Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 4 de 4
Filter
Add more filters










Database
Language
Publication year range
1.
Digit Health ; 6: 2055207620962297, 2020.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33117557

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: Mobile health platforms have become an important component of pain self-management programs and hundreds of mobile applications are commercially available for patients to monitor pain. However, few of these applications have been developed in collaboration with healthcare professionals or have been critically evaluated. Manage My Pain is a user-driven mobile health platform developed by ManagingLife in collaboration with clinician researchers. Manage My Pain allows patients to keep a "pain record" and supports communication of this information with clinicians. The current report describes a user engagement study of Manage My Pain among patients at the Transitional Pain Service (TPS) at Toronto General Hospital, a multidisciplinary clinic for patients at high risk of developing postsurgical pain. METHODS: Patients at the TPS were encouraged to register on Manage My Pain as one component of a larger, non-randomized prospective study of treatment predictors and treatment enhancement. Uptake of the application and rates of registration, use, and retention were tracked for 90 days. RESULTS: Of the 196 patients who consented to the larger study, 132 (67%) also provided consent to the Manage My Pain component, indicating that they found this to be an acceptable treatment adjunct, and 119 (61%) completed registration. Of those who used the app, 67.9% and 43.2% continued to use Manage My Pain beyond 30 and 90 days, respectively. On average, users engaged with the app for 93.14 days (SD = 151.9 days) logged an average of 47.39 total records (SD = 136.1). CONCLUSIONS: Manage My Pain was found acceptable by a majority of patients at an academic pain management program. Rates of user registration and retention were favorable compared to those reported by other applications. Further research is needed to develop strategies to retain users and maximize patient benefit.

2.
BMJ Open ; 10(7): e036472, 2020 07 19.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32690522

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: At the conception of this study (January 2019), a literature search by the authors found no evidence-based or consensus perioperative guidelines for patients consuming cannabis products, or for those patients in whom a cannabinoid medication could be considered for perioperative treatment. Currently, there is a large global population that consumes cannabis. The availability of cannabis has also increased this decade with greater legal access to cannabis products in some countries such as USA, Canada, Uruguay, Israel, Australia and Germany. There are recognised possible therapeutic benefits for the use of cannabis in patients with chronic pain, chronic neuropathic pain and chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting. There are also potential side effects from cannabis use such as psychosis, cannabis hyperemesis syndrome, misuse disorder and cannabis withdrawal syndrome. There is evidence that cannabis may also affect factors in the perioperative period such as monitoring, quality of analgesia, sleep and opioid consumption. Given the large population of persons using cannabis, the heterogeneity of cannabis products and the paucity (and heterogeneity) of perioperative literature surrounding it, perioperative guidelines for cannabis consuming patients are both lacking and necessary. In this paper, we present the design for a modified Delphi technique that has been started with the intent of deriving cannabis perioperative guidelines from the available medical literature and the consensus of multidisciplinary experts. MATERIALS, METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This study will use a scoping narrative literature review and modified Delphi process to generate cannabis perioperative guidelines. A scoping narrative review of cannabis in the perioperative period by the authors of this proposal was completed and provided to a panel of 17 experts. These experts were recruited for their knowledge and expertise regarding cannabis and/or perioperative medicine. They were asked to rate a series of indications and clinical scenarios in two rounds. During the first round, the expert panel was blinded to each other's participation. During the second round of this process, the expert panel met after being provided with an analysis of the first round's submissions so they could be discussed further and, if possible, reach a further consensus regarding them. Using the results obtained from the Delphi review process, a draft of proposed cannabis perioperative guidelines will be generated. These proposed guidelines will be returned to the expert panel for critiquing prior to their finalisation. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Study and panellist data will be deidentified and stored as per institutional (Toronto General Hospital) guidelines. Institutional research ethics board provided a waiver for this modified Delphi protocol. Findings will be presented and published in peer-reviewed publications and conferences.


Subject(s)
Cannabinoids , Cannabis , Delphi Technique , Humans , Pain, Postoperative/drug therapy , Perioperative Care
3.
Can J Pain ; 4(1): 67-85, 2020 Mar 08.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33987487

ABSTRACT

This Consensus Statement provides recommendations on the prescription of pain medication at discharge from hospital for opioid-naïve adult patients who undergo elective surgery. It encourages health care providers (surgeons, anesthesiologists, nurses/nurse practitioners, pain teams, pharmacists, allied health professionals, and trainees) to (1) use nonopioid therapies and reduce the prescription of opioids so that fewer opioid pills are available for diversion and (2) educate patients and their families/caregivers about pain management options after surgery to optimize quality of care for postoperative pain. These recommendations apply to opioid-naïve adult patients who undergo elective surgery. This consensus statement is intended for use by health care providers involved in the management and care of surgical patients. A modified Delphi process was used to reach consensus on the recommendations. First, the authors conducted a scoping review of the literature to determine current best practices and existing guidelines. From the available literature and expertise of the authors, a draft list of recommendations was created. Second, the authors asked key stakeholders to review and provide feedback on several drafts of the document and attend an in-person consensus meeting. The modified Delphi stakeholder group included surgeons, anesthesiologists, residents, fellows, nurses, pharmacists, and patients. After multiple iterations, the document was deemed complete. The recommendations are not graded because they are mostly based on consensus rather than evidence.


Cette déclaration de consensus fait des recommandations pour la prescription d'analgésiques à la sortie de l'hôpital pour les patients adultes n'ayant jamais pris d'opiacés et qui subissent une intervention chirurgicale non urgente. Elle encourage les prestataires de soins de santé (chirurgiens, anesthésiologistes, infirmières et infirmiers, infirmières et infirmiers praticiens, équipes antidouleur, pharmaciens, professionnels de la santé et stagiaires) à (1) utiliser des traitements non opiacés et à réduire la prescription d'opiacés afin de réduire le nombre de pilules opiacées pouvant être détournées; et (2) à éduquer les patients, ainsi que leurs familles et soignants, sur les options de prise en charge de la douleur après l'opération afin d'optimiser la qualité des soins pour la douleur postopératoire.Ces recommandations s'appliquent aux patients adultes n'ayant jamais pris d'opioïdes et qui subissent une intervention chirurgicale non urgente. Cette déclaration de consensus est destinée à être utilisée par les prestataires de soins de santé impliqués dans la prise en charge des patients opérés et les soins qui leur sont apportés.Un processus Delphi modifié a été utilisé pour parvenir à un consensus sur les recommandations. Tout d'abord, les auteurs ont procédé à une de la portée de la littérature afin de déterminer les pratiques exemplaires actuelles et les lignes directrices existantes. À partir de la littérature disponible et de l'expertise des auteurs, une liste provisoire de recommandations a été créée. Ensuite, les auteurs ont demandé aux principales parties prenantes d'examiner et de commenter plusieurs versions préliminaires du document et d'assister à une réunion de consensus en personne. Le groupe des parties prenantes du processus Delphi modifié comprenait des chirurgiens, des anesthésiologistes, des résidents, des fellows, des infirmières et infirmiers, des pharmaciens et des patients. Après de multiples itérations, le document a été jugé complet. Les recommandations n'ont pas été notées car elles étaient fondées sur un consensus plutôt que sur des données probantes.

4.
Cannabis Cannabinoid Res ; 4(4): 219-230, 2019.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31872058

ABSTRACT

As countries progressively embrace the legalization of both medicinal and recreational cannabis, there remains a significant knowledge gap when it comes to the perioperative uses of cannabis, as well as the management of cannabis users. This review summarizes the information available on the subject based on existing published studies. Articles outlining the physiological changes occurring in the human body during acute and chronic use of cannabis (outside the context of anesthesia) are also taken into consideration as understanding these changes allows a more calculated approach to better anticipate patients' needs in the perioperative setting. Common questions facing the anesthesiologist at each phase of the perioperative period will be addressed and a systematic approach to the effect of cannabinoids on various organ systems will also be presented. Issues unique to cannabis use such as cannabis withdrawal syndrome and alterations in post-operative pain processing will also be discussed. To date, the number of studies available for guidance is small and study designs are markedly heterogenous, if not limited, making conclusions challenging. While the currently available information can assist in making decisions, further studies of larger scale are eagerly anticipated to help guide future patient care.

SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...