The Clinical journal of pain
-
Burn injuries produce severe wound care pain that is ideally controlled on intensive burn care units with high-dosage intravenous opioid medications. We report a case illustrating the use of hypnosis for pain management when one opioid medication was ineffective. ⋯ This case illustrates that hypnosis can not only be used easily and quite appropriately in a busy medical intensive care unit environment, but that sometimes this treatment may be a very useful alternative when opioid pain medication proves to be dangerous and ineffective. This case also illustrates possible clinical implications both pain relief and side-effect profiles for opioid receptor specificity. Although this report does not provide data regarding hypnotic mechanisms, it is clear that with some patients nonopioid inhibitory mechanisms can be activated in a highly effective manner, that clinical context may be important for the activation of those pathways, and that those mechanisms may be accessed more easily than opioid mechanisms.
-
To determine to what extent stressful life events and psychological dysfunction play a role in the pathogenesis of Complex Regional Pain Syndrome type I (CRPS). ⋯ Stressful life events are more common in the CRPS group, which indicates that there may be a multiconditional model of CRPS. The experience of stressful life events besides trauma or surgery are risk factors, not causes, in such a model.
-
Clinical Trial Controlled Clinical Trial
Effect of carbamazepine on pain scores of unipolar depressed patients with chronic pain: a trial of off-on-off-on design.
The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effect of carbamazepine on chronic pain in patients with major depression. ⋯ These results may indicate that carbamazepine has both an antidepressive and an analgesic action in depressed patients. Thus, carbamazepine may offer an acceptable therapeutic option in depressed patients with chronic pain that is unresponsive to antidepressants. Alternatively, these results may indicate that carbamazepine appears to help depression in this group of pain patients because of its analgesic effect (i.e., helps depression as a result of helping pain or vice versa).
-
To compare efficacies, failure rates, and technical complication rates of intraspinal treatments in patients with "refractory" nonmalignant pain conditions in relation to the approach (epidural/intrathecal), the drug (opioid/opioid-bupivacaine or bupivacaine), and the type of system used (externalized/internalized). In these comparisons, recent data from a companion paper (Nitescu et al., Clin J Pain 1998;14:17-28) were used as a reference to be compared with data from a literature review of different intraspinal treatment modalities in nonmalignant pain. ⋯ (a) The intrathecal approach, compared with the epidural approach, was associated with higher rates of satisfactory pain relief for both externalized (86/90, 95% vs. 17/40, 42.5%, p < .0001) and internalized (295/336, 89% vs. 33/56, 59%, p < .0001) catheters; higher rates of treatment failures with externalized epidural catheters than with internalized intrathecal catheters (24/47, 51%, vs. 36/338, 11%, p < .0001); lower rates of treatment failures with internalized intrathecal catheters than with internalized epidural catheters (36/338, 11% vs. 29/76, 38%, p < .0001); higher rates of system replacement with internalized epidural catheters than with internalized intrathecal catheters (23/32, 72% vs. 6/49, 12%, p < .0001; higher rates of system removal with internalized epidural catheters than with internalized intrathecal catheters (22/49, 45% vs. 5/49, 10%, p < .001); higher rates of catheter-related complications with epidural than with intrathecal catheters (dislodgement 13/126, approximately 10% vs. 6/150, 4%, p < .05; leakage 5/51, approximately 10% vs. 1/116, 0.9%, p < .05; obstruction 2
-
To explore the possibility of obtaining pain relief by continuous intrathecal infusion of bupivacaine and opioid in patients with intractable nonmalignant pain. ⋯ During the intrathecal period [range, 3-1,706 days; median, 60 days; totaling 14,686 days, 7,460 (50% of which were spent at home)], 86 patients (approximately 95%) obtained acceptable (60-100%) pain relief. The nocturnal sleep duration increased from <4 to 7 hours (median values), nonopioid analgesic and sedative daily consumption became approximately two times lower, whereas the gait ability and ambulation patterns remained practically unchanged. Five patients still had ongoing treatment after durations of 30 to 1,707 (median, 206) days at the close of the study. In the remaining 85 patients, the intrathecal treatment was terminated because of patients' death (n = 23), replacement of the intrathecal treatment by dorsal column stimulation (n = 1), pain resolution (n = 32), refusal to continue the intrathecal treatment (n = 19), lack of cooperation due to delirium or to manipulation of the pump (n = 8), and loss of efficacy of the intrathecal treatment (n = 2). Thus, in the long run, the intrathecal treatment failed in 29 of the 85 patients with terminated treatment (34%). The principal side-effects and complications, except those attributed to the dural puncture, the equipment, and the long-term catheterization of the subarachnoid space, which are presented separately, were severe bradypnea (n = 1), transient paresthesiae (n = 26), short-lasting pareses (n = 16), temporary urine retention (n = 34), episodic orthostatic arterial hypotension (n = 11), and attempted suicide (n = 5, 3 of which were successful). No neurologic sequelae or death could be attributed to the intrathecal procedure. (ABSTRACT TRUNCATED)