In September 2006, members of the Sex, Gender and Pain Special Interest Group of the International Association for the Study of Pain met to discuss the following: (1) what is known about sex and gender differences in pain and analgesia; (2) what are the "best practice" guidelines for pain research with respect to sex and gender; and (3) what are the crucial questions to address in the near future? The resulting consensus presented herein includes input from basic science, clinical and psychosocial pain researchers, as well as from recognized experts in sexual differentiation and reproductive endocrinology. We intend this document to serve as a utilitarian and thought-provoking guide for future research on sex and gender differences in pain and analgesia, both for those currently working in this field as well as those still wondering, "Do I really need to study females?" Keywords Sex differences; Gonadal hormones; Estrogens The case for studying sex and gender differences in pain and analgesiaThe pain field has moved from debating whether sex differences in pain exist to recognizing the importance of these differences. Attention is now directed toward understanding (1) what conditions lead to the expression of sex and gender differences in pain experience and reactivity, (2) what mechanisms underlie these differences, and (3) how these differences can inform clinical management of pain.As noted in a recent review, at least 79% of animal studies published in Pain over the preceding 10 years included male subjects only, with a mere 8% of studies on females only, and another 4% explicitly designed to test for sex differences (the rest did not specify) [142]. Given the substantially greater prevalence of many clinical pain conditions in women vs. men [20,199], and growing evidence for sex differences in sensitivity to experimental pain and to analgesics [21,41,213], we recommend that all pain researchers consider testing their hypotheses in both sexes, or if restricted by practical considerations, only in females. It is invalid to assume that data obtained in male subjects will generalize to females, and the best non-human model of the modal human pain sufferer -a woman -is a female animal. If only males are examined in a given study, it is important that a rationale for exclusion of females be provided and that the potential limitation in generalizability of the findings be addressed in the discussion, particularly when examining a pain phenomenon that occurs with greater prevalence or severity in females. In both preclinical and clinical studies, a comparison of both sexes will further our understanding of individual differences in sensitivity to pain and analgesia, thus improving our ability to treat and prevent pain in all people. General considerationsTwo issues of terminology are important. First, the term "sex" refers to biologically based differences, while the term "gender" refers to socially based phenomena. Although biological sex exerts a major influence on one's gender identity, sex and gender a...

Epidemiology is the study of the distribution, determinants, and natural history of disease in populations. Epidemiology has several uses in addition to its traditional role of documenting the public health significance of a condition. Notably, epidemiologic methods and data can be used to identify and verify causes of disease. This article reviews the epidemiologic data on pain in the temporomandibular region, and on signs and symptoms associated with specific subtypes of temporomandibular disorders, with the aim of identifying possible etiologic factors for these conditions that deserve further study. Despite methodologic and population differences, several consistencies are apparent in the epidemiologic literature.Pain in the temporomandibular region appears to be relatively common, occurring in approximately 10% of the population over age 18; it is primarily a condition of young and middle-aged adults, rather than of children or the elderly, and is approximately twice as common in women as in men. This prevalence pattern suggests that etiologic investigations should be directed at biologic and psychosocial factors that are more common in women than in men, and diminish in older age groups. Most signs and symptoms associated with particular temporomandibular disorders (e.g., joint sounds, pain in the joint) also appear to be more prevalent in women than in men, although age patterns for these signs and symptoms are not as clear as for temporomandibular pain. The available data highlight the need for further research on etiologic factors associated with temporomandibular pain and with specific diagnostic subtypes of temporomandibular disorders.Key words. Temporomandibular disorders, epidemiology, etiologic factors, sex factors, age factors. (I) Temporomandibular DisordersThe term "temporomandibular disorders" (or TMD) is a collective used to describe a group of musculoskeletal conditions occurring in the temporomandibular region (Laskin et al., 1983). These conditions are characterized by pain in the muscles of mastication, the temporomandibular joint, or both. In addition to report of ongoing pain, pain on palpation and/or pain on function may be present. Signs that frequently accompany the pain in clinic populations include joint sounds, such as clicking or crepitation, and limitations or deviation upon mandibular opening. The most common subtypes of temporomandibular disorders in clinic populations appear to be myofascial pain and arthralgia, followed by disc displacements with reduction (Truelove et al., 1992). Although epidemiologic research on specific subtypes of temporomandibular disorders is in its infancy, historically these conditions were considered part of a single disease entity, and were investigated as such. Therefore, of necessity, much of this review will cover epidemiologic research that investigated temporomandibular disorders more generically. Whenever possible, an attempt will be made to "tease apart" the findings of these investigations to provide data relevant to the specific ...

SynopsisWith a psychiatrist's standardized clinical diagnosis as the criterion, the ‘Mini-Mental State’ Examination (MMSE) was 87% sensitive and 82% specific in detecting dementia and delirium among hospital patients on a general medical ward. The false positive ratio was 39% and the false negative ratio was 5 %. All false positives had less than 9 years of education; many were 60 years of age or older. Performance on specific MMSE items was related to education or age. These findings confirm the MMSE's value as a screen instrument for dementia and delirium when later, more intensive diagnostic enquiry is possible; they reinforce earlier suggestions that the MMSE alone cannot yield a diagnosis for these conditions.

No abstract

Objectives We describe age and gender trends in long-term use of prescribed opioids for chronic noncancer pain in 2 large health plans. Methods Age- and gender-standardized incident (beginning in each year) and prevalent (ongoing) opioid use episodes were estimated with automated health care data from 1997 to 2005. Profiles of opioid use in 2005 by age and gender were also compared. Results From 1997 to 2005, age–gender groups exhibited a total percentage increase ranging from 16% to 87% for incident long-term opioid use and from 61% to 135% for prevalent long-term opioid use. Women had higher opioid use than did men. Older women had the highest prevalence of long-term opioid use (8%–9% in 2005). Concurrent use of sedative-hypnotic drugs and opioids was common, particularly among women. Conclusions Risks and benefits of long-term opioid use are poorly understood, particularly among older adults. Increased surveillance of the safety of long-term opioid use is needed in community practice settings.