25
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: not found

      Neuropathic pain in the community: More under-treated than refractory?

      research-article

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Summary

          There is a significant proportion of chronic pain that is persistent and neuropathic, appears undertreated or untreated, and is associated with poor health and quality of life.

          Abstract

          Best current estimates of neuropathic pain prevalence come from studies using screening tools detecting pain with probable neuropathic features; the proportion experiencing significant, long-term neuropathic pain, and the proportion not responding to standard treatment are unknown. These “refractory” cases are the most clinically important to detect, being the most severe, requiring specialist treatment. The aim of this study was to estimate the proportion of neuropathic pain in the population that is “refractory,” and to quantify associated clinical and demographic features. We posted self-administered questionnaires to 10,000 adult patients randomly selected from 10 general practitioner practices in 5 UK locations. The questionnaire contained chronic pain identification and severity questions, cause of pain, SF-12, EQ-5D, S-LANSS (Self-administered Leeds Assessment of Neuropathic Signs and Symptoms), PSEQ (Pain Self-Efficacy Questionnaire), use of neuropathic pain medications, and health care utilisation. These data were combined to determine the presence and characteristics of “refractory” neuropathic pain according to the defining features identified by a Delphi survey of international experts. Graded categories of chronic pain with and without neuropathic characteristics were generated, incorporating the refractory criteria. Completed questionnaires were returned by 4451 individuals (response rate 47%); 399 had “chronic pain with neuropathic characteristics” (S-LANSS positive, 8.9% of the study sample); 215 (53.9%) also reported a positive relevant history (“Possible neuropathic pain”); and 98 (4.5% of all Chronic Pain) also reported an “adequate” trial of at least one neuropathic pain drug (“Treated possible neuropathic pain”). The most refractory cases were associated with dramatically poorer physical and mental health, lower pain self-efficacy, higher pain intensity and pain-related disability, and greater health care service use.

          Related collections

          Most cited references28

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Grading the severity of chronic pain.

          This research develops and evaluates a simple method of grading the severity of chronic pain for use in general population surveys and studies of primary care pain patients. Measures of pain intensity, disability, persistence and recency of onset were tested for their ability to grade chronic pain severity in a longitudinal study of primary care back pain (n = 1213), headache (n = 779) and temporomandibular disorder pain (n = 397) patients. A Guttman scale analysis showed that pain intensity and disability measures formed a reliable hierarchical scale. Pain intensity measures appeared to scale the lower range of global severity while disability measures appeared to scale the upper range of global severity. Recency of onset and days in pain in the prior 6 months did not scale with pain intensity or disability. Using simple scoring rules, pain severity was graded into 4 hierarchical classes: Grade I, low disability--low intensity; Grade II, low disability--high intensity; Grade III, high disability--moderately limiting; and Grade IV, high disability--severely limiting. For each pain site, Chronic Pain Grade measured at baseline showed a highly statistically significant and monotonically increasing relationship with unemployment rate, pain-related functional limitations, depression, fair to poor self-rated health, frequent use of opioid analgesics, and frequent pain-related doctor visits both at baseline and at 1-year follow-up. Days in Pain was related to these variables, but not as strongly as Chronic Pain Grade. Recent onset cases (first onset within the prior 3 months) did not show differences in psychological and behavioral dysfunction when compared to persons with less recent onset. Using longitudinal data from a population-based study (n = 803), Chronic Pain Grade at baseline predicted the presence of pain in the prior 2 weeks. Chronic Pain Grade and pain-related functional limitations at 3-year follow-up. Grading chronic pain as a function of pain intensity and pain-related disability may be useful when a brief ordinal measure of global pain severity is required. Pain persistence, measured by days in pain in a fixed time period, provides useful additional information.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: not found
            • Article: not found

            Classification of chronic pain. Descriptions of chronic pain syndromes and definitions of pain terms. Prepared by the International Association for the Study of Pain, Subcommittee on Taxonomy.

            (1986)
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Non-response and related factors in a nation-wide health survey.

              To analyse selective factors associated with an unexpectedly low response rate. The baseline questionnaire survey of a large prospective follow-up study on the psychosocial health of the Finnish working-aged randomly chosen population resulted in 21,101 responses (40.0%) in 1998. The non-respondent analysis used demographic and health-related population characteristics from the official statistics and behavioural, physical and mental health-related outcome differences between early and late respondents to predict possible non-response bias. Reasons for non-response, indicated by missing responses of late respondents, and factors affecting the giving of consent were also analysed. The probability of not responding was greater for men, older age groups, those with less education, divorced and widowed respondents, and respondents on disability pension. The physical health-related differences between the respondents and the general population were small and could be explained by differences in definitions. The late respondents smoked and used more psychopharmaceutical drugs than the early ones, suggesting similar features in non-respondents. The sensitive issues had a small effect on the response rate. The consent to use a medical register-based follow-up was obtained from 94.5% of the early and 90.9% of the late respondents (odds ratio: 1.70; 95% confidence interval: 1.49-1.93). Consent was more likely among respondents reporting current smoking, heavy alcohol use, panic disorder or use of tranquillisers. The main reasons for non-response may be the predisposing sociodemographic and behavioural factors, the length and sensitive nature of the questionnaire to some extent, and a suspicion of written consent and a connection being made between the individual and the registers mentioned on the consent form.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Pain
                Pain
                Pain
                Elsevier/North-Holland
                0304-3959
                1872-6623
                1 May 2013
                May 2013
                : 154
                : 5
                : 690-699
                Affiliations
                [a ]Medical Research Institute, University of Dundee, Dundee, UK
                [b ]Division of Applied Health Sciences, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, UK
                [c ]Academic Unit of Palliative Care, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK
                [d ]School of Medicine, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK
                [e ]Institute of Primary Care & Health Sciences, University of Keele, Keele, UK
                Author notes
                [* ]Corresponding author. Address: University of Dundee, Medical Research Institute, Ninewells Hospital & Medical School, Mackenzie Building, Kirsty Semple Way, Dundee DD2 4BF, UK. Tel.: +44 0 1382 383476. n.torrance@ 123456dundee.ac.uk
                Article
                PAIN8650
                10.1016/j.pain.2012.12.022
                3630326
                23485369
                a34071db-8138-4a97-8d55-58358c43e2f5
                © 2013 Elsevier B.V.

                This document may be redistributed and reused, subject to certain conditions.

                History
                : 16 October 2012
                : 20 December 2012
                : 31 December 2012
                Categories
                Article

                Anesthesiology & Pain management
                neuropathic pain,chronic pain,epidemiology,s-lanss,refractory
                Anesthesiology & Pain management
                neuropathic pain, chronic pain, epidemiology, s-lanss, refractory

                Comments

                Comment on this article