World Health Organization Analgesic Ladder Research Articles

Pharmacological pain management in cancer patients

Pharmacological pain therapy in cancer patients is based on guideline recommendations, which, however, do not fully coincide in all aspects due to varying weighting of evidence. The present article discusses current issues including the decreasing significance of the World Health Organization (WHO) analgesic ladder, with its distinction between step2 and3 being increasingly questioned. Risks of nonopioid analgesics such as paracetamol and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), particularly in older populations, are discussed. Paracetamol may potentially reduce the effectiveness of immunotherapies. Aspects of administering analgesics via afeeding tube are considered. Recommendations for the treatment of episodic pain, transitioning between different opioids, and some relevant interactions are also discussed.

Factors Associated With New Analgesic Requirements Following Critical Illness.

Chronic opioid use represents a significant burden to global healthcare with adverse long-term outcomes. Elevated patient reported pain levels and analgesic prescriptions have been reported following discharge from critical care. We describe analgesic requirements following discharge from hospital and identify if a critical care admission is a significant factor for stronger analgesic prescriptions. This retrospective observational cohort study identified patients in the UK Biobank with a registered admission to any UK hospital between January 1, 2010 and December 31, 2015 and information on prescriptions drawn both prior to and following hospital discharge. Two matched cohorts were created from the dataset: critical care patients and hospital patients admitted without a critical care encounter. Outcomes were analgesic requirements following hospital discharge and factors associated with increased analgesic prescriptions. Multivariable logistic regression was used to identify factors associated with prescriptions from higher steps on the World Health Organization (WHO) analgesic ladder. In total, 660 formed the total study population. Strong opioid prescriptions following discharge were significantly higher in the critical care cohort (P value <.001). Critical care admission (OR = 1.45) and increasing Townsend deprivation (OR = 1.04) index were significantly associated with increasing strength of analgesic prescriptions following discharge. Critical care patients require stronger analgesic prescriptions in the 12 months following hospital discharge. Patients from areas of high socioeconomic deprivation may also be associated with increased analgesic requirements. Multidisciplinary support is required for patients who may be at risk of chronic opioid use and could be delivered within critical care recovery programs.

Pain Self-Management with Inhaled Methoxyflurane by Emergency Department Trauma Patients: A Prospective, Interventional, Single-Center Study.

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has led to overcrowding in many emergency departments (EDs). The present single-center, prospective, interventional study (conducted at Bichat University Medical Center (Paris, France)) was designed to assess the impact of self-administered, inhaled, low-dose methoxyflurane on trauma pain in a pre-ED fast-track zone dedicated to the management of lower-acuity non-COVID-19 patients. In the first phase of the study, the control group consisted of patients with mild-to-moderate trauma pain, for whom the triage nurse initiated pain management (based on the World Health Organization (WHO)'s analgesic ladder). In the second phase, the intervention group consisted of similar patients who self-administered methoxyflurane as an adjuvant to the standard analgesic ladder. The primary endpoint was the numerical pain rating scale (NPRS) score (from 0 to 10) recorded at different time points during the patient's care (T0: arrival in the ED, T1: exit from the triage box, T2: in the radiology department, T3: clinical examination, and T4: discharge from the ED). The level of agreement between the NPRS and the WHO analgesic ladder was assessed by the calculation of Cohen's kappa. Pairwise comparisons of continuous variables were performed with Student's t-test or a non-parametric Mann-Whitney U test. Changes over time in the NPRS were analyzed in an analysis of variance (with Scheffe's post hoc test if a pairwise comparison was significant) or a non-parametric Kruskal-Wallis H test. In all, 268 and 252 patients were included in the control and intervention groups, respectively. The two groups had similar characteristics. The level of agreement between the NPRS score and the analgesic ladder was high in both the control and intervention groups (Cohen's kappa: 0.74 and 0.70, respectively). The NPRS score decreased significantly between T0 and T4 in both groups (p < 0.001), but the decrease between T2 and T4 was significantly greater in the intervention group (p < 0.001). The proportion of patients still in pain on discharge was significantly lower in the intervention group than in the control group (p = 0.001). In conclusion, a combination of self-administered methoxyflurane and the WHO analgesic ladder improves pain management in the ED.

On-Site Therapeutic Drug Monitoring of Paracetamol Analgesic in Non-Invasively Collected Saliva for Personalized Medicine.

Paracetamol or acetaminophen is the main non-opioid analgesic recommended for mild pain by the World Health Organization (WHO) analgesic ladder. However, the high levels used of paracetamol are associated with the hepatotoxicity and nephrotoxicity caused by accumulation of toxic metabolites. The sensor is produced on a polyester substrate containing a full electrochemical device with working, auxiliary, and reference electrodes in which, guiding personalized medicine solutions are not reported. Temporal paracetamol profiles in human saliva are performed with the subject taking different amounts of commercial analgesic pills. The variation of saliva paracetamol levels is demonstrated to be interference free from electroactive interfering species and human saliva constituents. In addition, the sensor displays to be useful as a disposable device for the fast detection of paracetamol in untreated raw saliva following pill intake. The maximum concentration (Cmax ) and half-life time (t1/2 ) for paracetamol are 143.27µm and 110min. The results demonstrate the potential of a simple strategy with electrochemical devices for noninvasive personalized therapy toward guiding drug interventions through tracking of active substance, detecting, and correcting insufficiency of absorption to meet individual needs avoiding overdoses, side effects, and intoxication.

Farmakoterapija kancerskog bola opioidnim analgeticima

Introduction: Selection of analgesics should be based on the World Health Organization (WHO) analgesic ladder, beginning with non-opioid analgesics in combination with adjuvants for mild pain, weak opioids with adjuvants are indicated for moderate pain, while potent opioids, non-opioids and adjuvants are recommended for severe pain. Methods: The facts presented in this paper are expanded by searching for recent literature data in the following index-data-bases: SCI index, PubMed, Google Scholar, Scopus, and by using adequate key words. The idea supporting this paper was to make practice easier for clinicians who are engaged in supportive oncology and to help in adequate and up-to-date malignant pain management in oncology patients in everyday practice. Topic: Initial opioid dose should be low, and long-acting opioid dose should be gradually increased and titrated considering daily requirements of short-acting opioid formulation due to pain breakthrough. It is mandatory for patients on long-acting opioid treatment to be provided with fast-acting medication for breakthrough pain treatment. The following long-acting strong opioids formulations are available in Serbia - oxycodone, oxycodone/ naloxone fixed combination, hydromorphone, tapentadol, fentanyl. A patient and his/her family should be warned about possible side effects of opioids, primarily morphine. There is great fear of prescribing opioid analgesics due to their possible side-effect of tory depression. Opiophobia is defined as exaggerated concern about the consequences of medical use of opioids. The risk of opioids is estimated to overweight the benefits of the treatment, resulting in the fact that they are not used where indicated. Avoiding opioid prescriptions is one of the biggest barriers for successful treatment of cancer pain. Conclusion: Oncology patients with moderate and severe pain have a constitutional right not to tolerate pain and they have a right to strong opioid treatment. Implementation of analgesic elevator is recommended. There should not be any fear of addiction or other side-effects that can be controlled, and the benefits greatly outweigh the risks of possible side-effects in these patients. Cancer pain management should be an equally important element of overall cancer treatment. Only by multimodal and multidisciplinary treatment approach satisfactory analgesic effects may be achieved while minimizing adverse side-effects.

An international, open-label, randomised trial comparing a two-step approach versus the standard three-step approach of the WHO analgesic ladder in patients with cancer

Worldwide, cancer pain management follows the World Health Organization (WHO) three-step analgesic ladder. Using weak opioids (e.g. codeine) at step 2 is debatable with low-dose strong opioids being potentially better, particularly in low- and middle-income countries where weak opioids are expensive. We wanted to assess the efficiency, safety and cost of omitting step 2 of the WHO ladder. We carried out an international, open-label, randomised (1 : 1) parallel group trial. Eligible patients had cancer, pain ≥4/10 on a 0-10 numerical rating scale, required at least step 1 (paracetamol) of the WHO ladder and were randomised to the control arm (weak opioid, step 2 of the WHO ladder) or the experimental arm (strong opioid, step 3). Primary outcome was time to stable pain control (3 consecutive days with pain ≤3). Secondary outcomes included distress, opioid-related side-effects and costs. The primary outcome analysis was by intention to treat and the follow-up was for 20 days. One hundred and fifty-three patients were randomised (76 control, 77 experimental). There was no statistically significant difference in time to stable pain control between the arms, P= 0.667 (log-rank test). The adjusted hazard ratio for the control arm was 1.03 (95% confidence interval 0.72-1.49). In the control arm, 38 patients (53%) needed to change to a strong opioid due to ineffective analgesia. The median time to change was day 6 (interquartile range 4-11). Compared to the control arm, patients in the experimental arm had less nausea (P= 0.009) and costs were less. This trial provides some evidence that the two-step approach is an alternative option for cancer pain management.

Epidemiology and routine care treatment of patients with hip or knee osteoarthritis and chronic lower back pain: real-world evidence from Germany

AimMusculoskeletal disorders are a major public health problem in most developed countries. As a main cause of chronic pain, they have resulted in an increasing prescription of opioids worldwide. With regard to the situation in Germany, this study aimed at estimating the prevalence of musculoskeletal diseases such as chronic low back pain (CLBP) and hip/knee osteoarthritis (OA) and at depicting the applied treatment patterns.Subject and methodsGerman claims data from the InGef Research Database were analyzed over a 6-year period (2011–2016). The dataset contains over 4 million people, enrolled in German statutory health insurances. Inpatient and outpatient diagnoses were considered for case identification of hip/knee OA and CLBP. The World Health Organization (WHO) analgesic ladder was applied to categorize patients according to their pain management interventions. Information on demographics, comorbidities, and adjuvant medication was collected.ResultsIn 2016, n = 2,693,481 individuals (50.5% female, 49.5% male) were assigned to the study population; 62.5% of them were aged 18–60 years. In 2016, n = 146,443 patients (5.4%) with CLBP and n = 307,256 patients (11.4%) with hip/knee OA were identified. Of those with pre-specified pain management interventions (CLBP: 66.3%; hip/knee OA: 65.1%), most patients received WHO I class drugs (CLBP: 73.6%; hip/knee OA: 68.7%) as the highest level.ConclusionThis study provides indications that CLBP and hip/knee OA are common chronic pain conditions in Germany, which are often subjected to pharmacological pain management. Compared to non-opioid analgesic prescriptions of the WHO I class, the dispensation of WHO class II and III opioids was markedly lower, though present to a considerable extent.

Topikalni preparati u lečenju mišićno-skeletnog bola

Musculoskeletal pain is a global health and socioeconomic problem. Chronic musculoskeletal pain (MSC) is a pain that lasts for at least 3 months, becomes a disease itself. Given the constant increase in the frequency of musculoskeletal pain, it is necessary to work on improving prevention, early diagnosis and therapy, in order to improve outcomes and reduce treatment costs. Causes of MSC pain can be degenerative and / or inflammatory changes of joint and extra-articular structures, as well as dynamic vertebral segment. The use of symptomatic therapy for pain and swelling must be based on adequate patient selection, selection of the painful condition, with a balance between the risks of use and benefits. The stepwise approach of the WHO (World Health Organization) analgesic ladder represents an escalation strategy from weak to strong analgesics in pain therapy. Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs are used in the treatment of mild to moderate acute and chronic musculoskeletal pain with an inflammatory component. The choice of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs in the treatment of pain is useful as monotherapy and as a component of multimodal analgesic therapy. The average prescribed daily dose, as well as the length of drug use in the treatment of musculoskeletal pain must be in accordance with the guidelines. Topical application of NSAID-s is the therapy of choice within the pharmacological approach in elderly patients, with acute and chronic musculoskeletal pain in accordance with modern guidelines.

Bone Metastases: State of the Art in Minimally Invasive Interventional Oncology.

Bone is the third most common site involved by cancer metastases, and skeleton-related events such as intractable pain due to direct osseous tumor involvement, pathologic fracture, and neurologic deficits as a consequence of nerve or spinal cord compression often affect patients' functional independence and quality of life unfavorably. The annual medical-economic burden related to bone metastases is a substantial component of the total direct medical cost estimated by the National Institutes of Health. There have been substantial recent advances in percutaneous image-guided minimally invasive musculoskeletal oncologic interventions for the management of patients with osseous metastatic disease. These advances include thermal ablation, cementation with or without osseous reinforcement with implants, osteosynthesis, thermal and chemical neurolyses, and palliative injections, which are progressively incorporated into the management paradigm for such patients. These interventions are performed in conjunction with or are supplemented by adjuvant radiation therapy, systemic therapy, surgery, or analgesic agents to achieve durable pain palliation, local tumor control, or cure, and they provide a robust armamentarium for interventional radiologists to achieve safe and effective treatment in a multidisciplinary setting. In addition, these procedures are shifting the patient management paradigm in modern-era practice. The authors detail the state of the art in minimally invasive percutaneous image-guided musculoskeletal oncologic interventions and the role of radiologists in managing patients with skeletal metastases. ©RSNA, 2021.

Pain and palliative care treatment in daily practice

In addition to other distressing symptoms, palliative patients often suffer from very severe pain. For this reason, a precise pain diagnosis is necessary in order to be able to initiate the necessary therapeutic measures. Pain therapy includes the medications specified in the World Health Organization (WHO) analgesic ladder as well as various supportive measures.

Independent Research on Cancer Pain Management in the Setting of Early Palliative Care: A Flywheel to Counteract General Opioid Misuse and Abuse.

The increased recognition of the high prevalence and important burden of cancer pain and the documentation of a large proportion of patients receiving inadequate analgesic treatment should have reinforced the need for evidence-based recommendations. The World health Organization (WHO) guidelines on cancer pain management—or palliative care—are traditionally based on a sequential, three-step, analgesic ladder according to pain intensity: nonopioids (paracetamol or nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs) to mild pain in step I; weak opioids (eg, codeine or tramadol) to mild-moderate pain in step II; and strong opioids to moderate-severe pain in step. III. Despite the widespread use of this ladder, unrelieved pain continues to be a substantial concern in one third of patients with either solid or hematologic malignancies. The sequential WHO analgesic ladder, and in particular, the usefulness of step II opioids have been questioned but there are no universally used guidelines for the treatment of pain in patients with advanced cancer and not all guideline recommendations are evidence-based. The American Society of Clinical Oncology and the European Society of Medical Oncology have recommended the implementation of early palliative care (EPC), which is a novel model of care, consisting of delivering dedicated palliative service concurrent with active treatment as early as possible in the cancer disease trajectory. Improvement in cancer pain management is one of the several important positive effects following EPC interventions. Independent well-designed research studies on pharmacological interventions on cancer pain, especially in the EPC setting are warranted and may contribute to spur research initiatives to investigate the poorly addressed issues of pain management in non cancer patients.

Revisiting the WHO Analgesic Ladder for Surgical Management of Pain.

The opioid epidemic challenges current attitudes toward pain management and necessitates the reexamination of the World Health Organization (WHO) 3-step analgesic ladder, introduced in 1986 for cancer pain management. Surgical treatment of pain is a logical extension of the original guideline, which is often absent in conversations with patients about treatment options for their pain and consequentially underutilized. However, with concerns growing regarding opioid use, a shift in the stepwise approach of the WHO analgesic ladder in an age of developing technology and surgical offerings could have profound implications for patients and public health. Surgical interventions potentially provide a long-term, cost-effective management strategy to reduce opioid use. This review canvasses surgical options, highlights literature on failed back surgery syndrome and spinal cord stimulation and reconsiders the current ladder approach to pain management.

Schmerztherapie bei Sichelzellkrankheit

Sickle cell disease is associated with numerous symptoms and complications. Acute painful crisis is the most characteristic manifestation of the disease. In addition, many patients report chronic pain. As both acute and chronic pain severely diminish quality of life, adequate pain management is crucial. Recommendations for the treatment of acute painful crises are based on the World Health Organization analgesic ladder, which has been developed for cancer-related pain. Chronic pain can be treated with basic long-acting opioids and on-demand short-acting opioids. If patients show signs of neuropathic pain, administration of anticonvulsants, antidepressants or possibly ketamine should be considered.

Efficacy of the World Health Organization analgesic ladder in the paclitaxel-induced pain syndrome in rats.

Paclitaxel use in cancer treatment is limited by a painful syndrome that has no effective treatment. Despite new therapies, drugs of the World Health Organization (WHO) analgesic ladder remain a useful therapeutic tool for cancer pain relief. Since cancer pain is caused by both tumor and chemotherapy, we assessed the efficacy of drugs from the WHO analgesic ladder for cancer pain relief in a paclitaxel-induced pain syndrome (P-IPS) model. P-IPS was induced in rats by one or four injections of paclitaxel on alternate days. The acute and chronic phases were assessed 24h and 15days after the first paclitaxelinjection, respectively. The mechanical allodynia was evaluated after (step 1 of the ladder) paracetamol, (step 2) codeine alone or plus paracetamol and (step 3) morphine treatment in the acute or chronic phase of P-IPS. Paracetamol, codeine and morphine were equally efficacious in reducing the acute phase of the P-IPS. Codeine plus paracetamol had similar efficacy and potency when administered together in the acute phase of the P-IPS, but produced a longer-lasting effect than when separately managed. Moreover, paracetamol, codeine and morphine partially reduced the chronic phase of P-IPS, losing their efficacy and, in the case of codeine, potency when compared to the acute phase. However, paracetamol plus codeine increased the potency and efficacy of the codeine when compared to codeine administered alone in the chronic phase of P-IPS, producing a long-lasting anti-allodynic effect. Together, analgesics of WHO analgesic ladder reduce both acute and chronic phases of P-IPS, with codeine plus paracetamol presenting more potent, efficacious and long-lasting effect. Thus, in addition to tumor pain, drugs of WHO analgesics ladder could also be useful to treat P-IPS.

Evaluation of Pain Management after Surgery: An Observational Study.

Background and Objectives: Choosing a pain management strategy is essential for improving recovery after surgery. Effective pain management reduces the stress response, facilitates mobilization, and improves the quality of the postoperative period. The aim of the study was to assess the effectiveness of pain management in patients after surgery. Materials and Methods: The study included 216 patients operated on in the following surgical wards: the Department of Cardiosurgery and the Department of General and Endocrine Surgery. Patients were hospitalized on average for 6 ± 4.5 days. Patients were randomly selected for the study using a questionnaire technique with a numerical rating scale. Results: Immediately after surgery, pre-emptive analgesia, multimodal analgesia, and analgosedation were used significantly more frequently than other methods (p < 0.001). In the subsequent postoperative days, the method of administering drugs on demand was used most often. Patients with confirmed complications during postoperative wound healing required significantly more frequent use of drugs from Steps 2 and 3 of the World Health Organization (WHO) analgesic ladder compared with patients without complications. Conclusion: The mode of patient admission for surgery significantly affected the level of pain perception. Different pain management methods were used and not every method was effective.

The Modified WHO Analgesic Ladder: Is It Appropriate for Chronic Non-Cancer Pain?

IntroductionFrom 1986, the World Health Organization (WHO) analgesic ladder has been used as the simple and valuable pain-relieving guidance in the pharmaceutical pain management, however, with the development of medical history, notions about pain physiology and pain management have already updated. Is the analgesic ladder still appropriate for chronic non-cancer pain (CNCP) patients? This study aims to analyse the current usage of the analgesic ladder in patients with CNCP by evaluating previously published pertinent studies.MethodsLiterature published in English from January 1980 to April 2019 and cited on PubMed database was included. Analysis on the analgesic ladder, current status of CNCP management, and a new revised ladder model were developed based on relevant literature.ResultsThe WHO analgesic ladder for cancer pain is not appropriate for current CNCP management. It is revised into a four-step ladder: the integrative therapies being adopted at each step for reducing or even stopping the use of opioid analgesics; interventional therapies being considered as step 3 before upgrading to strong opioids if non-opioids and weak opioids failed in CNCP management.DiscussionA simple and valuable guideline in past years, the WHO analgesic ladder is inappropriate for the current use of CNCP control. A revised four-step analgesic ladder aligned with integrative medicine principles and minimally invasive interventions is recommended for control of CNCP.

Comparison of the effectiveness of oral morphine versus oral tramadol on early pain control in opioid-naive patients with moderate cancer pain.

11581 Background: Adequate pain control, an essential part of cancer care remains a challenge in resource limited countries like Nepal. Early use of morphine for Moderate Cancer Pain (MCP) and not sequential World Health Organization (WHO) analgesic ladder seems reasonable in the setting of limited access to health care. The purpose of this study was to compare efficacy of oral Morphine (MOR) with oral Tramadol (TRM) in control of pain as well as physical wellbeing in patients (pts) with MCP using Edmonton Symptom Assessment Scale (ESAS). Methods: An IRB approved randomized phase II trial was performed in opioid-naive pts with MCP as defined by pain score in Numerical rating score (NRS)of 4-6.Patients were randomized to receive MOR syrup 5 mg 4 hourly or TRM 50 mg four times a day. Titration of dose was done in both groups for 3 days as per standard recommendation for MOR or till maximum recommended daily dose for TRM. MOR was changed to prolonged release form at Day 4.The primary endpoint was number of early responders, defined as pts with at least 20% reduction in pain intensity on NRS on Day 3. Secondary outcome was number of patients with highly meaningful pain reduction, defined as decrease in pain intensity on NRS by ≥ 5 and improvement in physical well-being with ESAS at Day 7. Results: 68 pts consented and were randomized, 34 in each arm. The primary endpoint occurred in 94.1% pts in MOR and 55.9% in TRM (p &lt;0.001). Number of patients with highly meaningful pain reduction was significantly higher in MOR than in TRM (76.5% vs. 32.35%; p&lt;0.001). Improvement in general physical wellbeing as assessed by ESAS was better in morphine group. No difference in adverse effects was noted between the treatment arms. Conclusions: In this study Morphine was superior to Tramadol in the control of pain with statistically significant difference in the primary and secondary endpoints. So, early use of morphine skipping the WHO sequential analgesic ladder for moderate cancer pain seems a higher value option in resource scarce country with limited access to healthcare.

Clinical Audit Project Report —Audit of the Palliative Care Practitioners’ Adherence to WHO Guidelines in Managing Patients’ Pain at Cancer Diseases Hospital, Lusaka, Zambia

Appropriate adherence to World Health Organisation (WHO) pain management guidelines is vital in palliative care centres as it promotes the comfort of patients who are experiencing pain and it improves their quality of life. WHO (1996) highlighted the use of the WHO analgesic ladder guideline. This “analgesic ladder” proposes that after proper assessment with an appropriate pain assessment tool, patients in mild pain should be given non-opioids plus or minus adjuvants (including anticonvulsants and steroids); patients in moderate pain should be given weak opioids plus or minus non-opioids plus or minus adjuvants; and patients in severe pain should be given strong opioids plus or minus non-opioids plus or minus adjuvants as per the WHO pain ladder. The audit project was focused on assessing the palliative care practitioners’ (PCPs) adherence to WHO guidelines in managing their patients’ pain at Cancer Diseases Hospital (CDH). 15 participants were involved in the study and the data collection method used was a cross-sectional study in which the auditor observed PCPs, with an observation checklist comparing practice with WHO analgesic ladder guidelines. The result revealed that most of the PCPs were not meeting 80% of the standard set in the specific objectives for the audit. 7 (47%) PCPs were scoring the pain level before analgesia administration, whereas 8 (53%) PCPs were not scoring the pain level before analgesia administration. On the other hand, 47% (7 PCPs) were adhering to the WHO ladder of pain management, but 53% (8 PCPs) were not adhering to the WHO ladder of pain management. Therefore, effective adherence to the WHO analgesic ladder practice is still lacking in the PCPs at CDH. The percentage of PCPs who were not scoring the pain and not adhering to the WHO pain ladder guidelines was high, which is 8 (53%). Therefore, a re-audit is recommended to find out if levels of adherence have improved or not.

Benefits of pre-emptive analgesia by local infiltration at day-case general anaesthetic open inguinal hernioplasty.

Introduction The open prosthetic repair of inguinal hernias under local anaesthesia (LA) is well established, with the concept of intraoperative 'pre-emptive analgesia' evolving so that patients are as comfortable as possible. We used a peri-incisional LA solution in patients undergoing day-case inguinal hernioplasty under general anaesthesia (GA) and recorded use of analgesia in the immediate postoperative period. Methods In this observational cohort study, 100 consecutive unselected men underwent open inguinal hernia repair as a day case. Of these, 75 underwent repair under GA and 25 with peri-incisional LA solution (equal mixture of 0.5% bupivacaine and 1% lignocaine with 1:200,000 adrenaline). Analgesia prescribed at induction, for maintenance and after cessation of anaesthesia was scored in accordance with the World Health Organization (WHO) analgesic ladder. Results The median age in the GA group was 59 years (range: 25-89 years) and in the GA+LA group, it was 62 years (range: 27-88 years). Of the 100 patients, 82 underwent a mesh plug repair by seven surgeons whereas 18 underwent a flat (Lichtenstein) mesh repair by two surgeons. WHO analgesic induction and postoperative scores were significantly lower in the GA+LA group (p=0.034 and p<0.001 respectively). There was also a significant difference in use of postoperative antiemetics (23% vs 0% in the GA only and GA+LA cohorts respectively, p=0.020). Six patients (8%) in the GA group failed day-case discharge criteria. Conclusions Patients undergoing contemporary day-case GA inguinal hernioplasty with pre-emptive LA solution infiltration require lower levels of postoperative opioid analgesia and antiemetics. These cases are less likely to fail discharge criteria for planned day surgery.

The Tri-Institutional Pain Registry-Analysis of Outpatient Pain Management at a Specialized Cancer Center.

The Outpatient Pain Clinics at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center participated in developing a pain registry to gain insight on the referral and management of cancer pain as related to demographic information, cancer history, prescription records, and interventional pain procedures stored in the institutional database. Five cohorts (subsets of one another) were defined and compared to describe demographics and differences in management and outcomes by age, race, sex, and cancer type. Clinic patients were compared with the entire institution to determine factors associated with better pain relief and reduced side effects. A small percentage were referred to a pain specialist. A total of 1,043 patients completed 3,544 surveys. Compared with the institution, there were higher proportions of patients age 51 to 60 years, nonwhites, and patients with thoracic, abdominal, and head and neck cancers. Medical management controlled pain with three drug categories in 40% of visits. Short-acting opioids were the only category that statistically provided good pain relief with fewer side effects. Pain scores were improved with increasing opioid dose. Management differed by sex, age, and race; women consistently had lower doses of opioids, poorer pain control, more side effects, and were prescribed a greater variety of medications. A limited set of medications was required to manage most patients in the clinic, supporting the continued place of opioids and the World Health Organization analgesic ladder in managing cancer pain. Women may need a more nuanced approach for obtaining the best balance of pain relief and side effects.