Evaluating Pain Management Practices for Cancer Patients among Health Professionals: A Global Survey.

Background: Cancer incidence in the world is predicted to increase in the next decade. While progress has been in diagnosis and treatment, much still remains to be done to improve cancer pain therapy, mainly in underserved communities in low-income countries. Objective: To determine knowledge, beliefs, and barriers regarding pain management in both high- and low-income countries (according to the WHO classification); and to learn about ways to improve the current state of affairs. Design: Descriptive survey. Setting/Subjects: Fifty-six countries worldwide; convenience sample of 1639 consisted of 36.8% physicians; 45.1% nurses, and 4.5% pharmacists employed in varied settings. Results: Improved pain management services are key elements. Top barriers include religion factors, lack of appropriate education and training at all levels, nonadherence to guidelines, patients' reluctance to report on pains, over regulation associated with prescribing and access to opioid analgesics, fear of addiction to opioids, and lack of discussions around prognosis and treatment planning. Conclusion: The majority of patients with cancer in low-income countries are undertreated for their pain. Promoting cancer pain accredited program of training and education on pain management for physicians and nurses is crucial, as well as advocating policymakers and the public at large.

Optimizing cancer pain management in resource-limited settings.

PURPOSE: Adequate cancer pain management (CPM) is challenging in resource-limited settings, where current international guideline recommendations are difficult to implement owing to constraints such as inadequate availability and accessibility of opioids, limited awareness of appropriate opioid use among patients and clinicians, and lack of guidance on how to translate the best evidence into clinical practice. The multinational and multidisciplinary CAncer Pain managEment in Resource-limited settings (CAPER) Working Group proposes a two-step initiative to bridge clinical practice gaps in CPM in resource-limited settings. METHODS: A thorough review of the literature, a steering committee meeting in February 2017, and post-meeting teleconference discussions contributed to the development of this initiative. As a first step, we developed practical evidence-based CPM algorithms to support healthcare providers (HCPs) in tailoring treatment according to availability of and access to resources. The second part of the initiative proposes a framework to support an effective implementation of the CPM algorithms that includes an educational program, a pilot implementation, and an advocacy plan. RESULTS: We developed CPM algorithms for first-line use, breakthrough cancer pain, opioid rotation, and refractory cancer pain based on the National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines and expert consensus. Our proposed educational program emphasizes the practical elements and illustrates how HCPs can provide optimal CPM according to evidence-based guidelines despite varied resource limitations. Pilot studies are proposed to demonstrate the effectiveness of the algorithms and the educational program, as well as for providing evidence to support a draft advocacy document, to lobby policymakers to improve availability and accessibility of analgesics in resource-limited settings. CONCLUSIONS: These practical evidence-informed algorithms and the implementation framework represent the first multinational step towards achieving optimal CPM in resource-limited settings.

Decisional control preferences among patients with advanced cancer: An international multicenter cross-sectional survey.

BACKGROUND: Understanding patients' decision control preferences is important in providing quality cancer care. Patients' decisional control preference can be either active (patients prefer to make decisions themselves), shared (collaborative between patient, their physician, and/or family), or passive (patients prefer that the decisions are made by either the physician and/or their family). AIM: To determine the frequency and predictors of passive decision control preferences among advanced cancer patients. We also determined the concordance between actual decision-making and decision control preferences and its association with patient satisfaction. DESIGN: In this cross-sectional survey of advanced cancer patients referred to palliative care across 11 countries, we evaluated sociodemographic variables, Control Preference Scale, and satisfaction with the decisions and care. RESULTS: A total of 1490 participants were evaluable. Shared, active, and passive decision control preferences were 33%, 44%, and 23%, respectively. Passive decision control preferences (odds ratio, p value) was more frequent in India (4.34, <0.001), Jordan (3.41, <0.001), and France (3.27, <0.001). Concordance between the actual decision-making and decision control preferences was highest in the United States ( k = 0.74) and lowest in Brazil (0.34). Passive decision control preference was significantly associated with (odds ratio per point, p value) better performance status (0.99/point, 0.017), higher education (0.64, 0.001), and country of origin (Brazil (0.26, <0.0001), Singapore (0.25, 0.0003), South Africa (0.32, 0.0002), and Jordan (2.33, 0.0037)). CONCLUSION: Passive decision control preferences were less common (23%) than shared and active decision control preference even among developing countries. Significant predictors of passive decision control preferences were performance status, education, and country of origin.

Transfusion related acute lung injury (TRALI) in a parturient with disseminated intravascular coagulation

The objective of this case study is to present the anesthetic consideration of a patient with DIC for 'E' hysterotomy and the role of hemotherapy and its possible complications.