Multidisciplinary Pain Treatment Research Articles

141 Implementation of exercise program after multidisciplinary treatment of chronic widespread musculoskeletal pain in the primary healthcare – study protocol

141 Implementation of exercise program after multidisciplinary treatment of chronic widespread musculoskeletal pain in the primary healthcare – study protocol

Principles of Organization of Multidisciplinary Clinics and Pain Treatment Centers (Literature Review and Own Experience)

Pain is one of the most important problems of modern medicine. The high prevalence of pain causes significant material and social losses. As an effective measure to solve this problem, the idea of organizing a network of pain treatment centers and clinics was put forward. The purpose of the work is to describe the structure of the organization of multidisciplinary clinics and pain treatment centers. The article discusses the basic principles of the organization of pain treatment centers and the system of analgesic care. An example of the work of the pain center on the basis of a multidisciplinary hospital (Volga District Medical Center of the FMBA of Russia) is given. The authors shared the structure and organization of the work of this pain treatment center. They also presented the results of his work. Currently, there are no specialized pain centers in Russia. Now in many cities of Russia there is a process of formation of analgesic care. However, this process faces a number of difficulties.

Assessing the Feasibility and Preliminary Effects of a Web-Based Self-Management Program for Chronic Noncancer Pain: Mixed Methods Study.

In Canada, adults with chronic noncancer pain face a persistent insufficiency of publicly funded resources, with the gold standard multidisciplinary pain treatment facilities unable to meet the high clinical demand. Web-based self-management programs cost-effectively increase access to pain management and can improve several aspects of physical and emotional functioning. Aiming to meet the demand for accessible, fully automated resources for individuals with chronic noncancer pain, we developed a French web- and evidence-based self-management program, Agir pour moi (APM). This program includes pain education and strategies to reduce stress, practice mindfulness, apply pacing, engage in physical activity, identify and manage thinking traps, sleep better, adapt diet, and sustain behavior change. This study aims to assess the APM self-management program's feasibility, acceptability, and preliminary effects in adults awaiting specialized services from a center of expertise in chronic pain management. We conducted a mixed methods study with an explanatory sequential design, including a web-based 1-arm trial and qualitative semistructured interviews. We present the results from both phases through integrative tables called joint displays. Response rates were 70% (44/63) at postintervention and 56% (35/63) at 3-month follow-up among the 63 consenting participants who provided self-assessed information at baseline. In total, 46% (29/63) of the participants completed the program. We interviewed 24% (15/63) of the participants. The interview's first theme revolved around the overall acceptance, user-friendliness, and engaging nature of the program. The second theme emphasized the differentiation between microlevel and macrolevel engagements. The third theme delved into the diverse effects observed, potentially influenced by the macrolevel engagements. Participants highlighted the features that impacted their self-efficacy and the adoption of self-management strategies. We observed indications of improvement in self-efficacy, pain intensity, pain interference, depression, and catastrophizing. Interviewees described these and various other effects as potentially influenced by macrolevel engagement through behavioral change. These findings provided preliminary evidence that the APM self-management program and research methods are feasible. However, some participants expressed the need for at least phone reminders and minimal support from a professional available to answer questions over the first few weeks of the program to engage. Recruitment strategies of a future randomized controlled trial should focus on attracting a broader representation of individuals with chronic pain in terms of gender and ethnicity. ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05319652; https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT05319652.

Exploring the effects of fitbit incentive on treatment outcomes in veterans undergoing intensive pain rehabilitation program

ObjectiveThis study compares clinical pain outcomes between patients in a pain treatment program that received a Fitbit, to patients that did not. We also explored: (1) cognitive, emotional, and psychological factors that may have impacted the decision to opt in to receiving a Fitbit; and (2) whether the choice to receive a Fitbit impacted changes in cognitive, emotional, and psychological factors following treatment.MethodsAmong 58 patients in a multidisciplinary pain treatment program at a Veterans Affairs Healthcare System hospital, 31 patients opted to receive a Fitbit as adjunct treatment, while 27 did not. This study utilized patient-reported and practitioner-collected data from the pain treatment program.ResultsCompared to the non-Fitbit group, the Fitbit group displayed a significant decrease in average pain intensity, however showed no correlation between Fitbit activity and average pain intensity. Additionally, treatment satisfaction was the only predictor of treatment group, when modeling pre- and post-treatment outcomes changes.ConclusionThe implementation of a Fitbit may lead to improved pain intensity. Initial evidence suggests that opting to receive a Fitbit during a pain treatment program indicates treatment engagement leading to greater treatment satisfaction. Future work is needed to verify and expand upon this potential mechanism.

Changes in pain, daily occupations, lifestyle, and health following an occupational therapy lifestyle intervention: a secondary analysis from a feasibility study in patients with chronic high-impact pain.

This study explored changes in pain-related parameters, occupational function, occupational balance, lifestyle factors, and self-perceived health status in adults with chronic high-impact pain participating in an occupational therapy lifestyle intervention. This one-group longitudinal feasibility study was performed in three continuous feasibility rounds. The occupational therapists-led intervention targeted meaningful occupations, regular physical activity, and a healthy diet. The intervention contained individual and group sessions and was added to the standard multidisciplinary chronic pain treatment. Outpatients (n=40, 85 % females, 46.6 ± 10.9 years old) participated in the study between April 2019 and December 2021. The analysis includes data for 31 participants. Analysis of pre-post changes assessed after each feasibility round were performed for the outcomes: pain intensity, pain sensitivity and pain modulation (pressure pain threshold and tolerance, temporal summation of pain and conditioned pain modulation), pain self-efficacy, pain catastrophizing, motor and process skills, occupational balance, daily wake-time movement, daily walking steps, body mass index, waist circumference, blood pressure, and self-perceived health status. Improvements in motor skills (assessment of motor and process skills score=0.20 (1.37; 1.57), 95 % CI 0.01; 0.38) and temporal summation of pain (-1.19 (2.86; -1.67), 95 % CI -2.16; -0.22), but a decrease in pain tolerance (-7.110 (54.42; 47.32), 95 % CI -13.99; -0.22) were observed. Correlation analysis suggested moderate-to-very strong statistically significant relationships in several outcomes related to pain, health, pain coping, occupational balance, occupational functioning, body anthropometrics, and pain sensitivity. This study suggested that the lifestyle intervention would benefit motor skills while effects on other outcomes were unclear in adults with chronic pain. To confirm the findings, a randomized trial evaluating effectiveness is needed. Ethical committee number: SJ-307 Reg. Clinicaltrials.gov: NCT03903900.

Trajectories of opioid consumption as predictors of patient-reported outcomes among individuals attending multidisciplinary pain treatment clinics.

This study aimed to identify opioid consumption trajectories among persons living with chronic pain (CP) and put them in relation to patient-reported outcomes 6 months after initiating multidisciplinary pain treatment. This study used data from the Quebec Pain Registry (2008-2014) linked to longitudinal Quebec health insurance databases. We included adults diagnosed with CP and covered by the Quebec public prescription drug insurance plan. The daily cumulative opioid doses in the first 6 months after initiating multidisciplinary pain treatment were transformed into morphine milligram equivalents. An individual-centered approach involving principal factor and cluster analyses applied to longitudinal statistical indicators of opioid use was conducted to classify trajectories. Multivariate regression models were applied to evaluate the associations between trajectory group membership and outcomes at 6-month follow-up (pain intensity, pain interference, depression, and physical and mental health-related quality of life). We identified three trajectories of opioid consumption: "no or very low and stable" opioid consumption (n = 2067, 96.3%), "increasing" opioid consumption (n = 40, 1.9%), and "decreasing" opioid consumption (n = 39, 1.8%). Patients in the "no or very low and stable" trajectory were less likely to be current smokers, experience polypharmacy, use opioids or benzodiazepine preceding their first visit, or experience pain interference at treatment initiation. Patients in the "increasing" opioid consumption group had significantly greater depression scores at 6-month compared to patients in the "no or very low and stable" trajectory group. Opioid consumption trajectories do not seem to be important determinants of most PROs 6 months after initiating multidisciplinary pain treatment.

Obesity and the risk of multiple or severe frequent knee pain episodes: a 4-year follow-up of the ELSA-Brasil MSK cohort.

Knee pain is an important health problem due to its high prevalence, negative impact on daily activities and quality of life, and societal burden. While the link between excess weight and knee pain has been well-documented in the literature, many studies are limited to patients with osteoarthritis or use cross-sectional data. This longitudinal study investigated whether overweight and obesity were associated with the frequency and severity of frequent knee pain (FKP) episodes over 4 years in civil servants enrolled in the ELSA-Brasil MSK cohort. Knee pain was assessed during baseline face-to-face interviews (2012-2014) and four yearly telephone follow-ups (2015-2019). Disabling FKP episodes or those of moderate to very severe intensity were classified as severe. Multinomial logistic regression models adjusted for confounders were used to test for associations in two participant groups: those with knee pain at baseline (prognosis cohort) and those without knee pain (incidence cohort). A total of 2644 participants were included: 54.2% female, mean age 55.8 (SD 8.8) years. In the incidence cohort (n = 1896), obesity increased the risk of one (OR: 1.63; 95% CI 1.13-2.37) and multiple FKP episodes (OR: 2.61; 95% CI 1.71-3.97), as well as the risk of non-severe (OR: 1.72; 95% CI 1.04-2.84) and severe FKP episodes (OR: 2.10; 95% CI 1.50-2.95). In the prognosis cohort (n = 748), obesity increased the risk of multiple (OR: 2.54; 95% CI 1.60-4.05) and severe FKP episodes (OR: 2.31; 95% CI 1.49-3.59). Overweight presented the same trends but fell short of significance. These results provide further support that overweight and obesity are important contributors to the incidence and worsening of FKP, and that weight management must be prioritized in multidisciplinary knee pain prevention and treatment programs to reduce the burden of musculoskeletal disorders.

Seasonal impact on the outcome of multidisciplinary pain therapy

ABSTRACT Multidisciplinary pain treatment programs (MPTP) have been considered to be the most effective treatment of chronic pain. In this study, we analyzed the influence of seasons on the outcome of chronic pain patients undergoing MPTP. Therefore, a prospective, observational trial was conducted in patients with chronic pain undergoing a 5-week interdisciplinary treatment program. Psychological stabilization (measured by ADS – Allgemeine Depressionsskala) and pain levels (measured by NRS – numeric rating scale) were considered as primary endpoints. As a result of this study, we could show that chronic pain patients (exempt patients with chronic headache) showed a highly significant better improvement in terms of ADS after MPTP when participating in autumn (coefficient: −11.67, p = .004). Patients treated during winter showed a tendency towards a better improvement in ADS scores (coefficient: −6.89, p = .051). These effects were not found in patients suffering from chronic headache. Finally, patients participating in MPTPs during summer, autumn, and winter presented a tendency of higher reduction in pain scores when compared to patients participating in spring. In conclusion, the effect of MPTPs in terms of psychological stabilization is considered to be best during autumn. This should be therefore considered in planning an MPTP in all patients who do not need immediate psychological stabilization. The treatment effect of MPTP on pain seems not being dependent on a specific season.

Implementation and Preliminary Effectiveness of a Multidisciplinary Telemedicine Pilot Initiative for Patients with Chronic Non-Cancer Pain in Rural and Underserved Areas at a Major Academic Medical Center.

Arkansas lacks adequate access to high-quality pain care, as evidenced, in part, by it having the second highest opioid prescribing rate in the United States. To improve access to high-quality treatment of chronic pain, we developed the Arkansas Improving Multidisciplinary Pain Care and Treatment (AR-IMPACT) Telemedicine Clinic, a multidisciplinary and interprofessional team of specialists who provide evidence-based pain management for patients with chronic pain. We conducted a single-arm pilot trial of the AR-IMPACT Telemedicine Clinic with rural, university-affiliated primary care clinics. We assessed the AR-IMPACT Telemedicine Clinic using an implementation framework and preliminary effectiveness measures. Specifically, we assessed 5 of the 8 implementation outcomes of the framework (ie, penetration, adoption, acceptability, appropriateness, and feasibility) using a mixed methods approach. To evaluate implementation outcomes, we used surveys, interviews, and administrative data. We used electronic health record data to measure preliminary effectiveness (ie, changes in average morphine milligram equivalents per day and pain and depression scores). The AR-IMPACT team saw 23 patients that were referred by 13 primary care physicians from three rural, university-affiliated primary care clinics over one year. Of the 19 patients willing to participate in the pilot study, 12 identified as women, 31.6% identified as Black, and over 50% had less than a bachelor's level education. Patients rated the clinic positively with high overall satisfaction. Referring physicians indicated high levels of appropriateness, acceptability, and feasibility of the program. AR-IMPACT team members identified several barriers and facilitators to the feasibility of implementing the program. No changes in preliminary effectiveness measures were statistically significant. Overall, the AR-IMPACT Telemedicine Clinic obtained moderate penetration and adoption, was highly acceptable to patients, was highly acceptable and appropriate to providers, and was moderately feasible to providers and AR-IMPACT team members.

Multimodal pain therapy for persistent idiopathic facial pain - a pilot study.

Persistent Idiopathic Facial Pain (PIFP) is a pain syndrome with missing evidence-based therapy recommendations. According to the biopsychosocial pain model, multidisciplinary pain treatment (MPT) offers a promising therapeutic option for chronic pain syndromes. MPT is an interprofessional treatment procedure, consisting of medical, physiotherapeutic and psychotherapeutic treatment units, which has not yet been studied in PIFP. This retrospective study included 25 patients with PIFP, who had been treated with MPT. Pain intensity on the numerical rating scale (NRS), perceived disability, habitual well-being, as well as anxiety/depression and stress scales were recorded. Moreover, the patients evaluated the efficacy of each type of the single therapeutic interventions. There was a highly significant decrease in the characteristic pain intensity. Also habitual well-being improved significantly, as did anxiety and depression. The perceived disability and stress also improved, but without statistical significance. Physiotherapy was rated as the most effective therapeutic unit. Among the medical measures, consultations took first place (40% of the participants). Nearly three-fourths of the patients (72%) would recommend MPT. The present study shows beneficial outcomes in patients with PIFP following MPT. Patients evaluate physiotherapeutic treatment as particularly efficacious. Therefore, MPT can be considered as a therapeutic option in patients with PIFP.

Occupational therapy lifestyle intervention added to multidisciplinary treatment for adults living with chronic pain: a feasibility study

ObjectivesTo evaluate the feasibility and outcomes of an occupational therapy lifestyle intervention for adults living with chronic pain.DesignThis one-group pre-post interventional study investigated the feasibility and outcomes of the Redesign...

Spinal cord stimulation in chronic pain treatment - first experiences in Bosnia and Herzegovina.

Aim To describe results of spinal cord stimulation technique when the conventional multidisciplinary treatment of neuropathic or mixed pain failed. Methods The research was conducted at the Institute for Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation "Dr. Miroslav Zotović", Banjaluka. Ten patients, who had chronic pain resistant to other therapeutic options and a failed back surgery, were sent for an evaluation. Each patient underwent a 4-week evaluation by a team of medical specialists, phychologist and social workers. Additional diagnostic methods (MRI of the lumbosacral spine, electromyoneurography of lower extermities, congnitive assessment tests) were also performed to establish a proper indication for implantation of the system for spinal cord stimulation. Leads of a system for spinal cord stimulation were implanted percutaneously or surgically at the epidural space. Functional outcome measures (visual analogue scale, Oswestry index, anxiety and depression scales) were taken before the implantation of the system and on several followups. Results Four patients did not meet critea for the inclusion in the study (two were not ready, two showed psychopathological symptoms). One patient had a percutaneous lead implant, but it was removed after six months due to paresthesia. The remaining five had surgicaly implanted epidural leads and showed significant improvement in pain control, Oswestry index had lower values, and all except one patient had improvement registered by anxiety and depression scales. Conclusion. Short-term and long-term follow up showed a long lasting pain reduction and improvement of functionality in all patients.

Characteristics of patients who dropped out after multidisciplinary pain management in Japan: A prospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Because regular visits to distant hospitals may be a burden to patients, both in terms of time and cost, some patients with chronic musculoskeletal pain may discontinue multidisciplinary pain treatment, unable to maintain motivation to attend.OBJECTIVE: To evaluate and compare the pre-program characteristics of patients who dropped out and patients who continued treatment, thereby clarifying the characteristics of patients at risk of dropping out.METHODS: A multidisciplinary pain management treatment program was implemented for patients at the Pain Management Center, Hoshi General Hospital. From April 2015 to March 2018, 23 patients participated in the program. Twelve of the 23 patients lived outside the prefecture where the hospital is located. Of these 12 patients, five completed the program, while seven did not. We compared the dropout and continuation groups in terms of patient characteristics, pain severity, pain-related psychosocial factors, and quality of life.RESULTS: We found significant differences ( 0.05) in median age, Japanese Orthopaedic Association Back Pain Evaluation Questionnaire walking ability dysfunction score, and Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire score.CONCLUSIONS: The characteristics of patients who dropped out were older age, walking ability dysfunction, and low quality of life associated with low back pain.

Signature for Pain Recovery IN Teens (SPRINT): protocol for a multisite prospective signature study in chronic musculoskeletal pain

IntroductionCurrent treatments for chronic musculoskeletal (MSK) pain are suboptimal. Discovery of robust prognostic markers separating patients who recover from patients with persistent pain and disability is critical for developing patient-specific...

Frequency and characteristics of patient exclusion criteria in Canadian multidisciplinary pain treatment facilities: a cross-sectional study.

A multidisciplinary approach is recommended for patients with complex chronic pain (CP). Many multidisciplinary pain treatment facilities (MTPFs) use patient exclusion criteria but little is known about their characteristics. The objective of this study was to describe the frequency and characteristics of exclusion criteria in public Canadian MTPFs. We conducted a cross-sectional study in which we defined an MPTF as a clinic staffed with professionals from three disciplines or more (including at least one medical specialty) and whose services were integrated within the facility. We disseminated a web-based questionnaire in 2017-2018 to the administrative leads of MPTFs across the country. They were invited to complete the questionnaire about the characteristics of their facilities. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics and correlation measures. A total of 87 MTPFs were included in the analyses. Half of them (52%) reported using three exclusion criteria or more. There was no significant association between the number of exclusion criteria and wait time for a first appointment or number of new consultations in the past year. Fibromyalgia and migraine were the most frequently excluded pain syndromes (10% and 7% of MPTFs, respectively). More than one MPTF out of four excluded patients with mental health disorders (30%) and/or substance use disorders (29%), including MPTFs with specialists in their staff. Multidisciplinary pain treatment facility exclusion criteria are most likely to affect CP patients living with complex pain issues and psychosocial vulnerabilities. Policy efforts are needed to support Canadian MPTFs in contributing to equitable access to pain management.

Pain is one of the crucial issues of modern medicine. The high pain prevalence causes significant material and social losses. The main scientific and practical efforts are aimed at studying the issues of pain etiology, pathogenesis and therapy. As an effective measure to solve this problem, the idea of organizing a network of centers and clinics for the pain treatment

Pain is one of the crucial issues of modern medicine. The high pain prevalence causes significant material and social losses. The main scientific and practical efforts are aimed at studying the issues of pain etiology, pathogenesis and therapy. As an effective measure to solve this problem, the idea of organizing a network of centers and clinics for the pain treatment was put forward. Purpose of the work: description of the structure of the organization of multidisciplinary clinics and pain treatment centers. There are currently few publications on the organization of pain relief. The article discusses the basic principles of organizing pain treatment centers and pain relief systems abroad. In this organization, attention is drawn to the principles of interdisciplinary interaction, the development of treatment tactics and the organization of work with a patient suffering from pain. Further, the paper presents the experience of organizing specialized pain relief care abroad. An example of the work of a pain center on the basis of a multidisciplinary hospital (Privolzhsky District Medical Center of the Federal Medical and Biological Agency of Russia) is given. The authors shared the structure and organization of this pain treatment center. They also presented the results of its work. Conclusion. Currently, there are no specialized pain centers in Russia. Now in many cities of Russia, there is a process of formation of pain relief care. However, this process faces a number of difficulties.

Preliminary Outcomes from an Intensive Multidisciplinary Pain Program in a Veteran’s Administration Hospital: A Pilot Study

Chronic pain is a leading cause of lost productivity, disability payments, and health care utilization among the Veteran population. As such, there is interest in chronic pain treatments that address not only physical functioning and pain, but also psychological functioning and pain-related beliefs. One such treatment that has been explored is multidisciplinary team treatments. This pilot study aimed to determine whether a multidisciplinary treatment program for chronic pain would be effective in a sample of primarily rural-based Veterans. Seventy Veterans completed multidisciplinary chronic pain treatment, which consisted of 3–5 hours of pain related services per week for twelve weeks with providers from seven different disciplines. Veterans took standardized pre- and post-test measures of functioning, pain, pain-related beliefs, and mood. The program was highly acceptable and feasible to both Veterans and medical providers. Participants reported statistically significant improvements in average pain level following the intervention and improvements in pain related beliefs, pain-related catastrophizing, pain-related self-efficacy, mood symptoms and increased activity engagement. The program was highly acceptable to participants and feasible to a rural VA medical center, as evidenced by high completion rates. Future research is needed for cost-benefit analysis of the multidisciplinary program compared to less time-intensive pain related services (e.g. CBT-CP), post-intervention pain-related health care utilization, and the role of pain-related beliefs in treatment outcomes.

Multidisciplinary pain treatment for complex regional pain syndrome in bilateral upper extremities after median sternotomy: a case report

Multidisciplinary pain treatment for complex regional pain syndrome in bilateral upper extremities after median sternotomy: a case report

Gender differences in multidisciplinary pain rehabilitation: The mediating role of pain acceptance

The present study aimed to investigate gender differences in multidisciplinary pain treatment outcomes and whether pain acceptance contributes to gender differences. A retrospective cohort study was conducted on participants of a three-week multidisciplinary group pain rehabilitation program (N = 36). To accurately compare men and women, men (n = 18) were matched to similar women on sociodemographic and pain variables. Patients completed a battery of measures at baseline and discharge. Both men and women improved significantly from baseline to discharge (p < .001) in depressive symptoms, but only women had significant reductions in average pain severity. Between-group analyses showed gender differences in changes from baseline to discharge in pain interference, anxiety, and pain acceptance, with women improving more than men. Activity engagement (a behavioral component of pain acceptance) significantly mediated the effects of gender on pain severity, pain interference, and depression, and pain willingness (a cognitive component of pain acceptance) significantly mediated the effects of gender on pain interference and anxiety. Overall, multidisciplinary pain rehabilitation appears to benefit both men and women, but women showed greater improvements than men at discharge. Gender differences in changes in pain severity, pain interference, and anxiety may be explained, in part, by increased pain acceptance in women. Future work is needed to replicate these findings in larger samples and to ascertain how potential modifications to multimodal pain treatment could meet the specific needs of both men and women with chronic pain to optimize outcomes for more patients.

The Needs and Experiences of Patients on Pain Education and the Clinical Reasoning of Physical Therapists Regarding Cancer-Related Pain. A Qualitative Study.

Objective: This study offers direction for interaction between physical therapists and patients about cancer-related pain during physical training. The study may increase awareness of rehabilitation strategies for cancer-related pain during and after cancer treatment.Methods: Qualitative study, evaluating results of two qualitative studies. Data has been collected using semi-structured interviews, in which topics were discussed with patients and physical therapists. Respondents were adult patients with cancer in the Northern Netherlands with moderate to severe pain who followed physical training with a (oncologic) physical therapist. The physical therapists were respondents specialized in oncology and working with patients with cancer in a primary care setting in in the Netherlands. Data were analyzed using thematic analysis.Results: Eighteen patients and fifteen physical therapists were interviewed. Data was categorized in statements regarding “patients' needs”, “patients' experiences” and “clinical reasoning of the physical therapist”. “Patients' needs” for education were personal and included needs for information about the cause, course and effect of pain in relation to cancer and/or medical treatment, needs for practical tools for reducing pain, needs for strategies dealing with pain in daily activities, and needs for information about additional treatment and care options. When discussing ‘patients’ experiences', patients mentioned that physical therapists are cautious to express their expectations of the progress of pain and to offer pain education with respect to the cause of pain, dealing with pain and limitations in daily life, exercising, posture, learning self-care and information about additional treatment and care options in cancer-related pain. Patients provided insight into their educational, mental, and social support relative to experiences with physical therapists. Additionally, when discussing the communication they experienced with physical therapists, patients used descriptors such as accessibility, empathy, trust, knowledge and eliminating uncertainties. Interviews with physical therapists regarding their clinical reasoning process in cancer-related pain described that they identified pain from anamnesis (medical history review) and performed screening and analysis for pain secondary to cancer (treatment), as type of pain and pain influencing factors. Thoughts and experiences about pain, the use of pain clinometry, the establishment of objectives and interventions for physical therapy and multidisciplinary treatment of cancer-related pain were also described.Conclusion: Patients with cancer-related pain during physical training have personal needs regarding pain education and experience that specialized oncologic physical therapists focus on patient-centered information and self-management support. Specialized oncologic physical therapists analyze pain in the anamnesis and keep in mind the origin and impact of pain for the patient during screening and treatment. Different methods of pain management are used. It is recommended that physical therapists who give physical training take the initiative to repeatedly discuss pain.