Real-World Evidence on the Efficacy and Tolerability of Tramadol/Dexketoprofen (TRAM/DKP) Fixed-Dose Combination for the Management of Acute Non-surgical Pain in Asian Patients: A Multicentre Retrospective Case Series.

INTRODUCTION: Multimodal analgesia is key in the effective management of acute pain. Previous clinical trials have demonstrated good results with the use of a fixed-dose combination (FDC) of tramadol 75 mg and dexketoprofen 25 mg (TRAM/DKP) in acute pain management. However, there is a dearth of real-world evidence on the efficacy and safety of this combination in the management of acute non-surgical pain, especially among Asian patients. The case series reported herein investigates the real-world experiences of physicians and Asian patients with the use of TRAM/DKP FDC in the management of acute non-surgical pain. METHODS: Data were collected retrospectively on 11 Asian patients across multiple hospitals who had received a short course of TRAM/DKP FDC for acute non-surgical orthopaedic and non-orthopaedic pain. Data on baseline characteristics, medical history, treatment regimen, clinical outcomes, and patient satisfaction were compiled and shared at a peer-to-peer expert meeting in October 2022. RESULTS: All patients experienced a reduction in pain intensity and were very satisfied with pain management, with a mean satisfaction score of 4.3/5. Five patients (range: 63-74 years) experienced mild adverse events, including nausea, vomiting, and dizziness, which resolved with no need for additional treatment in the majority of cases. No serious adverse events were recorded. CONCLUSION: Asian patients with acute non-surgical orthopaedic and non-orthopaedic pain achieved good pain control with TRAM/DKP FDC. The regimen was well tolerated, and patients reported high levels of satisfaction with the outcomes, indicating that TRAM/DKP FDC is an effective choice for the control of acute non-surgical pain in Asian patients.

The invisible cost of pain management by the current International Classification of Diseases coding system: a study in a tertiary care inpatient setting.

ABSTRACT: The International Classification of Diseases ( ICD ) is applied worldwide for public health data collection among other use cases. However, the current version of the ICD ( ICD-10 ), to which the reimbursement system is linked in many countries, does not represent chronic pain properly. This study aims to compare the ICD-10 with the ICD-11 in hospitalized patients in terms of specificity, clinical utility, and reimbursement for pain management. The medical records of hospitalized patients consulted for pain management at Siriraj Hospital, Thailand, were reviewed, and all pain-related diagnoses were coded into ICD-10 and ICD-11 . The data of 397 patients showed unspecified pain was coded 78% in the ICD-10 and only 0.5% in the ICD-11 version. The difference gap in the proportion of unspecified pain between the 2 versions is wider than in the outpatient setting. The 3 most common codes for ICD-10 were other chronic pain, low back pain, and pain in limb. The 3 most common codes for ICD-11 were chronic cancer pain, chronic peripheral neuropathic pain, and chronic secondary musculoskeletal pain. As in many other countries, no pain-related ICD-10 codes were coded for routine reimbursement. The simulated reimbursement fee remained the same when adding 397 pain-related codings, even if the cost of pain management, such as cost of labor, existed. Compared with the ICD-10 version, the ICD-11 is more specific and makes pain diagnoses more visible. Thus, shifting from ICD-10 to ICD-11 has the potential to improve both the quality of care and the reimbursement for pain management.

Comparing the ICD-11 chronic pain classification with ICD-10: how can the new coding system make chronic pain visible? A study in a tertiary care pain clinic setting.

ABSTRACT: Pain is a frequent reason for patients to ask for medical services. However, systematic information about the extent and impact of pain, especially in developing countries, has not been available up to now. We evaluated whether the 11th edition of the International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems (ICD) can fill this gap by coding all electronic out-patient medical records of the pain clinic at Siriraj Hospital in Thailand in 2019 (8714 visits), using the ICD-10 and ICD-11 browsers referenced on the WHO websites. The 3 most frequent pain-related codes in ICD-10 were R52.2 "other chronic pain" (29%), M54.5 "low back pain" (18%), and M79.6 "pain in limb" (13%). In ICD-11, the 3 most frequent codes were MG30.31 "chronic secondary musculoskeletal pain associated with structural changes" (28%), MG30.51 "chronic peripheral neuropathic pain" (26%), and MG30.10 "chronic cancer pain" (23%). Thus, using the currently valid ICD-10 system, roughly one-third of patient encounters were coded as "other chronic pain," and the next 2 were specifying the pain region rather than any underlying cause. By contrast, ICD-11 coding of the same patients identified underlying causes (bones and joints, somatosensory nervous system, cancer, or surgery), which provide guidance towards differential patient management. In our pain clinic, most patients suffered from chronic cancer pain, chronic neuropathic pain, and chronic secondary musculoskeletal pain, which were poorly defined or nonexistent in the current ICD-10 coding system. Compared with the ICD-10, the ICD-11 provides more detailed diagnostic categories and is more informative for clinical use, research, and resource allocation for pain-related conditions.

C-terminal hydrophobic region leads PRSV P3 protein to endoplasmic reticulum.

P3 protein is one of the least characterized potyviral proteins in both functions and sub-cellular localization. In this study, we examined the sub-cellular localization of PRSV P3 and its intermediate, P3-6K1 by expressing their GFP fusion proteins in onion epidermal cells. Our results showed that both P3- and P3-6K1 GFP fusion proteins were localized at the endoplasmic reticulum. Deletion analysis indicated that C-terminal of P3 protein contained localization signal, and a 19 amino acids hydrophobic domain from this region was able to target the GFP fusion protein to endoplasmic reticulum. C-terminal of P3 proteins has been suggested to be involved in both viability and pathogenicity of the potyvirus. Therefore, our result suggests that localization of P3 protein at endoplasmic reticulum is essential for functionality of P3 protein.