Prevalencia y características clínicas del dolor en pacientes con enfermedad crónica avanzada / Prevalence and clinical characteristics of pain in patients with advanced chronic disease

Objetivos: Determinar la prevalencia y las características clínicas del dolor en pacientes con enfermedad crónica avanzada, e identificar la frecuencia del dolor irruptivo. Diseño: Estudio observacional, descriptivo y transversal. Emplazamiento: Tres equipos de atención primaria y un hospital de cuidados intermedios. Participantes: Se seleccionaron todos los pacientes con enfermedad crónica avanzada. Mediciones principales: Se realizó una entrevista semiestructurada para recoger variables demográficas, clínicas y específicas de dolor mediante escalas validadas. Se registraron la ubicación (domicilio, residencia u hospital) y la trayectoria de cronicidad avanzada (insuficiencia de órgano, enfermedad oncológica, demencia o multimorbilidad). Se valoró la presencia de dolor según la Brief Pain Inventory (BPI) y, en los casos de demencia invalidante, según la Pain Assessment in Advanced Dementia (PAINAD). Análisis estadístico descriptivo y comparativo entre variables utilizando el programa R. Resultados: Se incluyeron 223 pacientes (60,4% de los seleccionados). Prevalencia del dolor: 83,9% (n=187), sin diferencias según la ubicación ni según la trayectoria. Diferencias significativas en la intensidad del dolor según la ubicación (p=0,0046) (moderado-severo en domicilio, moderado en hospital y leve en residencia) y según la trayectoria (p<0,0001) (dolor moderado-severo en insuficiencia de órgano y multimorbilidad, moderado en cáncer y leve en demencia). Se observó impacto funcional por dolor leve-moderado, impacto emocional severo en el 41,5% de los pacientes (n=51) y dolor irruptivo en el 8,6% (n=13). Conclusiones: El dolor debe ser siempre explorado y evaluado en pacientes con cronicidad avanzada, ya que fue muy prevalente en todas las ubicaciones y trayectorias, especialmente intenso en la insuficiencia de órgano y en la multimorbilidad a domicilio. Apareció dolor irruptivo en trayectorias no oncológicas.(AU)

Objectives: Determine pain prevalence and clinical characteristics in patients with advanced chronic disease and identify breakthrough pain frequency. Design: Observational, descriptive, cross-sectional study. Location: Three primary care teams and one intermediate care hospital. Participants: All patients with advanced chronic disease. Main measurements: A semi-structured interview was performed to collect demographic, clinical, and specific variables of pain using validated scales. Patient location (home, nursing home or hospital) and advanced chronicity trajectory (organ failure, oncological disease, dementia, or multimorbidity) were recorded. Pain was assessed based on the Brief Pain Inventory (BPI) and, in cases of disabling dementia, using the Pain Assessment in Advanced Dementia (PAINAD). A statistical descriptive, comparative analysis between variables was performed using the R software. Results: Of all patients selected, 223 (60.4%) were included. Prevalence of pain: 83.9% (n=187), with no differences based on location or trajectory. Significant differences in pain intensity based on location (P=.0046) (moderate-severe in patients at home, moderate in hospital patients, and mild in nursing home patients) and on trajectory (P<.0001) (moderate-severe in patients with organ failure and multimorbidity, moderate in patients with cancer, and mild in patients with dementia). Global functional impact of pain was mild-moderate, emotional impact was severe in 41.5% of patients (n=51), and breakthrough pain was observed in 8.6% (n=13). Conclusions: Pain must always be explored and assessed in patients with advanced chronicity, since it was highly prevalent in all locations and trajectories, being particularly intense in patients at home with organ failure and multimorbidity. Breakthrough pain was found in non-oncological trajectories.(AU)

[Prevalence and clinical characteristics of pain in patients with advanced chronic disease]. / Prevalencia y características clínicas del dolor en pacientes con enfermedad crónica avanzada.

OBJECTIVES: Determine pain prevalence and clinical characteristics in patients with advanced chronic disease and identify breakthrough pain frequency. DESIGN: Observational, descriptive, cross-sectional study. LOCATION: Three primary care teams and one intermediate care hospital. PARTICIPANTS: All patients with advanced chronic disease. MAIN MEASUREMENTS: A semi-structured interview was performed to collect demographic, clinical, and specific variables of pain using validated scales. Patient location (home, nursing home or hospital) and advanced chronicity trajectory (organ failure, oncological disease, dementia, or multimorbidity) were recorded. Pain was assessed based on the Brief Pain Inventory (BPI) and, in cases of disabling dementia, using the Pain Assessment in Advanced Dementia (PAINAD). A statistical descriptive, comparative analysis between variables was performed using the R software. RESULTS: Of all patients selected, 223 (60.4%) were included. Prevalence of pain: 83.9% (n=187), with no differences based on location or trajectory. Significant differences in pain intensity based on location (P=.0046) (moderate-severe in patients at home, moderate in hospital patients, and mild in nursing home patients) and on trajectory (P<.0001) (moderate-severe in patients with organ failure and multimorbidity, moderate in patients with cancer, and mild in patients with dementia). Global functional impact of pain was mild-moderate, emotional impact was severe in 41.5% of patients (n=51), and breakthrough pain was observed in 8.6% (n=13). CONCLUSIONS: Pain must always be explored and assessed in patients with advanced chronicity, since it was highly prevalent in all locations and trajectories, being particularly intense in patients at home with organ failure and multimorbidity. Breakthrough pain was found in non-oncological trajectories.

Estudio observacional, prospectivo y multicéntrico sobre el uso de citrato de fentanilo transmucosa en la práctica clínica habitual para el control de las crisis de dolor irruptivo en pacientes oncológicos / Observational, prospective and multicenter study on the use of transmucosal fentanyl citrate in regular clinical practice for the control of breakthrough pain crises in cancer patients

Objetivo: Evaluar el grado de satisfacción de los pacientes y/o cuidadores con el tratamiento de citrato de fentanilo transmucosa en la gestión de las crisis de dolor irruptivo oncológico en términos de facilidad de uso. Métodos: Se realizó un estudio observacional, prospectivo y multicéntrico con 48 pacientes sometidos a tratamiento de mantenimiento con opioides para el dolor crónico basal provocado por el cáncer y que, además, sufrían crisis de dolor irruptivo para las que estaban recibiendo tratamiento con citrato de fentanilo. La variable principal del estudio fue el grado de satisfacción de los pacientes y/o sus cuidadores con el citrato de fentanilo en el manejo de las crisis de dolor irruptivo oncológico, evaluadas mediante cuestionarios Escala Visual Analógica (EVA). Resultados: El 90,6 % de los pacientes/cuidadores muestran un elevado grado de satisfacción con el empleo de citrato de fentanilo en términos de facilidad de uso (valor medio EVA de 8,2). Por su parte, tanto la valoración general por parte de los pacientes/cuidadores como por parte de los sanitarios ha sido muy positiva (valor medio EVA 7,7). Conclusiones: El citrato de fentanilo es una terapia fácil de usar y eficaz para el tratamiento de las crisis de dolor irruptivo oncológico, con amplia aceptación tanto por parte de pacientes y cuidadores como de los profesionales sanitarios.(AU)

Objective: To assess the degree of satisfaction of patients and/or caregivers with transmucosal fentanyl citrate treatment in the management of breakthrough cancer pain crises in terms of ease of use. Methods: An observational, prospective and multicenter study was carried out with 48 patients undergoing maintenance treatment with opioids for baseline chronic cancer pain and who, in addition, suffered breakthrough pain crises for those who were receiving treatment with fentanyl citrate. The main variable of the study was the degree of satisfaction of the patients and/or their caregivers with fentanyl citrate in the management of breakthrough cancer pain crises, evaluatedby means of Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) questionnaires. Results: 90.6 % of patients/caregivers show a high degree of satisfaction with the use of fentanyl citrate in terms of ease of use (mean VAS value of 8.2). For its part, both the general assessment by the patients/caregivers and by the healthcare professionals has been very positive (mean VAS value 7.7). Conclusions: Fentanyl citrate is an easy-to-use and effective therapy for the treatment of breakthrough cancer pain crises, widely accepted by both patients and caregivers as well as health professionals.(AU)

Prevalencia y caracterización del dolor irruptivo oncológico en pacientes hospitalizados en Vigo. Estudio Dolopaho / Prevalence and characterization of breakthough cancer pain in hospitalized patients in Vigo. The Dolopaho study

Introducción: El dolor sigue siendo en la actualidad un problema no resuelto en los pacientes con cáncer. A pesar de los avances en el tratamiento del dolor en los últimos años, persisten lagunas que dificultan un tratamiento global, como es el caso del dolor irruptivo oncológico (DIO). Objetivos: Evaluar la prevalencia de DIO de una muestra de pacientes ingresados en un servicio de oncología médica, analizar si el dolor era el principal motivo de ingreso en estos pacientes, así como determinar si existe un infradiagnóstico y, por tanto, un infratratamiento en los mismos previamente al ingreso. Métodos: Estudio observacional prospectivo. Se reclutaron los pacientes de forma consecutiva, independientemente del motivo de ingreso. Las variables analizadas en relación con el dolor irruptivo fueron las siguientes: presencia de dolor irruptivo según el algoritmo de Davies; semejanza de los episodios de dolor irruptivo entre sí y respecto al dolor basal; número de crisis de dolor a lo largo del día y a lo largo de la semana; escala visual analógica del dolor irruptivo; tiempo desde el inicio del dolor hasta su máxima intensidad medida en los siguientes rangos: < 5 min, 5-30 min, > 30 min; la duración de los episodios: < 5 min, 5-30 min, > 30 min; desencadenantes del dolor irruptivo (incidental, espontáneo); percepción individual de la alteración en la calidad de vida y efectividad de los fármacos utilizados. Resultados: Se incluyeron un total de 115 pacientes. En la muestra analizada el 33,9 % de los pacientes presentaron dolor irruptivo, de ellos el 95 % recibían tratamiento con opioides mayores, pero en solo el 56 % de los casos se asociaron a opioides de liberación ultrarrápida. Conclusión: El manejo de los pacientes con DIO continúa siendo un reto a día de hoy. Cerca de la mitad de los pacientes con dolor irruptivo no habían recibido tratamiento adecuado en nuestro estudio y, por tanto, probablemente no estaban bien caracterizados. (AU)

Background: Pain is often inadequately treated in patients with cancer. Although in recent years there have been major advances in the treatment of pain, there are still gaps for a global treatment, such as breakthrouth cancer pain (BCP). Objectives: The main objective was to evaluate the prevalence of BCP in a sample of patients admitted to a oncology medical department, in order to see whether pain is the main reason for admission in these patients, as well as to determine whether they were correctly treated and diagnosed before admission. Methods: An observational, prospective study. Patients were enrolled consecutively, regardless of reason for admission. The variables analyzed in relation to breakthrough pain were the following: presence of breakthrough pain according to the Davies scale; similarities of breakthrough pain events to each other and to baseline pain; number of irruptive pain events throughout the day and throughout the week; visual analogue scale of breakthrough pain; time between the onset of breakthrough pain and maximum intensity as measured in the following ranges: < 5 minutes, 5-30 minutes, > 30 minutes; duration of the breakthrough pain event (< 5 minutes, 5-30 minutes, > 30 minutes); triggers of breakthrough pain (incidental, spontaneous); perceived quality of life impairment and effectiveness of the drugs used. Results: A total of 115 patients consecutively admitted were analyzed regardless of reason for admission. In the analyzed sample, 33.9 % of patients had breakthrouth pain, and 95 % of the patients with breakthrough pain received treatment with strong opioids, though only in 56.4 % of cases associated with ultra-rapid-release opioids.Conclusions: The management of BCP is still a challenge. About half of patients with breakthrough cancer pain had not received adecuated treatment in our study, and were therefore poorly diagnosed. (AU)

Management and perception of therapeutic adherence of breakthrough cancer pain by oncologists in Spain / Manejo y percepción de la adherencia al tratamiento del dolor irruptivo oncológico por oncólogos españoles

Objectives:The objective of this study was to evaluate the perception of oncologists on adherence to opioid treatment for breakthrough cancer pain (BTcP) in current clinical practice. Our study also included an assessment of other aspects of the management of BTcP, such as the reasons for non-adherence, the adequacy of the treatment, or the possible interventions required to improve adherence.Methods:This observational, multicentric study was carried out in 84 hospitals throughout Spain. Oncologists were surveyed by means of an online questionnaire on their management of background cancer pain and BTcP, and their perception of adherence to the treatments.Results:Oncologists (N = 97) reported that their first choice for BTcP was fentanyl (various formulations), with high perceived tolerance (> 76 % of patients). Most oncologists (96.8 %) evaluated adherence in their patients but only 69. 1% always prescribed medication to prevent adverse effects of opioids and only 74.2 % always titrated the minimum dose. Most oncologists (51.0 %) perceived that 25-50 % of the patients did not adhere to the treatment for BTcP. Adherence to background pain treatments was high, although many oncologists considered that patients usually stopped taking the medication when feeling better. The main reported reasons for non-adherence were the self-perceived feeling that treatment was unnecessary, perceived inefficacy of the treatment, concerns about potential adverse effects, and lack of family support.Conclusions:Oncologists perceived that adherenceto BTcP treatment can be improved and recommended treatment of adverse effects, better education about pain management to patients and relatives, written prescription instructions, and simplification of drug regimens.(AU)

Introducción:El objetivo de este estudio fue evaluar la percepción de los oncólogos sobre la adherencia al tratamiento con opioides para el dolor irruptivo oncológico (DIO) en la práctica clínica real. El estudio también incluyó una evaluación de otros aspectos del manejo del DIO, como las razones de la no adherencia, la adecuación del tratamiento, o las posibles intervenciones necesarias para mejorar la adherencia.Métodos:Este estudio observacional multicéntrico se realizó en 84 hospitales de toda España. Los oncólogos fueron encuestados por medio de un cuestionario online sobre su manejo del dolor oncológico basal y del DIO, y su percepción de la adherencia a los tratamientos.Resultados:Los oncólogos (n = 97) indicaron que su primera opción para el DIO fue el fentanilo (varias formulaciones), con alta tolerancia (> 76 % de los pacientes). La mayoría de los oncólogos (96,8 %) evaluaron la adherencia en sus pacientes, pero solo el 69,1 % siempre prescribió medicamentos para prevenir los efectos adversos de los opioides, y solo el 74,2 % siempre tituló la dosis mínima. La mayoría de los oncólogos (51 %) percibieron que el 25-50 % de los pacientes no mostraban buena adherencia al tratamiento para DIO. La adherencia a los tratamientos de dolor basal fue alta, aunque muchos oncólogos consideraron que los pacientes generalmente dejaban de tomar el medicamento cuando se sentían mejor. Las principales razones para la no adherencia fueron la sensación de que el tratamiento era innecesario, la ineficacia percibida del tratamiento, la preocupación por los posibles efectos adversos y la falta de apoyo familiar.Conclusiones:Los oncólogos percibieron que la adherencia al tratamiento para el DIO puede mejorarse y recomendaron el tratamiento de los efectos adversos de la medicación, una mejor educación sobre el manejo del dolor a los pacientes y familiares, instrucciones escritas de prescripción y simplificación de los regímenes de medicamentos.(AU)

[Breakthrough cancer pain in the elderly]. / Dolor irruptivo oncológico en el anciano.

Breakthrough pain is defined as an acute exacerbation of pain with rapid onset, short duration and moderate or high intensity, which occurs spontaneously or in connection with a predictable or unpredictable event despite there being stabilised and controlled baseline pain. However, there are doubts about the definition, terminology, epidemiology, and assessment of breakthrough pain, with no clear answers or consensus, especially in the elderly population. This non-systematic review summarises the most important aspects of breakthrough pain in the elderly, based on the limited publications there are in that population group.

[Breakthrough pain treatment with sublingual fentanyl in patients with chronic cutaneous ulcers]. / Tratamiento del dolor irruptivo con fentanilo sublingual en pacientes con úlceras cutáneas crónicas.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of the study was to assess the efficacy and safety of opioids in the management of pain in those patients with chronic cutaneous ulcers and breakthrough/incidental pain. MATERIAL AND METHOD: An open-label, multicentre, prospective, uncontrolled study was conducted in the pain and ulcer units of 5 hospitals across the Comunidad Valenciana. Eligibility criteria were baseline pain 4 in the visual analogue scale or breakthrough procedural pain 4. Exclusion criteria were cognitive impairment, opioid intolerance, or patient refusal to provide informed consent. The protocol scheduled 5 controls: baseline (enrolment), 15 days, one month, 2 months, and 3 months. The main outcome measure of the study was the visual analogue scale score during rest, movement and procedures. Opioids were administered for release of the baseline pain, and sublingual fentanyl for breakthrough pain. RESULTS: A total of 32 patients (86.5%) completed the study. Baseline pain achieved a mean improvement of 3.6 visual analogue scale points (SD 2.3), movement pain improved by 3.9 points (SD 2.5) and procedural pain improved by 4.5 points (SD 2.8), and the mean pain intensity improvement was statistically significant from the first control and at all controls thereafter (P<.001). Nausea was reported by 14 patients (43.8%), drowsiness and constipation by 7 (21.9%), itching by 5 (15.6%), and one (3.1%) reported vomiting. CONCLUSIONS: Structured assessment of pain is a key concept in the management of patient with chronic cutaneous ulcers. The results of this study suggest that opioid therapy provides clinically significant pain relief with few adverse effects.