421 Closed loop analgesia audit, a Single Centre Experience in Raigmore Hospital, Inverness, Scotland

Aim Assess are we following the analgesic step ladder accurately and if not are the reasons clear and documented? Method A closed-loop audit performed on the use of the WHO Analgesic ladder in surgical patients. We looked at the compliance of the analgesic ladder and are the reasons documented or explained when the ladder is not followed. The data was collated, analysed, and presented at an audit meeting. We then implemented changes in the form of educational sessions and information leaflets sharing, as well as email reminders among staff. Post-implementation showed an improvement in the documentation when the analgesic ladder was not followed. Results A total of 103 surgical patients were included. Prior to the implementation of interventions, 83.3% of patients had analgesia prescribed following the analgesic ladder. Of those remaining patients who had analgesia prescribed not according to the analgesic ladder, only 50% documented the indications and reasons. Post-implementation, the analgesic ladder compliance dropped to 50.9% with documentation improvement to 56%. Conclusions All surgical patients have prescribed analgesia when needed. Though WHO ladder compliance has shown reduction compared to the first data sample, the reasons are clinically justified, and improvements have been shown in documentation after intervention though there is still room for improvement for documentation. This is perhaps surgical teams are more aware of the choice of analgesia used post-intervention while taking the analgesic ladder into consideration. Stepwise multimodal analgesia prescribing will improve analgesic effect hence improves post-operative recovery hence reduce the length of hospital stay as part of the ERAS protocol.

New WHO guidelines for cancer pain in adults and adolescents

In this article we performed publication analysis devoted to pain medicine in oncology during anticancer therapy and in palliative setting. Until recently, the main WHO guidelines for pain management in oncology were the recommendations of 1996, which included only pain relievers, as well as adjuvant and symptomatic drugs, which were applied according to the WHO analgesic ladder. These recommendations were based on the collective expert opinion of leading clinicians and scientists. The new WHO clinical guidelines were published in 2019. They are based on the principles of evidence-based medicine, including modern concepts of the etiology and pathogenesis of tumor pain syndrome. This recommendations contain sections on the analgesic efficacy of radiation therapy and antitumor drug therapy. The new WHO recommendations have not yet been published in Russian and are not sufficiently available for a wide range of oncologists and palliative specialists in our country. The purpose of this publication is to present within one volume a concise but complete and comprehensible discussion of the latest trends in pain therapy in oncology, published by WHO experts.

Development of Professional Attributes through Integration of Science and Practice at First-Year Pharmacy Level

The design, implementation and evaluation of a year 1 pharmacy-integrated learning component, using the World Health Organisation’s (WHO) analgesic ladder as a scaffold for case-based learning, is described. A novel aspect of the integrated component is the mapping of the cases to the national Core Competency Framework (CCF) for Pharmacists in Ireland and to the school’s own cross-cutting curricular integration themes. The integrated cases were student led and delivered through peer-to-peer teaching for 68 first-year pharmacy students. The integrated cases mapped strongly to three of the CCF’s domains, namely, personal skills, organisation and management skills and supply of medicines. With regard to the school’s curricular integrative themes, the cases mapped strongly to the curricular integration themes of professionalism and communications; medicines sourcing, production and use; and safe and rational use of medicines. Highlights from an anonymous online student survey were the recognition by students of the importance of core science knowledge for practice, the enabling of integrated learning and the suitability of the integrated component for entry-level. While a majority of students were found to favour individual work over group work, future iterations will need to consider a greater degree of group work with a view to reducing the volume of content and time required to complete the cases.

Analgesics

It is the responsibility of the professional care team to develop an effective person-centred Pain Management strategy which appropriately assesses patients, analyses the results of the assessment and devises a person centred plan to manage pain while allowing the person to remain as independent and functional as possible. The medications useful in treating acute pain are similar to those used in treating other types of pain. The World Health Organization (WHO) analgesic ladder developed for treating patients with cancer pain also provides a useful approach to treat acute pain. At the lowest level (mild pain) are recommended nonopioid analgesics such as paracetamol or/plus nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) (e.g. ibuprophen). Such drugs have an analgesic ceiling; above a certain dose, no further analgesia is expected. For moderate pain, are recommended combining paracetamol and/or a NSAID with an opioid (a weak opoid). The inclusion of paracetamol limits the amount of opoids that should be used within 24 hour period, with many benefits which will be discussed later in the chapter. For severe level of pain, a strong opoid such as morphine is a better choice; such opoids have no analgesic ceiling. Most postoperative or trauma patients initially respond better to a morphine-equivalent opoid. At the moment when the patient is eating and drinking, a combination of oral analgesics including opoids and paracetamol plus/minus NSAID are most of the time an adequate choice.

Independent Research on Cancer Pain Management in the Setting of Early Palliative Care: A Flywheel to Counteract General Opioid Misuse and Abuse

The increased recognition of the high prevalence and important burden of cancer pain and the documentation of a large proportion of patients receiving inadequate analgesic treatment should have reinforced the need for evidence-based recommendations. The World health Organization (WHO) guidelines on cancer pain management—or palliative care—are traditionally based on a sequential, three-step, analgesic ladder according to pain intensity: nonopioids (paracetamol or nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs) to mild pain in step I; weak opioids (eg, codeine or tramadol) to mild-moderate pain in step II; and strong opioids to moderate-severe pain in step. III. Despite the widespread use of this ladder, unrelieved pain continues to be a substantial concern in one third of patients with either solid or hematologic malignancies. The sequential WHO analgesic ladder, and in particular, the usefulness of step II opioids have been questioned but there are no universally used guidelines for the treatment of pain in patients with advanced cancer and not all guideline recommendations are evidence-based. The American Society of Clinical Oncology and the European Society of Medical Oncology have recommended the implementation of early palliative care (EPC), which is a novel model of care, consisting of delivering dedicated palliative service concurrent with active treatment as early as possible in the cancer disease trajectory. Improvement in cancer pain management is one of the several important positive effects following EPC interventions. Independent well-designed research studies on pharmacological interventions on cancer pain, especially in the EPC setting are warranted and may contribute to spur research initiatives to investigate the poorly addressed issues of pain management in non cancer patients.

Evaluation of Pain Management after Surgery: An Observational Study

Background and Objectives: Choosing a pain management strategy is essential for improving recovery after surgery. Effective pain management reduces the stress response, facilitates mobilization, and improves the quality of the postoperative period. The aim of the study was to assess the effectiveness of pain management in patients after surgery. Materials and Methods: The study included 216 patients operated on in the following surgical wards: the Department of Cardiosurgery and the Department of General and Endocrine Surgery. Patients were hospitalized on average for 6 ± 4.5 days. Patients were randomly selected for the study using a questionnaire technique with a numerical rating scale. Results: Immediately after surgery, pre-emptive analgesia, multimodal analgesia, and analgosedation were used significantly more frequently than other methods (p < 0.001). In the subsequent postoperative days, the method of administering drugs on demand was used most often. Patients with confirmed complications during postoperative wound healing required significantly more frequent use of drugs from Steps 2 and 3 of the World Health Organization (WHO) analgesic ladder compared with patients without complications. Conclusion: The mode of patient admission for surgery significantly affected the level of pain perception. Different pain management methods were used and not every method was effective.

Ganglion Impar Neurolysis in the Management of Pelvic and Perineal Cancer-Related Pain

Cancer-related pain is a very prevalent problem in all stages, with 10% of patients requiring invasive techniques for adequate pain management. Ganglion impar neurolysis has been used in the treatment of pelvic-perineal pain with efficacy and rare complications, but only a few case or series reports in cancer patients have been published. We report the case of a patient presenting with an ovarian carcinoma (FIGO stage IIIC), who had several disease relapses at the colorectal transition and need for palliative colic prosthesis. She presented later with anorectal pain associated with a rectovaginal fistula, which had an important impact on the activities of her daily life. She was submitted to two ganglion impar neurolyses, which resulted in improved pain control for a total of 5 months, an important improvement in her quality of life, and reduction of opioid consumption. The authors aim to alert to the importance of pain control and to address the fourth step of the WHO analgesic ladder as an option for cancer patients, including palliative patients.

Dexketoprofen – an additional opportunity to control chronic pain syndrome in malignant neoplasms

Chronic pain syndrome (CPS) is an independent disease. Patients with disseminated malignant tumors may experience chronic pain even with successful anticancer therapy. For the control of CPS use the WHO analgesic ladder. Despite adequate pain relief, patients may experience breakthrough pain. Clinical guidelines suggest the use of opioids for the treatment of breakthrough pain. Dexketoprofen is a nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAIDs) of rapid action. The drug is highly effective for pain in the bones of various origins. Dexketoprofen can be used for incident predictable breakthrough pain.