Survey on recognition of post-mastectomy pain syndrome by breast specialist physician and present status of treatment in Japan

• Published in: Breast cancer (Tokyo, Japan) Vol. 21; no. 2; pp. 191 - 197
• Main Authors: Kojima, Keiko Y., Kitahara, Masaki, Matoba, Motohiro, Shimoyama, Naohito, Uezono, Shoichi
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Tokyo Springer Japan 01.03.2014; Springer
• Subjects: Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal - therapeutic use; Asian Continental Ancestry Group; Attitude of Health Personnel; Breast Neoplasms - surgery; Cancer Research; Chronic pain; Chronic Pain - etiology; Female; Health Surveys; Homeopathy; Humans; Male; Mastectomy - adverse effects; Materia medica and therapeutics; Medicine; Medicine & Public Health; Oncology; Original Article; Pain, Postoperative - etiology; Pain, Postoperative - therapy; Patient Education as Topic; Physicians; Surgery; Surgical Oncology; Surveys; Surveys and Questionnaires; Therapeutics; Treatment; Breast Cancer; Post-mastectomy pain syndrome; Recognition by physicians; Quality of life
• ISSN: 1340-6868; 1880-4233
• DOI: 10.1007/s12282-012-0376-8

Background Post-mastectomy pain syndrome (PMPS) is chronic pain after breast cancer surgery and is reported to influence quality of life (QOL). Although the results of a survey in Japan showed high incidence, at 21–65 %, many of the patients had never been treated for PMPS. One reason for this low treatment rate may be poor understanding of PMPS by medical personnel. In this study, we conducted the survey by using questionnaire to assess current treatment and the recognitions of the medical personnel. Methods We mailed a questionnaire to 647 specialist members of the Breast Cancer Society. Results Of those, 34.7 % responsed. While PMPS was recognized by as much as 70.5 % of responding physicians, it was treated by as little as 47.7 % of the responders. In addition, while non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), which were ineffective in relieving PMPS, were used by 78.4 % of the responders, effective drugs were rarely used; therefore, treatment was considered ineffective by 69.5 %. This indicates that appropriate therapies are not widely used, and none of the current therapies are very effective. Conclusions The results showed high recognition of PMPS pathology among physicians, but the treatment rate was as low as 47.7 %. NSAIDs were the main treatment, and the treatment effects were not satisfactory. It was revealed that currently appropriate treatment modalities have not been widely used. Education of physicians, distribution of treatment information and further studies are considered necessary for the spread of appropriate treatment modality.