Psychology

The magnitude of the cost of chronic pain has been a matter of concern in many countries worldwide. The high prevalence, the cost it implies for the health system, productivity, and absenteeism need to be addressed urgently. Studies have begun describing this problem in Chile, but there is still a debt in highlighting its importance and urgency on contributing to chronic pain financial coverage. This study objective is to estimate the expected cost of chronic pain and its related musculoskeletal diseases in the Chilean adult population. We conducted a mathematical decision model exercise, Markov Model, to estimate costs and consequences. Patients were classified into severe, moderate, and mild pain groups, restricted to five diseases: knee osteoarthritis, hip osteoarthritis, lower back pain, shoulder pain, and fibromyalgia. Data analysis considered a set of transition probabilities to estimate the total cost, sick leave payment, and productivity losses. Results show that the total annual cost for chronic pain in Chile is USD 943,413,490, corresponding an 80% to the five diseases studied. The highest costs are related to therapeutic management, followed by productivity losses and sick leave days. Low back pain and fibromyalgia are both the costlier chronic pain-related musculoskeletal diseases. We can conclude that the magnitude of the cost in our country's approach to chronic pain is related to increased productivity losses and sick leave payments. Incorporating actions to ensure access and financial coverage and new care strategies that reorganize care delivery to more integrated and comprehensive care could potentially impact costs in both patients and the health system. Finally, the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic will probably deepen even more this problem.

Paracetamol (N-acetyl-p-aminophenol (APAP), also known as acetaminophen) is used to relieve mild to moderate pain and reduce fever. APAP is widely used during pregnancy as it is considered safe when used as directed by regulatory authorities. However, a significant amount of epidemiological and experimental research suggests that prenatal exposure potentially alters fetal development. In this paper, we summarize the potentially harmful adverse effects of APAP and the limitations of the current evidence. It highlights the urgent need for a clinical trial, and the aim of the presented qualitative pilot study on APAP use during pregnancy is the feasibility of a large-scale randomized controlled trial (RCT). In the qualitative study, we included 232 Danish women from three hospitals in the spring of 2021. After recognizing the pregnancy, 48% had taken any APAP, and 6% had taken it weekly or more than weekly. A total of 27% who had taken APAP in the first trimester of pregnancy (even rarely) would potentially participate in an RCT. In a potential clinical trial, the women would need to be included early in the 1st trimester as the suspected harmful effects of APAP lies within this early reproductive developmental window. A possible recruitment strategy was explored. These data suggest that the target population appears positive towards an RCT. As a negative attitude among users has been considered the major hindrance for such a study, we cannot see hindrances for performing an RCT.

Tic disorders (TDs) are complex neurological conditions characterized by involuntary, persistent vocalizations and motor movements called tics. Tics involve brief muscle movements and can impair many aspects of daily functioning and quality of life in patients – and their physical nature can cause pain. Understanding individuals' experiences of tic-related pain and pain management could help explore this under-researched area and identify additional support needs for this population. The aim of this study was to investigate experiences of pain and use of pain management techniques in people with tic disorders.

The assumption that hypnotic analgesia produces placebo effects is controversial. The cognitive dimension that can distinguish hypnosis from placebo analgesia has been suggested as hypnotic susceptibility. The aim of this study is to investigate the role of the relationship between patient and therapist, assumed to produce the placebo effect, in the clinical context of hypnotic treatment for pain. Seventy subjects were given hypnosis administered by the therapist in person (Group A) and 37 practiced self-hypnosis (Group B) for 8 weeks. The Somatosensory Amplification Scale (SSAS), Stanford hypnotic susceptibility scale type A, Cold pressor test (CPT) and SCL-90 were administered at baseline, and Italian Pain Questionnaire (IPQ) dimensions were used as outcome measures. The SSAS did appear to reflect the efficacy of hypnotic analgesia in all pain variables explored, but only in Group B. An improvement in pain intensity and all IPQ dimensions were found at 8 weeks. In particular, an improvement in the affective dimension of pain, with a medium-high effect size (η2 = .774), was recorded after hypnotic analgesia, with the outcome being better in Group A than in Group B ( = .001). This outcome was independent of hypnotic susceptibility in both groups. Considering our hypothesis that, given the administration of the same suggestions, the therapist could promote the placebo response, contributing to the improvement in the affective dimension of pain outcome, which exhibited a response to the hypnotic treatment independently of hypnotic susceptibility.