METHODS: This was a cross-sectional study conducted over a period of 18 months. A self-administered questionnaire assessing knowledge and perception regarding neonatal pain was used.

RESULTS: Twenty-four hospitals participated in the study, with 423 respondents. The response rate was 85%. One hundred and ninety-seven respondents (47%) were aware of tools for neonatal pain assessment, but only 6% used them in daily practice. Doctors with >4 years of experience in neonatal care had better awareness of available pain assessment tools (59.4% vs 40.9%, P = 0.001). Sixteen statements regarding knowledge were assessed. Mean score obtained was 10.5 ± 2.5. Consultants/specialists obtained a higher mean score than medical officers (11.9 vs 10.4, P < 0.001). More than 80% of respondents were able to discriminate painful from non-painful procedures.

AIM: The main aim of the present study was to design a new tool called neck pain functional limitation scale (NPFLS) for measuring disability related to neck pain and observe its reliability, concurrent validity and criterion validity.

SETTING AND DESIGN: This study was performed at the institutional hospital.

MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 157 subjects (neck pain group) and 25 control subjects (control group) without neck pain were recruited for this study. NPFLS was framed as a new tool for this study, which consisted of 5 domains - pain intensity, activities of daily living, social activities, functional activities and psychological factors. Neck Bournemouth questionnaire (NBQ) was used as a gold standard to measure the concurrent validity and criterion validity of the NPFLS.

STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Criterion validity and concurrent validity between the neck Bournemouth questionnaire (NBQ) and NPFLS scores were tested statistically using Mann-Whitney U test and Spearman correlation test. The reliability was tested by examining the internal consistency to calculate the Cronbach's alpha value for each item in NPFLS.

RESULTS: No significant difference between NPFLS and NBQ was observed using Mann-Whitney U Test, with P value greater than 0.05 (P= 0.557). Besides that, NPFLS had a high concurrent validity (r= 0.916) and good internal consistency with high Cronbach's alpha value of (r= 0.948), which demonstrated strong correlation between the items of NPFLS and NBQ.

METHODS: This was a prospective, randomised controlled trial. We recruited diabetic patients aged > 18 years, American Society of Anesthesiologists class II-III, who were scheduled for unilateral diabetic foot surgery below the knee. All patients were assessed for autonomic dysfunction using the Survey of Autonomic Symptoms score. Participants were randomly assigned to receive either PNB or SAB for the surgery. Hemodynamic data, including usage of vasopressors, were recorded at 5-min intervals for up to 1 h after the induction of anesthesia. Pain scores were recorded postoperatively, and follow-up was done via telephone 6 months later.

RESULTS: Compared to the PNB group, the SAB group had a larger number of patients with significant hypotension (14 vs. 1; p = 0.001) and more patients who required vasopressor boluses (6 vs. 0 patients). Compared to SAB group, the patients in the PNB group had a longer postoperative pain-free duration (9 vs. 4.54 h; p = 0.002) and lower pain scores 1 day after surgery (3.63 vs. 4.69; p = 0.01).

CONCLUSION: Peripheral nerve block should be considered, whenever possible, as the first option of anesthesia for lower limb surgery in diabetic patients as it provides hemodynamic stability and superior postoperative pain control compared to SAB.

DESIGN: Real-world, prospective, multicentre, observational, phase IV study.

SETTING: 13 tertiary-care hospital sites across the Philippines, Thailand, Malaysia and Singapore.

PARTICIPANTS: Adult patients aged 18-80 years prescribed TRAM/DKP FDC for the short-term (up to 5 days) treatment of moderate-to-severe acute pain.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Primary endpoints were the proportion of patients prescribed TRAM/DKP FDC with different types of postsurgical and non-surgical treatments, and the average dosing frequency and duration of TRAM/DKP FDC treatment. Secondary endpoints were the proportion of patients achieving ≥30% pain reduction at 8 hours post the first dose (pain severity was assessed using the 11-point Numeric Pain Rating Scale); patient satisfaction at the end of treatment (based on a 5-point Patient Global Evaluation Scale (PGE)) and safety including the incidence of adverse drug reactions (ADRs).

RESULTS: Among 599 patients (median age 44 years, 61.3% female) enrolled in this study, 68.61% (n=411) were postsurgical and 31.39% (n=188) were non-surgical patients. TRAM/DKP FDC was prescribed in a diverse group of postsurgical patients (eg, orthopaedic, general and cancer surgery) as well as in non-surgical conditions (eg, lower back pain and musculoskeletal pain). In the majority of patients, TRAM/DKP FDC was prescribed every 8 hours (65.94%) and for 5 days (78.80%). There was a significant reduction in pain intensity throughout the study and 65% of patients achieved ≥30% pain reduction from baseline at 8 hours post the first dose of TRAM/DKP FDC on day 1. 95.69% of patients were satisfied with the treatment (rated good, very good and excellent on the PGE scale). Overall, 13.9% of patients reported ADRs; most were mild to moderate in severity. The most common ADRs were nausea, vomiting and dizziness.