PROGRAM PROFILE

Nonopioid Alternatives to Addressing Pain Intensity: A Retrospective Look at 2 Noninvasive Pain Treatment Devices

Author and Disclosure Information

 

References

In the context of the opioid crisis, the availability of effective nonopioid, nonpharmacologic, noninvasive treatments for chronic pain is needed. The Joint Commission recently expanded its pain management guidelines to support hospitals offering nonpharmacologic pain treatments.23 Integrating AS-M, LTO, or similar products into standard pain management practices allows for other treatment pathways with positive outcomes for providers and patients. The Joint Commission also recommends an interdisciplinary approach, defined as a process whereby health care professionals from different disciplines collaborate to diagnose and treat patients experiencing difficult pain conditions. This approach facilitates multimodal management because these disciplines contribute knowledge about a variety of treatment options. Devices such AS-M and LTO are well suited to interdisciplinary pain management because they are not seen as being under the purview of a specific health care specialty.

Limitations

Our findings are limited because they are derived from a retrospective, quality improvement evaluation of outcomes from a single clinic. Findings must be considered in the context of the relatively small samples of veterans. Because analyses were conducted as part of a quality improvement effort, veterans were offered a specific device based on clinical indications, there were no comparisons between devices, and there was no comparison group. Although most participants were using medication and other treatments as part of their pain treatment plan, all reported continued pain intensity before use of a device. Analyses did not control for variation in treatments received concurrently. Last, the logs used to collect self-report data on daily pain and relaxation levels were not validated.

The data highlight a clear need for research to better understand the long-term effects of these devices as well as the characteristics of patients who respond best to each device. Noninvasive treatments for pain often are dismissed as placebos. Rigorously designed, controlled studies will help demonstrate that these devices offer a statistically significant benefit beyond any placebo effect.

Conclusion

Understanding of chronic pain and its treatment will continue to evolve. It is clear that each person dealing with chronic pain requires a tailored combination of treatments and multimodal approaches, which is more effective than any single treatment. Nonpharmacologic, noninvasive devices pose fewer risks and seem to be more effective in reducing pain intensity than traditional treatments, including medications or surgical intervention. In light of the current emphasis on evidence-based health care and as the evidence for the effectiveness of noninvasive pain devices modalities grows, it is likely that treatments incorporating modalities such as MET, CES, and LLLT will become common options for managing chronic pain.

Pages

Recommended Reading

FDA approval of powerful opioid tinged with irony
Federal Practitioner
Comorbid TBI & PTSD raise the risk for sleep disturbances, pain
Federal Practitioner
Mapping the Pathway of Pain
Federal Practitioner
The Underrecognized Risk for Drug Overdose Deaths
Federal Practitioner
Over 20 Years, Pain Is on the Rise
Federal Practitioner
Possible mortality risk seen with tramadol in osteoarthritis
Federal Practitioner
Opioid overdose risk greater among HIV patients
Federal Practitioner
Through the eyes of migraine: Ocular considerations
Federal Practitioner
Report calls for focus on ‘subpopulations’ to fight opioid epidemic
Federal Practitioner
Rituximab does not improve fatigue symptoms of ME/CFS
Federal Practitioner

Related Articles