Journal of Rehabilitation Medicine 51-6 | Page 59

Chronic pain in ICU survivors Table I. Patient demographics for the physiotherapy intervention group Patient characteristics Total number of participants (n  = 47) New chronic pain (n  = 31) No new chronic pain (n  = 16) Sex, male, % Age, years, median (IQR) Intensive care unit length of stay, days, median (IQR) Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation, median (IQR) 68 52 (43–57) 15 (10–27) 23 (18–27) 55 51 (44–56) 12 (7–27) 23 (18–27) 81 54 (43–59) 19 (11–29) 23 (16–28) Scottish Index of Multiple Deprivation decile, median (IQR) b 64 58 75 2 (1–4) 3 (1–4) 1 (1–4) Sepsis, yes, % a a Sepsis as defined by the Surviving Sepsis Campaign (2013) (24). b Scottish Index of Multiple Deprivation scores for 1–5, with 1 being the most deprived. IQR: interquartile range. Table II. Admitting speciality Admitting speciality n General medicine General surgery Gastroenterology Burns and plastics Orthopaedics Respiratory medicine Urology 19 12 5 4 4 2 1 Incidence and location of pain At baseline assessment, two-thirds (66%, n = 31) of patients reported a “new” chronic pain since ICU admission at initial assessment (Table I). In these patients, lower limb pain was reported in over two- fifths of this group (42%, n = 13), but the shoulder joint was the most frequently affected joint (39%, n = 12), followed by the trunk/back (32%, n = 10), upper limb (6%, n = 2) and head (3%, n = 1) (Fig. 1). Thirty-nine percent of patients (n = 12) reporting a “new” chronic pain, had pain at more than one anatomical location/ joint. Bilateral symptoms were reported in almost all of those who reported having lower limb pain (85%, n = 11), in contrast to only one-third of those with shoulder pain (33%, n = 4). Brief Pain Inventory intensity/severity The mean BPI score for pain severity of those reporting a “new” chronic pain at initial assessment was 5.3 45 Frequency (%) 40 35 30 25 20 15 (standard deviation (SD) 2.4; range 0–10) and the mean score at 1 year was 4.6 (SD 2.7). The difference between reported pain severity at baseline and at 1-year was not significant (p = 0.66). Brief Pain Inventory interference The mean BPI score given by patients to describe the impact of pain on daily function or interference in those reporting chronic pain was 6.5 (SD 2.5). Pain interference decreased significantly between baseline assessment and follow-up at 1-year (mean 6.5 (SD 2.5) vs mean 4.5 (SD 2.7), respectively) (p = 0.04). Further investigation of pain interference on individual activities of daily living indicated that “enjoyment of life” (mean 7.1, SD 2.8) and sleep (mean 6.9, SD 3.3) were the most severely affected and “relations” the least affected by chronic pain (mean 5.7, SD 3.5) at baseline assessment. However, at 1 year “enjoyment of life” (mean 5.2, SD 3.2) and “normal work” (mean 5.2, SD 3.3) were the most affected. Predictors There was no significant difference in any of the vari- ables, including ICU length of stay (LOS) , age, SIMD or sepsis, between those with and without chronic pain (Table III). Analgesics The number of patients taking analgesics (steps 1–3 pain medications, as defined by the WHO pain ladder) prior to admission was 43% (n = 20). This figure had increased to 81% (n = 38) at the time of the patients’ baseline clinic visit. The intensity of analgesics pres- cribed also increased, with the number of patients prescribed strong opioids (step 3 of the WHO pain Table III. Risk factors for the incidence of chronic pain: results of binary logistic regression analysis 10 453 5 Variable p-value 0 Intensive care unit length of stay Age Scottish Index of Multiple Deprivation Sepsis 0.53 0.55 0.29 0.09 Lower limbs Shoulder joint Trunk/Back Upper limb Head Fig. 1. Anatomical location of “new” chronic pain at baseline assessment. J Rehabil Med 51, 2019