Syrjala Karen L, Abrams Janet R, Polissar Nayak L, Hansberry Jennifer, Robison Jeanne, DuPen Stuart, Stillman Mark, Fredrickson Marvin, Rivkin Saul, Feldman Eric, Gralow Julie, Rieke John W, Raish Robert J, Lee Douglas J, Cleeland Charles S, DuPen Anna
Biobehavioral Sciences, Clinical Research Division, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, D5-220, 1100 Fairview Avenue N, Seattle, WA 98109, USA.
Pain. 2008 Mar;135(1-2):175-86. doi: 10.1016/j.pain.2007.10.026. Epub 2008 Jan 8.
Standard guidelines for cancer pain treatment routinely recommend training patients to reduce barriers to pain relief, use medications appropriately, and communicate their pain-related needs. Methods are needed to reduce professional time required while achieving sustained intervention effectiveness. In a multisite, randomized controlled trial, this study tested a pain training method versus a nutrition control. At six oncology clinics, physicians (N=22) and nurses (N=23) enrolled patients (N=93) who were over 18 years of age, with cancer diagnoses, pain, and a life expectancy of at least 6 months. Pain training and control interventions were matched for materials and method. Patients watched a video followed by about 20 min of manual-standardized training with an oncology nurse focused on reviewing the printed material and adapted to individual concerns of patients. A follow-up phone call after 72 h addressed individualized treatment content and pain communication. Assessments at baseline, one, three, and 6 months included barriers, the Brief Pain Inventory, opioid use, and physician and nurse ratings of their patients' pain. Trained versus control patients reported reduced barriers to pain relief (P<.001), lower usual pain (P=.03), and greater opioid use (P<.001). No pain training patients reported severe pain (>6 on a 0-10 scale) at 1-month outcomes (P=.03). Physician and nurse ratings were closer to patients' ratings of pain for trained versus nutrition groups (P=.04 and <.001, respectively). Training efficacy was not modified by patient characteristics. Using video and print materials, with brief individualized training, effectively improved pain management over time for cancer patients of varying diagnostic and demographic groups.
癌症疼痛治疗的标准指南通常建议对患者进行培训,以减少疼痛缓解的障碍,合理使用药物,并传达与疼痛相关的需求。需要一些方法来减少所需的专业时间,同时实现持续的干预效果。在一项多中心随机对照试验中,本研究测试了一种疼痛训练方法与营养控制方法的效果。在六家肿瘤诊所,医生(N = 22)和护士(N = 23)招募了年龄在18岁以上、患有癌症、有疼痛且预期寿命至少为6个月的患者(N = 93)。疼痛训练和对照干预在材料和方法上进行了匹配。患者观看一段视频,随后与一名肿瘤护士进行约20分钟的手动标准化训练,重点是复习印刷材料并根据患者的个人情况进行调整。72小时后的随访电话涉及个性化治疗内容和疼痛沟通。在基线、1个月、3个月和6个月时的评估包括障碍、简明疼痛问卷、阿片类药物使用情况,以及医生和护士对其患者疼痛的评分。接受训练的患者与对照组患者相比,报告疼痛缓解障碍减少(P <.001)、日常疼痛较低(P =.03)且阿片类药物使用量更大(P <.001)。未接受疼痛训练的患者在1个月的结果中报告有严重疼痛(0 - 10分制中>6分)(P =.03)。与营养组相比,接受训练组的医生和护士评分更接近患者的疼痛评分(分别为P =.04和<.001)。训练效果不受患者特征的影响。使用视频和印刷材料,并进行简短的个性化训练,随着时间的推移,有效地改善了不同诊断和人口统计学组别的癌症患者的疼痛管理。