Is an easy and reliable diagnosis of localized neuropathic pain (LNP) possible in general practice? Development of a screening tool based on IASP criteria

Mick, G.; Baron, Ralf; Correa-Illanes, Gerardo; Hans, Guy; Mayoral, V.; Frías, Xavier; Sintes, Dolors; Keller, Thomas

doi:10.1185/03007995.2014.907562

Cited by 21 publications

(26 citation statements)

References 33 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…18,53 The anatomic distribution of these physical examination findings may not correspond exactly to the sensory symptoms. 2,30,46,53,78,80,109,115,120,148,152,158,162 …”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

AAPT Diagnostic Criteria for Chronic Cancer Pain Conditions

Paice¹,

Mulvey

Bennett

et al. 2017

The Journal of Pain

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Chronic cancer pain is a serious complication of malignancy or its treatment. Currently, no comprehensive, universally accepted cancer pain classification system exists. Clarity in classification of common cancer pain syndromes would improve clinical assessment and management. Moreover, an evidence-based taxonomy would enhance cancer pain research efforts by providing consistent diagnostic criteria, ensuring comparability across clinical trials. As part of a collaborative effort between the Analgesic, Anesthetic, and Addiction Clinical Trial Translations, Innovations, Opportunities, and Networks (ACTTION) and the American Pain Society (APS), the ACTTION-APS Pain Taxonomy initiative worked to develop the characteristics of an optimal diagnostic system. After the establishment of these characteristics, a working group consisting of clinicians and clinical and basic scientists with expertise in cancer and cancer-related pain was convened to generate core diagnostic criteria for an illustrative sample of 3 chronic pain syndromes associated with cancer (ie, bone pain and pancreatic cancer pain as models of pain related to a tumor) or its treatment (ie, chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy). A systematic review and synthesis was conducted to provide evidence for the dimensions that comprise this cancer pain taxonomy. Future efforts will subject these diagnostic categories and criteria to systematic empirical evaluation of their feasibility, reliability, and validity and extension to other cancer-related pain syndromes.

show abstract

“…18,53 The anatomic distribution of these physical examination findings may not correspond exactly to the sensory symptoms. 2,30,46,53,78,80,109,115,120,148,152,158,162 …”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

AAPT Diagnostic Criteria for Chronic Cancer Pain Conditions

Paice¹,

Mulvey

Bennett

et al. 2017

The Journal of Pain

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…An expert consensus conference, based on a literature survey and analysis identifying articles most relevant to LNP, led to a definition of LNP as “a type of NP characterized by consistent and circumscribed area(s) of maximum pain associated with negative or positive sensory signs and/or spontaneous symptoms characteristic of NP.” 14 , 34 …”

Section: Lnp Assessmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

Localized neuropathic pain: an expert consensus on local treatments

Pickering¹,

Martin²,

Tiberghien³

et al. 2017

DDDT

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundPain localization is one of the hallmarks for the choice of first-line treatment in neuropathic pain. This literature review has been conducted to provide an overview of the current knowledge regarding the etiology and pathophysiology of localized neuropathic pain (LNP), its assessment and the existing topical pharmacological treatments.Materials and methodsLiterature review was performed using Medline from 2010 to December 2016, and all studies involving LNP and treatments were examined. A multidisciplinary expert panel of five pain specialists in this article reports a consensus on topical approaches that may be recommended to alleviate LNP and on their advantages in clinical practice.ResultsSuccessive international recommendations have included topical 5% lidocaine and 8% capsaicin for LNP treatment. The expert panel considers that these compounds can be a first-line treatment for LNP, especially in elderly patients and patients with comorbidities and polypharmacy. Regulatory LNP indications should cover the whole range of LNP and not be restricted to specific etiologies or sites. Precautions for the use of plasters must be followed cautiously.ConclusionAlthough there is a real need for more randomized controlled trials for both drugs, publications clearly demonstrate excellent risk/benefit ratios, safety, tolerance and continued efficacy throughout long-term treatment. A major advantage of both plasters is that they have proven efficacy and may reduce the risk of adverse events such as cognitive impairment, confusion, somnolence, dizziness and constipation that are often associated with systemic neuropathic pain treatment and reduce the quality of life. Topical modalities also may be used in combination with other drugs and analgesics with limited drug–drug interactions.

show abstract

Section: The Role Of Non-pain Medicine Specialists In the Multidiscipmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…A simple, easy-to-use screening tool for neuropathic pain and localized neuropathic pain, designed for use in general practice, has previously been shown to have realistic diagnostic accuracy 111 . The screening tool, based on IASP criteria, focuses on medical history and the distribution of painful symptoms and sensory signs 111 . Using currently available information, is it feasible that a simple, easy-to-use screening tool could also be developed for use by primary care physicians and non-pain medicine specialists in patients at risk for pain chronification?…”

Section: The Role Of Non-pain Medicine Specialists In the Multidiscipmentioning

confidence: 99%