|
Chronic Refractory Angina |
||||||||||||||
The Primary Care TeamPrimary care teams have an important part to play in the management of chronic refractory angina. Unfortunately many GPs appear to be intimidated by the complexity of a clinical problem that has already confounded the "specialists". Patients and their carers often say "our family doctor is very kind but what can he do when even the specialist says that there is nothing more he can do?" The trick to managing patients with chronic refractory angina is to recognise that it is an ischaemia-related chronic visceral pain syndrome in which fear, anxiety and depression play an important role. Like all chronic pain conditions there is ample opportunity for the doctor to play a role in the progression of the syndrome. A clear example of this is when the patient is told by the cardiologist or cardiac surgeon "there is nothing more that I can do". Nearly every patient says that it was one of the lowest points in their life. Thus once the diagnosis has been made and no sensible treatment options offered it would be helpful to arrange to see the patient and their carers in order to regain their confidence and develop a treatment plan. The phrase "there is nothing more that I can do" is not the same thing as "there is nothing more that can be done" but that is commonly what patients think it means. This is partly because the cardiac patient has become conditioned to believe that the revascularisation strategy is the only strategy. After 2 or more bypass procedures and umpteen angioplasties patients can hardly be blamed for asking "if simple alternatives exist then why weren't they tried earlier?" The real reasons for this are complex and have to do with the prevailing disease-centred treatment paradigm in which the anti-ischaemia approach to the management of chronic disabling angina is considered the only justifiable way to treat patients and that alternative pain management techniques should be reserved as a treatment of last resort once that anti-ischaemia treatment possibilities have been exhausted. The fact that a simple explanation of the condition, cardiac rehabilitation, relaxation techniques and transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) can produce profound improvements in the patients quality of life represents a major challenge to the conventional treatment model. The notion that relaxation training must be reserved until after a trial of redo revascularisation is a logical absurdity on all counts except in the increasingly rare situation when redo revascularisation can realistically increase life expectancy. The process of rehabilitation begins with agreeing realistic goals and is based on a proper understanding of the pathogenesis of the condition. Too much information can overwhelm the patient so the first visit should simply set out the aims and briefly outline the strategy. A patient information sheet on angina and the treatment guideline can be helpful. Proposed checklist
It may also be worth making a formal request to the cardiac specialist for the patient to be seen in the new patient clinic once the diagnosis has been made. This will ensure that the patient will have extra time to discuss important issues with a senior experienced clinician rather than the often unhelpful and all to brief meeting with an inexperienced junior. Chronic refractory angina has been badly neglected and the complexity of the problem requires a multi disciplinary approach involving professional groups such as pain specialists, psychologists and rehabilitation teams who do not interact closely with cardiologists and cardiac surgeons. The primary care physician can use his/her influence to encourage the development of multi professional groups with an interest in refractory angina. A list of specialist centres with an interest in refractory angina will be available from January 2001. |