We have conducted a meta-analysis of the clinical effects of morphine and hydromorphone to compare their benefit in analgesia. Embase and Medline were searched with an end-date of June 2009 for randomized, controlled trials or observational studies that addressed comparative analgesic and side-effects or particular side-effects. Two researchers independently identified included studies and extracted the data. Estimates of opioid effects were combined by using a random-effects model. Meta-analysis of eight studies suggested that hydromorphone (494 patients) provides slightly better (P=0.012) clinical analgesia than morphine (510 patients). The effect-size was small (Cohen's d=0.266) and disappeared when one study was removed, although the advantage of hydromorphone was more evident in studies of better quality (Jadad's rating). Side-effects were similar, for example, nausea (P=0.383, nine studies, 456 patients receiving hydromorphone and 460 morphine); vomiting (P=0.306, six studies, 246 patients receiving hydromorphone and 239 morphine); or itching (P=0.249, eight studies, 405 patients receiving hydromorphone, 410 morphine). This suggests some advantage of hydromorphone over morphine for analgesia. Additional potential clinical pharmacological advantages with regard to side-effects, such as safety in renal failure or during acute analgesia titration, are based on limited evidence and require substantiation by further studies.

No abstract

Every physician should be able to treat pain regardless of the specialty, but patients with a risk of chronification or chronic pain should receive care from specialized physicians and non-medical professionals. Specialized pain treatment is an additional qualification in Germany, which may be achieved in different specialties by defined structure criteria and experience. The German Society for the Study of Pain and the Professional Association of the German Society of Anesthetists conducted a survey on specialized outpatient pain treatment settings in Germany, encompassing personal and technical equipment, procedures and interdisciplinary multi-professional cooperation. The survey showed a clear increase in the number of pain treatment settings compared to previous surveys, but with a huge span from small single practice or outpatient services at hospitals to large specialized hospitals. However, the quality criteria suggested by the pain treatment societies were not always met. Treatment options for patients with a risk of chronification and chronic pain show regional variations and are insufficiently developed.

On behalf of the German chapter of the International Association for the Study of Pain (IASP) recommendations for German pain treatment services have been developed for the first time. The criteria were based on the IASP recommendations but adapted to the specific German situation. According to the structure and process criteria four different levels of pain treatment services can be distinguished. The aim of the recommendations is to serve as a guide for future development and implementation of pain therapy and quality assurance.