Long-term pain outcomes after serial lidocaine infusion in participants with recent onset of peripheral neuropathic pain: A pilot double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: This study investigated the outcomes up to 12 weeks after serial lidocaine infusion for early-onset peripheral neuropathic pain. METHODS: This pilot double-blind, randomized, 2-arm placebo-controlled trial recruited 50 participants with onset of peripheral neuropathic pain within the past 6 months and randomized them to either receive lidocaine (3 mg/kg) in normal saline (50 mL) intravenous infusion over 1 hour (lidocaine group) once a week for 4 weeks or 50 mL of normal saline infusion (placebo group) once a week for 4 weeks. Twenty-nine participants completed the protocol; 15 participants were assigned to the lidocaine group and 14 to the placebo group. The outcomes were pain intensity assessed using a numerical rating scale (NRS), quality of life assessed using EuroQol-Five Dimensions-Five Levels questionnaire (EQ-5D-5L), psychological function using the Thai version of the 21-item Depression Anxiety Stress Scales (DASS-21), pain medication use, and adverse effects, all assessed at baseline (BL) and again at 4, 8, and 12 weeks following randomization. RESULTS: The reported tramadol use at 8 and 12 weeks following the first infusion was significantly lower in the lidocaine group (P = .023). No other significant between-group differences were observed at any time point or for any other outcome, and no serious adverse events were observed. CONCLUSION: Multiple lidocaine infusions of 3 mg/kg once a week for 4 weeks in participants with recent onset of peripheral neuropathic pain demonstrated no significant benefits in pain intensity, quality of life, or psychological outcomes. At most, this treatment may result in less tramadol use.

The incidence, characteristics, impact and risk factors of post-COVID chronic pain in Thailand: A single-center cross-sectional study.

The COVID-19 pandemic has affected millions of individuals worldwide. Pain has emerged as a significant post-COVID-19 symptom. This study investigated the incidence, characteristics, and risk factors of post-COVID chronic pain (PCCP) in Thailand. A cross-sectional study was conducted in participants who had been infected, including those hospitalized and monitored at home by SARS-CoV-2 from August to September 2021. Data were collected for screening from medical records, and phone interviews were done between 3 to 6 months post-infection. Participants were classified into 1) no-pain, 2) PCCP, 3) chronic pain that has been aggravated by COVID-19, or 4) chronic pain that has not been aggravated by COVID-19. Pain interference and quality of life were evaluated with the Brief Pain Inventory and EuroQol Five Dimensions Five Levels Questionnaire. From 1,019 participants, 90% of the participants had mild infection, assessed by WHO progression scale. The overall incidence of PCCP was 3.2% (95% CI 2.3-4.5), with 2.8% (95% CI 2.0-4.1) in mild infection, 5.2% (95% CI 1.2-14.1) in moderate infection and 8.5% (95% CI 3.4-19.9) in severe infection. Most participants (83.3%) reported pain in the back and lower extremities and were classified as musculoskeletal pain and headache (8.3%). Risk factors associated with PCCP, included female sex (relative risk [RR] 2.2, 95% CI 1.0-4.9) and greater COVID-19 severity (RR 3.5, 95% CI 1.1-11.7). Participants with COVID-19-related exacerbated chronic pain displayed higher pain interferences and lower utility scores than other groups. In conclusion, this study highlights the incidence, features, and risk factors of post-COVID chronic pain (PCCP) in Thailand. It emphasizes the need to monitor and address PCCP, especially in severe cases, among females, and individuals with a history of chronic pain to improve their quality of life in the context of the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic.

The validity of the Edmonton Symptom Assessment System-Depression item for screening for depression in individuals with cancer pain: A cross-sectional study.

CONTEXT: Depression is common in individuals with cancer and pain, negatively impacts quality of life, treatment adherence, tumor progression, and survival. OBJECTIVES: The primary aims of this study were to (1) evaluate the validity of the Edmonton Symptom Assessment System's depression (ESAS-D) for detecting major depressive disorder (MDD) as diagnosed by a psychiatrist and (2) identify the best cutoff for this purpose in a sample of cancer pain individuals. The secondary aim was to compare ESAS-D with another commonly used screening measure (Patient Health Questionnaire-2 [PHQ-2]) for classifying individuals as meeting or not meeting Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition (DSM-5) criteria for depression. METHODS: 49 cancer pain individuals completed the ESAS-D and PHQ-2 Within 2 weeks, a psychiatrist interviewed the participants and determined whether or not they met criteria for MDD based on the DSM-5. RESULTS: The ESAS-D demonstrated acceptable accuracy and validity for classifying MDD. A cutoff of ≥2 was identified as being best able to balance sensitivity (85%) and specificity (76%) and had an overall accuracy of 79%. A receiver operating characteristic curve analysis showed an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.81 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.68-0.94). The ESAS-D also compared favorably with the modified Thai PHQ-2 (sensitivity, 75%; specificity, 72%; overall accuracy, 73%; AUC, 0.74 [95% CI: 0.59-0.88]) for identifying MDD individuals. CONCLUSIONS: The ESAS-D showed acceptable sensitivity, specificity, and overall accuracy for screening for MDD in cancer and pain. It could therefore be used to screen for probable depression in this population.

Cost-Utility and Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Spinal Cord Stimulation for Chronic Refractory Pain in the Context of Developing Country.

BACKGROUND: Spinal cord stimulation (SCS) is an effective treatment for chronic refractory pain. The evidence of pain reduction, improvement of function, quality of life, and cost-effectiveness are strong in developed countries. Nevertheless, there is still a lack of economic studies of SCS in the context of low- and middle-income countries. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the cost-effectiveness and cost-utility of additional SCS to conventional management (CMM) in patients with chronic refractory pain in Thailand. STUDY DESIGN: Prospective observational study. SETTING: The pain clinic at Siriraj Hospital, a tertiary care center in Thailand. METHODS: This study recruited patients undergoing SCS implants due to refractory pain to CMM from varieties of conditions and followed up to 36 months. The clinical outcomes, quality of life, and costs of treatment were collected before and after SCS implantation. A decision tree and Markov model were developed to estimate the total lifetime costs and health benefits of SCS using a societal perspective. The results were presented as an incremental cost-utility ratio (ICUR) in 2021 Thai Baht (THB) per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained and an incremental cost-effective ratio (ICER) in 2021 THB per numeric rating pain score (NRS) reduction. RESULTS: Twenty-nine patients who underwent SCS implantation reported pain intensity and increased utility at every point in time. Compared to pre-implantation, the QALY gained in both rechargeable and non-rechargeable SCS was 2.13 QALYs. The economic analysis showed the ICUR in the rechargeable and non-rechargeable SCS + CMM group was 660,106.96, and 620,120.59 THB/QALY gained, respectively, which was higher than Thais' willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold at 160,000 THB/QALY gained. Pain score reduction was 2.49/10 at the 3-year point, and the ICER was 496,932.08 and 337,341.77 THB/NRS reduction for rechargeable and non-rechargeable SCS, respectively. LIMITATIONS: As this is a single-center prospective cohort study, the results might be subject to selection bias and may not truly represent all patients from a developing country. The cost-effectiveness results should also be carefully interpreted for generalizability. CONCLUSION: Spinal cord stimulation is effective in pain control and improves the quality of life for patients with chronic refractory pain. However, the ICUR of SCS is above the WTP, leading to the interpretation that SCS is still not a cost-effective treatment in the current context in Thailand.

The Effectiveness of Cancer Pain Management in a Tertiary Hospital Outpatient Pain Clinic in Thailand: A Prospective Observational Study.

Objectives: The objective was to examine the effectiveness of the updated approach. Methods: With IRB approval, outpatients with cancer were enrolled from January to December 2018. Assessments were recorded at baseline and three consecutive visits (BL, FU1, FU2, and FU3), including Numerical Rating Scale (NRS), the Brief Pain Inventory (BPI), the Edmonton Symptom Assessment System (ESAS), side effects, and analgesic use. The primary outcome was a favorable response, defined as an NRS decrease more than 30% or NRS <4. Secondary outcomes included trends over time in BPI, ESAS, side effects, and analgesic use. Pain response predictors at FU3 were analyzed using logistic regression. Results: Among 150 patients, 72 (48%) completed follow-ups. Of these, 61% achieved a favorable response at FU3. Pain interference diminished at all visits relative to baseline (p < 0.05). Median morphine equivalent daily dosage (MEDD) at BL was 20 mg/day, with a statistically significant, but clinically modest increase to 26.4 mg/day at FU3. Radiation therapy during pain care was a predictor of pain responders. Conclusion: The current Siriraj multidisciplinary approach provided effective relief of pain and stabilization of other cancer-related symptoms. Radiation therapy during pain care can be used to predict pain outcomes. Ongoing improvement domains were identified and considered in the context of cultural, economic, and geographic factors.

Trends in Gabapentin and Pregabalin Prescribing in a Tertiary Pediatric Medical Center.

OBJECTIVES: Analgesic medications are commonly prescribed in pediatrics, with prescribing practices frequently extrapolated from adult trials. Gabapentinoids (gabapentin and pregabalin) are widely used as analgesics but are labeled in pediatrics only for epilepsy. We aim to (1) define trends in pediatric gabapentinoid prescribing (label and off-label) over 7 years, and (2) evaluate use in chronic pain clinic (CPC) patients during 2018. METHODS: Retrospective data from a tertiary-care pediatric hospital were collected between 2013 and 2019. Annual numbers of gabapentinoid prescriptions were stratified by prescriber specialty. Additional information about gabapentinoid prescribing in the CPC was manually collected from initial clinic notes in 2018. RESULTS: There were 15 808 outpatient prescriptions for gabapentinoids among 5172 patients over 7 years. Of these, 93% were gabapentin and 7% were pregabalin. Numbers of patients receiving gabapentin and pregabalin prescriptions increased by 1.4- and 1.3-fold, respectively, between 2013 and 2019. Few prescriptions were done for patients with a previous epilepsy diagnosis (in 2019, 16% for gabapentin and 13% for pregabalin). Approximately 28% of 650 CPC new patients were prescribed gabapentin or pregabalin before referral. Among those, 44% had discontinued the medication because of adverse events (35%), inefficacy (46%), or both (5%). Most side effects reported were mild to moderate. Diagnoses at first visit were diverse, not limited to neuropathic pain conditions, and did not differ between patients receiving or not receiving gabapentinoid prescriptions. CONCLUSIONS: In our hospital, gabapentinoids are commonly prescribed off-label for diverse indications, including chronic pain. Future research is needed to evaluate gabapentinoid efficacy in these indications.

A Randomized Placebo-Controlled Trial of Oral Ramosetron for Prevention of Post Operative Nausea and Vomiting after Intrathecal Morphine in Patients Undergoing Gynecological Surgery.

BACKGROUND: The incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) after intrathecal morphine is high. Ramosetron is a 5-HT3 antagonist that has been shown to reduce PONV in general anesthesia. The objective of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of Ramosetron in preventing PONV MATERIAL AND METHOD: 165 patients undergoing elective gynecological surgery under spinal anesthesia were randomly allocated to two groups: the Ramosetron group (0.1 mg orally, n = 82), and the placebo group (oral corn starch, n = 83). The incidence of PONV severity of nausea and use of rescue antiemetic during the first 24 hour after surgery were evaluated. RESULTS: The incidence of PONV was significantly lower in the Ramosetron group compared with the placebo group (24.4% vs. 44.6%, number needed to treat (NNT) = 5.0). The severity of nausea was significantly lower in the Ramosetron group compared with the placebo group (20.7% vs. 39.8%, NNT = 6.0) in the 24 hour period. CONCLUSION: Oral Ramosetron 0.1 mg was more effective than placebo in PONV prevention and reduced the incidence of moderate to severe nausea after intrathecal morphine in the first 24 hour after gynecological surgery.

Psychometric Validity and Reliability of the Thai Version of the Neuropathic Pain Symptom Inventory.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to evaluate validity and reliability of the Thai version of the Neuropathic Pain Symptom Inventory (NPSI-T) in Thai patients with neuropathic pain. Although the Thai version of Neuropathic Pain Symptom Inventory (NPSI-T) has been linguistically validated, the tool has to be psychometrically validated before applying to neuropathic pain patients in daily practice. MATERIAL AND METHOD: Forty Thai patients with diagnosis of neuropathic pain were enrolled to the study and were evaluated by visual analog scale (VAS), the Thai version of Neuropathic Pain Diagnostic Questionnaire (DN4-T) and NPSI-T questionnaires. Four hours later the patients were asked to perform retest NPSI-T and to evaluate the understanding of each NPSI-T question. RESULTS: The total score of NPSI-T questionnaire was statistically correlated to visual analog scale (VAS) (Spearman's correlation coefficient = 0.599, p < 0.001) and neuropathic pain diagnostic questionnaire (DN4-T) (Spearman's correlation coefficient = 0.695, p < 0.001). The reliability was determined by Intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC), an excellent interobserver agreement (ICC > 0.8) and good agreement (ICC 0.6-0.8) were presented in 30% and 70% of the questionnaire, respectively. CONCLUSION: The study demonstrated validity and reliability of the NPSI-T for assessing the neuropathic pain in Thai patients.

Effective Pain Management for Inpatients at Siriraj Hospital: A Retrospective Study.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: The prevalence of severe cancer and non-cancer pain among in patients has been reported at rates ranging from 15% to 36%. We examined the effectiveness of the pain management provided to inpatients by the Siriraj Pain Clinic. MATERIAL AND METHOD: A retrospective chart review was conducted among inpatients who had consulted the clinic between January 2013 and December 2014. Patients with a numeric pain rating scale (NRS) 4 on the day of consultation, those discharged within seven days, and postoperative patients were excluded. Successful pain control was defined as NRS ≤ 4 within seven days of the initial consultation. RESULTS: We identified 352 eligible patients, of which 231 (65.4%) had cancer pain. Only 42.6% achieved successful pain control. An absence of psychological problems (odds ratio (OR) 2.1, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.1-4.2; p = 0.010); an initial NRS < 7 (OR 1.9, 95% CI 1.2-3.0; p = 0.008); the use of either a non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) or a Coxibs (OR 2.3, 95% CI 1.3-3.9; p = 0.017), and abdominal pain (OR 2.7, 95% CI 1.5-4.7; p =0.008) were factors associated with successful pain control. CONCLUSION: Adequate pain control was achieved in less than half of the inpatients in our institution. Psychological disturbance and severe pain predicted unsatisfactory pain control.