Pain intensity of chronic non-cancer patients was reduced by cannabinoids consumption , but effect sizes were small .
Efficacy for neuropathic and non-neuropathic pain was similar
There is growing interest in using cannabinoids for chronic pain .
We performed a systematic review and meta- analysis of r and omized controlled trials to evaluate the analgesic efficacy and adverse effects of cannabinoids for chronic non-cancer pain .
Defining the clinically important difference in pain outcome measures
& NA ; The purpose of this study was to determine the levels of change on st and ard pain scales that represent clinical ly important differences to patients . Data from analgesic studies are often difficult to interpret because the clinical importance of the results is not obvious . Differences between groups , as summarized by a change in mean values over time , can be difficult to apply to clinical care . Baseline scores vary widely and group mean differences could reflect large changes in a few patients , small changes in many patients , or any combination of these outcomes . Determination of the proportion of patients who have a clinical ly important improvement in their pain would provide a more interpretable result with direct clinical implication s. However , determining a clinical ly important outcome requires information about the degree of change over time that is clinical ly important . Data from the titration phase of a multiple cross‐over r and omized clinical trial of oral transmucosal fentanyl citrate ( OTFC )  for the treatment of cancer‐related breakthrough pain were re‐analyzed to examine the differences in pain scores between treatment episodes that did and did not yield adequate pain relief . The scales evaluated were absolute pain intensity difference ( PID , 0–10 scale ) , percentage pain intensity difference ( PID% , 0–100 % scale ) , pain relief ( PR , 0 ( none ) , 1 ( slight ) , 2 ( moderate ) , 3 ( lots ) , 4 ( complete ) ) , sum of the pain intensity difference ( SPID over 60 min ) , percentage of maximum total pain relief ( % Max TOTPAR over 60 min ) , and global medication performance ( 0 ( poor ) , 1 ( fair ) , 2 ( good ) , 3 ( very good ) , 4 ( excellent ) ) . Adequate relief was defined by the patient 's decision not to use another dose of opioid medication as a rescue , in addition to the study medication , to treat each painful episode . One hundred thirty OTFC naive patients contributed data on 1268 episodes of breakthrough pain . The scales that were converted to a percentage change yielded the best accuracy in predicting adequate relief , with balanced sensitivity and specificity . The best cut‐off point for both the % Max TOTPAR and the PID% was 33 % . The best cut‐off points for the absolute scales were absolute pain intensity difference of 2 , pain relief of 2 ( moderate ) , and SPID of 2 . The global medication performance of 2 ( good ) had excellent values as well . This study presents data ‐derived cut‐off points for the changes in several pain scales , each reflecting the clinical ly important improvement for patients treating breakthrough cancer pain episodes with OTFC . Confirmation in other patient population s and different pain syndromes will be needed . The use of consistent clinical ly important cut‐off points as the primary outcome in future pain therapy clinical trials will enhance their validity , comparability , and clinical applicability
Pain intensity of chronic non-cancer patients was reduced by cannabinoids consumption , but effect sizes were small .
Efficacy for neuropathic and non-neuropathic pain was similar
There is growing interest in using cannabinoids for chronic pain .
We performed a systematic review and meta- analysis of r and omized controlled trials to evaluate the analgesic efficacy and adverse effects of cannabinoids for chronic non-cancer pain .