File Download

There are no files associated with this item.

  Links for fulltext
     (May Require Subscription)
Supplementary

Article: Healthcare professionals’ views of the use of oral morphine and transmucosal diamorphine in the management of paediatric breakthrough pain and the feasibility of a randomised controlled trial: A focus group study (DIPPER)

TitleHealthcare professionals’ views of the use of oral morphine and transmucosal diamorphine in the management of paediatric breakthrough pain and the feasibility of a randomised controlled trial: A focus group study (DIPPER)
Authors
Keywordsbreakthrough pain
diamorphine
focus groups
opioids
Paediatrics
pain management
palliative care
terminal care
Issue Date1-Jun-2021
PublisherSAGE Publications
Citation
Palliative Medicine, 2021, v. 35, n. 6, p. 1118-1125 How to Cite?
AbstractBackground: Oral morphine is frequently used for breakthrough pain but the oral route is not always available and absorption is slow. Transmucosal diamorphine is administered by buccal, sublingual or intranasal routes, and rapidly absorbed. Aim: To explore the perspectives of healthcare professionals in the UK caring for children with life-limiting conditions concerning the assessment and management of breakthrough pain; prescribing and administration of transmucosal diamorphine compared with oral morphine; and the feasibility of a comparative clinical trial. Design/ participants: Three focus groups, analysed using a Framework approach. Doctors, nurses and pharmacists (n = 28), caring for children with life-limiting illnesses receiving palliative care, participated. Results: Oral morphine is frequently used for breakthrough pain across all settings; with transmucosal diamorphine largely limited to use in hospices or given by community nurses, predominantly buccally. Perceived advantages of oral morphine included confidence in its use with no requirement for specific training; disadvantages included tolerability issues, slow onset, unpredictable response and unsuitability for patients with gastrointestinal failure. Perceived advantages of transmucosal diamorphine were quick onset and easy administration; barriers included lack of licensed preparations and prescribing guidance with fears over accountability of prescribers, and potential issues with availability, preparation and palatability. Factors potentially affecting recruitment to a trial were patient suitability and onerousness for families, trial design and logistics, staff time and clinician engagement. Conclusions: There were perceived advantages to transmucosal diamorphine, but there is a need for access to a safe preparation. A clinical trial would be feasible provided barriers were overcome.
Persistent Identifierhttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/347640
ISSN
2023 Impact Factor: 3.6
2023 SCImago Journal Rankings: 1.310
ISI Accession Number ID

 

DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorJamieson, Liz-
dc.contributor.authorHarrop, Emily-
dc.contributor.authorJohnson, Margaret-
dc.contributor.authorLiossi, Christina-
dc.contributor.authorMott, Christine-
dc.contributor.authorOulton, Kate-
dc.contributor.authorSkene, Simon S.-
dc.contributor.authorWong, Ian C.K.-
dc.contributor.authorHoward, Richard F.-
dc.date.accessioned2024-09-26T00:30:19Z-
dc.date.available2024-09-26T00:30:19Z-
dc.date.issued2021-06-01-
dc.identifier.citationPalliative Medicine, 2021, v. 35, n. 6, p. 1118-1125-
dc.identifier.issn0269-2163-
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/347640-
dc.description.abstractBackground: Oral morphine is frequently used for breakthrough pain but the oral route is not always available and absorption is slow. Transmucosal diamorphine is administered by buccal, sublingual or intranasal routes, and rapidly absorbed. Aim: To explore the perspectives of healthcare professionals in the UK caring for children with life-limiting conditions concerning the assessment and management of breakthrough pain; prescribing and administration of transmucosal diamorphine compared with oral morphine; and the feasibility of a comparative clinical trial. Design/ participants: Three focus groups, analysed using a Framework approach. Doctors, nurses and pharmacists (n = 28), caring for children with life-limiting illnesses receiving palliative care, participated. Results: Oral morphine is frequently used for breakthrough pain across all settings; with transmucosal diamorphine largely limited to use in hospices or given by community nurses, predominantly buccally. Perceived advantages of oral morphine included confidence in its use with no requirement for specific training; disadvantages included tolerability issues, slow onset, unpredictable response and unsuitability for patients with gastrointestinal failure. Perceived advantages of transmucosal diamorphine were quick onset and easy administration; barriers included lack of licensed preparations and prescribing guidance with fears over accountability of prescribers, and potential issues with availability, preparation and palatability. Factors potentially affecting recruitment to a trial were patient suitability and onerousness for families, trial design and logistics, staff time and clinician engagement. Conclusions: There were perceived advantages to transmucosal diamorphine, but there is a need for access to a safe preparation. A clinical trial would be feasible provided barriers were overcome.-
dc.languageeng-
dc.publisherSAGE Publications-
dc.relation.ispartofPalliative Medicine-
dc.rightsThis work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.-
dc.subjectbreakthrough pain-
dc.subjectdiamorphine-
dc.subjectfocus groups-
dc.subjectopioids-
dc.subjectPaediatrics-
dc.subjectpain management-
dc.subjectpalliative care-
dc.subjectterminal care-
dc.titleHealthcare professionals’ views of the use of oral morphine and transmucosal diamorphine in the management of paediatric breakthrough pain and the feasibility of a randomised controlled trial: A focus group study (DIPPER)-
dc.typeArticle-
dc.identifier.doi10.1177/02692163211008737-
dc.identifier.pmid33845654-
dc.identifier.scopuseid_2-s2.0-85104327258-
dc.identifier.volume35-
dc.identifier.issue6-
dc.identifier.spage1118-
dc.identifier.epage1125-
dc.identifier.eissn1477-030X-
dc.identifier.isiWOS:000641925300001-
dc.identifier.issnl0269-2163-

Export via OAI-PMH Interface in XML Formats


OR


Export to Other Non-XML Formats