CP is a prevalent problem in many countries. No suitable widespread study is conducted on the prevalence, treatment, and other aspects of CP in Iran. The current study aimed to obtain preliminary information on CP in a large urban population of Iran, examining, treatment methods, satisfaction, and patient characteristics.
Widespread studies show that the prevalence of CP varies in different communities. In a systematic review by Ospina and Harstall on CP (
3), the average prevalence of CP was reported 35%. In the selected sample from urban areas of Shiraz, the prevalence of CP was only 6.95% (73/1050), which was lower in comparison to the results of most of the previous studies.
world health organization (WHO) data on neurological disorders leading to public health challenges estimated the prevalence of chronic pain ranging from 5% to 30% in the adult population of different countries (
14). The statistics published by WHO revealed that approximately 20% of the global population had CP to some degree (
15). According to a study on 57,660 individuals aged 12 to 44 years in Canada, the prevalence of CP was 10% (
9). In addition, two other studies performed in the U.S. and 16 European countries indicated that the prevalence of CP was 25% and 20%, respectively (
2,
10). Prevalence of CP in these European countries ranged from 12% in Spain to 30% in Norway (
2). A study in Australia indicated that the prevalence of CP was 18.5% in the adult population (
16).
Comparing the current study data to those of Breivik’s (
2), obvious limitations accounting to variances and limitation of interpretation include sample size, and geographical location. The current study was single centered, with smaller sample of one cultural group. Breivik’s study was a multicenter broader study on 46,000 individuals in 15 different European countries and Israel (
17,
18). Despite differences between the studies, the current study results showed significant prevalence of CP in the study group, encouraging further comprehensive evaluation of CP in Iran.
A potential method to extend sample sizes and locations in Iran would be using telephone, internet and video interviewing technologies. Up to now, several recent studies have used such tools to complete questionnaires successfully (
2).
In the study by Breivik et al. (
2), 60% of CP subjects experienced two to nine medical consultations within six months of the study. In the current study, about 77% of the CP subjects were examined by a general practitioner once or more. In the U.S., 70 million individuals visited doctors for CP and health services were used for CP 425 million times each year (
6,
7). It can have a big impact on health economies and individuals out of pocket costs (
1,
5).
In a study conducted in Europe, 40% of the subjects said that their medical treatments were satisfactory and effective, 41% believed that medical treatments were sometimes effective, and 15% indicated that their medical treatments were inadequate and ineffective. In that study, up to 77% of the subjects expressed that their treatments were complete and satisfactory (
11). In more recent findings, the patients with CP described 27% - 42% of medical treatments as very effective and adequate for their problems (
12,
13). The current study results were significantly higher especially regarding the levels of treatment satisfaction (44% - 50%).
The study by Breivik et al. (
2) indicated that 66% of the subjects were treated by the analgesics prescribed by doctors. These drugs included NSAIDs (44%), weak opioids (23%), paracetamol (Acetaminophen) (18%), COX-2 inhibitors (1 to 36%), and strong opioids (5%). In a study by Perez et al. 66% of the subjects were under pharmacological treatments (
19). Gamero et al. (
20) estimated that NSAIDs (57%), paracetamol (29% - 32%), and opioids (6.4%) were used more frequently to treat CP. The current study results showed that 54% of the subjects used common over the counter analgesics, including NSAIDs (25.3%), narcotic analgesics (17.2%), and beta blockers (7.5%). These findings are comparable with those of other studies, such as the one by Breivik et al. (
2).
Breivik et al. (
2), demonstrated that two-thirds of the subjects with CP also used other treatment modalities such as massage therapy (30%), physical therapy (21%), and acupuncture (13%), with or without drug therapy. Similarly, Gamero et al. (
20) showed that 33% - 35% of the subjects used non-drug treatments, such as massage (9% - 15%) and physical therapies (7% - 8%). Rodriguez et al. (
21) showed that 51% of the subjects used complementary therapies . In the current study, 37% of the subjects used non-pharmacological treatments, including traditional cultural medicine (20.4%), acupuncture (18.5%), thermotherapy (15%), and exercise (13%). The rate of non-drug therapy use in the study (37%) is in agreement with the findings of the study by Gamero et al. (33% - 35%) (
20). In the study by Breivik et al. (
2), a greater number of the subjects with CP used non-pharmacological treatments (66%). These disparities could be due to health literacy, cultural issues or level of acceptance of non-pharmacological treatments as the main method to treat CP in different countries.
There were some limitations in the current study. The prevalence of subtypes of chronic pain such as neuropathic, nociceptive or inflammatory pain was not investigated. The prevalence could be affected by limitations in capturing all pain populations. For example, cognitively impaired and nursing home residents or patients with cancer could not be included. The current study was based on that of Breivik’s, which defined the duration of chronic pain in the current study is considered at least six months, and this could have an impact on the prevalence of CP when compared with those of the other studies. Some studies used three months or less as a trigger for inclusion in CP (
16).
The face-to-face nature of the interviews is considered as strength of the study. However, the timing of the interviews could have a negative impact, since interviews were conducted on the week-days and in working hours, which is likely to include less men or working participants. Most of the overseas studies were conducted using a telephone or computer-based interview system, which may also have implications on the CP assessment (
2). There are well-established biases created in any telephone interviews. Only those people listed in the telephone directories were included. Females were more likely to answer the telephone and more willing to cooperate and take part in a survey than the males, and there was also a greater likelihood that the elderly were at home than a young person (
2).
The current study demonstrated 6.95% prevalence for CP in Shiraz, Iran. Authors expected a higher rate, given that Iran has been through much turmoil in recent decades including an eight- year war, many natural disasters such as earthquakes and a very high rate of road accidents. Pain medicine is a young specialty and is introduced as a postgraduate fellowship in recent years. There seems to be a growing recognition of CP amongst patients and health practitioners. Findings of the current study can contribute to better recognition of CP as a significant health care issue in Iran.
Larger population based studies at a national level are needed to gain more accurate data on CP, and also explore other aspects of chronic pain including cancer-related chronic pain, neuropathic pain, health related costs etc. in Iranian communities. Therefore, health policy makers will have a better overview to consider appropriate policies to tackle this issue.