European countries were received. In most European countries opioid prescriptions increased from 2004 to 2016. The levels of opioid consumption and their increase differed between countries. Some Eastern European countries still have a low opioid consumption. Opioids are mainly prescribed for acute pain and chronic noncancer pain in some Western and Northern European countries. There was a parallel increase in opioid prescriptions and some proxies of opioid-related harms in France, Finland and the Netherlands, but not in Germany, Spain and Norway. In United Kingdom, opioid overdose deaths, but not opioid prescriptions increased between 2016 and 2018. There are no robust data available on whether prescribed opioids for pain patients contributed to opioid-related harms.ConclusionsThere are marked differences between European countries in trends of opioid prescribing and of proxies for opioid-related harms. Europe as a whole is not facing an opioid crisis. Discussions on the potential harms of opioids should not obstruct their prescription for cancer pain and palliative care.SignificanceEurope as a whole is not facing an opioid crisis. Some Eastern European countries have limited access to opioid medicines. Discussions on the potential harms of opioid medicines for noncancer pain should not obstruct opioid therapy for cancer therapy and palliative care.

ispartof: JOURNAL OF REHABILITATION status: published

One of the essences of rehabilitation is enhancing a persons' functioning and participation in society, including work. According to the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF), participation can be influenced by a wide range of factors, including pain. In many patients with a pain complaint a neuropathic pain component is present. To steer (vocational) rehabilitation, it is important to recognize the presence of neuropathic pain. Expensive and time-consuming instrumental tests (e.g. Quantitative Sensory Testing) to identify presence of neuropathic pain are available in specialized centers but not applicable in daily clinical practice in rehabilitation settings. The aim of this manuscript is to give an overview of alternative screening and assessment methods of neuropathic pain that are applicable in a daily clinical setting and for the different professionals who may be involved in rehabilitation (e.g., physical therapists, occupationl therapists, counselors, etc). The first part elaborates on the definition of neuropathic pain and common terminology. Second, basic anatomy and physiology related to neuropathic pain are presented needed to understand neuropathic pain. Third, the relevant aspects of clinical history and clinical examination are discussed. Finally, screening tools for neuropathic pain and alternative clinical assessments methods for Quantitative Sensory Testing are presented.

Refereed/Peer-reviewed Purpose: Here, we describe the development and pilot study of a personalized eHealth intervention containing a pain science education program and self-management support strategies regarding pain and pain-related functioning in female survivors of breast cancer. First, we aimed to evaluate the eHealth intervention’s acceptability, comprehensibility, and satisfaction; second, we aimed to assess its preliminary efficacy. Methods: A mixed-method study design was used. Breast cancer survivors with persistent pain were recruited. After 6 weeks of engagement with the eHealth intervention, acceptability, comprehensibility, and satisfaction were measured quantitatively with a self-constructed questionnaire and described qualitatively using focus groups. A joint display was used to present the meta-interferences between data. Efficacy was assessed via mixed effects models with repeated measures (outcomes assessed at baseline, 6 weeks, and 12 weeks). Results: Twenty-nine women with persistent pain after breast cancer surgery participated. Overall, the eHealth program was well received and experienced as easy to use and helpful. The eHealth intervention seems useful as an adjunct to comprehensive cancer aftercare. Efficacy estimates suggested a significant improvement in pain-related functioning, physical functioning, and quality of life. Conclusion: A personalized eHealth intervention appears valuable for persistent pain management after breast cancer surgery. A large controlled clinical trial to determine effectiveness, and a full process evaluation, seems warranted.

This paper discusses the growing problem of persisting pain after successful treatment of breast cancer and presents recommendations for improving pain-related outcomes for this group. We discuss the dominant treatment approach for persisting pain post-breast cancer treatment and draw contrasts with contemporary treatment approaches to persistent pain in non-cancer-related populations. We discuss modern application of the biopsychosocial model of pain and the notion of variable sensitivity within the pain system, moment by moment and over time. We present the implications of increasing sensitivity over time for treatment selection and implementation. By drawing on transformative changes in treatment approaches to persistent non-cancer-related pain, we describe the potentially powerful role that an intervention called pain science education, which is now recommended in clinical guidelines for musculoskeletal pain, may play in improving pain and disability outcomes after successful breast cancer treatment. Finally, we present several research recommendations that centre around adaptation of the content and delivery models of contemporary pain science education, to the post-breast cancer context. ispartof: JOURNAL OF CANCER SURVIVORSHIP ispartof: location:United States status: Published online

Eline Coppens, The role of childhood adversities in fibromyalgia: prevalence and relationship to stress reactivity Supervisors: prof. dr. Patrick Luyten, prof. dr. Lukas Van Oudenhove, Co-supervisor: prof. dr. Bart Morlion Dissertation submitted to obtain the degree of Ph.D. in Psychology Patients with fibromyalgia syndrome (FM) suffer from chronic widespread pain (CWP). A history of childhood adversities (ECA) has been shown to elevate the risk to develop FM. The prevalence of ECA in FM typically ranges between 16% and 60%. However, it is not clear whether the prevalence of ECA in FM is different compared to other functional somatic disorders (FSS), and whether and how ECA may play a role in the pathogenesis of these disorders. FSS has been associated with dysfunction of the stress response system. The hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal (HPA) axis, which plays a central role in stress regulation, in particular might be influenced by psychosocial factors such as ECA, and associated insecure adult attachment strategies and impairments in embodied mentalizing. Therefore, in Chapter 1, we investigated the prevalence of different types of (ECA) and posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) features in female FM/CWP patients compared with patients with Functional Dyspepsia (FD), another FSS, and achalasia, a somatic disease. The second aim of this study was to investigate the relationship between ECA and pain severity as well as the possible role of PTSD symptom severity in this relationship. As expected, we found that about half of all FM/CWP patients reported at least one type of ECA. Furthermore, the odds of reporting at least one type of ECA did not differ from the odds in FD patients, but was four times higher compared to achalasia patients. However, the presence or severity of ECA was not related to pain severity. Yet, FM/CWP patients were about 6 times more likely to meet PTSD criteria compared to those with functional dyspepsia (FD) and achalasia. PTSD severity also mediated the relationship between ECA severity and pain severity, despite the lack of a direct relationship between both. In chapter 2, in the same sample of FM/CWP women, we explored possible relationships between both ECA and PTSD symptom severity on the one hand and various indices of psychosocial and physical functioning, on the other. We found that ECA was only associated with depression severity. PTSD symptom severity, by contrast, was highly significantly associated with all indices of physical and psychosocial functioning. Furthermore, relationships among PTSD severity and these indices were mediated by problems with embodied mentalizing, with problems with describing emotions being particularly important. From Chapter 3 onwards, we focused on the neurobiology of FM in relation to psychosocial features typical of these patients. We found a, blunted cortisol responsivity of FM to the Trier Social Stress Test (TSST) compared with healthy controls (HC) without ECA. FM patients had, however, higher subjective stress levels compared with HCs, particularly at baseline and during recovery from the TSST. In FM patients, ECA was not associated with cortisol or subjective stress levels, nor with responsivity to the TSST. These results reflect a dissociation between subjective and cortisol responses to stress in FM. In chapter 4 we found significantly more difficulties with identifying feelings (DIF), but not difficulties with describing feelings (DDF), in FM patients compared to HCs. We did not find any significant differences, however, in adult attachment strategies or emotion processing between FM and HC. Yet, insecure attachment was related to both the cortisol response and subjective distress in the TSST in HC, but not in FM. These latter findings may be related to the observed hypoactivity of the cortisol stress system in FM and high baseline levels of subjective distress in these patients. In conclusion, high levels of ECA in FM/CWP in combination with PTSD features, but not ECA as such, were related to pain severity. This suggests that the impact, rather than the mere presence, of ECA is of crucial importance in determining the influence of ECA on pain severity in FM/CWP. Indeed, PTSD features were associated with all physical and psychosocial functioning indices. Moreover, these relationships were mediated by problems with embodied mentalizing. Finally, we observed a "crash" of the stress system or attenuated resilience in FM compared with HC. Prospective research is needed in this context to further replicate these findings. status: published