Patient Perceptions Of Treatment Options For Chronic Pain

Chronic pain and pain management are frequently discussed and debated topics in American medicine today. The patients' understanding of treatment options for management of chronic pain is a less frequently discussed topic. The purpose of this study is to explore patient perceptions of chronic pain treatment options. The framework for guiding this study was Neuman's Systems Model (1995) based on the concepts of stress, client stability, and intervention. A review of the literature was completed that revealed very little information on the topic and therefore further research regarding patient perceptions of treatment options for chronic pain was warranted. Nine patients participated in interviews and shared their experiences with treatment options and contexts or situations that influenced or affected those experiences of treatment options. Participants described their experience with chronic pain to include options available to them; the effectiveness of the methods tried; lifestyle changes associated with their pain; feelings of hopelessness for the future relative to pain resolution as well as available options; the effects of listening and understanding; and depression.

Drug overdose, driven largely by overdose related to the use of opioids, is now the leading cause of unintentional injury death in the United States. The ongoing opioid crisis lies at the intersection of two public health challenges: reducing the burden of suffering from pain and containing the rising toll of the harms that can arise from the use of opioid medications. Chronic pain and opioid use disorder both represent complex human conditions affecting millions of Americans and causing untold disability and loss of function. In the context of the growing opioid problem, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) launched an Opioids Action Plan in early 2016. As part of this plan, the FDA asked the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine to convene a committee to update the state of the science on pain research, care, and education and to identify actions the FDA and others can take to respond to the opioid epidemic, with a particular focus on informing FDA's development of a formal method for incorporating individual and societal considerations into its risk-benefit framework for opioid approval and monitoring.

The data analysis responded to the primary goal of the research and its objective by comparing conventional versus alternative, complementary, and integrative medicine for the treatment of chronic pain. The study also indicated the reasons that the participants preferred a particular method over the others. For example, as stated before according to physician A one participant preferred alternative medicine to conventional medicine because "the participant did not want to have an injection to his elbow, and acupuncture gave him an alternative answer to his problem." Technically a mixed study, the primary portion of the research was qualitative. The use of content analysis with quantitative design was used to summarize the counts and percentages of how many participants contributed to each qualitative theme. The quantitative portion was the health survey. The study did not focus on the structure of consciousness in human experiences. The study showed that participants preferred alternative, complementary, or integrative medicine to conventional medicine. The reason may link to the strong value attached by each culture and religious belief to the treatment type, and the confidence of participants have in their physicians. In general, 41.2% ( n= 7) were satisfied with integrative medicine for chronic pain or some combination with it, whereas 47.1% ( n = 8) were satisfied with alternative treatment only: 47.1% ( n = 8) used integrative medicine for chronic pain or some combination with it, whereas 29.4% ( n =5) used alternative treatment only. Thirteen of the 17 participants ( 76.5%) chose alternative medicine because it was good for the body, for personal preference, and because it was practical.

Publisher's Note: Products purchased from 3rd Party sellers are not guaranteed by the Publisher for quality, authenticity, or access to any online entitlements included with the product. A Comprehensive Handbook of Cancer Pain Management in Developing Countries Written by an international panel of expert pain physicians, A Comprehensive Handbook of Cancer Pain Management in Developing Countries addresses this challenging and vital topic with reference to the latest body of evidence relating to cancer pain. It thoroughly covers pain management in the developing world, explaining the benefit of psychological, interventional, and complementary therapies in cancer pain management, as well as the importance of identifying and overcoming regulatory and educational barriers.

The significantly updated third edition of this short, practical book prepares students to write a questionnaire, generate a sample, conduct their own survey research, analyse data, and write up the results, while learning to read and interpret excerpts from published research. It combines statistics and survey research methods in a single book.

Pain is the most common symptom bringing a patient to a physician's attention. Physicians training in pain medicine may originate from different disciplines and approach the field with varying backgrounds and experience. This book captures the theory and evidence-based practice of behavioral, psychotherapeutic and psychopharmacological treatments in modern pain medicine. The book's contributors span the fields of psychiatry, psychology, anesthesia, neurology, physical medicine and rehabilitation, and nursing. Thus the structure and content of the book convey the interdisciplinary approach that is the current standard for the successful practice of pain management. The book is designed to be used as a text for training fellowships in pain medicine, as well as graduate courses in psychology, nursing, and other health professions.

Chronic pain costs the nation up to $635 billion each year in medical treatment and lost productivity. The 2010 Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act required the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) to enlist the Institute of Medicine (IOM) in examining pain as a public health problem. In this report, the IOM offers a blueprint for action in transforming prevention, care, education, and research, with the goal of providing relief for people with pain in America. To reach the vast multitude of people with various types of pain, the nation must adopt a population-level prevention and management strategy. The IOM recommends that HHS develop a comprehensive plan with specific goals, actions, and timeframes. Better data are needed to help shape efforts, especially on the groups of people currently underdiagnosed and undertreated, and the IOM encourages federal and state agencies and private organizations to accelerate the collection of data on pain incidence, prevalence, and treatments. Because pain varies from patient to patient, healthcare providers should increasingly aim at tailoring pain care to each person's experience, and self-management of pain should be promoted. In addition, because there are major gaps in knowledge about pain across health care and society alike, the IOM recommends that federal agencies and other stakeholders redesign education programs to bridge these gaps. Pain is a major driver for visits to physicians, a major reason for taking medications, a major cause of disability, and a key factor in quality of life and productivity. Given the burden of pain in human lives, dollars, and social consequences, relieving pain should be a national priority.

This text covers the fundamentals of pain, the pharmacology of drugs used, and summarises the current evidence base for the management of acute pain. It provides practical direct clinical applications and strategies for the management of specific medical conditions in patient groups such as the elderly