Literature DB >> 28364172

Mapping French people and health professionals' positions regarding the circumstances of morphine use to relieve cancer pain.

Julie Mazoyer1, Maria Teresa Muñoz Sastre1, Paul Clay Sorum2, Etienne Mullet3.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Cancer patients suffer in part because some health professionals prescribe or administer amounts of analgesics, namely opioids, which are too small or too widely spaced to be fully effective. Patients' reluctance to use opioids for pain treatment is often mentioned as a reason not to apply the official guidelines, but very few studies have been conducted on people's attitudes about opioid use to relieve cancer pain.
METHODS: One hundred twenty lay participants and 30 health professionals (7 physicians and 23 nurses) were presented with a set of vignettes describing a terminally ill woman with cancer who is in pain. The vignettes were composed according to a four within-subject factor design: (a) level of pain reported by the patient, (b) patient's explicit request for additional administration of analgesics, (c) the physicians' final decision (e.g., to use a stronger analgesic combining paracetamol and codeine), and (d) the way the decision was made (collectively or not). Participants were asked to assess the extent to which the physician's decision was, in their view, acceptable.
RESULTS: Seven qualitatively different positions were found among participants. They were called as follows: tend to disagree with any decision (9%), increase the strength of the painkiller in any case (16%), give morphine preferentially (9%), partly depends on pain level (23%), fully depends on pain level (6%), depends on decision process and on pain level (22%), and tend not to disagree with any collective decision (25%).
CONCLUSIONS: Overall, 91% of participants agreed with the use of morphine in terminally ill cancer patients when the pain level was high (score of 7) and the decision to increase the strength of the painkiller was taken collectively. This percentage dropped to 69% when the team was not involved in the decision and to 40% when the pain level was lower (score of 4). If opposition to the use of morphine exists, it is not opposition to morphine itself but opposition to the circumstances of its use.

Entities:  

Keywords:  French people; Health professionals; Morphine use

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28364172     DOI: 10.1007/s00520-017-3682-z

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Support Care Cancer        ISSN: 0941-4355            Impact factor:   3.603


  20 in total

1.  Attitudes and knowledge about cancer pain in Flanders. The educational effect of workshops regarding pain and symptom control.

Authors:  S Bauwens; W Distelmans; G Storme; L Kaufman
Journal:  Palliat Med       Date:  2001-05       Impact factor: 4.762

2.  TwoMP: a MATLAB graphical user interface for two-mode partitioning.

Authors:  Jan Schepers; Joeri Hofmans
Journal:  Behav Res Methods       Date:  2009-05

3.  French general practitioners vary in their attitudes toward treating terminally ill patients.

Authors:  Céline Mas; Marie-Claire Albaret; Paul C Sorum; Etienne Mullet
Journal:  Palliat Med       Date:  2009-10-01       Impact factor: 4.762

Review 4.  Barriers to effective cancer pain management: a review of the literature.

Authors:  K L Pargeon; B J Hailey
Journal:  J Pain Symptom Manage       Date:  1999-11       Impact factor: 3.612

5.  Exploring the myths of morphine in cancer: views of the general practice population.

Authors:  Matthew Grant; Anna Ugalde; Platon Vafiadis; Jennifer Philip
Journal:  Support Care Cancer       Date:  2014-08-20       Impact factor: 3.603

6.  French laypeople's and health professionals' views on the acceptability of terminal sedation.

Authors:  Julie Mazoyer; María Teresa Muñoz Sastre; Paul Clay Sorum; Etienne Mullet
Journal:  J Med Ethics       Date:  2016-08-26       Impact factor: 2.903

7.  Clinical guidelines for the use of chronic opioid therapy in chronic noncancer pain.

Authors:  Roger Chou; Gilbert J Fanciullo; Perry G Fine; Jeremy A Adler; Jane C Ballantyne; Pamela Davies; Marilee I Donovan; David A Fishbain; Kathy M Foley; Jeffrey Fudin; Aaron M Gilson; Alexander Kelter; Alexander Mauskop; Patrick G O'Connor; Steven D Passik; Gavril W Pasternak; Russell K Portenoy; Ben A Rich; Richard G Roberts; Knox H Todd; Christine Miaskowski
Journal:  J Pain       Date:  2009-02       Impact factor: 5.820

8.  Morphine: patient knowledge and attitudes in the central anatolia part of Turkey.

Authors:  Dilsen Colak; Arzu Oguz; Dogan Yazilitas; Inanc Goksen Imamoglu; Mustafa Altinbas
Journal:  Asian Pac J Cancer Prev       Date:  2014

9.  Opinions toward pain management and palliative care: comparison between HIV specialists and oncologists.

Authors:  P Peretti-Watel; M K Bendiane; A Galinier; J M Lapiana; R Favre; H Pegliasco; Y Obadia
Journal:  AIDS Care       Date:  2004-07

10.  NICE Opioids in Palliative Care (Clinical Guideline 140) - A Guideline Summary.

Authors:  Penelope J Teoh; Christian F Camm
Journal:  Ann Med Surg (Lond)       Date:  2012-08-02
View more
  2 in total

1.  British laypeople's attitudes towards gradual sedation, sedation to unconsciousness and euthanasia at the end of life.

Authors:  Antony Takla; Julian Savulescu; Andreas Kappes; Dominic J C Wilkinson
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2021-03-26       Impact factor: 3.240

2.  Opioid Use at End-Of-Life Among Nova Scotia Patients With Cancer.

Authors:  Laura V Minard; Judith Fisher; Larry Broadfield; Gordon Walsh; Ingrid Sketris
Journal:  Front Pharmacol       Date:  2022-03-24       Impact factor: 5.810

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.