癌痛规范化治疗在晚期癌症病人镇痛中的应用

[目的]探讨癌痛规范化治疗在晚期癌症病人镇痛中的应用效果。[方法]将120例晚期癌症病人随机分为观察组和对照组,每组60例,观察组给予癌痛规范化治疗及护理,对照组给予常规治疗及护理,7d后比较两组病人疼痛缓解率和不良反应发生率。[结果]观察组疼痛缓解率为91.67%,对照组为76.67%,两组比较差异有统计学意义(P0.05);观察组尿潴留发生率低于对照组。[结论]癌痛规范化治疗及护理可以有效提高晚期癌症病人的镇痛效果,减少不良反应,提高生活质量。     

肺癌经支气管动脉灌注118例疗效观察

目的：观察化疗药物经支气管动脉灌注肺癌的疗效。材料与方法：收集化疗药物经支气管动脉灌注原发性肺癌118例，其中中央型78例，周围型40例；鳞癌52例，腺癌33例，大细胞未分化癌19例，小细胞未分化癌14例。观察其组织学类型、血供情况及发生部位与疗效的关系。结果：小细胞未分化癌总缓解率为78．6％，鳞癌75．0％，腺癌63．6％，大细胞未分化癌57．0％，中央型与周围型总缓解率分别为71．4％和52．3％；多血供型与中等血供型总缓解率为74．2％。而少血供型仅为23．5％。结论：化疗药物经支气管动脉灌注是治疗肺癌的有效方法；疗效主要取决于癌瘤血供癌细胞对抗癌药物的敏感及／与癌瘤细胞学类型。     

电针治疗癌性疼痛的疗效观察

目的:探讨电针治疗癌性疼痛的疗效.方法:将1999～2001年60例癌症病人随机分为治疗组30例,对照组30例.治疗组用电针取穴治疗,对照组口服强痛定和安定治疗.结果:治疗组显效18例,有效9例,总有效率90%;对照组显效8例,有效4例,总有效率40%,两组相比差异有统计学意义(P＜0.01).结论:电针治疗癌性疼痛镇痛效果快,维持时间长,明显优于常用药物强痛定和安定.     

桂参止痛合剂治疗中重度晚期癌症疼痛的临床评价

目的：观察桂参止痛合剂(康赛德)对晚期癌症伴中重度疼痛患者的镇痛效果与不良反应。方法：69例癌痛患者随机分为两组，试验组(36例)应用桂参止痛合剂50～150ml，每8小时1次，对照组(33例)路盖克片1～2片，每6小时1次。两组均连用7天。评价指标为疼痛强度，疼痛缓解率，生活质量、不良反应。结果：桂参止痛合剂总的疼痛缓解率为80．6％，对中、重度疼痛的缓解率分别为92．6％、55．6％。与对照组相比，止痛效果无显著性差异，但生活质量改善明显为优，不良反应低，患者接受程度好。结论：桂参止痛合剂是治疗中度癌痛较好的药物。     

低浓度罗哌卡因联合芬太尼镇痛分娩对产妇皮质醇的影响

目的探讨低浓度罗哌卡因镇痛分娩对产妇皮质醇及胎儿的影响。方法60例初产妇随机分为对照组和镇痛组，镇痛组30例用0．06％的罗哌卡因联合芬太尼，以硬膜外阻滞麻醉方式，对产妇分娩时进行麻醉镇痛处理；对照组30例未行分娩镇痛。观察2组产妇分娩时疼痛效果、运动阻滞程度、分娩方式和新生儿情况，测定产妇静脉血及脐血中皮质醇含量。结果镇痛组疼痛视觉模拟评分（VAS）明显低于对照组，差异有统计学意义（P〈0．01）。2组下肢运动神经阻滞评分差异无统计学意义（P〉0．05）。镇痛组用药后活跃期缩短，与对照组比较差异有统计学意义（P〈0．05）；镇痛组第2产程较对照组时间长，但差异无统计学意义（P〉0．05）；2组剖宫产率差异无统计学意义（P〉0．05）。2组新生儿出生后1、5min Apgar评分比较差异均无统计学意义（均P〉0．05）。对照组皮质醇含量较分娩前差异有统计学意义（P〈0．05）。镇痛组镇痛后皮质醇含量与对照组比较差异有统计学意义（P〈0．01）；脐血中皮质醇含量较对照组低，产后_d皮质醇明显下降，与产前比较差异均有统计学意义（均P〈0．01）；2组产妇产后皮质醇比较差异无统计学意义（P〉0．05）。结论用0．06％的罗哌卡因联合芬太尼镇痛分娩是理想的分娩方式。     

疼痛服务组织体系在控制癌性疼痛中的作用

[目的]探讨疼痛服务组织体系在控制癌性疼痛中的作用。[方法]选择94例经病理确诊的恶性肿瘤疼痛病人，随机分为两组，试验组采用镇痛小组服务模式进行综合干预，对照组按照其自主择医镇痛的意愿，不增加医疗护理干预，治疗前及治疗后30d评定病人的疼痛程度、生活质量及治疗后镇痛效果。[结果]试验组疼痛缓解率（93．8％）较对照组（78．3％）高，各类型疼痛评分均较对照组低，生活质量及总体满意度较对照组明显提高（P〈0．05或P〈0．01）。[结论]应用镇痛小组服务模式对癌痛病人进行综合干预，可提高镇痛效果和病人的生活质量。     

丁丙诺啡含片治疗晚期癌痛初始剂量的观察

目的：临床评价初始剂量的丁丙诺啡含片对癌痛的镇痛效果及药物的不良反应。方法：各类型晚期癌症中度顽固性疼痛患者160例，随机分为两组，舌下含服丁丙诺啡含片0．2mg(实验组)80例，0．4mg(对照组)80例，连续用药1周，观察疗效及药物不良反应。结果：丁丙诺啡片用于缓解癌症中度疼痛，初始剂量0．2mg，6～8h／次，可使85％的疼痛患者得到中度以上缓解。丁丙诺啡片药物不良反应主要为头晕、恶心、呕吐等。其发生率0．4mg丁丙诺啡组略高于0．2mg丁丙诺啡组。结论：丁丙诺啡含片对晚期癌痛确有明显镇痛效果，药效维持时间长，且使用方便，不良反应轻，患者容易接受。     

89SrCl2治疗骨转移癌镇痛效果分析

目的观察^89SrCl2治疗骨转移癌镇痛疗效。方法骨转移癌持续骨痛患者45例静脉注射^89SrCl2 148-222MBq（4—6mci／次）。结果骨痛完全消失20例，显效率44．4％；骨痛明显缓解22例，有效率48．9％，总有效率93．3％；骨痛无明显变化3例，无效率6．7％。结论^89SrCl2治疗骨转移癌镇痛疗效可靠，不良反应轻。     

希罗达联合奥沙利铂治疗晚期胃癌的临床研究

目的评价希罗达联合奥沙利铂治疗晚期胃癌的临床疗效。方法将入选胃癌病例按计算机生成随机数字分为试验组和对照组，每组各30例。试验组采用希罗达联合奥沙利铂治疗，对照组采用5．氟尿嘧啶联合奥沙利铂及亚叶酸钙治疗，完成2周期化疗，采用实体瘤的疗效评价标准（RECIST）评价近期疗效，且通过评价肿瘤疼痛等情况对比两组患者的临床受益情况。结果60例病例均完成2周化疗。（1）近期疗效：试验组30例，2例完全缓解，1l例部分缓解，15例稳定，2例进展，客观有效率为43．3％；对照组30例，1例完全缓解，11例部分缓解，14例稳定，4例进展，客观有效率为40．0％。两组近期有效率比较无统计学差异（P〉0．05）。（2）临床受益率：试验组与对照组均为2周期化疗后评价临床受益，试验组30例，21例受益，9例未受益，临床受益率为70．0％；对照组30例，12例受益，18例未受益，临床受益率为40．0％，试验组临床受益率显著高于对照组，差异有统计学意义（P〈0．05）。结论两种方案治疗晚期胃癌，近期疗效相当，但试验组临床受益率优于对照组。     

芬太尼透皮贴剂缓解老年晚期癌痛及对生活质量的影响

目的：观察芬太尼透皮贴剂治疗老年晚期癌痛的临床疗效、不良反应及使用后生活质量的改善程度。方法：选取30例伴有中、重度疼痛的老年恶性肿瘤患，使用芬太尼透皮贴剂止痛，至少应用5贴，观察15d，记录治疗前后的疼痛强度、生活质量评分和用药中的不良反应。结果：使用芬太尼透皮贴剂后获得完全缓解20％(6／30)，明显缓解30％(9／30)，中度缓解40％(12／30)，轻度缓解3．33％(1／30)，未缓解6．66％(2／30)，总止痛有效率90％，总获益率93．33％。中度疼痛缓解率91．67％(11／12)，重度疼痛缓解率88．89％(16／18)。不良反应有头晕、嗜睡、便秘、恶心、呕吐、排尿困难、皮肤过敏等，无危及生命的严重不良反应，生活质量明显改善。结论：芬太尼透皮贴剂治疗老年晚期癌痛疗效显，尤其适用于不能耐受口服止痛药的老年患。     

From past pain to future pain through the pain of others: Information about other people's pain ratings can alleviate our subsequent pain

Background

Previous studies have shown that pain memories have a profound impact on subsequent pain experiences. This study investigated whether pain ratings derived from other people can modify an individual's memory of past pain. This study also examined whether pain memory modified by others' pain ratings determines subsequent pain experiences.

Methods

Participants were divided into two groups: an experimental group and a control group. Participants in both groups were exposed to pain stimulation; then, they recalled its intensity twice over a period of time; after a break, they were again exposed to pain stimulation of the same intensity. The final sample consisted of 53 participants. The only difference between the experimental group and the control group was that in the former the pain ratings of other alleged participants were presented between the two consecutive pain recalls. These ratings suggested that other people experienced the same pain as less intense.

Results

The pain ratings derived from other people did not alter the pain memory; nevertheless, they affected an individual's next pain experience even for a certain period of time after their presentation. This type of pain-related information shaped participants' subsequent pain experiences regardless of their empathy, conformity, and susceptibility to social influence.

Conclusions

Information on pain derived from other people not only shapes the response to a novel stimulation but also substantially modifies the subsequent experience of that stimulation.

Significance

The study demonstrates the importance of social information on pain and provides evidence that this type of information substantially modifies the subsequent experience of the same pain. These results suggest that social information on pain can be used to alleviate pain associated with recurring medical procedures and thus increase patients' willingness to continue treatment.     

Electronic momentary assessment in chronic pain II: pain and psychological pain responses as predictors of pain disability

OBJECTIVES AND METHODS: More than 7,100 electronic diaries from 80 patients with chronic pain (mean: 89.3, range 30-115) entered multilevel analyses to establish the statistical prediction of disability by pain intensity and by psychological functioning (fear avoidance, cognitive, and spousal pain responses). We also tested the differences between pre-chronic, recently chronic, and persistently chronic pain in the prediction of disability (impaired physical and mental capacity, pain interference with activities, immobility due to pain). RESULTS: Pain intensity explained 8% to 19% of the disability variance. Beyond this psychological functioning explained 7% to 16%: particularly fear-avoidance and cognitive pain responses predicted chronic pain disorder disability; spousal responses predicted immobility better than other aspects of disability. Immobility due to actual pain occurred infrequently. When it did, however, it was better predicted by avoidance behavior in the patient and by spousal discouragement of movement than by actual pain intensity. The prediction of immobility due to pain by, respectively, avoidance behavior and catastrophizing was better in chronic pain (>6 months) and that of physical impairment by catastrophizing better in persistently chronic pain (>12 months) than in pain of shorter duration. DISCUSSION: The psychological prediction of chronic pain disorder disability was determined beyond that accounted for by pain intensity. Nonetheless, psychological functioning explained substantial variance in chronic pain disorder disability. The psychological prediction of immobility and physical impairment was stronger with longer pain duration. Patient characteristics and momentary states of disability-and in particular of immobility-should be carefully distinguished and accounted for in chronic pain disorder.     

Neuraxial pain relief for intractable cancer pain

Most patients with cancer pain achieve good analgesia using traditional analgesics and adjuvant medications; however, an important minority of patients (2% to 5%) suffers from severe and refractory cancer pain. For these individuals, spinal analgesics (intrathecal or epidural) provide significant hope for pain relief over months or years of treatment to help improve quality of life. Spinal analgesics have been suggested as the fourth step in the World Health Organization guidelines in the management of cancer pain, and thus the pain physician should be familiar with principles of use. Most patients achieve pain relief using spinal analgesics, with a minimum of complications that are easily managed at home. A variety of opioids, local anesthetics, clonidine, ketamine, and other analgesics are available for the spinal route of administration and should be titrated to clinical effect or intolerable side effect. This article discusses the appropriate selection of patients for spinal analgesics, reviews current recommended infusion systems and current spinal analgesics, discusses possible complications, and includes practical suggestions for patient management.