Network


Latest external collaboration on country level. Dive into details by clicking on the dots.

Hotspot


Dive into the research topics where K. Dean Willis is active.

Publication


Featured researches published by K. Dean Willis.


Neuromodulation | 2007

Polyanalgesic consensus conference 2007: recommendations for the management of pain by intrathecal (intraspinal) drug delivery: report of an interdisciplinary expert panel.

Timothy R. Deer; Elliot S. Krames; Samuel J. Hassenbusch; Allen W. Burton; David Caraway; Stuart DuPen; James C. Eisenach; Michael A. Erdek; Eric Grigsby; Phillip Kim; Robert M. Levy; Gladstone McDowell; Nagy Mekhail; Sunil Panchal; Joshua Prager; Richard Rauck; Michael Saulino; Todd Sitzman; Peter S. Staats; Michael Stanton-Hicks; Lisa Stearns; K. Dean Willis; William W. Witt; Kenneth A. Follett; Marc A. Huntoon; Leong Liem; James P. Rathmell; Mark S. Wallace; Eric Buchser; Michael Cousins

Background.  Expert panels of physicians and nonphysicians in the field of intrathecal therapies convened in 2000 and 2003 to make recommendations for the rational use of intrathecal analgesics based on the preclinical and clinical literature known up to those times. An expert panel of physicians convened in 2007 to update previous recommendations and to form guidelines for the rational use of intrathecal opioid and nonopioid agents.


Journal of Pain and Symptom Management | 2000

Evidence-Based Review of the Literature on Intrathecal Delivery of Pain Medication

Gary J. Bennett; Mario Serafini; Kim J. Burchiel; Eric Buchser; Ashley Classen; Tim Deer; Stuart L. Du Pen; F. Michael Ferrante; Samuel J. Hassenbusch; Leland Lou; Jan Maeyaert; Richard D. Penn; Russell K. Portenoy; Richard Rauck; K. Dean Willis; Tony L. Yaksh

Evidence-based medicine depends on the existence of controlled clinical trials that establish the safety and efficacy of specific therapeutic techniques. Many interventions in clinical practice have achieved widespread acceptance despite little evidence to support them in the scientific literature; the critical appraisal of these interventions based on accumulating experience is a goal of medicine. To clarify the current state of knowledge concerning the use of various drugs for intraspinal infusion in pain management, an expert panel conducted a thorough review of the published literature. The exhaustive review included 5 different groups of compounds, with morphine and bupivacaine yielding the most citations in the literature. The need for additional large published controlled studies was highlighted by this review, especially for promising agents that have been shown to be safe and efficacious in recent clinical studies.


Journal of Pain and Symptom Management | 2000

Clinical guidelines for intraspinal infusion: Report of an expert panel

Gary J. Bennett; Kim J. Burchiel; Eric Buchser; Ashley Classen; Tim Deer; Stuart L. Du Pen; F. Michael Ferrante; Samuel J. Hassenbusch; Leland Lou; Jan Maeyaert; Richard D. Penn; Russell K. Portenoy; Richard Rauck; Mario Serafini; K. Dean Willis; Tony L. Yaksh

Consensus guidelines developed by an expert panel are helpful to clinicians when there is variation in practice and lack of a firm evidence base for an intervention, such as intraspinal therapy for pain. An internet-based survey of practitioners revealed remarkable variation in practice patterns surrounding intraspinal therapy. This prompted an interdisciplinary panel with extensive clinical experience in intraspinal infusion therapy to evaluate the results of the survey, the systematic reviews of the literature pertaining to this approach, and their own clinical experience with long-term spinal infusions. The panel proposed a scheme for the selection of drugs and doses for intraspinal therapy, and suggested guidelines for administration that would increase the likelihood of a successful outcome. These expert panel guidelines were designed to provide an initial structure for clinical decision making that is based on the best available evidence and the perspectives of experienced clinicians.


Neuromodulation | 2012

Polyanalgesic Consensus Conference 2012: Recommendations for the Management of Pain by Intrathecal (Intraspinal) Drug Delivery: Report of an Interdisciplinary Expert Panel: INTRATHECAL THERAPY CONSENSUS

Timothy R. Deer; Joshua Prager; Robert M. Levy; James P. Rathmell; Eric Buchser; Allen W. Burton; David Caraway; Michael Cousins; José De Andrés; Sudhir Diwan; Michael A. Erdek; Eric Grigsby; Marc A. Huntoon; Marilyn S. Jacobs; Philip Kim; Krishna Kumar; Michael Leong; Liong Liem; Gladstone McDowell; Sunil Panchal; Richard Rauck; Michael Saulino; B. Todd Sitzman; Peter S. Staats; Michael Stanton-Hicks; Lisa Stearns; Mark T. Wallace; K. Dean Willis; William W. Witt; Tony L. Yaksh

Introduction:  The use of intrathecal (IT) infusion of analgesic medications to treat patients with chronic refractory pain has increased since its inception in the 1980s, and the need for clinical research in IT therapy is ongoing. The Polyanalgesic Consensus Conference (PACC) panel of experts convened in 2000, 2003, and 2007 to make recommendations on the rational use of IT analgesics based on preclinical and clinical literature and clinical experiences.


Neuromodulation | 2012

Polyanalgesic Consensus Conference--2012: recommendations to reduce morbidity and mortality in intrathecal drug delivery in the treatment of chronic pain.

Timothy R. Deer; Robert M. Levy; Joshua Prager; Eric Buchser; Allen W. Burton; David Caraway; Michael Cousins; José De Andrés; Sudhir Diwan; Michael A. Erdek; Eric Grigsby; Marc A. Huntoon; Marilyn S. Jacobs; Philip Kim; Krishna Kumar; Michael Leong; Liong Liem; Gladstone McDowell; Sunil Panchal; Richard Rauck; Michael Saulino; B. Todd Sitzman; Peter S. Staats; Michael Stanton-Hicks; Lisa Stearns; Mark S. Wallace; K. Dean Willis; William W. Witt; Tony L. Yaksh; Nagy Mekhail

Introduction:  Targeted intrathecal drug infusion to treat moderate to severe chronic pain has become a standard part of treatment algorithms when more conservative options fail. This therapy is well established in the literature, has shown efficacy, and is an important tool for the treatment of both cancer and noncancer pain; however, it has become clear in recent years that intrathecal drug delivery is associated with risks for serious morbidity and mortality.


Neuromodulation | 2012

Polyanalgesic Consensus Conference--2012: recommendations on trialing for intrathecal (intraspinal) drug delivery: report of an interdisciplinary expert panel.

Timothy R. Deer; Joshua Prager; Robert M. Levy; Allen W. Burton; Eric Buchser; David Caraway; Michael Cousins; José De Andrés; Sudhir Diwan; Michael A. Erdek; Eric Grigsby; Marc A. Huntoon; Marilyn S. Jacobs; Phillip Kim; Krishna Kumar; Michael Leong; Liong Liem; Gladstone McDowell; Sunil Panchal; Richard Rauck; Michael Saulino; Peter S. Staats; Michael Stanton-Hicks; Lisa Stearns; B. Todd Sitzman; Mark S. Wallace; K. Dean Willis; William W. Witt; Tony L. Yaksh; Nagy Mekhail

Introduction:  Trialing for intrathecal pump placement is an essential part of the decision‐making process in placing a permanent device. In both the United States and the international community, the proper method for trialing is ill defined.


Neuromodulation | 2012

Polyanalgesic Consensus Conference—2012: Consensus on Diagnosis, Detection, and Treatment of Catheter‐Tip Granulomas (Inflammatory Masses)

Timothy R. Deer; Joshua Prager; Robert M. Levy; James P. Rathmell; Eric Buchser; Allen W. Burton; David Caraway; Michael Cousins; José De Andrés; Sudhir Diwan; Michael A. Erdek; Eric Grigsby; Marc A. Huntoon; Marilyn S. Jacobs; Philip Kim; Krishna Kumar; Michael Leong; Liong Liem; Gladstone McDowell; Sunil Panchal; Richard Rauck; Michael Saulino; B. Todd Sitzman; Peter S. Staats; Michael Stanton-Hicks; Lisa Stearns; Mark S. Wallace; K. Dean Willis; William W. Witt; Tony L. Yaksh

Introduction:  Continuous intrathecal infusion of drugs to treat chronic pain and spasticity has become a standard part of the algorithm of care. The use of opioids has been associated with noninfectious inflammatory masses at the tip of the intrathecal catheter, which can result in neurologic complications.


Neuromodulation | 2008

Management of Intrathecal Catheter‐Tip Inflammatory Masses: An Updated 2007 Consensus Statement From An Expert Panel

Timothy R. Deer; Elliot S. Krames; Samuel J. Hassenbusch; Allen W. Burton; David Caraway; Stuart DuPen; James C. Eisenach; Michael A. Erdek; Eric Grigsby; Phillip Kim; Robert M. Levy; Gladstone McDowell; Nagy Mekhail; Sunil Panchal; Joshua Prager; Richard Rauck; Michael Saulino; Todd Sitzman; Peter S. Staats; Michael Stanton-Hicks; Lisa Stearns; K. Dean Willis; William W. Witt; Kenneth A. Follett; Mark Huntoon; Leong Liem; James P. Rathmell; Mark S. Wallace; Eric Buchser; Michael Cousins

Background.  Expert panel of physicians and nonphysicians, all expert in intrathecal (IT) therapies, convened in the years 2000 and 2003 to make recommendations for the rational use of IT analgesics based on the preclinical and clinical literature known up to those times, presentations of the expert panel, discussions on current practice and standards, and the result of surveys of physicians using IT agents. An expert panel of physicians and convened in 2007 to review previous recommendations and to form recommendations for the rational use of IT agents as they pertain to new scientific and clinical information regarding the etiology, prevention and treatment for IT granuloma.


Neuromodulation | 1999

The effects of long-term intraspinal infusion therapy with noncancer pain patients: evaluation of patient, significant-other, and clinic staff appraisals.

K. Dean Willis; Daniel M. Doleys

Objective. This study examines, in a retrospective fashion, the effects of intraspinal infusion therapy, primarily using opioids, in the treatment of recalcitrant noncancer pain in a sample of 29 consecutive patients. Patients were, on average, 58 years of age having had one surgery, with a pain duration of 221 months. Mean follow‐up duration was 31 months. Telephone interviews by a disinterested party were used to obtain follow‐up data from patients and their significant others. In addition, clinic staff rated patient improvement.


Neuromodulation | 2008

Future Directions for Intrathecal Pain Management: A Review and Update From the Interdisciplinary Polyanalgesic Consensus Conference 2007

Timothy R. Deer; Elliot S. Krames; Samuel J. Hassenbusch; Allen W. Burton; David Caraway; Stuart DuPen; James C. Eisenach; Michael A. Erdek; Eric Grigsby; Phillip Kim; Robert M. Levy; Gladstone McDowell; Nagy Mekhail; Sunil Panchal; Joshua Prager; Richard Rauck; Michael Saulino; Todd Sitzman; Peter S. Staats; Michael Stanton-Hicks; Lisa Stearns; K. Dean Willis; William W. Witt; Kenneth A. Follett; Mark Huntoon; Leong Liem; James P. Rathmell; Mark S. Wallace; Eric Buchser; Michael Cousins

Background.  Expert panels of physicians and nonphysicians, all expert in intrathecal (IT) therapies, convened in the years 2000 and 2003 to make recommendations for the rational use of IT analgesics, based on the preclinical and clinical literature known up to those times, presentations of the expert panels, discussions on current practice and standards, and the result of surveys of physicians using IT agents. An expert panel of physicians and nonphysicians has convened in 2007 to update information known regarding IT therapies and to update information on new and novel opioid and nonopioid analgesic compounds that might show promise for IT use.

Collaboration


Dive into the K. Dean Willis's collaboration.

Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Joshua Prager

University of California

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Lisa Stearns

University of Minnesota

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Michael Cousins

Royal North Shore Hospital

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Allen W. Burton

University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

David Caraway

West Virginia University

View shared research outputs
Researchain Logo
Decentralizing Knowledge