Comparative Analysis of Inpatient Costs for Obstetrics and Gynecology Surgery Patients Treated With IV Acetaminophen and IV Opioids Versus IV Opioid-only Analgesia for Postoperative Pain

Postoperative around-the-clock administration of intravenous acetaminophen for pain control following robot-assisted radical prostatectomy

The objective of this study was to examine the impact of around-the-clock (ATC) administration of intravenous (IV) acetaminophen following robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP). Intravenous infusion of acetaminophen was started on the day of the operation at 1000 mg/dose every 6 h, and the infusion was continued on a fixed schedule until postoperative day 2 a.m. In a retrospective observational study, we compared 127 patients who were administered IV acetaminophen on a fixed schedule (ATC group) with 485 patients who were administered analgesic drugs only as needed (PRN group). We investigated postoperative pain intensity and additional analgesic consumption on postoperative day 0, 1, 2, 3, and 5 between the two groups. Postoperative pain scores were significantly lower in the ATC group than in the PRN group at 1 and 2 days, and this period matched the duration of ATC administration of IV acetaminophen. Postoperative frequency of rescue analgesia was significantly lower in the ATC group than in the PRN group at postoperative 0, 1, and 2 days. ATC administration of IV acetaminophen has the potential to be a very versatile and valuable additional dose to achieve appropriate postoperative analgesia in patients with RARP.

Preoperative Intravenous Versus Oral Acetaminophen in Outpatient Surgery: A Double-Blinded, Randomized Control Trial

PURPOSE

Preoperative acetaminophen is recognized as an effective part of the multimodal approach to perioperative pain management. The present study, conducted between April 12, 2018 and February 14, 2019, examined whether there are differences in patient-reported pain, postoperative opioid consumption, negative opioid effects, length of postanesthesia care unit stay, and patient satisfaction with pain control between patients who receive intravenous (IV) acetaminophen and patients who receive oral acetaminophen.

DESIGN

This double-blinded, randomized controlled trial was conducted among 120 patients undergoing outpatient surgery.

METHODS

Patients were randomized to receive preoperatively either intravenous (IV) acetaminophen (and oral placebo) or oral acetaminophen (and IV placebo). Results were analyzed using SPSS statistical software; statistical analyses consisted of Mann-Whitney U test, independent samples t test, and χ² test. In all analyses, a P value less than .05 was considered significant.

FINDINGS

There were no significant differences in any outcome measures based on the route of acetaminophen administration.

CONCLUSIONS

The findings of the present study support the practice of administering oral acetaminophen, as opposed to IV acetaminophen, preoperatively as part of the multimodal approach to manage postoperative pain in patients able to tolerate preoperative oral medications.

Safety of Postoperative Opioid Alternatives in Plastic Surgery: A Systematic Review

With the growing opioid epidemic, plastic surgeons are being encouraged to transition away from reliance on postoperative opioids. However, many plastic surgeons hesitate to use nonopioid analgesics such as nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs and local anesthetic blocks because of concerns about their safety, particularly bleeding. The goal of this systematic review is to assess the validity of risks associated with nonopioid analgesic alternatives. A comprehensive literature search of the PubMed and MEDLINE databases was conducted regarding the safety of opioid alternatives in plastic surgery. Inclusion and exclusion criteria yielded 34 relevant articles. A systematic review was performed because of the variation between study indications, interventions, and complications. Thirty-four articles were reviewed that analyzed the safety of ibuprofen, ketorolac, celecoxib, intravenous acetaminophen, ketamine, gabapentin, liposomal bupivacaine, and local and continuous nerve blocks after plastic surgery procedures. There were no articles that showed statistically significant bleeding associated with ibuprofen, celecoxib, or ketorolac. Similarly, acetaminophen administered intravenously, ketamine, gabapentin, and liposomal bupivacaine did not have any significant increased risk of adverse events. Nerve and infusion blocks have a low risk of pneumothorax. Limitations of this study include small sample sizes, different dosing and control groups, and more than one medication being studied. Larger studies of nonopioid analgesics would therefore be valuable and may strengthen the conclusions of this review. As a preliminary investigation, this review showed that several opioid alternatives have a potential role in postoperative analgesia. Plastic surgeons have the responsibility to lead the reduction of postoperative opioid use by further developing multimodal analgesia.

Evolving the management of acute perioperative pain towards opioid free protocols: a narrative review

Objective: Identification of pain as the fifth vital sign has resulted in over-prescription and overuse of opioids in the US, with addiction reaching epidemic proportions. In Europe, and more recently in the US, a shift has occurred with the global adoption of multimodal analgesia (MMA), which seeks to minimize perioperative opioid use. Improved functional outcomes and reduced healthcare utilization costs have been demonstrated with MMA, but wide scale use of opioids in pain management protocols continues. As a next step in the pain management evolution, opioid-free analgesia (OFA) MMA strategies have emerged as feasible in many surgical settings.Methods: Articles were limited to clinical studies and meta-analyses focusing on comparisons between opioid-intensive and opioid-free/opioid-sparing strategies published in English.Results: In this review, elimination or substantial reduction in opioid use with OFA strategies for perioperative acute pain are discussed, with an emphasis on improved pain control and patient satisfaction. Improved functional outcomes and patient recovery, as well as reduced healthcare utilization costs, are also discussed, along with challenges facing the implementation of such strategies.Conclusions: Effective MMA strategies have paved the way for OFA approaches to postoperative pain management, with goals to reduce opioid prescriptions, improve patient recovery, and reduce overall healthcare resource utilization and costs. However, institution-wide deployment and adoption of OFA is still in early stages and will require personalization and better management of patient expectations.

Health Care Burden Associated with Outpatient Opioid Use Following Inpatient or Outpatient Surgery

BACKGROUND

The treatment of postsurgical pain with prescription opioids has been associated with persistent opioid use and increased health care utilization and costs.

OBJECTIVE

To compare the health care burden between opioid-naive adult patients who were prescribed opioids after a major surgery and opioidnaive adult patients who were not prescribed opioids.

METHODS

Administrative claims data from the IBM Watson Health MarketScan Research Databases for 2010-2016 were used. Opioid-naive adult patients who underwent major inpatient or outpatient surgery and who had at least 1 year of continuous enrollment before and after the index surgery date were eligible for inclusion. Cohorts were defined based on an opioid pharmacy claim between 7 days before index surgery and 1 year after index surgery (opioid use during surgery and inpatient use were not available). To ensure an opioid-naive population, patients with opioid claims between 365 and 8 days before surgery were excluded. Acute medical outcomes, opioid utilization, health care utilization, and costs were measured during the post-index period (index surgery hospitalization and day of index outpatient surgery not included). Predicted costs were estimated from multivariable log-linked gamma-generalized linear models.

RESULTS

The final sample consisted of 1,174,905 opioid-naive patients with an inpatient surgery (73% commercial, 20% Medicare, 7% Medicaid) and 2,930,216 opioid-naive patients with an outpatient surgery (74% commercial, 23% Medicare, and 3% Medicaid). Opioid use after discharge was common among all 3 payer types but was less common among Medicare patients (63% inpatient/43% outpatient) than patients with commercial (80% inpatient/75% outpatient) or Medicaid insurance (86% inpatient/81% outpatient). Across all 3 payers, opioid users were younger, were more likely to be female, and had a higher preoperative comorbidity burden than nonopioid users. In unadjusted analyses, opioid users tended to have more hospitalizations, emergency department visits, and pharmacy claims. Adjusted predicted 1-year post-period total health care costs were significantly higher (P< 0.001) for opioid users than nonopioid users for commercial insurance (inpatient: $22,209 vs. $14,439; outpatient: $13,897 vs. $8,825), Medicare (inpatient: $31,721 vs. $26,761; outpatient: $24,529 vs. $15,225), and Medicaid (inpatient: $13,512 vs. $9,204; outpatient: $11,975 vs. $8,212).

CONCLUSIONS

Filling an outpatient opioid prescription (vs. no opioid prescription) in the 1 year after inpatient or outpatient surgery was associated with increased health care utilization and costs across all payers.

DISCLOSURES

Funding for this study was provided by Heron Therapeutics, which participated in analysis and interpretation of data, drafting, reviewing, and approving the publication. All authors contributed to the development of the publication and maintained control over the final content. Brummett is a paid consultant for Heron Therapeutics and Recro Pharma and reports receipt of research funding from MDHHS (Sub K Michigan Open), NIDA (Centralized Pain Opioid Non-Responsiveness R01 DA038261-05), NIH0DHHS-US-16 PAF 07628 (R01 NR017096-05), NIH-DHHS (P50 AR070600-05 CORT), NIH-DHHS-US (K23 DA038718-04), NIH-DHHS-US-16-PAF06270 (R01 HD088712-05), NIH-DHHS-US-17-PAF02680 (R01 DA042859-05), and UM Michigan Genomics Initiative and holding a patent for peripheral perineural dexmedetomidine. Oderda is a paid consultant for Heron Therapeutics. Pawasauskas is a paid consultant to Heron Therapeutics and Mallinckrodt Pharmaceuticals. England and Evans-Shields are employees of Heron Therapeutics. Kong, Lew, Zimmerman, and Henriques are employees of IBM Watson Health, which was compensated by Heron Therapeutics for conducting this research. Portions of this work were presented as a poster at the AMCP Managed Care and Specialty Pharmacy Annual Meeting 2019; March 25-28, 2019; San Diego, CA.

Intravenous acetaminophen vs saline in perioperative analgesia with laparoscopic hysterectomy

BACKGROUND

Opioids are effective for the treatment of postoperative pain but can cause nausea and are associated with dependency with long-term use. Nonopioid medications such as acetaminophen offer the promise of decreasing these nondesirable effects while still providing patient comfort.

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to compare intravenous acetaminophen with placebo and to evaluate postoperative pain control and opioid usage after laparoscopic hysterectomy.

STUDY DESIGN

We conducted a prospective double-blind randomized study with 183 patients who were assigned randomly (1:1) to receive acetaminophen or placebo (Canadian Task Force Design Classification I). Patients received either 1000 mg of acetaminophen (n=91) or a placebo of saline solution (n=92) at the time of induction of anesthesia and a repeat dose 6 hours later. Both groups self-reported pain and nausea levels preoperatively and at 2, 4, 6, 12, and 24 hours after extubation with the use of a visual analog scale with a score of 0 for no pain to 10 for highest level of pain. Patients self-reported pain, nausea, and postoperative oral opiates that were taken after discharge. All opiates were converted to milligram equivalents of oral morphine for standardization.

RESULTS

There were no significant differences in generalized abdominal pain at any time point postoperatively that included 2 hours (placebo 3.6±2.5 vs acetaminophen 4.4±2.5; P=.07) and up to 24 hours (placebo 3.3±2.4 vs acetaminophen 3.6±2.5; P=.28). Similar results were observed for nausea scores. There were no differences in opioid consumption at any time point including intraoperatively (placebo 4.4±3.9 vs acetaminophen 3.3±4.0; P=.06), post anesthesia care unit (placebo 10.5±10.3 vs acetaminophen 9.7±10.3; P=.59), and up to 24 hours after surgery (placebo 1.4±2.0 vs acetaminophen 1.6±2.1; P=.61). There were no differences in demographics or surgical data between groups.

CONCLUSION

There was no difference between acetaminophen and placebo groups in postoperative pain, satisfaction scores, or opioid requirements. Given the relatively high cost ($23.20 per dose in our study), lack of benefit, and available oral alternatives, our results do not support routine use during hysterectomy.

Improved Outcomes Associated With the Use of Intravenous Acetaminophen for Management of Acute Post-Surgical Pain in Cesarean Sections and Hysterectomies

Background

Post-surgical pain impacts many patient outcomes. Effective pain management increasingly relies on multimodal analgesia regimens in which acetaminophen (APAP) is a key component. The aim of our study was to examine the impact of oral APAP versus intravenous (IV) APAP as a component of post-surgical pain management after Cesarean sections and hysterectomies.

Methods

A retrospective analysis of the Cerner HealthFacts® database (from January, 2011 to December, 2015) was conducted to compare outcomes of Cesarean section and hysterectomy surgery patients who received oral APAP to those who received IV APAP post-surgically. Length of stay (LOS), daily morphine milligram equivalent (MME) consumption, the presence of potential opioid-related adverse events (ORADEs), and total pharmacy costs were assessed. Adjusted results were derived using inverse probability weighted regression adjustment (IPW-RA) estimators based on covariates that included demographics, comorbidities, patient clinical characteristics, and hospital characteristics.

Results

The study identified 29,124 Cesarean section patients (24,612 oral APAP; 4,512 IV APAP) and 9,767 hysterectomy surgery patients (5,586 oral APAP; 4,181 IV APAP). Compared to the oral APAP group, the IV APAP group had reductions in adjusted LOS (Cesarean section: -11.7% days (P < 0.001), hysterectomy: -11.8% days (P = 0.005)), lowered adjusted daily MME consumption from day 0 to day 3 (Cesarean section: -1.6 mg (P < 0.001), hysterectomy: -1.7 mg (P = 0.014)), and reduced risk of ORADEs for Cesarean sections (relative risk of 0.45, P < 0.001). Total pharmacy costs were not significantly different between the two APAP groups.

Conclusions

Post-surgical pain managed with IV APAP in patients undergoing Cesarean section or hysterectomy was associated with shorter LOS, reduced risk of ORADEs, and lower opioid consumption compared to patients managed with oral APAP, without adversely impacting total pharmacy costs.