5 research outputs found
Recommended from our members
The Problem-Oriented Psychiatric Examination of the Chronic Pain Patient and Its Application to the Litigation Consultation
ObjectiveThe purpose of this paper is (a) to delineate the behavior problems or complaints of chronic pain patients (CPPs) as presented in the literature and to add those behavior problems that have not yet been identified; (b) to present a semistructured psychiatric interview format that would lead to the delineation of these problems; and (c) to present a format and structure for the proposed semistructured psychiatric interview that could be utilized for the purposes of medicolegal assessment of the CPP and the reporting of that assessment to the litigation process.SettingAny psychiatric/psychological examination of the CPP.MethodsThe pain literature was reviewed for any research reports that specifically addressed or delineated the types of behavior problems found within the chronic pain (CP) population. These behavior problems were placed in a semistructured interview format, organized in such a way as to facilitate reporting to the litigation process if necessary.ResultsThis semistructured psychiatric examination format is presented. Controversial problem areas in this format are discussed with appropriate references.ConclusionsCPPs are seen for the psychiatric examination with a set of behavioral problems largely determined by their medical condition, the consequences of that condition, and the social circumstances surrounding that medical condition (e.g., the litigation process). The psychiatric examination should be tailored to this special set of problems
Recommended from our members
Prediction of Pain Center Treatment Outcome for Geriatric Chronic Pain Patients
ObjectiveGeriatric chronic pain patients (age 65 and over) form an increasing percentage of the pain center treatment population. It is therefore important to be able to predict pain center treatment success or failure for these patients; this is the first study to address this concern.DesignChronic pain patients rated themselves at pain center admission and discharge on 43 rating scales for the areas of pain, functional status, behavioral variables, and other pain center modification categories. The 43 scores at admission were used as potential predictors, while the 43 change scores (from admission to discharge) were the outcome measures to be predicted. Additional possible predictors were 16 other variables that are considered prognostic of treatment outcome, including age, number of surgeries, and prior occupational level. The statistical analysis consisted of a five-step procedure(a) mathematical techniques were used to remove redundant outcome measures; (b) each of the remaining outcome variables was correlated with the full set of predictor variables; (c) regression techniques were used to predict the outcome variables; (d) these outcome variables were combined into independent factors using factor analysis; and (e) regression techniques were used to predict the factors.ResultsThe variable-reduction technique was successful in removing 26 of the 43 outcome variables. Factor analysis of change scores of the remaining variables resulted in four factors, which were identified as change in activity, change in pain and behavior, change in constant pain, and change in attitude to pain center goals. The analysis showed that the best predictor of a variableʼs change score was the initial level of that variable. Regression analysis, using all variables as predictors except initial level, found a number of statistically significant predictors. However, no predictor variable, alone or in combination, was able to account for >30% of the variance of any outcome measure.ConclusionThese results indicate that we cannot as yet predict geriatric pain center treatment outcome. Potential reasons for these results are discussed
Recommended from our members
Münchausen syndrome presenting with chronic pain: Case report
A factitious disorder is one that has been fabricated or simulated by the patient. Münchausen syndrome is a subtype of factitious disorder. This syndrome has not previously been described in relationship to chronic pain/chronic pain treatment units. Such a patient is presented and the clues to the identification of this syndrome within chronic pain patients are presented
Recommended from our members
Clonazepam Open Clinical Treatment Trial for Myofascial Syndrome Associated Chronic Pain
Objective. A number of case reports and nonplacebo controlled studies have documented the efficacy of clonazepam (Klonopin) in the treatment of a number of chronic pain syndromes including lancinating and neuropathic/deafferentation pain. There are, however, no data on the efficacy of clonazepam for chronic pain (CP) associated with myofascial pain syndrome (MFPS). Therefore, we wish to report the results of an open clinical treatment trial of clonazepam for CP associated with MFPS.
Design. Forty‐six patients with chronic pain (PWCP) and a diagnosis of MFPS were recruited into a clonazepam pain treatment open clinical trial. At entrance and completion of the study the patients completed a 10‐cm visual analog scale (VAS) requesting them to rate their pain over the last 24 hours. Clonazepam was titrated upwards from 0.5 mg per day, at 0.5 mg increments, every 2 days. These patients rated their perceived pain relief daily on a 3‐point rating scale: none, partial, total. Once a patient claimed partial pain relief clonazepam increases were stopped. Patients who complained of intolerable side effects before partial pain relief were withdrawn from the study. For a subgroup of patients claiming partial pain relief, clonazepam serum levels were determined. Because of the reported efficacy of clonazepam for neuropathic/deafferentation type of pain, patients with this diagnosis were withdrawn from the partial response group. Statistical analyses were performed on this remaining patient group with myofascial pain syndrome without a secondary diagnosis of neuropathic/deafferentation pain and partially responsive to clonazepam. Descriptive statistics were calculated for this group. Drop in pain level from entrance to partial response was tested for statistical significance via t test. In addition, 17 independent variables such as presence of trigger points, presence of burning pain etc, were utilized in a regression analysis, with drop in pain level as the dependent variable. A Pearson correlation analysis was first performed in order to determine which of the independent variables significantly correlated with decrease in pain level. Independent variables having a Pearson r of .3687 or greater were selected for the regression procedure.
Setting. Multidisciplinary pain facility.
Patients. Patients with chronic pain with a diagnosis of MFPS and without neuropathic/deafferentation pain.
Results. Of the 46 patients entered into the study, 9 were not titrated to partial pain relief because of intolerable sedation and 9 had a diagnosis of neuropathic/deafferentation pain. For the remaining group (n = 28), mean drop in VAS pain level from beginning of the study to partial response was 2.78 (SD = 1.94). This was statistically significant (t = 5.49, P < .001). Mean clonazepam dosage to reach partial response was 2.41 (SD = 1.62) mg/day and the mean dosage per kilogram body weight per day was 0.04 (SD = 0.03) mg. Mean clonazepam serum level was 30.58 (SD = 24.53) μg/L. Decrease in pain level was associated with the presence of the following independent variables: trigger points (r = .451); range of motion restriction (r = .653); non anatomical sensory abnormalities (r = .370); chronic low back pain (r = .451); and burning pain (r = .482). In the regression analysis, restricted range of motion and presence of burning pain accounted for 42% and 16% of the variance respectfully.
Conclusion. Clonazepam may have an antinociceptive effect for pain associated with myofascial pain syndrome
Recommended from our members
The Prediction of Return to the Workplace After Multidisciplinary Pain Center Treatment
The prediction of return to the workplace after Multidisciplinary Pain Center (MPC) treatment has become a major research area. To delineate the variables that predict this outcome, the authors reviewed 164 multidisciplinary outcome studies. Of these, 79 addressed work as an outcome variable. Twenty-six studies attempted to identify patient variables predicting return to the workplace. These latter studies were critically inspected for eight methodological criteriapain location, follow-up time interval, response percentage and follow-up method, return to work subcategorization, vocational movement, univariate vs. multivariate statistics, multicolinearity and variance, and statistical treatment of dropouts. In addition, other disability studies besides those in the chronic pain area were reviewed for return to the workplace predictor variables. Of these 26 studies, only a few appeared to satisfy the criteria examined. In addition, many studies were in conflict with one another on whether a variable was predictive. The review of the nonchronic pain/disability prediction literature yielded a large number of potential predictors that related to the work area. It is unclear which variables or set of variables predict return to the workplace after MPC treatment. Chronic pain studies may be neglecting the work area as an important source of return to the workplace predictor variables