Personalized Pain Goals and Responses in Advanced Cancer Patients
| Autor: | Alessandra Casuccio, Romina Rossi, Patrizia Ferrera, Claudio Adile, Kyriaki Mistakidou, Federica Aielli, Marta Rosati, Luiz Guilherme L Soares, Marco Maltoni, Sebastiano Mercadante, Stefano DeSantis, Lanzetta Gaetano |
|---|---|
| Přispěvatelé: | Mercadante S., Adile C., Aielli F., Gaetano L., Mistakidou K., Maltoni M., Soares L.G., Desantis S., Ferrera P., Rosati M., Rossi R., Casuccio A., Mercadante, Sebastiano, Adile, Claudio, Aielli, Federica, Gaetano, Lanzetta, Mistakidou, Kyriaki, Maltoni, Marco, Soares, Luiz Guilherme, DeSantis, Stefano, Ferrera, Patrizia, Rosati, Marta, Rossi, Romina, Casuccio, Alessandra |
| Jazyk: | angličtina |
| Rok vydání: | 2020 |
| Předmět: |
Adult
Male medicine.medical_specialty Palliative care Adolescent Symptom assessment Young Adult 03 medical and health sciences 0302 clinical medicine Humans Pain Management Medicine 030212 general & internal medicine Precision Medicine Acute pain Aged Pain Measurement Aged 80 and over business.industry Symptom management Minimal clinically important difference Clinical Response General Medicine Cancer Pain Middle Aged Advanced cancer Intensity (physics) Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine 030220 oncology & carcinogenesis Physical therapy Female Pain Intensity Neurology (clinical) business Cancer pain Goals |
| Popis: | Objective To assess the personalized pain intensity goal (PPIG), the achievement of a personalized pain goal response (PPGR), and patients' global impression (PGI) in advanced cancer patients after a comprehensive pain and symptom management. Design Prospective, longitudinal Setting Acute pain relief and palliative/supportive care. Subjects 689 advanced cancer patients. Methods Measurement of Edmonton Symptom Assessment Score (ESAS) and personalized pain intensity goal (PPIG) at admission (T0). After a week (T7) personalized pain goal response (PPGR) and patients' global impression (PGI) were evaluated. Results The mean PPIG was 1.33 (SD 1.59). A mean decrease in pain intensity of − 2.09 was required on PPIG to perceive a minimal clinically important difference (MCID). A better improvement corresponded to a mean change of − 3.41 points, while a much better improvement corresponded to a mean of − 4.59 points. Patients perceived a MCID (little worse) with a mean increase in pain intensity of 0.25, and a worse with a mean increase of 2.33 points. Higher pain intensity at T0 and lower pain intensity at T7 were independently related to PGI. 207 (30.0%) patients achieved PPGR. PPGR was associated with higher PPIG at T0 and T7, and inversely associated to pain intensity at T0 and T7, and Karnofsky level. Patients with high pain intensity at T0 achieved a favorable PGI, even when PPIG was not achieved by PPGR. Conclusion PPIG, PPGR and PGI seem to be relevant for evaluating the effects of a comprehensive management of pain, assisting decision-making process according to patients' expectations. Some factors may be implicated in determining the individual target and the clinical response. |
| Databáze: | OpenAIRE |
| Externí odkaz: |
|