Poorly controlled pain is a global public health issue. The personal, familial and societal costs are immeasurable. Only a minority of European patients have access to a comprehensive specialist pain clinic. More commonly the responsibility for chronic pain management and initiating opioid therapy rests with the primary care physician and other non‐specialist opioid prescribers. There is much confusing and conflicting information available to non‐specialist prescribers regarding opioid therapy and a great deal of unjustified fear is generated. Opioid therapy should only be initiated by competent clinicians as part of a multi‐faceted treatment programme in circumstances where more simple measures have failed. Throughout, all patients must be kept under close clinical surveillance. As with any other medical therapy, if the treatment fails to yield the desired results and/or the patient is additionally burdened by an unacceptable level of adverse effects, the overall management strategy must be reviewed and revised. No responsible clinician will wish to pursue a failed treatment strategy or persist with an ineffective and burdensome treatment. In a considered attempt to empower and inform non‐specialist opioid prescribers, EFIC convened a European group of experts, drawn from a diverse range of basic science and relevant clinical disciplines, to prepare a position paper on appropriate opioid use in chronic pain. The expert panel reviewed the available literature and harnessed the experience of many years of clinical practice to produce these series of recommendations. Its success will be judged on the extent to which it contributes to an improved pain management experience for chronic pain patients across Europe. Significance This position paper provides expert recommendations for primary care physicians and other non‐ specialist healthcare professionals in Europe, particularly those who do not have ready access to specialists in pain medicine, on the safe and appropriate use of opioid medications as part of a multi‐faceted approach to pain management, in properly selected and supervised patients.

The culturally adapted version of the painDETECT presents good psychometric properties and shows to be a valid patient-reported outcome for measuring the presence of a neuropathic component in patients with chronic pain.

No abstract

Our results support the view of surgical sympathectomy as the gold-standard treatment in severe cases of Hh and Fb. Radiofrequency sympathicolysis is useful as a second-treatment choice for Hh patients. Fb patients do not benefit from radiofrequency sympathicolysis.

The results suggest that (1) the clinical parameters considered to be suitable for bipolar CRF should not necessarily be considered valid for bipolar PRF, and vice versa; and (2) the ablative effect of the CRF mode is mainly due to its much greater level of delivered energy than is the case in PRF, and therefore at same applied energy levels, CRF, and PRF are expected to result in same outcomes in terms of thermal damage zone dimension.