Background Web-based analysis of search queries has become a very useful method in various academic fields for understanding timely and regional differences in the public interest in certain terms and concepts. Particularly in health and medical research, Google Trends has been increasingly used over the last decade. Objective This study aimed to assess the search activity of pain-related parameters on Google Trends from among the most populated regions worldwide over a 3-year period from before the report of the first confirmed COVID-19 cases in these regions (January 2018) until December 2020. Methods Search terms from the following regions were used for the analysis: India, China, Europe, the United States, Brazil, Pakistan, and Indonesia. In total, 24 expressions of pain location were assessed. Search terms were extracted using the local language of the respective country. Python scripts were used for data mining. All statistical calculations were performed through exploratory data analysis and nonparametric Mann–Whitney U tests. Results Although the overall search activity for pain-related terms increased, apart from pain entities such as headache, chest pain, and sore throat, we observed discordant search activity. Among the most populous regions, pain-related search parameters for shoulder, abdominal, and chest pain, headache, and toothache differed significantly before and after the first officially confirmed COVID-19 cases (for all, P<.001). In addition, we observed a heterogenous, marked increase or reduction in pain-related search parameters among the most populated regions. Conclusions As internet searches are a surrogate for public interest, we assume that our data are indicative of an increased incidence of pain after the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic. However, as these increased incidences vary across geographical and anatomical locations, our findings could potentially facilitate the development of specific strategies to support the most affected groups.
Pain therapy often entails gastrointestinal adverse events. While opioids are effective drugs for pain relief, the incidence of opioid-induced constipation (OIC) varies greatly from 15% to as high as 81%. This can lead to a significant impairment in quality of life, often resulting in discontinuation of opioid therapy. In this regard, a good doctor-patient relationship is especially pivotal when initiating opioid therapy. In addition to a detailed history of bowel habits, patient education regarding the possible gastrointestinal side effects of the drugs is crucial. In addition, the bowel function must be regularly evaluated for the entire duration of treatment with opioids. Furthermore, if the patient has preexisting constipation that is well under control, continuation of that treatment is important. In the absence of such history, general recommendations should include sufficient fluid intake, physical activity, and regular intake of dietary fiber. In patients of OIC with ongoing opioid therapy, the necessity of opioid use should be critically reevaluated in terms of an with acceptable quality of life, particularly in cases of non-cancer pain. If opioids must be continued, lowering the dose may help, as well as changing the type of opioid. If these measures do not suffice, the next step for persistent OIC is the administration of laxatives. If these are ineffective as well, treatment with peripherally active μ-opioid receptor antagonists should be considered. Enemas and irrigation are emergency measures, often used as a last resort.
Palmitoylethanolamide (PEA) is marketed as a “dietary food for special medical purposes”. Its broad-spectrum analgesic, anti-inflammatory, and neuroprotective effects make PEA an interesting substance in pain management. However, the underlying analgetic mechanisms have not yet been investigated in humans. The aim of our study is to provide a deeper understanding of the involved mechanisms, which is essential for differentiating therapeutic approaches and the establishment of mechanism-based therapeutic approaches. In this randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blinded crossover trial, 14 healthy volunteers were included. PEA (3 × 400 mg per day) or placebo were taken for 4 weeks. Our study investigated the mode of action of PEA using an established pain model, “Repetitive phasic heat application”, which is well-suited to investigate analgesic and anti-hyperalgesic effects in healthy volunteers. Parameters for peripheral and central sensitization as well as for pain modulation were assessed. Repetitive heat pain was significantly decreased, and the cold pain tolerance was significantly prolonged after the PEA treatment. The pressure pain tolerance and the conditioned pain modulation were increased after the PEA treatment. The wind-up ratio and the average distance of allodynia were significantly decreased after the PEA treatment. The heat pain tolerance was significantly higher after the PEA treatment. The present study has demonstrated that PEA has clinically relevant analgesic properties, acting on both peripheral and central mechanisms as well as in pain modulation.
Chronic pain is a major source of morbidity for which there are limited effective treatments. Palmitoylethanolamide (PEA), a naturally occurring fatty acid amide, has demonstrated utility in the treatment of neuropathic and inflammatory pain. Emerging reports have supported a possible role for its use in the treatment of chronic pain, although this remains controversial. We undertook a systematic review and meta-analysis to examine the efficacy of PEA as an analgesic agent for chronic pain. A systematic literature search was performed, using the databases MEDLINE and Web of Science, to identify double-blind randomized controlled trials comparing PEA to placebo or active comparators in the treatment of chronic pain. All articles were independently screened by two reviewers. The primary outcome was pain intensity scores, for which a meta-analysis was undertaken using a random effects statistical model. Secondary outcomes including quality of life, functional status, and side effects are represented in a narrative synthesis. Our literature search identified 253 unique articles, of which 11 were ultimately included in the narrative synthesis and meta-analysis. Collectively, these articles described a combined sample size of 774 patients. PEA was found to reduce pain scores relative to comparators in a pooled estimate, with a standard mean difference of 1.68 (95% CI 1.05 to 2.31, p = 0.00001). Several studies reported additional benefits of PEA for quality of life and functional status, and no major side effects were attributed to PEA in any study. The results of this systematic review and meta-analysis suggest that PEA is an effective and well-tolerated treatment for chronic pain. Further study is warranted to determine the optimal dosing and administration parameters of PEA for analgesic effects in the context of chronic pain.
Smoking is a known risk factor for developing various pain-related disorders. However, acute pain often triggers the craving for cigarette consumption, resulting in a positive feedback mechanism. In addition, there is evidence of decreased pain tolerance during the early stages of abstinence. Therefore, in this study, we aimed to investigate whether a period of decreased pain tolerance and increased pain intensity occurs during smoking cessation. A systematic literature search was conducted through PubMed and Web of Science databases for controlled studies investigating the influence of smoking cessation on acute (defined as pain presentation of \ 3 months) and postoperative pain. The outcomes of interest included pain perception threshold, pain tolerance, pain intensity, and postoperative opioid requirements. The search strategy yielded 1478 studies, of which 13 clinical studies met our inclusion criteria. The included studies collectively represented data from 1721 participants from four countries. Of these, 43.3% of the included individuals were females. The mean age of the included subjects was 44.2 ± 8.2 years. The duration of smoking cessation varied considerably. The shortest duration was 2 h; others investigated the effect after more than 1 month of smoking cessation. Smokers had a history of 14.6 ± 9.9 years of nicotine abuse. The mean number of daily smoked cigarettes was 17.5 ± 10.3. Most studies examined in this systematic review show a negative influence of smoking cessation on acute pain. However, the affected pain modalities, the duration of the altered pain perception, and whether male and female smokers are equally affected could not be ascertained due to high heterogeneity and few available studies.
Introduction: Several clinical trials have demonstrated that low-level light therapy (LLLT), a method of photobiomodulation, is an effective analgetic treatment. However, the mechanism of action has not yet been finally clarified. In particular, unanswered questions include whether it only affects peripheral or whether it also affects the spinal or supraspinal level. This study aimed to evaluate the effect of low-level light therapy on primary and secondary hyperalgesia in a human pain model. Methods: This study was planned as a randomized, sham-controlled, and double-blinded trial with repeated measures within subject design. Capsaicin was applied on both forearms of ten healthy volunteers to induce peripheral and central sensitization. One forearm was treated with low-level light therapy; the other served as sham control. Results: Low-level light therapy significantly increased the mechanical pain threshold, heat pain threshold, and decreased pain intensity. Conclusions: Our data indicate that low-level light therapy is effective at reducing the heat and mechanical pain threshold in a human pain model, pointing to a significant modulating effect on peripheral and central sensitization. These effects-especially in the absence of reported side effects-make low-level light therapy a promising tool in pain management. The application of low-level light therapy to treat chronic pain should be considered for further clinical trials.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.