Skip to main content

Main menu

  • HOME
  • ONLINE FIRST
  • CURRENT ISSUE
  • ALL ISSUES
  • AUTHORS & REVIEWERS
  • SUBSCRIBE
  • BJGP LIFE
  • MORE
    • About BJGP
    • Conference
    • Advertising
    • eLetters
    • Alerts
    • Video
    • Audio
    • Librarian information
    • Resilience
    • COVID-19 Clinical Solutions
  • RCGP
    • BJGP for RCGP members
    • BJGP Open
    • RCGP eLearning
    • InnovAIT Journal
    • Jobs and careers

User menu

  • Subscriptions
  • Alerts
  • Log in

Search

  • Advanced search
British Journal of General Practice
Intended for Healthcare Professionals
  • RCGP
    • BJGP for RCGP members
    • BJGP Open
    • RCGP eLearning
    • InnovAIT Journal
    • Jobs and careers
  • Subscriptions
  • Alerts
  • Log in
  • Follow bjgp on Twitter
  • Visit bjgp on Facebook
  • Blog
  • Listen to BJGP podcast
  • Subscribe BJGP on YouTube
British Journal of General Practice
Intended for Healthcare Professionals

Advanced Search

  • HOME
  • ONLINE FIRST
  • CURRENT ISSUE
  • ALL ISSUES
  • AUTHORS & REVIEWERS
  • SUBSCRIBE
  • BJGP LIFE
  • MORE
    • About BJGP
    • Conference
    • Advertising
    • eLetters
    • Alerts
    • Video
    • Audio
    • Librarian information
    • Resilience
    • COVID-19 Clinical Solutions
Clinical Intelligence

Managing chronic pain in the non-specialist setting: a new SIGN guideline

Blair H Smith, John D Hardman, Ailsa Stein and Lesley Colvin on behalf of the SIGN Chronic Pain Guideline Development Group
British Journal of General Practice 2014; 64 (624): e462-e464. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3399/bjgp14X680737
Blair H Smith
University of Dundee, Dundee.
Roles: Professor of Population Health Science
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
John D Hardman
Dalhousie Medical Practice, Bonnyrigg.
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Ailsa Stein
Scottish Intercollegiate Guideline Network, Edinburgh.
Roles: Programme Manager
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Lesley Colvin
University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh.
Roles: Consultant/Reader in Anaesthesia & Pain Medicine
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • Info
  • eLetters
  • PDF
Loading

CHRONIC PAIN AND THE NEED FOR A GUIDELINE

Chronic pain, defined as pain lasting beyond normal tissue healing time (taken to be 3 months),1 is a syndrome that affects a large proportion of the primary care population. It is ‘significant’ in around 14% of UK adults, imposing a heavy burden on the physical and psychosocial health of sufferers, their families and society, at high cost to the healthcare services.2 It was estimated in 2002 that people with chronic pain account for 4.6 million GP appointments in the UK, at an annual cost to the NHS of £69 million, equivalent to the employment of 793 GPs.3 Although many clinical conditions can lead to chronic pain, there are common underlying neurobiological and psychosocial mechanisms, and the impact is generally independent of the clinical aetiology. Effective assessment and treatment of chronic pain therefore means that GPs should have:

  • adequate education and knowledge;

  • access to evidence-based effective management strategies; and

  • agreed criteria for referral to specialist clinics.

Unfortunately, none of these requirements is generally in place.

Undergraduate training in management of pain is demonstrably minimal, accounting for <1% of programme hours,4 despite its high prevalence and impact. Much of the available evidence for potential interventions is derived from specialist settings or in specific clinical conditions, making it difficult to apply to a general primary care population. Even standard treatments, such as drugs, often lack evidence for effectiveness beyond the short or medium term. However, in recent years, there have been some innovations in primary care, and a growing body of evidence for their feasibility and effectiveness. Partly on the strength of this, there are now standard guidelines to support nonspecialist management of some chronic pain conditions, such as low back pain5 and neuropathic pain.6 There has not been a comprehensive guideline consolidating current knowledge of effectiveness of all interventions for all chronic pain, although this would be valuable in primary care. As Moore et al recently indicated, most people with pain do not respond well to any single intervention, but most will respond to at least one intervention.7 Therefore ,the current challenges are to identify the correct intervention(s) for each patient, and to identify and stop ineffective treatments. These will be aided by easily-accessed clinical evidence, informed patient-centred review of our patients, and appropriate referral to colleagues in specialist services.

SIGN

For the past 20 years, the Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network (SIGN) has produced evidence-based guidelines to optimally inform clinical practice, with the aims of reducing variation in service and improving patient outcomes. The methodology and objectivity of SIGN guidelines are internationally recognised and have an influence on healthcare worldwide. Recognising a large area of unmet need, a multidisciplinary SIGN guideline development group produced a new guideline on chronic pain, published in December 2013.8 This guideline is specifically aimed at the non-specialist reviewing the assessment and management of adults with chronic non-malignant pain.

SUMMARY OF THE GUIDELINE

Following SIGN methodology,9 the guideline development group identified 17 structured key questions about chronic pain, addressing the following areas:

  • assessment;

  • self-management;

  • pharmacological therapies;

  • psychologically-based interventions;

  • physical therapies; and

  • complementary therapies.

A systematic search was undertaken for the years 2007 to 2012, including MEDLINE, Embase, Cinahl, PsychINFO and the Cochrane Library for each key question. All relevant articles were critically appraised and rated using the SIGN Grading system.9 The rated evidence was then graded9 and summarised by the guideline development group. The primary output was a total of 55 graded recommendations relating to the predefined key questions, including but not restricted to those summarised in Table 1. They include helpful guidance on aspects of pharmacological and non-pharmacological approaches to chronic pain. Some of the best evidence was available for pharmacological management of neuropathic pain, resulting in several Grade A recommendations. In contrast, evidence for approaches to assessment and self-management was generally lacking. There was generally limited or absent high quality evidence for complementary therapies (excluding acupuncture) and dietary interventions.

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
Table 1

Summary of some of the Recommendations for chronic pain management included in the SIGN Guidelinea

Where good quality evidence was lacking, but a practical point could be made, the group used their clinical experience to produce ‘Good practice points’. In addition, a number of patient pathways were developed to address important areas for nonspecialists, combining the evidence reviewed with existing high quality guidelines, clinical experience and consensus. These covered:

  • assessment, early management, and care planning (from presentation to specialist referral);

  • neuropathic pain; and

  • the use of strong opioids.

These are intended to guide us practically, through a comprehensive biopsychosocial process of assessment and management, recognising the need for patient-centredness and safety.

The guideline concludes with recommended sources of further information and support, both for professionals and for patients. Finally, a patient version of the guideline is available, summarising the content and recommendations in lay language, aiming to facilitate engagement in a collaborative process towards optimal outcomes.

IMPLEMENTATION AND NEXT STEPS

This Guideline is relevant internationally, presenting the best available evidence for management of chronic pain by nonspecialists. It is available freely online6 and also in a quick reference guide and apps for Apple and Android systems. It therefore has the potential to inform all healthcare practitioners, and will be of particular interest to GPs and primary healthcare teams in the UK. Its implementation will be supported by the NHS in Scotland through linkage with SIGN to all NHS Boards, and through audit tools, linked to performance indicators, and targeted educational events.

This guideline will confirm and support much of the excellent practice that GPs are already providing for chronic pain in primary care. It will also provide a useful summary for those who are trying to find a way through the complex multimodal maze, which has so far been beset with conflicting evidence and advice. It will potentially highlight the importance of multidimensional and multi-discplinary approaches to chronic pain, and the need for continuing education and training in this area (as well as increased resource provision).

Finally, perhaps the most important finding in the guideline development process, of longer-term relevance, is the relative lack of good quality evidence available and applicable in primary care. This includes both standard approaches to treatment (for example, long-term opioids) and more innovative approaches (for example, self-management programmes). Therefore, there is an urgent need to commission and conduct primary care-based trials, recognising the need for psychological and physical therapy, considering the potential role of education, advice and complementary approaches, and the methodological complexities of identifying and measuring timely, relevant outcomes. This will allow an enhanced second edition of this Guideline when it is considered for review in 3 years’ time.

Acknowledgments

The authors were members of this SIGN Guideline Development Group. They acknowledge the contribution of all members of the Group to the writing of the Guideline, and to NHS Healthcare Improvement who supported it.

Notes

Provenance

Freely submitted; externally peer reviewed.

Competing interests

The authors have declared no competing interests.

Discuss this article

Contribute and read comments about this article: www.bjgp.org/letters

  • Received November 12, 2013.
  • Revision requested November 22, 2013.
  • Accepted November 23, 2013.
  • © British Journal of General Practice 2014

REFERENCES

  1. 1.↵
    1. Merskey H,
    2. Bogduk N
    (1994) Classification of chronic pain: Descriptions of chronic pain syndromes and definitions of pain terms. (International Association for the Study of Pain, Seattle).
  2. 2.↵
    1. Smith BH,
    2. Elliott AM,
    3. Chambers WA,
    4. et al.
    (2001) The impact of chronic pain in the community. Fam Pract 18:292–299.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  3. 3.↵
    1. Belsey J
    (2002) Primary care workload in the management of chronic pain. A retrospective cohort study using a GP database to identify resource implications for UK primary care. J Med Econ 5:39–50.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  4. 4.↵
    1. Briggs E,
    2. Whittaker M,
    3. Carr E
    Survey of undergraduate pain curricula for healthcare professionals in the United Kingdom. A short report. (The Pain Education Special Interest Group of the British Pain Society.) http://www.britishpainsociety.org/members_sig_edu_short_report_survey.pdf (accessed 28 May 2014).
  5. 5.↵
    Low back pain (CG88), National institute for Health and Care Excellence. http://guidance.nice.org.uk/CG88 (accessed 6 Jun 2014).
  6. 6.↵
    Neuropathic pain — pharmacological management (CG173), National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. http://guidance.nice.org.uk/CG173 (accessed 6 Jun 2014).
  7. 7.↵
    1. Moore A,
    2. Derry S,
    3. Eccleston C,
    4. Kalso E
    (2013) Expect analgesic failure; pursue analgesic success. BMJ 346:f2690.
    OpenUrlFREE Full Text
  8. 8.↵
    SIGN 136 Management of chronic pain A national clinical guideline, Healthcare Improvement Scotland. Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network. http://www.sign.ac.uk/pdf/SIGN136.pdf (accessed 6 Jun 2014).
  9. 9.↵
    SIGN 50: A guideline developer’s handbook, Healthcare Improvement Scotland. Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network. http://www.sign.ac.uk/pdf/sign50.pdf (accessed 6 Jun 2014).
Back to top
Previous ArticleNext Article

In this issue

British Journal of General Practice: 64 (624)
British Journal of General Practice
Vol. 64, Issue 624
July 2014
  • Table of Contents
  • Index by author
Download PDF
Article Alerts
Or,
sign in or create an account with your email address
Email Article

Thank you for recommending British Journal of General Practice.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person to whom you are recommending the page knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Managing chronic pain in the non-specialist setting: a new SIGN guideline
(Your Name) has forwarded a page to you from British Journal of General Practice
(Your Name) thought you would like to see this page from British Journal of General Practice.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Citation Tools
Managing chronic pain in the non-specialist setting: a new SIGN guideline
Blair H Smith, John D Hardman, Ailsa Stein, Lesley Colvin
British Journal of General Practice 2014; 64 (624): e462-e464. DOI: 10.3399/bjgp14X680737

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero

Share
Managing chronic pain in the non-specialist setting: a new SIGN guideline
Blair H Smith, John D Hardman, Ailsa Stein, Lesley Colvin
British Journal of General Practice 2014; 64 (624): e462-e464. DOI: 10.3399/bjgp14X680737
del.icio.us logo Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo CiteULike logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One
  • Mendeley logo Mendeley

Jump to section

  • Top
  • Article
    • CHRONIC PAIN AND THE NEED FOR A GUIDELINE
    • SIGN
    • SUMMARY OF THE GUIDELINE
    • IMPLEMENTATION AND NEXT STEPS
    • Acknowledgments
    • Notes
    • REFERENCES
  • Figures & Data
  • Info
  • eLetters
  • PDF

More in this TOC Section

  • How to manage low testosterone level in men: a guide for primary care
  • Hyperparathyroidism (primary) NICE guideline: diagnosis, assessment, and initial management
  • The atypical presentation of COVID-19 as gastrointestinal disease: key points for primary care
Show more Clinical Intelligence

Related Articles

Cited By...

Intended for Healthcare Professionals

BJGP Life

BJGP Open

 

@BJGPjournal's Likes on Twitter

 
 

British Journal of General Practice

NAVIGATE

  • Home
  • Current Issue
  • All Issues
  • Online First
  • Authors & reviewers

RCGP

  • BJGP for RCGP members
  • BJGP Open
  • RCGP eLearning
  • InnovAiT Journal
  • Jobs and careers

MY ACCOUNT

  • RCGP members' login
  • Subscriber login
  • Activate subscription
  • Terms and conditions

NEWS AND UPDATES

  • About BJGP
  • Alerts
  • RSS feeds
  • Facebook
  • Twitter

AUTHORS & REVIEWERS

  • Submit an article
  • Writing for BJGP: research
  • Writing for BJGP: other sections
  • BJGP editorial process & policies
  • BJGP ethical guidelines
  • Peer review for BJGP

CUSTOMER SERVICES

  • Advertising
  • Contact subscription agent
  • Copyright
  • Librarian information

CONTRIBUTE

  • BJGP Life
  • eLetters
  • Feedback

CONTACT US

BJGP Journal Office
RCGP
30 Euston Square
London NW1 2FB
Tel: +44 (0)20 3188 7400
Email: journal@rcgp.org.uk

British Journal of General Practice is an editorially-independent publication of the Royal College of General Practitioners
© 2023 British Journal of General Practice

Print ISSN: 0960-1643
Online ISSN: 1478-5242