The Calgary Postoperative Pain after Spine Surgery (CAPPS) score was developed to identify patients at risk of experiencing poorly controlled pain after spine surgery. The goal of this study was to independently validate the CAPPS score on a prospectively collected patient sample.

Poor postoperative pain control was defined as a mean numeric rating scale (NRS) for pain >4 at rest in the first 24 hours after surgery. Baseline characteristics in this study (validation cohort) were compared to those of the development cohort used to create the CAPPS score. Predictive performance of the CAPPS score was assessed by the area under the curve (AUC) and percentage misclassification for discrimination. A graphical comparison between predicted probability vs. observed incidence of poorly controlled pain was performed for calibration.

Fifty-two percent of 201 patients experienced poorly controlled pain. The validation cohort exhibited lower depression scores and a higher proportion using daily opioid medications compared to the development cohort. The AUC was 0.74 [95%CI = 0.68–0.81] in the validation cohort compared to 0.73 [95%CI = 0.69–0.76] in the development cohort for the eight-tier CAPPS score. When stratified between the low- vs. extreme-risk and low- vs. high-risk groups, the percentage misclassification was 21.2% and 30.7% in the validation cohort, compared to 29.9% and 38.0% in the development cohort, respectively. The predicted probability closely mirrored the observed incidence of poor pain control across all scores.

The CAPPS score, based on seven easily obtained and reliable prognostic variables, was validated using a prospectively collected, independent sample of patients.

This study compared the pain associated with the intratympanic injection combined with various local anaesthetics vs without anaesthesia.

The study included 40 patients (aged 18–78 years) who received intratympanic steroid injections for sudden idiopathic hearing loss or tinnitus. Each patient underwent all three injection methods at one-week intervals. Patients received one of two local anaesthetics (lidocaine injection or lidocaine spray) or no anaesthesia before intratympanic injection, and used a visual analogue scale to indicate the pain level after 5 and 45 minutes.

Five minutes after injection, patients who did not receive anaesthesia and those who received lidocaine spray reported lower pain scores than those who received a lidocaine injection (p < 0.05). There was no difference in pain scores for all three methods at 45 minutes after intratympanic injection.

Neither of the local anaesthetics was found to be superior to having no anaesthesia.

Visceral pain is one of the most common forms of pain and for which new drugs would be welcome. The aim of this study was to investigate whether gabapentin inhibits induced abdominal contractions in mice and to examine the effect of its co-administration with morphine.

A total of 96 mice received acetic acid intraperitoneally after administration of saline or gabapentin (1, 5, 10, 50 and 100 mg kg−1) or morphine (0.25, 0.5, 1, 3 and 5 mg kg−1) or a combination of morphine and gabapentin. Other groups also received naloxone. The number of writhes were counted.

Both gabapentin and morphine reduced writhing in a dose-dependent manner. The number of writhes was decreased significantly by gabapentin (50 and 100 mg kg−1) and morphine (0.5, 1, 3 and 5 mg kg−1) (P < 0.001). Also, the lowest dose of morphine 0.25 mg kg−1 when combined with low doses of gabapentin significantly decreased the number of writhes (P < 0.005). The combination of a low effective dose of gabapentin (50 mg kg−1) with a low dose of morphine decreased the writhing by 94% as compared to the controls. The antinociceptive effect of combined administration was not reversed by naloxone.

These data demonstrated the comparable efficacy of gabapentin with morphine in visceral pain. Also, the results showed that the combination of doses of gabapentin and morphine, which were ineffective alone, produced a significant analgesic effect in the writhing model of pain. This may be clinically important in the management of visceral pain.

Epidural and intravenous analgesia are widely used for postoperative pain management. Efficacy and safety is enhanced with the establishment of acute pain services. We studied the terms of application of these techniques in Greek hospitals and compared practices between anaesthetic departments with or without acute pain services.

We performed a postal survey regarding departmental policy on the application of epidural and intravenous analgesia, patient monitoring, audit and educational activities, acute pain service teams and proposals for improvement. Pain services were classified according to predetermined quality criteria. Hospitals with or without acute pain services were compared.

Response rate was 46.3% (51 of 110 departments). Epidural analgesia was used in 49 departments, equally applied as intermittent boluses or continuous infusion. Twenty-two of the 39 departments that were using continuous infusion, used exclusively a lumbar approach. Intravenous analgesia was used by 42 (82%) departments; 13 used exclusively continuous infusion. All eight departments that had an established acute pain service fulfilled the predefined quality criteria compared with only ten of the remaining 43 (P < 0.001).

Our study discloses important issues regarding the use of intravenous and epidural analgesia and postoperative patient monitoring in Greek hospitals. Implementation of acute pain services that are satisfying the quality criteria may help to improve patient care.

In human beings, pain and taste perception are two major sensory inputs. We investigated whether increasing bitter taste sensitivity would increase intensity or incidence of pain associated with propofol, and whether there is a relationship between bitter sensitivity and venepuncture pain.

One hundred (50 males, 50 females) American Society of Anesthesiologists Grade I adults undergoing elective surgery were included in this study. Determination of the taste thresholds employed a series of propylthiouracil solutions. The filter paper disk method was used to measure the taste threshold. A 20-G intravenous (i.v.) cannula was inserted in the dorsum of the non-dominant hand. Venepuncture pain was assessed by using a numerical rating scale (NRS; 0, no pain and 10, extreme pain). Propofol 10 mL (100 mg) was injected over 30 s. Assessment of pain with i.v. propofol was made using a 4-point scale: 0, no pain; 1, mild pain; 2, moderate pain; 3, severe pain.

The NRS score of venepuncture pain was 2.8 ± 1.5. Sixty patients had pain during propofol injection. There was statistically significant correlation between bitter sensitivity and propofol injection pain, and between bitter sensitivity and venepuncture pain (P < 0.05).

We conclude that increased bitter taste sensitivity correlates with increased intensity or incidence of propofol injection pain and NRS of venepuncture pain.

The aim of this study was to use a visual analogue scale (VAS) to measure the adequacy of prehospital pain management. Patients reported pain severity at two points in time during treatment and transport by ambulance paramedics. The change in pain score was compared with a benchmark reduction of 20 mm that has been shown to correspond with the minimum clinically significant change in pain perception reported by patients.

This prospective, observational study used a VA S to record pain severity among patients reporting pain who were transported to a hospital by paramedics. Patients used a VAS to score pain severity during the initial patient assessment process (T0), and again at the hospital of destination (Tend). This study reports the mean changes in the scores, and the percentage of cases for whom the difference between T0and Tend in the study population achieved or exceeded the 20 mm benchmark. A survey also was administered to paramedics who participated in this study in order to identify attitudes, values, and beliefs relating to the measurement of pain.

A total of 262 patients were enrolled in this study. The mean value for thereduction in VAS (T0-Tend) was 18.2±23.9 mm [±SD] (Median = 14.0mm, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 15.3–21.1 mm). One hundred and thirty-four patients (51.1%) did not receive analgesia (either morphine sulfate or methoxyflurane). The mean initial (T0) pain score for the no-analgesia group was 54.5 ±24.7 mm [±SD], with the mean value for the change in VAS (T0-Tend) = 10.6 mm (median = 5 mm, 95% CI = 6.4–14.8 mm). Fo rty-six patients (17.6%) recorded some deterioration in their pain score at Tend (T0-Tend<0 mm). Survey results identified attitudes that may affect paramedics' pain management practice.

The results suggest that inadequate analgesia is an issue in this study setting. Effective analgesia requires formal protocols or guidelines supported by effective analgesic therapies along with education that addresses attitudes that may inhibit pain assessment or management by paramedics. Regular audits form part of clinical quality assurance programs that assess analgesic practice. However, such auditsmust have access to data obtained from patient self-reporting of pain using a valid and reliable pain measurement tool.

The underuse of analgesics, or “oligoanalgesia,” is common in emergency departments (EDs). To improve care we must understand our patients’ pain experiences as well as our clinical practice patterns. To this end, we examined pain etiology, pain management practices and patient satisfaction in 2 urban EDs.

We conducted a cross-sectional study using structured interviews and chart reviews for patients with pain who presented to either of 2 university-affiliated EDs. We assessed pain etiologies, patient pain experiences, pain management practices, and patient satisfaction with pain management.

The 525 study subjects reported high pain intensity levels on presentation, with a median rating of 8 on a 10-point numerical rating scale (NRS). At discharge, pain severity had decreased to a median rating of 4; however, 48% of patients were discharged from the ED in moderate to severe pain (NRS 5–10). Subjects reported spending 57% of their ED stay in moderate to severe pain. Analgesics were administered to only 50% of patients. The mean time to analgesic administration was almost 2 hours. Despite high levels of reported pain at discharge and low rates of analgesic administration, subjects reported high satisfaction with pain management.

In the 2 EDs studied, we found high levels of pain severity for our patients, as well as low levels of analgesic use. When used, analgesic administration was often delayed. Despite these findings, patient satisfaction remained high. Despite recent efforts to improve pain management practice; oligoanalgesia remains a problem for our specialty.