|
11th October 2004
Fighting Inequality in Chronic Pain
Equality is a basic right for all European citizens1, yet 75 million adults2 are being denied this right as a result of significant differences in the treatment of people and their pain. In the search for a solution to this inequality, patients' representatives will come together during European Week against Pain (llth -17th October).
Initial research, due for publication next year, has revealed unique country differences. In Finland, Narcotic Prescription forms are manufactured and distributed with the same vigilance and scrutiny as bank notes3, almost no (1 %) Swiss chronic pain sufferers have seen a pain specialist2, while in France only one opioid is indicated in the treatment of non-cancer pain4. "An army of chronic pain sufferers have been let down for too long," said Frances Whelan of the Irish Chronic Pain Association. "We need to find a way to have a strong central voice, only then will we be able to lobby effectively ," concludes Whelan .
In the Netherlands, life for people with persistent pain is made even harder by regulations which ban those who require strong opioids from driving5, despite evidence that their ability is not impaired6. It's a decision branded "crazy" by Hilda Wieberneit- Tolman of the Dutch Pain Platform. "This ban does not happen elsewhere in Europe. Opioids are a safe and effective way for people to regain their normal evervday life."
Variations in care
These examples show that attitudes and standards to chronic pain and its management mean people with pain can face marginalisation and unhelpful regulation. Additionally, education of healthcare professionals in the subject of pain can be woefully lacking in general across Europe and in some countries it is effectively non-existent. "It would be laughable if it wasn't so serious," says Pete Moore of the NHS Expert Patients Programme. "These wild variations in the care offered to chronic pain sufferers makes a mockery of the European Union."
Patient's representatives from the following European countries will input into the strategy; Finland, Norway, Sweden, Denmark, Ireland, United Kingdom, Israel, Portugal, Belgium, Germany, Netherlands, Austria and Switzerland.
-ends-
Quantifying the Problem -The Pain in Europe Study
The Pain in Europe survey was the largest and most in depth study of long term (chronic) pain to date. The survey uncovered that even with the advanced treatment options that are available today, the stark reality is that nearly 1 in 5 of the adult population across Europe suffers from long-term pain -at least 75 million people.
In interviews with over 46,000 people across Europe the Pain in Europe study highlighted the true burden of chronic pain. Isolation, desperation and a general belief that they are being a burden to their families, friends and colleagues are the overriding feelings of the people with pain interviewed for the survey. One in five has lost their job, a similar number have been diagnosed with depression because of their pain and, for one in six, the pain is sometimes so bad they simply want to die2.
For more information on Pain in Europe please visit www.painineurope.com.
Pain in Europe has been funded by an educational grant from Mundipharma International Limited.
About EFIC and the European Week Against Pain
Against this background of apathy, EFIC, the European Federation of National IASP Chapters (International Association for the Study of Pain), conducts European Week Against Pain (12-19th October) to fight for increased awareness and recognition for people living with chronic pain.
For further information, please contact:
Emily Wheldon
Email : emily.wheldon@redconsultancy.com
Tel: +44 (0) 20 7025 6404
Mob: +44 (0) 07801 367 164
1 Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union
2 Pain in Europe Study 2003
3 http://www.setec.fi/
4 Agence Française de securite santitaire des Produits de Sante (http://agmed.sante.gouv.fr)
5 http://rijbewijs.cbr .nllpdfIRegeling%20eisen%20geschikt%202000.pdf
6 Fishbain DA, Cutler RB, Rosomoff HL, et al. J Pain Symptom Manage 2003;25:559-77.
|
