Advertisement

Supportive Care in Cancer

, Volume 20, Issue 10, pp 2491–2500 | Cite as

Interviews with patients with advanced cancer—another step towards an international cancer pain classification system

  • Anne Kari KnudsenEmail author
  • Nina Aass
  • Ellen Heitzer
  • Pål Klepstad
  • Marianne Jensen Hjermstad
  • Walter Schippinger
  • Elisabeth Brenne
  • Stein Kaasa
  • Elisabet Wasteson
  • On behalf of the European Palliative Care Research Collaborative (EPCRC)
Original Article

Abstract

Purpose

Patients’ involvement in the development of assessment tools is recommended, and the European Palliative Care Research Collaborative has adhered to this when developing a shared language for cancer pain, an international assessment and classification system. Study objectives were to investigate how patients ranked the relevance of several previously identified pain domains, to investigate patients’ perception of the pain experience and to disclose additional, relevant pain domains for cancer pain classification to those identified in the literature.

Methods

Semistructured interviews with advanced cancer patients treated with opioids were performed and analysed verbatim. Patients scored the relevance of predefined pain domains on an 11-point Numerical Rating Scale.

Results

Thirty-three Norwegian and Austrian patients were included (16 females and 17 males); the mean age was 63 years, and the mean Karnofsky performance score was 65. The ranking of domains was as follows etiology (mean Numerical Rating Scale score, 8.5), duration (8.0), intensity (7.4), coping (7.1), physical (5.9) and psychological functioning (5.8). Sleep was identified as a new candidate domain to include in the system. The patients emphasised consequences of having pain, for example, poor physical functioning and psychological distress.

Conclusions

Previously identified pain domains were confirmed to be relevant to the patients; however, the ranking differed from the experts’ ranking. Sleep disturbances may be added as a domain in a future classification system.

Keywords

Cancer Classification Pain Palliative care Qualitative method PROs 

Notes

Acknowledgements

We would like to thank all the patients for their kind and generous sharing of thoughts and experiences.

Thanks to Bente Moldaunet for conscientious transcribing of the interviews and to Hanne Paltiel for proofreading the translated quotations.

Funding

This study was supported by the EU’s 6th framework, contract no. 037777, PI Stein Kaasa, and funding from Trondheim University Hospital, Norway. Anne Kari Knudsen received a grant from the Central Norway Regional Health Authority.

Conflict of interest

None of the authors have a relationship with any entities that have a financial interest in this topic.

The authors have full control of all primary data; the journal is allowed to review the data upon request.

References

  1. 1.
    Bender JL, Hohenadel J, Wong J, Katz J, Ferris LE, Shobbrook C, Warr D, Jadad AR (2008) What patients with cancer want to know about pain: a qualitative study. J Pain Symptom Manage 35:177–187PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Blazeby J, Sprangers M, Cull A, Groenvold M, Bottomley A (2008) The EORTC Quality of Life Group guidelines for module development http://groups.eortc.be/qol/downloads/200208module_development_guidelines.pdf. Accessed 02 December 2012
  3. 3.
    Bruera E, Kuehn N, Miller MJ, Selmser P, Macmillan K (1991) The Edmonton Symptom Assessment System (ESAS): a simple method for the assessment of palliative care patients. J Palliat Care 7:6–9PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bruera E, MacMillan K, Hanson J, MacDonald RN (1989) The Edmonton staging system for cancer pain: preliminary report. Pain 37:203–209PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Coyle N, Tickoo R (2007) Qualitative research: what this research paradigm has to offer to the understanding of pain. Pain Med 8:205–206PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    EPCRC (2011) The European Palliative Care Research Collaborative (EPCRC). http://www.epcrc.org Accessed 14 December 2011
  7. 7.
    Fainsinger RL, Nekolaichuk C, Lawlor P, Hagen N, Bercovitch M, Fisch M, Galloway L, Kaye G, Landman W, Spruyt O, Zhukovsky D, Bruera E, Hanson J (2010) An international multicentre validation study of a pain classification system for cancer patients. Eur J Cancer 46:2896–2904PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Fainsinger RL, Nekolaichuk CL (2008) A “TNM” classification system for cancer pain: The Edmonton Classification System for Cancer Pain (ECS-CP) Support Care CancerGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Fainsinger RL, Nekolaichuk CL, Lawlor PG, Neumann CM, Hanson J, Vigano A (2005) A multicenter study of the revised Edmonton Staging System for classifying cancer pain in advanced cancer patients. J Pain Symptom Manage 29:224–237PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Fayers PM (2007) Developing a quationnaire Quality of Life The assessment, analysis and interpretation of patient-reported outcomes. Wiley, West Sussex, pp 55–58Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Fayers PM, Hjermstad MJ, Ranhoff AH, Kaasa S, Skogstad L, Klepstad P, Loge JH (2005) Which Mini-Mental State Exam items can be used to screen for delirium and cognitive impairment? J Pain Symptom Manage 30:41–50PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    FDA (2006) Guidance for industry: patient-reported outcome measures: use in medical product development to support labeling claims: draft guidance. Health Qual Life Outcomes 4:79CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Folstein MF, Folstein SE, McHugh PR (1975) Mini-mental state. A practical method for grading the cognitive state of patients for the clinician. J Psychiatr Res 12:189–198PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Giorgi A (1985) Sketch of a psychological phenomenological method. In: Giorgi A (ed) Phenomenology and psychological research. Dusquesne University Press, Pittsburgh, pp 8–22Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Hjermstad MJ, Fainsinger R, Kaasa S (2009) Assessment and classification of cancer pain. Curr Opin Support Palliat Care 3:24–30PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Hjermstad MJ, Gibbins J, Haugen DF, Caraceni A, Loge JH, Kaasa S (2008) Pain assessment tools in palliative care: an urgent need for consensus. Palliat Med 22:895–903PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Holen JC, Hjermstad MJ, Loge JH, Fayers PM, Caraceni A, De CF, Forbes K, Furst CJ, Radbruch L, Kaasa S (2006) Pain assessment tools: is the content appropriate for use in palliative care? J Pain Symptom Manage 32:567–580PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Hwang SS, Chang VT, Fairclough DL, Kasimis B (2002) Development of a cancer pain prognostic scale. J Pain Symptom Manage 24:366–378PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    IASP International Association for the Study of Pain http://www.iasp-pain.org/Content/NavigationMenu/GeneralResourceLinks/PainDefinitions/default.htm Accessed 13 December 2011
  20. 20.
    Knudsen AK, Aass N, Fainsinger R, Caraceni A, Klepstad P, Jordhoy M, Hjermstad MJ, Kaasa S (2009) Classification of pain in cancer patients—a systematic literature review. Palliat Med 23:295–308PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Kaasa S (2010) An international multicentre validation study of a pain classification system for cancer patients. Eur J Cancer 46:2865–2866PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Kaasa S, Loge JH, Fayers P, Caraceni A, Strasser F, Hjermstad MJ, Higginson I, Radbruch L, Haugen DF (2008) Symptom assessment in palliative care: a need for international collaboration. J Clin Oncol 26:3867–3873PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Laugsand EA, Jakobsen G, Kaasa S, Klepstad P (2010) Inadequate symptom control in advanced cancer patients across Europe Support Care CancerGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Malterud K (2001) Qualitative research: standards, challenges, and guidelines. Lancet 358:483–488PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Merskey H, Bogduk N (1994) International Association for the Study of Pain: Classification of Chronic Pain. IASP Press, SeattleGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Mystakidou K, Tsilika E, Parpa E, Katsouda E, Galanos A, Vlahos L (2006) Psychological distress of patients with advanced cancer: influence and contribution of pain severity and pain interference. Cancer Nurs 29:400–405PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Nekolaichuk CL, Fainsinger RL, Lawlor PG (2005) A validation study of a pain classification system for advanced cancer patients using content experts: the Edmonton Classification System for Cancer. Pain Palliat Med 19:466–476CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    NICE National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence. http://www.nice.org.uk/. Accessed 20 June 2011
  29. 29.
    Patton MQ (2002) Qualitative designs and data collection: qualitative research and evaluation methods. Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, pp 242–246Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Patton MQ (2002) Qualitative interviewing. In: Patton MQ (ed) Qualitative research and evaluation methods. Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, pp 344–347Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Patton MQ (2002) Qualitative Research and Evaluation Methods. Sage Publications, Thousand OaksGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Portenoy RK, Lesage P (1999) Management of cancer pain. Lancet 353:1695–1700PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Reid CM, Gooberman-Hill R, Hanks GW (2008) Opioid analgesics for cancer pain: symptom control for the living or comfort for the dying? A qualitative study to investigate the factors influencing the decision to accept morphine for pain caused by cancer. Ann Oncol 19:44–48PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Sandelowski M (1995) Sample size in qualitative research. Res Nurs Health 18:179–183PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Sharma N, Hansen CH, O’Connor M, Walker J, Kleiboer A, Murray G, Espie C, Storey D, Sharpe M (2011) Sleep problems in cancer patients: prevalence and association with distress and pain Psychooncology Jul 1. [Epub ahead of print]Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Snyder CF, Aaronson NK (2009) Use of patient-reported outcomes in clinical practice. Lancet 374:369–370PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Sprangers MA, Cull A, Groenvold M, Bjordal K, Blazeby J, Aaronson NK (1998) The European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer approach to developing questionnaire modules: an update and overview. EORTC Qual Life Stud Group Qual Life Res 7:291–300Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Sutton LM, Porter LS, Keefe FJ (2002) Cancer pain at the end of life: a biopsychosocial perspective. Pain 99:5–10PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Watanabe S, Nekolaichuk C, Beaumont C, Mawani A (2009) The Edmonton symptom assessment system—what do patients think? Support Care Cancer 17:675–683PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Anne Kari Knudsen
    • 1
    • 7
    Email author
  • Nina Aass
    • 2
    • 3
  • Ellen Heitzer
    • 4
  • Pål Klepstad
    • 5
    • 6
  • Marianne Jensen Hjermstad
    • 1
    • 3
  • Walter Schippinger
    • 4
  • Elisabeth Brenne
    • 1
    • 7
  • Stein Kaasa
    • 1
    • 7
  • Elisabet Wasteson
    • 1
    • 8
  • On behalf of the European Palliative Care Research Collaborative (EPCRC)
  1. 1.European Palliative Care Research Centre, Department of Cancer Research and Molecular Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, NTNU, 3.etg. BevegelseTrondheim University HospitalTrondheimNorway
  2. 2.Faculty of MedicineUniversity of OsloOsloNorway
  3. 3.Regional Center for Excellence in Palliative CareOslo University HospitalOsloNorway
  4. 4.Division of Palliative Medicine, Department of Internal MedicineMedical University of GrazGrazAustria
  5. 5.Department of Circulation and Medical ImagingFaculty of MedicineTrondheimNorway
  6. 6.Department of Anesthesiology and Emergency Medicine, Intensive Care UnitTrondheim University HospitalTrondheimNorway
  7. 7.Department of OncologyTrondheim University HospitalTrondheimNorway
  8. 8.Division of Psychology, Department of Social SciencesMid Sweden UniversityÖstersundSweden

Personalised recommendations