A Multi-centered Cross-sectional Study of Disease Burden of Pain of Inpatients in Southwest China

Postoperative pain management in non-traumatic emergency general surgery: WSES-GAIS-SIAARTI-AAST guidelines

BACKGROUND

Non-traumatic emergency general surgery involves a heterogeneous population that may present with several underlying diseases. Timeous emergency surgical treatment should be supplemented with high-quality perioperative care, ideally performed by multidisciplinary teams trained to identify and handle complex postoperative courses. Uncontrolled or poorly controlled acute postoperative pain may result in significant complications. While pain management after elective surgery has been standardized in perioperative pathways, the traditional perioperative treatment of patients undergoing emergency surgery is often a haphazard practice. The present recommended pain management guidelines are for pain management after non-traumatic emergency surgical intervention. It is meant to provide clinicians a list of indications to prescribe the optimal analgesics even in the absence of a multidisciplinary pain team.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

An international expert panel discussed the different issues in subsequent rounds. Four international recognized scientific societies: World Society of Emergency Surgery (WSES), Global Alliance for Infection in Surgery (GAIS), Italian Society of Anesthesia, Analgesia Intensive Care (SIAARTI), and American Association for the Surgery of Trauma (AAST), endorsed the project and approved the final manuscript.

CONCLUSION

Dealing with acute postoperative pain in the emergency abdominal surgery setting is complex, requires special attention, and should be multidisciplinary. Several tools are available, and their combination is mandatory whenever is possible. Analgesic approach to the various situations and conditions should be patient based and tailored according to procedure, pathology, age, response, and available expertise. A better understanding of the patho-mechanisms of postoperative pain for short- and long-term outcomes is necessary to improve prophylactic and treatment strategies.

From Patient-Controlled Analgesia to Artificial Intelligence-Assisted Patient-Controlled Analgesia: Practices and Perspectives

Pain relief is a major concern for patients who have undergone surgery, and it is an eternal pursuit for anesthesiologists. However, postoperative pain management is far from satisfactory, though the past decades have witnessed great progress in the development of novel analgesics and analgesic techniques. A Cochrane systematic review showed that patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) achieved better pain relief and greater patient satisfaction than traditional “on-demand” parenteral analgesia, suggesting that it might be the manner of analgesia implementation that matters for effective postoperative pain management. A wireless intelligent PCA (Wi-PCA) system that incorporated remote monitoring, an intelligent alarm, intelligent analysis and assessment of the PCA equipment, as well as automatically recording and reserving key information functions under a wireless environment was introduced in our department in 2018. The practice showed that the Wi-PCA system significantly reduced the incidence of moderate to severe postoperative pain and relevant adverse effects, shortened hospital stays, and improved patient satisfaction with postoperative pain relief. Nevertheless, for both traditional and Wi-PCA, analgesics are only administered when pain occurs, leaving behind a realm of possibilities for better postoperative pain management. With the rapid development of machinery and deep learning algorithms, artificial intelligence (AI) is changing the mode of clinical decision making. Integrating the big data collected by state-of-the-art monitoring sensors, the Internet of Things and AI algorithms, an AI-assisted PCA (Ai-PCA) may be a promising future direction for postoperative pain management.

Stratified pain management counseling and implementation improving patient satisfaction: a prospective, pilot study

BACKGROUND

Post-operative pain is unpleasant for patients and may worsen surgical recovery. Peri-operative multimodal analgesia has been used for many years; however, its efficacy still needs improvement. In the present study, a thorough peri-operative pain counseling and stratified management program based on risk assessment was implemented, with the goal of improving post-operative analgesia and patient satisfaction.

METHODS

This prospective, controlled, pilot study included 361 patients who underwent elective surgery. Of these 361 patients, 187 received peri-operative pain risk assessment and stratified analgesia and counseling (stratified analgesia group), while 174 received conventional multimodal analgesia (conventional group). The two groups were compared regarding the post-operative pain intensity, rescue analgesia administration, post-operative quality of recovery as assessed via the quality of recovery 40 questionnaire, total dosage of peri-operative opioids, analgesic satisfaction, and analgesic costs.

RESULTS

Compared with the conventional group, the stratified analgesia group reported decreased pain intensity during motion at 24 h post-operatively and required lower dosages of rescue analgesia (P = 0.03). The total quality of recovery 40 questionnaire score and the scores for physical wellbeing and pain were significantly better in the stratified analgesia group than the conventional group (P = 0.04); the stratified analgesia group also reported better scores for analgesic satisfaction (P = 0.03) and received lower dosages of opioids (P = 0.03). Analgesic costs were lower in the stratified analgesia group than the conventional group; the cost-effective ratio was 109 in the conventional group and 62 in the stratified analgesia group.

CONCLUSIONS

The analgesic efficacy was improved by the implementation of stratified analgesia based on surgical pain risk assessment and counseling. This stratified analgesia protocol increased the patients' analgesic satisfaction and improved the quality of recovery without increasing healthcare costs. The present findings may help improve the efficacy of peri-operative multimodal analgesia in clinical practice.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRY

NCT02728973; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02728973?term=NCT02728973&draw=2&rank=1.

A National Multicenter Survey on Management of Pain, Agitation, and Delirium in Intensive Care Units in China

Background:

The management of pain, agitation, and delirium (PAD) in Intensive Care Unit (ICU) is beneficial for patients and makes it widely applied in clinical practice. Previous studies showed that the clinical practice of PAD in ICU was improving; yet relatively little information is available in China. This study aimed to investigate the practice of PAD in ICUs in China.

Methods:

A multicenter, nationwide survey was conducted using a clinician-directed questionnaire from September 19 to December 18, 2016. The questionnaire focused on the assessment and management of PAD by the clinicians in ICUs. The practice of PAD was compared among the four regions of China (North, Southeast, Northwest, and Southwest). The data were expressed as percentage and frequency. The Chi-square test, Fisher's exact test, and line-row Chi-square test were used.

Results:

Of the 1011 valid questionnaire forms, the response rate was 80.37%. The clinicians came from 704 hospitals across 158 cities of China. The rate of PAD assessment was 75.77%, 90.21%, and 66.77%, respectively. The rates of PAD scores were 45.8%, 68.94%, and 34.03%, respectively. The visual analog scale, Richmond agitation-sedation scale, and confusion assessment method for the ICU were the first choices of scales for PAD assessment. Fentanyl, midazolam, and dexmedetomidine were the first choices of agents for analgesic, sedation, and delirium treatment. While choosing analgesics and sedatives, the clinicians put the pharmacological characteristics of drugs in the first place (66.07% and 76.36%). Daily interruption for sedation was carried out by 67.26% clinicians. Most of the clinicians (87.24%) used analgesics while using sedatives. Of the 738 (73%) clinicians titrating the sedatives on the basis of the proposed target sedation level, 268 (26.61%) clinicians just depended on their clinical experience. Totally, 519 (51.34%) clinicians never used other nondrug strategies for PAD. The working time of clinicians was an important factor in the management of analgesia and sedation rather than their titles and educational background. The ratios of pain score and sedation score in the Southwest China were the highest and the North China were the lowest. The ratios of delirium assessment and score were the same in the four regions of China. Moreover, the first choices of scales for PAD in the four regions were the same. However, the top three choices of agents in PAD treatment in the four regions were not the same.

Conclusions:

The practice of PAD in China follows the international guidelines; however, the pain assessment should be improved. The PAD practice is a little different across the four regions of China; however, the trend is consistent.

Trial Registration:

The study is registered at http://www.clinicaltrials.gov (No. ChiCTR-OOC-16009014, www.chictr.org.cn/index.aspx.).

Prevalence and trends of pain associated with chronic diseases and personal out-of-pocket medical expenditures in Korea

BACKGROUND

There have been few studies about pain using a big data. The purpose of this study was to identify the prevalence of pain, and trends of pain associated with chronic diseases and personal out-of-pocket medical expenditures over time.

METHODS

Subjects were 58,151 individuals, using the Korea Health Panel from 2009 to 2013. Chi-square and multinomial logistic regression were conducted to identify the prevalence and odds ratios (ORs) of pain. Repeated measures ANOVA was used to find the trend over these 5 years.

RESULTS

Prevalence of mild and severe pain was 28.1% and 1.7% respectively. The ORs of mild and severe pain were 1.6 and 1.4 in females compared with males. From 2009 to 2013, numbers of chronic diseases producing mild pain were 2.1, 2.4, 2.8, 2.9, and 3.1 and those producing severe pain were 3.0, 3.4, 3.9, 4.2, and 4.4, respectively. After applying the average South Korean inflation rate by year over 5 years, the annual, personal out-of-pocket medical expenditures (unit: ￦1,000) for mild pain were 322, 349, 379, 420, and 461, and those for severe pain were 331, 399, 504, 546, and 569, respectively (P < 0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS

The pain prevalence was 29.8%. The numbers of chronic diseases and the personal out-of-pocket medical expenditures revealed increasing trends annually, especially in those with pain. Therefore, to eliminate and alleviate the pain, there needs to be further study for developing a systemic approach.

A cross-cultural adaptation and validation of the short-form McGill Pain Questionnaire-2: Chinese version in patients with chronic visceral pain

Objective

The present study aimed to develop a culturally appropriate and functional Standard Mandarin Chinese translation of the short-form McGill Pain Questionnaire-2 (SF-MPQ-2) and to assess its reliability and validity for characterizing chronic visceral pain in Chinese patients.

Background

The SF-MPQ-2 has been widely used in studies of pain epidemiology, diagnosis and treatment, and even pathophysiologic mechanisms to assess the major symptoms of clinical pain. Previous reports have shown favorable reliability, validity, and responsiveness of the SF-MPQ-2 in diverse samples of patients with chronic and acute pain. However, a culturally appropriate, functional Chinese version of the scale has never been developed.

Methods

Beaton’s guidelines were used for the translation and back-translation procedures. Patients (n=145) with chronic visceral pain were recruited to complete the Standard Mandarin Chinese version of the SF-MPQ-2 (SF-MPQ-2-CN), of which 41 were asked to complete the SF-MPQ-2-CN a second time, 3 days after the initial visit. The test–retest reliability was quantified using the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC), and Cronbach’s alpha was calculated to assess internal consistency. Possible components were determined by exploratory factor analysis with varimax rotation, and a value of 0.4 was considered requisite for the loading of each factor.

Results

The ICC for subscales ranged from 0.909 to 0.952, and that of the total scale was 0.927, suggesting excellent reliability and validity of the SF-MPQ-2-CN. Cronbach’s alpha for subscales ranged from 0.896 to 0.916, and that of the total scale was 0.836 and 0.831 for primary and secondary visits, respectively. The factor loading matrix of the SF-MPQ-2-CN ranged from 0.734 to 0.901 for each of the following subscales: continuous, intermittent, neuropathic, and affective, revealing four components similar to the original scale.

Conclusion

The reliability and validity of the SF-MPQ-2-CN scale are statistically acceptable for the evaluation of Chinese patients with chronic visceral pain.

Body Pain Intensity and Interference in Adults (45-53 Years Old): A Cross-Sectional Survey in Chongqing, China

Culture and national care models matter both in reporting and treatment of pain status. However, most findings on body pain intensity and interference in adults are from Western studies, with little reliable evidence from China. This study aimed to assess body pain intensity and interference and its associations with demographic, socioeconomic characteristics, and health behaviors in adults. A cross-sectional survey was performed to collect data from 1224 adults, who were recruited via multistage stratified random sampling. The SF-36 quality-of-life instrument was used to investigate body pain intensity and interference. Ordinal logistic regression analysis was used in this study. Our results showed that 64.1% of the participants (males: 687; females: 537) reported body pain, and 45.7% of the participants reported body pain interference. Middle-aged respondents who were female, were unmarried/divorced or separated/widowed, had a negative relationship with their family, had poor sleep quality, and were not satisfied with their current living conditions had a higher body pain intensity rating (ordered logistic regression/six-level pain intensity criterion; odds ratios, p < 0.05). Respondents who were unmarried/divorced or separated/widowed, with a low education level, were unemployed, had lower incomes, had a negative relationship with their family, and were not satisfied with their current living conditions had a higher body pain interference rating (ordered logistic regression/five-level pain interference criterion; odds ratios, p < 0.05). In conclusion, an estimated 64.1% of middle-aged adults reported body pain, and 45.7% of middle-aged adults reported body pain interference. These results provide a clue for possible interventions for improving body pain intensity and interference in adults, especially among middle-aged people. These factors should be taken into consideration in the prevention of pain, pain management and treatment planning in order to help relieve the stress of pain among adults.