Explore the vast range of titles available.

The essence of nursing care continually exposes nurses to suffering. Although they bear witness to the suffering of others, their own suffering is less frequently exposed. This book attempts to give voice to the suffering that nurses witness in patients, families, colleagues, and themselves. By making this suffering visible, the book aims both to honor and help solve the problem. The book offers nurses' colleagues in other professions — social workers, psychologists, chaplains, ethicists, and physicians — a window onto what it means to practice nursing.

This book provides an evidence-based overview of supportive care for the nephrology patient. An international group of contributors emphasize the continuum of palliative care from the time of diagnosis through to end-of-life care and the issues surrounding withdrawal of dialysis. The book addresses the psychological impact of the disease, the importance of involving the patient in making decisions about their care, ethical considerations, the role of the family and the multidisciplinary team. This second edition includes two new chapters on conservative management of advanced kidney disease (AKD) and dialysis in the very elderly. The chapters covering non pain symptoms, advance care planning, quality of life, psychological and psychiatric consideration, and end-of-life care have also be completely revised to include new evidence and current thinking.

Drawing from his extensive clinical experience and many years of teaching, the author of this book has written a guide to palliative care for clinicians. The topics addressed range from an overview of death and dying to specific approaches to symptom management. As an introduction to both the art and science of palliative care, the book reflects the perspectives of one physician who has dedicated his career to this rapidly evolving field. It links real stories of illness with practical advice, thereby delineating clinical practice in a way that reflects the daily concerns of clinicians.

This book shows how much better fitted advanced concepts of primary care medicine are to America's health-care needs. It offers insights into how primary care physicians can be better trained to meet the needs of their patients, both well and sick, and to keep these patients as the focus of their practice. Modern medical training, the book notes, arose at a time when medical science was in ascendancy. Thus the ideals of science — objectivity, rationality — became the ideals of medicine, and disease — the target of most medical research — became the logical focus of medical practice. When clinicians treat a patient with pneumonia, they are apt to be thinking about pneumonia in general — which is how they learn about the disease — rather than this person's pneumonia. This objective, rational approach has its value, but when it dominates a physician's approach to medicine, it can create problems. Most important, this book argues that primary care medicine should become a central focus of America's health care system, not merely a cost-saving measure as envisioned by managed care organizations. Indeed, the book shows that the primary care physician can fulfill a unique role in the medical community, and a vital role in society in general. It shows that primary care medicine is not a retreat from scientific medicine, but the natural next step for medicine to take in the coming century.

This is a revised and expanded edition of a classic in palliative medicine, originally published in 1991, with three added chapters and a new preface summarizing our progress in the area of pain management. The obligation of physicians to relieve human suffering stretches back into antiquity. But what exactly, is suffering? One patient with cancer of the stomach, from which he knew he would shortly die, said he was not suffering. Another, someone who had been operated on for a minor problem—in little pain and not seemingly distressed—said that even coming into the hospital had been a source of pain and suffering. With such varied responses to the problem of suffering, inevitable questions arise. Is it the doctor's responsibility to treat the disease or the patient? And what is the relationship between suffering and the goals of medicine? According to the author of this book, these are crucial questions, but ones that have unfortunately remained only queries void of adequate solutions. It is time for the sick person, the author believes, to be not merely an important concern for physicians but the central focus of medicine. With this in mind, he argues for an understanding of what changes should be made in order to successfully treat the sick while alleviating suffering, and how to actually go about making these changes with the methods and training techniques firmly rooted in the doctor's relationship with the patient.

Context The use of methadone for cancer pain management is gaining wider acceptance. However, switching to methadone treatment can still pose challenges. Consequently, there is ongoing development of its use in low doses in combination with other opioids, despite a lack of clinical evidence regarding its efficacy and safety. Objectives This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of low-dose methadone in combination with another opioid in patients with moderate-to-severe cancer-related pain in a clinical setting. Patients and methods This was a prospective, open-label study conducted in 19 pain and/or palliative care centres treating patients with cancer-related pain. Pain intensity, patients' global impression of change, and adverse effects were assessed on day 7 and day 14. The main outcome measure was the proportion of responders. Results The study included 92 patients. The daily dose of methadone was 3 [3–6] mg at baseline, 9 [4–10] mg on day 7 and 10 [6–15] mg on day 14. The NRS pain ratings significantly decreased from 7 [6–8] at baseline to 5 [3–6] on visit 2 ( p  < .0001) and 4 [3–6] on visit 3 ( p  < .0001). Similarly, the VRS pain ratings decreased from 3 [3–3] at baseline to 2 [2–3] on visit 2 ( p  = 0.026) and 2 [1–3] ( p  < 0.001) on visit 3. At Visits 1 and 2, half of the patients were considered Responders. Of those responders, 73.5% were High-Responders at Visit 1 and 58.7% were High-Responders at Visit 2. No adverse events related to the risk of QT prolongation, overdose, or drug interactions were reported. Conclusion For patients experiencing moderate to severe cancer-related pain despite initial opioid treatment, our study found that low-dose methadone, when used in combination with another opioid, was both safe and effective. This supports the use of methadone as an adjunct to opioid-based treatment for cancer pain.

Management of cancer pain is challenging. Despite the poor evidence, opioid therapy still remains the cornerstone for the management of cancer-related pain. Opioids should be given according to the clinical presentation in the different stages of disease. There is no drug of choice, as most opioids are effective. Thus, the choice should be based on the individual characteristics of patients. Optimization of opioid therapy may allow individual treatment according to the patient’s characteristics and pain syndromes, providing timely alternatives in the different stages of disease. While most patients respond to an appropriate treatment associated with a comprehensive assessment and symptom control, a high level of experience and knowledge is necessary in determining conditions to maximize the analgesic response, eventually adding adjuvants in some specific circumstances. Alternative opioids may improve the balance between analgesia and adverse effects in the presence of a poor response to the first opioid in a large number of patients. Finally, a selected population can benefit from some interventional procedures.

PurposeCancer-induced bone pain (CIBP) can be challenging to manage in advanced cancer. The unique properties of methadone may have a role in refractory CIBP. We aimed to evaluate the analgesic effects of methadone for CIBP when other opioids are ineffective or intolerable.MethodsA retrospective study of palliative care inpatients rotated to methadone from another opioid for CIBP over a 4-year period. Primary outcome was ≥ 30% reduction in pain intensity (11-point numeric rating scale) from baseline to completion of methadone rotation (MR). Secondary outcomes were ≥ 50% reduction in pain intensity and changes in long-acting and breakthrough opioid requirements.ResultsNinety-four eligible patients completed MR for the following reasons: poor pain control (72.3%), opioid toxicities (4.3%) or both (23.4%). On completion of MR, 70.2% and 53.2% achieved a ≥ 30% and ≥ 50% reduction in pain respectively, with mean pain intensity score reduced from 5.6 (SD = 2.1) at baseline to 2.6 (SD = 2.5) (p < 0.001). Mean calculated daily methadone dose pre-MR was 25.7 mg (SD = 10.9), with 72.3% of patients requiring a lower dose on completion of MR (mean 17.0 mg, SD = 8.5). The mean number of breakthrough opioid analgesia used a day reduced from 3.4 (SD = 2.3) to 1.8 (SD = 1.7) (p < 0.001).ConclusionsMR for CIBP may result in reduction in pain intensity, when other opioids are ineffective or intolerable, with patients requiring reduced overall dosing of their long-acting opioid and frequency of breakthrough opioid use.

Chronic pain is a major clinical problem and opiates are often the only treatment, but they cause significant problems ranging from sedation to deadly respiratory depression. Resiniferatoxin (RTX), a potent agonist of Transient Receptor Potential Vanilloid 1 (TRPV1), causes a slow, sustained and irreversible activation of TRPV1 and increases the frequency of spontaneous excitatory postsynaptic currents, but causes significant depression of evoked EPSCs due to nerve terminal depolarization block. Intrathecal administration of RTX to rats in the short-term inhibits nociceptive synaptic transmission, and in the long-term causes a localized, selective ablation of TRPV1-expressing central sensory nerve terminals leading to long lasting analgesia in behavioral models. Since RTX actions are selective for central sensory nerve terminals, other efferent functions of dorsal root ganglion neurons can be preserved. Preventing nociceptive transmission at the level of the spinal cord can be a useful strategy to treat chronic, debilitating and intractable pain.

Background To summarize the available literature on the management of immunosuppressive therapy in palliative care patients at the end-of-life stage, highlighting challenges associated with decision-making in this context and the current lack of clear clinical guidelines. Methods A systematic search was conducted in the PubMed, EMBASE, and Medline databases for studies evaluating the application of immunosuppressive therapy in patients nearing the end of life or patients who have allograft failure without plans for retransplantation and thus are candidates for palliative care. The search strategy followed PRISMA guidelines. Results We screened 2892 studies, assessed 23 records for eligibility, and included 9 publications in the systematic review. These studies cover different immunosuppressive strategies in palliative care for patients with solid organ or stem cell transplants. The evidence suggests that it is common practice to discontinue immunosuppression for patients with allograft failure who do not have any plans for retransplantation. Corticosteroids can be used to ameliorate the negative effects that arise from immunosuppressant discontinuation. Conclusions The management of immunosuppression after allograft failure requires a careful balance between minimizing drug-related risks and preserving future transplant eligibility. Discontinuing immunosuppression may be appropriate for many patients nearing the end of life, provided that symptom management and ethical considerations are prioritized. Standardized guidelines and multidisciplinary approaches are needed to optimize immunosuppression withdrawal, reduce complications, and ensure patient-centered care.