Literature DB >> 11275392

The Amsterdam Pain Management Index compared to eight frequently used outcome measures to evaluate the adequacy of pain treatment in cancer patients with chronic pain.

Rianne de Wit1, Frits van Dam, Simone Loonstra, Linda Zandbelt, Anneke van Buuren, Karin van der Heijden, Gerleen Leenhouts, Huda Huijer Abu-Saad.   

Abstract

There is no 'gold standard' to assess the adequacy of pain treatment in cancer patients. The purpose of the study is to explore the Amsterdam Pain Management Index, a newly designed measure to evaluate the adequacy of cancer pain treatment, and to compare it with eight frequently used outcome measures. The Amsterdam Pain Management Index compares patients' Present Pain Intensity, Average Pain Intensity, and Worst Pain Intensity with a composite score of analgesics used, while correcting for what a patient considers as a tolerable level of pain. The eight frequently used outcome measure consisted of three Pain Intensity Markers, the Pain Relief Scale, the Patient Satisfaction Scale, and three Pain Management Indexes. In a randomized controlled trial, 313 cancer patients with a pain duration of at least 1 month were included and followed-up three times until 2 months postdischarge at home. The experimental group received a Pain Education Program, consisting of tailored pain information and instruction. Results showed that, except for the three Pain Management Indexes, the agreement between the measures was very low to moderate. The test of known-groups comparisons and equivalence between groups indicated that the Amsterdam Pain Management Index showed promising results. The Pain Intensity Markers and the Pain Relief Scale were limited in discriminating between groups, while the Patient Satisfaction Scale showed no differences between patient groups. Although it was possible for the Pain Management Indexes to distinguish between patient groups, the differences were not in the expected direction. The ability of the outcome measures to detect changes over time was clearly demonstrated by all outcome measures. Effects of the intervention were only found for the Amsterdam Pain Management Index and patients' Substantial Worst Pain score. Although support was provided for the use of the Amsterdam Pain Management Index, more research is warranted.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2001        PMID: 11275392     DOI: 10.1016/S0304-3959(00)00455-3

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Pain        ISSN: 0304-3959            Impact factor:   6.961


  19 in total

Review 1.  A systematic review and meta-analysis on the use of traditional Chinese medicine compound kushen injection for bone cancer pain.

Authors:  Bao Yanju; Liping Yang; Baojin Hua; Wei Hou; Zhan Shi; Weidong Li; Conghuang Li; Cihui Chen; Rui Liu; Yinggang Qin; Wenliang Lv
Journal:  Support Care Cancer       Date:  2013-11-26       Impact factor: 3.603

2.  Osteoplasty: Percutaneous Bone Cement Injection beyond the Spine.

Authors:  Giovanni Carlo Anselmetti
Journal:  Semin Intervent Radiol       Date:  2010-06       Impact factor: 1.513

3.  Selective blockade of the capsaicin receptor TRPV1 attenuates bone cancer pain.

Authors:  Joseph R Ghilardi; Heidi Röhrich; Theodore H Lindsay; Molly A Sevcik; Matthew J Schwei; Kazufumi Kubota; Kyle G Halvorson; Jeannie Poblete; Sandra R Chaplan; Adrienne E Dubin; Nicholas I Carruthers; Devin Swanson; Michael Kuskowski; Christopher M Flores; David Julius; Patrick W Mantyh
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2005-03-23       Impact factor: 6.167

4.  SNPs in PTGS2 and LTA predict pain and quality of life in long term lung cancer survivors.

Authors:  Sarah M Rausch; Brian D Gonzalez; Matthew M Clark; Christi Patten; Sara Felten; Heshan Liu; Yafei Li; Jeff Sloan; Ping Yang
Journal:  Lung Cancer       Date:  2012-03-29       Impact factor: 5.705

5.  Inadequate pain management in cancer patients attending an outpatient palliative radiotherapy clinic.

Authors:  Sherlyn Vuong; Natalie Pulenzas; Carlo DeAngelis; Sarah Torabi; Soha Ahrari; May Tsao; Cyril Danjoux; Toni Barnes; Edward Chow
Journal:  Support Care Cancer       Date:  2015-07-26       Impact factor: 3.603

6.  Neuropathic and nociceptive pain in head and neck cancer patients receiving radiation therapy.

Authors:  Joel B Epstein; Diana J Wilkie; Dena J Fischer; Young-Ok Kim; Dana Villines
Journal:  Head Neck Oncol       Date:  2009-07-14

7.  Stage-dependent anti-allodynic effects of intrathecal Toll-like receptor 4 antagonists in a rat model of cancer induced bone pain.

Authors:  Xiu Li; Xiao-Wei Wang; Xiao-Ming Feng; Wen-Jun Zhou; Yan-Qing Wang; Qi-Liang Mao-Ying
Journal:  J Physiol Sci       Date:  2013-02-08       Impact factor: 2.781

Review 8.  Prevalence of undertreatment in cancer pain. A review of published literature.

Authors:  S Deandrea; M Montanari; L Moja; G Apolone
Journal:  Ann Oncol       Date:  2008-07-15       Impact factor: 32.976

9.  Pain in hospitalized children: a prospective cross-sectional survey of pain prevalence, intensity, assessment and management in a Canadian pediatric teaching hospital.

Authors:  Elsa M Taylor; Kristina Boyer; Fiona A Campbell
Journal:  Pain Res Manag       Date:  2008 Jan-Feb       Impact factor: 3.037

10.  Down-regulation of Toll-like receptor 4 gene expression by short interfering RNA attenuates bone cancer pain in a rat model.

Authors:  Liu Si Lan; Yang Jian Ping; Wang Li Na; Jiang Miao; Qiu Qiao Cheng; Ma Zhen Ni; Liu Lei; Li Cai Fang; Ren Chun Guang; Zhou Jin; Li Wei
Journal:  Mol Pain       Date:  2010-01-20       Impact factor: 3.395

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.