Search

Introduction Neuropathic pain is a common symptom, present in 39% of the patients with cancer pain. Treating this type of pain is challenging, as this patient group is often frail and has comorbidities which increase the risk of side events and hence influences their quality of life. Clinical practice guidelines ( CPGs) can be helpful for clinicians, especially when scientific evidence is uncertain or weak. In this study, we focused on the quality of the review of the literature used in treatment recommendations in the selected European CPGs. Methods In a previous study, 9 CPGs from European countries that contained at least one paragraph on treatment for neuropathic pain in cancer were included. Recommendations with their grade (according SIGN 55 classification) and supporting literature (first author, patients' population, year and type of publication) were compared between CPGs. Results In all CPGs, amitriptylin was mentioned as the drug of first choice. Six guidelines proposed also gabapentinoids. Only 30 of the 163 citations (18%) were based on studies in patients with cancer. Seven CPGs did not argue the indirect evidence due to extrapolation of study results from non-cancer to patients with cancer. Conclusion The majority of guideline development groups extrapolated their results from non-cancer publications to formulate recommendations. Consequently, these guidelines fail to address important issues such as altered kinetics and side effect profiles in these patients. We recommend creating specific recommendations by an international expert group for the treatment for neuropathic pain in patients with cancer supported by targeted research in patients with cancer. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Between 19% and 39% of patients with cancer pain suffer from neuropathic pain. Its diagnosis and treatment is still challenging. Yet, national clinical practice guidelines ( CPGs) have been developed in several European countries to assist practitioners in managing these patients safely and legally. The aim of this study was to assess the quality of the development and reporting of these CPGs. Methods In collaboration with the European Federation of IASP Chapters, a European inventory of CPGs was conducted. Inclusion criteria were at least one paragraph dedicated to the treatment of neuropathic pain in cancer. Using the Appraisal of Guidelines, Research and Evaluation II instrument, 2 appraisers independently assessed the quality of the development process of the included CPGs in 6 quality domains. Besides, CPGs developed by governmental organization were compared with those developed by professional societies using t-tests. Results Mean scores of the domains 'scope and purpose' (80%) and 'clarity of presentation' (61%) were satisfactory, 'stakeholder involvement' (58%), 'rigor of development' (57%), and 'editorial independence' (53%) were acceptable, and 'applicability' was insufficient (39%). Governmental guidelines had higher quality scores than professional society guidelines for domain 'stakeholder involvement' and 'editorial independence' ( P < 0.01). Conclusions The quality of the development process of the 9 included CPGs varied widely. CPGs should be developed within a structured guideline program, including methodological support. As developing a CPG is expensive and time-consuming, we recommend more international cooperation to increase quality and lower the development costs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Context: A gold standard or validated tool for monitoring the level of discomfort during continuous palliative sedation (CPS) is lacking. Therefore, little is known about the course of discomfort in sedated patients, the efficacy of CPS, and the determinants of discomfort during CPS.Objectives: To identify the course of discomfort in patients receiving CPS.Methods: A prospective observational multicenter study in nine hospices and palliative care units was performed. The Discomfort Scale-Dementia of Alzheimer Type (DS-DAT) was independently assessed for monitoring of patient discomfort during CPS. The DS-DAT scores range from 0 (no observed discomfort) to a maximum of 27 (high level of observed discomfort). Using a mixed model, the mean group score of discomfort between four predefined time frames of CPS was compared, correcting for confounding patient characteristics.Results: A total of 130 patients were sedated, and the DS-DAT was completed in 106 patients at least once. The median duration of the sedation in these 106 patients was 25.5 hours (range 2-161). The mean score of the DS-DAT in the phase before sedation was 12.16 (95% CI 9.83-14.50) and decreased significantly to 8.06 (95% CI 5.53-10.58) in the titration phase of sedation. The mean score of the DS-DAT in the final phase of sedation was 7.42 (95% CI 4.90-9.94).Conclusion: This study shows that CPS is associated with a decrease in the level of discomfort within an acceptable time frame, although in some sedated patients higher levels of discomfort in the last hours of life occurred. Although the DS-DAT seems to be of value for monitoring the level of discomfort during CPS, the results of this study should be interpreted within the constraints of the limitations, and further research on the psychometric properties of this tool is needed before the DS-DAT can be used in clinical practice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Context: Knowledge of determinants that are associated with the administration of continuous palliative sedation (CPS) helps physicians identify patients who are at risk of developing refractory symptoms, thereby enabling proactive care planning.Objectives: This study aims to explore which patient-related factors at admission are associated with receiving CPS later in the terminal phase of life.Methods: A prospective multicenter observational study was performed in six Dutch hospices and three nursing home-based palliative care units. The association between patient-related variables at admission (age, gender, diagnosis, use of opioids or psycholeptics, number of medications, Karnofsky Performance Status scale score, Edmonton Symptom Assessment System distress score, and Glasgow Coma Scale score) and the administration of CPS at the end of life was analyzed.Results: A total of 467 patients died during the study period, of whom 130 received CPS. In univariate analysis, statistically significant differences were noted between the sedated and nonsedated patients with respect to younger age (P = 0.009), malignancy as a diagnosis (P = 0.05), higher Karnofsky Performance Status score (P = 0.03), the use of opioids (P < 0.001), the use of psycholeptics (P = 0.003), and higher Edmonton Symptom Assessment System distress score (P = 0.05). Multivariate logistic regression analysis showed that only the use of opioids at admission (odds ratio 1.90; 95% confidence interval 1.18-3.05) was significantly associated with the administration of CPS.Conclusion: Physicians should be aware that patients who use opioids at admission have an increased risk for the administration of CPS at the end of life. In this group of patients, a comprehensive personalized care plan starting at admission is mandatory to try to prevent the development of refractory symptoms. Further research is recommended, to identify other determinants of the administration of CPS and to investigate which early interventions will be effective to prevent the need for CPS in patients at high risk. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]