The costs and benefits of extending the role of the acute pain service on clinical outcomes after major elective surgery

A smart device application for acute pain service in surgical patients at a tertiary hospital in South Korea: a prospective observational feasibility study

BACKGROUND

Pain assessment and patient education are essential for successful postoperative pain management. However, the provision of personnel for performing these tasks is often insufficient. Recently, attempts have been made to implement smartphone applications for educating and monitoring surgical patients. We developed a smartphone application (app) for postoperative pain management, and conducted a feasibility study.

METHODS

This single-center prospective observational study included 60 patients aged < 70 years who underwent elective surgery. This study evaluated the SmartAPS application, which offers tools for postoperative pain assessment and educational materials for pain management. The primary outcome was the active usage rate, defined as responding at least twice daily on postoperative days (PODs) 1 and 2. Additionally, we investigated patient satisfaction with the app and educational videos as well as any challenges encountered during use.

RESULTS

Sixty patients were enrolled in the study and active app use was achieved in 56.7% of them. Response rates peaked at 85.0% for pain intensity and 83.3% for opioid-related side effects at 14:00 on POD 1 but dropped to 56.7% and 58.3%, respectively, at 18:00 on POD 2. Among the patients who responded to the survey regarding the app usage, 84.0% reported satisfaction with the app and 80% found it beneficial for managing postoperative pain. Furthermore, 92.0% did not encounter difficulties using the app, indicating a generally positive user experience.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings support the utility of the SmartAPS application in acute pain services, highlighting its potential for improving postoperative pain management.

Improved Postoperative Pain Management Outcomes After Implementation of Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) Protocol for Cytoreductive Surgery and Hyperthermic Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy (CRS-HIPEC)

BACKGROUND

Cytoreductive surgery with hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (CRS-HIPEC) for patients with peritoneal carcinomatosis is promising but has potential for significant morbidity and prolonged hospitalization. Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) is a standardized protocol designed to optimize perioperative care. This study describes trends in epidural and opioid use after implementing ERAS for CRS-HIPEC at a tertiary academic center.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis of patients undergoing CRS-HIPEC from January 2020 to September 2023 was conducted. ERAS was implemented in February 2022. Medication and outcomes data were compared before and after ERAS initiation. All opioids were converted to morphine milligram equivalents (MMEs).

RESULTS

A total of 136 patients underwent CRS-HIPEC: 73 (54%) pre- and 63 (46%) post-ERAS. Epidural usage increased from 63% pre-ERAS to 87% post-ERAS (p = 0.001). Compared with those without epidurals, patients with epidurals had decreased total 7-day oral and intravenous (IV) opioid requirements (45 MME vs. 316 MME; p < 0.001). There was no difference in 7-day opioid totals between pre- and post-ERAS groups. After ERAS, more patients achieved early ambulation (83% vs. 53%; p < 0.001), early diet initiation (81% vs. 25%; p < 0.001), and early return of bowel function (86% vs. 67%; p = 0.012).

CONCLUSIONS

ERAS implementation for CRS-HIPEC was associated with increased epidural use, decreased oral and IV opioid use, and earlier bowel function return. Our study demonstrates that epidural analgesia provides adequate pain control while significantly decreasing oral and IV opioid use, which may promote gastrointestinal recovery postoperatively. These findings support the implementation of an ERAS protocol for effective pain management in patients undergoing CRS-HIPEC.

Acute Pain Services and pain-related patient-reported outcomes in Hungarian hospitals

BACKGROUND

Postoperative pain management is an important part of surgical care, where Acute Pain Service offers added value in terms of patient outcomes and costs. The technology, however, has hardly been adopted in Hungary, with only two hospitals operating Acute Pain Service and whose performance has not been evaluated yet. This research compared pain management outcomes of surgical, orthopedic, and traumatology patients in Hungarian hospitals with and without Acute Pain Service.

METHODS

We recruited 348 patients, 120 in the APS group and 228 in the control group, whose experience was surveyed with an adapted version of the American Pain Society Patient Outcome Questionnaire. The questionnaire covered pain intensity, pain interference with physical and emotional functions, side effects, patient satisfaction, information received, and participation in treatment decisions. The differences were analyzed by Fisher's exact test and Mann-Whitney U test.

RESULTS

The APS group showed better results with lower pain intensity scores regarding worst postoperative pain (χ2 = 18.919, p = 0.0043). They reported less pain interference with activities in bed (χ2 = 21.978, p = 0.0006) and out of bed (χ2 = 14.341, p = 0.0129). Furthermore, patients in the APS group experienced fewer pain-management-related side effects, like nausea (χ2 = 15.240, p = 0.0101), drowsiness (χ2 = 26.965, p = 0.0001), and dizziness (χ2 = 13.980, p = 0.0124). However, patient information (χ2 = 3.480, p = 0.0945) and patient satisfaction (χ2 = 5.781, p = 0.2127) did not differ significantly between the two groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings confirm earlier international evidence on the benefits of Acute Pain Service in postoperative pain management and support the wider adoption of the technology in Hungarian hospitals. Nevertheless, close attention should be paid to patient information and involvement as better outcomes alone do not necessarily increase patient satisfaction.

Process, structural, and outcome quality indicators to support perioperative opioid stewardship: a rapid review

Opioids are effective analgesics but can cause harm. Opioid stewardship is key to ensuring that opioids are used effectively and safely. There is no agreed set of quality indicators relating to the use of opioids perioperatively. This work is part of the Yorkshire Cancer Research Bowel Cancer Quality Improvement programme and aims to develop useful quality indicators for the improvement of care and patient outcomes at all stages of the perioperative journey.A rapid review was performed to identify original research and reviews in which quality indicators for perioperative opioid use are described. A data tool was developed to enable reliable and reproducible extraction of opioid quality indicators.A review of 628 abstracts and 118 full-text publications was undertaken. Opioid quality indicators were identified from 47 full-text publications. In total, 128 structure, process and outcome quality indicators were extracted. Duplicates were merged, with the final extraction of 24 discrete indicators. These indicators are based on five topics: patient education, clinician education, pre-operative optimization, procedure, and patient-specific prescribing and de-prescribing and opioid-related adverse drug events.The quality indicators are presented as a toolkit to contribute to practical opioid stewardship. Process indicators were most commonly identified and contribute most to quality improvement. Fewer quality indicators relating to intraoperative and immediate recovery stages of the patient journey were identified. An expert clinician panel will be convened to agree which of the quality indicators identified will be most valuable in our region for the management of patients undergoing surgery for bowel cancer.

The First Comprehensive Survey of the Practice of Postoperative Pain Management in Hungarian Hospitals - a Descriptive Study

BACKGROUND

Pain management is a key issue in health care. Providers adopt promising technological developments, like Acute Pain Service, at differing speeds, with countries, such as the USA and Germany taking the lead. Where Hungary stands is unknown, as the practice of pain management has not yet been comprehensively reviewed in that country.

AIM

To explore the practice of postoperative pain management in Hungarian hospitals by addressing the questions of who is responsible for it, who measures pain and how, what kind of pain relief technologies are used, and who takes care of patients during duty hours.

METHODS

We carried out a survey covering Hungarian hospitals with operational license for surgery, traumatology, orthopedics and anesthesiology between December 2019 and March 2020. The response rate was 72%, and we analyzed 135 questionnaires.

RESULTS

We identified only 2 hospitals with an Acute Pain Service. In the majority of hospitals, the attending physician orders pain relief therapy. During duty hours the surgeon on duty takes care of pain management in 52.1% of the cases. Among pain relief therapies, intravenous infusions (74.1%) and oral medication (67.4%) are the most frequent. Ward nurses measure postoperative pain (77.8%) with unidimensional scales. According to 59.7% of the respondents, pain is not measured and documented at rest. Written protocols are available in 34.4% of the departments.

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with other countries, pain management in Hungary lags behind with significant room for improvement. Development and implementation of pain management protocols with appropriate education is the key intervention point.

Methods and timing in the assessment of postoperative recovery: a scoping review

BACKGROUND

There is no consensus about the type of instrument with which to assess postoperative recovery or the time points when assessments are most appropriate. It is also unclear whether instruments measure the four dimensions of postoperative recovery, that is physical, psychological, social, and habitual recovery. This scoping review had three objectives: (1) to identify and describe instruments used in clinical trials to assess postoperative recovery; (2) to determine how, when, and the number of times postoperative recovery was measured; and (3) to explore whether the four dimensions of postoperative recovery are represented in the identified instruments.

METHODS

A literature search was conducted in CINAHL, MEDLINE, and Web of Science. The search terms were related to three search strands: postoperative recovery, instrument, and clinical trials. The limits were English language and publication January 2010 to November 2021. In total, 5015 studies were identified.

RESULTS

A total of 198 studies were included in the results. We identified 20 instruments measuring postoperative recovery. Different versions of Quality of Recovery represented 81.8% of the included instruments. Postoperative recovery was often assessed at one time point (47.2%) and most often on postoperative day 1 (81.5%). Thirteen instruments had items covering all four dimensions of postoperative recovery.

CONCLUSIONS

Assessing recovery is important to evaluate and improve perioperative care. We emphasise the importance of choosing the right instrument for the concept studied and, if postoperative recovery is of interest, of assessing more than once. Ideally, instruments should include all four dimensions to cover the whole recovery process.

A Standardized Emergency Department Order Set Decreases Admission Rates and In-Patient Length of Stay for Adults Patients with Sickle Cell Disease

INTRODUCTION

Pain associated with sickle cell disease (SCD) causes severe complications and frequent presentation to the emergency department (ED). Patients with SCD frequently report inadequate pain treatment in the ED, resulting in hospital admission. A retrospective analysis was conducted to assess a quality improvement project to standardize ED care for patients presenting with pain associated with SCD.

METHODS

A 3-year prospective quality improvement initiative was performed. Our multidisciplinary team of providers implemented an ED order set in 2019 to improve care and provide adequate analgesia management. Our primary outcome was the overall hospital admission rate for patients after the intervention. Secondary outcome measures included ED disposition, rate of return to the ED within 72 hours, ED pain scores at admission and discharge, ED treatment time, in-patient length of stay, non-opioid medication use, and opioid medication use.

RESULTS

There was an overall 67% reduction in the hospital admission rate after implementation of the order set (P = 0.005) and a significant decrease in the percentage admission rate month over month (P = 0.047). Time to the first non-opioid analgesic decreased by 71 minutes (P > 0.001), and there was no change in time to the first opioid medication. The rate of return to the ED within 72 hours remained unchanged (7.0% vs 7.1%) (P = 0.93), and the ED elopement rate remained unchanged (1.3% vs 1.85%) (P = 0.93). After the implementation, there were significant increases in the prescribing of orally administered acetaminophen (7%), celecoxib (1.2%), and tizanidine (12.5%) and intravenous ketamine (30.5%) and ketorolac (27%). ED pain scores at discharge were unchanged for both hospital-admitted (7.12 vs 7.08) (P = 0.93) and non-admitted (5.51 vs 6.11) (P = 0.27) patients. The resulting potential cost reduction was determined to be $193,440 during the 12-month observation period, with the mean cost per visit decreasing by $792.

CONCLUSIONS

Use of a standardized and multimodal ED order set reduced hospital admission rates and the timeliness of analgesia without negatively impacting patients' pain.

Acute Pain Service in Hungarian hospitals

Background

Surgical procedures play an increasing role among health technologies to treat diseases. Pain often accompanies such diseases, both as a result of their pathology, but also as the side-effect of the intervention itself, and it is not only a burdensome subjective feeling, but adversely affects the recovery process, can induce complications and increases treatment costs. Acute Pain Service Teams are becoming increasingly widespread in hospitals to address post-operative pain, yet we have so far no data on how many hospitals have actually adopted this technology in Hungary.

Objectives

The main objectives of our study were to assess the prevalence of Acute Pain Service Teams, map their structure and operation, as well as to understand the barriers and conducive factors of their establishment in Hungarian hospitals.

Methods

We carried out a survey among the 72 hospitals with surgical departments. The questionnaire was filled in by 52 providers, which gave us a response rate of 72.2%.

Results

Our results show, that only two of the responding hospitals have Acute Pain Service Teams albeit their structure and operation are in line with the literature. In the 50 hospitals without such teams, financing difficulties and human resources shortages are mentioned to be the most important obstacles of their establishment, but the lack of initiative and interest on the part of the specialities concerned are also an important barrier.

Conclusions

Lagging behind the more affluent EU member states, but similarly to other Central and Eastern European countries, Acute Pain Service has been hardly adopted by Hungarian hospitals. Hungarian health professionals know the technology and would support its wider introduction, if the technical feasibility barriers could be overcome. Health policy should play a more active role to facilitate change in this area, the investment in which promises a substantial return in terms of health gains and cost savings.

Implementation of Individualized Pain Care Plans Decreases Length of Stay and Hospital Admission Rates for High Utilizing Adults with Sickle Cell Disease

OBJECTIVE

Patients with sickle cell disease (SCD) face inconsistent effective analgesic management, leading to high inpatient healthcare utilization and significant financial burden for healthcare institutions. Current evidence does not provide guidance for inpatient management of acute pain in adults with sickle cell disease. We conducted a retrospective analysis of a longitudinal cohort quality improvement project to characterize the role of individualized care plans on improving patient care and reducing financial burden in high healthcare-utilizing patients with SCD-related pain.

METHODS

Individualized care plans were developed for patients with hospital admissions resulting from pain associated with sickle cell disease. A 2-year prospective longitudinal cohort quality improvement project was performed and retrospectively analyzed. Primary outcome measure was duration of hospitalization. Secondary outcome measures included: pain intensity; 7, 30, and 90-day readmission rates; cost per day; total admissions; total cost per year; analgesic regimen at index admission; and discharge disposition.

RESULTS

Duration of hospitalization, the primary outcome, significantly decreased by 1.23 days with no worsening of pain intensity scores. Seven-day readmission decreased by 34%. Use of intravenous hydromorphone significantly decreased by 25%. The potential cost saving was $1,398,827 as a result of this quality initiative.

CONCLUSIONS

Implementation of individualized care plans reduced both admission rate and financial burden of high utilizing patients. Importantly, pain outcomes were not diminished. Results suggest that individualized care plans are a promising strategy for managing acute pain crisis in adult sickle cell patients from both care-focused and utilization outcomes.

The effectiveness of an oral opioid rescue medication algorithm for postoperative pain management compared to PCIA : A cohort analysis

Background

Standard protocols or algorithms are considered essential to ensure adequate analgesia. Germany has widely adopted postoperative protocols for pain management including oral opioids for rescue medication, but the effectiveness of such protocols has only been evaluated longitudinally in a before and after setting. The aim of this cohort analysis was to compare the effectiveness of an oral opioid rescue medication algorithm for postoperative management of pain to the gold standard of patient-controlled intravenous analgesia (PCIA).

Material and methods

This study compared cohorts of patients of two prospective observational studies undergoing elective total hip replacement. After surgery patients received piritramide to achieve a pain score of ≤3 on the numeric rating scale (NRS 0–10). A protocol was started consisting of oral long-acting oxycodone and ibuprofen (basic analgesia). Cohort 1 (C1, 126 patients) additionally received an oral opioid rescue medication (hydromorphone) when reporting pain >3 on the NRS. Cohort 2 (C2, 88 patients) was provided with an opioid by PCIA (piritramide) for opioid rescue medication. Primary endpoints were pain intensity at rest, during movement, and maximum pain intensity within the first 24 h postoperative. Secondary endpoints were opioid consumption, functional outcome and patient satisfaction with pain management.

Results

Pain during movement and maximum pain intensity were higher in C1 compared to C2: pain on movement median 1st–3rd quartile: 6 (3.75–8) vs. 5 (3–7), p = 0.023; maximum pain intensity: 7 (5–9) vs. 5 (3–8), p = 0.008. There were no differences in pain intensity at rest or between women and men in either group. The mean opioid consumption in all patients (combined PACU, baseline, and rescue medication; mean ± SD mg ME) was 126.6 ± 51.8 mg oral ME (median 120 (87.47–154.25) mg ME). Total opioid consumption was lower in C1 than C2 (117 ± 46 mg vs 140 ± 56 mg, p = 0.002) due to differences in rescue opioids (C1: 57 ± 37 mg ME, C2: 73 ± 43 mg ME, p = 0.006, Z = −2.730). Basic analgesia opioid use was comparable (C1: 54 ± 31 mg ME, C2: 60 ± 36 mg ME, p = 0.288, Z = −1.063). There were no differences in respect to the addition of non-opioids and reported quality of mobilization, sleep, frequency of nausea and vomiting, or general satisfaction with pain management.

Conclusion

In this study PCIA provided a better reduction of pain intensity, when compared to a standardized protocol with oral opioid rescue medication. This effect was associated with increased opioid consumption. There were no differences in frequencies of opioid side effects. This study was a retrospective analysis of two cohorts of a major project. As with all retrospective studies, our analysis has several limitations to consider. Data can only represent the observation of clinical practice. It cannot reflect the quality of a statement of a randomized controlled trial. Observational studies do not permit conclusions on causal relationships.

A survey of acute pain services in the UK

The organisational state of inpatient pain management in UK hospitals is difficult to determine. We sent an electronic questionnaire to 209 acute pain service leads throughout the UK. Questions were about staffing and service provision. We received 141 responses (67%); 47% of all UK hospitals. Each service was responsible for a median (IQR [range]) of 566 (400-839 [120-2800]) beds. Each acute pain specialist nurse was responsible for 299 (238-534 [70-1923]) beds. The mean (SD) number of consultant hours per week was 5.54 (4.62), delivered by a median of 1.0 (1.0-2.5 [0.2-7.0]) consultant. Overnight cover was provided by 20 (15%) acute pain services, and weekend cover by 39 (29%). Acute pain services commonly (in 50 (35%) hospitals) had roles in addition to acute pain management. Most teams (105, (77%)) reviewed medical patients and patients with chronic pain (in 131, (96%) teams). Half of the services (56, (49%)), reported that they were part of an integrated acute and chronic pain service, however, 83 (59%) did not have any members who work in chronic pain clinics. The majority (79, (70%)) were able to access a nominated chronic pain consultant for advice. Provision of acute pain services throughout the UK is highly variable. The majority do not meet core UK standards.

Management of postoperative pain in maxillofacial surgery

In this review we describe the evidence base for postoperative analgesia after maxillofacial surgery. We discuss the implications of poorly managed pain, risk factors for the development of severe pain, and pharmacological and non-pharmacological analgesic strategies to manage it.

Establishing an Acute Pain Service in Private Practice and Updates on Regional Anesthesia Billing

Acute pain management is an expanding perioperative specialty and there is a renewed focus on implementing and developing an acute pain service (APS) in nonacademic hospitals (ie, "private practice"). An anesthesiologist-led APS can improve patient care by decreasing perioperative morbidity and potentially reducing the risk of chronic postsurgical pain syndromes. Elements of a successful APS include multidisciplinary collaboration to develop perioperative pain protocols, education of health care providers and patients, and regular evaluation of patient safety and quality of care metrics. Standardization of regional anesthesia procedures and billing practices can promote consistent outcomes and efficiency.

[Acute pain therapy in German hospitals as competitive factor. Do competition, ownership and case severity influence the practice of acute pain therapy?]

BACKGROUND

Due to the implementation of the diagnosis-related groups (DRG) system, the competitive pressure on German hospitals increased. In this context it has been shown that acute pain management offers economic benefits for hospitals. The aim of this study was to analyze the impact of the competitive situation, the ownership and the economic resources required on structures and processes for acute pain management.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A standardized questionnaire on structures and processes of acute pain management was mailed to the 885 directors of German departments of anesthesiology listed as members of the German Society of Anesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine (DGAI, Deutsche Gesellschaft für Anästhesiologie und Intensivmedizin).

RESULTS

For most hospitals a strong regional competition existed; however, this parameter affected neither the implementation of structures nor the recommended treatment processes for pain therapy. In contrast, a clear preference for hospitals in private ownership to use the benchmarking tool QUIPS (quality improvement in postoperative pain therapy) was found. These hospitals also presented information on coping with the management of pain in the corporate clinic mission statement more often and published information about the quality of acute pain management in the quality reports more frequently. No differences were found between hospitals with different forms of ownership in the implementation of acute pain services, quality circles, expert standard pain management and the implementation of recommended processes. Hospitals with a higher case mix index (CMI) had a certified acute pain management more often. The corporate mission statement of these hospitals also contained information on how to cope with pain, presentation of the quality of pain management in the quality report, implementation of quality circles and the implementation of the expert standard pain management more frequently. There were no differences in the frequency of using the benchmarking tool QUIPS or the implementation of recommended treatment processes with respect to the CMI.

CONCLUSION

In this survey no effect of the competitive situation of hospitals on acute pain management could be demonstrated. Private ownership and a higher CMI were more often associated with structures of acute pain management which were publicly accessible in terms of hospital marketing.

Clinical benefits, referral practice and cost implications of an in-hospital pain service: results of a service evaluation in a London teaching hospital

BACKGROUND

In-hospital pain services (IPS) are commonplace, but evidence of efficacy is inadequate, and patients' pain management in any hospital ward remains problematic. This service evaluation aimed to measure the effect of a contemporary IPS, its appropriate use and cost-efficacy.

METHODS

Records of 249 adults reviewed by the IPS in an inner London Teaching Hospital over an 8-month period were analysed for demographic data, interventions, workload and change in pain intensity measured by numerical rating scale (NRS). Non-parametric tests were used to evaluate differences between initial and final NRS. Spearman's rank correlation analysis was used to create a correlation matrix to evaluate associations between all identified independent variables with the change in NRS. All strongly correlated variables (ρ > 0.5) were subsequently included in a binary logistic regression analysis to identify predictors of pain resolution greater than 50% NRS and improvement rather than deterioration or no change in NRS. Finally, referral practice and cost of inappropriate referrals were estimated. Referrals were thought to be inappropriate when pain was not optimised by the referring team; they were identified using a set algorithm.

RESULTS

Initial median NRS and final median NRS were significantly different when a Wilcoxon signed-rank test was applied to the whole cohort; Z = -5.5 (p = 0.000). Subgroup analysis demonstrated no significant difference in the 'mild' pain group; z = -1.1 (p = 0.253). Regression analysis showed that for every unit increase in initial NRS, there was a 62% chance of general and a 33% chance of >50% improvement in final NRS. An estimated annual cost-saving potential of £1546 to £4558 was found in inappropriate referrals and patients experiencing no benefit from the service.

DISCUSSION

Results suggest that patients with moderate to severe pain benefit most from IPS input. Also pain management resources are often distributed inefficiently. Future research is required to develop algorithms for easy identification of potential treatment responders.

Postoperative hyperalgesia does not predict persistent post-sternotomy pain; observational study based on clinical examination

BACKGROUND

Persistent post-sternotomy pain is a common problem, but the risk of developing it varies among patients. We sought to find out whether the risk of persistent post-sternotomy pain could be predicted by measuring the area of acute sensory dysfunction around the sternotomy wound. The secondary aim was to determine risk factors for persistent post-sternotomy pain.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Hundred patients who were scheduled to undergo elective coronary artery bypass surgery were recruited to the study. Patients were excluded if they had undergone previous cardiac surgery or if they lacked co-operation. Preoperative pain scores were determined and the patients filled in questionnaires about depression, anxiety, and pain. The area of sensory dysfunction around the sternotomy wound was assessed by pin prick on postoperative day 4. The presence of persistent post-sternotomy pain was determined at a follow-up evaluation at 4-6 months after surgery.

RESULTS

The sizes of the area of hyperalgesia or overall sensory dysfunction were not associated with persistent post-sternotomy pain. Independent risk factors for persistent post-sternotomy pain were found to be smoking and high pain score on postoperative day 1. The prevalence of persistent post-sternotomy pain in our study population was 38% analyzed by only the questionnaire and 15% according to the clinical examination.

CONCLUSION

Measuring the area of hyperalgesia in the acute phase does not give any additional information on the risk of developing a persistent post-sternotomy pain. We do thus not recommend measuring the area in this particular group of patients. Evaluation of pain by only a questionnaire risks to overestimate the presence of persistent post-sternotomy pain as compared to clinical examination.

Development and Validation of a Prediction Model for Admission After Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography

BACKGROUND & AIMS

In outpatients undergoing endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) with anesthesia, rates of and risk factors for admission are unclear. We aimed to develop a model that would allow physicians to predict hospitalization of patients during postanesthesia recovery.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective study of data from ERCPs performed on outpatients from May 2012 through October 2013 at the Indiana University School of Medicine. Medical records were abstracted for preanesthesia, intra-anesthesia, and early (within the first hour) postanesthesia characteristics potentially associated with admission. Significant factors associated with admission were incorporated into a logistic regression model to identify subgroups with low, moderate, or high probabilities for admission. The population was divided into training (first 12 months) and validation (last 6 months) sets to develop and test the model.

RESULTS

We identified 3424 ERCPs during the study period; 10.7% of patients were admitted to the hospital, and 3.7% developed post-ERCP pancreatitis. Postanesthesia recovery times were significantly longer for patients requiring admission (362.6 ± 213.0 minutes vs 218.4 ± 71.8 minutes for patients not admitted; P < .0001). A higher proportion of admitted patients had high-risk indications. Admitted patients also had more severe comorbidities, higher baseline levels of pain, longer procedure times, performance of sphincter of Oddi manometry, higher pain during the first hour after anesthesia, and greater use of opiates or anxiolytics. A multivariate regression model identified patients who were admitted with a high level of accuracy in the training set (area under the curve, 0.83) and fair accuracy in the validation set (area under the curve, 0.78). On the basis of this model, nearly 50% of patients could be classified as low risk for admission.

CONCLUSION

By using factors that can be assessed through the first hour after ERCP, we developed a model that accurately predicts which patients are likely to be admitted to the hospital. Rates of admission after outpatient ERCP are low, so a policy of prolonged observation might be unnecessary.

Acute Pain Management/Regional Anesthesia

Effective and efficient acute pain management strategies have the potential to improve medical outcomes, enhance patient satisfaction, and reduce costs. Pain management records are having an increasing influence on patient choice of health care providers and will affect future financial reimbursement. Dedicated acute pain and regional anesthesia services are invaluable in improving acute pain management. In addition, nonpharmacologic and alternative therapies, as well as information technology, should be viewed as complimentary to traditional pharmacologic treatments commonly used in the management of acute pain. The use of innovative technologies to improve acute pain management may be worthwhile for health care institutions.

A follow-up on Acute Pain Services in Germany compared to international survey data

BACKGROUND

After the introduction of instruments for benchmarking, certification and a national guideline for acute pain management, the aim of this study was to describe the current structure, processes and quality of German acute pain services (APS).

METHODS

All directors of German departments of anaesthesiology were invited to complete a postal questionnaire on structures und processes of acute pain management. The survey asked for staff, techniques and quality criteria, which enabled a comparison to previous data from 1999 and surveys from other countries.

RESULTS

Four hundred and eight (46%) questionnaires were returned. APS have increased considerably and are now available in 81% of the hospitals, mainly anaesthesia based. However, only 45% fulfilled the minimum quality criteria, such as the assignment of personnel, the organization of patient care during nights and weekends, written protocols for postoperative pain management, regular assessments and documenting pain scores. Staff resources varied considerably, but increased compared to 1999. Two daily rounds were performed in 71%, either by physicians and nurses (42%), by physicians only (25%) or by supervised nurses (31%). Most personnel assigned to the APS shared this work along with other duties. Only 53% of the hospitals had an integrated rotation for training their specialty trainees.

CONCLUSIONS

The availability of APS in Germany and other countries has increased over the last decade; however, the quality of nearly half of the APS is questionable. Against the disillusioning background of recently reported unfavourable pain-related patient outcomes, the structures, organization and quality of APS should be revisited.

Patient controlled opioid analgesia versus non-patient controlled opioid analgesia for postoperative pain

BACKGROUND

This is an updated version of the original Cochrane review published in Issue 4, 2006. Patients may control postoperative pain by self administration of intravenous opioids using devices designed for this purpose (patient controlled analgesia or PCA). A 1992 meta-analysis by Ballantyne et al found a strong patient preference for PCA over non-patient controlled analgesia, but disclosed no differences in analgesic consumption or length of postoperative hospital stay. Although Ballantyne's meta-analysis found that PCA did have a small but statistically significant benefit upon pain intensity, a 2001 review by Walder et al did not find statistically significant differences in pain intensity or pain relief between PCA and groups treated with non-patient controlled analgesia.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of patient controlled intravenous opioid analgesia (termed PCA in this review) versus non-patient controlled opioid analgesia of as-needed opioid analgesia for postoperative pain relief.

SEARCH METHODS

We ran the search for the previous review in November 2004. For this update, we searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL 2014, Issue 12), MEDLINE (1966 to 28 January 2015), and EMBASE (1980 to 28 January 2015) for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in any language, and reference lists of reviews and retrieved articles.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We selected RCTs that assessed pain intensity as a primary or secondary outcome. These studies compared PCA without a continuous background infusion with non-patient controlled opioid analgesic regimens. We excluded studies that explicitly stated they involved patients with chronic pain.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently extracted data, which included demographic variables, type of surgery, interventions, efficacy, and adverse events. We graded each included study for methodological quality by assessing risk of bias and employed the GRADE approach to assess the overall quality of the evidence. We performed meta-analysis of outcomes that included pain intensity assessed by a 0 to 100 visual analog scale (VAS), opioid consumption, patient satisfaction, length of stay, and adverse events.

MAIN RESULTS

Forty-nine studies with 1725 participants receiving PCA and 1687 participants assigned to a control group met the inclusion criteria. The original review included 55 studies with 2023 patients receiving PCA and 1838 patients assigned to a control group. There were fewer included studies in our updated review due to the revised exclusion criteria. For the primary outcome, participants receiving PCA had lower VAS pain intensity scores versus non-patient controlled analgesia over most time intervals, e.g., scores over 0 to 24 hours were nine points lower (95% confidence interval (CI) -13 to -5, moderate quality evidence) and over 0 to 48 hours were 10 points lower (95% CI -12 to -7, low quality evidence). Among the secondary outcomes, participants were more satisfied with PCA (81% versus 61%, P value = 0.002) and consumed higher amounts of opioids than controls (0 to 24 hours, 7 mg more of intravenous morphine equivalents, 95% CI 1 mg to 13 mg). Those receiving PCA had a higher incidence of pruritus (15% versus 8%, P value = 0.01) but had a similar incidence of other adverse events. There was no difference in the length of hospital stay.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Since the last version of this review, we have found new studies providing additional information. We reanalyzed the data but the results did not substantially alter any of our previously published conclusions. This review provides moderate to low quality evidence that PCA is an efficacious alternative to non-patient controlled systemic analgesia for postoperative pain control.

Systematic review of the predisposing, enabling, and reinforcing factors which influence nursing administration of opioids in the postoperative period

AIM

To provide an overview of the administration of opioid analgesics by nurses when prescription is on an "as-needed" basis for postoperative pain, and to identify the important factors that determine the decisions of nurses, by using the framework of predisposing, reinforcing, and enabling causes in educational diagnosis and evaluation.

METHODS

Multiple databases were searched for the period from 2000-2012. Out of a total of 1755 citations and 148 abstracts retrieved, 39 studies met the criteria for inclusion. Studies were considered eligible for review if they focused on situations or factors influencing a nurse's performance in pain assessment and the administration of opioid analgesics in postoperative pain management.

RESULTS

The topics of the descriptive and qualitative studies presented four themes: (i) nurses' knowledge and attitudes about pain management; (ii) the situation of nurses' work practices in administrating range orders for opioid analgesics; (iii) factors that influenced nurses' work practices; and (iv) perceived barriers to effective pain management from the nurse's perspective. The experimental studies investigated the effects of different approaches in nurses' pain management practices in postoperative settings and their outcomes for patients.

CONCLUSION

A knowledge deficit was observed to be the reason in most cases for a nurse's failure to administrate adequate analgesics for postoperative pain relief. Pain-related education for nurses is the cornerstone to improve pain management. The integration of enabling and reinforcing factors will help nurses to develop the ability to make the decision to engage in a comprehensive intervention to improve pain management and patient outcomes.

Predictors for moderate to severe acute postoperative pain after total hip and knee replacement

PURPOSE

The ability to identify and focus care to patients at higher risk of moderate to severe postoperative pain should improve analgesia and patient satisfaction, and may affect reimbursement. We undertook this multi-centre cross-sectional study to identify preoperative risk factors for moderate to severe pain after total hip (THR) and knee (TKR) replacement.

METHODS

A total of 897 patients were identified from electronic medical records. Preoperative information and anaesthetic technique was gained by retrospective chart review. The primary outcomes were moderate to severe pain (pain score ≥ 4/10) at rest and with activity on postoperative day one. Logistic regression was performed to identify predictors for moderate to severe pain.

RESULTS

Moderate to severe pain was reported by 20 % at rest and 33 % with activity. Predictors for pain at rest were female gender (OR 1.10 with 95 % CI 1.01-1.20), younger age (0.96, 0.94-0.99), increased BMI (1.02, 1.01-1.03), TKR vs. THR (3.21, 2.73-3.78), increased severity of preoperative pain at the surgical site (1.15, 1.03-1.30), preoperative use of opioids (1.63, 1.32-2.01), and general anaesthesia (8.51, 2.13-33.98). Predictors for pain with activity were TKR vs. THR (1.42, 1.28-1.57), increased severity of preoperative pain at the surgical site (1.11, 1.04-1.19), general anaesthesia (9.02, 3.68-22.07), preoperative use of anti-convulsants (1.78, 1.32-2.40) and anti-depressants (1.50, 1.08-2.80), and prior surgery at the surgical site (1.28, 1.05-1.57).

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings provide clinical guidance for preoperative stratification of patients for more intensive management potentially including education, nursing staffing, and referral to specialised pain management.

Post-operative pain treatment in Denmark from 2000 to 2009: a nationwide sequential survey on organizational aspects

BACKGROUND

In Denmark, the first acute pain service (APS) was introduced in 1993. An important objective became to facilitate implementation of accelerated post-operative rehabilitation programmes (ACC) in selected procedures in abdominal, gynaecological and orthopaedic surgery. Therefore, it is of considerable interest to study the association between the developments of post-operative pain management and the ACC by sequential analyses from 2000 to 2009.

METHODS

In 2000, 2003, 2006 and 2009, a questionnaire was mailed to all Danish anaesthesiology departments. The headings of the questionnaire were demographics of responder departments, resources allocated to pain management methods, quality assessment methods, research activities and implementation of ACC.

RESULTS

The responder rates varied between 80% and 94% (mean 88%) representing a mean number of anaesthetics of 340.000 per year. The number of APSs in the study period varied in university hospitals between 52% and 71% (P = 0.01), regional hospitals between 8% and 40% (P < 0.01), and local hospitals between 0% and 47% (P < 0.01). The prevalences of departments actively engaged in ACC were 40% in 2000, 54% in 2003, 73% in 2006 and 80% in 2009 (P < 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

The study, spanning nearly a decade, illustrates that following an increase in number of APSs from 2000 to 2006, followed by a significant decline, a steadily increasing number of departments implemented ACC.

The cost-effectiveness of an outpatient anesthesia consultation clinic before surgery: a matched Hong Kong cohort study

Background

Outpatient anesthesia clinics are well established in North America, Europe and Australia, but few economic evaluations have been published. The Perioperative Systems in Hong Kong are best described as a hybrid model of the new and old systems of surgical care. In this matched cohort study, we compared the costs and effects of an outpatient anesthesia clinic (OPAC) with the conventional system of admitting patients to the ward a day before surgery for their pre-anesthesia consultation. A second objective of the study was to determine the patient’s median Willingness To Pay (WTP) value for an OPAC.

Methods

A total of 352 patients were matched (1:1) on their elective surgical procedure to either the clinic group or to the conventional group. The primary outcome was quality of recovery score and overall perioperative treatment cost (US$). To detect a difference in the joint cost-effect relationship between groups, a cost-effectiveness acceptability curve (CEAC) was drawn. A modified Poisson regression model was used to examine the factors associated with patients willing to pay more than the median WTP value for an OPAC.

Results

The quality of recovery scores on the first day after surgery between the clinic and conventional groups were similar (mean difference, -0.1; 95% confidence interval (CI), -0.6 to 0.3; P = 0.57). Although the preoperative costs were less in the clinic group (mean difference, -$463, 95% CI, -$648 to -$278 per patient; P <0.001), the total perioperative cost was similar between groups (mean difference, -$172; 95% CI, -$684 to $340 per patient; P = 0.51). The CEAC showed that we could not be 95% confident that the clinic was cost-effective. Compared to the conventional group, clinic patients were three times more likely to prefer OPAC care (relative risk (RR) 2.75, 95% CI, 2.13 to 3.55; P <0.001) and pay more than the median WTP (US$13) for a clinic consultation (RR 3.27, 95% CI, 2.32 to 4.64; P <0.001).

Conclusions

There is uncertainty about the cost-effectiveness of an OPAC in the Hong Kong setting. Most clinic patients were willing to pay a small amount for an anesthesia clinic consultation.

[Quality of postoperative analgesia protocols in a local hospital]

OBJECTIVES

To demonstrate that the introduction of a nursing based Acute Pain Service (APS) leads to better postoperative pain management and a decrease in treatment-related adverse events. To assess the quality criteria of postoperative pain control and discuss their compliance.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A total of 116 major elective surgeries were assessed between November and December 2010 and compared to those collected between November and December 2007 before the introduction of the APS. The following variables were studied: sociodemographic data, type of surgery and postoperative analgesia, pain ratings (numeric verbal scale- NVS) per nursing shift (48 hours), compliance of quality criteria in pain management, and a patient satisfaction survey.

RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS

Despite there being a higher number of surgeries related to expected moderate-intense pain, better scores in pain ratings were obtained both at rest (86.1% ± 11.2 vs 50.7% ± 12.1 NVS ≤ 3, p=.0001) and during activity (73.9% ± 10.8 vs 50.1% ± 12.1 NVS ≤ 5, p=.0026) in surgical wards, but treatment-related side effects did not decrease with the analgesics and there was no increase treatment-related patient satisfaction. The data analysis showed that there is still a deficiency in the recording of the pain scores by nursing shift (70 ± 6.1 vs 40 ± 11.9, p=.0002).