Pain assessment tools in paediatric palliative care: A systematic review of psychometric properties and recommendations for clinical practice

Background: Assessing pain in infants, children and young people with life-limiting conditions remains a challenge due to diverse patient conditions, types of pain and often a reduced ability or inability of patients to communicate verbally. Aim: To systematically identify pain assessment tools that are currently used in paediatric palliative care and examine their psychometric properties and feasibility and make recommendations for clinical practice. Design: A systematic literature review and evaluation of psychometric properties of pain assessment tools of original peer-reviewed research published from inception of data sources to April 2021. Data sources: PsycINFO via ProQuest, Web of Science Core, Medline via Ovid, EMBASE, BIOSIS and CINAHL were searched from inception to April 2021. Hand searches of reference lists of included studies and relevant reviews were performed. Results: From 1168 articles identified, 201 papers were selected for full-text assessment. Thirty-four articles met the eligibility criteria and we examined the psychometric properties of 22 pain assessment tools. Overall, the Faces Pain Scale-Revised (FPS-R) had high cross-cultural validity, construct validity (hypothesis testing) and responsiveness; while the Faces, Legs, Activity, Cry and Consolability (FLACC) scale and Paediatric Pain Profile (PPP) had high internal consistency, criterion validity, reliability and responsiveness. The number of studies per psychometric property of each pain assessment tool was limited and the methodological quality of included studies was low. Conclusion: Balancing aspects of feasibility and psychometric properties, the FPS-R is recommended for self-assessment, and the FLACC scale/FLACC Revised and PPP are the recommended observational tools in their respective age groups

Total ankle replacement versus arthrodesis (TARVA): protocol for a multicentre randomised controlled trial.

INTRODUCTION: Total ankle replacement (TAR) or ankle arthrodesis (fusion) is the main surgical treatments for end-stage ankle osteoarthritis (OA). The popularity of ankle replacement is increasing while ankle fusion rates remain static. Both treatments have efficacy but to date all studies comparing the 2 have been observational without randomisation, and there are no published guidelines as to the most appropriate management. The TAR versus arthrodesis (TARVA) trial aims to compare the clinical and cost-effectiveness of TAR against ankle arthrodesis in the treatment of end-stage ankle OA in patients aged 50-85 years. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: TARVA is a multicentre randomised controlled trial that will randomise 328 patients aged 50-85 years with end-stage ankle arthritis. The 2 arms of the study will be TAR or ankle arthrodesis with 164 patients in each group. Up to 16 UK centres will participate. Patients will have clinical assessments and complete questionnaires before their operation and at 6, 12, 26 and 52 weeks after surgery. The primary clinical outcome of the study is a validated patient-reported outcome measure, the Manchester Oxford foot questionnaire, captured preoperatively and 12 months after surgery. Secondary outcomes include quality-of-life scores, complications, revision, reoperation and a health economic analysis. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The protocol has been approved by the National Research Ethics Service Committee (London, Bloomsbury 14/LO/0807). This manuscript is based on V.5.0 of the protocol. The trial findings will be disseminated through peer-reviewed publications and conference presentations. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT02128555

Consensus for methods and outcomes in trials of oral morphine versus transmucosal diamorphine for breakthrough pain in children in the UK: the DIPPER study

Objectives: No randomised controlled trials have been conducted for breakthrough pain in paediatric palliative care and there are currently no standardised outcome measures. The DIPPER study aims to establish the feasibility of conducting a prospective randomised controlled trial comparing oral and transmucosal administration of opioids for breakthrough pain. The aim of the current study was to achieve consensus on design aspects for a small-scale prospective study to inform a future randomised controlled trial of oral morphine, the current first-line treatment, versus transmucosal diamorphine. / Methods: The nominal group technique was used to achieve consensus on best practice for mode of administration, dose regimen and a range of suitable pain intensity outcome measures for transmucosal diamorphine in children and young people with breakthrough pain. An expert panel of ten clinicians in paediatric palliative care and three parent representatives participated. Consensus was achieved when agreement was reached and no further comments from participants were forthcoming. / Results: The panel favoured the buccal route of administration, with dosing according to the recommendations in the Association for Paediatric Palliative Medicine formulary (fifth Edition, 2020). The verbal Numerical Rating Scale was selected to measure pain in children 8 years old and older, the Faces Pain Scale-Revised for children between 4 and 8 years old, and Face, Legs, Activity, Cry and Consolability (FLACC)/FLACC-Revised as the observational tools. / Conclusions: The nominal group technique allowed consensus to be reached for a small-scale, prospective, cohort study and provided information to inform the design of a randomised controlled trial

Administration of Albumin Solution increases serum levels of albumin in patients with chronic liver failure in a single-arm feasibility trial

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Infections are life threatening to patients with acute decompensation and acute-on-chronic liver failure (AD/ACLF). Patients with AD/ACLF have prostaglandin E2-mediated immune suppression, which can be reversed by administration of albumin; infusion of 20% human albumin solution (HAS) might improve outcomes of infections. We performed a feasibility study to determine optimal trial design, assess safety, and validate laboratory assessments of immune function to inform design of a phase 3 trial. METHODS: We performed a prospective multi-center, single-arm, open-label trial of 79 patients with AD/ACLF and levels of albumin lower than 30 g/L, seen at 10 hospitals in the United Kingdom from May through December 2015. Patients were given daily infusions of 20% HAS, based on serum levels, for 14 days or until discharge from the hospital. Rates of infection, organ dysfunction, and in-hospital mortality were recorded. The primary endpoint was daily serum albumin level during the treatment period. Success would be demonstrated if 60% achieved and maintained serum albumin levels at or above 30 g/L on at least one-third of days with recorded levels. RESULTS: The patients' mean model for end-stage disease score was 20.9±6.6. The primary endpoint (albumin ≥30g/L on at least one-third of days recorded) was achieved by 68 of the 79 patients; 75% of administrations were in accordance with suggested dosing regimen. Mean treatment duration was 10.3 days (104±678 ml administered). There were 8 deaths and 13 serious adverse events, considered by the independent data-monitoring committee to be consistent with those expected. Twelve of 13 patients that developed either respiratory or cardiovascular dysfunction (based on ward-based clinical definitions) as their only organ dysfunction were alive at 30 days compared with 1 of 3 that developed renal dysfunction. Only 1 case of brain dysfunction was recorded. CONCLUSION: In a feasibility trial, we found that administration of HAS increased serum levels of albumin in patients with AD/ACLF. The dosing regimen was acceptable at multiple sites and deemed safe by an independent data-monitoring committee. We also developed a robust system to record infections. The poor prognosis for patients with renal dysfunction was confirmed. However, patients with cardiovascular or respiratory dysfunction had good outcomes, which is counter-intuitive. Severe encephalopathy appeared substantially under-reported, indicating that ward-based assessment of these parameters cannot be recorded with sufficient accuracy for use as a primary outcome in phase 3 trials. Trial registration no: EudraCT 2014-002300-24 and ISRCTN14174793

Exenatide once weekly versus placebo in Parkinson's disease: a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial

BACKGROUND: Exenatide, a glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) receptor agonist, has neuroprotective effects in preclinical models of Parkinson's disease. We investigated whether these effects would be apparent in a clinical trial. METHODS: In this single-centre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial, patients with moderate Parkinson's disease were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive subcutaneous injections of exenatide 2 mg or placebo once weekly for 48 weeks in addition to their regular medication, followed by a 12-week washout period. Eligible patients were aged 25-75 years, had idiopathic Parkinson's disease as measured by Queen Square Brain Bank criteria, were on dopaminergic treatment with wearing-off effects, and were at Hoehn and Yahr stage 2·5 or less when on treatment. Randomisation was by web-based randomisation with a two strata block design according to disease severity. Patients and investigators were masked to treatment allocation. The primary outcome was the adjusted difference in the Movement Disorders Society Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (MDS-UPDRS) motor subscale (part 3) in the practically defined off-medication state at 60 weeks. All efficacy analyses were based on a modified intention-to-treat principle, which included all patients who completed any post-randomisation follow-up assessments. The study is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT01971242) and is completed. FINDINGS: Between June 18, 2014, and March 13, 2015, 62 patients were enrolled and randomly assigned, 32 to exenatide and 30 to placebo. Our primary analysis included 31 patients in the exenatide group and 29 patients in the placebo group. At 60 weeks, off-medication scores on part 3 of the MDS-UPDRS had improved by 1·0 points (95% CI -2·6 to 0·7) in the exenatide group and worsened by 2·1 points (-0·6 to 4·8) in the placebo group, an adjusted mean difference of -3·5 points (-6·7 to -0·3; p=0·0318). Injection site reactions and gastrointestinal symptoms were common adverse events in both groups. Six serious adverse events occurred in the exenatide group and two in the placebo group, although none in either group were judged to be related to the study interventions. INTERPRETATION: Exenatide had positive effects on practically defined off-medication motor scores in Parkinson's disease, which were sustained beyond the period of exposure. Whether exenatide affects the underlying disease pathophysiology or simply induces long-lasting symptomatic effects is uncertain. Exenatide represents a major new avenue for investigation in Parkinson's disease, and effects on everyday symptoms should be examined in longer-term trials. FUNDING: Michael J Fox Foundation for Parkinson's Research

Defending the genome from the enemy within:mechanisms of retrotransposon suppression in the mouse germline

The viability of any species requires that the genome is kept stable as it is transmitted from generation to generation by the germ cells. One of the challenges to transgenerational genome stability is the potential mutagenic activity of transposable genetic elements, particularly retrotransposons. There are many different types of retrotransposon in mammalian genomes, and these target different points in germline development to amplify and integrate into new genomic locations. Germ cells, and their pluripotent developmental precursors, have evolved a variety of genome defence mechanisms that suppress retrotransposon activity and maintain genome stability across the generations. Here, we review recent advances in understanding how retrotransposon activity is suppressed in the mammalian germline, how genes involved in germline genome defence mechanisms are regulated, and the consequences of mutating these genome defence genes for the developing germline

Ex Vivo Treatment with a Novel Synthetic Aminoglycoside NB54 in Primary Fibroblasts from Rett Syndrome Patients Suppresses MECP2 Nonsense Mutations

BACKGROUND: Nonsense mutations in the X-linked methyl CpG-binding protein 2 (MECP2) comprise a significant proportion of causative MECP2 mutations in Rett syndrome (RTT). Naturally occurring aminoglycosides, such as gentamicin, have been shown to enable partial suppression of nonsense mutations related to several human genetic disorders, however, their clinical applicability has been compromised by parallel findings of severe toxic effects. Recently developed synthetic NB aminoglycosides have demonstrated significantly improved effects compared to gentamicin evident in substantially higher suppression and reduced acute toxicity in vitro. RESULTS: We performed comparative study of suppression effects of the novel NB54 and gentamicin on three MECP2 nonsense mutations (R294X, R270X and R168X) common in RTT, using ex vivo treatment of primary fibroblasts from RTT patients harboring these mutations and testing for the C-terminal containing full-length MeCP2. We observed that NB54 induces dose-dependent suppression of MECP2 nonsense mutations more efficiently than gentamicin, which was evident at concentrations as low as 50 µg/ml. NB54 read-through activity was mutation specific, with maximal full-length MeCP2 recovery in R168X (38%), R270X (27%) and R294X (18%). In addition, the recovered MeCP2 was translocated to the cell nucleus and moreover led to parallel increase in one of the most important MeCP2 downstream effectors, the brain derived neurotrophic factor (BDNF). CONCLUSION: Our findings suggest that NB54 may induce restoration of the potentially functional MeCP2 in primary RTT fibroblasts and encourage further studies of NB54 and other rationally designed aminoglycoside derivatives as potential therapeutic agents for nonsense MECP2 mutations in RTT

The International HapMap Project

Peer Reviewedhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/62838/1/nature02168.pd

Intraperitoneal drain placement and outcomes after elective colorectal surgery: international matched, prospective, cohort study

Despite current guidelines, intraperitoneal drain placement after elective colorectal surgery remains widespread. Drains were not associated with earlier detection of intraperitoneal collections, but were associated with prolonged hospital stay and increased risk of surgical-site infections.Background Many surgeons routinely place intraperitoneal drains after elective colorectal surgery. However, enhanced recovery after surgery guidelines recommend against their routine use owing to a lack of clear clinical benefit. This study aimed to describe international variation in intraperitoneal drain placement and the safety of this practice. Methods COMPASS (COMPlicAted intra-abdominal collectionS after colorectal Surgery) was a prospective, international, cohort study which enrolled consecutive adults undergoing elective colorectal surgery (February to March 2020). The primary outcome was the rate of intraperitoneal drain placement. Secondary outcomes included: rate and time to diagnosis of postoperative intraperitoneal collections; rate of surgical site infections (SSIs); time to discharge; and 30-day major postoperative complications (Clavien-Dindo grade at least III). After propensity score matching, multivariable logistic regression and Cox proportional hazards regression were used to estimate the independent association of the secondary outcomes with drain placement. Results Overall, 1805 patients from 22 countries were included (798 women, 44.2 per cent; median age 67.0 years). The drain insertion rate was 51.9 per cent (937 patients). After matching, drains were not associated with reduced rates (odds ratio (OR) 1.33, 95 per cent c.i. 0.79 to 2.23; P = 0.287) or earlier detection (hazard ratio (HR) 0.87, 0.33 to 2.31; P = 0.780) of collections. Although not associated with worse major postoperative complications (OR 1.09, 0.68 to 1.75; P = 0.709), drains were associated with delayed hospital discharge (HR 0.58, 0.52 to 0.66; P < 0.001) and an increased risk of SSIs (OR 2.47, 1.50 to 4.05; P < 0.001). Conclusion Intraperitoneal drain placement after elective colorectal surgery is not associated with earlier detection of postoperative collections, but prolongs hospital stay and increases SSI risk