Pain thresholds and intensities of CRPS type I and neuropathic pain in respect to sex

Abstract Background and aims Healthy women have generally been found to have increased experimental pain perception and chronic pain has a higher prevalence in female as compared to male patients. However, no study has investigated whether pain intensity and pain perception thresholds are distinct or similar between sexes within various chronic pain entities. We investigated whether average pain intensities and pain thresholds assessed using quantitative sensory testing (QST) differed between women and men suffering from three distinct chronic pain conditions: Complex Regional Pain Syndrome (CRPS type I), peripheral nerve injury (PNI) or polyneuropathy (PNP), as compared to paired healthy volunteers. Methods QST data of 1252 patients (669 female, 583 male) with PNI (n=342), PNP (n=571) or CRPS (n=339), and average pain intensity reports from previously published studies were included. Absolute and z-values (adjusted for age and body region) of cold, heat, pressure (PPT) and pinprick pain thresholds were compared in generalized linear models with aetiology, duration of underlying pain disease and average pain intensity as fixed effects. Results Average pain intensity during the past four weeks did not differ between women and men, in both mean and range. In women absolute pain thresholds for cold, heat and pinprick were lower than in males across all diagnoses (pPeer reviewe

Patients' experiences and perceived causes of persisting discomfort following day surgery

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>The aim of this study was to describe patients' experiences and perceived causes of persisting discomfort following day surgery. Earlier research has mainly covered symptoms and signs during a recovery period of up to one month, and not dealt with patients' perceptions of what causes persisting, longer-term discomfort.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>This study is a part from a study carried out during the period May 2006 to May 2007 with a total of 298 day surgery patients. Answers were completed by 118 patients at 48 hours, 110 at seven days and 46 at three months to one open-ended question related to discomfort after day surgery constructed as follows: <it>If you are still experiencing discomfort related to the surgery, what is the reason, in your opinion</it>? Data was processed, quantitatively and qualitatively. Descriptive, inferential, correlation and content analyses were performed.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>The results suggest that patients suffer from remaining discomfort e.g. pain and wound problem, with effects on daily life following day surgery up to three months. Among patients' perceptions of <it>factors leading to discomfort </it>may be <it>wrongful or suboptimal treatment</it>, <it>type of surgery </it>or <it>insufficient access to provider/information.</it></p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>The results have important implications for preventing and managing discomfort at home following day surgery, and for nursing interventions to help patients handle the recovery period better.</p

Comparing very low birth weight versus very low gestation cohort methods for outcome analysis of high risk preterm infants

© 2017 The Author(s). Background: Compared to very low gestational age (<32 weeks, VLGA) cohorts, very low birth weight (<1500 g; VLBW) cohorts are more prone to selection bias toward small-for-gestational age (SGA) infants, which may impact upon the validity of data for benchmarking purposes. Method: Data from all VLGA or VLBW infants admitted in the 3 Networks between 2008 and 2011 were used. Two-thirds of each network cohort was randomly selected to develop prediction models for mortality and composite adverse outcome (CAO: mortality or cerebral injuries, chronic lung disease, severe retinopathy or necrotizing enterocolitis) and the remaining for internal validation. Areas under the ROC curves (AUC) of the models were compared. Results: VLBW cohort (24,335 infants) had twice more SGA infants (20.4% vs. 9.3%) than the VLGA cohort (29,180 infants) and had a higher rate of CAO (36.5% vs. 32.6%). The two models had equal prediction power for mortality and CAO (AUC 0.83), and similarly for all other cross-cohort validations (AUC 0.81-0.85). Neither model performed well for the extremes of birth weight for gestation (<1500 g and ≥32 weeks, AUC 0.50-0.65; ≥1500 g and <32 weeks, AUC 0.60-0.62). Conclusion: There was no difference in prediction power for adverse outcome between cohorting VLGA or VLBW despite substantial bias in SGA population. Either cohorting practises are suitable for international benchmarking