Chapter 22: Cancer pain assessment and management
Skip chapter table of contents and go to main content
Pain management
Evidence‐based approaches
Pain management uses a multidisciplinary team approach that matches therapy to the individual patient. In some instances, simple analgesia can be sufficient to control pain. Simple or non‐opioid analgesics include paracetamol and non‐steroidal anti‐inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) used either individually or in combination.
Multimodal analgesia
Multimodal or balanced analgesia involves the use of more than one analgesic compound or method of pain control to achieve additive (or synergistic) pain relief while minimizing adverse effects (Schug and Chong [202]). This allows for lower doses of individual drugs. It combines different analgesics that act by different mechanisms and at different sites in the nervous system. The aim is to achieve greater analgesia than each of the individual drugs could provide alone.
Opioids, non‐opioids (such as paracetamol, NSAIDs, cyclo‐oxygenase‐2‐selective inhibitors [COX‐2]), local anaesthetics and anticonvulsants are all examples of drugs that may be used as part of a multimodal analgesic approach. An example of multimodal analgesia to manage acute post‐operative pain would be a continuous epidural infusion of a combined opioid and local anaesthetic solution in combination with paracetamol and an NSAID (if not contraindicated). Another example would be a continuous peripheral nerve block with paracetamol and an NSAID. Both of these approaches combine different analgesic compounds and analgesic approaches (oral route, epidural route and peripheral nerve block).
A multimodal approach may also include non‐pharmacological approaches such as relaxation therapy, imagery, TENS and heat therapy.
Management of persistent chronic and cancer pain
The control of pain is directed by the ‘analgesic ladder’, which was presented by the World Health Organization (WHO) in 1996 as a guide to the management of persistent cancer pain (Figure 22.3). It is also often used to guide the management of chronic persistent pain. It involves a stepwise approach to the use of analgesics, including non‐opioids (step 1), opioids for mild‐to‐moderate pain (step 2) and opioids for moderate‐to‐severe pain (step 3). Adjuvant drugs are those that contribute to pain relief but are not primarily indicated for pain management. They can be used at all steps of the ladder. Examples include antidepressant and anticonvulsant drugs, corticosteroids, benzodiazepines, antispasmodics and bisphosphonates.
The WHO treatment guide recommends the following five points for the correct use of analgesics.
- Administered orally if appropriate.
- Given at regular intervals.
- Prescribed according to assessment of pain intensity evaluated using a pain intensity scale.
- The dose of the analgesic should be adapted to the individual. There is no standard dose to treat certain types of pain.
- Analgesia should be prescribed with ongoing review, monitoring for effectiveness and side‐effects (WHO [236]).
Therefore, some patients who present with severe pain will need to start on step 3 of the ladder; it would not be appropriate to progress through each step in this circumstance. Treatment of chronic/cancer pain does not necessarily begin with step 1, progress to step 2 and follow with step 3 (Eisenberg et al. [61]).
It is important to remember that the patient will experience different types of pain due to different aetiological and physiological changes. Each pain needs to be assessed individually, since the pain may need to be managed in a different manner and one analgesic intervention or route will rarely be sufficient. Often the best practice is to combine different types of analgesia in order to achieve maximum pain control (Table 22.1). It is also important to utilize non‐pharmacological interventions at all stages of the treatment plan. Whilst the pain ladder has been questioned as to further iterations of its current format which might include patients being moved from step 1 to step 3, thus excluding step 2 (Reid and Davies [185]), it remains one of the most used tools in the management of pain in cancer.
Table 22.1 The use of adjuvant drugs (co‐analgesics)
Type | Use | Examples |
---|---|---|
Non‐steroidal anti‐inflammatory drugs | Bone pain
Muscular pain
Inflammation
Visceral pain | Diclofenac
Naproxen
Ibuprofen
Nabumetone |
Steroids | Pressure
Bone pain
Inflammation
Raised intracranial pressure | Dexamethasone
Prednisolone |
Tricyclic antidepressants | Neuropathic pain | Amitriptyline
Nortriptyline |
Anticonvulsants | Sodium valproate
Carbamazepine
Gabapentin
Pregabalin | |
Antibiotics | Infection | Flucloxacillin
Trimethoprim |
Benzodiazepines | Anxiety | Diazepam
Clonazepam |
Antispasmodics | Spasms | Baclofen |
Bisphosphonates | Bone pain | Zoledronic acid |
Accurate ongoing assessment is imperative for efficient and effective pain control.
Methods of pain management
Using the WHO analgesic ladder
The analgesic ladder was designed as a framework for the management of cancer pain (see Figure 22.3). There are several drugs available to manage cancer pain and the analgesic ladder allows the flexibility to choose from the range according to the patient's requirements and tolerance (Hanks et al. [89]). For acute pain management, the WHO ladder can be used as a guide in reverse, starting at step 3 for immediate post‐operative pain and moving down through step 2 and then step 1 as post‐operative pain improves.
Step 1: non‐opioid drugs
Examples of non‐opioid drugs include paracetamol, aspirin and NSAIDs that are effective for mild‐to‐moderate pain. These drugs are especially effective for musculoskeletal and visceral pain (Twycross et al. [220]).
Step 2: opioids for mild‐to‐moderate pain
Examples of opioids for mild‐to‐moderate pain include codeine, dihydrocodeine, tramadol and low‐dose oxycodone (steps 2 and 3). These drugs are used when adequate pain management is not achieved with non‐opioids and are usually used in combination formulations. It is not recommended to administer another analgesic from the same group if the drug being used is not controlling the pain. Uncontrolled pain needs to be assessed and managed with the titration of an opioid by moving up the ladder. The exception to this would be if the patient was experiencing intolerable side‐effects on the weak opioid and an alternative drug might be beneficial.
Step 3: opioids for moderate‐to‐severe pain
Examples of opioids for moderate‐to‐severe pain include morphine, oxycodone, fentanyl, diamorphine, methadone, buprenorphine, hydromorphone and alfentanil.
Methods of drug delivery
Oral analgesia
The oral route is invariably the chosen method of drug delivery. This is based mainly on the ease of use for the patient. This obviously is dependent on the patient being able to tolerate oral medications and absorb them. This route can be limited by a number of factors, mainly nausea and/or vomiting.
Subcutaneous analgesia
Opioids are often given subcutaneously to manage chronic cancer pain. This is usually influenced by the patient's ability to take medication by the oral route and if there are issues such as bowel obstruction that may impact on drug absorption. Consent from the patient for this method of delivery is key in achieving concordance with drug administration.
Intramuscular analgesia
Until the early 1990s, regular 3–4‐hourly intramuscular injections of opioids such as pethidine and morphine were routinely used for the management of post‐operative pain. Because alternative techniques such as patient‐controlled analgesia (PCA) and epidural analgesia are now available, intramuscular analgesia is used less frequently. Some useful algorithms have been developed to give guidance on titrating intramuscular analgesia (Harmer and Davies [90], Macintyre and Schug [128]. Absorption via this route may be impaired in conditions of poor perfusion (e.g. in hypovolaemia, shock, hypothermia or immobility). This may lead to inadequate early analgesia (the drug cannot be absorbed properly and reach the systemic circulation and so forms a drug depot) and late absorption of the drug depot (where the drug has remained in the muscular tissue and is absorbed only once perfusion is restored) (Macintyre et al. [129]).
Transdermal analgesia
Transdermal analgesia is a simple method of giving analgesia. It is convenient, and often very acceptable to patients, particularly those who dislike tablets or have many to take. A number of patch formulations have been developed to allow the delivery of drugs across the skin (such as fentanyl, buprenorphine or local anaesthetics). Disadvantages of giving strong opioids such as fentanyl by this route include inflexibility (the patient usually has to be on a stable dose of an opioid and it takes a long time for a dose increase to take effect) and breakthrough doses must be given by another route (oral, buccal or sublingual).
Buccal or sublingual analgesia
Buccal means that the analgesia is placed between the upper lip and the lining of the upper gum. A sublingual drug is placed under the tongue. Drugs given by this route pass directly into the systemic circulation and bypass first‐pass metabolism. Their speed of onset is often rapid (Stannard and Booth [209]).
Intranasal administration
Intranasal administration is a non‐invasive method of drug delivery because drugs can be absorbed into the systemic circulation through the nasal mucosa. It is suggested that it offers advantages such as ease of administration, rapid onset of action and avoidance of first‐pass metabolism, which consequently offers for example an alternative to subcutaneous, oral transmucosal, oral or rectal administration in the management of pain with opioids. Fentanyl‐containing formulations have been approved and marketed for the treatment of breakthrough cancer pain (Grassin‐Delyle et al. [87]).
Pre‐procedural considerations
Pharmacological support
Non‐opioid analgesics
Paracetamol and paracetamol combinations
The use of non‐opioid analgesics such as paracetamol or paracetamol combined with a weak opioid such as codeine is recommended for managing pain following minor surgical procedures or when the pain following major surgery begins to subside (McQuay et al. [144]). It is also used in cancer patients with pain related to the cancer itself, procedure or treatment‐related pain. Paracetamol can also be given rectally if the oral route is contraindicated. An intravenous preparation of paracetamol is now available and can provide effective analgesia after surgical procedures (Romsing et al. [192]). It is more effective and of faster onset than the same dose given enterally. The use of the intravenous form should be limited to patients in whom the enteral route cannot be used. With regard to dosing schedules for parenteral administration of paracetamol, the dose should be reduced for those who weigh 50 kg or under. For example, patients who weigh 33–50 kg should not exceed a maximum daily dose of 60 mg/kg, not exceeding 3 g. For patients over 50 kg with an additional risk factor for hepatotoxicity, the maximum daily dose should be 3 g in 24 hours, and for those patients over 50 kg with no risk factor then the maximum daily dose can be up to 4 g (Bristol‐Myers Squibb [23]).
Paracetamol taken in the correct dose of not more than 4 g per day is relatively free of side‐effects. When used in combination with codeine preparations, the most frequent side‐effect is constipation.
Non‐steroidal anti‐inflammatory drugs
Non‐steroidal anti‐inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) have been shown to provide better pain relief than paracetamol combinations for acute pain (McQuay et al. [144]). These drugs can be used alone or in combination with both opioid and non‐opioid analgesics. Two commonly used NSAIDs are diclofenac, which can be administered by the oral, parenteral, enteral or rectal route, and ibuprofen, which is available only as an oral or enteral preparation. The disadvantage of both of these is that often side‐effects such as coagulation problems, renal impairment and gastrointestinal disturbances limit their use. Newer COX‐2‐specific NSAIDs have the advantage that they have similar analgesic and anti‐inflammatory effects (Reicin et al. [184]) but have no effect on platelets or the gastric mucosa (Rowbotham [194]). As a result, coagulation problems and gastrointestinal irritation are likely to be significantly reduced. However, several of these drugs have been withdrawn from the market due to long‐term cardiovascular side‐effects and it will take time for newer products with an improved safety profile to re‐establish themselves in practice (Macintyre et al. [129]).
A meta‐analysis has suggested that there is little evidence to suggest that any of these drugs are safe in cardiovascular terms. Compared with placebo, rofecoxib was associated with the highest risk of myocardial infarction and ibuprofen with the highest risk of stroke followed by diclofenac. Diclofenac and lumiracoxib were associated with the highest risk of cardiovascular death. Naproxen is viewed as being least harmful for cardiovascular safety but this advantage should be weighed against gastrointestinal toxicity (Trelle et al. [216]). The decision to prescribe an NSAID should be based on an assessment of a person's individual risk factors, including any history of cardiovascular and gastrointestinal illness (NICE [154]). Naproxen (1000 mg a day or less) and low‐dose ibuprofen (1200 mg a day or less) are considered to have the most favourable thrombotic cardiovascular safety profiles of all NSAIDs. The lowest effective dose should be used for the shortest duration necessary to control symptoms. A person's need for symptomatic relief and response to treatment should be re‐evaluated periodically.
Opioids for mild‐to‐moderate pain
Tramadol
In studies, tramadol has been recognized as being efficacious in the management of chronic cancer pain of moderate severity (Davis et al. [47]).
It is uncertain whether tramadol is more effective than other opioids for mild‐to‐moderate neuropathic pain; one report suggests a reduction in allodynia (pain from stimuli which are not normally painful) (Sindrup and Jensen [206], Twycross and Wilcock [218]). It is uncertain whether tramadol is more effective in neuropathic pain than other opioids for mild to moderate pain (Dühmke et al. [58]). Tramadol has been associated with seizures, notably when the total daily dose exceeds 400 mg or when tramadol has been prescribed alongside other medications that may lower the seizure threshold, for example tricyclic antidepressants and selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) (Twycross et al. [220]). It is available in immediate‐ and modified‐release preparations. A warning about tramadol from the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) suggested an increased risk of suicide in those patients who were emotionally unstable and in particular those already taking anti‐depressants and tranquillizers.
Codeine phosphate
Codeine is metabolized by the hepatic cytochrome CYP2D6 to morphine. Approximately 7% of Caucasians and 1–3% of the Asian population are poor CYP2D6 metabolizers and therefore do not experience effective analgesia with codeine.
Codeine is available in tablet and syrup formulations. Doses of 30–60 mg po qds are generally prescribed to a maximum of 240 mg/24 h. It is also available in combination preparations with a non‐opioid. The combination preparations are available in varying strengths of codeine and paracetamol, including co‐codamol 8 mg/500 mg, 15 mg/500 mg and 30 mg/500 mg.
Morphine
A large amount of information and research is available concerning morphine and therefore it tends to be the first‐line opioid (of choice). It is available in oral, rectal, parenteral and intraspinal preparations.
All strong opioids require careful titration from an expert practitioner. Where possible, modified‐release preparations should be used at regular intervals in the management of persistent pain (British Pain Society [BPS] [25]). For patients who are requiring in excess of 120–180 mg of morphine or equivalent, advice from a pain specialist should be sought. Patients should be informed of potential side‐effects such as constipation, nausea and increased sleepiness, in order to allay any fear. The patient should also be told that nausea and drowsiness are transitory and normally improve within 48 hours, but that constipation can be an ongoing problem and it is recommended that a laxative should be prescribed when the opioid is started.
Patients often have many concerns about commencing strong drugs such as morphine. Fears frequently centre around addiction and abuse (Cherny et al. [37]). Time should be taken to reassure patients and their families and verbal and written information provided (NICE [155]).
Although morphine is still considered to be the opioid drug of choice for moderate‐to‐severe pain (Hanks et al. [89]), alternative opioids allow the practitioner to carefully assess the patient on an individual basis and select the most appropriate one to use. From a palliative care perspective, guidance available from NICE supports safe prescribing of opioids (NICE [155]).
Durogesic (fentanyl)
Fentanyl is a strong opioid, available in a patch, which is recommended in patients who have stable pain requirements. Transdermal patches are available in doses of 12, 25, 50, 75 or 100 μg per hour. It is reported to have an improved side‐effect profile in comparison to morphine in relation to constipation (Urban et al. [222]), although some patients experience nausea and mild drowsiness. Use of the patch has increased because it frees the patient from taking tablets.
Changing of the patch is recommended every 3 days but in some circumstances patients may require a dosing interval of 2 days (Urban et al. [222]). The patch should be applied to skin that is free from excess hair and any form of irritation and should not be applied to irradiated areas. It is advisable to change the location on the body to avoid an adverse skin reaction. Occasionally difficulties arise relating to the titration of the patch as each patch is equivalent to a range of morphine (Table 22.2).
Table 22.2 Recommended conversion rate guide from oral morphine to 72‐hour fentanyl patch
Morphine dose in 24 hours (mg) | Fentanyl TTS (μg/h) |
---|---|
30 | 12 |
60 | 25 |
120 | 50 |
180 | 75 |
240 | 100 |
TTS, transdermal therapeutic system. |
Methadone
Methadone is a synthetic opioid developed more than 40 years ago (Riley [187]). It is available in oral, rectal and parenteral preparations. There has been some reluctance amongst professionals to use methadone, which arose from the difficulties experienced in titrating the drug due to its long half‐life (15 hours) that caused accumulation to occur, especially in the elderly (Gannon [82]). There are different methods of achieving effective titration (Gannon [82]); for example, one regimen is to calculate one‐tenth of the total daily dose of morphine (maximum starting dose must not exceed 30 mg). Administer the methadone to the patient on an as‐required basis but not within 3 hours of the last fixed dose. The total dose required over a 24‐hour period is calculated after 5–6 days, divided and given as a two or three times daily regimen and this avoids the build‐up of methadone within the body (Morley and Makin [148]). Titration is recommended in a hospital setting to ensure accurate administration. This can be difficult for patients because they have to experience pain before they are administered a dose of methadone in the titration period.
Methadone can be a cheap, effective alternative to morphine if titration is supervised by the specialist pain or palliative care team (Gardner‐Nix [83]).
It is particularly useful in patients with renal failure. Morphine is excreted via the kidneys and, if renal failure occurs, this may lead to the patient experiencing severe drowsiness as a result of accumulation of morphine metabolites (Gannon [82]). Methadone is lipid soluble and is metabolized mainly in the liver. About half of the drug and its metabolites are excreted by the intestines and half by the kidneys. Methadone should be used with the advice of a pain/palliative care specialist.
Oxycodone
Oxycodone is available as an immediate‐ or modified‐release preparation and titration should occur in the same way as morphine. Oxycodone is a useful alternative to morphine (Riley [187]). It has similar properties and can be administered orally, rectally and parenterally. Oxycodone has similar side‐effects and is usually given 4–6 hourly. It has an analgesic potency 1.5–2.0 times higher than morphine. It has similar side‐effects to morphine, although oxycodone has been found to cause less nausea (Heiskanen and Kalso [95]) and significantly less itchiness (Mucci‐LoRusso et al. [149]).
A study by Riley ([188]) identified that on a population level there is no difference between morphine and oxycodone in terms of analgesia efficacy and tolerability.
Targinact
This drug is a combination of modified‐release oxycodone and naloxone. The aim of this combination is to prevent the potential negative effects of opioids on bowel function. It is suggested that approximately 97% of the naloxone is eliminated by first‐pass metabolism (the drug is absorbed into the gastrointestinal tract through the portal vein into the liver which means only a proportion of the drug reaches the circulation) in the healthy liver, preventing it from significantly affecting analgesic effects (Vondrackova et al. [227]).
Tapentadol
Tapentadol is a centrally acting opioid analgesic supported by evidence for the management of acute and severe chronic pain (Schwartz et al. [203], Wild et al. [234]). It is available in oral preparations in immediate‐ and modified‐release forms. The conversion factor for tapentadol from oral morphine is 2.5:1. Therefore 10 mg oral morphine is equivalent to 25 mg of tapentadol. Side‐effects associated with tapentadol are similar to other opioids, including dizziness, headaches, somnolence, nausea and constipation.
Diamorphine
Diamorphine is used parenterally in a syringe pump for the control of moderate‐to‐severe pain when patients are unable to take the oral form of morphine. It is calculated by dividing the total daily dose of oral morphine by three. Breakthrough doses are calculated by dividing the 24‐hour dose of diamorphine by six and administering on an as‐required basis (Fallon et al. [67]).
Buprenorphine
Buprenorphine is an alternative strong opioid available in patch form. The patch has similar advantages to fentanyl but does not contain a reservoir of the drug. Instead, it is contained in a matrix form with effective levels of the drug being reached within 24 hours. Titration is recommended with an alternative opioid initially and then transfer to the patch when stable requirements have been reached. A lower dose patch (Butrans) is available in strengths of 5, 10 and 20 μg/h that should be worn continuously by the patient for 7 days. The higher dose patch (Transtec) of 35, 52.5 and 70 μg/h is licensed to be used up to 96 hours or twice weekly for patient convenience. Conversion is based on the chart supplied by the pharmaceutical company which demonstrates equivalent doses. Buprenorphine is also available as a sublingual tablet, which is titrated from 200 to 800 μg 6 hourly. Conversion is based on multiplying the total daily dose of buprenorphine by 100 to give the total daily dose of morphine (i.e. 200 μg buprenorphine/8‐hourly = 600 μg buprenorphine/24 hours = 60 mg morphine/24 hours) (Budd [29]).
Transmucosal opioids such as fentanyl citrate (Actiq), Abstral, Effentora and intranasal preparations such as PecFent are licensed to be used for the treatment of cancer breakthrough pain. There are some circumstances when these agents are used off licence but they should always be used under the guidance of a specialist.
Oral transmucosal fentanyl citrate (Actiq)
Licensed for the management of breakthrough pain in patients who are already on an established maintenance dose of opioid for cancer pain, oral transmucosal fentanyl citrate (OTFC) is a lozenge which is rubbed against the oral mucosa on the side of the cheek, leading to the lozenge being dissolved by the saliva. The advantage of OTFC is its fast onset via the buccal mucosa (5–15 minutes) and its short duration (up to 2 hours). It is available in a range of doses (200–1600 μg) but there is no direct relation between the baseline analgesia and the breakthrough dose. Titration can be difficult and lengthy as the recommended starting dose is 200 μg with titration upwards (Portenoy et al. [175]). It is recommended that the lozenge be removed from the mouth if the pain subsides before it has completely dissolved. The lozenge should not be reused but should be dissolved under running hot water.
Fentanyl buccal tablet
Fentanyl buccal tablets are licensed medications for breakthrough pain in adults with cancer who are already receiving a maintenance opioid for chronic cancer. The brand names for these medications are Effentora and Abstral. Patients receiving maintenance opioid therapy are those who are taking at least 60 mg of oral morphine daily, at least 25 μg of transdermal fentanyl per hour, at least 30 mg of oxycodone daily, at least 8 mg of oral hydromorphone daily or an equi‐analgesic dose of another opioid for a week or longer.
Effentora buccal tablet is available in 100, 200, 400, 600 and 800 μg. It is placed on the oral mucosa above the third upper molar which leads to the tablet being dissolved by the saliva. It usually takes 15–25 minutes for the tablet to dissolve. It is recommended that if the tablet has not completely dissolved within 30 minutes then the remainder of the tablet should be swallowed with water as it is thought that the tablet will then only be likely to consist of inactive substances rather than active fentanyl (Darwish et al. [45]).
Abstral is an oral transmucosal delivery formulation of fentanyl citrate, indicated for the management of breakthrough pain in patients using opioid therapy for chronic cancer pain (Rauch et al. [182]). The tablet is administered sublingually and it rapidly disintegrates, ensuring the fentanyl dissolves quickly. Abstral is available in six dosing strengths: 100, 200, 300, 400, 600 and 800 μg fentanyl citrate.
Adjuvant drugs (co‐analgesics)
Most chronic pain contains elements of neuropathic pain. Patients with nociceptive pain are likely to gain some benefit from conventional medications such as NSAIDs but these drugs come with a strong side‐effect profile. Individuals with neuropathic pain are likely to gain some relief from co‐analgesics such as tricyclic antidepressants (e.g. amitriptyline and nortriptyline) and anticonvulsant drugs (e.g. gabapentin and pregabalin) (Mackintosh and Elson [130]).
The WHO analgesic ladder recommends the use of these drugs in combination with non‐opioids, opioids for mild‐to‐moderate pain and opioids for moderate‐to‐severe pain (see Figure 22.3).
Cannabis
Studies are currently examining the potential benefits of using cannabis for the management of chronic conditions, for example multiple sclerosis and cancer. There is some evidence for relief of spasticity and neuropathic pain and for improvement in sleep (Lynch and Campbell [127]). For those patients who may present wishing to use medications such as cannabis oil, local policies should be consulted.
Education of patient
Opioids and driving
In the UK, patients who are prescribed opioids are permitted to drive. The BPS has suggested that under certain circumstances patients who are taking opioids should not drive. These circumstances include:
- The condition for which they are being treated has physical consequences that might impair their driving ability.
- They feel unfit to drive.
- They have just started opioid treatment.
- The dose of opioid has been recently adjusted upwards or downwards (as withdrawal of opioids can also have an impact on driving).
- They have consumed alcohol or drugs that can produce an additive effect.
The Driving and Vehicle Licensing Agency (DVLA) is the only legal body that can advise a patient about their right to hold a driving licence. Patients starting opioids should be advised to inform the DVLA that they are now taking opioids, and prescribers should document that this advice has been given (BPS [25]). More recent guidance has been published for professionals to guide practice and support patients (Department of Transport [51]).
Complications
The use of opioids in renal failure
Renal failure can cause significant and dangerous side‐effects due to the accumulation of the drug. A systematic review in patients with cancer pain has concluded that fentanyl, alfentanil and methadone, with caveats, are the medications likely to cause least harm in patients with renal impairment when used appropriately (King et al. [116]). Basic guidelines for pain management in renal failure include the following:
- Reduce analgesia dose and/or dose frequency (6‐hourly instead of 4‐hourly).
- Select a more appropriate drug (not renally excreted).
- Avoid modified‐release preparations.
- Seek advice from a specialist pain/palliative care team and/or pharmacist (Farrell and Rich [72]).
The use of opioids in liver failure
As the liver is the main site for the metabolism of most drugs, hepatic impairment may lead to changes in the pharmacokinetics which can include:
- accumulation of the drug or its metabolites
- prolonged half‐life
- increased bioavailability.
The severity will depend on the degree of damage to the liver (Twycross et al. [220]). The recommendation would be to avoid hepatotoxic drugs or use with care and specialist support.
Management of breakthrough cancer pain (BTCP)
The management of cancer‐related breakthrough pain involves several modalities of care. These include lifestyle changes, non‐pharmacology interventions, pharmacology, optimizing round the clock medication, rescue medication and where necessary interventional techniques (EONS [65]). Rapid‐onset opioids have been developed specifically for the treatment of BTCP. Fentanyl has been the opioid of choice for the development of BTCP medications that use the oral transmucosal and intranasal routes of administration. Transmucosal administration of lipophilic substances has gained popularity in recent years due to the rapid, clinically observable effect occurring 10–15 minutes after drug administration. The oral and nasal mucosae are easily accessible and convenient sites for drug delivery because they allow for a non‐invasive, less threatening approach to patients than other routes of administration, such as intravenous or intramuscular (Zepettella [238]). There are many rapid‐onset fentanyl products for the treatment of BTCP on the market, each with diverse features. The most commonly used are listed in Box 22.1. Further information can be sourced from Breakthrough Cancer Pain Guidelines (EONS [65]).
Box 22.1
Examples of rapid‐onset fentanyl preparations
- Oral transmucosal fentanyl citrate
- Fentanyl buccal tablet
- Fentanyl sublingual tablet
- Fentanyl buccal soluble film
- Intranasal fentanyl spray
- Fentanyl pectin nasal spray
Management of chemotherapy‐induced peripheral neuropathy (CIPN)
There is little evidence to support the use of pharmacological agents in the treatment of CIPN (BPS [25]). Given the lack of pharmacological treatments available to patients, non‐pharmacological treatments should also be considered in a multimodal treatment plan (Taverner [211]).
Pharmacology
NICE ([156]) neuropathic pain guidelines suggest first‐line treatment with amitriptyline, duloxetine, gabapentin or pregabalin. However this is specific not to CIPN but to all neuropathic pain. Chu et al. ([39]) performed a systematic review into the use of drugs affecting the central nervous system and found limited evidence to support the use of these drugs in the management of CIPN.
One randomized controlled trial (RCT) found that the use of duloxetine had a positive impact in reducing pain score and improving quality of life when compared with a placebo (Ellen et al. [62]). Use of oxycodone has also been shown to have benefits in a small trial of patients undergoing treatment with oxaliplatin. Patients receiving oxycodone were more likely to complete the full course of treatment compared with those who were not (Nagashima et al. [150]).
Rao et al. ([180]) performed a double‐blind RCT into the effectiveness of gabapentin versus placebo effect. Given the use of gabapentin in management of other neuropathic pains, its role in treating CIPN could have a positive outcome for patients. Rao et al. ([180]) found that pain scores improved by 20–30% over the course of the 6‐week trial regardless of the treatment method. They found there was no difference between the placebo and gabapentin group.
Topical treatments
Topical treatments are also used to treat CIPN, often off licence. Capsaicin 0.025% cream, capsaicin 8% patches and lidocaine plasters/patches have all been shown to have benefit in other neuropathic pain states although there is minimal evidence for their use in CIPN, and menthol cream has some demonstrated efficacy in CIPN (Farquhar‐Smith and Brown [70]).
The use of topical capsaicin has shown some benefit in two separate Cochrane reviews (Derry et al. [52], [53]) into the reduction of pain related to CIPN and is also recommended by NICE ([156]). Capsaicin is derived from chilli peppers and has action in the depletion and prevention of substance P in the peripheries. Substance P is responsible for the transmission of pain impulses from peripheries to the CNS (Tofthagen et al. [213]). The most common side‐effect from application is local erythema and skin irritation, however long‐term side‐effects are as yet unknown (Dworkin et al. [60]).
The use of topical lidocaine can be very beneficial in reducing pain as a result of CIPN (Fallon [68]). This works by using a localized anaesthetic effect to prevent the conduction of normal nerve impulses in the chosen area of application. The patches are applied for 12‐hour periods (Tofthagen et al. [213]). These patches can have a cooling and soothing effect on the area which can be very beneficial to patients reporting classic neuropathic symptoms of burning pain. The most common side‐effect from this treatment is local skin irritation (Dworkin et al. [60]).
Proudfoot et al. ([178]) found that activation of TRPM8 found in the sensory nerve through cooling resulted in analgesic effect in neuropathic and chronic pain pathways. The method by which they achieved this cooling effect was with topical menthol cream.
Fallon et al. ([69]) trialled the use of 1% menthol cream on 51 patients complaining of CIPN over a course of 4–6 weeks and found 82% showed a marked reduction in pain scores when assessed with brief pain inventory. They also showed improved fine motor skills and improvements in walking ability and mood.
Non‐pharmacological
Taverner ([211]) recommends the use of occupational therapy and psychological support in order to empower patients to manage their pain via alternative methods. The use of occupational and physical therapies can improve overall function and fine motor skills that can be affected as a result of CIPN symptoms (Brewer et al. [21]).
Wong and Sagar ([235]) reported in a case review of five patients a decrease in pain scores and increase in quality of life following a course of acupuncture. Schroeder et al. ([201]) showed that patients receiving acupuncture treatment for CIPN had a reduction in pain scores and increase in nerve conduction studies. The mechanism of action for acupuncture is thought to be a release of nerve growth factor (NGF), gamma‐aminobutyric acid (GABA) and adenosine (Filshie et al. [74]).
Non‐pharmacological methods of managing pain
Optimal pain control is more likely to be achieved by combining non‐pharmacological with pharmacological techniques. Despite the lack of research evidence to support the effectiveness of many non‐pharmacological techniques, their benefits to patients and families should not be underestimated.
Psychological interventions
Psychological interventions can help patients to cope with pain by reducing stress and muscle tension (Chapman [35]). Encouraging activities such as reading, listening to music and, where possible, interacting with family and friends can all improve the patient's perception of the pain.
A number of simple psychological interventions can improve a patient's pain control by:
- reducing anxiety, stress and muscle tension
- distraction (distraction plays a role in pain management by pushing awareness of pain out of central cognition)
- increasing control and pain‐coping mechanisms
- improving general well‐being.
Some simple interventions include the following:
Creating trusting therapeutic relationships
By creating trusting relationships with patients, nurses are instrumental in reducing anxiety and helping patients to cope with pain. Nurses may underestimate the benefits and comfort they bring by staying with a patient who is experiencing pain (Mann and Carr [135]). Nurses can help to create a trusting relationship by:
- listening to the patient
- believing the patient's pain experience
- acting as a patient advocate
- providing patients with appropriate physical and emotional support.
Information/education
Patient information/education can make all the difference between effective and ineffective pain relief. Information/education helps to reduce anxiety (Chapman [35]) and enables patients to make informed decisions about their care. Patients should be given specific information about why pain control is important, what to expect in terms of pain relief, how they can participate in their management and what to do if pain is not controlled. Some caution is required, however, because not all patients respond positively to the same level of information. Patients with high levels of anxiety may find that detailed information can increase their anxiety and influence their pain control. NICE guidance on the safe prescribing of opioids suggests that all patients who start on opioids should be offered written information to support them (NICE [155]).
Relaxation/guided imagery
This can be used to help patients manage pain and anxiety. It helps by engaging the patient in a more pleasant activity and provides distraction from the pain or may change the perception of a painful experience such as venepuncture/cannulation (Chapman [35]). Relaxation techniques are further discussed in the section on ‘Cancer‐related fatigue (CRF) and sleep’ in Chapter c27.
Music
The use of music in the healthcare setting can also provide relaxation and distraction from pain (Heiser et al. [94]). Setting up a library of music (e.g. easy listening, classical) and having personal listening devices available for patient use is a simple way to provide patients with relaxing music. Vaajoki et al. ([224]) reported significantly lower pain intensity and pain distress in bedrest on the second post‐operative day in a music group compared with a control group after elective abdominal surgery.
Art
A literature review highlighted that art therapy could be used to alleviate physical symptoms in some patients. Therapeutic art‐making was shown to be beneficial in improving the quality of life for patients. Art therapy allows patients emotional safety and assists them to resolve the personal struggles that contribute to their pain (Angheluta and Lee [3]).
Physical interventions
In addition to psychological interventions, a number of physical interventions can be helpful in reducing pain.
Comfort measures
Simple comfort measures such as positioning pillows and bedlinen (e.g. to support a painful limb) (Mann and Carr [135]) can help the patient feel more relaxed and improve patient comfort and pain control. Other comfort measures include ensuring that interruptions and noise are minimized to promote rest and ensuring the ambient temperature is comfortable.
Exercise
Transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation
Transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) (Figure 22.4) is thought to work by sending a weak electrical current through the skin to stimulate the sensory nerve endings. Depending on the stimulation parameters used, TENS is thought to modulate pain impulses by closing the gate to pain transmission within the spinal cord by stimulating the release of natural pain‐relieving chemicals in the brain and spinal cord (King [115]).
Evidence for the use of TENS is variable. Johnson and Martinson ([113]) reported significant decreases in pain at rest and on movement in a meta‐analysis of 38 studies on TENS and peripheral nerve stimulation for chronic musculoskeletal pain. The evidence for TENS for post‐operative pain is often negative, but this may be due to how the studies are conducted.
Heat therapies
For decades, superficial heat therapy has been used to relieve a variety of muscular and joint pains, including arthritis, back pain and period pain. There is much anecdotal and some scientific evidence to support the usefulness of heat as an adjunct to other pain treatments (French et al. [79]).
Heat works by:
- stimulating thermoreceptors in the skin and deeper tissues, thereby reducing the sensitivity to pain by closing the gating system in the spinal cord
- reducing muscle spasm
- reducing the viscosity of synovial fluid which alleviates painful stiffness during movement and increases joint range (Carr and Mann [32]).
In the home environment, people use a variety of different methods for applying heat therapies, such as warm baths, hot water bottles, wheat‐based heat packs and electrical heating pads. In the hospital setting, caution is required with this equipment as it does not reach health and safety standards (no even and regular temperature distribution) and there have been incidences of serious burns (Barillo et al. [8]). Carr and Mann ([32]) note that heat therapy should not be used immediately following tissue damage as it will increase swelling. The Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA [145]) has documented evidence of burns caused by using heat patches or packs and therefore urges caution in their use and also recommends regular checking of skin throughout therapy.
Cold therapies
Cold therapies can also be used to stimulate nerves and modulate pain (Carr and Mann [32]). Cold may be particularly valuable following an acute bruising injury where it can help to reduce inflammation and limit further damage. Cold can be applied in the form of crushed ice or gel‐filled cold packs which should be wrapped in a towel to protect the skin from an ice burn.