Social cost of chronic pain in Italy

Chronic pain negatively impacts on sick people's daily life and their working ability, and it is a heavy financial burden on the health systems. This article is aimed at evaluating the social costs of chronic pain in Italy.The analysis is based on national tariffs and prices and on epidemiologic, health resource consumption, and absence from work published data; when no information specifically related to Italy was available, results from studies carried out in other European Countries were used as appropriate.The average annual cost per patient amounts to €4,556, 31% of which (€1,400) is charged on the National Health Service. Of this share, 51% is due to hospitalisation and 6% to analgesic drug (mostly NSAIDs) costs. Indirect costs (€3,157) are caused by sickness leaves (31%) and retirements.Based on an estimated prevalence of 8 million people with pain in Italy, the impact of chronic pain direct costs on public health expenditure results 9.6%, whereas the impact of total costs on gross domestic product..

The 5% Lidocaine-medicated Plaster: Its Inclusion In International Treatment Guidelines For Treating Localized Neuropathic Pain, and Clinical Evidence Supporting Its Use

When peripheral neuropathic pain affects a specific, clearly demarcated area of the body, it may be described as localized neuropathic pain (LNP). Examples include postherpetic neuralgia and painful diabetic neuropathy, as well as post-surgical and post-traumatic pain. These conditions may respond to topical treatment, i.e., pharmaceutical agents acting locally on the peripheral nervous system, and the topical route offers advantages over systemic administration. Notably, only a small fraction of the dose reaches the systemic circulation, thereby reducing the risk of systemic adverse effects, drug-drug interactions and overdose. From the patient's perspective, the analgesic agent is easily applied to the most painful area(s). The 5% lidocaine-medicated plaster has been used for several years to treat LNP and is registered in approximately 50 countries. Many clinical guidelines recommend this treatment modality as a first-line option for treating LNP, particularly in frail and/or elderly patients and those receiving multiple medications, because the benefit-to-risk ratios are far better than those of systemic analgesics. However, some guidelines make only a weak recommendation for its use. This paper considers the positioning of the 5% lidocaine-medicated plaster in international treatment guidelines and how they may be influenced by the specific criteria used in developing them, such as the methodology employed by randomized, placebo-controlled trials. It then examines the body of evidence supporting use of the plaster in some prevalent LNP conditions. Common themes that emerge from clinical studies are: (1) the excellent tolerability and safety of the plaster, which can increase patients' adherence to treatment, (2) continued efficacy over long-term treatment, and (3) significant reduction in the size of the painful area. On this basis, it is felt that the 5% lidocaine-medicated plaster should be more strongly recommended for treating LNP, either as one component of a multimodal approach or as monotherapy

From micro- to nanostructured implantable device for local anesthetic delivery

Local anesthetics block the transmission of painful stimuli to the brain by acting on ion channels of nociceptor fibers, and find application in the management of acute and chronic pain. Despite the key role they play in modern medicine, their cardio and neurotoxicity (together with their short half-life) stress the need for developing implantable devices for tailored local drug release, with the aim of counterbalancing their side effects and prolonging their pharmacological activity. This review discusses the evolution of the physical forms of local anesthetic delivery systems during the past decades. Depending on the use of different biocompatible materials (degradable polyesters, thermosensitive hydrogels, and liposomes and hydrogels from natural polymers) and manufacturing processes, these systems can be classified as films or micro- or nanostructured devices. We analyze and summarize the production techniques according to this classification, focusing on their relative advantages and disadvantages. The most relevant trend reported in this work highlights the effort of moving from microstructured to nanostructured systems, with the aim of reaching a scale comparable to the biological environment. Improved intracellular penetration compared to microstructured systems, indeed, provides specific drug absorption into the targeted tissue and can lead to an enhancement of its bioavailability and retention time. Nanostructured systems are realized by the modification of existing manufacturing processes (interfacial deposition and nanoprecipitation for degradable polyester particles and high- or low-temperature homogenization for liposomes) or development of novel strategies (electrospun matrices and nanogels). The high surface-to-volume ratio that characterizes nanostructured devices often leads to a burst drug release. This drawback needs to be addressed to fully exploit the advantage of the interaction between the target tissues and the drug: possible strategies could involve specific binding between the drug and the material chosen for the device, and a multiscale approach to reach a tailored, prolonged drug release

Novel compound heterozygous pathogenic variants in nucleotide-binding protein like protein (NUBPL) cause leukoencephalopathy with multi-systemic involvement.

NUBPL (Nucleotide-binding protein like) protein encodes a member of the Mrp/NBP35 ATP-binding proteins family, deemed to be involved in mammalian complex I (CI) assembly process. Exome sequencing of a patient presenting with infantile-onset hepatopathy, renal tubular acidosis, developmental delay, short stature, leukoencephalopathy with minimal cerebellar involvement and multiple OXPHOS deficiencies revealed the presence of two novel pathogenic compound heterozygous variants in NUBPL (p.Phe242Leu/p.Leu104Pro). We investigated patient's and control immortalised fibroblasts and demonstrated that both the peripheral and the membrane arms of complex I are undetectable in mutant NUBPL cells, resulting in virtually absent CI holocomplex and loss of enzyme activity. In addition, complex III stability was moderately affected as well. Lentiviral-mediated expression of the wild-type NUBPL cDNA rescued both CI and CIII assembly defects, confirming the pathogenicity of the variants. In conclusion, this is the first report describing a complex multisystemic disorder due to NUBPL defect. In addition, we confirmed the role of NUBPL in Complex I assembly associated with secondary effect on Complex III stability and we demonstrated a defect of mtDNA-related translation which suggests a potential additional role of NUBPL in mtDNA expression

A year in review in Minerva Anestesiologica 2019. Anesthesia, analgesia, and perioperative medicine

Innovations in anesthesia and perioperative pain management have animated the debate the last year

The prevention of analgesic opioids abuse: expert opinion

Opioids are drugs of reference for the treatment of moderate to severe pain. Their proper use and a periodic assessment of the patient are crucial to prevent misuse. A multidisciplinary group suggests strategies for all stakeholders involved in the management of pain and suggests the importance of the doctor-patient relationship

A year in review in Minerva Anestesiologica 2014

Year in revie

Does a research group increase impact on the scientific community or general public discussion? Alternative metric-based evaluation

In this study, we investigated the impact of scientific publications of the Italian SIMPAR (Study In Multidisciplinary PAin Research) group by using altmetrics, defined as nontraditional metrics constituting an alternative to more traditional citation-impact metrics, such as impact factor and H-index. By correlating traditional and alternative metrics, we attempted to verify whether publications by the SIMPAR group collectively had more impact than those performed by its individual members, either in solo publications or in publications coauthored by non-SIMPAR group investigators (which for the purpose of this study we will refer to as “individual publications”). For all the 12 members of the group analyzed (pain therapists, biologists, and pharmacologists), we created Open Researcher and Contributor ID and Impact Story accounts, and synchronized these data. Manually, we calculated the level metrics for each article by dividing the data obtained from the research community by those obtained from the public community. We analyzed 759 articles, 18 of which were published by the SIMPAR group. Altmetrics demonstrated that SIMPAR group publications were more likely to be saved (77.8% vs 45.9%), discussed (61.1% vs 1.1%, P<0.0001), and publicly viewed (11.1% vs 1.3%, P=0.05) than individual publications. These results support the importance of multidisciplinary research groups in the impact of scientific literature; the interaction and synergy among the research participants allowed the obtainment of high impact-literature in the field of personalized pain medicine. Finally, our findings demonstrate the potential of altmetrics in estimating the value of the research products of a group