Pain Management

Question: Discuss about thePain Management. Answer: Introduction: This tends to be a summary of the article, Interdisciplinary Chronic Pain Management developed by Robert Gatchel, Donald McGeary, Ben Lippe and Cindy McGeary. At the begin the authors begin by reinstating that chronic pain has been a significant and costly challenge to our country, as well as globally. Thus, there has emerged some concerns in regards to the effectiveness of the traditional medical methods, hence creating the suggestions of the needs of setting an alternative chronic pain treatment methods. Marcus (2009) further continues arguing that the study of bio-psychological model of pain in the past one decade has stimulated the development of therapeutically effective and cost effective interdisciplinary chronic pain management initiatives. Compared to their past articles on history of pain management, this article will provide discussion on the major components of the interdisciplinary pain management initiative, most probably their aim is on providing based results that has turn out to be documented as effective ways of interdisciplinary pain management program, as well as noting the barriers that have blocked the application of this pain management program. Hence, its clear that the authors have effectively worked on addressing the issue of chronic pain which too many is not a joke because of the arising complications if not treated. Recent studies conducted show that 30% and 40% of the adults suffer from chronic illness, and over 100 million adults globally suffer from the chronic pain condition, which tends to be great than the total number of people suffering from diabetes Gatchel et al, (2015). As a result, the authors indicate that chronic pain from such statistics carried out is a primary health problem both to our country and globally. Since, history the idea of pain management has existed for many years with some examples being on records from the ancient civilization that is from China, Egypt, India, Greece and Roman who were the first to understand the significance of the nervous system. The study on formal pain medication went on for quite sometimes and until 1970s when USA took the initiative of establishing chronic pain rehabilitation programs after they witnessed the importance of pain management needs for injured soldiers who took place in World War 2. Indications developed by the author shows that Bonica (1997) study expressed concerns that some people were still struggling with the condition of chronic pain and it tends to hard to find timely access to the specialized pain care. According to Wall (2000) report for early pain sufferers they were forced, because of the absence of having an organized pain clinic services to make an assumption of the simple causes of pain and they hoped that they would easily find a specialist to provide them with appropriate care. From such historical facts on pain management, the authors have used different treatment and cost effectiveness strategic interdisciplinary pain management initiatives in development of the article. As stated from the article treatment and cost-effectiveness interdisciplinary initiatives have been effectively certified in regards to scientific literature. For instance, Jasen (2011) rates that application of interdisciplinary team for low back pain to be a strong recommendation which is often associated with high quality level evidence. Hence, having such strong endorsements in a persons mind coupled with other facts tends to consider additional clinical research in future. An investigation done by Stannard (2010) indicates that the existence of long term effectiveness of the interdisciplinary pain management initiatives reported improvements outcome from different domains (such as pain severity, the interference of pain and functioning), thus these gains were perceived to maintain at one year follow up. Herr Kwekkeboom (2003) indicated that the interdisciplinary pain management initiative could outperform the standard medical pain services that was less coordinated. As for the low chronic pain Banks Mackrodt (2005) indicates that the interdisciplinary care tends to demonstrate greater effectiveness compared to other numerous typical pain management strategies, including the use of medication and cognitive behavioral therapy. Hence, it becomes certain that from the arguments developed y the authors on behavioral health provider it can easily enhance chronic illness care in patient centered medical homes through improvement of motivation and treatment adherence in the care patients. The authors article still review that cost effectiveness in regards to interdisciplinary pain initiative has been appropriately documented, but there still exist some form of reluctance in terms of third party who pay compensate for such incentive comprehensive care. Since, the interdisciplinary treatment tends to be a superior treatment choice when considering treatment cost in terms of health care; it tends to be an effective strategy for chronic pain management. In terms of barrier Bill and colleagues (2011) found out that the primary barriers to the authorization and the use of the interdisciplinary pain management initiative has been the third party insurance payers. The payers tend to refuse to agree on programs such as that of available cost containment. As indicated in the article the third parties payers have been unable to get a grips of the essence of such programs and they have remained in the dark for a long time. Hence, the imprudent of such cost cutting efforts have limited the effective independent of interdisciplinary pain management programs. Therefore, the existences of these barriers have limited the access of patient to effective treatment and at a cut treatment cost. Based on the development of such barriers a lot has emerged in the landscape pertaining to pain management for the last one decade. Hence, in future the author argues that more work is needed for the translation of excellent scientific findings for the purpose of psychological interdisciplinary pain interventions. In addition they argue that with the increasing alarming rates of complexities in chronic pain for patients presenting different psychosocial co-morbidities, the existence of all these tends to act as the future frontier in regards to pain management facing specialist such as psychologists. (Gatchel et al, 2015). As pertained from the article chronic pain tends to be a significant and costly problem in Australia, and throughout the world. Though there has been significant progress made in identification of treatment approaches, there are still emerging obstacles which must be solved before there is witness of the benefits of the treatment. Data is available that indicates the significance of this chronic pain management strategy. As a result there is the need of paving way for such programs so that we could witness the significance of such an approach (Gatchel et al, 2015). Lastly, this article has significance as it argues the call for improved pain clinical models, as it argues the rest of interdisciplinary team to join in the fight of promoting chronic pain care for patients and families. References Gatchel.J. Robert, McGeary.D. Donald, McGeary.A. Cindy Lippe Ben. (2015). Interdisciplinary Chronic Pain Management. Schatman, M. E., Campbell, A. (2007).Chronic pain management: guidelines for multidisciplinary program development. New York, Informa Healthcare. Marcus, D. A. (2009).Chronic pain: an atlas of investigation and management. Oxford, Clinical Pub. Jensen, M. P. (2011).Hypnosis for chronic pain management. New York, Oxford University Press.. Stannard, C. F., Kalso, E., Ballantyne, J. (2010).Evidence-based chronic pain management. Chichester, UK, Wiley-Blackwell/BMJ. Banks, C., Mackrodt, K. (2005).Chronic pain management. London, Whurr. Herr, K., Kwekkeboom, K. (2003).Chronic pain management. Philadelphia, W.B. Saunders Co.