Postoperative Pain Management Discharge Teaching in a Rural Population

Interventions to improve primary healthcare in rural settings: A scoping review

BACKGROUND

Residents of rural areas have poorer health status, less healthy behaviours and higher mortality than urban dwellers, issues which are commonly addressed in primary care. Strengthening primary care may be an important tool to improve the health status of rural populations.

OBJECTIVE

Synthesize and categorize studies that examine interventions to improve rural primary care.

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA

Experimental or observational studies published between January 1, 1996 and December 2022 that include an historical or concurrent control comparison.

SOURCES OF EVIDENCE

Pubmed, CINAHL, Cochrane Library, Embase.

CHARTING METHODS

We extracted and charted data by broad category (quality, access and efficiency), study design, country of origin, publication year, aim, health condition and type of intervention studied. We assigned multiple categories to a study where relevant.

RESULTS

372 papers met our inclusion criteria, divided among quality (82%), access (20%) and efficiency (13%) categories. A majority of papers were completed in the USA (40%), Australia (15%), China (7%) or Canada (6%). 35 (9%) papers came from countries in Africa. The most common study design was an uncontrolled before-and-after comparison (32%) and only 24% of studies used randomized designs. The number of publications each year has increased markedly over the study period from 1-2/year in 1997-99 to a peak of 49 papers in 2017.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite substantial inequity in health outcomes associated with rural living, very little attention is paid to rural primary care in the scientific literature. Very few studies of rural primary care use randomized designs.

Development and pilot implementation of a patient-oriented discharge summary for critically Ill patients

BACKGROUND

Patients leaving the intensive care unit (ICU) often experience gaps in care due to deficiencies in discharge communication, leaving them vulnerable to increased stress, adverse events, readmission to ICU, and death. To facilitate discharge communication, written summaries have been implemented to provide patients and their families with information on medications, activity and diet restrictions, follow-up appointments, symptoms to expect, and who to call if there are questions. While written discharge summaries for patients and their families are utilized frequently in surgical, rehabilitation, and pediatric settings, few have been utilized in ICU settings.

AIM

To develop an ICU specific patient-oriented discharge summary tool (PODS-ICU), and pilot test the tool to determine acceptability and feasibility.

METHODS

Patient-partners (i.e., individuals with lived experience as an ICU patient or family member of an ICU patient), ICU clinicians (i.e., physicians, nurses), and researchers met to discuss ICU patients’ specific informational needs and design the PODS-ICU through several cycles of discussion and iterative revisions. Research team nurses piloted the PODS-ICU with patient and family participants in two ICUs in Calgary, Canada. Follow-up surveys on the PODS-ICU and its impact on discharge were administered to patients, family participants, and ICU nurses.

RESULTS

Most participants felt that their discharge from the ICU was good or better (n = 13; 87.0%), and some (n = 9; 60.0%) participants reported a good understanding of why the patient was in ICU. Most participants (n = 12; 80.0%) reported that they understood ICU events and impacts on the patient’s health. While many patients and family participants indicated the PODS-ICU was informative and useful, ICU nurses reported that the PODS-ICU was “not reasonable” in their daily clinical workflow due to “time constraint”.

CONCLUSION

The PODS-ICU tool provides patients and their families with essential information as they discharge from the ICU. This tool has the potential to engage and empower patients and their families in ensuring continuity of care beyond ICU discharge. However, the PODS-ICU requires pairing with earlier discharge practices and integration with electronic clinical information systems to fit better into the clinical workflow for ICU nurses. Further refinement and testing of the PODS-ICU tool in diverse critical care settings is needed to better assess its feasibility and its effects on patient health outcomes.

Opioid use among veterans undergoing major joint surgery managed by a multidisciplinary transitional pain service

BACKGROUND

Chronic postsurgical pain and opioid use is a problem among patients undergoing many types of surgical procedures. A multidisciplinary approach to perioperative pain management known as a transitional pain service (TPS) may lower these risks.

METHODS

This retrospective cohort study was conducted at the Salt Lake City VA Medical Center to compare patients undergoing elective primary or revision total knee, hip, or shoulder replacement or rotator cuff repair in the year before (2017) and after (2018) implementation of a TPS. The primary outcome is the proportion of patients taking opioids 90 days after surgery. Secondary outcomes include new chronic opioid use (COU) after surgery as well as the proportion of previous chronic opioid users who stopped or decreased opioid use after surgery.

RESULTS

At 90 days after surgery, patients enrolled in TPS were significantly less likely to be taking opioids (13.4% TPS vs 27.3% pre-TPS; p=0.002). This relationship remained statistically significant in a multivariable logistic regression analysis, where the TPS group had 69% lower odds of postoperative COU compared with the preintervention group (OR: 0.31; 95% CI: 0.14 to 0.66; p=0.03). Opioid-naive patients enrolled in TPS were less likely to have new COU after surgery (0.7% TPS vs 8.4% pre-TPS; p=0.004). Further, patients enrolled in TPS with existing COU prior to surgery were more likely to reduce or completely stop opioid use after surgery (67.5% TPS vs 45.3% pre-TPS; p=0.037) as compared with pre-TPS.

CONCLUSIONS

These data suggest that a TPS is an effective strategy for preventing new COU and reducing overall opioid use following orthopedic joint procedures in a Veterans Affairs hospital.

Impact of patient-centered discharge tools: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

Patient-centered discharge tools provide an opportunity to engage patients, enhance patient understanding, and improve capacity for self-care and postdischarge outcomes.

PURPOSE

To review studies that engaged patients in the design or delivery of discharge instruction tools and that tested their effect among hospitalized patients.

DATA SOURCES

We conducted a search of 12 databases and journals from January 1994 through May 2014, and references of retrieved studies.

STUDY SELECTION

English-language studies that tested discharge tools meant to engage patients were selected. Studies that measured outcomes after 3 months or without a control group or period were excluded.

DATA EXTRACTION

Two independent reviewers assessed the full-text papers and extracted data on features of patient engagement.

DATA SYNTHESIS

Thirty articles met inclusion criteria, 28 of which examined educational tools. Of these, 13 articles involved patients in content creation or tool delivery, with only 6 studies involving patients in both. While many of these studies (10 studies) demonstrated an improvement in patient comprehension, few studies found improvement in patient adherence despite their engagement. A few studies demonstrated an improvement in self-efficacy (2 studies) and a reduction in unplanned visits (3 studies).

CONCLUSIONS

Improving patient engagement through the use of media, visual aids, or by involving patients when creating or delivering a discharge tool improves comprehension. However, further studies are needed to clarify the effect on patient experience, adherence, and healthcare utilization postdischarge. Better characterization of the level of patient engagement when designing discharge tools is needed given the heterogeneity found in current studies. Journal of Hospital Medicine 2017;12:110-117.

Management of Postoperative Pain: A Clinical Practice Guideline From the American Pain Society, the American Society of Regional Anesthesia and Pain Medicine, and the American Society of Anesthesiologists' Committee on Regional Anesthesia, Executive Committee, and Administrative Council

Most patients who undergo surgical procedures experience acute postoperative pain, but evidence suggests that less than half report adequate postoperative pain relief. Many preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative interventions and management strategies are available for reducing and managing postoperative pain. The American Pain Society, with input from the American Society of Anesthesiologists, commissioned an interdisciplinary expert panel to develop a clinical practice guideline to promote evidence-based, effective, and safer postoperative pain management in children and adults. The guideline was subsequently approved by the American Society for Regional Anesthesia. As part of the guideline development process, a systematic review was commissioned on various aspects related to various interventions and management strategies for postoperative pain. After a review of the evidence, the expert panel formulated recommendations that addressed various aspects of postoperative pain management, including preoperative education, perioperative pain management planning, use of different pharmacological and nonpharmacological modalities, organizational policies, and transition to outpatient care. The recommendations are based on the underlying premise that optimal management begins in the preoperative period with an assessment of the patient and development of a plan of care tailored to the individual and the surgical procedure involved. The panel found that evidence supports the use of multimodal regimens in many situations, although the exact components of effective multimodal care will vary depending on the patient, setting, and surgical procedure. Although these guidelines are based on a systematic review of the evidence on management of postoperative pain, the panel identified numerous research gaps. Of 32 recommendations, 4 were assessed as being supported by high-quality evidence, and 11 (in the areas of patient education and perioperative planning, patient assessment, organizational structures and policies, and transitioning to outpatient care) were made on the basis of low-quality evidence.

PERSPECTIVE

This guideline, on the basis of a systematic review of the evidence on postoperative pain management, provides recommendations developed by a multidisciplinary expert panel. Safe and effective postoperative pain management should be on the basis of a plan of care tailored to the individual and the surgical procedure involved, and multimodal regimens are recommended in many situations.

Acute pain management in the older person

The proportion of older people in society is growing steadily. This particular group is more likely to be admitted to hospital and a number of papers have highlighted the inadequate or inappropriate assessment and management of their pain, particularly in the perioperative period. Pain relief is possible for the majority of people. This paper aims to give an overview of the assessment and management of pain in older people.

A review of the literature on heart failure and discharge education

The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) have proposed changes in the health care reimbursement for patients diagnosed with heart failure (HF) if readmission to a hospital occurs within 30 days of their discharge. The Joint Commission (TJC) has identified 6 key education topics for HF patients with their families that can result in decreased readmissions. Though the patient may be too ill, critical care nurses have an opportunity to begin the discharge education process immediately with families or caregivers. This literature review discusses studies focused on discharge education in general and then those studies specific to HF discharge education. This review reports on what is known or supported by evidence within 8 major topics. Finally, the discussion section summarizes the evidence for discharge education by answering 6 questions that address the "who and when" as well as the "what" of discharge education.

From patient education to patient engagement: implications for the field of patient education

OBJECTIVE

Advances in health care require that individuals participate knowledgeably and actively in their health care to realize its full benefit. Implications of these changes for the behavior of individuals and for the practice of patient education are described.

METHODS

An "engagement behavior framework" (EBF) was compiled from literature reviews and key informant interviews. To assess the focus of research and interventions on the identified engagement behaviors, the EBF was used to code scientific sessions in professional conferences relevant to patient education in the US in 2006-2007.

RESULTS

Many specific behaviors constitute engagement. Professional conferences on patient education show only modest attention to the full range of relevant behaviors.

CONCLUSION

People must make informed choices about insurance and clinicians, coordinate communications among providers and manage complex treatments on their own. Not doing so risks preventable illness, suboptimal outcomes and wasted resources.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

Increased responsibilities of individuals, sick and well, to find and actively participate in high quality health care provides an opportunity for patient education researchers and clinicians to improve health outcomes by developing innovative strategies to support all individuals to effectively participate in their care to the extent possible.