Blast from the past: Addiction fears and palliative care

 Recalled without comment...

November 25, 2003
The Delicate Balance Of Pain and Addiction
By BARRY MEIER

Over the past two decades, conflicting medical ideas have surfaced about narcotic painkillers, the drugs that Rush Limbaugh blames for his addiction while being treated for chronic back pain. And both of them, not surprisingly, have centered on the bottom-line question: just how great a risk of abuse and addiction do narcotics pose to pain patients?

Throughout much of the last century, doctors believed that large numbers of patients who used these drugs would become addicted to them. That incorrect view meant that cancer sufferers and other patients with serious pain were denied drugs that could have brought them relief.

But over the past decade, a very different viewpoint has emerged, one championed by doctors specializing in pain treatment and drug companies eager to broaden the market for such drugs. It held that these medications posed scant risk to pain patients, and some experts now believe that it also had unfortunate consequences because it caused, among other things, physicians to develop a false sense of security about these drugs.

''The pendulum went in two opposite directions,'' said Dr. Bradley S. Galer, group vice president for scientific affairs at Endo Pharmaceuticals, which manufactures two widely used narcotics, Percodan and Percocet. ''Luckily, now the pendulum is focusing where it should be, right in the middle.''

The reassessment of narcotic risk comes at a time of skyrocketing rates of misuse and abuse of such drugs. Medical experts agree that most pain patients can successfully use narcotics without consequences. But the same experts also say that much remains unknown about the number or types of chronic pain sufferers who will become addicted as a result of medical care, or ''iatrogenically'' addicted. The biggest risk appears to be to patients who have abused drugs or to those who have an underlying, undiagnosed vulnerability to abuse substances, a condition that may affect an estimated 3 to 14 percent of the population.

Dr. James Zacny, an associate professor at the University of Chicago and a leading narcotics researcher, said there was a dearth of data about the long-term risks that narcotics pose. ''We don't know a lot about the rate of iatrogenic addiction,'' he said.

It is not unusual for views about particular drugs and their hazards to change over time. But a look at the shift in medical thinking about the risk of addiction shows a struggle that was waged both as a guerrilla war among doctors and a high-powered drug industry initiative. It was also an effort that, while seeking a laudable goal, inaccurately portrayed science.

Modern views about the threat posed to patients by narcotics were shaped in the mid-1980's when pain treatment experts reported that cancer patients treated with such drugs did not exhibit the type of euphoria displayed by people who abused narcotics. That led some physicians to argue that strong, long-acting narcotics could also be used safely to treat patients with serious pain unrelated to cancer, like persistent back pain or nerve disorders.

One leader of this initiative, known as the ''pain management movement,'' was Dr. Russell Portenoy, who is now chairman of the pain medicine and palliative care department at Beth Israel Medical Center in New York. And soon Dr. Portenoy and others were pointing to studies that they said backed up their contention that the risk of powerful narcotics to pain patients was scant.

''There is a growing literature showing that these drugs can be used for a long time, with few side effects and that addiction and abuse are not a problem,'' Dr. Portenoy said in a 1993 interview with The New York Times.

Drug companies amplified that theme in materials sent to doctors and pharmacists. For example, Janssen Pharmaceutica, the producer of Duragesic, called the risk of addiction ''relatively rare'' in a package insert with the drug. Endo termed the risk ''very rare'' in presentations to hospital pharmacists. Purdue Pharma, the manufacturer of the powerful narcotic OxyContin, distributed a brochure to chronic pain patients called ''From One Pain Patient to Another,'' contending that it and similar drugs posed minimal risks.

''Some patients may be afraid of taking opioids because they are perceived as too strong or addictive,'' the brochure stated. ''But that is far from actual fact. Less than 1 percent of patients taking opioids actually become addicted.''

The trouble, however, was that studies that looked at the experience of pain patients who used long-acting narcotics for extended periods of time did not exist. So narcotics advocates like Dr. Portenoy and drug companies like Purdue Pharma had looked elsewhere, at surveys of patients whose use of narcotics was limited. And those reports were not always put into proper context.

A frequently cited survey of narcotics use, taken in 1980, found ''only four cases of addiction among 11,882 hospitalized patients.'' A director of that survey, Dr. Hershel Jick, an associate professor of medicine at Boston University, said his study did not follow patients after they left the hospital and did not address the risk of narcotics when they were prescribed in outpatient settings.

In another case, advocates of increased narcotics use also misstated a study's results. It involved a study of chronic headache sufferers conducted at the Diamond Headache Clinic in Chicago that some pain care specialists repeatedly claimed had found only ''three problem cases'' among some 2,000 patients.

While the Diamond Headache Clinic did treat 2,369 patients in the study period, just 62 were studied because they met the criteria of having used painkillers alone or in combination with barbiturates for six months before entering the clinic. And the report's findings were far different from the way they were characterized by narcotics advocates. It concluded, ''There is a danger of dependency and abuse in patients with chronic headaches.''

Dr. Seymour Diamond, the clinic's director, said in a recent interview that neither pain experts nor narcotics manufacturers like Purdue Pharma who cited his study contacted him to discuss how they planned to use it. And he added that he believed that it was mischaracterized.

''It distorts the picture and it clearly underplays the risks,'' Dr. Diamond said.

In a recent interview, Dr. Portenoy said he now had misgivings about how he and other pain specialist used the research. He said that he had not intended to mischaracterize it or to mislead fellow doctors, but that he had tried to counter claims that overplayed the risk of addiction. Still, he and others acknowledge, the campaign by pain specialists and drug companies has had consequences.

''In our zeal to improve access to opioids and relieve patient suffering, pain specialists have understated the problem, drawing faulty conclusions from very limited data,'' Dr. Steven D. Passik, a pain management expert wrote in a 2001 letter published in The Journal of Pain and Symptom Management. ''In effect, we have told primary care doctors and other prescribers that the risk was so low they essentially could ignore the possibility of addiction.''

Today, some narcotics manufacturers like Endo have changed or are changing the way they present abuse and addiction information. For example, Purdue Pharma, while maintaining the accuracy of its past position, now states in patient information that it does ''not know how often patients with continuing (chronic) pain become addicted to narcotics but the risk has been reported to be small.'' Ligand Pharmaceuticals, which manufactures a time-released form of morphine under the brand name Avinza, makes a similar statement.

For its part, a spokeswoman for the federal Food and Drug Administration, Kathleen K. Quinn, said the agency believed that ''the risk of addiction to chronic pain patients treated with narcotic analgesics has not been well studied and is not well characterized.''

In a letter to The New York Times, Purdue stated that it had found no cases of iatrogenic addiction in a recently completed long-term study of chronic pain patients suffering from osteoarthritis, diabetes and low pain back. Purdue did not identify where it planned to submit the study for publication although the company said it involved an older group of patients whose average age was 55.

Such results are encouraging. But several pain experts said that the full risks of narcotics will not be fully known until these drugs are tested in a wide range of pain patients of different ages and conditions.

''You may have a study telling how uncommon these problems are in patients over 50,'' Dr. Portenoy said. ''But what does that tell you about the risks to younger patients or those patients who walk into a doctor's office with a history of substance abuse or psychological problems.''


Link

Placebo effect video

Here's a nice summary of some of the current understanding of the placebo effect. I'm also a fan of the fact that the efficacy of a placebo pill increases with the geometric complexity of its shape.

Also, the point at the end about using the research on placebos is bolstered by research on the nocebo effect -where contextual cues make the condition worse (though the nocebo effect lacks much of the placebo effect's nuance).

Oklahoma restricting injections for chronic pain

Unfortunately, the article doesn't say why this was an issue in the first place

Oklahoma House gets bill restricting injections for chronic pain | NewsOK.com: "
Only physicians would be allowed to administer precise pain management injections under a bill approved Tuesday by a House committee.

The House Public Health Committee approved Senate Bill 1133 by a 14-5 vote. It now goes to the full House.
Rep. John Trebilcock, who took over authorship of the bill, said pain management injections into a patient’s spinal or neck area must be precisely administered.

'Chronic pain medication is medicine and should be practiced by doctors,’ said Trebilcock, R-Broken Arrow.

The measure was carried over from last year after it failed to win passage. Efforts to come up with a compromise among a hospital group, doctors and certified registered nurse anesthetists fizzled. Certified registered nurse anesthetists now administer spinal injections to manage pain.

Trebilcock said the practice of chronic pain management is 'extremely dangerous.’

An injection in the wrong spot could cause paralysis or not effectively treat the pain, he said.

Trebilcock said certified nurse anesthetists would be allowed to continue to give other injections. It’s estimated the chronic pain injections take up only about 4 percent of their duties, he said.

Marvin York, a lobbyist for the Oklahoma Association of Nurse Anesthetists, said the measure would be a hardship to rural patients, because few rural doctors practice in pain management.

'I can’t imagine why any rural legislator ... could possibly be for this bill,’ he said.

Victor Long of Norman, a certified registered nurse anesthetist, said about 80 percent of the spinal injections for pain are administered by certified registered nurse anesthetists. About 500 certified registered nurse anesthetists are in the state, he said.

Rep. Pat Ownbey, R-Ardmore, said he wondered why the bill was necessary because no complaints had been filed against certified registered nurse anesthetists administering chronic pain management injections.

'Is this a patient issue or a money issue?’ he asked fellow committee members. 'Make no mistake, this is a turf war.’

Trebilcock said doctors are willing to travel to rural areas to administer the injections.

'Rural Oklahoma shouldn’t have to settle for less than a doctor when they suffer from chronic pain,’ he said."

Does Morphine Stimulate Cancer Growth?

No.

GeriPal does yeoman's work in explaining why

Does Morphine Stimulate Cancer Growth? | GeriPal - A Geriatrics and Palliative Care Blog: ""

Antidepressants, CYP2D6, and opioid metabolism

Awhile back I posted this bleg for more information about the interaction between antidepressants and codeine. Peter Nelson emailed me asking whether I had found out anything else. I hadn't, so he did some research of his own which he has kindly agreed to allow me to share.

Take it away, Peter:

[Usual disclaimer: Neither he nor I are medical professionals. Don't take this as medical advice, et cetera.]

Since emailing you I’ve been studying the research literature and it’s crystal clear that codeine will not have any analgesic properties for people either genetically lacking CYP2D6 (6-10% of caucasians, other %’s for other ethnic groups) or who are taking a drug that blocks it.
Many antidepressants, including fluoxetine, paroxetine and bupropion are strong inhibitors of it, as are many other drugs including various antiarrhythmics, antifungals, cancer drugs, etc.

The story on the other synthetic opioids doesn’t look too good either. CYP2D6 plays a critical role in the metabolism of hydrocodone, oxycodone, and tramadol but they have more complex metabolic pathways and even now there are details that remain to be elucidated.

Hydrocodone itself has little affinity for the μ opioid (pain) receptors so it has to get metabolized the main clinically-active metabolite is assumed to be hydromorphone because it’s a known painkiller with a high affinity for the μ opioid receptors. And lack of CYP2D6 blocks that process. That part is clear, but there are unanswered questions.

For example in Kaplan et al, (Inhibition of cytochrome P450 2D6 metabolism of hydrocodone to hydromorphone does not importantly affect abuse liability J Pharmacol Exp Ther. 1997 Apr;281(1):103-8) subjects’ subjective perception of the effects of hydrocodone were unrelated to hydromorphone conversion. Heiskanen et al, (Effects of blocking CYP2D6 on the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of oxycodone. Clin Pharmacol Ther. 1998 Dec;64(6):603-11. ) performed a similar experiment involving oxycodone with similar results.
But critically, neither experiment looked at pain tolerance. Also Otton et al, (CYP2D6 phenotype determines the metabolic conversion of hydrocodone to hydromorphone - SV - Clin Pharmacol Ther - 01-NOV-1993; 54(5):) performed an experiment similar to Kaplan’s but did find that subjects responded in ways consisten with hydromorphone conversion (again, no pain test).

Based on what we think we know about hydrocodone (i.e., that the active metabolite is hydromorphone), Otton’s results make more sense. But both hydrocodone and oxycodone still have work left to do elucidating the effects of some of the other metabolites that are currently thought to be inactive.

And Heiskanen’s results also make sense because oxycodone – the parent compound - actually appears to have a nontrivial affinity for μ receptors itself, and furthermore some of its other metabolites such as noroxycodone, which may be mediated by a different enzyme – CYP2C19 - may also have high binding affinity. (Lalovic et al, Quantitative contribution of CYP2D6 and CYP3A to oxycodone metabolism in human liver and intestinal microsomes. Drug Metab Dispos. 2004 Apr;32(4):447-54. )
In other words oxycodone may work fine as an analgesic for CYP2D6 impaired patients. BUT that doesn’t mean oxycodone gets us off the hook - instead it appears to have a nastier hook: The oxymorhone is far more readily cleared than the parent compound oxycodone. So without CYP2D6 oxycodone accumulates, potentially becoming toxic or fatal.
Two studies underscore that risk: Jannetto, et al, Pharmacogenomics as molecular autopsy for postmortem forensic toxicology; genotyping cytochrome P450 2D6 for oxycodone cases. J Anal Toxicol 2002; 26:438–447 and Drummer et al, A study of deaths involving oxycodone. J Forensic Sci 1994; 39:1069–1075.

The real bottom lines are these:

1. Work remains to be done in elucidating both the pharmacokinetics and clinical effects of various metabolites for all of the synthetic opioids.

2. As far as I could tell, there seem to be no human studies evaluating analgesic properties of synthetic opioids for patients who either lack the gene for CYP2D6 or for whom CYP2D6 is blocked by a drug-drug interaction.

3. Drug-drug interactions of this type will become more common as the population becomes older and as we use a greater variety of drugs. As it is, bupropion. paroxetine and fluoxetine (all potent CYP2D6 blockers) accounted for roughly 50 million prescriptions in the US alone last year. Other CYP2D6 blockers account for millions more.

4. I’ve spoken to several physicians about this and they all expressed worry and concern that they feel unsure how to do pain management for CYP2D6-impaired patients, especially in postoperative or fracture cases where OTC drugs aren’t enough and the “nuclear options” like fentanyl or methadone (both of which work regardless of CYP2D6) would be overkill and dangerous.

Visit Peter's blog at http://blog.pnart.com/. Thanks again!

A role for glial cell-targeting treatments for pain?

The Psychology of Pain blog links to an interesting new study from CU-Boulder. I don't want to steal too much of his post, so here's a tease:

Under normal circumstances glial cells are thought to be like housekeepers, said Watkins. They essentially clean up debris and provide support for neurons.

But, like Gremlins, they have a nasty side too

[the researchers] believe they have figured out how morphine affects glial cells and neurons. 'We've found that different receptors are involved in how morphine suppresses pain through its actions on neurons versus how morphine activates glial cells,' Watkins said. 'What this means is that you should be able to separate the suppressive effects of morphine -- its pain-reducing effects through its action on neurons -- from all of its bad effects when it excites glial cells.'

(Via Psychology of Pain.)

Redheads need more drugs

Huh.

The Pain of Being a Redhead - Well Blog - NYTimes.com:
A growing body of research shows that people with red hair need larger doses of anesthesia and often are resistant to local pain blockers like Novocaine. As a result, redheads tend to be particularly nervous about dental procedures and are twice as likely to avoid going to the dentist as people with other hair colors, according to new research published in The Journal of the American Dental Association.

Researchers believe redheads are more sensitive to pain because of a mutation in a gene that affects hair color. In people with brown, black and blond hair, the gene, for the melanocortin-1 receptor, produces melanin. But a mutation in the MC1R gene results in the production of a substance called pheomelanin that results in red hair and fair skin.

The MC1R gene belongs to a family of receptors that include pain receptors in the brain, and as a result, a mutation in the gene appears to influence the body’s sensitivity to pain. A 2004 study showed that redheads require, on average, about 20 percent more general anesthesia than people with dark hair or blond coloring. And in 2005, researchers found that redheads are more resistant to the effects of local anesthesia, such as the numbing drugs used by dentists.
[....]

It's also nice to hear that the research came from taking this sort of common experience seriously, rather than simply dismissing it:

Dr. Daniel I. Sessler, an anesthesiologist and chairman of the department of outcomes research at the Cleveland Clinic, said he began studying hair color after hearing so many colleagues speculate about redheads requiring more anesthesia.

‘The reason we studied redheads in the beginning, it was essentially an urban legend in the anesthesia community saying redheads were difficult to anesthetize,’ Dr. Sessler said. ‘This was so intriguing we went ahead and studied it. Redheads really do require more anesthesia, and by a clinically important amount.’

If I had red hair, I would bring a copy of the paper with me to the dentist/doctor to help them take my needs seriously.*

*Just as I would, for example, show literature on the usefulness of pre-incision lidocaine in lowering post-surgicial pain to my surgeon.

I might also post articles on the problems with using morphine in patients with kidney problems on the wall by an elderly relative's hospital bed.

Methadone prescribers' network

The astonishing recent rise in opioid overdoses (many involving methadone) has finally forced me to agree that our (at least in the US) opioid policies and practices need some revision. Thus this expansion of a program available to buprenorphine prescribers seems welcome.

A New Service For Health Care Providers Who Prescribe Methadone To Treat Chronic Pain Or Opioid Addiction: "
A new service for health care providers prescribing methadone to treat chronic pain or opioid addiction -- the Physician Clinical Support System for Methadone (PCCS-M) -- opens this week with a mechanism to connect prescribers of methadone with experienced clinicians for one-to-one mentoring regarding the use of this medication.

Methadone is an inexpensive opioid medication that has several unique properties that make it particularly well suited to the treatment of chronic pain or opioid addiction, but it also has side effects and the potential for overdose and requires specific information for its proper use.

The new service is one in a number of federally-funded projects that address the need within the nation's health care system to provide safe and effective care of patients with chronic pain and opioid addiction while, at the same time, protecting the public from prescription drug abuse and diversion of medications. Using this new service, prescribers can contact a mentor, a knowledgeable colleague, by phone or e-mail with specific questions about the use of methadone for treating chronic pain or opioid addiction.

Source: American Society of Addiction Medicine "

As a general rule, I think drug policy should (strongly) promote the responsible clinician's ability to prescribe opioids as she sees fit . So, insofar as this sort of program can help stem diversion and accidental overdose, I'd much rather see more of these than more restrictive drug policies.

Mindfulness in cancer treatment

Go read Mindy Greenstein's WaPo piece:

Aided by a Proponent of Mindfulness, Cancer Patient Focuses on Joys of Today - washingtonpost.com

Why are you still here?

It's awesome. Trust me.

Okay fine. Don't believe me. Here's a small bit of its awesomeness to entice you:

Sanderson realized that this was what she was doing with her needle and, ultimately, with her illness: letting her experience of the present moment be overtaken by her fears for the future. Every hour she spent ruminating about the pain that was awaiting her was another hour she wasn't fully engaged with her life, another hour she couldn't enjoy. She couldn't pretend she didn't know her prognosis. So she chose a different route.

"I realized," she told us, "that the moments of pain -- even if the pain was excruciating -- were actually very short compared with the pain I put myself through by thinking about it ahead of time." If she could stay focused on the present moment no matter what she was doing -- washing dishes, talking to a colleague, even chatting with the doctor just before her treatment -- up until the moment the needle actually pierced her skin, she could cope. Even more, if she could keep that same focus from meandering to thoughts about what lay ahead in the future in general, she could continue to make the most of every moment that was not painful.

Some people think being positive means being certain of a cure. For others, it means enjoying the kindness of a friend or the mischief of a child or a rerun of "Battlestar Galactica" today, and leaving tomorrow's sorrows for tomorrow. For me, it meant.....

Oh you want to know how it ends don't you?

Now do you believe me?

Go read it. I'll still be here when you get back.

H/T: LB

Confusing 'ameliorating' with 'obliterating'

I've seen several authors make this point, but in an email to me, reader SV put it in a very nice way:

"We physicians are called upon to "ameliorate" pain, which often is considered synonymous with "obliterating" pain."

This is a very important flip-side to the incredible advances that have been made in pain medicine and public expectations about treatment.


The way 'ameliorate' and 'obliterate' have gotten run together in the public's (and even in many physicians') expectations has a significant downside: In addition to being annoying and disappointing to all involved, there's a case to be made that this sometimes (often?) leads to worse treatment outcomes.

For example, if a patient expects complete relief from her pain, partial relief might leave her depressed, frustrated, and resigned. Attitudes like those can be some of the biggest factors in determining how bad a pain is.* This is especially the case with many chronic pain conditions.

Of course, we've come a long way from seeing pain as an inevitable concomitant of disease and treatment, and thus not a direct concern for the physician.

And, we've to a large degree gotten over the invidious tendency to heap moral condemnation upon those who don't suffer in silence, and to see all pains, including medical pains, as deserved (the words 'pain' and 'punishment' both have their roots in 'poena').

On that note, this story in the Boston Globe is important: The Day Pain Died: What Really Happened During the Most Famous Moment in Boston Medicine

So, I suppose its worth keeping some perspective on how much attitudes and expectations have come in a very short amount of time. Still, there's still a long way left to go.

--

*As always: These attitudes are not merely responses to the pain, they can become part of the pain itself.

It is a serious conceptual mistake to think of a patient who feels helpless and resigned in the face of her pain as (necessarily) being in two bad states:

(a) Her pain is bad to degree x

and

(b) Feeling helpless and resigned is bad to degree y.

Rather, these feelings are themselves parts of the pain. Their treatment is just as much a treatment of the pain itself as is the administration of morphine.

Percocet and Vicodin be gone (hopefully)

In light of my long-running antipathy toward the way acetominophen is currently used and regulated, this makes me very happy:

Panel Recommends Ban on 2 Popular Painkillers - NYTimes.com

By GARDINER HARRIS
Published: June 30, 2009

ADELPHI, Md. — A federal advisory panel voted narrowly on Tuesday to recommend a ban on Percocet and Vicodin, two of the most popular prescription painkillers in the world, because of their effects on the liver.
[....]

The agency is not required to [....] follow the recommendations of its advisory panels, but it usually does.

Unfortunately

But they voted 20 to 17 against limiting the number of pills allowed in each bottle, with members saying such a limit would probably have little effect and could hurt rural and poor patients. Bottles of 1,000 pills are often sold at discount chains.

‘We have no data to show that people who overdose shop at Costco,’ said Dr. Edward Covington, a panel member from the Cleveland Clinic Foundation.

IIRC, the problem is that their parents do. The patients who intentionally take handfuls of acetaminophen are usually teenage girls in initial and not-fully-serious suicide attempts. Few other countries allow the sort of bulk packaging we do.

Finally, I find this very hard to bellieve:

Still, some doctors predicted that the recommendation would put extra burdens on physicians and patients.

‘More people will be suffering from pain,’ said Dr. Sean Mackey, chief of pain management at Stanford University Medical School. ‘More people will be seeing their doctors more frequently and running up health care costs.’

The recommendation doesn't attempt to ban acetominophen. And, the 1,000 pill bottles are relatively cheap, so its hard to see too much of an increase in marginal cost if a patient will also have to buy the acetominophen OTC.

Moreover, why would more people go to the doctor because they have to get their oxycodone and acetominophen separately? Why would they go more frequently?

Indeed,

“It ties the doctor’s hands when you put the two drugs together,” said Dr. Scott M. Fishman, a professor of anesthesiology at the University of California, Davis, and a former president of the American Academy of Pain Medicine. “There’s no reason you can’t get the same effect by using them separately.” Dr. Fisher said the combinations were prescribed so often for the sake of convenience, but added, “When you’re using controlled substances, you want to err on the side of safety rather than convenience.”

Fingers crossed that the FDA will follow the recommendation....

Opioids often preferable to NSAID's in the elderly

This is important.

The NYT reports that in light of findings that

[in elderly patients] The risks of Nsaids include ulcers and gastrointestinal bleeding and, with some drugs, an increased risk of heart attacks or strokes. The drugs do not interact well with medicines for heart failure and other conditions, and may increase high blood pressure and affect kidney function, experts said.

The American Geriatrics Society

removed those everyday medicines, called Nsaids, for nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, from the list of drugs recommended for frail elderly adults with persistent pain. The panel said the painkillers should be used “rarely” in that population, “with extreme caution” and only in “highly selected individuals.”
[....]
“We’ve come out a little strong at this point in time about the risks of Nsaids in older people,” said Dr. Bruce Ferrell, a professor of geriatrics at U.C.L.A. who is chairman of the panel. “We hate to throw the baby out with the bathwater — they do work for some people — but it is fairly high risk when these drugs are given in moderate to high doses, especially when given over time.

“It looks like patients would be safer on opioids than on high doses of Nsaids for long periods of time,” he continued

Link (My italics; I've interpolated the order of the paragraphs)

Editorial comment: I'm unhappy that the reporter chose to use this quote in emphasizing that opioids have their own dangers:

“We’re seeing huge increases nationwide of reports about the misuse and diversion of prescription drugs and related deaths,” said Dr. Roger Chou, a pain expert who was not involved in writing the guidelines for the elderly but directed the clinical guidelines program for the American Pain Society. “The concerns about opioids are very real.”

Diversion of opioids is a real problem. But it really annoys me to see it used as a counterpoint in discussions of their clinical usefulness.

I almost feel like these claims are saying something like: Advil might kill Grandma, but we might not want to give her a safer treatment because her grandson might steal it and kill himself.' (I don't think the reporter or Dr. Chou intended it this way --that's just how I take it)

Update: I was bothered by not knowing why the stuff about diversion annoys me so much. So I've posted some very rough thoughts here.

Resources for Causalgia (CRPS/RSD)

Here's a helpful guide to resources on Complex Regional Pain Syndrome/Reflex Sympathetic Dystrophy (CRPS/RSD/Causalgia)

Resources and Relief for Reflex Sympathetic Dystrophy

For those of you who don't know, Causalgia (CRPS/RSD) should rank high on the list of 'Things-You-Don't-Want'.

On the IASP definition:

Causalgia
A syndrome of sustained burning pain, allodynia, and hyperpathia after a traumatic nerve lesion, often combined with vasomotor and sudomotor dysfunction and later trophic changes.

Or as it was first described by Silas Weir Mitchell in 1872 after the Civil War

"We have some doubt as to whether this form of pain ever originates at the moment of the wounding. . . Of the special cause which provokes it, we know nothing, except that it has sometimes followed the transfer of pathological changes from a wounded nerve to unwounded nerves, and has then been felt in their distribution, so that we do not need a direct wound to bring it about. The seat of the burning pain is very various; but it never attacks the trunk, rarely the arm or thigh, and not often the forearm or leg. Its favorite site is the foot or hand. . . Its intensity varies from the most trivial burning to a state of torture, which can hardly be credited, but reacts on the whole economy, until the general health is seriously affected....The part itself is not alone subject to an intense burning sensation, but becomes exquisitely hyperanesthetic, so that a touch or tap of the finger increases the pain." quoted in UCLA pain exhibit

In other words, in causalgia part of your body feels like it's constantly on fire.

Acupuncture And Pain

In answer to a reader's question, How To Cope With Pain digs up some conclusions about the efficacy of acupuncture.

Acupuncture And Pain: "An excellent review article by Edzard Ernst, M.D.,  reports that the conditions that are most solidly backed up by evidence showing acupuncture helps are:

• chemotherapy-induced nausea/vomiting


• postoperative nausea/vomiting


• idiopathic headache (headache of unknown cause)

Many other diseases, both pain-related and not, were not helped by acupuncture.  Ernst concludes that studies ‘do not suggest that this treatment is effective for a wide range of conditions.’"

[Read the rest for some limitations in the current literature]

The original article is Acupuncture: What does the most reliable evidence tell us?, in the Journal of Pain and Symptom Management 2009, Vol 37, pages 709-714.

(Via How To Cope With Pain Blog.)

Treating Psychiatric Symptoms

From the How To Cope With Pain Blog, here's a bit about the role of a psychiatrist in comprehensive pain management:

Treating Psychiatric Symptoms: "

Welcome to the continuing series Why You Should See a Pain Management Psychiatrist.  Last week we learned that psychiatric symptoms - such as depression, anxiety, etc. - often accompany chronic pain.  This week we’ll look at how to treat psychiatric diseases.

As we saw, depression (8-50% of patients with pain), anxiety (19-50%), PTSD (10%), sleep disturbance (50% or more), drug and alcohol problems (3-19%) are common in patients with pain.  Let’s look at some important issues related to treating these problems.

1. Identifying symptoms

To be able to treat psychiatric symptoms, they first have to be identified.  Your doctor should be asking about these common symptoms and referring you if appropriate.  You should also report if you’re having such symptoms.  Don’t be embarrassed or feel like you’re complaining.  Getting help is important!

2. Taking symptoms seriously

If you’re having significant depression, anxiety or other symptoms, it’s important to report these to start to get treatment for them.  These symptoms should not be dismissed as, ‘of course you have depression - it’s because of your pain.’  Chronic pain does not automatically  mean depression, anxiety and disturbed sleep.  There’s treatment for these symptoms.!  And they should be treated!

3. Treat all the disorders that are present.

We know that if psychiatric problems are present along with pain, it’s crucial to treat both.  Treating just 1 doesn’t make the other go away.  For example, if someone has depression and pain, treating just pain doesn’t necessarily mean the depression will go away.  And sometimes neither gets better unless you treat both.

4. Treatment

There are both therapies and medications to treat nearly all psychiatric diseases.  Medication should be used only along with therapy.  I strongly recommend trying therapy first, before medication, to see if just therapy alone can work.  There are times, when psychiatric symptoms are severe, that both will be started at once, but that’s less common.  Most people with pain disorders are already on several medications and sometimes already tolerating side effects, so trying non-medication treatment first makes sense.

Other articles in the series:

1. Why comprehensive treatment works better


2. Benefits of a psychiatric evaluation


3. Treatment of psychiatric symptoms


4. Using psychiatric medications for pain


5. Learning psychological skills


6. Making positive behavioral changes


7. Making positive psychological changes


8. Benefits of supportive therapy


9. Benefits of a pain support group


10. New brain-based treatments

"

(Via How To Cope With Pain Blog.)

Regional blocks better for Cesarean sections

Medical News Today
For Cesarean Section, Regional Blocks Prove Superior To General Anesthesia
30 Apr 2009

General anesthesia (GA) is associated with an increased risk of infant intubation and low Apgar scores, relative to regional anesthesia. An analysis of 50,806 cesarean deliveries, published in the open access journal BMC Medicine, strongly supports guidelines that regional anesthesia is to be preferred over GA for most cesarean sections.

Charles Algert, from the Kolling Institute at the Royal North Shore Hospital, Sydney, was part of a team of researchers who studied births in the state of New South Wales, Australia, between 1998 and 2004. He said, "We have shown that general anesthesia poses significant risks to the neonate of both resuscitation requiring intubation and of a poor Apgar score at 5 minutes. The greatest relative risk of both adverse outcomes occurred in low-risk, planned, repeat cesarean deliveries under GA, but the greatest excess in risk attributable to GA was for emergency deliveries for fetal distress where the infant would already have been compromised to some extent".

Although current guidelines recommend regional blocks, GA was still used for 12.6% of cesareans across NSW in 2006. According to the NHS Maternity Statistics, 8.7% of cesarean sections in England in 2006-2007 were performed using GA. It is generally presumed that any harm caused by GA is short-lasting, with most studies focusing on resuscitation and the Apgar score at one minute. According to Algert, however, this may not be the case, "The increased rates of neonatal intubation after GA shown in this study represent harm in and of itself, and the persistence of low 5-minute Apgar scores suggests that deleterious effects may last longer than the immediate aftermath of delivery".

The authors conclude, "Clinicians considering the use of GA for a cesarean delivery should be aware of these possible consequences for the infant, for both planned and emergency sections".

Regional block versus general anaesthesia for caesarean section and neonatal outcomes: a population-based study
Charles S Algert, Jennifer R Bowen, Warwick B Giles, Greg E Knoblanche, Samantha L Lain and Christine L Roberts
BMC Medicine (in press)
Article available at journal website: http://www.biomedcentral.com/bmcmed/

Source:
Graeme Baldwin
BioMed Central

Article URL: http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/148091.php

More drugs, please: Italian edition

May I have your attention please?

Ahem.

STOP DENYING CANCER PATIENTS THE MEDICINE THEY NEED.

Thank you for your attention

Pattern and quality of care of cancer pain management. Results from the Cancer Pain Outcome Research Study Group.: "

Br J Cancer. 2009 Apr 28;
Apolone G, Corli O, Caraceni A, Negri E, Deandrea S, Montanari M, Greco MT

Most patients with advanced or metastatic cancer experience pain and despite several guidelines, undertreatment is well documented. A multicenter, open-label, prospective, non-randomised study was launched in Italy in 2006 to evaluate the epidemiology, patterns and quality of pain care of cancer patients. To assess the adequacy of analgesic care, we used a standardised measure, the pain management index (PMI), that compares the most potent analgesic prescribed for a patient with the reported level of the worst pain of that patient together with a selected list of clinical indicators. A total of 110 centres recruited 1801 valid cases. 61% of cases were received a WHO-level III opioid; 25.3% were classified as potentially undertreated, with wide variation (9.8-55.3%) according to the variables describing patients, centres and pattern of care. After adjustment with a multivariable logistic regression model, type of recruiting centre, receiving adjuvant therapy or not and type of patient recruited (new or already on follow-up) had a significant association with undertreatment. Non-compliance with the predefined set of clinical indicators was generally high, ranging from 41 to 76%. Despite intrinsic limitations of the PMI that may be considered as an indicator of the poor quality of cancer pain care, results suggest that the recourse to WHO third-level drugs still seems delayed in a substantial percentage of patients. This delay is probably related to several factors affecting practice in participating centres and suggests that the quality of cancer pain management in Italy deserves specific attention and interventions aimed at improving patients' outcomes.British Journal of Cancer advance online publication, 28 April 2009; doi:10.1038/sj.bjc.6605053 www.bjcancer.com."

(Via HubMed - pain.)

Well, this sucks....

My 89 year old grandpa has graciously decided to allow me to put my several years of dilettantism with the pain sciences into practice. He's entered the hospital in pretty dire straights. I'm trying to help my parents be involved with decisions about his palliative care (without getting in the real clinicians way).

So, I'll be posting some reflections about his/my experiences with pain care, ethical issues, and other topics, as we go. I'm sure much of this will be naive; especially compared with many of your experiences and backgrounds. But perhaps I'll stumble across something interesting or useful to you.

Also, from time to time I'll probably be soliciting advice on where to find information on certain specialized topics. I'll really appreciate any help I can get.

Carnival of PAIN!!!!!

The always excellent and informative How to Cope with Pain carnival for January is up here. Check it out.

Efficacy of morphine

ScienceDaily (Feb. 3, 2008) — Opioids, such as morphine, are effective and widely used drugs for the control of pain.

However, tolerance to opioids can develop with repeated administration (that is, higher and higher doses of the drug are required to achieve the same level of pain relief).

Nonetheless, there is some evidence to suggest that tolerance to opiods does not develop when they are used to treat individuals with diseases that are accompanied by inflammation.

Support for this hypothesis has now been provided by Christian Zöllner and colleagues from Charité--Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Germany, who found that peripheral tolerance to morphine did not develop in the chronically inflamed paws of rats.

Furthermore, blocking the action of endogenous opioid compounds in the inflamed tissue enabled tolerance to morphine to develop.

These data indicated that under conditions of chronic pain, endogenous opioid compounds prevent morphine from causing tolerance, inferring that the use of peripherally acting opioids for the prolonged treatment of inflammatory diseases such as chronic arthritis, inflammatory neuropathy, and cancer is not necessarily accompanied by opioid tolerance.

Journal of Clinical Investigation (2008, February 3). Managing Chronic Pain: When Does Morphine Become Less Effective?. ScienceDaily. Retrieved February 6, 2008, from http://www.sciencedaily.com­ /releases/2008/02/080203101431.htm#