↓ Skip to main content

Breakthrough Pain in Elderly Patients with Cancer: Treatment Options

Overview of attention for article published in Drugs & Aging, May 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
11 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
64 Mendeley
Title
Breakthrough Pain in Elderly Patients with Cancer: Treatment Options
Published in
Drugs & Aging, May 2014
DOI 10.1007/s40266-014-0181-5
Pubmed ID
Authors

Sophie Pautex, Nicole Vogt-Ferrier, Gilbert B. Zulian

Abstract

The prevalence of pain is high in the elderly and increases with the occurrence of cancer. Pain treatment is challenging because of age-related factors such as co-morbidities, and over half of the patients with cancer pain experience transient exacerbation of pain that is known as breakthrough pain (BTP). As with background pain, BTP should be properly assessed before being treated. The first step to be taken is optimizing around-the-clock analgesia with expert titration of the painkiller. Rescue medication should then be provided as per the requested need, while at the same time preventing identified potential precipitating factors. In the elderly, starting treatment with a lower dose of analgesics may be justified because of age-related physiological changes such as decreased hepatic and renal function. Whenever possible, oral medication should be provided prior to a painful maneuver. In the case of unpredictable BTP, immediate rescue medication is mandatory and the subcutaneous route is preferred unless patient-controlled analgesia via continuous drug infusion is available. Recently, transmucosal preparations have appeared in the medical armamentarium but it is not yet known whether they represent a truly efficient alternative, although their rapid onset of activity is already well recognized. Adjuvant analgesics, topical analgesics, anesthetic techniques and interventional techniques are all valid methods to help in the difficult management of pain and BTP in elderly patients with cancer. However, none has reached a satisfying scientific level of evidence as to nowadays make the development of undisputed best practice guidelines possible. Further research is therefore on the agenda.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 64 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 64 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 12 19%
Student > Postgraduate 9 14%
Researcher 8 13%
Student > Bachelor 7 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 8%
Other 15 23%
Unknown 8 13%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 28 44%
Nursing and Health Professions 10 16%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 6 9%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 3%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 3%
Other 7 11%
Unknown 9 14%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 07 January 2015.
All research outputs
#14,780,519
of 22,755,127 outputs
Outputs from Drugs & Aging
#937
of 1,194 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#127,859
of 227,074 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Drugs & Aging
#13
of 18 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,755,127 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,194 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.6. This one is in the 20th percentile – i.e., 20% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 227,074 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 18 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.