Browsing by Author "Clark, Alexander J"

Now showing 1 - 4 of 4
  • Thumbnail Image
    ItemOpen Access
    A Triage Approach to Managing a Two Year Wait-List in a Chronic Pain Program
    (2005-01-01) Clark, Alexander J; Beauprie, Ian; Clark, Lynne B; Lynch, Mary E
    OBJECTIVE: Individuals with chronic pain referred to specialist chronic pain management programs frequently wait months to years for assessment and care. In the authors' pain management program, approximately 600 patients are on the waiting list. An innovative recommendation program to encourage and educate referring physicians to continue active care of pain during this waiting period was developed.METHODS: All referrals to the Queen Elizabeth II Health Sciences Centre's Pain Management Unit for a one-year period were reviewed and triaged as either 'regular waiting list' or 'fast track'. Patients in the fast track group were seen within four months and required limited interventions or were urgent in nature. The regular waiting list group waited up to 27 months for assessment and development of a treatment plan. Treatment recommendations were faxed to the referring physician. A follow-up questionnaire was sent to each physician to assess whether these treatment recommendations were useful.RESULTS: Recommendations were faxed for 297 patients. One hundred forty-nine physicians returned the follow-up questionnaire. Ninety-five physicians used the recommendations and 68 patients followed the recommendations. Seventy-nine physicians felt that the recommendations were helpful to them in their care of the patient. For 39 patients, the recommendations were helpful. The most frequently used recommendations were those on medications (eg, tricylic antidepressants, anticonvulsants, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and controlled-release opioids). Other modalities included participation in an interdisciplinary group program and physiotherapy.CONCLUSIONS: A triage review process with recommendations faxed to referring physicians was developed and put into action for one year. The recommendations were used by 32% of the physicians (64% of responding physicians). Fifty-three per cent of responding physicians felt that the recommendations were helpful in the care of their patient. This process led to a benefit in care, as perceived by the physician, in 26% of patients (of physicians who returned the questionnaire [13% of all patients]) on the waiting list for a tertiary care pain management unit.
  • Thumbnail Image
    ItemOpen Access
    Buprenorphine Transdermal System for Opioid Therapy in Patients with Chronic Low Back Pain
    (2010-01-01) Gordon, Allan; Rashiq, Saifudin; Moulin, Dwight E; Clark, Alexander J; Beaulieu, André D; Eisenhoffer, John; Piraino, Paula S; Quigley, Patricia; Harsanyi, Zoltan; Darke, Andrew C
    OBJECTIVE: The present randomized, double-blinded, crossover study compared the efficacy and safety of a seven-day buprenorphine transdermal system (BTDS) and placebo in patients with low back pain of moderate or greater severity for at least six weeks.METHODS: Prestudy analgesics were discontinued the evening before random assignment to 5 μg/h BTDS or placebo, with acetaminophen 300 mg/codeine 30 mg, one to two tablets every 4 h to 6 h as needed, for rescue analgesia. The dose was titrated to effect weekly, if tolerated, to 10 μg/h and 20 μg/h BTDS. Each treatment phase was four weeks.RESULTS: Fifty-three patients (28 men, 25 women, mean [± SD] age 54.5±12.7 years) were evaluable for efficacy (completed two weeks or more in each phase). Baseline pain was 62.1±15.5 mm (100 mm visual analogue scale) and 2.5±0.6 (five-point ordinal scale). BTDS resulted in lower mean daily pain scores than in the placebo group (37.6±20.7 mm versus 43.6±21.2 mm on a visual analogue scale, P=0.0487; and 1.7±0.6 versus 2.0±0.7 on the ordinal scale, P=0.0358). Most patients titrated to the highest dose of BTDS (59% 20 μg/h, 31% 10 μg/h and 10% 5 μg/h). There were improvements from baseline in pain and disability (Pain Disability Index), Pain and Sleep (visual analogue scale), Quebec Back Pain Disability Scale and Short-Form 36 Health Survey scores for both BTDS and placebo groups, without significant differences between treatments. While there were more opioid-related side effects with BTDS treatment than with placebo, there were no serious adverse events. A total of 82% of patients chose to continue BTDS in a long-term open-label evaluation, in whom improvements in pain intensity, functionality and quality of life were sustained for up to six months without analgesic tolerance.CONCLUSION: BTDS (5 μg/h to 20 μg/h) represents a new treatment option for initial opioid therapy in patients with chronic low back pain.
  • Thumbnail Image
    ItemOpen Access
    Chronic Pain in Canada: Have We Improved Our Management of Chronic Noncancer Pain?
    (2007-01-01) Boulanger, Aline; Clark, Alexander J; Squire, Pamela; Cui, Edward; Horbay, GLA
    BACKGROUND: Chronic noncancer pain (CNCP) is a global issue, not only affecting individual suffering, but also impacting the delivery of health care and the strength of local economies.OBJECTIVES: The current study (the Canadian Chronic Pain Study II [CCPSII]) was designed to assess any changes in the prevalence and treatment of CNCP, as well as in attitudes toward the use of strong analgesics, compared with a 2001 study (the CCPSI), and to provide a snapshot of the current standards of care for pain management in Canada.METHODS: Standard, computer-assisted telephone interview survey methodology was applied in two segments, ie, a general population survey and a survey targeting randomly selected primary care physicians (PCPs) who treat moderate to severe CNCP.RESULTS AND DISCUSSION: The patient-reported prevalence of CNCP within Canada has not markedly changed since 2001 but the duration of suffering has decreased. There have been minor changes in regional distribution and generally more patients receive medical treatment, which includes prescription analgesics. Physicians continue to demonstrate opiophobia in their prescribing practices; however, although this is lessened relating to addiction, abuse remains an important concern to PCPs. Canadian PCPs, in general, are implementing standard assessments, treatment approaches, evaluation of treatment success and tools to prevent abuse and diversion, in accordance with guidelines from the Canadian Pain Society and other pain societies globally, although there remains room for improvement and standardization.
  • Thumbnail Image
    ItemOpen Access
    Waiting for Treatment for Chronic Pain – a Survey of Existing Benchmarks: Toward Establishing Evidence-Based Benchmarks for Medically Acceptable Waiting Times
    (2007-01-01) Lynch, Mary E; Campbell, Fiona A; Clark, Alexander J; Dunbar, Michael J; Goldstein, David; Peng, Philip; Stinson, Jennifer; Tupper, Helen; the Canadian Pain Society Wait Times Task Force,
    As medical costs escalate, health care resources must be prioritized. In this context, there is an increasing need for benchmarks and best practices in wait time management. In December 2005, the Canadian Pain Society struck a Task Force to identify benchmarks for acceptable wait times for treatment of chronic pain. The task force mandate included a systematic review and survey to identify national or international wait time benchmarks for chronic pain, proposed or in use, along with a review of the evidence upon which they are based. An extensive systematic review of the literature and a survey of International Association for the Study of Pain Chapter Presidents and key informants has identified that there are no established benchmarks or guidelines for acceptable wait times for the treatment of chronic pain in use in the world. In countries with generic guidelines or wait time standards that apply to all outpatient clinics, there have been significant challenges faced by pain clinics in meeting the established targets. Important next steps are to ensure appropriate additional research and the establishment of international benchmarks or guidelines for acceptable wait times for the treatment of chronic pain. This will facilitate advocacy for improved access to appropriate care for people suffering from chronic pain around the world.