Archive for August, 2013

The importance of a multi-disciplinary approach to persistent pain

An example of the importance of a multi-disciplinary approach to persistent pain is the patient with Kinesiophobia (fear of movement associated with anxiety related to an injury).  Just as stress and anxiety can make pain worse, kinesiophobia can prevent a patient from recovering to their full extent and achieving relief from muscle pain.

An example….

Consider the case of a 50-year-old woman who was visiting the Norman Marcus Pain Institute for the treatment of her foot and ankle pain. The pain started two weeks after a fall, and had plagued her for five months. Because she felt that she was unable to walk without support, she used a walker or a cane. She complained of pain in her heel and ankle and in her Achilles tendon.  Her foot was cold and clammy. Attempting to move her foot up and down and applying pressure to the painful areas caused the pain to become much worse.

She was overwhelmed with her pain and fearful that she would never get better. With her continued pain, tenderness, stiffness, and cold and clammy feet, her doctor told her she had RSD and needed to see a pain doctor for medications and possibly nerve block injections.

When she came in to consult with Dr. Marcus, he wanted to see if he could help increase the range of motion in her ankle. He used Ethyl Chloride spray to briefly make the area cold and numb. She moved her ankle and her pain was gone! Once she felt relief from her original pain, Dr. Marcus asked her to stand. However, she couldn’t because she was too weak. Five months without walking had weakened her muscles and made her unable to walk. She needed strengthening exercises, so she was referred to a physical therapist that helped her re-learn her walking technique while strengthening her muscles. She is now without pain because she no longer holds her ankle stiffly.

Kinesiophobia created more problems than necessary

Her fear of pain and her belief that not walking or moving her ankle would protect her caused her to become disabled, relying on her walker or cane. This could have easily been mistaken for RSD and lead to unnecessary, expensive and painful treatments. She had kinesiophobia, or fear of movement. This is an important factor when a patient is trying to overcome the effects of a painful injury.

Share

The emphasis on procedures vs. cognitive and non-interventional approaches is a driving force in producing unsustainable costs of care in all areas of American Medicine. A recent study in JAMA Internal Medicine revealed that some procedures are reimbursed 3-5X more than cognitive services.  The insurance industry appears to have inadvertently affected the delivery of care for patients in pain by incentivizing expensive interventional procedures and shortchanging all others.

In the past 40 years the field of Pain Medicine has shifted dramatically. A Thermidorian Reaction has occurred in the pain treatment community. The failure of surgical interventions for many chronic pain problems was the foundation for the original mission of clinicians treating these patients. We were aware that focusing on a putative pain generator in the periphery or relying on opioids to minimize pain and suffering, often produced sub-optimal results.  We have reverted to the position against which we originally revolted. The platinum standard of care, the multi-disciplinary pain treatment center has been supplanted by high tech expensive interventions, often of questionable value (cost divided by effectiveness).

How can we take advantage of technological innovation in Medicine whilst at the same time continue to value what is simple and works well? This will require a shift in how we pay for medical services.  As we have seen when there is a large disparity between pay scales in different medical disciplines, human nature will oblige many new graduates to avoid the least reimbursed fields. Ultimately society suffers. If exercise can eliminate back pain in some patients who appear to have an operable lesion how can we improve the chances that it will be tried first? If we do not collectively come up with an effective solution, someone else will. What are your thoughts?

Share

One reason for the closing of many centers was the pull back by insurance carriers for payments for non-interventional pain treatment services. Doing a procedure seemed to be considered more valid and worthy of payment than a non-invasive service even if it was effective in reducing pain, improving function and lowering future cost of care. Today some of the best pain centers cannot survive by depending on insurance payments and are forced to charge their patients large out of pocket sums in order to remain in operation. Some of these insurance carriers that will not pay for comprehensive pain centers will routinely pay for procedures of questionable effectiveness. Although the number of CARF approved pain centers in the US halved, the number of outpatient pain centers mushroomed. The services provided however focused on two areas:

  1. Medication management
  2. Nerve blocks and other invasive procedures.

Some patients could be helped with one or both of these approaches, but many patients in need of physical therapy and psychological services that had been integrated in a comprehensive treatment plan, would no longer receive optimal treatment. Reimbursement would be the driver of care rather than the needs of the patient. Centers could not stay in business and provide care that insurance companies would not cover. The shift toward procedures became an accepted standard of care and new organizations of pain physicians were formed whose membership focused predominantly on invasive procedures.

The emphasis on medication management was in part fueled by the belief that most patients with persistent pain could be treated successfully and safely with strong pain medications, such as opioids like morphine and oxycodone. We have a better understanding now of problems encountered when we freely offered potent pain medications to too many patients. Strong pain medications not only treat pain but also affect mood. Many patients with or without pain have anxiety and/or depression. Pain medications can provide emotional relief and patients would take them consciously or inadvertently for psychological rather than pain relief. Prescribed pain medication have become more popular than street drugs such as heroin for people who were drug abusers and some patients feigned pain and sold the prescribed pills for a handsome profit.

The cost of services for the treatment of back and neck pain, now with many less comprehensive multi-disciplinary centers, has nonetheless continued to rise at an alarming rate. Next time let’s look at the phenomenon of unintended consequences.

 

Share

John Bonica, M.D. a world renowned anesthesiologist at the University of Washington in Seattle was the individual most responsible for the creation of a new specialty, Pain Medicine. In 1977 The American Pain Society was founded and became the United States national chapter in the International Association for the Study of Pain. Complicated difficult to treat pain patients were usually not successfully treated by a physician representing one medical discipline and thus the multi-disciplinary pain treatment model was created.

Clinicians observed that patients with persistent pain had misconceptions about their condition that inhibited their ability to recover. Patient would frequently say “ if I have pain it means I am harming myself “ resulting in the avoidance of activities that produce discomfort and eventually eliminating many important activities in their life with resulting deconditioning, depression, drug use, dollars spent, and ultimately disability. Pain becomes the focus of life and the more it is pondered the worse it feels. Multi-disciplinary teams composed of a pain management physician, psychiatrist, psychologist, social worker, occupational therapist, physical therapist and pain team nurses were created to address all of the factors associated with perpetuating the patient’s inability to function. Multidisciplinary pain centers provided weeks of intensive full day treatment programs with remarkable success in restoring function to patients disabled with persistent pain.

There is an organization called Cochrane Collaborations that reviews commonly provided treatments for various medical conditions to determine if the treatment is effective, ineffective or undetermined. Almost all of the treatments for chronic back pain have been found to be neither ineffective or effective, meaning the evidence is inconclusive and more and better studies are needed- but multi-disciplinary pain centers have consistently been found to be effective for the treatment of chronic back pain. In the early 1990s there were more than a hundred pain centers certified by the Commission on Accreditation of Rehabilitation Facilities and despite their success, close to half of them are no longer operating. “So what’s up with that?”

Share

A number of my patients who have been struggling with pain management for more than a year may report that although their pain began in one specific spot, over time, it began to spread. Sometimes, over time, neck pain would involve the lower back pain as well. Many of these patients were thought to possibly have fibromyalgia syndrome and were given anticonvulsant or serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors (SNRIs). The spread of pain may be from central sensitization (CS) (http://bit.ly/1aVsdg0, http://bit.ly/1bHgSDU). With some of these patients when the worst pain was treated and resolved from one area it could appear in another and muscles not recognized on the initial examination would now be found to be causing discomfort. This could be a function of diffuse noxious inhibitory control (DNIC) http://bit.ly/14Ac4GL,

These confounding problems appear to represent two opposing and confusing phenomenon: CS and DNIC [currently referred to as conditioned pain modulation (CPM)] (http://bit.ly/1aVuish). Do these issues enter into your evaluation and treatment protocols?

Share

The study published in JAMA today demonstrated that from 1999-2010 in 3 key areas, guidelines for the treatment of back pain are being ignored:

  1. Use of recommended NSAIDs and APAP as first line drugs decreased by ~35% whilst not recommended opioid use increased by ~50%.
  2. Not recommended referral from PCPs to specialists for back pain increased by ~106%.
  3. Not recommended use of imaging increased ~50% for MRI and CT and for x-ray remained the same.

Is this a problem? If so, how should it be addressed?

Read more: http://bit.ly/13touQu

 

Share
NORMAN MARCUS PAIN INSTITUTE
30 East 40th Street - New York, NY 10016
Tel 212-532-7999 Fax 212-532-5957
Share
Help Desk Software