Objective Electronic (eHealth) and mobile (mHealth) technologies may be a useful adjunct to clinicians treating patients with chronic pain. The primary aim of this study was to investigate the effects of eHealth and mHealth interventions that do not require clinician contact or feedback on pain-related outcomes recommended by the Initiative on Methods, Measurement, and Pain Assessment in Clinical Trials (IMMPACT) guidelines in adults with chronic pain. Methods We searched four databases and included English language randomized controlled trials of ambulatory adults with chronic pain from January, 1 2000, to January 31, 2018, with interventions that are independent of clinician contact or feedback. In the meta-analysis, outcomes were assessed at short- (three months or less), intermediate- (four to six months), and long-term (seven or more months) follow-up. Results Seventeen randomized controlled trials (N = 2,496) were included in the meta-analysis. Both eHealth and mHealth interventions had a significant effect on pain intensity at short- and intermediate-term follow-up. Similarly, a significant but small effect was observed for depression at short- and intermediate-term follow-up and self-efficacy at short-term follow-up. Finally, a significant effect was observed for pain catastrophizing at short-term follow-up. Conclusions eHealth and mHealth interventions had significant effects on multiple short- and intermediate-term outcome measures recommended in the IMMPACT guidelines. Given widespread availability and low cost to patients, clinicians treating patients with chronic pain could consider using eHealth and mHealth interventions as part of a multidisciplinary pain treatment strategy.

BackgroundThe reported prevalence of chronic pain after spinal cord injury (SCI) varies widely due, in part, to differences in the taxonomy of chronic pain. A widely used classification system is available to describe subcategories of chronic pain in SCI, but the prevalence of chronic pain in SCI based on this system is unknown.ObjectiveThe primary objective of this systematic review and meta-analysis is to determine the prevalence of chronic pain after SCI based on the International Spinal Cord Injury Pain (ISCIP) classification system.Evidence reviewA comprehensive search of databases from January 1980 to August 2019 was conducted. The risk of bias was assessed using a modified tool developed for uncontrolled studies. The Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach was used to assess certainty in prevalence estimates.FindingsA total of 1305 records were screened, and 37 studies met inclusion criteria. The pooled prevalence of overall chronic pain was 68% (95% CI 63% to 73%). The pooled prevalence of neuropathic pain in 13 studies was 58% (95% CI 49% to 68%); the pooled prevalence of musculoskeletal pain in 11 studies was 56% (95% CI 41% to 70%); the pooled prevalence of visceral pain in 8 studies was 20% (95% CI 11% to 29%) and the pooled prevalence of nociceptive pain in 2 studies was 45% (95% CI 13% to 78%). Meta-regression of risk of bias (p=0.20), traumatic versus non-traumatic etiology of injury (p=0.59), and studies where pain was a primary outcome (p=0.32) demonstrated that these factors were not significant moderators of heterogeneity. Certainty in prevalence estimates was judged to be low due to unexplained heterogeneity.ConclusionThis systematic review and meta-analysis extends the findings of previous studies by reporting the prevalence of chronic pain after SCI based on the ISCIP classification system, thereby reducing clinical heterogeneity in the reporting of pain prevalence related to SCI.

IntroductionMany providers report lack of confidence in managing patients with chronic pain. Thus, the primary aim of this study was to investigate the associations of provider confidence in managing chronic pain with their practice behaviors and demographics.Materials and methodsThe primary outcome measure was the results of the Opioid Therapy Provider Survey, which was administered to clinicians attending a pain-focused continuing medical education conference. Nonparametric correlations were assessed using Spearman’s rho.ResultsOf the respondents, 55.0% were women, 92.8% were white, and 56.5% were physicians. Primary care providers accounted for 56.5% of the total respondents. The majority of respondents (60.8%) did not feel confident managing patients with chronic pain. Provider confidence in managing chronic pain was positively correlated with 1) following an opioid therapy protocol (P=0.001), 2) the perceived ability to identify patients at risk for opioid misuse (P=0.006), and 3) using a consistent practice-based approach to improve their comfort level with prescribing opioids (P<0.001). Provider confidence was negatively correlated with the perception that treating pain patients was a “problem in my practice” (P=0.005).ConclusionIn this study, the majority of providers did not feel confident managing chronic pain. However, provider confidence was associated with a protocolized and consistent practice-based approach toward managing opioids and the perceived ability to identify patients at risk for opioid misuse. Future studies should investigate whether provider confidence is associated with measurable competence in managing chronic pain and explore approaches to enhance appropriate levels of confidence in caring for patients with chronic pain.

PREDICT is an easy tool to administer to be able to identify patients who are at high risk of 1-year mortality and who could benefit from AHDs, goals-of-care discussion, and when appropriate in the context of an end-of-life setting, palliative medicine consultation. External validation of PREDICT was successful in our population. We simplified PREDICT and derived a new tool, the modified PREDICT minus ICU tool, without significantly altering the sensitivity, specificity, and AUC for death at 1 year. The next steps include external validation of the newly derived rule and prospective implementation.

BackgroundTo examine the relationship between delta mean arterial pressure (ΔMAP; MAP change between pre-admission minus post-resuscitation) and acute kidney injury (AKI) among patients with septic shock. In this retrospective, single-center cohort study of adult patients pre-admission MAP is defined as the median MAP recorded from 365 to 7 days before admission. Post-resuscitation MAP was median MAP during the 7th hour after initiating resuscitation.ResultsIn our cohort (N = 233; 55% male), the median (interquartile range [IQR]) age was 71 (58–81) years and the median (IQR) acute physiology, age, chronic health evaluation (APACHE) III score was 81 (66–97). Although those in the lowest ΔMAP quartile (−24.5 to 3.9 mmHg) had no demographic differences compared with the rest of the cohort, the odds ratio for AKI was 0.26 (95% CI 0.11–0.57) after adjustment for other known AKI risk factors. Among patients with a history of hypertension, the lowest quartile had an odds ratio for AKI of 0.12 (95% CI 0.04–0.37) after adjusting for risk factors for AKI in this cohort.ConclusionsThe incidence of AKI was lowest among those whose post-resuscitation MAP was closest to or higher than their pre-admission MAP. Further study regarding the effect of targeting the pre-admission MAP for post-resuscitation on the incidence of AKI is warranted.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (10.1186/s13613-018-0468-5) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Purpose: Optimal red blood cell (RBC) transfusion thresholds in acute brain injury (ABI) are poorly defined. Materials and Methods:We conducted a retrospective cohort study of adult patients with ABI and moderate anemia (Hb 7-10 g/dL) in a neurological intensive care unit (ICU) at an academic medical center between 2008-2015. Transfused and non-transfused patients were matched based on age, ABI subtype, pre-transfusion hemoglobin, and ICU length of stay (LOS) at the time of RBC transfusion. Multivariable regression analyses were performed to assess the relationship between RBC transfusion and hospital LOS, hospital mortality, ICU LOS, ICU mortality, and 24 hour change in sequential organ failure assessment (SOFA) scores.Results: 2,638 patients met inclusion criteria, with 225 (8.5%) receiving RBC transfusion. Acute ischemic stroke was the most prevalent ABI diagnosis (43.3%) then intracranial hemorrhage

No abstract

There is great interest in expanding the use of ultrasound (US), but new challenges exist with its application to lumbar facet-targeted procedures. The primary aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to determine the risk of incorrect needle placement associated with US-guided lumbar medial branch blocks (MBB) and facet joint injections (FJI) as confirmed by fluoroscopy or computerized tomography (CT). An a priori protocol was registered, and a database search was conducted. Inclusion criteria included all study types. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane risk of bias tool for randomized controlled trials and the National Heart, Lung, and Blood tool for assessing risk bias for observational cohort studies. Pooled analysis of the risk difference (RD) of incorrect needle placement was calculated. Pooled analysis of 7 studies demonstrated an 11% RD (P , 0.0009) of incorrect needle placement for US-guided MBB confirmed using fluoroscopy with and without contrast. Pooled analysis of 3 studies demonstrated a 13% RD (P , 0.0001) of incorrect needle placement for US-guided FJI confirmed using CT. The time to complete a single-level MBB ranged from 2.6 to 5.0 minutes. The certainty of evidence was low to very low. Ultrasound-guided lumbar MBB and FJI are associated with a significant risk of incorrect needle placement when confirmed by fluoroscopy or CT. The technical limitations of US and individual patient factors could contribute to the risk of incorrect needle placement.