Nonpharmacologic Pain Treatments Research Articles

Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation Combined With Meditation for Older Adults With Knee Osteoarthritis

Osteoarthritis (OA) of the knee is one of the most common causes of pain in older adults. Recent evidence suggests that knee OA pain is characterized by alterations in central pain processing in the brain. Two nonpharmacological pain treatments, transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) and mindfulness-based meditation (MBM), have been shown to improve pain-related brain function in older adults with knee OA. Because tDCS promotes neuroplasticity, it may potentiate the effect of MBM that also stimulates adaptive changes in the brain. However, no studies have examined whether tDCS combined with MBM can reduce OA symptoms in older adults with knee OA. Thus, the purpose of this study was to examine the preliminary efficacy of tDCS combined with MBM in older adults with knee OA. Thirty participants with knee OA were randomly assigned to receive 10 daily sessions of home-based 2 mA tDCS combined with active MBM for 20 minutes (n=15) or sham tDCS combined with sham MBM (n=15). We measured OA-related clinical symptoms using the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC). Participants (60% female) had a mean age of 59 years. Active tDCS combined with active MBM significantly reduced scores on the WOAMC (Cohen’s d = 0.83, P = 0.02). Participants tolerated tDCS combined with MBM well without serious adverse effects. Our findings demonstrate promising clinical efficacy of home-based tDCS combined with MBM for older adults with knee OA. Future studies with larger-scale randomized controlled trials with follow-up assessments are needed to validate our findings.

Are Methods for Evaluating Medications Appropriate for Evaluating Nonpharmacological Treatments for Pain?—Challenges for an Emerging Field of Research

Are Methods for Evaluating Medications Appropriate for Evaluating Nonpharmacological Treatments for Pain?—Challenges for an Emerging Field of Research

Pain Improvement After Healing Touch and Massage in Breast Cancer: an Observational Retrospective Study

Healing Touch (HT) and Oncology Massage (OM) are nonpharmacologic pain interventions, yet a comparative effectiveness study has not been conducted for pain in breast cancer. This breast cancer subgroup analysis compared the effectiveness of HT vs. OM on pain. The research occurred at an outpatient setting at an academic hybrid, multi-site, community-based cancer institute and Department of Supportive Oncology across four regional locations. Breast cancer outpatients along the cancer continuum who experienced routine clinical, nonexperimentally manipulated HT or OM. The study was an observational, retrospective, comparative effectiveness post hoc subanalysis of a larger dataset. Patients reporting pain < 2 were excluded. Pre- and posttherapy pain scores and differences were calculated. Logistic regression modeled posttherapy pain by modality, adjusting for pretherapy pain. The proportions experiencing ≥ 2-point (clinically significant) pain reduction were compared with chi-square tests. The study focused on the first session of either HT or OM. Pre- and posttherapy pain (range: 0 = no pain to 10 = worst possible pain). A total of 407 patients reported pre- and posttherapy pain scores, comprised of 233 (57.3%) who received HT and 174 (42.8%) who received OM. Pretherapy mean pain was higher in HT (M=5.1, ± 2.3) than OM (M=4.3, ± 2.1) (p < .001); posttherapy mean pain remained higher in HT (M=2.7, ± 2.2) than OM (M=1.9, ± 1.7) (p < .001). Mean difference in pain reduction was 2.4 for both HT and OM. Both HT (p < .001) and OM (p < .001) were associated with reduced pain. Proportions of clinically significant pain reduction were similar (65.7% HT and 69.0% OM, p = .483). Modality was not associated with pain improvement (p = .072). Both HT and OM were associated with clinically significant pain improvement. Future research should explore attitudes toward the modalities and potential influence of cancer stage and treatment status on modality self-selection.

Deep Cervical Plexus Block for Neck and Shoulder Pain Due to Myofascial Pain: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Myofascial pain is one of the most common causes of regional pain with no definitive treatment. This randomized clinical trial was conducted to assess the efficacy of deep cervical plexus block versus placebo injection (sham block) for the treatment of myofascial neck and shoulder pain in terms of analgesic consumption and pain during a follow-up period of 2 weeks after the block. Patients were randomly divided into 2 groups. Group I (block) received deep cervical plexus block and group II (placebo) received normal saline. A total of 66 patients were included in the study, 34 patients in the block group and 32 patients in the placebo group. Two weeks after the intervention, the average pain duration was significantly lower in the block group: 1.38±1.39 versus 5.25±1.72 for the block and placebo groups, respectively (P<0.0001). Pain intensity was significantly less in the block group such that 2.9% of patients in the block group had severe pain compared with 53.1% of patients in the placebo group (P<0.0001). Two weeks after receiving the block, the mean opioid consumption calculated as tramadol equivalent was 21.1±44.2 mg compared with 166.1±118.8 mg for the block and placebo groups, respectively. Multivariate analysis showed that patients with a longer history of pain had a higher pain score after 2 weeks. The possibility of recovery is affected by pain duration as patients with a history of chronic pain were least affected by the block. This technique could be an alternative to pharmacological and other nonpharmacological treatments for myofascial pain.

A protocol for chronic pain outcome measurement enhancement by linking PROMIS-29 scale to legacy measures and improving chronic pain stratification

BackgroundSubstantial investment has gone into research on the efficacy and effectiveness of pharmaceutical and nonpharmacologic interventions for chronic pain. However, synthesizing this extensive literature is challenging because of differences in the outcome measures used in studies of similar or competing interventions. The absence of a common metric makes it difficult to replicate findings, pool data from multiple studies, resolve conflicting conclusions, or reach consensus when interpreting findings.MethodsThis study has a seven-member Advisory Council of chronic pain experts. Preliminary analyses will be performed on data from several large existing datasets; intermediate analyses will be performed using primary data collected from Amazon’s Mechanical Turk (MTurk); and cross-validation will use primary data collected from a nationally-representative, probability-based panel. Target sample size for both primary datasets is 1500. The three study aims are as follows:Aim 1 will develop and evaluate links between the 29-item Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS®-29) and legacy measures used for chronic pain such as the Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire (RMDQ) and the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI). We will assess the best method of score linking and create crosswalk tables.Aim 2 will evaluate and refine the Impact Stratification Score (ISS) based on 9 PROMIS-29 items and proposed by the NIH Research Task Force on chronic low back pain. We will evaluate the ISS in terms of other indicators of condition severity and patient prognosis and outcomes and identify cut-points to stratify chronic pain patients into subgroups.Aim 3 will evaluate the strengths and limitations of MTurk as a data collection platform for estimating chronic pain by comparing its data to other data sources.DiscussionThe accomplishment of Aims 1 and 2 will allow direct comparison of results across past and future studies of chronic pain. These comparisons will help us to understand different results from seemingly similar studies, and to determine the relative effectiveness of all pharmaceutical and nonpharmacologic interventions for chronic pain across different trials. Aim 3 findings will provide valuable information to researchers about the pros and cons of using the MTurk platform for research-based data collection.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov: NCT04426812; June 10, 2020.

TCM nonpharmacological interventions for chronic low-back pain: A protocol for systematic review and network meta-analysis.

Background:chronic low back pain (CLBP) are common symptoms bothering people in daily life. Traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) nonpharmacological interventions are gaining an increasing popularity for CLBP. Nevertheless, the evidence of efficacy and safety of random controlled trials (RCTs) remains controversial. This study aims to evaluate the efficacy and acceptability of different TCM nonpharmacological therapies by systematic review and network meta-analysis.Methods:According to the strategy, The authors will retrieve a total of 7 electronic databases by September 2020, including PubMed, the Cochrane Library, EMbase, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, China Biological Medicine, Chongqing VIP, and Wan-fang databases After a series of screening, 2 researchers will use Aggregate Data Drug Information System and Stata software to analyze the data extracted from the randomized controlled trials of TCM nonpharmacological interventions for CLBP. The primary outcome will be the improvement of Pain intensity and functional status/disability and the secondary outcomes will include lobal improvement, health-related quality of life, satisfaction with treatment, and adverse events. Both classical meta-analysis and network meta-analysis will be implemented to investigate direct and indirect evidences on this topic. The quality of the evidence will be evaluated using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation instrument.Results:This study will provide a reliable evidence for the selection of TCM nonpharmacological therapies in the treatment of CLBP.Conclusion:This study will generate evidence for different TCM nonpharmacological therapies for CLBP and provide a decision-making reference for clinical research.Ethics and dissemination:This study does not require ethical approval. The results will be disseminated through a peer-reviewed publication.OSF registration number:DOI 10.17605/OSF.IO/4H3Y9.

Top Ten Tips Palliative Care Clinicians Should Know About Interventional Pain and Procedures.

Pain is a common symptom for patients with advanced illness. Palliative care (PC) clinicians are experts in pharmacologic and nonpharmacologic treatment of pain and other symptoms for these patients. True multimodal pain control should include consideration of interventional procedures and pumps to improve difficult-to-manage pain. This article, written by clinicians with expertise in interventional pain and PC, outlines and explains many of the adjunctive and interventional therapies that can be considered for patients with pain in the setting of serious illness. Only by understanding and considering all available options can we ensure that our patients are receiving optimal care.

Osteopathic Manipulation in the Management of Chronic Pain: Current Perspectives.

Chronic pain is a common condition that often interferes with work or other activities. Guidelines support the use of non-pharmacological treatments, such as spinal manipulation, in patients with chronic pain. Osteopathic physicians in the United States are uniquely positioned to manage chronic pain because their professional philosophy embraces the biopsychosocial model and they are trained in the use of osteopathic manipulative treatment (OMT) to complement conventional medical care. This narrative review provides current perspectives on the osteopathic approach to chronic pain management, including evidence for the efficacy of OMT based on systematic searches of the biomedical literature and the ClinicalTrials.gov database. Men, persons with low levels of education, and non-White and Hispanic patients are significantly less likely to have received OMT during their lifetime. Patients with low back and neck pain are most likely to be treated with OMT, and osteopathic manipulative medicine specialty physicians and family medicine physicians most often use OMT. However, many osteopathic physicians report using OMT infrequently. Although OMT is considered safe, based on millions of patient encounters over more than a century, there is limited evidence on its efficacy in treating chronic pain. The lone exception involves chronic low back pain, wherein there is evidence from systematic reviews, a large clinical trial, and observational studies. There is lesser evidence to support cost effectiveness and patient satisfaction associated with OMT for chronic pain. The only clinical practice guideline established by the American Osteopathic Association recommends that OMT should be used to treat chronic low back pain in patients with somatic dysfunction. Given the philosophy of osteopathic medicine, universal training of osteopathic physicians to use OMT, and national guidelines supporting non-pharmacological treatments for chronic pain, it is unclear why OMT use is reported to be remarkably low in physician surveys.

Identifying Predictors of Recommendations for and Participation in Multimodal Nonpharmacological Treatments for Chronic Pain Using Patient-Reported Outcomes and Electronic Medical Records.

High-quality chronic pain care emphasizes multimodal treatments that include medication and nonpharmacological treatments. But it is not clear which patients will participate in nonpharmacological treatments, such as physical therapy or mental health care, and previous research has shown conflicting evidence. We used the Patient Outcomes Repository for Treatment (PORT) registry, which combines patient-reported outcomes data with electronic medical records. In this retrospective observational study, we performed two separate multinomial regression analyses with feature selection to identify PORT variables that were predictive of 1) recommendation of a nonpharmacological treatment by the provider and 2) patient participation in nonpharmacological treatments. Two hundred thirty-six patients were recommended (REC) or not recommended (NO REC) a nonpharmacological treatment, and all REC patients were classified as participating (YES) or not participating (NO) in the recommendations. Female gender and a diagnosis of Z79 "Opioid drug therapy" were significant positive and negative predictors of nonpharmacological treatment recommendations, respectively. Schedule II opioid use at initial presentation and recommendations for rehabilitation therapy were significant predictors of nonparticipation. Patients using opioids are less likely to be recommended nonpharmacological treatments as part of multimodal chronic pain care and are less likely to participate in nonpharmacological treatments once recommended. Males are also less likely to be recommended nonpharmacological treatments. Patients referred for rehabilitation therapies are less likely to comply with those recommendations. We have identified patients in vulnerable subgroups who may require additional resources and/or encouragement to comply with multimodal chronic pain treatment recommendations.

Examining the Effect of a Whole Health Primary Care Pain Education and Opioid Monitoring Program on Implementation of VA/DoD-Recommended Guidelines for Long-term Opioid Therapy in a Primary Care Chronic Pain Population.

To describe the core elements of a Whole Health Primary Care Pain Education and Opioid Monitoring Program (PC-POP) and examine its effectiveness at increasing adherence to six of the Veteran Affairs/Department of Defense (VA/DoD) recommended guidelines for long-term opioid therapy (LOT) among chronic noncancer patients seen in primary care (i.e., urine drug screens [UDS], prescription drug monitoring program [PDMP] queries, informed consent, naloxone education/prescriptions, morphine equivalent daily dose [MEDD], and referrals to nonpharmacological pain interventions). A within-subjects comparison of outcomes was conducted between pre- and post-PC-POP enrollees (N = 25), as was a a between-subjects comparison to a comparison group (N = 25) utilizing a six-month range post-index date of 10/1/2018 (i.e., between-subjects comparison at Time 2). A convenience sample of adult veterans with chronic noncancer pain receiving opioid therapy consecutively for the past three months in primary care. Results showed increased concordance with VA/DoD guidelines among those enrolled in the PC-POP, characterized by increased documentation of urine drug screens, prescription drug monitoring program queries, informed consent, naloxone education/prescriptions, and a decrease in MEDD among patients enrolled in the PC-POP. The PC-POP shows promise for increasing guideline-concordant care for providers working in primary care.

Efficacy and acceptability of pharmacological and non-pharmacological interventions for non-specific chronic low back pain: a protocol for a systematic review and network meta-analysis

BackgroundDespite the enormous financial and humanistic burden of chronic low back pain (CLBP), there is little consensus on what constitutes the best treatment options from a multitude of competing interventions. The objective of this network meta-analysis (NMA) is to determine the relative efficacy and acceptability of primary care treatments for non-specific CLBP, with the overarching aim of providing a comprehensive evidence base for informing treatment decisions.MethodsWe will perform a systematic search to identify randomised controlled trials of interventions endorsed in primary care guidelines for the treatment of non-specific CLBP in adults. Information sources searched will include major bibliographic databases (MEDLINE, Embase, CENTRAL, CINAHL, PsycINFO and LILACS) and clinical trial registries. Our primary outcomes will be patient-reported pain ratings and treatment acceptability (all-cause discontinuation), and secondary outcomes will be functional ability, quality of life and patient/physician ratings of overall improvement. A hierarchical Bayesian class-based NMA will be performed to determine the relative effects of different classes of pharmacological (NSAIDs, opioids, paracetamol, anti-depressants, muscle relaxants) and non-pharmacological (exercise, patient education, manual therapies, psychological therapy, multidisciplinary approaches, massage, acupuncture, mindfulness) interventions and individual treatments within a class (e.g. NSAIDs: diclofenac, ibuprofen, naproxen). We will conduct risk of bias assessments and threshold analysis to assess the robustness of the findings to potential bias. We will compute the effect of different interventions relative to placebo/no treatment for both short- and long-term efficacy and acceptability.DiscussionWhile many factors are important in selecting an appropriate intervention for an individual patient, evidence for the analgesic effects and acceptability of a treatment are key factors in guiding this selection. Thus, this NMA will provide an important source of evidence to inform treatment decisions and future clinical guidelines.Systematic review registrationPROSPERO registry number: CRD42019138115

Teaching Chronic Pain in the Family Medicine Clerkship: Changes From 2014.

The management of chronic pain is an important topic for training competent family physicians. The purpose of this study was to determine factors in teaching about chronic pain and whether state overdose death rates were associated with teaching chronic pain topics. Data were collected as part of the 2019 Council of Academic Family Medicine Educational Research Alliance (CERA) Clerkship Directors' Survey. The response rate was 71%. Respondents answered questions about the amount of time spent teaching about chronic pain diagnoses, approach to chronic pain, opioid medications, nonopioid medications and nonpharmacologic treatments for chronic pain. The most frequent topic was chronic pain diagnoses, taught by 64% of clerkships with an average of 92 minutes spent on the topic. Each chronic pain topic was taught by nearly 50% of clerkships, and 72.3% of clerkships taught at least one topic. More clerkships were teaching about opioids, nonopioids, and nonpharmacological treatments for chronic pain than in 2014. Time currently spent teaching about opioids was positively correlated with clerkships' state 2014 drug overdose death rate. The majority of family medicine clerkships teach about chronic pain, and the amount of time dedicated to this topic has increased over the last 5 years. A state's opioid overdose rate correlates with the amount of time spent teaching about opioids, but does not correlate with the amount of time teaching about other chronic pain subtopics. It is possible that the opioid crisis is causing a shift in the subtopics of chronic pain teaching.

Improving care of chronic pain patients with spinal cord stimulator therapy amidst the opioid epidemic.

The US government and other key stakeholders including professional medical bodies have amended recommendations in recent years to emphasize using no opioids or the lowest effective dose of opioids needed for treatment of chronic pain. However, there remains an unmet need for pain treatments that can both relieve the pain of patients and reduce the doses of opioids they require. The Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) is currently considering such treatments through the SUPPORT ACT and has recently conferred with the Health and Human Services (HHS) Inter-agency Pain Management Task Force to consider such therapies. We reviewed literature evidence in PubMed on pain relief and opioid reduction following spinal cord stimulation (SCS) treatment. SCS presents an effective non-pharmacologic pain treatment modality that has been used for decades to reduce chronic pain from trauma or neuropathy and has been shown to either stabilize or reduce opioid use in some patients with painful conditions. A more recently developed high-frequency SCS modality, 10kHz SCS, has the advantage of being paresthesia-independent. It has been shown to be associated with significant reductions in opioid consumption after stimulation therapy was initiated, and many patients even taking high doses of opioids (> 90mg morphine equivalent dose per day) were able to reduce their opioid intake to levels associated with less risk. The evidence shows that reduction of opioids as early in the treatment process as possible is desirable to reduce patient risk and improve pain relief from stimulation therapy.

Reducing the Use of Opioids in the Peripartum Period—A Quality Improvement Initiative [34E

INTRODUCTION: The aim of this quality improvement initiative was to reduce the use of oral opioids in the inpatient postpartum period. METHODS: A systematic approach to pain management during the postpartum hospitalization was employed. A step-wise approach was implemented that included non-pharmacologic interventions, scheduled non-opioid pain medications, and oral opioids for breakthrough pain. Outcomes for the first 8 months were compared to baseline data from all patients delivered in 2017. RESULTS: In the vaginal delivery group 2889 patients were evaluated. The average number of opioid tablets taken was 0.53 per patient compared to 1.64 per patient in the baseline group, a 68% reduction. The average number of patients who received any opioid during their postpartum hospitalization was 12.4% compared to 33.6% in the baseline group, a 63% reduction. In the Cesarean section group 1162 patients were evaluated. The average number of opioid tablets taken was 6.5 per patient compared to 10.2 per patient in the baseline group, a 36% reduction. The average number of patients who received any opioid during their postpartum hospitalization was 78.4% compared to 95.3% in the baseline group, an 18% reduction. CONCLUSION: This quality improvement project evaluated a systematic approach to pain management in the postpartum period that includes a scheduled non-opioid pharmacologic, non-pharmacologic pain interventions, and oral opioids for breakthrough pain. The results demonstrate a clear reduction in oral opioid pain medication consumption during the postpartum hospitalization.

Lower levels of bodily pain increase risk for non-medical use of prescription drugs among current US reserve soldiers

BackgroundMilitary populations have a higher prevalence of pain compared to their civilian counterparts and are also at increased risk for substance use. The link between clinically significant pain and substance use has been established, but it is unclear if lower levels of pain relate to risk. The goal of this inquiry was to determine if level of bodily pain was associated with increased risk of current substance use over time among a community sample of U.S. Army Reserve/National Guard (USAR/NG) soldiers. MethodsData were drawn from an ongoing study of USAR/NG soldiers. We used generalized estimating equations to examine the longitudinal impact of baseline bodily pain level (modeled in standard deviations from the mean pain score) on current drug use (illicit and non-medical use of prescription drugs [NMUPD]) among soldiers (n = 387) over two-years. Final models controlled for baseline post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), anxiety, and depression symptomatology, history of deployment (yes/no), years of military service, and substance use norms. ResultsBodily pain was longitudinally associated with increased odds of current NMUPD (AOR: 1.49, p < .05), but not with the current use of illicit drugs (AOR: 1.18, p > .05), controlling for symptoms of PTSD, anxiety, depression, deployment, years of service, and substance use norms. ConclusionsOverall, our findings indicate that bodily pain is longitudinally associated with NMUPD among male soldiers, but not with illicit drugs. Significantly, our results stem from a non-clinical sample of soldiers with overall lower levels of pain. This indicates that pain may be important, even at lower levels, and underscores the importance of early non-pharmacologic interventions for pain.

Veterans Team Recovery Integrative Immersion Process (Vet TRIIP): A Qualitative Evaluation of Participation and Impact.

The Veterans Team Recovery Integrative Immersion Process (Vet TRIIP) is a short-term multi-modality complementary, integrative immersion program for veterans with chronic pain, post-traumatic stress, and related symptoms. Geared toward Veterans, active duty servicemembers, family members, and caregivers, Vet TRIIP aims to honor and empower them to create healthy, happy, and productive civilian lives. This study evaluates the program to determine its impact on the quality of life and ways to improve and develop Vet TRIIP. In total, 14 clients participated in the qualitative review of the Vet TRIIP program in San Antonio. The participants were interviewed related to their reason for participating, their most bothersome symptoms and the effects of Vet TRIIP on those symptoms, service provided that is most and least appreciated, suggestions for improvement, and things learned from Vet TRIIP that helped them daily. Responses were analyzed for emerging themes. The main reasons for participating were physiological and psychological needs, social support, and curiosity to address their reported symptoms such as pain, stress/anxiety, and depression. Vet TRIIP reportedly improved their quality of life and decreased stress. The participants liked most the support of the Vet TRIIP staff and the interventions such as reiki and massage. Other participants did not like acupuncture. Participants suggested the addition of professional psychological services could be helpful. They reported that emotional freedom technique (EFT/tapping) and guided breathing were most useful in their daily lives. Each participant reported that Vet TRIIP was a positive experience that helped with their pain, anxiety, and stress management, providing an improvement in their quality of life. It also imparted an eye-opening experience to nontraditional non-pharmacological interventions for pain, anxiety, and stress. Evaluative studies on organizations that support Veterans are useful to gauge the effectiveness and impact. Through this study, Veterans expressed perceived strengths and weaknesses of the program so further development and appropriate services will be provided. Similar studies on the impact of non-profit organizations are encouraged. Vet TRIIP significantly impacts the lives of many through stress and pain reduction, potentially preventing suicide.

Pain interventions in adults with intellectual disability: A scoping review and pharmacological considerations.

Having to deal on a daily routine with prescriptions in adults with intellectual disability (ID), we systematically reviewed the literature on the specificities of pain interventions in that population, focusing on medication and trying to gather practical information on appropriate pain treatments. Given the scarcity of the literature on the topic, we also discussed the pharmacological considerations to be taken into account when prescribing analgesic drugs in that vulnerable population. Articles on pain and ID were searched in the Medline and Google scholar electronic databases using the key words "Intellectual Disability," "Developmental Disability" and specific keywords for pharmacological and non-pharmacological pain interventions. Preset outcomes about pharmacological treatment specificity, efficacy and safety were then collected. One hundred and fifty-two articles were found and 16 were retained based on our inclusion and exclusion criteria. Of the 16 articles, five were topical reviews. Among the 11 remaining articles, five discussed pharmacological interventions, four considered non-pharmacological interventions and two discussed both. As anticipated, the literature matching our specific outcomes about the pharmacological treatment of pain was scarce and for the most part not designed to answer the questions of specificity, efficacy and safety of pain treatment in adults with ID. The specificity of analgesic treatments in adults with ID is a totally unexplored domain. In the absence of clinical guidelines, pharmacological facts-such as inter-individual variability in drug response, pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic interactions, frequent co-morbidities and ease of administration-must be systematically integrated, when prescribing in the population of adults with ID. This review synthesizes the state of research on pain interventions in adults with ID and is one of the rare articles addressing the specificities of analgesic prescriptions in this population.

The protocol for a multisite, double blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial of axillary nerve stimulation for chronic shoulder pain

BackgroundShoulder impingement syndrome is one of the most common causes of shoulder pain, accounting for approximately 30% of all shoulder pain. Approximately 35% of patients with shoulder impingement syndrome are refractory to conservative treatment. For patients who fail conservative treatment, there is no established treatment to successfully treat their chronic pain. Prior randomized control trials have demonstrated efficacy for the use of a single lead intramuscular peripheral nerve stimulation of the axillary nerve at the motor points of the deltoid muscle for treatment of hemiplegic shoulder pain. This is the first controlled trial to utilize the same novel technology to treat shoulder impingement syndrome outside of the stroke population.MethodsThis is a dual-site, placebo-controlled, double-blinded, randomized control trial. Participants will be randomized to two treatment groups. The intervention group will be treated with active peripheral nerve stimulation of the axillary nerve of the affected shoulder and the control group will be treated with sham peripheral nerve stimulation of the axillary nerve of the affected shoulder. Both groups will receive a standardized exercise therapy program directed by a licensed therapist.DiscussionThis study protocol will allow the investigators to determine if this novel, non-pharmacologic treatment of shoulder pain can demonstrate the same benefit in musculoskeletal patients which has been previously demonstrated in the stroke population.Trial registrationClinicaltrials.gov, NCT03752619. Registered on 26 November 2018.

The Association Between the Supply of Nonpharmacologic Providers, Use of Nonpharmacologic Pain Treatments, and High-risk Opioid Prescription Patterns Among Medicare Beneficiaries With Persistent Musculoskeletal Pain.

Opioids are prescribed more frequently than nonpharmacologic treatments for persistent musculoskeletal pain (MSP). We estimate the association between the supply of physical therapy (PT) and mental health (MH) providers and early nonpharmacologic service use with high-risk opioid prescriptions among Medicare beneficiaries with persistent MSP. We retrospectively studied Medicare beneficiaries (>65 y) enrolled in Fee-for-Service and Part D (2007-2014) with a new persistent MSP episode and no opioid prescription during the prior 6 months. Independent variables were nonpharmacologic provider supply per capita and early nonpharmacologic service use (any use during first 3 mo). One year outcomes were long-term opioid use (LTOU) (≥90 days' supply) and high daily dose (HDD) (≥50 mg morphine equivalent). We used multinomial regression and generalized estimating equations and present adjusted odds ratios (aORs). About 2.4% of beneficiaries had LTOU; 11.9% had HDD. The supply of MH providers was not associated with LTOU and HDD. Each additional PT/10,000 people/county was associated with greater odds of LTOU [aOR: 1.06; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.01-1.11). Early MH use was associated with lower odds of a low-risk opioid use (aOR: 0.81; 95% CI, 0.68-0.96), but greater odds of LTOU (aOR: 1.93; 95% CI, 1.28-2.90). Among beneficiaries with an opioid prescription, early PT was associated with lower odds of LTOU (aOR: 0.75; 95% CI, 0.64-0.89), but greater odds of HDD (aOR: 1.25; 95% CI, 1.15-1.36). The benefits of nonpharmacologic services on opioid use may be limited. Research on effective delivery of nonpharmacologic services to reduce high-risk opioid use for older adults with MSP is needed.

Non pharmacologic interventions for pain associated to venipuncture in children: a literature review

Venipuncture is one of the most common painful procedures performed on children. Pain prevention and control are essential in childhood, because the earlier is the nociceptive experience, the more it affects the response to subsequent painful events. To analyse the literature on non-pharmacological methods of pain management in children undergoing venipuncture. The review was carried out between May and July 2019 by consulting the PubMed and Cochrane Database, combining Mesh terms and free text. The references reported in the articles found in the first part of the research were also analyzed, to identify further relevant studies. A total of 20 articles were included in this review (8 randomized clinical trials, 10 systematic reviews, 1 meta-analysis and 1 pilot study), on a total population of almost 20,086 children aged 1-18 years. The settings considered by the studies were pediatric wards, pediatric outpatient, and Emergency Department. Non-pharmacological interventions can be classified in 4 categories: supportive or environmental therapies; physical therapies; cognitive-behavioral therapies; and non-nutritive suction for newborns and infants. The strength of evidence ranged from high to low or extremely low. Most non-pharmacological methods are simple, cheap, easily acquired, and do not need excessive application time. They allow pain control and support the comfort and cooperation of children undergoing venipuncture, alone or combined to pharmacological treatment.