Cherny N J, Chang V, Frager G, Ingham J M, Tiseo P J, Popp B, Portenoy R K, Foley K M
Department of Neurology, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York 10021, USA.
Cancer. 1995 Oct 1;76(7):1283-93. doi: 10.1002/1097-0142(19951001)76:7<1283::aid-cncr2820760728>3.0.co;2-0.
This survey documents the strategies used by pain control physicians in the selection of opioid drugs and routes of administration in the management of inpatients referred to a cancer pain service.
The following approaches were prospectively evaluated during the treatment of 100 consecutive inpatients: 1) the influence of the evaluation of the goals of care on decision making, 2) selection of opioid drugs, 3) indications for changing opioid drugs and the frequency with which this strategy is used, and 4) selection of route of administration.
Eighty of the 100 patients underwent a total of 182 changes in drug, route, or both drug and route before discharge or death. The major reasons for change were to improve the convenience of treatment regimen in the setting of adequate pain relief (31.4%), diminish side effects in the setting of controlled pain (25.0%), reduce the invasiveness of therapy in the setting of controlled pain (19.3%), and simultaneously improve pain control and reduce opioid toxicity (17.7%). When opioid toxicity was the reason for change, physicians changed the opioid drug in 71% of cases and the route in 29%. When convenience or invasiveness were targeted, the physicians changed the route in 61% of cases and the opioid in 39%. Forty-four patients required one or more change in the opioid, and 20 required 2 or more changes (range, 2-6 changes). At the time of discharge (n = 82), morphine was more commonly selected than hydromorphone or fentanyl (39% vs. 23% vs. 17%) and the routes of administration were oral (57%), transdermal (18%), intravenous (18%), subcutaneous (5%), and intraspinal (4%). Therapeutic changes were associated with improvement in physician-recorded pain intensity and a lower prevalence of cognitive impairment, hallucinations, nausea and vomiting, and myoclonus among patients who were discharged from the hospital.
These data illustrate the application of strategies for selections of opioid drugs and their route of administration that are recommended in current guidelines for the management of cancer pain.
本调查记录了疼痛控制医师在为转诊至癌症疼痛服务部门的住院患者进行管理时,选择阿片类药物及给药途径所采用的策略。
在连续治疗100例住院患者的过程中,对以下方法进行前瞻性评估:1)护理目标评估对决策的影响;2)阿片类药物的选择;3)更换阿片类药物的指征及该策略的使用频率;4)给药途径的选择。
100例患者中有80例在出院或死亡前共进行了182次药物、给药途径或药物与途径两者的变更。变更的主要原因是在疼痛得到充分缓解的情况下提高治疗方案的便利性(31.4%)、在疼痛得到控制的情况下减轻副作用(25.0%)、在疼痛得到控制的情况下降低治疗的侵入性(19.3%)以及同时改善疼痛控制并降低阿片类药物毒性(17.7%)。当阿片类药物毒性是变更原因时,医师在71%的病例中更换了阿片类药物,在29%的病例中更换了给药途径。当以便利性或侵入性为目标时,医师在61%的病例中更换了给药途径,在39%的病例中更换了阿片类药物。44例患者需要对阿片类药物进行一次或多次更换,20例患者需要进行2次或更多次更换(范围为2 - 6次更换)。出院时(n = 82),吗啡的选择比氢吗啡酮或芬太尼更为常见(39%对23%对17%),给药途径为口服(57%)、透皮(18%)、静脉注射(18%)、皮下注射(5%)和脊髓内注射(4%)。治疗变更与医师记录的疼痛强度改善以及出院患者中认知障碍、幻觉、恶心和呕吐及肌阵挛的患病率降低相关。
这些数据说明了当前癌症疼痛管理指南中推荐的阿片类药物及其给药途径选择策略的应用情况。