Management of chronic noncancer pain in depressed patients

Many patients with chronic noncancer pain present with comorbid depression, which can greatly complicate the treatment of pain. Chronic pain and depression each increase the risk of licit and illicit substance abuse, including the abuse of opioids, and of suicide. Patients attempting suicide may overdose on opioids, which are commonly perceived as potentially harmful, or acetaminophen, an agent that is believed to be safe but is actually the leading cause of liver failure in the United States. Opioids, acetaminophen, and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) have the potential to interact with antidepressants, and their adverse effects may be exacerbated by alcohol use, which is also common in patients with depression. Topical NSAIDs, capsaicin, and lidocaine provide effective analgesia for several pain conditions. These agents limit systemic drug exposure, reducing the risk of systemic adverse events without risk of accidental or deliberate overdose. However, use of topical agents is generally limited to localized pain syndromes and therefore does not substantially eliminate the need for systemic analgesics in those patients with diffuse persistent pain, central sensitization, and opioid-responsive pain. This review will discuss the challenges associated with treating chronic pain in depressed patients and will provide recommendations for optimizing treatment.     

Neuraxial infusion in patients with chronic intractable cancer and noncancer pain

Ever since the application in 1980 of morphine for spinal analgesia in patients with refractory cancer pain, spinal infusion therapy has become one of the cornerstones for the management of chronic, medically intractable pain. Initially, spinal infusion therapy was indicated only for patients with cancer pain that could not be adequately controlled with systemic narcotics. However, over the past decade, there has been a significant increase in the number of pumps implanted for the treatment of nonmalignant pain. Indeed, "benign" pain syndromes, particularly failed back surgery syndrome, are the most common indication for intrathecal opiates. As we have gained more experience with this therapy, it has become apparent that even intrathecal opiates, when administered in the long term, can be associated with problems such as tolerance, hyperalgesia, and other side effects. Consequently, long-term efficacy has not been as significant as had been hoped. Because of the difficulties associated with long-term intrathecal opiate therapy, much of the research, both basic and clinical, has focused on developing alternative nonopioid agents to be used either alone or in combination with opiates. Clinical trials have been and continue to be conducted to evaluate drugs such as clonidine, SNX-111, local anesthetics, baclofen, and many other less common agents to determine their efficacy and potential toxicity for intrathecal therapy. This article reviews the agents developed as alternatives to intrathecal opiates.     

Prevalence and characteristics of breakthrough pain in opioid-treated patients with chronic noncancer pain.

Breakthrough pain is well-characterized in cancer patients but not in patients with chronic noncancer pain. We recruited 228 patients with diverse types of chronic noncancer pain from 9 pain programs and administered a telephone questionnaire with a breakthrough pain assessment algorithm originally designed for cancer patients. All patients had controlled baseline pain, and 168 (74%) experienced severe to excruciating breakthrough pain. Among those with breakthrough pain, the most common syndrome was low back pain (52%), and the underlying pathophysiology was variably characterized as somatic (38%), neuropathic (18%), visceral (4%), or mixed (40%). A total of 189 different types of breakthrough pain were reported. The median number of episodes per day was 2 (range, <1 to 12). Median time to maximum intensity was 10 minutes (range, 0 to 180 minutes). Median duration of the breakthrough pain was 60 minutes (range, 1 to 720 minutes). Patients identified a precipitant for 69% of pains, and 92% of these were activity-related. Onset could never be predicted for 45% of pains and only sometimes predicted for 31% of pains. Breakthrough pain is highly prevalent and varied in this population. Further studies are warranted to clarify whether the clinical impact and therapeutic challenges posed by this phenomenon are comparable to the cancer population. PERSPECTIVE: This article presents results from a survey that demonstrates that breakthrough pain is highly prevalent and varied in opioid-treated patients with chronic noncancer pain. These findings will assist clinicians in assessing and managing this type of pain.     

Improving goal setting and goal attainment in patients with chronic noncancer pain.

Chronic noncancer pain (CNCP) is a major problem in health care today. Management of patients who have CNCP often poses a challenge for health care providers because their goals are nonspecific and as a group they are prone to frustration and depression. This article evaluates the characteristics of therapeutic goal setting, barriers to goal setting, and potential solutions to this problem. If the patients with CNCP can be assisted to set realistic goals, both patient care and its outcomes will improve.     

Opioid side effects and their treatment in patients with chronic cancer and noncancer pain

Opioids are the foundation of standard analgesic regimens for moderate to severe pain due to life-threatening illnesses such as cancer, and are increasingly employed in chronic noncancer pain of the same severity. Opioids are frequently used for long periods in these populations, sometimes for years. However, side effects are common and may reduce quality of life, or become life threatening, and frequently cause patients to discontinue opioid therapy. Successful opioid therapy dictates that benefits of analgesia outweigh safety concerns. The mechanisms, incidence, and treatment or prevention of commonly reported side effects in chronic pain populations are reviewed, employing best available evidence along with empiric practice. General management strategies include switching opioids ("opioid rotation"), discontinuation of concurrent medications that exacerbate side effects, and symptomatic treatment. In addition, recently recognized adverse events that occur after long-term opioid therapy are discussed. High-quality evidence is lacking for the treatment of most side effects, and the true incidence, underlying mechanisms, and clinical implications of long-term responses to opioid therapy are not yet fully understood.     

Safe use of opioids in chronic noncancer pain

Many physicians avoid prescribing opioid analgesics for chronic pain because of misconceptions or fears about efficacy, adverse effects, abuse, and addiction potential. We discuss these issues and offer suggestions for the rational use of opioid analgesics in patients with chronic noncancer pain.     

Complementary and alternative medicine use among veterans with chronic noncancer pain

We describe prior use and willingness to try complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) among 401 veterans experiencing chronic noncancer pain and explore differences between CAM users and nonusers. Participants in a randomized controlled trial of a collaborative intervention for chronic pain from five Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) primary care clinics self-reported prior use and willingness to try chiropractic care, massage therapy, herbal medicines, and acupuncture. Prior CAM users were compared with nonusers on demographic characteristics, pain-related clinical characteristics, disease burden, and treatment satisfaction. A majority of veterans ( n = 327, 82%) reported prior use of at least one CAM modality, and nearly all (n = 399, 99%) were willing to try CAM treatment for pain. Chiropractic care was the least preferred option, whereas massage therapy was the most preferred (75% and 96%, respectively). CAM users were less likely to have service-connection disabilities (54% vs 68%; chi square = 4.64, p = 0.03) and reported having spent a larger percentage of their lives in pain (26% vs 20%; Z = 1.40, p = 0.04) than nonusers. We detected few differences between veterans who had tried CAM and those who had not, suggesting that CAM may have broad appeal among veterans with chronic pain. Implications for VA policy and practice and for clinicians treating veterans with chronic pain are discussed.     

The Brief Pain Inventory: pain's interference with functions is different in cancer pain compared with noncancer chronic pain

OBJECTIVES: The Brief Pain Inventory (BPI) is a highly recommended and frequently used multidimensional pain assessment tool. The BPI includes 2 dimensions: pain intensity and pain's interference with functions. Our aims were to explore how patients respond to pain interference items by comparing responses from patients who had cancer with patients who had noncancer chronic pain (NCCP), and to explore how different levels of health-related quality of life affect upon pain's interference with functions. METHODS: Three hundred patients with cancer and 286 patients with NCCP were asked to complete the BPI and the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer's Quality of Life Questionnaire (EORTC QLQ-C30). The pain interference items were indexed into total interference, interference with physical functions, and interference with psychologic functions. Regression analyses were used to explore differences in pain's interference by group, pain intensity, and a possible interaction effect between them. The analyses were adjusted for age, sex, and all EORTC QLQ-C30 scales. RESULTS: The cancer patients reported higher values of physical interference than NCCP patients with the same level of pain intensity (P<0.001). NCCP patients reported higher values of psychologic interference than cancer patients (P=0.023). For total interference, these effects eliminated each other. When adjusting for age, sex, and the EORTC QLQ-C30 subscales, the results still remained significant except that adjusting for the subscale for physical function made the group effect insignificant for physical interference (P=0.30). DISCUSSION: The results indicate that patients are unable to report isolated pain's interference using the BPI. When reporting pain's interference with physical functioning, the level of physical functioning is more important than the level of pain. Patients' diagnoses have to be taken into account when interpreting reported pain's interference with functions.     

Controlling chronic noncancer pain in an era of opioid misuse

Will the new federal Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategy prevent abuse? Might it inhibit pain relief?