Pain Research

14,000,000 Leading Edge Experts on the ideXlab platform

Scan Science and Technology

Contact Leading Edge Experts & Companies

Scan Science and Technology

Contact Leading Edge Experts & Companies

The Experts below are selected from a list of 182679 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform

Stephen Butler - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

James H. Mcauley - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • Low back Pain Research priorities: a survey of primary care practitioners.
    BMC family practice, 2007
    Co-Authors: Nicholas Henschke, Christopher G. Maher, Kathryn M. Refshauge, Anurina Das, James H. Mcauley
    Abstract:

    Background Despite the large amount of time and money which has been devoted to low back Pain Research, successful management remains an elusive goal and low back Pain continues to place a large burden on the primary care setting. One reason for this may be that the priorities for Research are often developed by Researchers and funding bodies, with little consideration of the needs of primary care practitioners. This study aimed to determine the Research priorities of primary care practitioners who manage low back Pain on a day-to-day basis.

Rollin M. Gallagher - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • VHA Pain Research Working Group and VHA Pain Care.
    Journal of rehabilitation research and development, 2016
    Co-Authors: Rollin M. Gallagher
    Abstract:

    This important special issue of the Journal of Rehabilitation Research & Development (JRRD) documents the steady progress of the Veterans Health Administration (VHA) in promoting and supporting Pain Research. As described by Drs. Kerns and Heapy in their Editorial [1], the development of the VHA's Pain Research enterprise has evolved over many years, with a particular focus on understanding the factors, including combined treatments, that affect the course and outcome of Pain care for Veterans and inform clinical policy. The articles herein provide a sample of the breadth and sophistication of the VHA Pain Research enterprise in several domains: observational studies that help us understand the biopsychosocial factors influencing the development and perpetuation of chronic Pain and Pain treatment outcomes in Veterans with chronic Pain and its comorbidities, such as posttraumatic stress disorder; investigations of the effects of exercise on Pain sensitivity; and studies of the efficacy of multimodal treatments, e.g., combining exercise with medications to improve physical capacity. An important nidus of the VHA's effort lies in the Pain Research Working Group (PRWG), led by Dr. Kerns, which has met by telephone monthly for many years and in face-to-face meetings in several venues. These meetings have served to enable dialog between officials from the VHA's Office of Research Development (ORD) with Pain investigators, to introduce new investigators to the VHA Pain Research enterprise, and to foster collaborations among VHA investigators and Research centers. Meetings of the PRWG in several retreats and, in recent years, at the yearly Health Services Research & Development (HSR&D) meetings have enabled the interpersonal connectivity so critical to social networking in the development of a multicenter Research enterprise. As an example, the VHA Center for Healthcare Equity Research and Promotion based at my VHA institution, the Philadelphia Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Medical Center, supported a PRWG retreat chaired by Dr. Kerns in 2005, when I was new to the VHA, that led to my connection to VHA's Rehabilitation Research & Development Service (RR&D) and my subsequent Research, education, and policy work with the Department of Defense and with several VHA investigators. The RR&D-sponsored Pain state-of-the-art Research conference in September 2007, focusing on Veterans of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and chaired by Dr. Kerns, led to a special issue on VHA Pain Research in Pain Medicine in 2009, co-edited by Dr. Kerns and Pain Research leader Dr. Steve Dobscha from Oregon [2]. Dr. Kerns' extraordinary leadership in encouraging, sustaining, and expanding VHA Pain Research over these many years, which has been strongly supported by Dr. Kusiak and VHA ORD as well as VHA Central Office leadership, has been accompanied by a steady growth in the Pain Research enterprise throughout VHA. A recent highlight is the HSR&D-funded Center of Innovation (COIN) at the VA Connecticut Healthcare System, called the Pain Research, Informatics, Multi-Morbidities, and Education (PRIME) Center led by Drs. Kerns, Heapy, and others, which convenes Research experts from around VHA to focus on Pain Research and complements other VHA centers that, although not exclusively devoted to Pain Research, have developed important Pain Research programs. Of particular note is Research at the primary care level that has provided support for the Stepped Care Model [3-8]. Following the COIN award, Dr. Kerns' administrative leadership of the National VHA Pain Management Program Office naturally evolved to his present position as Special Advisor for Pain Research to our office, which involves his participation in our weekly Pain management office meetings and frequent presentations by members of the PRWG. This regular communication conveys several key benefits to VHA Pain Research. …

David A. Asch - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • Obtaining informed consent for clinical Pain Research: patients' concerns and information needs
    Pain, 2001
    Co-Authors: David Casarett, Jason Karlawish, Pamela Sankar, Karen B. Hirschman, David A. Asch
    Abstract:

    Investigators who conduct clinical Pain Research are required to obtain voluntary informed consent from patients. However, little is known about what information patients expect when they decide whether to enroll in such studies. It is important that investigators understand these information needs so they can effectively and clearly describe the Research risks and potential benefits that matter to potential subjects. By understanding these needs for information, investigators may also be better able to anticipate patients' concerns and to recruit subjects more efficiently. This study was designed to define information needs that patients have when they decide whether to participate in clinical Pain Research. This paper describes these information needs, and identifies clinical and demographic variables associated with specific needs.

  • Obtaining informed consent for clinical Pain Research: patients' concerns and informational needs. (University of Pennsylvania Center for Bioethics, Philadelphia, PA) Pain. 2001;92:71–79.
    Pain Practice, 2001
    Co-Authors: David Casarett, Jason Karlawish, Pamela Sankar, Karen B. Hirschman, David A. Asch
    Abstract:

    Investigators who conduct Pain Research are required to obtain voluntary informed consent from patients. However, little is known about what information patients expect when they decide whether to enroll in such studies. It is important that the investigators understand the need for information so that they can effectively and clearly describe the Research risks and potential benefits that matter to the potential subjects. This study was designed to define information needs that patients have when they decide whether to participate in clinical Pain Research and identified clinical and demographic variables associate with specific needs.

Jianren Mao - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • Profiles of Urine Drug Test in Clinical Pain Patients vs Pain Research Study Subjects
    Pain medicine (Malden Mass.), 2016
    Co-Authors: Cheng-ting Lee, Jianren Mao, Abigail S. Cohen, Shihab U. Ahmed, Yi Zhang, Lucy Chen
    Abstract:

    Objective. To examine similarities and differences in urine drug test (UDT) results in clinical Pain patients and Pain subjects participating in Pain Research studies. Design. An observational study with retrospective chart review and data analysis. Methods. We analyzed 1,874 UDT results obtained from 1) clinical Pain patients (Clinical Group; n = 1,529) and 2) Pain subjects consented to participate in Pain Research studies (Research Group; n = 345). Since several medications such as opioids used in Pain management are drugs of abuse (DOA) and can result in a positive UDT, we specifically identified those cases of positive UDT due to nonprescribed DOA and designated these cases as positive UDT with DOA (PUD). Results. We found that 1) there was a higher rate of PUD in clinical Pain patients (41.3%) than in Pain Research study subjects (14.8%); 2) although subjects in the Research Group were informed ahead of time that UDT will be conducted as a screening test, a substantial number (14.8%) of Pain Research study subjects still showed PUD; 3) there were different types of DOA between clinical Pain patients (cannabinoids as the top DOA) and Research study subjects (cocaine as the top DOA); and 4) a common factor associated with PUD was opioid therapy in both Clinical Group and Research Group. Conclusion. These results support previous findings that PUD is a common finding in clinical Pain patients, particularly in those prescribed opioid therapy, and we suggest that UDT be used as routine screening testing in Pain Research studies.

  • Current challenges in translational Pain Research
    Trends in pharmacological sciences, 2012
    Co-Authors: Jianren Mao
    Abstract:

    The current gap between basic science Research and the development of new analgesics presents a serious challenge for the future of Pain medicine. This challenge is particularly difficult in the search for better treatment for comorbid chronic Pain conditions because: (i) animal 'Pain' models do not simulate multidimensional clinical Pain conditions; (ii) animal behavioral testing does not assess subjective Pain experience; (iii) preclinical data provide little assurance regarding the direction of new analgesic development; and (iv) clinical trials routinely use over-sanitized study populations and fail to capture the multidisciplinary consequences of comorbid chronic Pain. Therefore, a paradigm shift in translational Pain Research is necessary to transform the current strategy from focusing on molecular switches of nociception to studying Pain as a system-based integral response that includes psychosocial comorbidities. Several key issues of translational Pain Research are discussed in this review.

  • Translational Pain Research: Achievements and Challenges
    The journal of pain : official journal of the American Pain Society, 2009
    Co-Authors: Jianren Mao
    Abstract:

    Abstract The achievements in both preclinical and clinical Pain Research over the past 4 decades have led to significant progress in clinical Pain management. However, Pain Research still faces enormous challenges and there remain many obstacles in the treatment of clinical Pain, particularly chronic Pain. Translational Pain Research needs to involve a number of important areas including: 1) bridging the gap between Pain Research and clinical Pain management; 2) developing objective Pain-assessment tools; 3) analyzing current theories of Pain mechanisms and their relevance to clinical Pain; 4) exploring new tools for both preclinical and clinical Pain Research; and 5) coordinating Research efforts among basic scientists, clinical investigators, and Pain-medicine practitioners. These issues are discussed in this article in light of the achievements and challenges of translational Pain Research. Perspective The subjective nature of clinical Pain calls for innovative Research approaches. As translational Pain Research emerges as an important field in Pain medicine, it will play a unique role in improving clinical Pain management through coordinated bidirectional Research approaches between bedside and bench.

Pain Research - 15 days free trial to Access Experts & Abstracts