The human μ-opioid receptor gene polymorphism (A118G) is associated with head pain severity in a clinical cohort of female migraine with aura patients

Migraine is a painful and debilitating, neurovascular disease. Current migraine head pain treatments work with differing efficacies in migraineurs. The opioid system plays an important role in diverse biological functions including analgesia, drug response and pain reduction. The A118G single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) in exon 1 of the μ-opioid receptor gene (OPRM1) has been associated with elevated pain responses and decreased pain threshold in a variety of populations. The aim of the current preliminary study was to test whether genotypes of the OPRM1 A118G SNP are associated with head pain severity in a clinical cohort of female migraineurs. This was a preliminary study to determine whether genotypes of the OPRM1 A118G SNP are associated with head pain severity in a clinical cohort of female migraineurs. A total of 153 chronic migraine with aura sufferers were assessed for migraine head pain using the Migraine Disability Assessment Score instrument and classified into high and low pain severity groups. DNA was extracted and genotypes obtained for the A118G SNP. Logistic regression analysis adjusting for age effects showed the A118G SNP of the OPRM1 gene to be significantly associated with migraine pain severity in the test population (P = 0.0037). In particular, G118 allele carriers were more likely to be high pain sufferers compared to homozygous carriers of the A118 allele (OR = 3.125, 95 % CI = 1.41, 6.93, P = 0.0037). These findings suggest that A118G genotypes of the OPRM1 gene may influence migraine-associated head pain in females. Further investigations are required to fully understand the effect of this gene variant on migraine head pain including studies in males and in different migraine subtypes, as well as in response to head pain medication.

Fresh frozen cadavers as a tool to educate student paramedics in procedural skills

Objectives – To describe the development of an educational workshop to develop procedural skills in undergraduate Paramedic students using fresh frozen cadavers and to report the student’s assessment of the program. Methods – A six-hour anatomy based workshop was developed using fresh frozen cadavers to teach a range of airway and invasive procedural skills to second year undergraduate paramedic students. Embedded QUAN (qual) methodology will be utilised to evaluate the student’s satisfaction, perception and quality of teaching as compared to other existing clinical teaching techniques such as high fidelity simulation. Students will be asked to complete an anonymous validated survey (10 questions formulated on a 5 point Likert scale) and provide a qualitative feedback pre and post the six-hour workshop. Results – This is a prospective study planned for September 2013. Low-risk human research ethics are being sought. Teaching evaluation results from the inaugural 2012 workshop (undergraduate and postgraduate Paramedic students) and interim results for 2013 will be presented. Conclusions – Clinical teaching using fresh frozen cadavers thus far has predominately been used in the education of medical and surgical trainees. A number of studies have found them to be effective and in some cases superior to traditional high fidelity simulation teaching strategies. Fresh frozen cadavers are said to provide perfect anatomy, normal tissue consistency and a realistic operative training experience (Lloyd, Maxwell-Armstrong et al. 2011). The authors believe that this study will show that the use of fresh frozen cadavers offers a safe and effective mode to teach procedural skills to student paramedics that will help bridge the skills gap and increase confidence prior to students undertaking such interventions on living patients. A modified training program may be formulated for general practitioners undertaking Emergency Medicine Advanced Rural Skills.

Clinical practice guidelines for nurse-administered procedural sedation and analgesia in the cardiac catheterisation laboratory : A modified Delphi study

Aim To develop clinical practice guidelines for nurse-administered procedural sedation and analgesia in the cardiac catheterisation laboratory. Background Numerous studies have reported that nurse-administered procedural sedation and analgesia is safe. However, the broad scope of existing guidelines for the administration and monitoring of patients who receive sedation during medical procedures without an anaesthetist presents means there is a lack of specific guidance regarding optimal nursing practices for the unique circumstances in which nurse-administered procedural sedation and analgesia is used in the cardiac catheterisation laboratory. Methods A sequential mixed methods design was utilised. Initial recommendations were produced from three studies conducted by the authors: an integrative review; a qualitative study; and a cross-sectional survey. The recommendations were revised in accordance with responses from a modified Delphi study. The first Delphi round was completed by nine senior cardiac catheterisation laboratory nurses. All but one of the draft recommendations met the pre-determined cut-off point for inclusion. There were a total of 59 responses to the second round. Consensus was reached on all recommendations. Implications for nursing The guidelines that were derived from the Delphi study offer twenty four recommendations within six domains of nursing practice: Pre-procedural assessment; Pre-procedural patient and family education; Pre-procedural patient comfort; Intra-procedural patient comfort; Intra-procedural patient assessment and monitoring; and Post-procedural patient assessment and monitoring. Conclusion These guidelines provide an important foundation towards the delivery of safe, consistent and evidence-based nursing care for the many patients who receive sedation in the cardiac catheterisation laboratory setting.

How Can Models of Motor Control Be Useful for Understanding Low Back Pain?

Introduction. The purpose of this chapter is to address the question raised in the chapter title. Specifically, how can models of motor control help us understand low back pain (LBP)? There are several classes of models that have been used in the past for studying spinal loading, stability, and risk of injury (see Reeves and Cholewicki (2003) for a review of past modeling approaches), but for the purpose of this chapter we will focus primarily on models used to assess motor control and its effect on spine behavior. This chapter consists of 4 sections. The first section discusses why a shift in modeling approaches is needed to study motor control issues. We will argue that the current approach for studying the spine system is limited and not well-suited for assessing motor control issues related to spine function and dysfunction. The second section will explore how models can be used to gain insight into how the central nervous system (CNS) controls the spine. This segues segue nicely into the next section that will address how models of motor control can be used in the diagnosis and treatment of LBP. Finally, the last section will deal with the issue of model verification and validity. This issue is important since modelling accuracy is critical for obtaining useful insight into the behavior of the system being studied. This chapter is not intended to be a critical review of the literature, but instead intended to capture some of the discussion raised during the 2009 Spinal Control Symposium, with some elaboration on certain issues. Readers interested in more details are referred to the cited publications.

Understanding chronic pain complicating disability: Finding meaning through focus group methodology

Over the past few decades a major paradigm shift has occurred in the conceptualisation of chronic pain as a complex multidimensional phenomenon. Yet, pain experienced by individuals with a primary disability continues to be understood largely from a traditional biomedical model, despite its inherent limitations. This is reflected in the body of literature on the topic that is primarily driven by positivist assumptions and the search for etiologic pain mechanisms. Conversely, little is known about the experiences of and meanings attributed to, disability-related pain. Thus the purpose of this paper is to discuss the use of focus group methodology in elucidating the meanings and experiences of this population. Here, a distinction is made between the method of the focus group and focus group research as methodology. Typically, the focus group is presented as a seemingly atheoretical method of research. Drawing on research undertaken on the impact of chronic pain in people with multiple sclerosis, this paper seeks to theorise the focus group in arguing the methodological congruence of focus group research and the study of pain experience. It is argued that the contributions of group interaction and shared experiences in focus group discussions produce data and insights less accessible through more structured research methods. It is concluded that a biopsychosocial perspective of chronic pain may only ever be appreciated when the person-in-context is the unit of investigation.

A Procedural Model for Ontological Analyses

In recent years, there has been a significant increase in the popularity of ontological analysis of conceptual modelling techniques. To date, related research explores the ontological deficiencies of classical techniques such as ER or UML modelling, as well as business process modelling techniques such as ARIS or even Web Services standards such as BPEL4WS, BPML, ebXML, BPSS and WSCI. While the ontologies that form the basis of these analyses are reasonably mature, it is the actual process of an ontological analysis that still lacks rigour. The current procedure is prone to individual interpretations and is one reason for criticism of the entire ontological analysis. This paper presents a procedural model for ontological analysis based on the use of meta models, multiple coders and metrics. The model is supported by examples from various ontological analyses.

Play and heal : randomized controlled trial of Ditto intervention efficacy on improving re-epithelialization in pediatric burns

BACKGROUND: The relationships between pain, stress and anxiety, and their effect on burn wound re-epithelialization have not been well explored to-date. The aim of this study was to investigate the effect of the Ditto (a hand-held electronic medical device providing procedural preparation and distraction) intervention on re-epithelialization rates in acute pediatric burns. METHODS/DESIGN: From August 2011 to August 2012, children (4-12 years) with an acute burn presenting to the Royal Children's Hospital, Brisbane, Australia fulfilled the study requirements and were randomized to [1] Ditto intervention or [2] standard practice. Burn re-epithelialization, pain intensity, anxiety and stress measures were obtained at every dressing change until complete wound re-epithelialization. RESULTS: One hundred and seventeen children were randomized and 75 children were analyzed (n=40 standard group; n=35 Ditto group). Inability to predict wound management resulted in 42 participants no longer meeting the eligibility criteria. Wounds in the Ditto intervention group re-epithelialized faster than the standard practice group (-2.14 days (CI: -4.38 to 0.10), p-value=0.061), and significantly faster when analyses were adjusted for mean burn depth (-2.26 days (CI: -4.48 to -0.04), p-value=0.046). Following procedural preparation at the first change of dressing, the Ditto group reported lower pain intensity scores (-0.64 (CI: -1.28, 0.01) p=0.052) and lower anxiety ratings (-1.79 (CI: -3.59, 0.01) p=0.051). At the second and third dressing removals average pain (FPS-R and FLACC) and anxiety scores (VAS-A) were at least one point lower when Ditto intervention was received. CONCLUSIONS: The Ditto procedural preparation and distraction device is a useful tool alongside pharmacological intervention to improve the rate of burn re-epithelialization and manage pain and anxiety during burn wound care procedures.

A comparative analysis of risk stratification tools for emergency department patients with chest pain

Background: Appropriate disposition of emergency department (ED) patients with chest pain is dependent on clinical evaluation of risk. A number of chest pain risk stratification tools have been proposed. The aim of this study was to compare the predictive performance for major adverse cardiac events (MACE) using risk assessment tools from the National Heart Foundation of Australia (HFA), the Goldman risk score and the Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction risk score (TIMI RS). Methods: This prospective observational study evaluated ED patients aged ≥30 years with non-traumatic chest pain for which no definitive non-ischemic cause was found. Data collected included demographic and clinical information, investigation findings and occurrence of MACE by 30 days. The outcome of interest was the comparative predictive performance of the risk tools for MACE at 30 days, as analyzed by receiver operator curves (ROC). Results: Two hundred eighty-one patients were studied; the rate of MACE was 14.1%. Area under the curve (AUC) of the HFA, TIMI RS and Goldman tools for the endpoint of MACE was 0.54, 0.71 and 0.67, respectively, with the difference between the tools in predictive ability for MACE being highly significant [chi2 (3) = 67.21, N = 276, p < 0.0001]. Conclusion: The TIMI RS and Goldman tools performed better than the HFA in this undifferentiated ED chest pain population, but selection of cutoffs balancing sensitivity and specificity was problematic. There is an urgent need for validated risk stratification tools specific for the ED chest pain population.

Visual analog scale and pressure pain threshold for delayed onset muscle soreness assessment

Objectives: To investigate the relationship between two assessments to quantify delayed onset muscle soreness [DOMS]: visual analog scale [VAS] and pressure pain threshold [PPT]. Methods: Thirty-one healthy young men [25.8 ± 5.5 years] performed 10 sets of six maximal eccentric contractions of the elbow flexors with their non-dominant arm. Before and one to four days after the exercise, muscle pain perceived upon palpation of the biceps brachii at three sites [5, 9 and 13 cm above the elbow crease] was assessed by VAS with a 100 mm line [0 = no pain, 100 = extremely painful], and PPT of the same sites was determined by an algometer. Changes in VAS and PPT over time were compared amongst three sites by a two-way repeated measures analysis of variance, and the relationship between VAS and PPT was analyzed using a Pearson product-moment correlation. Results: The VAS increased one to four days after exercise and peaked two days post-exercise, while the PPT decreased most one day post-exercise and remained below baseline for four days following exercise [p < 0.05]. No significant difference among the three sites was found for VAS [p = 0.62] or PPT [p = 0.45]. The magnitude of change in VAS did not significantly correlate with that of PPT [r = −0.20, p = 0.28]. Conclusion: These results suggest that the level of muscle pain is not region-specific, at least among the three sites investigated in the study, and VAS and PPT provide different information about DOMS, indicating that VAS and PPT represent different aspects of pain.

Advancing Nursing Practice in Pain Management

This book showcases the development and evaluation of innovative examples of pain management initiatives by advanced practitioners. It considers each service development or community initiative both in terms of advanced practice nursing and pain management. There is a wide range of examples of innovation in pain management included - from the introduction of ketamine use in one trust, to wider issues around meeting the needs of pain management in the community. The book considers issues including use of research, education and interprofessional working in the advanced practitioner role. Each chapter looks at development of the service, challenges of implementation, evaluation of the service's success and justifying the importance of the advanced nurse in the service's achievements.

Introduction to Advancing Practice in Pain Management

This chapter contains sections titled: Introduction Advanced practice The context of pain management: definitions and prevalence Advancing practice in pain management Bringing together advanced practice and pain management Conclusions References

Nurse Prescribing in Acute and Chronic Pain Management

This chapter contains sections titled: Introduction Acute pain Chronic pain Rationale for service development Evaluation use of audit and CPD Justifying the advanced nursing contribution to develop nurse prescribing in pain management Conclusions References

New Knowledge for Advancing Practice in Pain Management

This chapter contains sections titled: Introduction Advancing practice in pain management Conclusions References