Summary This detailed and user‐friendly guideline for the diagnosis and management of vitiligo in children and adults aims to give high quality clinical advice, based on the best available evidence and expert consensus, taking into account patient choice and clinical expertise. The guideline was devised by a structured process and is intended for use by dermatologists and as a resource for interested parties including patients. Recommendations and levels of evidence have been graded according to the method developed by the Scottish Inter‐Collegiate Guidelines Network. Where evidence was lacking, research recommendations were made. The types of vitiligo, process of diagnosis in primary and secondary care, and investigation of vitiligo were assessed. Treatments considered include offering no treatment other than camouflage cosmetics and sunscreens, the use of topical potent or highly potent corticosteroids, of vitamin D analogues, and of topical calcineurin inhibitors, and depigmentation with p‐(benzyloxy)phenol. The use of systemic treatment, e.g. corticosteroids, ciclosporin and other immunosuppressive agents was analyzed. Phototherapy was considered, including narrowband ultraviolet B (UVB), psoralen with ultraviolet A (UVA), and khellin with UVA or UVB, along with combinations of topical preparations and various forms of UV. Surgical treatments that were assessed include full‐thickness and split skin grafting, mini (punch) grafts, autologous epidermal cell suspensions, and autologous skin equivalents. The effectiveness of cognitive therapy and psychological treatments was considered. Therapeutic algorithms using grades of recommendation and levels of evidence have been produced for children and for adults with vitiligo.

Significant demands are being placed on the informal caregivers of chronically ill patients, including those suffering from cancer. Health care professionals need to be aware of these demands, and they need effective tools to assess the impact these demands place on the caregivers. Over the past 25 years, researchers have developed self-report instruments to assess informal caregivers. These instruments assess various aspects of the caregiving experience, including caregiver burden, needs, and quality of life. The purpose of this review was to identify and critically evaluate these instruments. MEDLINE and PUBMED were searched from 1966 to 2002. After an extensive literature search and review, and utilizing specific inclusion criteria, 28 instruments were identified and evaluated in terms of their development, content, and psychometric properties. In addition, a history of the construct and measurement development in the areas of caregiver burden, needs, and quality of life are discussed. Although some further development and refinement of instruments could benefit the field, depending on the questions researchers or clinicians seek to pursue, there are many proven tools available for their use. Future research needs to use these instruments to assess the effectiveness of interventions aimed at improving the care of the caregivers.

Observational studies using health administrative data have the potential to drive evidence-based palliative care practice and policy. Further development of quality care markers will enhance benchmarking activities across health care jurisdictions, providers, and patient populations.

Oral transmucosal fentanyl citrate (OTFC) is a novel opioid formulation in which the potent synthetic mu-agonist fentanyl is embedded in a sweetened matrix that is dissolved in the mouth. It is undergoing investigation as a treatment for cancer-related breakthrough pain, a prevalent phenomenon defined as a transitory flare of moderate to severe pain that interrupts otherwise controlled persistent pain. There have been no controlled trials of other treatments for this condition. To evaluate the safety and efficacy of ascending doses of OTFC, a novel controlled dose titration methodology was developed that applied blinding and randomization procedures to the evaluation of recurrent pains in the home environment. The study was a multicenter, randomized, double-blind dose titration study in ambulatory cancer patients. The sample comprised adult patients receiving a scheduled oral opioid regimen equivalent to 60-1000 mg oral morphine per day, who were experiencing at least one episode per day of breakthrough pain and had achieved at least partial relief of this pain by use of an oral opioid rescue dose. After collection of 2 days of baseline data concerning the efficacy of the usual rescue drug, patients were randomly treated with either 200 or 400 microg OTFC unit doses in double-blind fashion. Up to two breakthrough pains each day could be treated with up to four OTFC unit doses per pain. OTFC in unit doses containing 200, 400, 600, 800, 1200 or 1600 microg of fentanyl citrate were available for the study. The unit dose was titrated upward in steps until the patient had 2 consecutive days on which breakthrough pain could be treated with the single unit dose, titration was ineffective at a 1600 microg unit dose, or 20 days elapsed. To maintain the double-blind, orders to titrate up were ignored one-third of the time according to a pre-defined randomization schedule accessible only to an unblinded study pharmacist. Main outcome measures included, numeric or categorical measures of pain intensity, pain relief, and global assessment of drug performance. Dose response relationships were found suggesting that the methodology was sensitive to opioid effects. Seventy-four percent of patients were successfully titrated. There was no relationship between the total daily dose of the fixed schedule opioid regimen and the dose of OTFC required to manage the breakthrough pain. Although the study was not designed to provide a definitive comparison between OTFC and the usual rescue drug, exploratory analyses found that OTFC provided significantly greater analgesic effect at 15, 30 and 60 min, and a more rapid onset of effect, than the usual rescue drug. Adverse effects of the OTFC were typically opioid-related, specifically somnolence, nausea and dizziness. Very few adverse events were severe or serious. This study demonstrated the feasibility of controlled trial methodology in studies of breakthrough pain. OTFC appears to be a safe and effective therapy for breakthrough pain, and dose titration can usually identify a unit dose cap...