Executive summary In September 2015, the member states of the United Nations endorsed sustainable development goals (SDG) for 2030 that aspire to human rights-centered approaches to ensuring the health and well-being of all people. The SDGs embody both the UN Charter values of rights and justice for all and the responsibility of states to rely on the best scientific evidence as they seek to better humankind. In April 2016, these same states will consider control of illicit drugs, an area of social policy that has been fraught with controversy, seen as inconsistent with human rights norms, and for which scientific evidence and public health approaches have arguably played too limited a role. The previous UN General Assembly Special Session (UNGASS) on drugs in 1998 – convened under the theme “a drug-free world, we can do it!” – endorsed drug control policies based on the goal of prohibiting all use, possession, production, and trafficking of illicit drugs. This goal is enshrined in national law in many countries. In pronouncing drugs a “grave threat to the health and well-being of all mankind,” the 1998 UNGASS echoed the foundational 1961 convention of the international drug control regime, which justified eliminating the “evil” of drugs in the name of “the health and welfare of mankind.” But neither of these international agreements refers to the ways in which pursuing drug prohibition itself might affect public health. The “war on drugs” and “zero-tolerance” policies that grew out of the prohibitionist consensus are now being challenged on multiple fronts, including their health, human rights, and development impact. The Johns Hopkins – Lancet Commission on Drug Policy and Health has sought to examine the emerging scientific evidence on public health issues arising from drug control policy and to inform and encourage a central focus on public health evidence and outcomes in drug policy debates, such as the important deliberations of the 2016 UNGASS on drugs. The Johns Hopkins-Lancet Commission is concerned that drug policies are often colored by ideas about drug use and drug dependence that are not scientifically grounded. The 1998 UNGASS declaration, for example, like the UN drug conventions and many national drug laws, does not distinguish between drug use and drug abuse. A 2015 report by the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, by contrast, found it important to emphasize that “[d]rug use is neither a medical condition nor does it necessarily lead to drug dependence.” The idea that all drug use is dangerous and evil has led to enforcement-heavy policies and has made it difficult to see potentially dangerous drugs in the same light as potentially dangerous foods, tobacco, alcohol for which the goal of social policy is to reduce potential harms. Health impact of drug policy based on enforcement of prohibition The pursuit of drug prohibition has generated a parallel economy run by criminal networks. Both these networks, which resort to violence to protect their markets, and the police and sometimes military ...

Palliative care research should be a priority in LMIC, where many patients could benefit tremendously from it, and publication of findings in these countries should be encouraged.

Chronic pain is multi-dimensional. At the physical level itself, beyond the nociceptive pathway, there is hyper arousal state of the components of the nervous system, which negatively influences tension component of the muscles, patterns of breathing, energy levels and mindset, all of which exacerbate the distress and affect the quality of life of the individual and family. Beginning with the physical body, Yoga eventually influences all aspects of the person: vital, mental, emotional, intellectual and spiritual. It offers various levels and approaches to relax, energize, remodel and strengthen body and psyche. The asanas and pranayama harmonize the physiological system and initiate a “relaxation response” in the neuro endocrinal system. This consists of decreased metabolism, quieter breathing, stable blood pressure, reduced muscle tension, lower heart rate and slow brain wave pattern. As the neural discharge pattern gets modulated, hyper arousal of the nervous system and the static load on postural muscle come down. The function of viscera improves with the sense of relaxation and sleep gets deeper and sustained; fatigue diminishes. Several subtle level notional corrections can happen in case the subject meditates and that changes the context of the disease, pain and the meaning of life. Meditation and pranayama, along with relaxing asanas, can help individuals deal with the emotional aspects of chronic pain, reduce anxiety and depression effectively and improve the quality of life perceived.

It is a justifiable assumption that more than 15 million people in the World Health Organization South-East Asia Region are experiencing serious health-related suffering, much of it caused by persistent, severe pain. Despite this burden of suffering, overall access to pain relief and palliative care services is abysmal. The lack of access to controlled drugs for pain management is striking: the average morphine equivalence in the region in 2015 was just 1.7 mg per capita, while the global average was 61.5 mg per capita. Until recently, implementation of national legislation to facilitate medical and scientific use of opioids has proven to be very complex and difficult to achieve. The effects on the region of the exploitative British opium trade in previous centuries prompted countries to adopt draconian legislation on opioids, focused on restricting illicit use. In India, the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act of 1985, for example, stipulated harsh custodial sentences for even minor clerical errors in hospitals stocking opioids. Decades of persistent efforts by civil society resulted in the landmark amendment of the Act in 2014 to improve medical access, but implementation remains highly protracted. Although some progress has been made in recent years in Bangladesh, India, Nepal, Sri Lanka and Thailand, pain is a symptom that is grossly undertreated in most parts of the region. On both human rights and public health grounds, there is an urgent need for well-formulated drug policies to increase access to opioid medications, coupled with capacity-building and comprehensive public health systems incorporating palliative care.

BACKGROUND Access to palliative care within healthcare systems of low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) has never been more pronounced than in current times. The Lancet Commission Report (2018) estimates that 80% of global serious health-related suffering (SHS), which demands access to palliative care for its relief, are in LMICs. Cancer is a major contributor to SHS and a rapidly growing burden in LMICs. Similar to many LMICs, cancer is a leading cause of death in India. The North-East Region (NER) of India has a high prevalence of cancer and paucity of services for cancer and palliative care. OBJECTIVES To describe the strategies used to initiate and strengthen palliative care services integrated with the comprehensive cancer care initiatives in the state of Assam in NER. METHODS After an initial assessment of the status of palliative care in the NER, a multipronged strategy was adopted that aligned with the WHO framework recommended for initiating palliative care services. A core team working with a government and private collaborative strategized and activated supportive policies, education, and training and improved access and availability to essential drugs, while implementing the components synchronously within the state. SIGNIFICANCE This project demonstrates an informed regional adaptation of the WHO model. It highlights the strengths of integrating palliative care within cancer care program right from its inception. It emphasizes the sustainability of services activated across public healthcare systems, as compared with the donor- or champion-driven initiatives. The outcome of this project underlines the relevance of this model for LMIC regions with similar health systems and sociocultural and economic contexts.

The lack of adequate access to opioids in India as analgesics and for agonist therapies, forces millions to live with severe unalleviated pain, or languish with suffering associated with drug dependence. Although India is a major opium exporter, the excessively prohibitive 1985 narcotics law formulated to control harmful use of drugs, impeded the availability and access to opioids for medical and scientific purposes. Amendment of this law in 2014 established a new national regulatory framework for improved access to essential opioid analgesics. This article reflects on key elements and processes that led to this landmark achievement. Unlike quick timelines associated with effecting policy reforms for law enforcement, realizing the 2014 drug policy change primarily to mitigate human suffering, was a 22-year-long process. The most exacting challenges included recognizing the multilayered complexities of the prior policy framework and understanding their adverse impact on field practices to chart an appropriate and viable path for reform. The evolution of an informal civil society movement involving health care professionals, lawyers, media, policy analysts, government officials, and the public was pivotal in addressing these challenges and garnering momentum for reform. The success of the effort for improving access to opioid medications was underpinned by a three-pronged strategy of 1) persuading the executive arm of the government to take interim enabling measures; 2) leveraging judicial intervention through public interest litigation; and 3) crafting a viable policy document for legislative approval and implementation. We hope our findings are useful for realizing drug policy reforms, given the current transformed global policy mandates emphasizing humanitarian, healthcare, and quality-of-life considerations.

Introduction:Palliative care is usually delivered late in the course of illness trajectory. This precludes patients on active disease modifying treatment from receiving the benefit of palliative care intervention. A survey was conducted to know the opinion of oncologists, oncology nurses, and patients about the role of early specialist palliative care in cancer.Methods:A nonrandomized descriptive cross-sectional study was conducted at a tertiary cancer care center in India. Thirty oncologists, sixty oncology nurses, and sixty patients were surveyed.Results:Improvement in symptom control was appreciated by oncologists, oncology nurses, and patients with respect to pain (Z = −4.10, P = 0.001), (Z = −5.84, P = 0.001), (Z = −6.20, P = 0.001); nausea and vomiting (Z = −3.75, P = 0.001), (Z = −5.3, P = 0.001), (Z = −5.1, P = 0.001); constipation (Z = −3.29, P = 0.001), (Z = −4.96, P = 0.001), (Z = −4.49, P = 0.001); breathlessness (Z = −3.57, P = 0.001), (Z = −5.03, P = 0.001), (Z = −4.99, P = 0.001); and restlessness (Z = −3.68, P = 0.001), (Z = −5.23, P = 0.001), (Z = −3.22, P = 0.001). Improvement in end-of-life care management was appreciated by oncologists and oncology nurses with respect to communication of prognosis (Z = −4.04, P = 0.001), (Z = −5.20, P = 0.001); discussion on limitation of life-sustaining treatment (Z = −3.68, P = 0.001), (Z = −4.53, P = 0.001); end-of-life symptom management (Z = −4.17, P = 0.001), (Z = −4.59, P = 0.001); perimortem care (Z = −3.86, P = 0.001), (Z = −4.80, P = 0.001); and bereavement support (Z = −3-80, P = 0.001), (Z = −4.95, P = 0.001). Improvement in health-related communication was appreciated by oncologists, oncology nurses, and patients with respect to communicating health related information in a sensitive manner (Z = −3.74, P = 0.001), (Z = −5.47, P = 0.001), (Z = −6.12, P = 0.001); conducting family meeting (Z = −3.12, P = 0.002), (Z = −4.60, P = 0.001), (Z = −5.90, P = 0.001); discussing goals of care (Z = −3.43, P = 0.001), (Z = −5.49, P = 0.001), (Z = −5.61, P = 0.001); maintaining hope (Z = −3.22, P = 0.001), (Z = −4.85, P = 0.001), (Z = −5.61, P = 0.001); and resolution of conflict (Z = −3.56, P = 0.001), (Z = −5.29, P = 0.001), (Z = −5.28, P = 0.001). Patients appreciated improvement in continuity of care with respect to discharge planning (Z = −6.12, P = 0.001), optimal supply of essential symptom control medications on discharge (Z = −6.32, P = 0.001), follow-up plan (Z = −6.40, P = 0.001), after hours telephonic support (Z = −6.31, P = 0.001), and preferred place of care (Z = −6.28, P = 0.001).Conclusion:Oncologists, oncology nurses, and patients felt that integration of early specialist palliative care in cancer improves symptom control, end-of-life care, health-related communication, and continuity of care. The perceptions of benefit of the palliative care intervention in the components surveyed, differed among the three groups.

Novel corona virus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is an ongoing pandemic that has impacted the entire world. The Indian government has responded strongly and very stringently to the crisis, through a nationwide lockdown. The health-care (HC) systems in the country are striving hard to maintain equitable care across illness spectra, while responding the emergencies imposed by the COVID-19 crisis. Under these circumstances, guidelines for managing several diseases including that for cancer care have been modified. As modified guidelines for cancer care have their focus on disease management, cancer pain management and maintaining continuity of care for patients with advanced progressive disease have taken a backseat in the available cancer care guidelines. This article describes the challenges, approaches to solutions with evidence-based practices that can be utilized to ensure competent management of cancer pain during the COVID-19 pandemic in India. It provides an overview of adapting to telehealth consultations for identification, evaluation and management of cancer pain, safe and rational use of analgesics and adjuvant drugs, recognizing and responding to holistic care needs and addressing the total pain, ensuring continuity of pain management, and strategies when complying with narcotic drug regulations, while ensuring safety of patients and HC providers.