Table of Contents Author Guidelines Submit a Manuscript
Pain Research and Treatment
Volume 2017 (2017), Article ID 8402413, 11 pages
https://doi.org/10.1155/2017/8402413
Research Article

Interventional Pain Management in Multidisciplinary Chronic Pain Clinics: A Prospective Multicenter Cohort Study with One-Year Follow-Up

1Department of Biomedicine, Faculty of Medicine, University of Porto, Porto, Portugal
2Chronic Pain Center-Anesthesiology Department, Centro Hospitalar do Porto, Porto, Portugal
3National Observatory for Pain (NOPain), Porto, Portugal
4Institute for Molecular and Cell Biology (IBMC), University of Porto, Porto, Portugal
5Department of Community Medicine, Information and Health Decision Sciences (MEDCIDS), Faculty of Medicine, University of Porto, Porto, Portugal
6Centre for Health Technology and Services Research (CINTESIS), University of Porto, Porto, Portugal

Correspondence should be addressed to Cláudia Gouvinhas

Received 18 April 2017; Accepted 18 July 2017; Published 15 October 2017

Academic Editor: Robert L. Barkin

Copyright © 2017 Cláudia Gouvinhas et al. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Abstract

Background. Interventional Pain Management (IPM) is performed in multidisciplinary chronic pain clinics (MCPC), including a range of invasive techniques to diagnose and treat chronic pain (CP) conditions. Current patterns of use of those techniques in MCPC have not yet been reported. Objective. We aimed to describe quantitatively and qualitatively the use of IPM and other therapeutic procedures performed on-site at four Portuguese MCPC. Methods. A prospective cohort study with one-year follow-up was performed in adult patients. A structured case report form was systematically completed at baseline and six and 12 months. Results. Among 808 patients referred to the MCPC, 17.2% had been prescribed IPM. Patients with IPM were on average younger and had longer CP duration and lower levels of maximum pain and pain interference/disability. The three main diagnoses were low back pain (), postoperative CP, and knee pain ( each). From 195 IPM prescribed, nerve blocks (), radiofrequency (), and viscosupplementation () were the most prevalent. Some IPM techniques were only available in few MCPC. One MCPC did not provide IPM. Conclusions. IPM are seldom prescribed in Portuguese MCPC. Further studies on IPM safety and effectiveness are necessary for clear understanding the role of these techniques in CP management.