Introduction: Opioid treatment may affect endocrine measures in humans either through centrally or peripherally mediated mechanisms. There is a general lack of longitudinal studies examining endocrine measures in opioid-treated patients. Objectives: To longitudinally follow the levels of select endocrine measures in men and women with head and neck cancer for 1 year, who after having completed radiotherapy began tapering opioids. Methods: This was a prospective, longitudinal, observational study. Testosterone and estradiol were measured in men and women, respectively. Follicle-stimulating hormone (FSH), luteinizing hormone (LH), dehydroepiandrosterone sulfate (DHEAS), and prolactin were measured in both sexes. Women were grouped based on if premenopausal or postmenopausal. Samples were collected when opioid tapering started and at 1, 3, 6, and 12 months after tapering start. Daily opioid doses at the same time points were registered. Results: Twenty-five men and 12 women were followed for 12 months. In men, testosterone levels increased significantly during the first month after opioid tapering started (P < 0.001). Levels of testosterone, FSH, DHEAS, and prolactin changed significantly in men during the study period. A moderate correlation between opioid dose reduction and testosterone level increase in men aged <= 60 years was found (r(s) = -0.577, 95% CI -0.854 to -0.044, P = 0.039). In postmenopausal women (n = 10), levels of FSH and LH changed significantly during the study period. Conclusion: Previously known effects of opioids on endocrine measures in humans seem to be reversible as select endocrine measures changed significantly in men and postmenopausal women after opioid tapering was initiated.

Objectives: Physical inactivity is a global health concern and a significant problem among chronic pain patients. They often experience pain flare-ups when they try to increase their physical activity level. Most research on the relationship between pain sensitivity and physical activity has been on healthy participants. Data on chronic pain patients are lacking. Using cuff pressure algometry, this study investigated tonic cuff pressure pain sensitivity and its associations to self-reported physical activity and other patient-reported outcomes in chronic pain patients.Methods: Chronic pain patients (n=78) were compared to healthy controls (n=98). Multivariate data analysis was used to investigate the associations between tonic cuff pressure pain sensitivity, physical activity, and other patient-reported outcome measures.Results: The three most important variables for group discrimination were perceived health status (EQVAS: p(corr)=-0.85, i.e., lower in patients), depression (HADS-D: p(corr)=0.81, i.e., higher in patients), and the tonic cuff pressure pain sensitivity variable maximum pain intensity (VAS-peak-arm: p(corr)=0.75, i.e., higher in patients). In patients, the most important predictors for high VAS-peak-arm were female sex (p(corr)=-0.75), higher number of painful regions (p(corr)=0.72), higher pain intensity (p(corr)=0.55), followed by lower level of self-reported physical activity (p(corr)=-0.39). VAS-peak-arm in patients correlated negatively with self-reported physical activity (rho=-0.28, p=0.018).Conclusions: Physical activity may be the most important patient-changeable variable correlating to pain sensitivity. This study highlights the importance of more research to further understand how increased physical activity may decrease pain sensitivity in chronic pain patients.

Depression and anxiety are highly prevalent in chronic pain. Clinicians often interpret depression/anxiety as consequences of chronic pain, but some psychiatrists contend that the consequence hypothesis is overrated and that psychiatric symptoms in pain patients should be understood as part of the psychiatric disease. In this overview, the potential bidirectional nature of the relationship between chronic pain and depression/anxiety is discussed on a conceptual level. Two additional possible ways of understanding the relationship are presented: psychological vulnerability can be a risk factor for the chronification of pain, and an underlying mild chronic pain can be exacerbated when the patient encounters a new psychosocial stressor. In clinical practice, it is important not to get stuck in a fruitless chase for a causal understanding. However, it is of great value for clinicians to reflect upon the complexity and dynamic nature of the relationship between pain and depression/anxiety.

Enligt den nyantagna elfte versionen av International Classification of Diseases (ICD-11), som ännu inte översatts till svenska, definieras långvarig smärta som ihållande eller återkommande smärta med mer än 3 månaders varaktighet [1]. Denna tidsgräns är numera väl etablerad inom smärtforskarkollektivet, även om 6 månader ibland också anges [2]. Någon absolut tidsgräns föreligger förstås inte, utan poängen är att termen »långvarig smärta« begripliggör att smärta inte enbart är ett kortvarigt fenomen som beror på en akut vävnadsskada utan att smärta också kan bestå under lång tid – även när en initial skada har läkt ut som den ska. Ett annat sätt att uttrycka det är att smärta inte enbart är ett symtom, utan tämligen ofta i stället kan vara en sjukdom i sig. Enkelt uttryckt: även smärtsinnet kan bli sjukt [3]. Detta sätt att tänka går på tvärs mot allmänhetens intuitiva sätt att tänka om smärta, och det är ett stort problem att tanken på smärta som liktydig med vävnadsskada fortfarande verkar dominera även bland sjukvårdspersonal. Smärta är ett mångfasetterat fenomen, och det är viktigt att sjukvårdspersonal inte har ett stereotypt förhållningssätt utan förmår utföra en smärtanalys som tar hänsyn till smärtans många skepnader [4-11]. Dikotomin akut/långvarig må vara simpel, men för klinisk praxis har den ändå påtagliga praktiska implikationer, till exempel gällande indikationen för att förskriva opioider [4]. Ungefär var femte vuxen är drabbad av påtaglig långvarig smärta [2, 12, 13].

Pain is a symptom that can be associated with dangerous diseases such as cancer. Hence, to avoid delay in diagnosis of an underlying serious condition, it is important to be thorough when assessing pain. However, all pains are not symptoms of an underlying disease. Instead, many chronic pain conditions can be viewed as diseases in their own right. Indeed, sometimes the pain is the disease - such is for instance the case for fibromyalgia, painless fibromyalgia being a contradiction in terms. The new classification of chronic pain conditions according to the eleventh version of International Classification of Diseases (ICD-11) is presented and discussed. It is argued that the classification makes pain medicine visible as an academic discipline; that it may contribute to a legitimization process in which the suffering of pain patients is recognized semantically and taxonomically; and that it opens up new research possibilities in the chronic pain field.

Det är ofta fruktbart att se på långvarig smärta som en sjukdom i sig snarare än som ett symtom: även smärtsinnet kan bli sjukt.

Den elfte versionen av International classification of diseases (ICD-11) antogs av WHO 2019, och översättning till svenska pågår.

ICD-11 innehåller en ny klassifikation av olika långvariga smärttillstånd.

ObjectivesDespite the number of people affected by chronic back pain, and the many available treatment options, even the best modalities provide limited pain reduction on a group level, often without simultaneous improvements in functioning or health-related quality of life. The objective was to provide an overview of the treatment of chronic back pain in clinical practice at a multidisciplinary pain centre, and to study patient and pain characteristics in different treatment groups.Methods104 chronic back pain patients (primary ICD-10-SE-diagnosis M53.0-M54.9 excluding M54.1 and M54.3), referred to the Pain and Rehabilitation Centre, University Hospital, Linkoping in 2015, were studied using data from the Swedish Quality Registry for Pain Rehabilitation, self-reported medication data, and a retrospective medical record review.ResultsThe following treatment groups were identified: rehabilitation (n=21), analgesics (n=33), invasive intervention (n=14), and no treatment (n=35). Significant differences between groups were found with regards to age, sick leave, education level, persisting pain duration, punishing responses by significant other, previous invasive intervention, receiving sub-clinic, physician speciality and referring care level.ConclusionsOverall, patient demographics were associated with treatment strategy to a higher degree than patient-reported outcome measures. Moreover, physician speciality and organisational factors seemed to play a role in treatment choice.

Neuropathic pain (NP) is a chronic pain condition resulting from a lesion or disease in the somatosensory nervous system. The aim of this study was to investigate the metabolome in plasma from patients with chronic peripheral, posttraumatic/postsurgical NP compared to healthy controls. Further, we aimed to investigate the correlation between pain intensity and the metabolome in plasma. The metabolic profile in plasma samples from 16 patients with chronic NP and 12 healthy controls was analyzed using a nuclear magnetic resonance spectroscopy method. Information about pain intensity, pain duration, body mass index (BMI), age, sex, and blood pressure were obtained through a questionnaire and clinical examination. Multivariate data analysis was used to identify metabolites significant for group separation and their correlation with pain intensity and duration, BMI, and age. We found 50 out of 326 features in plasma significantly contributing to group discrimination between NP and controls. Several of the metabolites that significantly differed were involved in inflammatory processes, while others were important for central nervous system functioning and neural signaling. There was no correlation between pain intensity and levels of metabolite in NP. These findings indicate that there seems to be peripheral/systemic differences in the metabolic profile between patients with chronic NP and healthy individuals.

Opioids are an essential category of medicines, and opiophobia should therefore be shunned. However, it is also important to avoid opiocentrism, i.e., the phenomenon of giving an unduly central place to opioids in the practice of pain medicine. To find a way between these two extremes, it is essential to do a thorough pain assessment and a risk analysis. In this paper, the question of how to best prescribe opioids is related to a "Pain Analysis 3×3" framework in which 3 areas, each consisting of 3 points, are discussed: 1) Is the pain acute, chronic, or cancer-related? 2) Is the pain nociceptive, neuropathic, or nociplastic? 3) Have biological, psychological and social/contextual aspects been taken into consideration (the bio-psycho-social model of pain)? Chronic nociplastic pain conditions such as e.g. fibromyalgia, irritable bowel syndrome or "unspecific" back pain are generally unsuitable for treatment with opioids.

Leadership issues seem to be strangely absent from discussions about what good doctoral supervision is. The purpose of this paper is to explore the concept of doctoral supervision as a form of leadership, with special reference to the university hospital setting. From a personal reflective practice point of view, James Kouzes and Barry Posner's The Five Practices of Exemplary Leadership® Model is used as a lens through which Anne Lee’s concepts of doctoral research supervision are viewed. Four out of five of Lee’s concepts seem to be leadership-related, when viewed from the perspective of Kouzes & Posner, namely “enculturation”, “critical thinking”, “emancipation”, and “relationship development”. The fifth concept, “functional”, can instead be viewed to reflect managerial skills. Hence, it seems meaningful to view doctoral supervision as a form of leadership. The present concept paper should be viewed as hypothesis-generating, and future studies should examine the proposed hypothesis in a more in-depth fashion, using appropriate empirical methodologies and not as in the present paper mere practice-based reflections.