Postoperative patients' perspectives on rating pain: A qualitative study

Manual Acupuncture for Postoperative Pain and Recovery after Abdominal Surgeries: A Systematic Review

Introduction: Acupuncture's role in surgical and postoperative contexts is gaining traction. However, the evidence remains patchy and is often of low-grade quality, particularly in the context of postintestinal surgery. Purpose: To assess acupuncture's efficacy in pain relief and functional recovery after abdominal surgery. Methods: We searched PubMed, Cochrane, Web of Science, and Google Scholar for randomized trials using manual acupuncture as the main intervention. Outcomes included postoperative pain, analgesic use, nausea, gastrointestinal (GI) regeneration, and length of hospital stay. For risk of bias assessment Cochrane risk of bias tool 2 was employed. Registered with PROSPERO: CRD42022311718. Results: Of 700 records till May 2023, 8 trials (551 patients; 16-200/trial) were included. Due to factors such as varying experimental settings and unpublished protocols, there was high risk of bias and heterogeneity, making meta-analysis unfeasible. Safety data were documented sufficiently by two trials. However, acupuncture showed marked benefits in pain relief, less analgesic use, fewer nausea cases, and improved GI recovery. One study reported reduced hospitalization time. Conclusion: Due to the varied methodologies and potential biases in existing studies, the definitive effectiveness of acupuncture remains unclear. To confirm the potential benefits of acupuncture as suggested by the reviewed studies, it's imperative to have more standardized study protocols, well-defined interventions and controls, and objective measures of efficacy.

Use of opioids and opioid alternatives during general anesthesia: a pan-Canadian survey among anesthesiologists

PURPOSE

While there is limited patient-centred evidence (i.e., evidence that is important for patients and end-users) to inform the use of pharmacologic opioid minimization strategies (i.e., the use of opioid alternatives) for adult surgical patients requiring general anesthesia, such strategies are increasingly being adopted into practice. Our objectives were to describe anesthesiologists' beliefs regarding intraoperative opioid minimizing strategies use and utility, and to explore important clinical decision-making factors.

METHODS

We conducted a pan-Canadian web-based survey of anesthesiologists that was distributed using a modified Dillman technique. Our multidisciplinary team, including a patient partners panel, participated in the process of domains and items generation, items reduction, formatting, and composition. Our sampling frames were members of the Canadian Anesthesiologists' Society and members of the Association des Anesthésiologistes du Québec. We used the newsletters of each organization to distribute our survey, which was available in English and French and housed on the LimeSurvey (LimeSurvey GmbH, Hamburg, Germany) platform.

RESULTS

From our eligible sampling frame, 18% completed the survey (356 respondents out of 2,008 eligible participants). Most of the respondents believed that using opioid minimization strategies during general anesthesia could improve postoperative clinical outcomes, including pain control (84% agree or strongly agree, n = 344/409). Reported use of pharmacologic opioid minimization strategies was variable; however, most respondents believed that nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, acetaminophen, N-methyl-D-aspartate receptor antagonists (ketamine), α2-adrenoceptor agonists (dexmedetomidine), corticosteroids, and intravenous lidocaine improve prostoperative clinical outcomes. The primary factors guiding decision-making regarding the use of opioid minimization strategies were postoperative acute pain intensity, the impact of acute pain on functioning, patient well-being (i.e., quality of recovery) and patient satisfaction with care. A lack of evidence was the most important barrier limiting the use of opioid minimization strategies.

CONCLUSION

In our survey of Canadian anesthesiologists, several opioid minimization strategies were believed to be effective complements to general anesthesia, although there was substantial variation in their reported use. Future randomized controlled trials and systematic reviews evaluating the effectiveness of opioid minimization strategies should prioritize patient-centred outcome measures assessment such as the quality of recovery or the impact of acute pain on functioning.

Patient Experience of Pain Management Following Cardiac Surgery: A Mixed Methods Study

PURPOSE

Recovery following cardiac surgery via sternotomy involves weaning from invasive mechanical ventilation, maintaining hemodynamic stability, and preventing complications. In the early postoperative period, a key priority is adequate pain control to allow patients to actively participate in exercise. The purpose of this study was to (i) describe analgesic prescribing and administration practices following cardiac surgery via sternotomy and (ii) explore patients' pain experience and how this impacted participation in early postoperative care.

METHODS

This research project was a pilot descriptive exploratory study using multiple methods and conducted within a single site. A medical record chart audit was performed to obtain details of prescribed and administered multimodal analgesics and pain intensity scores over the first 3 days following surgery. Semi-structured interviews and responses to validated questionnaires were obtained from 20 postoperative patients on days 3-4 following cardiac surgery to determine pain experience and the impact of pain on participation in recovery.

RESULTS

Patients had a varied experience of pain intensity during their recovery. A total of 19 patients (95%) received 100% of their fixed daily dose of analgesics, but only 22% of available as needed opioids were administered on day 1 and only 12% were administered on day 2. Many patients experienced higher levels of pain at both rest and movement in the 24 hours prior to interview than were recorded in their medical records.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients can experience significant pain following major cardiac surgery, and this pain can hinder their ability to participate in important activities, such as deep breathing and coughing and mobilizing, that are central to their recovery. Gaps in the management of breakthrough pain in the early postoperative period were identified. To promote optimal recovery following cardiac surgery, nurses need to assess pain at both rest and movement and administer effective doses of as needed analgesia to manage the occurrence of breakthrough pain. Additionally, patients need to be more informed to understand the link between well controlled pain and their ability to participate in their recovery.

CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS

To promote optimal recovery following cardiac surgery, nurses need to assess pain at both rest and movement and administer effective doses of as needed analgesia to manage the occurrence of breakthrough pain. Additionally, patients need to be more informed to understand the link between well controlled pain and their ability to participate in their recovery.

Effectiveness of dexmedetomidine on patient-centred outcomes in surgical patients: a systematic review and Bayesian meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Dexmedetomidine is increasingly used for surgical patients requiring general anaesthesia. However, its effectiveness on patient-centred outcomes remains uncertain. Our main objective was to evaluate the patient-centred effectiveness of intraoperative dexmedetomidine for adult patients requiring surgery under general anaesthesia.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic search of MEDLINE, Embase, CENTRAL, Web of Science, and CINAHL from inception to October 2023. Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing intraoperative use of dexmedetomidine with placebo, opioid, or usual care in adult patients requiring surgery under general anaesthesia were included. Study selection, data extraction, and risk of bias assessment were performed by two reviewers independently. We synthesised data using a random-effects Bayesian regression framework to derive effect estimates and the probability of a clinically important effect. For continuous outcomes, we pooled instruments with similar constructs using standardised mean differences (SMDs) and converted SMDs and credible intervals (CrIs) to their original scale when appropriate. We assessed the certainty of evidence using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology. Our primary outcome was quality of recovery after surgery. To guide interpretation on the original scale, the Quality of Recovery-15 (QoR-15) instrument was used (range 0-150 points, minimally important difference [MID] of 6 points).

RESULTS

We identified 49,069 citations, from which 44 RCTs involving 5904 participants were eligible. Intraoperative dexmedetomidine administration was associated with improvement in postoperative QoR-15 (mean difference 9, 95% CrI 4-14, n=21 RCTs, moderate certainty of evidence). We found 99% probability of any benefit and 88% probability of achieving the MID. There was a reduction in chronic pain incidence (odds ratio [OR] 0.42, 95% CrI 0.19-0.79, n=7 RCTs, low certainty of evidence). There was also increased risk of clinically significant hypotension (OR 1.98, 95% CrI 0.84-3.92, posterior probability of harm 94%, n=8 RCTs) and clinically significant bradycardia (OR 1.74, 95% CrI 0.93-3.34, posterior probability of harm 95%, n=10 RCTs), with very low certainty of evidence for both. There was limited evidence to inform other secondary patient-centred outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with placebo or standard of care, intraoperative dexmedetomidine likely results in meaningful improvement in the quality of recovery and chronic pain after surgery. However, it might increase clinically important bradycardia and hypotension.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW PROTOCOL

PROSPERO (CRD42023439896).

Patient self-reported pain and nausea via smartphone following day care surgery, first year results: An observational cohort study

Contact with the hospital is usually limited for patients after day care surgery. Dedicated smartphone applications can improve communication and possibly enhance outcomes. The objective of this retrospective study was to evaluate patients' self-reported pain and nausea and assess the success of routine implementation of a smartphone application for outcome reporting. During preoperative assessment, patients were instructed to download and activate the smartphone application to report pain, nausea and to be in contact with the hospital after discharge. Main outcome was the number of patients actively using the smartphone application and the incidence of pain and nausea on postoperative day 1 to 7. In total, 4952 patients were included in the study. A total of 592 (12%) participants downloaded the application, of whom 351 (7%) were active users. A total of 4360 (88%) participants refrained from downloading the application. 56% (2,769) were female, the median age was 46 (18-92), and 4286 (87%) were classified as 1 or 2 American Society of Anesthesiologists Physical Status (ASA). Postoperative pain was experienced by 174 (76%) of 229 active users on postoperative day (POD) 1 and decreased to 44 (44%) of 100 active users on POD7. Postoperative nausea was experienced by 63 (28%) of 229 active users on POD1 and decreased to 12 (12%) of 100 active users on POD7. Female sex (p .000), socioeconomic status (p .001), and surgical severity (p .001) showed statistically significant differences between active users, non-active users, and non-downloaders. Most patients active with the application experienced pain and nausea on the first and second day after discharge. Only a minority of the patients used the application. Those who used it were satisfied with the possibilities offered to them. Future research should focus on increasing the uptake and effect of this application on the quality of recovery.

Experiences and perspectives of adults on using opioids for pain management in the postoperative period: A scoping review

BACKGROUND

Opioids play an important role in peri-operative pain management. However, opioid use is challenging for healthcare practitioners and patients because of concerns related to opioid crises, addiction and side effects.

OBJECTIVE

This review aimed to identify and synthesise the existing evidence related to adults' experiences of opioid use in postoperative pain management.

DESIGN

Systematic scoping review of qualitative studies. Inductive content analysis and the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF) were applied to analyse and report the findings and to identify unexplored gaps in the literature.

DATA SOURCES

Ovid MEDLINE, PsycInfo, Embase, CINAHL (EBSCO), Cochrane Library and Google Scholar.

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA

All qualitative and mixed-method studies, in English, that not only used a qualitative approach that explored adults' opinions or concerns about opioids and/or opioid reduction, and adults' experience related to opioid use for postoperative pain control, including satisfaction, but also aspects of overall quality of a person's life (physical, mental and social well being).

RESULTS

Ten studies were included; nine were qualitative ( n  = 9) and one used mixed methods. The studies were primarily conducted in Europe and North America. Concerns about opioid dependence, adverse effects, stigmatisation, gender roles, trust and shared decision-making between clinicians and patients appeared repeatedly throughout the studies. The TDF analysis showed that many peri-operative factors formed people's perceptions and experiences of opioids, driven by the following eight domains: Knowledge, Emotion, Beliefs about consequences, Beliefs about capabilities, Self-confidence, Environmental Context and Resources, Social influences and Decision Processes/Goals. Adults have diverse pain management goals, which can be categorised as proactive and positive goals, such as individualised pain management care, as well as avoidance goals, aimed at sidestepping issues such as addiction and opioid-related side effects.

CONCLUSION

It is desirable to understand the complexity of adults' experiences of pain management especially with opioid use and to support adults in achieving their pain management goals by implementing an individualised approach, effective communication and patient-clinician relationships. However, there is a dearth of studies that examine patients' experiences of postoperative opioid use and their involvement in opioid usage decision-making. A summary is provided regarding adults' experiences of peri-operative opioid use, which may inform future researchers, healthcare providers and guideline development by considering these factors when improving patient care and experiences.

Liposomal bupivacaine interscalene blocks demonstrate a greater proportion of total shoulder arthroplasty patients with clinically tolerable pain: a retrospective quality improvement study of 491 patients

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the effects of liposomal bupivacaine use for interscalene blocks on postoperative analgesia in total shoulder arthroplasty patients.

METHODS

De-identified total or reverse total shoulder arthroplasty patients between 2018 and 2021 were analyzed. Patients were grouped into single shot interscalene block with liposomal bupivacaine (LB) with plain bupivacaine, other block (OB) with other local anesthetics (mepivacaine, ropivacaine, or plain bupivacaine), or no block (NB). The primary outcome was the proportion of patients with clinically tolerable pain scores (mean VAS ≤4) from 0 to 24 ​h in each group. Secondary outcomes included averaged visual analog pain scores (VAS) and opioid consumption measured in morphine milligram equivalents (MMEs) from 0 to 24 ​h. We also analyzed the proportion of patients with clinically tolerable pain, mean VAS, and opioid consumption from 0 to 72 ​h in those patients with at least a 3-day hospital length of stay.

RESULTS

A total of 491 de-identified total shoulder arthroplasty patients, 285 liposomal bupivacaine group (LB), 178 other block group (OB), and 28 no block group (NB), were analyzed. The primary outcome showed a statistically significant different proportion of patients with clinically tolerable pain from 0 to 24 ​h in the LB group (69 ​%) vs. OB group (39 ​%) vs. NB group (11 ​%) (<0.001). Secondary outcomes included statistically significant differences in VAS (LB median ​= ​3.35, OB median ​= ​4.38, NB median ​= ​5.25 (p ​< ​0.001, <0.001)) and total MME opioid consumption (LB median ​= ​40, OB median ​= ​60, NB median ​= ​88 (p ​< ​0.001, 0.001)) between groups from 0 to 24 ​h. For patients who had hospital stays of at least 3 days, a significant association was found with having achieved clinically tolerable pain 0-72 ​h and the LB group (51 ​%) vs. OB group (21 ​%) vs. NB group (11 ​%) (P ​= ​0.006). However, there was no statistical difference in mean VAS or opioid consumption between these groups.

CONCLUSION

A greater proportion of total shoulder arthroplasty patients that received liposomal bupivacaine in interscalene block have clinically tolerable pain scores from 0 to 24 ​h, lower VAS, and lower MME consumption in patients following total shoulder arthroplasty.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III - Clinical Study.

Tools for assessing labour pain: a comprehensive review of research literature

ABSTRACT

The experience of pain associated with labour is complex and challenging to assess. A range of pain measurement tools are reported in the literature. This review aimed to identify current tools used in research to assess labour pain across the past decade and to evaluate their implementation and adequacy when used in the context of labour pain. A literature search was conducted in databases MEDLINE and Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health Literature, using search terms relating to labour, pain, and measurement. A total of 363 articles were selected for inclusion. Most studies (89.9%) assessed pain as a unidimensional experience, with the most common tool being the Visual Analogue Scale, followed by the Numerical Rating Scale. Where studies assessed pain as a multidimensional experience, the most common measurement tool was the McGill Pain Questionnaire. Only 4 studies that used multidimensional tools selected a tool that was capable of capturing positive affective states. Numerous variations in the implementation of scales were noted. This included 35 variations found in the wording of the upper and lower anchors of the Visual Analogue Scale, some assessment tools not allowing an option for "no pain," and instances where only sections of validated tools were used. It is clear that development of a standardised pain assessment strategy, which evaluates the multidimensions of labour pain efficiently and effectively and allows for both positive and negative experiences of pain to be reported, is needed.

Elective surgery in ankle and foot disorders-best practices for management of pain: a guideline for clinicians

PURPOSE

Complex elective foot and ankle surgeries are often associated with severe pain pre- and postoperatively. When inadequately managed, chronic postsurgical pain and long-term opioid use can result. As no standards currently exist, we aimed to develop best practice pain management guidelines.

METHODS

A local steering committee (n = 16) surveyed 116 North American foot and ankle surgeons to understand the "current state" of practice. A multidisciplinary expert panel (n = 35) was then formed consisting of orthopedic surgeons, anesthesiologists, chronic pain physicians, primary care physicians, pharmacists, registered nurses, physiotherapists, and clinical psychologists. Each expert provided up to three pain management recommendations for each of the presurgery, intraoperative, inpatient postoperative, and postdischarge periods. These preliminary recommendations were reduced, refined, and sent to the expert panel and "current state" survey respondents to create a consensus document using a Delphi process conducted from September to December 2020.

RESULTS

One thousand four hundred and five preliminary statements were summarized into 51 statements. Strong consensus (≥ 80% respondent agreement) was achieved in 53% of statements including the following: postsurgical opioid use risk should be assessed preoperatively; opioid-naïve patients should not start opioids preoperatively unless non-opioid multimodal analgesia fails; and if opioids are prescribed at discharge, patients should receive education regarding importance of tapering opioid use. There was no consensus regarding opioid weaning preoperatively.

CONCLUSIONS

Using multidisciplinary experts and a Delphi process, strong consensus was achieved in many areas, showing considerable agreement despite limited evidence for standardized pain management in patients undergoing complex elective foot and ankle surgery. No consensus on important issues related to opioid prescribing and cessation highlights the need for research to determine best practice.

Nurses' use of the clinically aligned pain assessment tool: A mixed methods study

BACKGROUND

Assessment of pain in the hospital has often relied on intensity rating alone. To address the gap in meeting patients' pain management expectations, a Midwestern medical center implemented the CAPA (Clinical Aligned Pain Assessment) tool for more comprehensive nursing pain assessments.

AIMS

This research described nurses' experience using CAPA on an adult general medicine unit and their documentation of the tool in the electronic health record (EHR) more than 5 years after CAPA implementation.

DESIGN

Mixed methods exploratory sequential design.

METHODS

A convenience sample of nurses (N = 8) participated in 2 focus groups to describe how they used CAPA, how well it assessed pain, how it determined pain interventions, and the challenges and advantages of using CAPA. Patient EHR data (N = 373) for a 6-month period from the same unit were analyzed to evaluate CAPA documentation.

RESULTS

Qualitative themes included: benefits of using CAPA, CAPA leads to a more comprehensive picture, variation in how CAPA is used, and challenges. Quantitative findings demonstrated most frequent documentation in the comfort domain and earlier, though still delayed, reassessment when a higher level of pain was noted. Mixed methods analysis revealed variation in knowledge and practice regarding which domains to document each shift and during reassessment.

CONCLUSIONS

As patient advocates, nurses are integral to thorough assessment and treatment of pain. Findings identified the need for methodological research of CAPA. As with any assessment tool, when using CAPA, ongoing monitoring is needed to address how it is administered, coded, and used for decision-making about pain management.

A comparison of acute pain management strategies after cesarean delivery

BACKGROUND

There are approximately 1.2 million cesarean deliveries performed each year in the United States alone. While traditional postoperative pain management strategies previously relied heavily on opioids, practitioners are now moving toward opioid-sparing protocols using multiple classes of nonnarcotic analgesics. Multimodal pain management systems have been adopted by other surgical specialties including gynecology, although the data regarding their use for postoperative cesarean delivery pain management remain limited.

OBJECTIVE

To determine if a multimodal pain management regimen after cesarean delivery reduces the required number of morphine milligram equivalents (a unit of measurement for opioids) compared with traditional morphine patient-controlled analgesia while adequately controlling postoperative pain.

STUDY DESIGN

This was a prospective cohort study of postoperative pain management for women undergoing cesarean delivery at a large county hospital. It was conducted during a transition from a traditional morphine patient-controlled analgesia regimen to a multimodal regimen that included scheduled nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and acetaminophen, with opioids used as needed. The data were collected for a 6-week period before and after the transition. The primary outcome was postoperative opioid use defined as morphine milligram equivalents in the first 48 hours. The secondary outcomes included serial pain scores, time to discharge, and exclusive breastfeeding rates. Women who required general anesthesia or had a history of substance abuse disorder were excluded. The statistical analyses included the Student t test, Wilcoxon rank-sum, and Hodges-Lehman shift, with a P value <.05 being considered significant.

RESULTS

During the study period, 877 women underwent cesarean delivery and 778 met the inclusion criteria-378 received the traditional morphine patient-controlled analgesia and 400 received the multimodal regimen. The implementation of a multimodal regimen resulted in a significant reduction in the morphine milligram equivalent use in the first 48 hours (28 [14-41] morphine milligram equivalents vs 128 [86-174] morphine milligram equivalents; P<.001). Compared with the traditional group, more women in the multimodal group reported a pain score ≤4 by 48 hours (88% vs 77%; P<.001). There was no difference in the time to discharge (P=.32). Of the women who exclusively planned to breastfeed, fewer used formula before discharge in the multimodal group than in the traditional group (9% vs 12%; P<.001).

CONCLUSION

Transition to a multimodal pain management regimen for women undergoing cesarean delivery resulted in a decrease in opioid use while adequately controlling postoperative pain. A multimodal regimen was associated with early successful exclusive breastfeeding.

Exploring the Face Validity of the Pain Numeric Rating Scale Among Healthcare Providers

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Healthcare providers (HCPs) use the numeric rating scale (NRS) under the assumption that it provides reliable information from which to make decisions regarding analgesic administration. METHODS: We explored the face validity of the NRS using a prospective single-blinded observational design. Pre and post NRS scores were obtained from HCPs who submerged their hand in a bucket of ice water (pain stimulus). RESULTS: Despite a consistent similar pain source, individual HCPs rated their pain very differently (range, 2-10), and there was a significant difference in self-estimated pain tolerance (μ = 7.06 [SD, 1.43]) and actual pain scores (μ = 6.35 [SD, 2.2]; t = 4.08, P < .001). CONCLUSION: The findings indicate a limitation in the face validity of the NRS. The high variance in NRS scores reaffirms the subjectivity of pain perception and brings into question the utility of using NRS scores when determining analgesic dosages.

Experience of Pain and Satisfaction with Pain Management in Patients After a Lumbar Disc Herniation Surgery

PURPOSE

The descriptive study was performed to assess patients' pain experienced in the early postoperative period of a lumbar disc herniation surgery and their satisfaction with the pain management administered.

DESIGN

This was a descriptive and cross-sectional study conducted from May 8 to November 8, 2017.

METHODS

Data collection was performed during interviews through the Patient Information Form (20 questions), Turkish version of clinical quality indicators in the Postoperative Pain Management questionnaire (19 questions). The questionnaire included 14 items and 3 subdimensions named nursing interventions, pain management, and the environment. The remaining 5 questions were related to pain management satisfaction and pain severity. Questionnaire items scored on a 1 to 5 Likert scale. The higher the total score obtained from the questionnaire is the satisfaction with pain management increases.

FINDINGS

The mean score obtained from the total questionnaire was 51.4 (standard deviation: 6.6).Characteristics of patients with lumbar disc herniation did not influence the total score obtained from the instrument and its sub-dimensions (P > .05). Overall satisfaction with pain management was high (mean: 8.3; standard deviation: 1.6) on the 0 to 10 visual analog scale. There was a statistically significant difference between the length of hospital stay, the type of anesthesia used, having more pain than expected, and the satisfaction score of patients (P < .05). As the length of procedure increases, the average and current pain scores increase as well (P < .05).

CONCLUSIONS

Results of this study indicate that despite pain experienced after the lumbar disc herniation surgery, patients' satisfaction with pain management was high. Encouraging nurses to implement systematic and evidence-based practices in pain management may help alleviate patients' pain after surgery and reduce variety of pain management practices among nurses.

Measuring pain in oncology outpatients: Numeric Rating Scale versus acceptable/non acceptable pain. A prospective single center study

Objectives

During all stages of oncologic diseases, pain is still a major problem. The Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) is one of the most frequently used tools for pain assessment, although interpretation is difficult. The main objective of this study is to compare two types of pain evaluation scales: NRS versus (non) acceptable pain evaluation scale. The secondary aim is to analyze a 10% sample of patients indicating non acceptable pain more in‐depth.

Methods

To assess the pain evaluation scales, a prospective observational study, with a nested retrospective in‐depth exploration, was conducted. One‐year data of patients visiting the outpatient clinic of the oncology center of a university hospital were used. Besides the pain scores of all patients, a 10% sample of patients indicating non acceptable pain was analyzed more in‐depth.

Results

During 1 year, a total of 37,580 patients registered at the outpatient clinic, of whom approximately 10% indicated non acceptable pain. The mean NRS of patients indicating non acceptable pain was 6.5 (n = 2153). For patients indicating acceptable pain, the mean NRS was 1.6 (n = 21,010). Although the presence of pain recorded in the patient record increased substantially over the year, the percentage of reported interventions only slightly increased.

Conclusion

The (non) acceptable pain evaluation seems a valuable addition to the NRS for assessing pain among patients with cancer. As interpretation of the NRS appears to be difficult, using the (non) acceptable pain evaluation is recommended. Moreover, creating awareness among specialists to discuss pain has a positive effect on the amount of pain discussed during consultation.

Comparison of prophylactic effect of topical Alchemilla vulgaris in glycerine versus that of dexamethasone on postoperative sore throat after tracheal intubation using a double-lumen endobronchial tube: a randomized controlled study

Background

Sore throat and hoarseness frequently occur following general anesthesia with tracheal intubation and are effectively reduced when dexamethasone is used prophylactically. Alchemilla vulgaris in glycerine (Neo Mucosal Activator^®) suppresses inflammatory response, possibly relieving sore throat.

Methods

We enrolled 94 patients (age ≥ 18 years) scheduled for thoracic surgery using double-lumen tube intubation. Before intubation, 0.2 mg/kg of dexamethasone was administered intravenously and 2 ml of normal saline was sprayed into the oropharyngeal cavity (Group D; n = 45), or 0.04 ml/kg normal saline was administered intravenously and 1 g of Neo Mucosal Activator^® mixed with 1 ml of normal saline was sprayed into the oropharyngeal cavity (Group N; n = 43), in a double blind and prospectively randomized manner. Postoperative sore throat and hoarseness were recorded using a numeral rating scale and a 4-point scale to detect a change in voice quality following tracheal extubation (at 1, 6, and 24 h). The primary outcome was the incidence of sore throat at 24 h following surgery. The secondary outcomes were incidence and severity of sore throat and hoarseness.

Results

There were no significant differences in the incidence of sore throat at 24 h following surgery (57.8% vs. 46.5%; P = 0.290) or in the incidence and intensity of sore throat and hoarseness at 1, 6, and 24 h following surgery between the groups.

Conclusions

A. vulgaris in glycerine did not significantly differ from dexamethasone for preventing sore throat and hoarseness owing to intubation.

Influence of interpretation of pain scores on patients' perception of pain: A prospective study

Background and Aims:

Assessment of pain using pain scales is essential. In the Numeric Rating Scale (NRS), patients are asked to score their pain intensity on a scale from 0 to 10 (10- worst pain). This requires some abstract thinking by the patient, also the pain scores (PS) may not essentially communicate the patients’ need for more analgesia. We planned a study to evaluate the change in patients’ self-assessed PS after understanding clinical interpretation of the NRS.

Methods:

This prospective study was registered after approval from our hospital ethics board. Sample size estimated for the trial was 360 patients. All postoperative patients were recruited after informed consent. Patients having prolonged stay in Intensive Care Unit (more than 48 h), or those who underwent emergency surgeries were excluded. During Acute Pain Service (APS) rounds, patients were asked to rate their PS on the NRS. This was followed by a briefing about the clinical interpretation of the scale, and the patients were asked to re score their pain using the same scale. The change in pain severity was compared using Chi-square test.

Results:

Following explanation, a change in severity was seen for PS at rest [X² (9, N- 360) = 441, P < 0.001] and at movement [X² (9, N- 360) = 508, P < 0.001]. Overall, a change in PS severity was seen in 162 patients (45%). A decrease and an increase in the severity of pain was seen in 119 and 41 patients respectively.

Conclusion:

Explaining the clinical interpretation of PS on a NRS does lead to a change in patients’ self-assessed PS.

Historical Alternans in the Emergency Department (H.A.t.E.D.) for Pain: An Analysis of Patient Pain Descriptors to Attending and Trainee Clinicians

OBJECTIVES

The concept of "historical alternans" (HA), a teaching folklore term referring to different descriptions of patient histories to trainees versus attending clinicians, can cause disjointed care and be a source of frustration for the trainee. Increased focus on the proper evaluation and treatment of pain in the emergency department (ED) setting prompts an evaluation of the HA concept as it relates to pain.

METHODS

We conducted a prospective observational pilot study comparing pain descriptions given to attending and trainee clinicians in the ED using a five-question pain description survey. Trainees included emergency medicine physician residents, emergency medicine physician assistant residents, off-service residents, and students. Trainees completed the first survey and attending clinicians repeated survey questions after at least a 10-minute washout. Surveys include descriptions of pain as part of patients' primary concern, severity indicated by a verbal numerical rating score (VNRS), and pain location, quality, and duration.

RESULTS

During a 10-day period, surveys were completed for 97 patient encounters. Most trainee clinicians were emergency medicine physician residents (53%), followed by emergency medicine physician assistants (32%), students (13%), and off-service residents (2%). Pain complaints centered on the abdomen (18.5%), chest (12%), and knee (6%). Differences in pain description were found in the majority of cases (55%), with most having one categorical difference. The majority of categorical differences were VNRS (38%), although the difference in scores was not statistically significant (P = 0.20). Medical students had the highest variance in VNRS difference compared with attending clinicians. There was no significant difference in described duration (P = 0.99) or quality of pain (P = 0.99) between trainee and attending clinicians.

CONCLUSIONS

Most patient encounters had at least one difference in categorical pain descriptors between trainee and attending clinicians. Although differences in severity of pain were present, they were not significant. HA does occur in the ED setting, but the magnitude of difference may be minimal.

A Scoping Review of Pain Management Education Programs (PMEPs): Do They Prepare Nurses to Deal with Patients' Postoperative Pain?

This is a report of a scoping review undertaken to obtain an overview of studies conducted on pain management education programs (PMEPs). The aim of this review was to describe existing research publications relating to PMEP to map how pain management practice training might directly influence surgical nurses in contributing to successful pain outcomes in patients. The initial search of electronic databases identified 40 articles according to the inclusion criteria and search strategy, which applied the following terms: ("Pain management education program") AND ∗ OR ∗ ("Nurses") AND ∗ OR ∗ ("Patient outcomes") AND ∗ ("Mixed methods"). Titles, abstracts, and keywords were also searched for the term "Nurse education." After applying exclusion criteria, five relevant peer-reviewed articles were eventually selected for the final charting of the data. The search included articles published between January 2015 and March 2019. The results show that PMEPs employ a variety of computer-based simulation, web-based facilitation, and video materials based on an evidence-based approach in their syllabuses. PMEPs were shown to enhance practice by promoting improved skills in critical thinking, leadership, patient management, and health promotion. Additionally, these programs promote an ability to practice across a variety of inpatient and outpatient settings, wherein nurses' engagement in managing patients' pain increased after completing the PMEP. Research within PMEP indicates that these programs may contribute to promoting opportunities for new collaborations within multidisciplinary team projects. Additionally, further research initiatives are needed to explore various aspects of these programs to enhance the nursing skills required for effective pain management, such as computer-based simulation, web-based facilitation, and video materials. Moreover, research relating to PMEPs in low- and middle-income countries is scarce and warrants further study.

∗Surgical patients' and registered nurses' satisfaction and Perception of Using the Clinically Aligned Pain Assessment (CAPA©) Tool for Pain Assessment

Pain management is a significant issue in all health care systems. Pain is often mismanaged because of lack of a comprehensive pain assessment. This often leads to inappropriate medication administration, inadequate pain relief, negative patient outcomes, and delayed discharges. There is an opportunity for developing a more comprehensive pain assessment. The Clinically Aligned Pain Assessment (CAPA©) pain tool was developed by the University of Utah.. It assesses 5 dimensions of pain: comfort, change in pain, pain control, functioning, and sleep. The purpose of the study was to determine if the patients and nurses were more satisfied discussing pain with CAPA© or the numeric rating scale (NRS) and words to describe pain, intensity, location, duration, and aggravating and/or alleviating factors (WILDA) tool. This study had a 2-group comparison design with mixed methods approach. One group comprised patients and the other group comprised nurses. There were 63 nurses and 95 patients enrolled in the study at two perioperative hospitals. The results demonstrated that the patients and nurses were more satisfied with using the CAPA© tool than the NRS/WILDA. The CAPA© tool allows for a more comprehensive way to assess pain which has the potential to create more effective treatments for pain, improve discharge time, and positive patient outcomes.

Prospective randomized appraisal of the best pain relief option after L4/L5 discectomy

OBJECTIVES

To determine the efficacy of paracetamol and tramadol analgesia via patient controlled pump and intermittent administration using the Short-Form McGill Pain Questionnaire after L4/L5 discectomy in neurosurgical patients.

METHODS

Fourteen months prospective quantitative study with 200 neurosurgical patients' participation who underwent elective discectomy of the L4/L5 intervertebral disc extrusion. The study was conducted due to a patient-controlled analgesia pump and intermittent analgesia application. Pain was assessed using the Short-Form McGill Pain Questionnaire in the Croatian language during the zero, first, and second postoperative day.

RESULTS

Perception of pain was reduced in patient controlled analgesia pump groups after the second measurement during the first postoperative day [95% CI: -3.89, -0.76], regardless of administered analgesic (p< 0.001). After the final measurement, at 7 PM on the second postoperative day, the differences were not significant (p= 0.070). This study results are registered and allocated in the Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ANZCTR).

DISCUSSION

Analgesia administration via patient-controlled pump contributes to the alleviation of postoperative pain after L4/L5 disc extrusion surgery regardless of administered analgesic.

Associations between ASA classification, self-estimated physical health, psychological wellbeing and anxiety among Swedish orthopaedic patients

BACKGROUND

The evaluation of one's physical health and psychological wellbeing may be subjective. Aspects of functional capacity, including the patients' own estimation of physical health and wellbeing, have been shown to be strong predictors of postoperative outcomes and should be the focus of further research.

AIM

This study aimed to explore the associations between ASA classification, self-estimated physical health, psychological wellbeing and anxiety among orthopaedic patients.

METHODS

This was a longitudinal study using a quantitative approach.

SETTINGS

A central county hospital in northern Sweden.

RESULTS

A high ASA classification rated by anaesthetists was not associated with physical health and psychological wellbeing self-estimated as less than good. A high ASA classification was significantly associated with self-estimated anxiety prior to surgery. Three days and one month post-surgery, the situation was reversed, and the ASA I/II group, to a significantly higher extent, rated that they felt anxiety.

CONCLUSION

Preoperative screening systems for orthopaedic patients should not only focus on the medical and objective physical issues but also include the patients' own estimation of their physical health and psychological wellbeing. It is essential that orthopaedic patients receive relevant information that provides a realistic outlook, as well as an honest and optimistic future view.

Patient reported postoperative pain with a smartphone application: A proof of concept

Postoperative pain management and pain assessment are still lacking the perspective of the patient. We have developed and studied a prototype smartphone application for patients to self-record postoperative pain. The main objective was to collect patient and stakeholder critique of improvements on the usability in order to develop a definitive version. The secondary objective was to investigate if patient self-recording compared to nurse-led assessment is a suitable method for postoperative pain management. Fifty patients and a stakeholder group consisting of ten healthcare- and ICT professionals and two members of the patient council participated in this study.

Patients' Experiences of Pain and Postoperative Nausea and Vomiting in the Early Postoperative Period After an Elective Knee Arthroplasty

PURPOSE

The aim of this study is to explore patients' experience of pain and postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) in the early postoperative period after knee arthroplasties.

DESIGN

This is a retrospective cohort study with a quantitative approach. Data from patients registered in the Swedish Perioperative Registry were used. We used the Strenghtening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) guidelines for cross-sectional studies.

METHODS

Data were collected from patients (N = 439) undergoing knee arthroplasties. The analysis was performed with descriptive and analytic statistics.

FINDINGS

The findings indicate that women experienced significantly higher levels of pain than men and suffered significantly more often from PONV. However, the relationship of postoperative pain and PONV was not significant. There was also no significance for the relationship among postoperative pain, PONV, and age.

CONCLUSIONS

Care needs to be sensitive to differences in experiencing pain and PONV depending on sex or gender bias, with a goal of increasing the equality in care.

Predictors for Early Physical Recovery for General and Orthopedic Patients after Major Surgery: Structural Equational Model Analyses

BACKGROUND

Attention to factors that may affect patients' ability to experience enhanced recovery after surgery is essential in planning for postoperative care.

AIMS

To create models of predefined pre,- peri-, and postoperative variables in order to analyze their impact on patients' physical recovery on postoperative days 1 and 2 after major orthopedic and general surgery.

DESIGN

An exploratory design with repeated measures was used, including 479 patients who had undergone orthopedic (289) or general surgery (190) at three hospitals.

METHODS

Pain, nausea, and level of physical ability were measured preoperatively and on postoperative days 1 and 2 by using the Numerical Rating Scale and items from the Postoperative Recovery Profile. Structural equation modeling was used to explore the impact of the predefined variables on patients' physical recovery.

RESULTS

The orthopedic group contained significantly more women and significantly more patients with pain and opioid use. Although the models showed good fit, "traditional" preoperative (pain, nausea, physical abilities, chronic pain, opioid use) and perioperative variables (anesthesia, length of surgery) constituted few (orthopedic) or no (general surgery) predictive properties for physical recovery. Postoperative average pain intensity, average nausea intensity, and physical ability explained physical recovery on day 1, and physical recovery on day 1 predicted physical recovery on day 2.

CONCLUSIONS

"Traditional" predictors had little effect on patients' postoperative physical recovery, while associations with common postoperative symptoms were shown. Further research is needed to explore additional variables affecting early physical recovery and to understand how soon patients are physically ready to return home.

Validation of a Chinese version critical-care pain observation tool in nonintubated and intubated critically ill patients: Two cross-sectional studies

AIMS AND OBJECTIVES

To validate the Chinese version of the Critical-Care Pain Observation Tool (CPOT) in nonintubated and intubated ICU patients.

BACKGROUND

While CPOT was found to have the best psychometric properties among objective pain assessment scales, there is no Chinese version CPOT for nonintubated patients.

DESIGN

Cross-sectional design was used in these two observational studies.

METHODS

Seventy-six nonintubated patients and 53 intubated patients were assessed to examine internal consistency, criterion-related and discriminative validity of CPOT in the first study. Pain assessment during low pain condition as well as increased pain condition was performed by Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) and the Chinese version COPT. Forty nonintubated patients and 43 intubated patients were assessed to examine inter-rater reliability in the second study. A bedside nurse and a researcher independently executed paired pain assessments with CPOT in the same conditions. The STROBE Statement was followed to guide these studies.

RESULTS

The Cronbach's α in nonintubated patients and intubated patients was 0.903-0.930 and 0.868-0.870. The intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) in nonintubated patients ranged from 0.959-0.982, and the ICC in intubated patients ranged from 0.947-0.959, confirming the inter-rater reliability. The moderately positive Pearson's correlations between CPOT and NRS scores (r = 0.757-0.838 in nonintubated patients, r = 0.574-0.705 in intubated patients) indicated the criterion-related validity. A significant increase in CPOT scores in the increased pain condition compared with those acquired in the low pain condition verified the discriminative validity.

CONCLUSIONS

The Chinese version of CPOT was presented to be valid and reliable for both nonintubated and intubated critically ill adults, which could be applicable for pain assessment in patients in ICU.

RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE

This study provides an applicable pain assessment tool for both nonintubated patients and intubated patients in ICU.

Fibromyalgia patients and healthy volunteers express difficulties and variability in rating experimental pain: a qualitative study

Background and aims Despite the enormous body of literature spanning more than 50 years describing results of pain experiments, very few have used qualitative methods to explore subjects' thoughts while scoring experimental painful stimuli, and none in the available literature have used qualitative interviews to do so. The current study examined how participants in experimental pain research delineate pain ratings to better understand the unique influences of the experimental setting on pain scores. An additional aim was to highlight how individuals with fibromyalgia and healthy volunteers are differently influenced by characteristics of the experimental setting. Methods This was an inductive, qualitative study in which individual, semi-structured interviews were performed with 31 fibromyalgia patients and 44 healthy volunteers. Participants had taken part in a pain experiment during which a thermode was used to induce painful heat stimuli on two skin areas. There were two primary interview questions analyzed for this report: (1) "Thinking back to when you were getting the heat pain on your leg, what were you thinking about when deciding on your pain score?" and (2) Participants who said that it was difficult to decide on a pain score were asked to, "Describe what made it difficult to choose a number." Thematic analysis was used to generate conceptual categories from textual data and find common themes. Results Three notable differences were found between fibromyalgia patients and healthy volunteers: (1) using current daily pain as a benchmark was seen more in patients, (2) wanting to appear strong in front of the study investigators was more common in healthy volunteers, and (3) becoming mentally fatigued from rating many stimuli was more common for fibromyalgia patients. Thoughts while scoring pain included: (1) comparing with previous or current pain, (2) self-monitoring of one's ability to endure the pain, (3) focusing on the physical aspects of the pain, (4) knowing the experimental setting is safe, (5) focusing on the pain scale as an anchor, and (6) desire to appear strong. Additionally, five difficulties in scoring experimental pain were identified: (1) falling asleep, (2) mentally fatigued, (3) feeling as though they were guessing, (4) having to make a quick decision, and (5) difficulty in being consistent. Conclusions This study provides insights into the thoughts of participants in experimental pain research studies. Participants were distracted and influenced by the experimental setting and some factors differed for fibromyalgia patients versus healthy volunteers. Implications Understanding the ways in which the experimental setting influences pain ratings may help pain researchers better design and interpret studies. Researchers can use these findings to mitigate difficulties for participants in experimental research to add to its validity.

Validation of the behavioral pain scale to assess pain intensity in adult, intubated postcardiac surgery patients: A cohort observational study - POL-BPS

Patients after cardiac surgery experience significant pain, but cannot communicate effectively due to opioid analgesia and sedation. Identification of pain with validated behavioral observation tool in patients with limited abilities to self-report pain improves quality of care and prevents suffering. Aim of this study was to validate Polish version of behavioral pain scale (BPS) in intubated, mechanically ventilated patients sedated with dexmedetomidine and morphine after cardiac surgery.Prospective observational cohort study included postoperative cardiac surgery patients, both sedated with dexmedetomidine and unsedated, observed at rest, during a nociceptive procedure (position change) and 10 minutes after intervention. Pain control was achieved using morphine infusion and nonopioid coanalgesia. Pain intensity evaluation included self-report by patient using numeric rating scale (NRS) and BPS assessments carried out by 2 blinded observers.A total of 708 assessments were performed in 59 patients (mean age 68 years), predominantly men (44/59, 75%). Results showed very good interrater correlation between raters (interrater correlation scores >0.87). Self-report NRS scores were obtained from all patients. Correlation between NRS and BPS was relatively strong during nociceptive procedures in all patients for rater A and rater B (Spearman R > 0.65, P < .001). Both mean NRS and BPS scores were significantly higher during nociceptive procedures as compared to assessments at rest, in both sedated and unsedated patients (P < .001).The results of this observational study show that the Polish translation of BPS can be regarded as a useful and validated tool for pain assessment in adult intubated patients. This instrument can be used in both unsedated and sedated cardiac surgery patients with limited communication abilities.

Management of acute pain in the postoperative setting: the importance of quality indicators

Despite the introduction of evidence-based recommendations for postoperative pain management (POPM), the consensus is that pain control remains suboptimal. Barriers to achieving patient-satisfactory analgesia include deficient knowledge regarding POPM among staff, lack of instructions, insufficient pain assessments and sub-optimal treatment. Effective monitoring of POPM is essential to enable policy makers and healthcare providers to improve the quality of care. Quality indicators (QIs) are quantitative measures of clinical practice that can monitor, evaluate and guide the quality of care provided to patients. QIs can be used to assess various aspects relating to the care process and they have proven useful in improving health outcomes in diseases such as myocardial infarction. In this commentary we critically analyze the evidence regarding the use of QIs in acute POPM based upon the experience of pain specialists from Europe and the USA who are members of the Change Pain Advisory Board. We also undertook a literature review to see what has been published on QIs in acute pain with the goal of assessing which QIs have been developed and used, and which ones have been successful/unsuccessful. In the hospital sector the development and implementation of QIs is complex. The nature of POPM requires a highly trained, multidisciplinary team and it is at this level that major improvements can be made. Greater involvement of patients regarding pain management is also seen as a priority area for improving clinical outcomes. Changes in structure and processes to deliver high-level quality care need to be regularly audited to ensure translation into better outcomes. QIs can help drive this process by providing an indicator of current levels of performance. In addition, outcomes QIs can be used to benchmark levels of performance between different healthcare providers.

Moving beyond pain scores: Multidimensional pain assessment is essential for adequate pain management after surgery

Background

Clinical experience teaches us that patients are willing to accept postoperative pain, despite high pain intensity scores. Nevertheless, relationships between pain scores and other methods of pain assessment, e.g. acceptability of pain or its interference with physical functioning, are not fully established. Our aims were to examine these relationships.

Methods

A cross-sectional study was conducted on patients who underwent major surgery between January 2008 and August 2013. Using logistic regression, we quantified the relationships between movement-evoked pain scores on the numerical rating scale (NRS-MEP) and three dichotomous dependent variables: patient’s opinion on acceptability of pain (PO: acceptable or unacceptable pain); nurses’ observation of patient’s performance of necessary activities to expedite recovery (NO: good or bad performance); a compound measure judging the presence of the clinically desirable situation of acceptable pain associated with good patients’ performance (PONO: present or not). Using Receiver Operating Characteristics (ROC) analysis, NRS cut-off points were determined such that they best discriminate between patients having one versus the other outcome for PO, NO and PONO.

Results

15,394 assessments were obtained in 9,082 patients in the first three postoperative days. Nine percent of the patients had unacceptable pain while having an NRS-MEP of 0–4. An estimated 47% (95%CI = 45%-49%) of patients with an NRS-MEP of 7 described their pain as acceptable on day one. Moreover, 33% (31%-35%) performed all required physical activities, and 22% (21%-24%) combined acceptable pain with appropriate movement. NRS cut-off points for PO, NO and PONO were five, four and four, respectively, but had insufficient discriminatory power.

Conclusions

Our results suggest pain management should be guided by the many dimensions of the patient’s pain experience, not solely by NRS cut-off points. Future research should evaluate the impact of such multidimensional pain assessment on patients’ functional outcome.

[Patient perspective of pain assessment by nursing personnel : Qualitative cross-sectional study on use of the NRS]

BACKGROUND

The assessment of pain as a part of adequate pain management is an integral part of the clinical routine. Much research has been carried out concerning use, relevance and validity of different assessment scales; however, patients' perspective of pain assessment has not yet been studied in Germany. The aim of the present study was to collate patients' experiences regarding pain assessment based on the numeric rating scale (NRS).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The survey was conducted as a qualitative cross-sectional study based on the grounded theory methodology by Strauss and Corbin. Interviews were carried out with 15 surgery patients. A semi-structured interview guide was used to collect data. The structured analysis was performed using MAXQDA. Data were first openly coded followed by thematic coding. Finally, the codes were compared and linked via axial coding. The data analysis was completed by object-related theory construction.

RESULTS

Patients have only vague ideas about the consequences of their responses. They experience pain assessment as a nursing routine, which was perceived as being largely insignificant for therapy. On reflection patients sporadically saw the scaling as being a problem as a reference value is missing and the quality of pain as well as the procedure fail the predetermined measurement system. Metric values not only reflect the level of pain but are also intentionally used to enable targeted measures, e.g. discharge from hospital.

CONCLUSION

The survey results indicate that the validity of the measurement and therefore the indicated therapy is influenced by subjective concepts. Patients themselves suggested alternatives for detecting the quality of pain. The data should be replicated in larger samples and also take possible influences on the perception of the assessment into account.