AAAPT Diagnostic Criteria for Acute Sickle Cell Disease Pain

Acute pain episodes are the most common complication in patients with sickle cell disease (SCD). Classically attributed to vaso-occlusion, recent insights suggest that chronic pain may also contribute to the pathogenesis of acute pain episodes, which adds complexity to their diagnosis and management. A taxonomy, or classification system, for acute pain in patients with SCD would aid research efforts and enhance clinical care. To meet this need, the Analgesic, Anesthetic, and Addiction Clinical Trial Translations, Innovations, Opportunities, and Networks public–private partnership with the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, the American Pain Society, and the American Academy of Pain Medicine formed the Analgesic, Anesthetic, and Addiction Clinical Trial Translations, Innovations, Opportunities, and Networks–American Pain Society–American Academy of Pain Medicine Pain Taxonomy initiative. One of the goals of this initiative was to develop taxonomies for acute pain disorders, including SCD. To accomplish this, a working group of experts in SCD and pain was convened. Based on available literature and expert opinion, the working group used a 5-dimenional structure (diagnostic criteria, common features, modulating factors, impact/functional consequences, and putative mechanisms) to develop an acute pain taxonomy that is specific to SCD. As part of this, a set of 4 diagnostic criteria, with 2 modifiers to account for the influence of chronic pain, are proposed to define the types of acute pain observed in patients with SCD.PerspectiveThis article presents a taxonomy for acute pain in patients with SCD. This taxonomy could help to standardize definitions of acute pain in clinical studies of patients with SCD.     

AAPT Diagnostic Criteria for Chronic Abdominal,Pelvic, and Urogenital Pain: Irritable Bowel Syndrome

In conjunction with the Analgesic, Anesthetic, and Addiction Clinical Trial Translations, Innovations, Opportunities, and Networks public-private partnership with the U.S. Food and Drug Administration and the American Pain Society, the Analgesic, Anesthetic, and Addiction Clinical Trial Translations, Innovations, Opportunities, and Networks-American Pain Society Pain Taxonomy (AAPT) initiative strove to develop the characteristics of a diagnostic system useful for clinical and research purposes across disciplines and types of chronic pain conditions. After the establishment of these characteristics, a working group of clinicians and clinical and basic scientists with expertise in abdominal, pelvic, and urogenital pain began generating core diagnostic criteria and defining the related extraintestinal somatic pain and other symptoms experienced by patients. Systematic diagnostic criteria for several common abdominal, pelvic, and urogenital pain conditions are in development. In this report, we present the proposed AAPT criteria for irritable bowel syndrome (IBS), the most common chronic, noncancer abdominal pain condition. A systematic review and synthesis was conducted to complement the Rome IV Diagnostic Criteria for IBS. Future efforts will subject these proposed AAPT criteria to systematic empirical evaluation of their feasibility, reliability, and validity. The AAPT IBS criteria are part of an evidence-based classification system that provides a consistent vocabulary regarding diagnostic criteria, common features, comorbidities, consequences, and putative mechanisms of the disorder. A similar approach is being applied to other chronic and often debilitating abdominal, pelvic, and urogenital pain conditions.

AAPT Diagnostic Criteria for Central Neuropathic Pain

Central neuropathic pain, which is pain caused by a lesion or disease of the central somatosensory nervous system, is a serious consequence of spinal cord injury, stroke, multiple sclerosis, and other conditions affecting the central nervous system. A collaborative effort between the Analgesic, Anesthetic, and Addiction Clinical Trial Translations, Innovations, Opportunities, and Networks public-private partnership and the American Pain Society, the Analgesic, Anesthetic, and Addiction Clinical Trial Translations, Innovations, Opportunities, and Networks-American Pain Society Pain Taxonomy (AAPT) initiative, invited a working group to develop diagnostic criteria for central neuropathic pain. The criteria for central neuropathic pain that were developed expand upon existing criteria for neuropathic pain and the International Classification of Diseases 11th Revision draft criteria to ensure consistency. This article focuses on central neuropathic pain associated with spinal cord injury, stroke, and multiple sclerosis, but the AAPT framework can be extended to central pain due to other causes such as traumatic brain injury. The classification of central neuropathic pain is organized according to the AAPT multidimensional framework, specifically: 1) core diagnostic criteria, 2) common features, 3) common medical and psychiatric comorbidities, 4) neurobiological, psychosocial, and functional consequences, and 5) putative neurobiological and psychosocial mechanisms, risk factors, and protective factors.

Analgesic,Anesthetic, and Addiction Clinical Trial Translations,Innovations, Opportunities,and Networks−American Pain Society−American Academy of Pain Medicine Pain Taxonomy Diagnostic Criteria for Acute Needle Pain

Needle procedures are among the most common causes of pain and distress for individuals seeking health care. While needle pain is especially problematic for children needle pain and associated fear also has significant impact on adults and can lead to avoidance of appropriate medical care. Currently there is not a standard definition of needle pain. A taxonomy, or classification system, for acute needle pain would aid research efforts and enhance clinical care. To meet this need, the Analgesic, Anesthetic, and Addiction Clinical Trial Translations, Innovations, Opportunities, and Networks public?private partnership with the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, the American Pain Society, and the American Academy of Pain Medicine formed the Analgesic, Anesthetic, and Addiction Clinical Trial Translations, Innovations, Opportunities, and Networks?American Pain Society?American Academy of Pain Medicine Pain Taxonomy initiative. One of the goals of this initiative was to develop taxonomies for acute pain disorders, including needle pain. To accomplish this, a working group of experts in needle pain was convened. Based on available literature and expert opinion, the working group used a 5-dimenional structure (diagnostic criteria, common features, modulating factors, impact and/or functional consequences, and putative mechanisms) to develop an acute pain taxonomy that is specific needle pain. As part of this, a set of 4 diagnostic criteria, with 2 modifiers to account for the influence of needle associated fear, are proposed to define the types of acute needle pain.PerspectiveThis article presents a taxonomy for acute needle pain. This taxonomy could help to standardize definitions of acute pain in clinical studies of patients undergoing needle procedures.     

The ACTTION-American Pain Society Pain Taxonomy (AAPT): An Evidence-Based and Multidimensional Approach to Classifying Chronic Pain Conditions

Current approaches to classification of chronic pain conditions suffer from the absence of a systematically implemented and evidence-based taxonomy. Moreover, existing diagnostic approaches typically fail to incorporate available knowledge regarding the biopsychosocial mechanisms contributing to pain conditions. To address these gaps, the Analgesic, Anesthetic, and Addiction Clinical Trial Translations Innovations Opportunities and Networks (ACTTION) public-private partnership with the U.S. Food and Drug Administration and the American Pain Society (APS) have joined together to develop an evidence-based chronic pain classification system called the ACTTION-APS Pain Taxonomy. This paper describes the outcome of an ACTTION-APS consensus meeting, at which experts agreed on a structure for this new taxonomy of chronic pain conditions. Several major issues around which discussion revolved are presented and summarized, and the structure of the taxonomy is presented. ACTTION-APS Pain Taxonomy will include the following dimensions: 1) core diagnostic criteria; 2) common features; 3) common medical comorbidities; 4) neurobiological, psychosocial, and functional consequences; and 5) putative neurobiological and psychosocial mechanisms, risk factors, and protective factors. In coming months, expert working groups will apply this taxonomy to clusters of chronic pain conditions, thereby developing a set of diagnostic criteria that have been consistently and systematically implemented across nearly all common chronic pain conditions. It is anticipated that the availability of this evidence-based and mechanistic approach to pain classification will be of substantial benefit to chronic pain research and treatment.PerspectiveThe ACTTION-APS Pain Taxonomy is an evidence-based chronic pain classification system designed to classify chronic pain along the following dimensions: 1) core diagnostic criteria; 2) common features; 3) common medical comorbidities; 4) neurobiological, psychosocial, and functional consequences; and 5) putative neurobiological and psychosocial mechanisms, risk factors, and protective factors.     

AAPT Diagnostic Criteria for Chronic Cancer Pain Conditions

Chronic cancer pain is a serious complication of malignancy or its treatment. Currently, no comprehensive, universally accepted cancer pain classification system exists. Clarity in classification of common cancer pain syndromes would improve clinical assessment and management. Moreover, an evidence-based taxonomy would enhance cancer pain research efforts by providing consistent diagnostic criteria, ensuring comparability across clinical trials. As part of a collaborative effort between the Analgesic, Anesthetic, and Addiction Clinical Trial Translations, Innovations, Opportunities, and Networks (ACTTION) and the American Pain Society (APS), the ACTTION-APS Pain Taxonomy initiative worked to develop the characteristics of an optimal diagnostic system. After the establishment of these characteristics, a working group consisting of clinicians and clinical and basic scientists with expertise in cancer and cancer-related pain was convened to generate core diagnostic criteria for an illustrative sample of 3 chronic pain syndromes associated with cancer (ie, bone pain and pancreatic cancer pain as models of pain related to a tumor) or its treatment (ie, chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy). A systematic review and synthesis was conducted to provide evidence for the dimensions that comprise this cancer pain taxonomy. Future efforts will subject these diagnostic categories and criteria to systematic empirical evaluation of their feasibility, reliability, and validity and extension to other cancer-related pain syndromes.

AAAPT Diagnostic Criteria for Acute Thoracic Surgery Pain

Patients undergoing thoracic surgery experience particular challenges for acute pain management. Availability of standardized diagnostic criteria for identification of acute pain after thoracotomy and video assisted thoracic surgery (VATS) would provide a foundation for evidence-based management and facilitate future research. The Analgesic, Anesthetic, and Addiction Clinical Trial Translations, Innovations, Opportunities, and Networks (ACTTION) public-private partnership with the United States Food and Drug Administration, the American Pain Society (APS), and the American Academy of Pain Medicine (AAPM) formed the ACTTION-APS-AAPM Pain Taxonomy (AAAPT) initiative to address absence of acute pain diagnostic criteria. A multidisciplinary working group of pain experts was invited to develop diagnostic criteria for acute thoracotomy and VATS pain. The working group used available studies and expert opinion to characterize acute pain after thoracotomy and VATS using the 5-dimension taxonomical structure proposed by AAAPT (i.e., core diagnostic criteria, common features, modulating factors, impact/functional consequences, and putative mechanisms). The resulting diagnostic criteria will serve as the starting point for subsequent empirically validated criteria.Perspective ItemThis article characterizes acute pain after thoracotomy and VATS using the 5-dimension taxonomical structure proposed by AAAPT (ie, core diagnostic criteria, common features, modulating factors, impact and/or functional consequences, and putative mechanisms).     

AAPT Diagnostic Criteria for Fibromyalgia

Fibromyalgia (FM) is a common chronic pain disorder that presents diagnostic challenges for clinicians. Several classification, diagnostic and screening criteria have been developed over the years, but there continues to be a need to develop criteria that reflect the current understanding of FM and are practical for use by clinicians and researchers. The Analgesic, Anesthetic, and Addiction Clinical Trial Translations Innovations Opportunities and Networks (ACTTION) public-private partnership with the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the American Pain Society (APS) initiated the ACTTION-APS Pain Taxonomy (AAPT) to develop a diagnostic system that would be clinically useful and consistent across chronic pain disorders. The AAPT established an international FM working group consisting of clinicians and researchers with expertise in FM to generate core diagnostic criteria for FM and apply the multidimensional diagnostic framework adopted by AAPT to FM. The process for developing the AAPT criteria and dimensions included literature reviews and synthesis, consensus discussions, and analyses of data from large population-based studies conducted in the United Kingdom. The FM working group established a revised diagnosis of FM and identified risk factors, course, prognosis, and pathophysiology of FM. Future studies will assess the criteria for feasibility, reliability, and validity. Revisions of the dimensions will also be required as research advances our understanding of FM.PerspectiveThe ACTTION-APS FM taxonomy provides an evidence-based diagnostic system for FM. The taxonomy includes diagnostic criteria, common features, comorbidities, consequences, and putative mechanisms. This approach might improve the recognition of FM in clinical practice.     

AAPT Diagnostic Criteria for Peripheral Neuropathic Pain: Focal and Segmental Disorders

Peripheral neuropathic pain is among the most prevalent types of neuropathic pain. No comprehensive peripheral neuropathic pain classification system that incorporates contemporary clinical, diagnostic, biological, and psychological information exists. To address this need, this article covers the taxonomy for 4 focal or segmental peripheral neuropathic pain disorders, as part of the Analgesic, Anesthetic, and Addiction Clinical Trial Translations, Innovations, Opportunities, and Networks (ACTTION) public-private partnership and the American Pain Society (APS) collaborative to develop a standardized, evidence-based taxonomy initiative: the ACTTION-APS Pain Taxonomy (AAPT). The disorders—postherpetic neuralgia, persistent posttraumatic neuropathic pain, complex regional pain disorder, and trigeminal neuralgia—were selected because of their clinical and clinical research relevance. The multidimensional features of the taxonomy are suitable for clinical trials and can also facilitate hypothesis-driven case-control and cohort epidemiologic studies.

AAPT Diagnostic Criteria for Chronic Low Back Pain

Chronic low back pain (CLBP) conditions are highly prevalent and constitute the leading cause of disability worldwide. The Analgesic, Anesthetic, and Addiction Clinical Trial Translations Innovations Opportunities and Networks (ACTTION) public-private partnership with the US Food and Drug Administration and the American Pain Society (APS), have combined to create the ACTTION-APS Pain Taxonomy (AAPT). The AAPT initiative convened a working group to develop diagnostic criteria for CLBP. The working group identified 3 distinct low back pain conditions which result in a vast public health burden across the lifespan. This article focuses on: 1) the axial predominant syndrome of chronic musculoskeletal low back pain, 2) the lateralized, distally-radiating syndrome of chronic lumbosacral radicular pain 3) and neurogenic claudication associated with lumbar spinal stenosis. This classification of CLBP is organized according to the AAPT multidimensional framework, specifically 1) core diagnostic criteria; 2) common features; 3) common medical and psychiatric comorbidities; 4) neurobiological, psychosocial, and functional consequences; and 5) putative neurobiological and psychosocial mechanisms, risk factors, and protective factors.PerspectiveAn evidence-based classification of CLBP conditions was constructed for the AAPT initiative. This multidimensional diagnostic framework includes: 1) core diagnostic criteria; 2) common features; 3) medical and psychiatric comorbidities; 4) neurobiological, psychosocial, and functional consequences; and 5) putative neurobiological and psychosocial mechanisms, risk factors, and protective factors.     

AAAPT Diagnostic Criteria for Acute Abdominal and Peritoneal Pain After Surgery

Abdominal and peritoneal pain after surgery is common and burdensome, yet the lack of standardized diagnostic criteria for this type of acute pain impedes basic, translational, and clinical investigations. The collaborative effort among the Analgesic, Anesthetic, and Addiction Clinical Trial Translations, Innovations, Opportunities, and Networks, American Pain Society, and American Academy of Pain Medicine Pain Taxonomy (AAAPT) provides a systematic framework to classify acute painful conditions. Using this framework, a multidisciplinary working group reviewed the literature and developed core diagnostic criteria for acute abdominal and peritoneal pain after surgery. In this report, we apply the proposed AAAPT framework to 4 prototypical surgical procedures resulting in abdominal and peritoneal pain as examples: cesarean delivery, cholecystectomy, colorectal surgical procedures, and pancreas resection. These diagnostic criteria address the 3 most common surgical procedures performed in the United States, capture diverse surgical approaches, and may also be applied to other surgical procedures resulting in abdominal and peritoneal pain. Additional investigation regarding the validity and reliability of this framework will facilitate its adoption in research that advances our comprehension of mechanisms, deliver better treatments, and help prevent the transition of acute to chronic pain after surgery in the abdominal and peritoneal region.PerspectiveUsing AAAPT, we present key diagnostic criteria for acute abdominal and peritoneal pain after surgery. We provide a systematic classification using 5 dimensions for abdominal and peritoneal pain that occurs after surgery, in addition to 4 specific surgical procedures: cesarean delivery, cholecystectomy, colorectal surgical procedures, and pancreas resection.     

AAPT Diagnostic Criteria for Chronic Painful Temporomandibular Disorders

The classification of temporomandibular disorders (TMD) has progressed substantially over the past 25 years owing to the strategic implementation of an initial classification system based on core taxonomic principles. In this article, we describe the development of the Diagnostic Criteria for Temporomandibular Disorders (DC/TMD) and its translation into the multidimensional Analgesic, Anesthetic, and Addiction Clinical Trial Translations Innovations Opportunities and Networks–AAPT for chronic pain disorders. The initial scientific classification system (Research Diagnostic Criteria for Temporomandibular Disorders) relied on a boot-strapping process that did not attempt to solve all known clinical problems but, rather, focused on problems that could be solved at that time. The core design principles included using epidemiologic data, operationalized concepts, reliable methods, and the incorporation of the biopsychosocial model into a dual axis system. This system led to sufficient data collection internationally that the system itself could be revised, first by critical evaluation of all aspects, second by review from invited experts, and third by the construction of a revised taxonomy (DC/TMD) that maintained the core design principles of the Research Diagnostic Criteria for Temporomandibular Disorders. The resultant disorders with pain as a dominant feature exhibit substantial sensitivity and specificity, and they have been translated into the AAPT framework. The AAPT TMD criteria are part of an evidence-based classification system providing a systematic structure that includes 5 dimensions: diagnostic criteria, common features, comorbidities, consequences, and putative mechanisms. Future research will attempt to extend this AAPT domain from solely TMDs to include other orofacial pain conditions.PerspectiveThe painful TMDs have well-established sensitivity and specificity, as based on the DC/TMD; their translation to the AAPT framework for chronic pain conditions provides a structure for consistent clinical application within the broader health care settings and for future research on the TMDs.     

Initial Content Validation and Roadmap for a New Patient-Reported Outcome Measure of Pain Intensity

Measures of pain intensity (eg, numeric rating scales [NRS]) are widely used in clinical research and practice. While these measures have evidence for validity and reliability, poor standardization of instructions, and response options limits precision of pain assessment, allows for inconsistency in interpretation, and presents a challenge for comparison and aggregation of study results. Despite these pitfalls, the 0 to 10 NRS remains the most commonly used primary outcome measure in clinical trials of pain treatments and is the core measure recommended by regulatory agencies. The purpose of this study was to describe the first phase in the development of a pain intensity measure that is easily interpretable, psychometrically sound, and that adheres to FDA qualification processes. The Analgesic, Anesthetic, and Addiction Clinical Trial, Translations, Innovations, Opportunities, and Networks (ACTTION) public-private partnership conducted concept elicitation interviews (N = 44; 22 with acute pain; 22 with chronic pain) to understand the patient perspective on rating pain intensity and to identify actionable suggestions for improved clarity and meaningfulness of instructions, recall periods, and response options. This article summarizes interview findings, describes how patient input and FDA feedback informed preliminary candidate measures, and provides an overview of the FDA qualification process.PerspectiveConcept elicitation interviews informed the development of content-valid candidate measures of acute and chronic pain intensity for planned use in clinical trials of pain treatments, and comprise the initial stage in FDA clinical outcome assessment qualification. Measures will subsequently be evaluated through cognitive interviews and a series of psychometric studies.     

AAAPT Diagnostic Criteria for Acute Pain Following Breast Surgery

Acute pain after breast surgery decreases the quality of life of cancer survivors. Previous studies using a variety of definitions and methods report prevalence rates between 10% and 80%, which suggests the need for a comprehensive framework that can be used to guide assessment of acute pain and pain-related outcomes after breast surgery. A multidisciplinary task force with clinical and research expertise performed a focused review and synthesis and applied the 5 dimensional framework of the AAAPT (Analgesic, Anesthetic, and Addiction Clinical Trial Translations, Innovations, Opportunities, and Networks [ACTTION], American Academy of Pain Medicine [AAPM], American Pain Society [APS] Pain Taxonomy) to acute pain after breast surgery. Application of the AAAPT taxonomy yielded the following: 1) Core Criteria: Location, timing, severity, and impact of breast surgery pain were defined; 2) Common Features: Character and expected trajectories were established in relevant surgical subgroups, and common pain assessment tools for acute breast surgery pain identified; 3) Modulating Factors: Biological, psychological, and social factors that modulate interindividual variability were delineated; 4) Impact/Functional Consequences: Domains of impact were outlined and defined; 5) Neurobiologic Mechanisms: Putative mechanisms were specified ranging from nerve injury, inflammation, peripheral and central sensitization, to affective and social processing of pain.PerspectiveThe AAAPT provides a framework to define and guide improved assessment of acute pain after breast surgery, which will enhance generalizability of results across studies and facilitate meta-analyses and studies of interindividual variation, and underlying mechanism. It will allow researchers and clinicians to better compare between treatments, across institutions, and with other types of acute pain.     

Adverse event assessment,analysis, and reporting in recent published analgesic clinical trials: ACTTION systematic review and recommendations

The development of valid and informative treatment risk–benefit profiles requires consistent and thorough information about adverse event (AE) assessment and participants’ AEs during randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Despite a 2004 extension of the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) statement recommending the specific AE information that investigators should report, there is little evidence that analgesic RCTs adequately adhere to these recommendations. This systematic review builds on prior recommendations by describing a comprehensive checklist for AE reporting developed to capture clinically important AE information. Using this checklist, we coded AE assessment methods and reporting in all 80 double-blind RCTs of noninvasive pharmacologic treatments published in the European Journal of Pain, Journal of Pain, and PAIN® from 2006 to 2011. Across all trials, reports of AEs were frequently incomplete, inconsistent across trials, and, in some cases, missing. For example, >40% of trials failed to report any information on serious adverse events. Trials of participants with acute or chronic pain conditions and industry-sponsored trials typically provided more and better-quality AE data than trials involving pain-free volunteers or trials that were not industry sponsored. The results of this review suggest that improved AE reporting is needed in analgesic RCTs. We developed an ACTTION (Analgesic, Anesthetic, and Addiction Clinical Trial Translations, Innovations, Opportunities, and Networks) AE reporting checklist that is intended to assist investigators in thoroughly and consistently capturing and reporting these critically important data in publications.     

Effect of variability in the 7-day baseline pain diary on the assay sensitivity of neuropathic pain randomized clinical trials: An ACTTION study

The degree of variability in the patient baseline 7-day diary of pain ratings has been hypothesized to have a potential effect on the assay sensitivity of randomized clinical trials of pain therapies. To address this issue, we obtained clinical trial data from the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) through the Analgesic, Anesthetic, and Addiction Clinical Trial Translations, Innovations, Opportunities, and Networks (ACTTION) public–private partnership, and harmonized patient level data from 12 clinical trials (4 gabapentin and 8 pregabalin) in postherpetic neuralgia (PHN) and painful diabetic peripheral neuropathy (DPN). Models were developed using exploratory logistic regression to examine the interaction between available baseline factors and treatment (placebo vs active medication) in predicting patient response to therapy (ie, >30% improvement). Our analysis demonstrated an increased likelihood of response in the placebo-treated group for patients with a higher standard deviation in the baseline 7-day diary without affecting the likelihood of a response in the active medication–treated group, confirming our hypothesis. In addition, there was a small but significant age-by-treatment interaction in the PHN model, and small weight-by-treatment interaction in the DPN model. The patient’s sex, baseline pain level, and the study protocol had an effect only on the likelihood of response overall. Our results suggest the possibility that, at least in some disease processes, excluding patients with a highly variable baseline 7-day diary has the potential to improve the assay sensitivity of these analgesic clinical trials, although reductions of external validity must be considered when increasing the homogeneity of the investigated sample.     

Adverse event reporting in nonpharmacologic,noninterventional pain clinical trials: ACTTION systematic review

Assessment of treatment safety is 1 of the primary goals of clinical trials. Organizations and working groups have created reporting guidelines for adverse events (AEs). Previous research examining AE reporting for pharmacologic clinical trials of analgesics in major pain journals found many reporting inadequacies, suggesting that analgesic trials are not adhering to existing AE reporting guidelines. The present systematic review documented AE reporting in 3 main pain journals for nonpharmacologic, noninterventional (NP/NI) trials examining pain treatments. To broaden our pool of nonpharmacologic trials, we also included trials examining acupuncture, leech therapy, and noninvasive stimulation techniques (eg, transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation). We documented AE reporting at 2 levels of specificity using coding manuals based on the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) harms reporting standards and Analgesic, Anesthetic, and Addiction Clinical Trial Translations, Innovations, Opportunities, and Networks (ACTTION) AE reporting checklist. We identified a number of inadequacies in AE reporting across the 3 journals. For example, using the ACTTION coding manual, we found that less than one-half of the trials reported specific AE assessment methods; approximately one-third of the trials reported withdrawals due to AEs for each study arm; and about one-fourth of the trials reported all specific AEs. We also examined differences in AE reporting across several trial characteristics, finding that AE reporting was generally more detailed in trials with patients versus those using healthy volunteers undergoing experimentally evoked pain. These results suggest that investigators conducting and reporting NP/NI clinical trials are not adequately describing the assessment and occurrence of AEs.     

PACU pain management algorithm.

Effective and safe pain management for a patient emerging from the effects of anesthesia is a specialized skill that is often acquired only through years of experience. This article provides perianesthesia nurses with a technique to assess the cognitively impaired postanesthesia patient and to incorporate vital circumstantial criteria in determining the presence of pain. Intervention recommendations are also included. The pain management algorithm includes research-based information from the following sources: Pain: Clinical Manual (ed 2), by pain nurse experts Margo McCaffery, RN, MS, FAAN, and Chris Pasero, RN, MS; and the American Pain Society's Principles of Analgesic Use in the Treatment of Acute Pain and Cancer Pain (ed 4). Parameters are incorporated for clinical use.     

Addiction, physical dependence, and tolerance: precise definitions to help clinicians evaluate and treat chronic pain patients

Pain is among the most common complaints for which people seek medical care; yet pain is also among the most undertreated patient complaints. Reasons for this include reluctance by clinicians to prescribe and support the use of opioids, often due to a fear of addiction. To address this issue, three major health professional organizations that deal with the treatment of pain and addiction, the American Academy of Pain Medicine, the American Pain Society, and the American Society of Addiction Medicine, formed the Liaison Committee on Pain and Addiction (LCPA). The first mission of the LCPA was to formulate precise definitions of the terms addiction, physical dependence, and tolerance. This report explains these definitions and discusses how they apply to clinical practice.