Browse by Audience
The ACCURATE randomized, controlled trial compared outcomes of dorsal root ganglion (DRG) stimulation versus tonic spinal cord stimulation (SCS) in 152 subjects with chronic lower extremity pain due to complex regional pain syndrome (CRPS) type I or II. This ACCURATE sub-study was designed to evaluate whether therapy habituation occurs with DRG stimulation as compared to SCS through 12-months. A modified intention-to-treat analysis was performed to assess percentage pain relief (PPR) and responder rates at follow-up visits (end-of-trial, 1, 3, 6, 9, 12-months post-permanent implant) for all subjects that completed trial stimulation (DRG:N=73, SCS_N=72). For both groups, mean PPR was significantly greater at end-of-trial (DRG:82.2%, SCS:77.0%) than all other follow-ups. Following permanent DRG system implantation, none of the time points were significantly different from one another in PPR (range:69.3-73.9%). For the SCS group, PPR at 9-months (58.3%) and 12-months (57.9%) was significantly less than at 1-month (66.9%). The responder rate also decreased for the SCS group from 1-month (68.1%) to 12-months (61.1%). After stratifying by diagnosis, it was found that only the CRPS-I population had diminishing pain relief with SCS. DRG stimulation resulted in more stable pain relief through 12-months, while tonic SCS demonstrated therapy habituation at 9- and 12-months. Trial Registration: The ACCURATE study was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov with Identifier NCT01923285. Perspective: This article reports on an ACCURATE sub-study, which found that long-term therapy habituation occurred at 12-months with SCS, but not DRG stimulation, in patients with CRPS. The underlying mechanisms of action for these results remain unclear, although several lines of inquiry are proposed.
Ubrogepant is an oral, small-molecule calcitonin gene-related peptide receptor antagonist for acute migraine treatment.
Patients with chronic pain demonstrate interpretational bias to pain and models of pain suggest interpretational bias affects subsequent pain experience. This study developed an interpretation bias modification for pain (IBM-P) and examined its efficacy. A total of 48 patients with chronic pain were recruited and randomly assigned to either the training group (n = 24) or the control group (n = 24). Interpretational bias, negative emotions, and attentional bias to pain-related stimuli were assessed before and after conducting IBM-P. The main results indicated that the training group showed less interpretational bias and negative emotions after IBM-P than the control group. The training group also gazed at neutral words longer than at "new" affective pain words after IBM-P than they did prior to the intervention. Furthermore, significant mediating effects of post-interpretational bias were found in the relationship between the group type and post-negative emotions and post-dwell time bias. These results suggest that IBM-P can modify interpretational bias which leads to changes in negative emotions and attentional bias. Future research is needed to confirm the effect of modifying interpretational bias and its clinical utility in the field of pain management. Perspective: This article investigated the efficacy of IBM-P and suggested that modifying interpretational bias is followed by changes in negative emotions and attentional bias. These findings may help health professionals understand the role of interpretational bias in chronic pain and encourage the potential use of IBM in pain management.
Many patients use opioids chronically before surgery; it is unclear if surgery alters the likelihood of ongoing opioid consumption in these patients.
Mindfulness training ameliorates clinical and self-report measures of depression and chronic pain, but its use as an emotion regulation strategy – in individuals who do not meditate – remains understudied. As such, whether it (a) down-regulates early affective brain processes and (b) depends on cognitive control systems remains unclear. We exposed meditation-naïve participants to two kinds of stimuli: negative vs. neutral images and painful vs. warm temperatures. On alternating blocks, we asked participants to either react naturally or exercise mindful-acceptance. Emotion regulation using mindful-acceptance was associated with reductions in reported pain and negative affect, reduced amygdala responses to negative images, and reduced heat-evoked responses in medial and lateral pain systems. Critically, mindful-acceptance significantly reduced activity in a distributed, a-priori neurologic signature that is sensitive and specific to experimentally-induced pain. In addition, these changes occurred in the absence of detectable increases in prefrontal control systems. The findings support the idea that momentary mindful-acceptance regulates emotional intensity by changing initial appraisals of the affective significance of stimuli, which has consequences for clinical treatment of pain and emotion.
Scientific progress requires transparency and openness. The ability to critique, replicate and implement scientific findings depends on the transparency of the study design and methods, and the open availability of study materials, data and code. Journals are key stakeholders in supporting transparency and openness. This study aimed to evaluate 10 highest ranked pain journals' authorship policies with respect to their support for transparent and open research practices. Two independent authors evaluated the journal policies (as at 27 May 2019) using three tools: the self-developed Transparency and Openness Evaluation Tool, the Centre for Open Science (COS) Transparency Factor and the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) requirements for disclosure of conflicts of interest. We found that the journal policies had an overall low level of engagement with research transparency and openness standards. The median COS Transparency Factor score was 3.5 (IQR 2.8) of 29 possible points, and only 7 of 10 journals' stated requirements for disclosure of conflicts of interest aligned fully with the ICMJE recommendations. Improved transparency and openness of pain research has the potential to benefit all that are involved in generating and using research findings. Journal policies that endorse and facilitate transparent and open research practices will ultimately improve the evidence base that informs the care provided for people with pain.
There is growing evidence to support Acceptance and Commitment Therapy (ACT) in the management of chronic pain. However, there is a need for further research evaluating ACT combined with physical exercise, and few studies have assessed the long-term impact of this type of intervention. This case series reports on the acceptability and impact of an ACT-based multidisciplinary pain management programme on a range of health outcomes in both the short and long-term.
Race disparities in pain care are well-documented. Given that the majority of Black patients are treated by White providers, patient-provider racial discordance is one hypothesized contributor to these disparities. Research and theory suggest that providers' trait-level intergroup anxiety impacts their state-level comfort while treating patients, which, in turn, impacts their pain treatment decisions. To test these hypothesized relationships, we conducted a planned secondary analysis of data from a randomized controlled trial of a perspective-taking intervention to reduce pain treatment disparities. Mediation analyses were conducted on treatment decision data from White providers for Black virtual patients with chronic pain. Results indicated that White providers with higher trait-level intergroup anxiety reported lower state-level comfort treating Black patients and were thereby more likely to recommend opioid (indirect effect=0.76, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.21,1.51) and pain specialty (indirect effect=0.91, 95% CI: 0.26,1.78) treatments and less likely to recommend non-opioid analgesics (indirect effect=-0.45, 95% CI: -0.94,-0.12). Neither trait-level intergroup anxiety nor state-level comfort significantly influenced provider decisions for physical therapy. This study provides important new information about intra- and inter-personal contributors to race disparities in chronic pain care. These findings suggest that intergroup anxiety and the resulting situational discomfort encroach on the clinical decision-making process by influencing White providers' decisions about which pain treatments to recommend to Black patients. Should these findings be replicated in future studies, they would support interventions to help providers become more aware of their trait-level intergroup anxiety and manage their state-level reactions to patients who are racially/ethnically different from themselves.