PubMed Health⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

S L Wallenstein

Publications and source records attributed to S L Wallenstein.

At least 19 recordsLinked to original sources
PubMed1987

The Memorial Pain Assessment Card. A valid instrument for the evaluation of cancer pain.

Effective evaluation and treatment of cancer pain require valid and independent measurement of pain intensity, pain relief, and psychological distress. The Memorial Pain Assessment Card (MPAC) is a simple instrument designed to provide rapid evaluation of these subjective experiences. On the 8.5 by 11 inch card are printed the eight pain intensity descriptors, and three visual analog scales which measure pain intensity, pain relief, and mood. Experienced patients can complete it in less than 20 seconds. The authors administered the MPAC to 50 hospitalized cancer patients within 48 hours of referral to the Pain Service for inadequate pain control, together with standard measures: The McGill Pain Questionnaire, Profile of Mood States, Hamilton Depression Scale, and Zung Anxiety Scale. Correlational and multiple regression analyses revealed that the MPAC can distinguish pain intensity from pain relief and from general psychological distress, and it can provide multidimensional assessment that is practically equivalent to the full assessment battery. We conclude that the MPAC is valid and effective for clinical use, and recommend it for the assessment of individual patients, and as an outcome measure in clinical trials.

Adolescent↗
PubMed1985

Intramuscular meptazinol and morphine in postoperative pain.

Meptazinol is an agonist-antagonist opioid analgesic believed to be unique in its selectivity for mu1 (high affinity) receptors and its cholinergic activity. Our objectives were to determine the relative analgesic potency of intramuscular meptazinol and morphine and to compare mood and side effects in 102 patients with cancer who have postoperative pain. Meptazinol (50, 100, and 200 mg) and morphine (4, 8, and 16 mg) were given for moderate to severe pain in a double-blind, randomized but balanced, incomplete block design. Serial multiple assessments of pain, relief, mood, and side effects were made. The most precise estimates of relative analgesic potency indicate that meptazinol is equivalent to 10 mg morphine at 120 mg (95% confidence interval 80 to 170 mg) for peak effect and at 175 mg (95% confidence interval 125 to 270 mg) for total effect. Mean (+/- SE) times to peak effect and to remedication were 0.9 +/- 0.1 and 3.6 +/- 0.2 hours for meptazinol and 1.4 +/- 0.1 and 4.8 +/- 0.4 hours for morphine at equianalgesic peak effects. The percentages of subjects with one or more side effects were 18, 49, and 73 for graded meptazinol doses and 32, 49, and 65 for graded morphine doses. Mean numbers of side effects per subject were 0.3, 1.5, and 3.5 for meptazinol and 0.5, 0.7, and 1.7 for morphine. Profiles of side effects differed. Mood improvement and overall satisfaction were dose related and greater for morphine than for meptazinol. Side effects may limit the use of meptazinol in doses that relieve severe postoperative pain.

Adolescent↗
PubMed1984

Measurement of pain and analgesia in cancer patients.

Measurement of pain in cancer patients requires all the procedural safeguards essential for the measurement of subjective responses, including the employment of active and inactive controls, double-blind techniques, randomization, and statistical verification of results. Pain is traditionally measured in analgesic studies by employing verbal descriptors of intensity, but more recently visual analogues of pain intensity have been used and generally provide more sensitive measures of pain intensity. Patients with chronic pain tend to rate the categories representing more intense pain as lower in the visual analogue scale than do patients with postoperative pain. This may well reflect differences in the prior pain experiences of the two groups. Patients with chronic cancer pain have greater positive mood effects after the narcotic, morphine, than after the non-steroidal antiinflammatory analgesic, zomepirac, and this appears to be independent of analgesic activity. It is possible to design crossover analgesic studies in cancer patients so as to minimize carry-over effects, and such studies are more efficient than parallel group assays. Crossover studies also provide the ability to measure carry-over when it occurs.

Analgesia↗
PubMed1983

Sources of variation in analgesic responses in cancer patients with chronic pain receiving morphine.

Our objective was to identify and quantify sources of variation in the relief of chronic pain with morphine. Relief scores were extracted from records obtained during controlled trials of analgesics in cancer patients with chronic pain in which intramuscular morphine was the assay standard. Relief data from 715 patients after 565 8-mg and 538 16-mg doses were segregated according to age, race, sex, pre-drug pain intensity, character and site. Middle-aged patients obtained relief after 8 mg comparable to relief obtained by younger patients after 16 mg; oldest patients obtained relief after 8 mg comparable to relief obtained by middle-aged patients after 16 mg. Blacks receiving 8 mg obtained relief comparable to whites receiving 16 mg. Sex-related differences were not significant. Patients with moderate, as compared to severe, pre-drug pain obtained significantly greater relief only after 16 mg. Patients reporting dull pain obtained relief after 8 mg comparable to relief obtained with sharp pain after 16 mg. Patients with abdominal pain obtained relief after 8 mg comparable to relief of pain in the chest or arms after 16 mg. These results provide dose-related evidence of variation in relief with morphine in chronic cancer pain and establish particular patient and pain characteristics as variables for which controls should be provided in analgesic assays.

Adolescent↗
PubMed1982

Clinical analgesic assay of sublingual buprenorphine and intramuscular morphine.

A six-point, incomplete block assay of sublingual buprenorphine and intramuscular morphine has been carried out, providing valid relative potency estimates of the two drugs in terms of total relief on both categorical and visual analog scales. Sublingual buprenorphine was about 15.5 times as potent as intramuscular morphine in terms of these total relief estimates. Similar relative potency estimates were obtained using first-dose-only data. There was no evidence of interaction by day in the crossover data, and the crossover study proved more efficient and provided tighter confidence limits. Sublingual buprenorphine produced a lower peak effect than intramuscular morphine. At equivalent peak effects, it produced longer-lasting analgesia. Side effect occurrence was roughly comparable for the two drugs, and no evidence of narcotic antagonist activity was seen after buprenorphine. The six-point assay proved to be effective in defining the dose-effect curves and relative potencies of the two drugs.

Administration, Oral↗
PubMed1981

Analgesic and mood effects of heroin and morphine in cancer patients with postoperative pain.

We designed a study to determine the relative analgesic potency of intramuscular heroin and morphine and to compare mood and side effects in 166 cancer patients with postoperative pain. Heroin was about twice as potent as morphine (95 per cent confidence limits, 1.6 to 2.6 times) in graded-dose, twin-crossover assays. Heroin provided an analgesic peak effect earlier than morphine (1.2 plus or minus 0.08 and 1.5 plus or minus 0.10 hours, respectively [mean plus or minus S.E.M.]). Doses with equal analgesic effects provided comparable improvements in various elements of mood, particularly feelings of peacefulness. Peak mood improvement occurred earlier after heroin than after morphine (1.2 plus or minus 0.10 and 1.8 plus or minus 0.13 hours, respectively). Both analgesia and mood improvement were less sustained after heroin at doses providing equal peak analgesic effects. The drugs shared the most common side effects, with no marked differences in their occurrence; sleepiness was the most frequent side effect after both drugs (46 per cent with each). Heroin has no apparent unique advantages or disadvantages for the relief pain in patients with cancer.

Clinical Trials as Topic↗
PubMed1981

Relative analgesic potency of intramuscular heroin and morphine in cancer patients with postoperative pain and chronic pain due to cancer.

Heroin hydrochloride is approximately twice as potent as morphine sulfate, and acts slightly faster but for a shorter duration than morphine. Although patients with chronic pain due to advanced cancer differ from cancer patients with postoperative pain in terms of their degree of tolerance to the analgesic effects of morphine and heroin and their reports of various elements of mood, there is, thus far, no indication that heroin has any unique advantage over morphine in terms of side effect occurrence or effects on mood at equianalgesic doses. Both drugs improve mood provided they are administered in doses which result in analgesia. While there appears to be some slight difference in the spectrum of side effects observed after heroin as compared to morphine, heroin and morphine share the most common side effects. The incidence of side effects following both drugs appear to be highest among those effects which are primarily somatic and undesirable. The use of visual analog scales concurrent with categorical pain and pain relief scores provides a means for the finer estimation of relative analgesic potency and time action. The results of these studies are in general agreement with those of other investigators. Where apparent differences exist they can usually be explained on the bases of differences in methods and subject populations.

Adult↗
PubMed1980

Relative analgesic potency of oral zomepirac and intramuscular morphine in cancer patients with postoperative pain.

A twin crossover assay of oral zomepirac and intramuscular morphine was completed in 159 cancer patients with postoperative pain. Zomepirac was a surprisingly effective oral analgesic in these patients, 100 mg orally being roughly equivalent to 16 mg intramuscular morphine. Time-effect data indicate that the peak effect for oral zomepirac may occur slightly later than that for morphine but that zomepirac is relatively rapidly effective after oral administration. Side effect occurrence was roughly in the same range for both drugs, with drowsiness, nausea, dry mouth, and feelings of weakness being observed after both drugs while sweating was observed more frequently after zomepirac. The assay further provided a demonstration of the effectiveness of the twin crossover design as a clinical assay method, providing increased sensitivity of crossover data in a patient population available for only a limited number of study treatments.

Administration, Oral↗
PubMed1979

Relative analgesic potency of intramuscular heroin and morphine in cancer patients with postoperative pain: a preliminary report.

The results of this study in postoperative patients have, thus far, revealed little that was not expected from a review of the literature. Heroin hydrochloride appears to be about two to three times more potent than morphine sulfate as an analgesic, to act more promptly and to have a slightly shorter duration of action. There is a suggestion that heroin may have a somewhat different spectrum of side effects and mood effects compared to morphine, but the effects of both drugs on mood were inversely correlated with the patients' feelings at the time of drug administration. Regardless, as a group, patients responded to both drugs with significantly improved moods. A lag time between the peak intensity of analgesic and mood effects of both heroin and morphine suggest a dissociation between these effects. Whether or not these early impressions will be reinforced as this study proceeds, and whether or not the effects of the drugs in patients with chronic pain due to advanced cancer will be any different than in these patients with postoperative pain, remains to be seen.

Affect↗
PubMed1979

Clinical analgesic assay of oral zomepirac and intramuscular morphine.

Zomepirac appears to be an unexpectedly effective oral, non-opioid analgesic. The relative potency of oral zomepirac is roughly 1/5 to 1/8 that of intramuscular morphine. Visual analogues of pain relief offer a reliable alternative to verbal categorical scales, and may provide some advantages in assays of peak drug effect, and in relatively small patient populations.

Administration, Oral↗