The journal of pain : official journal of the American Pain Society
-
Over the last decade, the content, delivery and media of pain education have been adjusted in line with scientific discovery in pain and educational sciences, and in line with consumer perspectives. This paper describes a decade-long process of exploring consumer perspectives on pain science education concepts to inform clinician-derived educational updates (undertaken by the authors). Data were collected as part of a quality audit via a series of online surveys in which consent (non-specific) was obtained from consumers for their data to be used in published research. ⋯ Early iteration of these Key Learning Statements was used to inform the development of Target Concepts and associated community-targeted pain education resources for use in public health and health professional workforce capacity building initiatives. PERSPECTIVE: This paper reflects an explicit interest in the insights of people who have been challenged by persistent pain and then recovered, to improve pain care. Identifying pain science concepts that consumers valued learning provided valuable information to inform resources for clinical interactions and community-targeted pain education campaigns.
-
Initial content validation and roadmap for a new patient-reported outcome measure of pain intensity.
Measures of pain intensity (eg, numeric rating scales [NRS]) are widely used in clinical research and practice. While these measures have evidence for validity and reliability, poor standardization of instructions, and response options limits precision of pain assessment, allows for inconsistency in interpretation, and presents a challenge for comparison and aggregation of study results. Despite these pitfalls, the 0 to 10 NRS remains the most commonly used primary outcome measure in clinical trials of pain treatments and is the core measure recommended by regulatory agencies. ⋯ This article summarizes interview findings, describes how patient input and FDA feedback informed preliminary candidate measures, and provides an overview of the FDA qualification process. PERSPECTIVE: Concept elicitation interviews informed the development of content-valid candidate measures of acute and chronic pain intensity for planned use in clinical trials of pain treatments, and comprise the initial stage in FDA clinical outcome assessment qualification. Measures will subsequently be evaluated through cognitive interviews and a series of psychometric studies.
-
The experiences of injustice and their impacts on pain among Latinx Americans are overlooked and understudied. Multidimensional and consequential experiences of racialized discrimination are common for Latinx Americans but have not been considered as factors relevant for enhanced pain experience or risk. In this study, we focused on the experiences of Latinx Americans living in Texas by assessing multiple dimensions of racialized discrimination (total lifetime discrimination, racialized exclusion, stigmatization, discrimination in the workplace or school, and racism-related threat and aggression) and a laboratory marker of central sensitization of pain (temporal summation of mechanical pain, MTS). ⋯ PERSPECTIVE: Racialized discrimination is multidimensional. Latinx Texans experience frequent discrimination that is associated with enhanced temporal summation of pain in the laboratory. Results indicate the importance of societal factors in pain processing and may reflect a mechanism of racism-related pre-clinical central sensitization observable before chronic pain onset.
-
Observational Study
Profiles of Pain Acceptance and Values-Based Action in the Assessment and Treatment of Chronic Pain.
Pain acceptance and values-based action are relevant to treatment outcomes in those with chronic pain. It is unclear if patterns of responding in these 2 behavioral processes can be used to classify patients into distinct classes at treatment onset and used to predict treatment response. This observational cohort study had 2 distinct goals. ⋯ In the smaller treated sample, participants in the Low AV and Moderate AV class demonstrated improvements across all outcome variables, whereas those in the High AV class did not. These findings support the role of pain acceptance and values-based action in those with chronic pain. PERSPECTIVE: Individuals with chronic pain can be classified with respect to pain acceptance and values-based action and these groups may respond differently to treatment.
-
To calibrate or not to calibrate? This question is raised by almost everyone designing an experimental pain study with supra-threshold stimulation. The dilemma is whether to individualize stimulus intensity to the pain threshold / supra-threshold pain level of each participant or whether to provide the noxious stimulus at a fixed intensity so that everyone receives the identical input. Each approach has unique pros and cons which need to be considered to i) accurately design an experiment, ii) enhance statistical inference in the given data and, iii) reduce bias and the influence of confounding factors in the individual study e.g., body composition, differences in energy absorption and previous experience. ⋯ PERSPECTIVE: To calibrate pain or not? This dilemma is related to almost every experimental pain research. The decision is a trade-off between statistical power and greater control of stimulus encoding. The article decomposes both approaches and presents the pros and cons of either approach supported by data and simulation experiment.