Post-caesarean delivery analgesia in resource-limited settings: a narrative review

A retrospective audit of pain assessment and management post-caesarean section at New Somerset Hospital in Cape Town, South Africa

Background

The most common major surgical procedure performed worldwide is the caesarean section (CS). Effective pain management is a priority for women undergoing this procedure, to reduce the incidence of persistent pain (a risk factor for postpartum depression), as well as optimise maternal-neonatal bonding and the successful establishment of breastfeeding. Multimodal analgesia is the gold standard for post-CS analgesia. At present, no perioperative pain management protocols could be identified for the management of patients presenting for CS at regional hospitals in South Africa. This audit aimed to review the folders of patients who underwent CS, with particular reference to perioperative pain management guidelines for CS.

Methods

A descriptive, retrospective, cross-sectional audit was conducted. Three hundred folders (10% of the annual number of caesarean procedures performed) from New Somerset Hospital, a regional hospital in Cape Town, South Africa were reviewed.

Results

The women were a mean age of 30 years (standard deviation [s.d.]: 6.2). Median gravidity was 3 (interquartile range [IQR]: 2–3) and parity was 1 (IQR: 1–2); 52% had previously undergone a CS. In 93.3% cases, spinal anaesthesia was employed for CS. Pain assessment was poor, with only 55 (18%) patients having their pain assessed on the day of the operation. Analgesia was prescribed in over 98% of the patients, however, medication was only administered as prescribed in 32.6%. Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) were prescribed in < 5% of cases. None of the patients received a patient-controlled analgesia (PCA), transversus abdominis plane (TAP) block, or wound infusion catheter as supplementary strategies.

Conclusion

Pain management for post-CS patient at this hospital is lacking. There is the need for the implementation of a structured assessment tool to improve administration of analgesics in these patients. In addition, the reasons for the omission of NSAIDs from the analgesia regimen requires investigation. Hospital requires post-CS pain protocols to guide management especially in resource-limited settings.

Analgesic effects of intravenous ketamine after spinal anaesthesia for non-elective caesarean delivery: a randomised controlled trial

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to determine if low dose intravenous ketamine is effective in reducing opioid use and pain after non-elective caesarean delivery.

DESIGN

Prospective, randomised, double-blind.

SETTING

Tertiary hospital, Bisheshwar Prasad Koirala Institute of Health Sciences, Dharan, Nepal PARTICIPANTS: 80 patients undergoing non-elective caesarean section with spinal anaesthesia.

INTERVENTIONS

Patients were allocated in 1:1 ratio to receive either intravenous ketamine 0.25 mg/kg or normal saline before the skin incision.

PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary outcome was the total amount of morphine equivalents needed up to postoperative 24 hours. Secondary outcome measures were postoperative pain scores, time to the first perception of pain, maternal adverse effects (nausea, vomiting, hypotension, shivering, diplopia, nystagmus, hallucination) and neonatal Apgar score at 1 and 5 min, neonatal respiratory depression and neonatal intensive-care referral.

RESULTS

The median (range) cumulative morphine consumption during the first 24 hours of surgery was 0 (0-4.67) mg in ketamine group and 1 (0-6) mg in saline group (p=0.003). The median (range) time to the first perception of pain was 6 (1-12) hours and 2 (0.5-6) hours in ketamine and saline group, respectively (p<0.001). A significant reduction in postoperative pain scores was observed only at 2 hours and 6 hours in the ketamine group compared with placebo group (p<0.05). Maternal adverse effects and neonatal outcomes were comparable between the two groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Intravenous administration of low dose ketamine before surgical incision significantly reduced the opioid requirement in the first 24 hours in patients undergoing non-elective caesarean delivery.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT03450499.

The effectiveness of the abdominal binder in relieving pain after cesarean delivery: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

Abdominal binder is a non-pharmacological method of relieving pain after surgical procedures.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the effectiveness of the abdominal binder in relieving pain and distress scores after cesarean delivery (CD).

SEARCH STRATEGY

The following terms were searched: cesarean section, cesarean, caesarean, abdominal deliveries, C-section, abdominal delivery, abdominal binding, binder, and abdominal binder.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) with patients undergoing CD receiving an abdominal binder compared with non-users of the abdominal binder.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Five electronic databases were searched until November 2019. Records were screened for eligibility. Data were extracted independently and analyzed. The main outcomes were pain and distress scores.

RESULTS

The final analysis included six RCTs. Overall effect estimate favored the abdominal binder group over the control group in the following outcomes: VAS pain scores after 24 h (mean difference [MD] -1.76; 95% confidence interval [CI] -3.14 to -0.39; P = 0.01), VAS scores after 48 h (MD -1.21; 95% CI -1.51 to -0.90; P < 0.001), distress score after 24 h (MD -1.87; 95% CI -3.01 to -0.73; P = 0.001), and distress score after 48 h (MD -1.87; 95% CI -3.07 to -0.67; P = 0.002).

CONCLUSION

The abdominal binder could be an effective, simple, non-pharmacological option of relieving pain and distress after CD.

Prehabilitation program for African sub-Saharan surgical patients is an unmet need

Approximately 4.2 million people worldwide die within 30 days of surgery each year. Half of these deaths occur in low- and middle-income countries. Postoperative deaths account for 7.7% of all deaths globally, making it the third-highest contributor to deaths, after heart disease and stroke. In sub-Saharan Africa, there is a higher rate of mortality following postoperative complications compared to high-income countries. The WHO has tools to help countries provide safer surgery. However, implementation remains poor in most African countries. Interventions focused on intraoperative or postoperative measures to improve perioperative prognosis may be too late for high-risk patients. Poor preoperative cardiorespiratory functional capacity, poor management of pre-existing comorbidities and risk factors and no assessment of the patient´s surgical risk is associated with adverse postoperative outcomes, including mortality, complications, slower recovery, longer intensive care stay, extended hospital length of stay and reduced postoperative quality of life. To significantly decrease morbidity and mortality following surgery in Africa, we propose the implementation of a comprehensive preoperative intervention, that must include: i) risk assessment of surgical patients to identify those at greater risk of postoperative complications for elective surgery; ii) increase the preoperative functional reserve of these high-risk patients, to enhance their tolerance to surgical stress and improve postoperative recovery; iii) anticipate postoperative care needs and organize tools, resources and establish simple workflows to manage postoperative complications. We believe this approach is simple, feasible and will significantly reduce postoperative burden for both patients, hospitals and society.