Assessing analgesic regimen adherence with the Morisky Medication Adherence Measure for Taiwanese patients with cancer pain

The purposes of this study were (1) to examine the psychometric properties of the Taiwanese version of the Morisky Medication Adherence Measure (MMAM), including its validity and reliability, (2) to investigate levels of analgesic regimen adherence, and (3) to explore the predictors of adherence to the analgesic regimen in a sample of Taiwanese cancer patients with pain. One hundred thirty-five patients receiving analgesics for cancer pain participated in this study. Instruments consisted of the Taiwanese version of the MMAM, the Barriers Questionnaire-Taiwan form, the Chinese version of the Brief Pain Inventory, the American Pain Society Outcome Questionnaire, Karnofsky Performance Status, and a demographic questionnaire. Analgesic use ratios were calculated. The Taiwanese version of the MMAM had good psychometric properties for measuring adherence with the analgesic regimens taken by Taiwanese cancer pain patients. Reliability was supported by good internal consistency Cronbach α and test-retest coefficients. Validity was corroborated by good known group validity, construct validity, and criterion-related validity. The majority of the patients (51%) showed low levels of medication adherence. The significant predictors for the medication adherence score were age, the Barriers Questionnaire score, and satisfaction with pain management by clinicians after entering pain severity, pain interference with daily life, age, gender, education, types of analgesics used, functional status, and satisfaction with pain management as independent variables. The model accounted for 63% of the variance in the medication adherence score. The Taiwanese version of the MMAM shows excellent reliability and validity. The use of this reliable, valid, simple, and easily administered tool can improve communication between patients and clinicians about use of analgesics and further improve the analgesic regimen adherence.     

Patient Trade-Offs Related to Analgesic Use for Cancer Pain: A MaxDiff Analysis Study

PurposeMany patients with cancer pain deviate from prescribed analgesic regimens. Our aim was to elicit the trade-offs patients make based on their beliefs about analgesic use and rank utilities (importance scores) using maximum difference (MaxDiff) scaling. We also investigated if there were unique clusters of patients based on their analgesic beliefs.MethodsThis was a secondary analysis of a three-month, prospective observational study. Patients (N = 207) were self-identified African Americans and Whites, >18 years, diagnosed with multiple myeloma or solid tumor, and were prescribed at least one around-the-clock analgesic for cancer pain. MaxDiff analysis allowed us to identify patients utilities. Second, a cluster analysis assisted in ranking how analgesic beliefs differed by groups. Third, clusters were described by comparing key sociodemographic and clinical variables.ResultsParticipants’ beliefs were a significant factor in choices related to analgesic use (chi-square = 498.145, p < .0001). The belief, ‘Pain meds keep you from knowing what is going on in your body’, had the highest patient endorsement. Two distinct clusters of patients based on analgesic beliefs were identified; ‘knowing body’ was ranked as top priority for both clusters. The belief that cancer patients become addicted to analgesics was moderately important for both clusters. Severity of side effects was the only key variable significantly different between clusters (p = .043).ConclusionsOur findings support tailored pain management interventions that attend to individual beliefs about cancer pain and analgesic use. Future research should explore the relationship between analgesic utilities, actual analgesic taking behaviors, and how they impact patients’ cancer pain outcomes.     

Prescribed Opioids Adherence Among Taiwanese Oncology Outpatients

The purpose of this study was to evaluate adherence to prescribed opioids in Taiwanese oncology outpatients and to examine the associations between various demographic and medical characteristics and prescribed opioids adherence. Ninety-two outpatients who had taken prescribed opioid analgesics for cancer-related pain at least once in the past week participated in this study. Patients were asked to recall the dose of each opioid analgesic that they had taken in the past 24 hours. Mean adherence rates were calculated for analgesic adherence. For mean adherence rates, all opioid analgesics were converted to morphine equivalents. The results of this study reveal a priority issue of poor opioid analgesic adherence. The adherence rate of 63.6% for the around-the-clock opioid analgesics in this study is well below acceptable levels. Also, an adherence rate of 30.9% for the as-needed opioid analgesics is very low. This study identified that women tend to be less adherent to their prescribed opioid analgesic regimen than men. Findings of this study suggest that to improve pain control, efforts to promote patients’ opioid regimen adherence should be given high priority. Clinicians should be particularly aware that there may be some gender difference in adherence to prescribed opioid analgesics. There is a need for better programmatic efforts to improve analgesic adherence.     

Concerns About Pain and Prescribed Opioids in Taiwanese Oncology Outpatients

Pharmacologic agents are considered to be a cornerstone of cancer pain management. Patients' concerns about use of analgesics are likely to lead to poor pain management. The purpose of this study was to describe participants' responses to their beliefs regarding pain and prescribed opioids. Ninety-two outpatients age ≥18 years who had taken prescribed opioid analgesics for cancer-related pain in two teaching hospitals in the Taipei area completed the Pain Opioid Analgesics Beliefs Scale–Cancer. An important finding of this study is that large numbers of patients had misconceptions about using opioids for pain. Between 33.7% and 68.5% of the patients in this study held negative beliefs about opioids and beliefs about pain. Specifically, 68.5% of the patients agreed that “opioid medication is not good for a person's body.” Many patients (62%) agreed that “the more opioid medicine a patient used, the greater the possibility that he/she might rely on the medicine forever,” and 61.0% agreed that “if a patient starts to use opioid medicine at too early a stage, the medicine will have less of an effect later.” Two-thirds (66.3%) of the sample agreed that adult patients should not use opioid medicine frequently. The findings provide empirical support for the need for better programmatic efforts to improve beliefs of pain and analgesics in Taiwanese oncology outpatients.     

Pre-packed take-home analgesics in ambulatory surgery

Clinical studies have revealed that a high percentage of patients experience moderate or severe pain during the first 24–48 h following ambulatory surgery. We examined, in a prospective, randomised study, if standardizing by dispensing a pre-packed take-home analgesics (fixed combination codeine phosphate/acetaminophen), would lead to high adherence with pain treatment together with an improved alleviation of pain after discharge compared to normal practice. “Normal practice” implied that analgesics were prescribed at the surgeon's discretion without any standardisation. A total of 150 patients were included (surgical procedures: knee arthroscopy, breast surgery and surgery of varicose veins or anal fistulae). Analgesic efficacy and influence of pain on daily functions after discharge were evaluated by self-assessment of pain intensity by selected items of the BPI-SF. Adherence to treatment, frequency of adverse events and analgesic intake were also recorded during the study period.No significant difference in pain intensity could be seen regardless of high adherence in the intervention group.We conclude that pre-packed medication is an opportunity to provide patients with an easy method of handling postoperative analgesics, but a high frequency of drug related adverse events and the absence of better analgesia indicates that customised analgesic therapies are warranted.     

Pain Scores Improve Analgesic Administration Patterns for Trauma Patients in the Emergency Department

OBJECTIVE: To determine the efficacy of pain scores in improving pain management practices for trauma patients in the emergency department (ED). METHODS: A prospective, observational study of analgesic administration to trauma patients was conducted over a nine-week period following educational intervention and introduction of verbal pain scores (VPSs). All ED nursing and physician staff in an urban Level I trauma center were trained to use the 0-10 VPS. Patients younger than 12 years old, having a Glasgow Coma Scale score (GCS) <8, or requiring intubation were excluded from analysis. Demographics, mechanism of injury, vital signs, pain scores, and analgesic data were extracted from a computerized ED database and patients' records. The staff was blinded to the ongoing study. RESULTS: There were 150 patients studied (183 consecutive trauma patients seen; 33 patients excluded per criteria). Pain scores were documented for 73% of the patients. Overall, 53% (95% confidence interval [CI] = 45% to 61%) of the patients received analgesics in the ED. Of the patients who had pain scores documented, 60% (95% CI = 51% to 69%) received analgesics, whereas 33% (95% CI = 18% to 47%) of the patients without pain scores received analgesics. No patient with a VPS < 4 received analgesics, whereas 72% of patients with a VPS > 4 and 82% with a VPS > 7 received analgesics. Mean time to analgesic administration was 68 minutes (95% CI = 49 to 87). CONCLUSIONS: Pain assessment using VPS increased the likelihood of analgesic administration to trauma patients with higher pain scores in the ED.     

A Pain Monitoring Program for nurses: effect on the administration of analgesics

Both physicians and nurses are responsible for adequate pain management. The aim of this study was to assess pain management behavior of physicians and nurses, and to evaluate the effects of a Pain Monitoring Program for nurses on the extent to which nurses administer analgesics. The Pain Monitoring Program consisted of two components: educating nurses about pain, pain assessment and pain management; and implementing daily pain assessment by means of a numeric rating scale. Several outcomes were distinguished to evaluate the administration of analgesics by nurses: the prescribed analgesics by physicians, the administered analgesics by nurses, and the discrepancy between the ordered and the administered analgesics. The effects of the Pain Monitoring Program on these outcomes were measured in a quasi-experimental design with a non-equivalent control group. In total, 703 patients participated: 358 patients in the control group and 345 in the intervention group. Patients were interviewed twice, i.e. at the beginning and at the end of hospitalization. Results of the control group showed that at the first interview 70% of the patients were prescribed analgesics by physicians and only 74% of those patients were actually administered analgesics by nurses. Consequently, 50% of the patients in pain received analgesics. The administered analgesics was in absolute agreement with the prescribed analgesics in 60% of the patients with routine analgesics and in 85% of the patients with PRN analgesics. The relative difference between ordered and administered routine analgesics was small, namely 15% for opioids and 20% for non-opioids. Similar results of the control group were found for the second interview. In addition, the results showed that the Pain Monitoring Program was effective in improving nurses' administration of analgesics. At the first interview more patients received analgesics that were prescribed on a PRN basis and the doses of administered routine non-opioids including PRN increased. At the time of the second interview, more patients received weak opioids. The Pain Monitoring Program was especially effective in patients with moderate to severe pain. However, the discrepancy between the analgesics ordered by physicians and actually administered by nurses did not change as a result of the Pain Monitoring Program. Based on this study it can be concluded that the use of a simple method such as a numeric rating scale together with pain education for nurses is effective in improving the administration of analgesics by nurses. These are important results because nurses play an essential role in helping patients to cope with their pain. Because the Pain Monitoring Program (PMP) was effective in a heterogeneous population in multiple care settings, the possibility of implementing the PMP in routine nursing practice should be considered.     

Barriers to Cancer Pain Management in Danish and Lithuanian Patients Treated in Pain and Palliative Care Units

The prevalence of cancer-related pain is high despite available guidelines for the effective assessment and management of that pain. Barriers to the use of opioid analgesics partially cause undertreatment of cancer pain. The aim of this study was to compare pain management outcomes and patient-related barriers to cancer pain management in patient samples from Denmark and Lithuania. Thirty-three Danish and 30 Lithuanian patients responded to, respectively, Danish and Lithuanian versions of the Brief Pain Inventory pain scale, the Barriers Questionnaire II, the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale, the Specific Questionnaire On Pain Communication, and the Medication Adherence Report Scale. Emotional distress and patient attitudes toward opioid analgesics in cancer patient samples from both countries explained pain management outcomes in the multivariate regression models. Pain relief and pain medication adherence were better in Denmark, and the country of origin significantly explained the difference in the regression models for these outcomes. In conclusion, interventions in emotional distress and patient attitudes toward opioid analgesics may result in better pain management outcomes generally, whereas poor adherence to pain medication and poor pain relief appear to be more country-specific problems.     

Pain management autobiographies and reluctance to use opioids for cancer pain management

Although pain management education results in improved pain control for some patients, it does not work for all patients because some patients remain reluctant or unwilling to use prescribed analgesics to their optimal effect. In a randomized clinical trial that tested the effectiveness of the PRO-SELF Pain Control Program, 11 patients declined to increase their analgesic use despite moderate to severe pain. These patients were selected for a qualitative analysis of their audiotaped discussions about pain management with their intervention nurses. This analysis revealed that these patients often spontaneously provided detailed explanations about why they were reluctant or unwilling to take analgesics in general or opioids in particular. We termed these explanatory accounts pain management autobiographies because of their narrative character and multilayered, richly detailed quality. Pain management autobiographies included stories about (1) previous experience with chronic pain management, including stigmatizing interactions with clinicians and family members; (2) bad experiences with cancer pain management, including severe constipation; and 3) strongly held conventions about medication use, including the belief that all medications are "toxins" that should be avoided. The study findings suggest that a small subset of patients with cancer pain may need interventions such as individual or family counseling or alternative pain management strategies to augment education about opioids.     

Predictive factors in advanced cancer pain treated only by analgesics.

Analgesic response, incidental pain and pain mechanism were evaluated in order to predict the chances of pain relief in advanced cancer patients. In an observation period of about 2 months, 130 patients were followed at home until death using only a pharmacological approach to control pain according to the WHO ladders. Ninety-eight patients were considered. Pain relief was considered good if less than moderate. Pain was assessed during the course of examinations (2-3 a week) by independent observers. If other techniques were needed the result was considered negative. The patients were tested with an NSAID (Diclofenac) and assigned to group 1 if the pain became slight in 3 days. If the response was negative, a 4-day trial with opioids was started. If the pain was slight the patient was included in group 3, otherwise in group 5. Every patient belonging to these groups but with incidentical pain was included in groups 2, 4 and 6, respectively. For each group a subdivision was made according to the pain characteristics. There was a progressive worsening in pain relief in groups 4, 5 and 6, suggesting a good correlation between response to the drugs and future chances of pain control in a period of 2 months. This study demonstrates that incidental pain reduces the possibility of pain control (50%) with the exclusive administration of analgesics in patients with a mean life expectation of about 2 months. This negative influence is counterbalanced by the possible individual response to analgesics administered sequentially during a 1-week period (85.8% good pain relief with NSAID, 74% with opioids).(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)     

Long-term effectiveness of a patient and family pain education program on overcoming barriers to management of cancer pain

The purpose of this research was to investigate the effectiveness of a patient and family pain education program on reducing cancer patients' and their families' barriers to (i.e., concerns or misconceptions about) cancer pain management, on increasing patients' adherence to a prescribed analgesic regimen, and on decreasing pain intensity and pain interference with daily life. An experimental and longitudinal design was used. The experimental group consisted of 31 pairs of cancer outpatients and their family carers, while the control group consisted of 30 patient-family pairs (N=122). Patients and their family carers in the experimental group simultaneously received a pain management education program. Both groups had pretest data collection and after-test follow-ups on the second and fourth weeks at the outpatient clinics. Comparisons between those two groups were made using the Generalized Estimating Equations (GEE) method. Results revealed that at both the second and fourth weeks, patients and family carers in the experimental group showed a significantly greater reduction in barrier scores than did patients and family carers in the control group. At the second and fourth weeks, patients in the experimental group reported significantly better adherence to a scheduled analgesic regimen than did patients in the control group. In the fourth week, patients in the experimental group reported significantly lower levels of worst pain intensity and pain interference than did patients in the control group. This research provides evidence of the effectiveness of a patient and family pain education program.     

Patients' night-time pain, analgesic provision and sleep after surgery

One hundred patients were interviewed about their experiences of pain and sleep following abdominal surgery. This information was supplemented by data on analgesic provision which were gathered from medication charts. Pain was the most commonly reported cause of night-time sleep disturbance and analgesics helped more patients to get back to sleep than any other intervention. About half of the patients felt that pain was worse at night than during the day. An examination of patterns of analgesic provision revealed that the number of doses given peaked at two points during the 24-hour cycle. The highest numbers of doses were given between 8 a.m. and 12 noon and 8 p.m. and 12 midnight. Fewer doses were given at night, between midnight and 4 a.m. Analgesic provision at night, therefore, did not appear to be explicitly related to need. The assessment and control of post-operative pain at night requires further attention in order to optimize pain control and promote sleep.     

Analgesic adherence measurement in cancer patients: comparison between electronic monitoring and diary

Adherence to analgesics in cancer patients has scarcely been studied. In this study, the Medication Event Monitoring System (MEMS) and medication diaries were compared with respect to feasibility and adherence measurements. Forty-six outpatients with nociceptive pain caused by cancer were asked to use MEMS for their analgesics and to record their medication usage in a diary for four weeks. Seventy-nine percent of the patients used MEMS for the full four-week period; 70% did so for the diary. The majority of patients were satisfied with both MEMS and diary. Adherence data assessed by MEMS and diary were comparable. Patients used the amount of analgesics adequately (taking adherence: 87%) but took them irregularly (timing adherence: 53%). Subgroup analyses in patients using single and multiple analgesic regimens confirmed the comparable suitability of both methods. MEMS and a medication diary are equally useful for analgesic adherence measurement in cancer patients with pain.