Métodos de avaliação da eficácia dos tratamentos para a dor

Pain is a subjective condition and, thus, difficult to measure. The best tools to assess pain are the pain evaluation questionnaires, which provide either diagnostic, pain evolution or pain intensity information. To provide information which could help differentiate between nociceptive pain and neuropathic pain is one of the most important functions of these questionnaires. The questionnaires can measure pain intensity, quality of life, or sleep quality. Quality of life and sleep are two really important characteristics to assess the pain impact on patients' life. Pain intensity assessing questionnaires combine physical evaluations with questions, providing information either from the patient sensations or clinical assessment of pain manifestations as well as the underlying biological mechanisms (such as hyperalgesia or allodynia). For example, the Pain Detect questionnaire has two parts: the patient form (intuitive, with pictures and easy understandable) and the physician form. Thus, in this questionnaire, subjective information is provided by the patient and the objective one is provided by the physician. Other pain intensity questionnaires are NPSI, DN4, LANSS or StEP. Quality of life questionnaires are versatile (can be used in different pathologies). These questionnaires include functional self-evaluation questions, and other ones associated to physical and mental health. Two of such quality of life questionnaires are SF-36 and NHP. Sleep evaluation questionnaires include quantitative features such as the number of sleep interruptions, sleep latency or sleep duration as well as qualitative characteristics such as rest sensation, mood and dreams. One of the most used sleep evaluation questionnaires is PSQI, which includes patient questions and bed-partner questions, providing information from two points of view.

A relativa legitimidade da depressão na atualidade: contribuições para uma ética psicanalítica do sujeito

This article is based on the author's clinical practice in the area of public health, and discusses depression as it is known today. Essentially, the author questions the practice of labeling depression as a psychopathological condition. The author also questions today’s trend of seeing a subject’s suffering as a "malaise," or a “disorder.” The possibility is brought up of understanding it as a "demand for analysis." Finally, the article is meant as a contribution to the ethics of psychoanalysis focused on the subject and the possibilities of psychoanalysis in subjectivating this "malaise."