An epidemiological study of neuropathic pain symptoms in Canadian adults

The reported prevalence of neuropathic pain ranges from 6.9% to 10%; however the only Canadian study reported 17.9%. The objective of this study was to describe the epidemiology of neuropathic pain in Canada. A cross-sectional survey was conducted in a random sample of Canadian adults. The response rate was 21.1% (1504/7134). Likely or possible neuropathic pain was defined using a neuropathic pain-related diagnosis and a positive outcome on the Self-Report Leeds Assessment of Neuropathic Symptoms and Signs pain scale (S-LANSS) or the Douleur Neuropathique 4 (DN4) Questions. The prevalence of likely neuropathic pain was 1.9% (S-LANSS) and 3.4% (DN4) and that of possible neuropathic pain was 5.8% (S-LANSS) and 8.1% (DN4). Neuropathic pain was highest in economically disadvantaged males. There is a significant burden of neuropathic pain in Canada. The low response rate and a slightly older and less educated sample than the Canadian population may have led to an overestimate of neuropathic pain. Population prevalence varies by screening tool used, indicating more work is needed to develop reliable measures. Population level screening targeted towards high risk groups should improve the sensitivity and specificity of screening, while clinical examination of those with positive screening results will further refine the estimate of prevalence

Additional Support for Simple Imputation of Missing Quality of Life Data in Nursing Research

Background. Missing data are a significant problem in health-related quality of life (HRQOL) research. We evaluated two imputation approaches: missing data estimation (MDE) and assignment of mean score (AMS). Methods. HRQOL data were collected using the Medical Outcomes Trust SF-12. Missing data were estimated using both approaches, summary statistics were produced for both, and results were compared using intraclass correlations (ICC). Results. Missing data were imputed for 21 participants. Mean values were similar, with ICC >.99 within both the Physical Component Summary and the Mental Component Summary when comparing the two methodologies. When imputed data were added into the full study sample, mean scores were identical regardless of methodology. Conclusion. Results support the use of a practical and simple imputation strategy of replacing missing values with the mean of the sample in cross-sectional studies when less than half of the required items of the SF-12 components are missing

Nurse clinic versus home delivery of evidence-based community leg ulcer care: A randomized health services trial

BACKGROUND: International studies report that nurse clinics improve healing rates for the leg ulcer population. However, these studies did not necessarily deliver similar standards of care based on evidence in the treatment venues (home and clinic). A rigorous evaluation of home versus clinic care is required to determine healing rates with equivalent care and establish the acceptability of clinic-delivered care. METHODS: Health Services RCT was conducted where mobile individuals were allocated to either home or nurse clinic for leg ulcer management. In both arms, care was delivered by specially trained nurses, following an evidence protocol. Primary outcome: 3-month healing rates. Secondary outcomes: durability of healing (recurrence), time free of ulcers, HRQL, satisfaction, resource use. Data were collected at base-line, every 3 months until healing occurred, with 1 year follow-up. Analysis was by intention to treat. RESULTS: 126 participants, 65 randomized to receive care in their homes, 61 to nurse-run clinics. No differences found between groups at baseline on socio-demographic, HRQL or clinical characteristics. mean age 69 years, 68% females, 84% English-speaking, half with previous episode of ulceration, 60% ulcers at inclusion < 5 cm(2 )for < 6 months. No differences in 3-month healing rates: clinic 58.3% compared to home care at 56.7% (p = 0.5) or in secondary outcomes. CONCLUSION: Our findings indicate that organization of care not the setting where care is delivered influences healing rates. Key factors are a system that supports delivery of evidence-based recommendations with care being provided by a trained nursing team resulting in equivalent healing rates, HRQL whether care is delivered in the home or in a community nurse-led clinic. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Protocol Registration System: NCT0065638

The Canadian Bandaging Trial: Evidence-informed leg ulcer care and the effectiveness of two compression technologies

Background: Objective: To determine the relative effectiveness of evidence-informed practice using two high compression systems: four-layer (4LB) and short-stretch bandaging (SSB) in community care of venous leg ulcers. Design and Setting: Pragmatic, multi-centre, parallel-group, open-label, randomized controlled trial conducted in 10 centres. Cognitively intact adults (≥18 years) referred for community care (home or clinic) with a venous ulceration measuring ≥0.7cm and present for ≥1 week, with an ankle brachial pressure index (ABPI) ≥0.8, without medication-controlled Diabetes Mellitus or a previous failure to improve with either system, were eligible to participate.Methods: Consenting individuals were randomly allocated (computer-generated blocked randomization schedule) to receive either 4LB or SSB following an evidence-informed protocol. Primary endpoint: time-to- healing of the reference ulcer. Secondary outcomes: recurrence rates, health-related quality of life (HRQL), pain, and expenditures.Results: 424 individuals were randomized (4LB n = 215; SSB n = 209) and followed until their reference ulcer was healed (or maximum 30 months). An intent-to-treat analysis was conducted on all participants. Median time to ulcer healing in the 4LB group was 62 days [95% confidence interval (CI) 51 to 73], compared with 77 days (95% CI 63 to 91) in the SSB group. The unadjusted Kaplan-Meier curves revealed the difference in the distribution of cumulative healing times was not significantly different between group (log rank χ2 = 0.001, P = 0.98) nor ulcers recurrence (4LB, 10.1%; SSB, 13.3%; p = 0.345). Multivariable Cox Proportional Hazard Modeling also showed no significant between-bandage differences in healing time after controlling for significant covariates (p = 0.77). At 3-months post-baseline there were no differences in pain (no pain: 4LB, 22.7%; SSB, 26.7%; p = 0.335), or HRQL (SF-12 Mental Component Score: 4LB, 55.1; SSB, 55.8; p = 0.615; SF-12 Physical Component Score: 4LB, 39.0; SSB, 39.6; p = 0.675). The most common adverse events experienced by both groups included infection, skin breakdown and ulcer deterioration.Conclusions: The Canadian Bandaging Trial revealed that in the practice context of trained RNs using an evidence-informed protocol, the choice of bandage system (4LB and SSB) does not materially affect healing times, recurrence rates, HRQL, or pain. From a community practice perspective, this is positive news for patient-centred care allowing individual/family and practitioner choice in selecting compression technologies based on circumstances and context.Trial registration: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00202267

The Role of Preference on Outcomes of People Receiving Evidence-Informed Community Wound Care in Their Home or in a Nurse-Clinic Setting: A Cohort Study (n = 230)

This study followed a cohort of community-dwelling individuals receiving wound-care in a large urban-rural region. During a randomized control trial (RCT) evaluating outcomes of receiving care in a nurse-clinic or at home, many approached were willing to participate if they could choose their location of care. This provided a unique opportunity to enroll them as a “choice” cohort, following them in the same manner as the trial participants but allowing them to select their setting of care. The objective was to investigate the role of preference and location of care on care outcomes, including satisfaction with care, healing, health-related quality of life (HRQL), pain, and resource use. This is a secondary analysis of a prospective cohort of 126 individuals enrolled in an RCT to receive care at home or in a nurse-clinic (Allocated group), and an additional 104 who received care at home or in a nurse-clinic based on their preference (Choice group). Mobile individuals with a leg ulcer of venous or mixed venous etiology, referred for community leg ulcer care, were eligible. Specially-trained nurses provided care to both groups using an evidence-informed protocol. Baseline data included socio-demographic, circumstance-of-living and a detailed wound assessment. Mean age of the cohort was 68 years. Satisfaction, healing, recurrence, pain, HRQL, and resource utilization did not differ between groups. If available, individuals should have an option of care venue given almost half of those approached indicated a clear preference for clinic or home. With outcomes being similar, health care planners and decision-makers, as well as individuals and their families, can feel confident that the setting of care will not impact the outcomes. However, larger studies in other contexts are needed to explore the interaction between choice and setting

Help-seeking behavior among community-dwelling adults with chronic pain

Background: Some individuals with chronic pain do not seek care. This decision may be due to characteristics of the individual, pain, and/or their health professional(s). Aims: This study aimed to identify and compare features of individuals with chronic pain, their pain and general health, and their health care professional between community-dwelling adults who did and did not seek care. Methods: Randomly selected adults were mailed a study questionnaire that screened for chronic pain (pain persisting ≥3 months) and asked about their general well-being (Short Form [SF]-36), pain location (body diagram), pain intensity and characteristics (Leeds Assessment of Neuropathic Symptoms and Signs), experiences with health care professionals (Chronic Illness Resources Survey), and visits made to health professionals over the past year. Respondents were categorized as help-seeking (≥1 visit in the past year) and non-help-seeking (zero visits in the past year). Results: Six percent of respondents (44/696) were non-help-seeking. These respondents differed in individual, pain, and health care professional characteristics when compared to those who did seek care. Specifically, when other variables were controlled, non-help-seeking individuals were less likely to be male (relative risk [RR] = 0.39, 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.18–0.86), report comorbid conditions (RR = 0.46, 95% CI, 0.22–0.98), report being treated as an equal partner in decision making (RR = 0.40, 95% CI, 0.18–0.93), and rate their health care professional as important to their pain management (RR = 0.39, 95% CI, 0.18–0.85). They were more likely to use over-the-counter medication to manage their pain (RR = 2.52, 95% CI, 1.14–5.58). Conclusions: Experiences with health professionals play a role in determining whether an individual manages his or her pain independently. Future research should explore the safety of those who do not seek care

Prevalence and determinants of pain and pain-related disability in urban and rural settings in southeastern Ontario

BACKGROUND: Canadian chronic pain prevalence estimates range from 11% to 66%, are affected by sampling and measurement bias, and largely represent urban settings

Chronic pain after surgery : time for standardization? A framework to establish core risk factor and outcome domains for epidemiological studies

Introduction and Objectives: Many studies have reported putative factors for the development of chronic pain after surgery. However, advances in knowledge about the etiology and prognosis of chronic postsurgical pain (CPSP) could be gained by improving methodology within studies of surgical pain. The purpose of this study was to review predictive factors and to propose core risk factor and outcome domains for inclusion in future epidemiological studies investigating CPSP. Methods: Using the Initiative on Methods, Measurement, and Pain Assessment in Clinical Trials as a framework we reviewed risk factor and outcome domains, methodological issues and standardized measurement tools based on findings from narrative and systematic reviews, primary clinical and epidemiological studies and published guidelines for chronic pain clinical trials. Results: Five “core” risk factor domains (demographic, pain, clinical, surgery-related, and psychological) and 4 outcome domains (pain, physical functioning, psychological functioning, and global ratings of outcome) were identified. Important methodological issues, related to the definition and timing of follow-up to assess transition from acute to chronic pain are discussed. We also propose the use of validated, standardized measurement tools to capture risk factor and outcome domains at multiple time points. Discussion: There is potential to advance the field of CPSP research by striving for consensus among pain experts; this would advance current evidence by improving our ability to compare findings from different studies and would facilitate the aggregation of surgical cohort datasets to allow international comparisons. We propose these findings as a starting point to build a comprehensive framework for epidemiological studies investigating chronic pain after surgery