Psychiatric polygenic risk scores: Experience, hope for utility, and concerns among child and adolescent psychiatrists.

Recent advances in psychiatric genetics have enabled the use of polygenic risk scores (PRS) to estimate genetic risk for psychiatric disorders. However, the potential use of PRS in child and adolescent psychiatry has raised concerns. This study provides an in-depth examination of attitudes among child and adolescent psychiatrists (CAP) regarding the use of PRS in psychiatry. We conducted semi-structured interviews with U.S.-based CAP (n = 29) who possess expertise in genetics. The majority of CAP indicated that PRS have limited clinical utility in their current form and are not ready for clinical implementation. Most clinicians stated that nothing would motivate them to generate PRS at present; however, some exceptions were noted (e.g., parent/family request). Clinicians spoke to challenges related to ordering, interpreting, and explaining PRS to patients and families. CAP raised concerns regarding the potential for this information to be misinterpreted or misused by patients, families, clinicians, and outside entities such as insurance companies. Finally, some CAP noted that PRS may lead to increased stigmatization of psychiatric disorders, and at the extreme, could be used to support eugenics. As PRS testing increases, it will be critical to examine CAP and other stakeholders' views to ensure responsible implementation of this technology.

Trajectories of pain and depressive symptoms among people living with low back pain during the COVID-19 pandemic: a 24-month longitudinal study.

Introduction: We explored trajectories of pain intensity and depressive symptoms over the first 24 months of the pandemic in people with low back pain. Methods: This longitudinal study was conducted alongside the Quebec Low Back Pain Study. Starting in April 2020 and every 3 months until July 2022, 291 participants completed an online survey. Group-based trajectory modeling was used to identify patterns of pain intensity and depressive symptoms. Onset outbreak characteristics were then put in relation with trajectory groups using multivariate logistic regression. Results: The analysis revealed 5 trajectories of pain intensity and depressive symptoms, respectively. The pain trajectories were stable mild (n = 17, 5.8%); stable moderate (n = 103, 35.4%); stable severe (n = 81, 27.8%); U-shape (n = 24, 8.3%), and inverted U-shape (n = 66, 22.7%). The trajectories of depressive symptoms were stable none (n = 58, 19.9%); stable very mild (n = 61, 21.0%); stable mild (n = 85, 29.2%); stable moderate (n = 59, 21.7%); and severe slightly improving (n = 24, 8.3%). Pre-COVID everyday/nearly everyday pain, average pain intensity, and widespread bodily pain were predictive of pain trajectory groups. Higher pre-COVID depression, acute stress disorder, and lockdown measures-related stress were associated with moderate/severe depressive trajectories. Discussion: Our findings indicated relative stability of pain and depressive symptoms among participants during the COVID-19 pandemic but also highlighted subgroups of people who experienced temporary deterioration or improvement over the first months of the pandemic that then reverted back to baseline levels. Modifiable risk factors were identified before the onset of the pandemic, which could give preventive measures in targeted populations.

Longitudinal multisite study of the chronobiological control of chronic pain: the CircaHealth CircaPain study protocol.

INTRODUCTION: One in five Canadians lives with chronic pain. Evidence shows that some individuals experience pain that fluctuates in intensity following a circadian (24-hour) rhythm. Endogenous molecular rhythms regulate the function of physiological processes that govern pain mechanisms. Addressing chronic pain rhythmicity on a molecular and biopsychosocial level can advance understanding of the disease and identify new treatment/management strategies. Our CircaHealth CircaPain study uses an online survey combined with ecological momentary assessments and biosample collection to investigate the circadian control of chronic pain and identify potential biomarkers. Our primary objective is to understand interindividual variability in pain rhythmicity, by collecting biopsychosocial measures. The secondary objective accounts for seasonal variability and the effect of latitude on rhythmicity. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Following completion of a baseline questionnaire, participants complete a series of electronic symptom-tracking diaries to rate their pain intensity, negative affect, fatigue and stress on a 0-10 scale at 8:00, 14:00 and 20:00 daily over 10 days. These measures are repeated at 6 and 12 months postenrolment to account for potential seasonal changes. We aim to recruit ≥2500 adults with chronic pain within Canada. Infrastructure is being developed to facilitate the collection of blood samples from subgroups of participants (~800) two times per day over 24-48 hours to identify rhythmic expression of circulating genes and/or proteins. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval for this study was obtained by the Queen's University Health Sciences and Affiliated Teaching Hospitals Research Ethics Board (File No. 6038114). Participants provide informed consent to participate, and their data will not be identifiable in any publication or report. Findings will be published in a relevant scientific journal and disseminated at scientific meetings and online webinars. We maintain a website to post updated resources and engage with the community. We employ knowledge mobilisation in the form of direct data sharing with participants.

Prioritizing chronic pain self-management amid coexisting chronic illnesses: An exploratory qualitative study.

Background: In Canada, one out of five people lives with chronic pain, a condition frequently co-occurring with other chronic illnesses. As with most chronic illnesses, successful engagement in symptom management is key. In the context of multiple illnesses, self-management involves daily prioritization of symptoms and conditions and decision-making, which can be challenging. Self-management of chronic illnesses can require more complex competence and tasks to address the different implications of each condition. Objective: Our research objective was to explore types and processes of self-management symptom prioritization among adults living with chronic pain and other chronic illnesses. Design: This research was carried out as part of a larger study that adopted an explanatory sequential mixed-methods design. This study focused more specifically on the qualitative part of the study. Settings: Participants recruited for the qualitative component took part in a semi-structured individual interview online or in-person at the center hospitalier de l'Université de Montréal. Participants: In total, 25 participants were interviewed, including 18 women and 7 men. Methods: To participate in the qualitative part of the study, participants were selected from the larger study and were eligible if they were 18 years old or older and experiencing pain for more than 3 months and had at least one other chronic illness for which they were receiving treatment or engaged in symptom management. Semi-structured interviews were conducted in-person or virtually and were transcribed verbatim. Reflexive thematic analysis was used to explore patients' narratives, and an open and iterative approach was adopted to code interviews and generate themes. Findings: The first theme, focus on symptom prioritization, showed different prioritization processes, including prioritizing a dominant illness, prioritizing multiple illnesses to avoid undesirable consequences, and finally absence of or automatic processes of prioritization. In the second theme, we identified several characteristics of an illness, in this case chronic pain that made it a self-management priority: uncontrollable and disabling nature, omnipresence, unpredictability, unpleasantness, and invisibility to others. In the last theme, we highlighted that some psychosocial factors influenced levels of engagement in self-management and prioritization processes, including social support and the patient-physician relationship. Conclusions: Chronic pain was the medical condition most often prioritized by participants in their self-management tasks. Because of its characteristics, it was the medical condition that had the most negative impact on day-to-day functioning.

Pain relief and associated factors: a cross-sectional observational web-based study in a Quebec cohort of persons living with chronic pain.

Objectives: Randomized clinical trials are used to evaluate the efficacy of various pain treatments individually, while a limited number of observational studies have portrayed the overall relief experienced by persons living with chronic pain. This study aimed to describe pain relief in real-world clinical settings and to identify associated factors. Methods: This exploratory web-based cross-sectional study used data from 1,419 persons recruited in the community. Overall pain relief brought by treatments used by participants was assessed using a 0%-100% scale (10-unit increments). Results: A total of 18.2% of participants reported minimal pain relief (0%-20%), 60.0% moderate to substantial pain relief (30%-60%), and 21.8% extensive pain relief (70%-100%). Multivariable multinomial regression analysis revealed factors significantly associated with greater pain relief, including reporting a stressful event as circumstances surrounding the onset of pain, living with pain for ≥10 years, milder pain intensity, less catastrophic thinking, use of prescribed pain medications, use of nonpharmacological pain treatments, access to a trusted healthcare professional, higher general health scores, and polypharmacy. Factors associated with lower pain relief included surgery as circumstances surrounding pain onset, use of over-the-counter pain medications, and severe psychological distress. Discussion: In this community sample of persons living with chronic pain, 8 out of 10 persons reported experiencing at least moderate relief with their treatment. The analysis has enabled us to explore potential modifiable factors as opportunities for improving the well-being of persons living with chronic pain.

Where we live matters: a comparison of chronic pain treatment between remote and non-remote regions of Quebec, Canada.

Objective: Where a person lives is a recognized socioeconomic determinant of health and influences healthcare access. This study aimed to compare the pain treatment profile of persons with chronic pain (CP) living in remote regions to those living in non-remote regions (near or in major urban centers). Methods: A cross-sectional study was performed among persons living with CP across Quebec. In a web-based questionnaire, participants were asked to report in which of the 17 administrative regions they were living (six considered "remote"). Pain treatment profile was drawn up using seven variables: use of prescribed pain medications, over-the-counter pain medications, non-pharmacological pain treatments, multimodal approach, access to a trusted healthcare professional for pain management, excessive polypharmacy (≥10 medications), and use of cannabis for pain. Results: 1,399 participants completed the questionnaire (women: 83.4%, mean age: 50 years, living in remote regions: 23.8%). As compared to persons living in remote regions, those living in non-remote regions were more likely to report using prescribed pain medications (83.8% vs. 67.4%), a multimodal approach (81.5% vs. 75.5%), experience excessive polypharmacy (28.1% vs. 19.1%), and report using cannabis for pain (33.1% vs. 20.7%) (bivariable p < 0.05). Only the use of prescribed medications as well as cannabis remained significantly associated with the region of residence in the multivariable models. Discussion: There are differences in treatment profiles of persons with CP depending on the region they live. Our results highlight the importance of considering remoteness, and not only rurality, when it comes to better understanding the determinants of pain management.

Investigating the Impact of Stress on Pain: A Scoping Review on Sense of Control, Social-Evaluative Threat, Unpredictability, and Novelty (STUN Model).

Background: Stress can have paradoxical effects on pain, namely hyperalgesia and hypoalgesia. Four situational characteristics activate the hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal axis, leading to a physiological stress response: lacking Sense of control, social-evaluative Threat, Unpredictability and Novelty (STUN). This scoping review reports on the types of evidence published on the effects of STUN characteristics on pain outcomes. Databases/Data Treatment: Searches of primary electronic databases were performed to identify articles published on adults between 1990 and 2021 that contained search terms on pain and stress/STUN characteristics. A total of 329 articles were included in the analysis. Results: Only 3.3% of studies examined simultaneously >1 STUN component. Almost all observational studies (177/180) examined the association between perceived stress and pain without measuring physiological stress responses. Of the 130 experimental studies, 78 (60.0%) manipulated stressful characteristics through nociception, and only 38.5% assessed if/how stress manipulation impacted perceived stress. Conclusion: There is a clear lack of integration of the characteristics that trigger a physiological stress response in the pain field. Only 3.3% of studies examined simultaneously more than one STUN component and there is an unequal attention given to individual components of the STUN framework. Recommendations for future research include selection of stress manipulations/measurements that are more precisely inducing/reflecting neurobiological mechanisms of stress responses to insure valid integration of scientific knowledge.

A Prospective Cohort Study of Acute Pain and In-Hospital Opioid Consumption After Cardiac Surgery: Associations With Psychological and Medical Factors and Chronic Postsurgical Pain.

BACKGROUND: Understanding the association of acute pain intensity and opioid consumption after cardiac surgery with chronic postsurgical pain (CPSP) can facilitate implementation of personalized prevention measures to improve outcomes. The objectives were to (1) examine acute pain intensity and daily mg morphine equivalent dose (MME/day) trajectories after cardiac surgery, (2) identify factors associated with pain intensity and opioid consumption trajectories, and (3) assess whether pain intensity and opioid consumption trajectories are risk factors for CPSP. METHODS: Prospective observational cohort study design conducted between August 2012 and June 2020 with 1-year follow-up. A total of 1115 adults undergoing cardiac surgery were recruited from the preoperative clinic. Of the 959 participants included in the analyses, 573 completed the 1-year follow-up. Main outcomes were pain intensity scores and MME/day consumption over the first 6 postoperative days (PODs) analyzed using latent growth mixture modeling (GMM). Secondary outcome was 12-month CPSP status. RESULTS: Participants were mostly male (76%), with a mean age of 61 ± 13 years. Three distinct linear acute postoperative pain intensity trajectories were identified: "initially moderate pain intensity remaining moderate" (n = 62), "initially mild pain intensity remaining mild" (n = 221), and "initially moderate pain intensity decreasing to mild" (n = 251). Age, sex, emotional distress in response to bodily sensations, and sensitivity to pain traumatization were significantly associated with pain intensity trajectories. Three distinct opioid consumption trajectories were identified on the log MME/day: "initially high level of MME/day gradually decreasing" (n = 89), "initially low level of MME/day remaining low" (n = 108), and "initially moderate level of MME/day decreasing to low" (n = 329). Age and emotional distress in response to bodily sensations were associated with trajectory membership. Individuals in the "initially mild pain intensity remaining mild" trajectory were less likely than those in the "initially moderate pain intensity remaining moderate" trajectory to report CPSP (odds ratio [95% confidence interval, CI], 0.23 [0.06-0.88]). No significant associations were observed between opioid consumption trajectory membership and CPSP status (odds ratio [95% CI], 0.84 [0.28-2.54] and 0.95 [0.22-4.13]). CONCLUSIONS: Those with moderate pain intensity right after surgery are more likely to develop CPSP suggesting that those patients should be flagged early on in their postoperative recovery to attempt to alter their trajectory and prevent CPSP. Emotional distress in response to bodily sensations is the only consistent modifiable factor associated with both pain and opioid trajectories.

Virtual group psychotherapy for chronic pain: exploring the impact of the virtual medium on participants' experiences.

BACKGROUND: Virtual psychotherapy for chronic pain (CP) has been shown to be feasible, efficacious, and acceptable; however, little is known about how virtual delivery of group psychotherapy affects participants' experiences. This study aimed to explore the impact of a virtual medium during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic on social interactions and therapeutic processes in the context of group psychotherapy for CP management. METHODS: This qualitative, interview-based study collected data on 18 individuals who participated in virtual group psychotherapy in a tertiary care pain management unit. RESULTS: Results of the thematic analysis showed 4 themes. First, the ability to participate and connect was modified by not meeting in person. Connections also occurred differently as the usual patterns of interactions changed. Participants described important shifts in how emotions are communicated and subsequent experience of empathy. Finally, the commonality of chronic pain experience was identified as a central driver of connection between participants. CONCLUSIONS: Mixed impacts of the virtual medium on group psychotherapy dynamics and processes were found. Future research could explore ways to mitigate the negative impacts.

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

PURPOSE: 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. METHODS: 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). RESULTS: 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. CONCLUSION: Opioid consumption trajectories do not seem to be important determinants of most PROs 6 months after initiating multidisciplinary pain treatment.

Changing society, changing research: integrating gender to better understand physical and psychological treatments use in chronic pain management.

ABSTRACT: Treatment of chronic pain should be multimodal and include pharmacological, physical, and psychological treatments. However, because various barriers to physical and psychological treatments (PPTs) exist, a better understanding of biopsychosocial factors leading to their use is relevant. This study aimed to explore the association between gender identity, gender-stereotyped personality traits, and the use of PPTs in chronic pain management. The ChrOnic Pain trEatment cohort, a self-reported data infrastructure resulting from a web-based recruitment of 1935 people living with chronic pain (Quebec, Canada) was analyzed. Gender identity was operationalized as women, men, and nonbinary. Gender-stereotyped personality traits were measured using the Bem Sex-Role Inventory (feminine, masculine, androgynous, undifferentiated). A checklist of 31 types of PPTs that can be used for chronic pain management was presented to participants (yes/no). From the 1433 participants, 85.5% reported using at least one PPT. Hot-cold therapies (43.4%), exercise (41.9%), and meditation (35.2%) were the most frequently used PPTs, but most popular PPTs were not the same among women and men. Women reported a significantly higher use of PPTs in general (87.2% vs 77.2%; P < 0.001). Multivariable and interaction analyses showed that identifying as a man decreased the odds of reporting the use of PPTs (odds ratio: 0.32, 95% confidence interval: 0.11-0.92) but only among participants who scored high on both masculine and feminine personality traits (those classified as androgynous). The high prevalence of PPTs use found in our study is positive. Our results are relevant for a more personalized promotion of PPTs for chronic pain management.

Peritoneal malignancy in the global COVID-19 pandemic: experience of recovery and restoration in a high-volume centre through NHS and independent sector collaboration.

INTRODUCTION: Treatment of peritoneal malignancy with cytoreductive surgery (CRS) and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) requires substantial critical care, theatre and nursing resources. The COVID-19 pandemic caused challenges in providing a high volume, tertiary referral service. METHODS: We reviewed data on referrals and operations performed in a tertiary referral centre in both NHS and independent sector settings. The impact of COVID-19 on activity was assessed using 2019 as a benchmark. RESULTS: New patient referrals were similar, with 891 in 2019 compared with 833 in 2020. Delivery of CRS and HIPEC operations were initially impacted by COVID-19. NHS and independent sector collaboration facilitated recovery, with 284 patients treated in 2020 compared with 280 in 2019. CONCLUSIONS: Close collaboration and structural organisation between the clinical and management teams in the NHS and independent sectors facilitated recovery and restoration of a complex tertiary referral service for peritoneal malignancy during the COVID pandemic.

The Medication Quantification Scale 4.0: An Updated Index Based on Prescribers' Perceptions of the Risk Associated With Chronic Pain Medications.

To quantify risks associated with drug utilization in the real world for the treatment of chronic pain (CP), an index called the Medication Quantification Scale (MQS) was developed in 1992 in the United States and last updated in 2003. This study aimed to update, adapt to the contemporary Canadian context, and validate a revised version of the MQS (the MQS-4.0). Step 1: An expert committee adapted the MQS to the Canadian clinical practice context. Step 2: An update of risk weights given to medication subclasses was achieved using a prescriber survey (weights were derived from median 0-10 scores given to each subclass). Step 3: Construct validity of the MQS-4.0 was assessed after applying risk weights to the medication use profile of persons living with CP covered by public drug insurance plan. Thirty-six medication subclasses were included in the MQS-4.0. A total of 207 prescribers (physicians, pharmacists, and nurse practitioners) participated in the perception survey; 10.63% identified as pain specialists. When risk weights were applied to prescription claims (n = 9,122), the MQS-4.0 score was associated (P < .05) with the MQS-III score and variables associated with polypharmacy (eg, Charlson Comorbidity Index, number of prescribers or health care visits). This study provides an updated index intended for adult populations based on prescribers' perceptions of the risk associated with CP medications that can be useful for clinical practice and research among persons living with CP in Canada. It will, however, be relevant to verify whether similar risk weights are obtained in future pain specialist surveys. PERSPECTIVE: The MQS-4.0 is an update of the MQS used for quantifying the risk associated with the use of analgesics/coanalgesics. Adequate psychometrics properties were found.

Co-designing a Canadian adaptation of a lifestyle-oriented intervention aimed to improve daily functioning of individuals living with chronic pain: a multi-method study protocol of REVEAL(OT) Canada.

Background: Living with chronic pain (CP) often implies major lifestyle changes, including modifications of daily routines and work. Surprisingly, few validated and effective interventions specifically target functional outcomes in this population. Redesign your Everyday Activities and Lifestyle with Occupational Therapy [REVEAL(OT)] is a lifestyle-oriented intervention led by occupational therapists that directly targets the daily functional challenges of living with CP. The intervention was initially developed and studied as an add-on to standard treatment delivered by Danish multidisciplinary specialized pain clinics. Adapting, implementing, and evaluating REVEAL(OT) within the Canadian healthcare system will contribute to broadening the scope of treatments offered in specialized pain clinics that do not yet include occupational therapy. Objective: The proposed study aims to define and refine REVEAL(OT)/CA with partners (authors of original intervention, people with lived experience, clinicians, managers). Methods: This participatory action research will use a multi-method design and follow the ORBIT model for developing behavioral treatments for chronic diseases. A process of co-construction with partners and an advisory committee will take place in two Montreal specialized pain clinics. It consists of two related work packages (WPs). In WP1, a first series of focus groups with partners (n = 86) and workshops with the advisory committee will be conducted to co-develop the hypothetical pathway describing intervention components and their potential mechanisms of action on targeted outcomes, as well as the first version of the adapted intervention manual. WP2 will co-refine REVEAL(OT)/CA by exploring its acceptability, feasibility and mechanisms of action through intervention deliveries (at least twice in each of two specialized pain clinics; n ≥ 60 patients) and focus groups and/or individual interviews with participating patients and partners. At the end of this study, the intervention manual will be generated both in French and English. Discussion: This study will set the stage for subsequent implementation and effectiveness assessment projects and be an important step towards the deployment of interventions aiming to improve engagement in meaningful daily activities among adults living with CP. Registration: OSF Registries, osf.io/8gksa. Registered 3 August 2023, https://osf.io/8gksa.

The Calm after the Storm: A State-of-the-Art Review about Recommendations Put Forward during the COVID-19 Pandemic to Improve Chronic Pain Management.

The COVID-19 pandemic has brought its fair share of consequences. To control the transmission of the virus, several public health restrictions were put in place. While these restrictions had beneficial effects on transmission, they added to the pre-existing physical, psychosocial, and financial burdens associated with chronic pain, and made existing treatment gaps, challenges, and inequities worse. However, it also prompted researchers and clinicians to seek out possible solutions and expedite their implementation. This state-of-the-art review focuses on the concrete recommendations issued during the COVID-19 pandemic to improve the health and maintain the care of people living with chronic pain. The search strategy included a combination of chronic pain and pandemic-related terms. Four databases (Medline, PsycINFO, CINAHL, and PubMed) were searched, and records were assessed for eligibility. Original studies, reviews, editorials, and guidelines published in French or in English in peer-reviewed journals or by recognized pain organizations were considered for inclusion. A total of 119 articles were analyzed, and over 250 recommendations were extracted and classified into 12 subcategories: change in clinical practice, change in policy, continuity of care, research avenues to explore, group virtual care, health communications/education, individual virtual care, infection control, lifestyle, non-pharmacological treatments, pharmacological treatments, and social considerations. Recommendations highlight the importance of involving various healthcare professionals to prevent mental health burden and emergency overload and emphasize the recognition of chronic pain. The pandemic disrupted chronic pain management in an already-fragile ecosystem, presenting a unique opportunity for understanding ongoing challenges and identifying innovative solutions. Numerous recommendations were identified that are relevant well beyond the COVID-19 crisis.

A Systematic Review of Vaccination Guidance for Humanitarian Responses.

Delivering vaccines in humanitarian response requires rigourous and continuous analysis of evidence. This systematic review mapped the normative landscape of vaccination guidance on vaccine-preventable diseases in crisis-affected settings. Guidance published between 2000 and 2022 was searched for, in English and French, on websites of humanitarian actors, Google, and Bing. Peer-reviewed database searches were performed in Global Health and Embase. Reference lists of all included documents were screened. We disseminated an online survey to professionals working in vaccination delivery in humanitarian contexts. There was a total of 48 eligible guidance documents, including technical guidance (n = 17), descriptive guidance (n = 16), operational guidance (n = 11), evidence reviews (n = 3), and ethical guidance (n = 1). Most were World Health Organization documents (n = 21) targeting children under 5 years of age. Critical appraisal revealed insufficient inclusion of affected populations and limited rigour in guideline development. We found limited information on vaccines including, yellow fever, cholera, meningococcal, hepatitis A, and varicella, as well as human papilloma virus (HPV). There is a plethora of vaccination guidance for vaccine-preventable diseases in humanitarian contexts. However, gaps remain in the critical and systematic inclusion of evidence, inclusion of the concept of "zero-dose" children and affected populations, ethical guidance, and specific recommendations for HPV and non-universally recommended vaccines, which must be addressed.

Pain Medications Used by Persons Living With Fibromyalgia: A Comparison Between the Profile of a Quebec Sample and Clinical Practice Guidelines.

Background: Pharmacological management of fibromyalgia is complex. Chronic pain management is characterized by off-label prescribing and use, multimorbidity, and polypharmacy. Aims: This study aimed to describe pain medications use and perceived risk among people living with fibromyalgia and compare this use to evidence-based recommendations. Methods: Directive telephone interviews were conducted with 63 individuals self-reporting a diagnosis of fibromyalgia (Quebec, Canada). The questionnaire addressed specific questions about their pain and pharmacological treatments currently used for pain management (prescribed and over-the-counter). Collected data were compared to the Canadian Fibromyalgia Clinical Practice Guidelines and to evidence reports published by recognized organizations. Results: Despite a lack of robust scientific evidence to support opioids use to manage pain in fibromyalgia, 33% of our sample reported using them. Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs were used by 54.0% of participants, although this medication is not recommended due to lack of efficacy. Tramadol, which is recommended, was used by 23.8% of participants. Among the medications strongly recommended, anticonvulsants were used by 36.5%, serotonin norepinephrine reuptake inhibitor antidepressants by 55.6%, and tricyclic antidepressants by 22.2%. Cannabinoids (17.5%) and medical cannabis (34.9%) use were also reported. For all of these medication subclasses, no differences were found between participants not reporting (n = 35) or reporting (n = 28) more than one pain diagnosis (P < 0.05). Medication subclasses considered most at risk of adverse effects by participants were the least used. Conclusions: Results reveal discordance between evidence-based recommendations and medications use, which highlights the complexity of pharmacological treatment of fibromyalgia.

Contexte: La prise en charge pharmacologique de la fibromyalgie est complexe. La prise en charge de la douleur chronique est caractérisée par la prescription et l'utilisation non conforme de médicaments, la multimorbidité et la polypharmacothérapie.Objectifs: Cette étude visait à décrire l'utilisation de médicaments contre la douleur et le risque perçu chez les personnes atteintes de fibromyalgie, et à comparer cette utilisation aux recommandations fondées sur des données probantes.Méthodes: Des entretiens téléphoniques directifs ont été menés auprès de 63 personnes ayant déclaré avoir reçu un diagnostic de fibromyalgie (Québec, Canada). Le questionnaire abordait des questions précises sur leur douleur et les traitements pharmacologiques actuellement utilisés pour la prise en charge de leur douleur (prescrits et vendus sans ordonnance). Les données recueillies ont été comparées aux Lignes directrices canadiennes sur la fibromyalgie et aux rapports de données probantes publiés par des organisations reconnues.Résultats: Malgré l'absence de données probantes robustes à l'appui de l'utilisation des opioïdes pour la prise en charge la douleur chez les personnes atteintes de fibromyalgie, 33 % de notre échantillon a déclaré les utiliser. Les anti-inflammatoires nonstéroïdiens étaient pour leur part utilisés par 54,0 % des participants, bien que ce médicament ne soit pas recommandé en raison d'un manque d'efficacité. Le tramadol, recommandé, était utilisé par 23,8 % des participants. Parmi les médicaments fortement recommandés, les anticonvulsivants étaient utilisés par 36,5 % desparticipants, les antidépresseurs inhibiteurs de la recapture de la sérotonine et de la noradrénaline par 55,6 % des participants, et les antidépresseurs tricycliques par 22,2 % d'entre eux. La consommation de cannabinoïdes (17,5 %) et de cannabis médical (34,9 %) ont également été signalées. Pour toutes ces sous-classes de médicaments, aucune différence n'a été trouvée entre les participants ne signalant pas (n = 35) ou signalant (n = 28) plus d'un diagnostic de douleur (P < 0,05). Les sous-classes de médicaments considérées par les participants comme les plus à risque d'effets indésirables étaient les moins utilisées.Conclusions: Les résultats révèlent une discordance entre les recommandations fondées sur des données probantes et l'utilisation de médicaments, ce qui met en évidence la complexité du traitement pharmacologique de la fibromyalgie.

Polypharmacy and Excessive Polypharmacy Among Persons Living with Chronic Pain: A Cross-Sectional Study on the Prevalence and Associated Factors.

Purpose: Polypharmacy can be defined as the concomitant use of ≥5 medications and excessive polypharmacy, as the use of ≥10 medications. Objectives were to (1) assess the prevalence of polypharmacy and excessive polypharmacy among persons living with chronic pain, and (2) identify sociodemographic and clinical factors associated with excessive polypharmacy. Patients and Methods: This cross-sectional study used data from 1342 persons from the ChrOnic Pain trEatment (COPE) Cohort (Quebec, Canada). The self-reported number of medications currently used by participants (regardless of whether they were prescribed or taken over-the-counter, or were used for treating pain or other health issues) was categorized to assess polypharmacy and excessive polypharmacy. Results: Participants reported using an average of 6 medications (median: 5). The prevalence of polypharmacy was 71.4% (95% CI: 69.0-73.8) and excessive polypharmacy was 25.9% (95% CI: 23.6-28.3). No significant differences were found across gender identity groups. Multivariable logistic regression revealed that factors associated with greater chances of reporting excessive polypharmacy (vs <10 medications) included being born in Canada, using prescribed pain medications, and reporting greater pain intensity (0-10) or pain relief from currently used pain treatments (0-100%). Factors associated with lower chances of excessive polypharmacy were using physical and psychological pain treatments, reporting better general health/physical functioning, considering pain to be terrible/feeling like it will never get better, and being employed. Conclusion: Polypharmacy is the rule rather than the exception among persons living with chronic pain. Close monitoring and evaluation of the different medications used are important for all persons, especially those with limited access to care.

Trends in Prescription Chronic Pain Medication Use before and during the First Wave of the COVID-19 Pandemic in Québec, Canada: An Interrupted Time Series Analysis.

BACKGROUND: In Canada, a state of health emergency was declared in May 2020 as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic. This study aimed to assess trends in the use of prescription medication for pain management by people living with chronic pain before and during the first wave of the pandemic. METHODS: Participants (n = 177) were adults reporting chronic pain who had completed a web-based questionnaire in 2019 and for whom complete longitudinal private and public insurance prescription claims were available. The monthly prevalence of medication use for nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), opioids, and prescribed cannabinoids was assessed. An interrupted time series analysis was then performed to evaluate if the COVID-19 pandemic had had an impact on trends in pain medication use. RESULTS: The beginning of the first wave of the pandemic was associated with the onset of a downward trend in opioid use (p < 0.05); no such association was found regarding NSAIDs. However, point prevalence of opioid use at the beginning (Nov. 2019) and at the end (Mai 2020) of the study period remained somewhat stable (17.0% vs. 16.4%). Regarding prescribed cannabinoids, a gradual increase in use was observed over the entire study period independently from the impact of the first wave of the pandemic (15.3% vs. 22.6%, p < 0.05). CONCLUSION: While the occurrence of the first wave did have an impact on opioid use among people living with chronic pain, access to and use of opioids appear to have returned to normal before the end of the first wave of COVID-19.