O modelo bioético principialista aplicado no manejo da dor

Trata-se de revisão integrativa da literatura, com o objetivo de analisar a produção científica referente às relações entre a dor e os princípios da bioética: autonomia, beneficência, não maleficência e justiça. Foram utilizados descritores controlados em três bases de dados internacionais (LILACS, SciELO, MEDLINE), em abril de 2012, resultando em 14 publicações, distribuídas nas categorias Dor e autonomia, Dor e beneficência, Dor e não maleficência, Dor e justiça. O alívio adequado da dor é um direito humano e uma questão moral que se relaciona diretamente com a bioética principialista. Entretanto, muitos profissionais negligenciam a dor de seus pacientes, desconsiderando seu papel ético frente ao sofrimento. Concluiu-se que o principialismo tem sido negligenciado no atendimento aos pacientes com dor, evidenciando a necessidade de novas práticas para mudança desse panorama

Terminology of chronic pain: the need to "level the playing field"

John F Peppin,1 Michael E Schatman2 1Center for Bioethics, Pain Management and Medicine, St Louis, MO, 2US Pain Foundation, Middletown, CT, USAPain medicine as a separate subspecialty is in its infancy, only fairly recently being recognized as such by the American Board of Medical Specialities.1 As it continues to find its way in the ever-changing world of medicine, terminology becomes an important consideration. Terms carry tremendous impact: for example, when a patient is told he or she has “cancer”, the impact emotionally will undoubtedly make further explanation difficult. To patients and their families, the word “cancer” has the effect of being hit with an emotional baseball bat. In the pain world, there was a recent, albeit failed, attempt to change the name of pain specialists to “algiatrists”.2 It was thought this would help define what such specialists did as opposed to other specialties. Accordingly, terminology matters, yet little attention has been paid to the terms we use to categorize and diagnose our patients. “Chronic cancer pain” and “chronic noncancer pain” are replete in the literature; however, the distinction here is actually obscure. A patient with pain from a cancer etiology has no different physiology than a patient with pain of noncancer etiologies

Tolerability of NGX-4010, a capsaicin 8% patch for peripheral neuropathic pain

John F Peppin1, Kristine Majors2, Lynn R Webster3, David M Simpson4, Jeffrey K Tobias5, Geertrui F Vanhove51The Pain Treatment Center of the Bluegrass, Lexington, KY, USA; 2Integrated Clinical Trial Services, Inc, West Des Moines, IA, USA; 3Lifetree Clinical Research and Pain Clinic, Salt Lake City, UT, USA; 4Mount Sinai Medical Center, New York, NY, USA; 5NeurogesX, Inc, San Mateo, CA, USABackground/purpose: NGX-4010 (QUTENZA™; NeurogesX Inc, San Mateo, CA), a capsaicin 8% dermal patch, is licensed in the European Union for the treatment of peripheral neuropathic pain (PNP) in nondiabetic adults and in the United States for the treatment of neuropathic pain associated with postherpetic neuralgia (PHN). While NGX-4010 treatment is associated with a low risk of systemic adverse events, patch application-related pain is common and may be managed with local cooling and/or oral analgesics. This article characterizes the tolerability of NGX-4010 and will help to guide any pain management.Methods: This integrated analysis of tolerability data collected from the NGX-4010 clinical study program included 1696 patients with PNP. Patch application-related pain on the treatment day was captured as Numeric Pain Rating Scale (NPRS) “pain now” scores while “average pain for the past 24 hours” NPRS scores were analyzed for 7 days following treatment. Other tolerability assessments included the percentage of patients completing ≥90% of the intended treatment duration and patients using medication for patch application-related pain.Results: The mean maximum change in “pain now” NPRS scores from pretreatment levels during and after patch application was 2.6 for all patients. This pain was transient and resolved following patch removal. Mean “average pain for the past 24 hours” NPRS scores returned to baseline by the evening of the treatment day for patients with PHN, and the evening of day 2 for patients with human immunodeficiency virus-associated distal sensory polyneuropathy or painful diabetic neuropathy. Repeated NGX-4010 applications did not affect the intensity of patch application-related pain. Almost all patients (≥98%) completed ≥90% of the full treatment duration, regardless of the number of treatments received.Conclusion: Transient patch application-related pain with NGX-4010 can be managed with local cooling and/or oral analgesics in nearly all cases. Patient adherence to the full intended treatment duration indicated that patch application-related pain was not a barrier to NGX-4010 use.Keywords: capsaicin 8% patch, NGX-4010, patch application-related pain, neuropathic pai