Interdisciplinary multimodal pain therapy (IMPT) is a biopsychosocial treatment approach for patients with chronic pain that comprises at least psychological and physiotherapeutic interventions. Core outcome sets (COSs) are currently developed in different medical fields to standardize and improve the selection of outcome domains, and measurement instruments in clinical trials, to make trial results meaningful, to pool trial results, and to allow indirect comparison between interventions. The objective of this study was to develop a COS of patient-relevant outcome domains for chronic pain in IMPT clinical trials. An international, multiprofessional panel (patient representatives [n = 5], physicians specialized in pain medicine [n = 5], physiotherapists [n = 5], clinical psychologists [n = 5], and methodological researchers [n = 5]) was recruited for a 3-stage consensus study, which consisted of a mixed-method approach comprising an exploratory systematic review, a preparing online survey to identify important outcome domains, a face-to-face consensus meeting to agree on COS domains, and a second online survey (Delphi) establishing agreement on definitions for the domains included. The panel agreed on the following 8 domains to be included into the COS for IMPT: pain intensity, pain frequency, physical activity, emotional wellbeing, satisfaction with social roles and activities, productivity (paid and unpaid, at home and at work, inclusive presentism and absenteeism), health-related quality of life, and patient's perception of treatment goal achievement. The complexity of chronic pain in a biopsychosocial context is reflected in the current recommendation and includes physical, mental, and social outcomes. In a subsequent step, measurement instruments will be identified via systematic reviews.

PRF treatment can be considered for the management of LRS patients. These results need to be confirmed in a randomized clinical trial.

PRF treatment of the DRG may be considered for patients with chronic, severe lumbosacral radicular pain refractory to conventional medical management.

Study Design. Multicenter double-blind randomized sham-controlled trial. Objective. To assess the efficacy of radiofrequency (RF) denervation of the cervical facet joints in chronic cervical facet joint pain. Summary of Background Data. One randomized controlled trial showed efficacy of RF denervation in whiplash-associated disease. There are no randomized controlled trials on RF denervation in patients with chronic cervical facet joint pain. Methods. Patients were randomized to receive RF denervation combined with bupivacaine (intervention group) or bupivacaine alone (control group). In the intervention group, an RF thermal lesion was made at the cervical medial branches after the injection of bupivacaine. The primary outcome was measured at 6 months and consisted of pain intensity, self-reported treatment effect, improvement on the Neck Disability Index, and the use of pain medication. Duration of effect was determined using telephone interviews. Results. We included 76 patients. In the intervention group, 55.6% showed > 30% pain decrease versus 51.3% in the control group (P = 0.711); 50.0% reported success on the Patients’ Global Impression of Change in the intervention group versus 41.0% (P = 0.435); the Neck Disability Index was 15.0 ± 8.7 in the intervention group compared with 16.5 ± 7.2 (P = 0.432), the need for pain medication did not differ significantly between groups (P = 0.461). The median time to end of treatment success for patients in the RF group was 42 months, compared with 12 months in the bupivacaine group (P = 0.014). Conclusions. We did not observe significant differences between RF denervation combined with injection of local anesthesia compared with local anesthesia only at 6 months follow-up. We found a difference in the long-term effect after 6 months follow-up in favor of the RF treatment. Level of Evidence: 2

Background and objectivesChronic pain affects many adults. To improve our daily practice, we need to understand multidisciplinary approaches, integrated treatment plans and the biopsychosocial context of these patients. To date, almost 15 000 chronic pain patients have been referred to the Maastricht University Pain Center in the Netherlands.MethodsThis study describes 11 214 of these patients suffering from chronic pain. Chronic pain was analyzed using relevant Initiative on Methods, Measurement, and Pain Assessment in Clinical Trials instruments.ResultsMost patients were female (59.3%). The prevalence of low education was 59%, and unemployment/disability was 35.9%. The mean age was 55.6 years. Severe pain (Numerical Rating Sale score 7–10) was reported by 71.9% of the patients; psychological and quality of life values deteriorated when pain severity increased. Approximately 36% of patients showed severe signs of depression or anxiety, and 39% displayed high pain catastrophizing. Of all patients, 17.8% reported high values for pain severity, catastrophizing and anxiety or depression.ConclusionsBased on baseline biopsychosocial values, this study shows the complexity of patients referred to pain centers. Pain management with a biopsychosocial approach in an integrated multidisciplinary setting is indispensable. Above all, adjusted education on chronic pain and attention to its biopsychosocial aspects are deemed necessary.