[Postoperative pain therapy in Germany]

Morphine Analgesia, Cannabinoid Receptor 2, and Opioid Growth Factor Receptor Cancer Tissue Expression Improve Survival after Pancreatic Cancer Surgery

Pancreatic cancer (PDAC) has a poor prognosis despite surgical removal and adjuvant therapy. Additionally, the effects of postoperative analgesia with morphine and piritramide on survival among PDAC patients are unknown, as are their interactions with opioid/cannabinoid receptor gene expressions in PDAC tissue. Cancer-specific survival data for 71 PDAC patients who underwent radical surgery followed by postoperative analgesia with morphine (n = 48) or piritramide (n = 23) were therefore analyzed in conjunction with opioid/cannabinoid receptor gene expressions in the patients' tumors. Receptor gene expressions were determined using the quantitative real-time polymerase chain reaction. Patients receiving morphine had significantly longer cancer-specific survival (CSS) than those receiving piritramide postoperative analgesia (median 22.4 vs. 15 months; p = 0.038). This finding was supported by multivariate modelling (p < 0.001). The morphine and piritramide groups had similar morphine equipotent doses, receptor expression, and baseline characteristics. The opioid/cannabinoid receptor gene expression was analyzed in a group of 130 pancreatic cancer patients. Of the studied receptors, high cannabinoid receptor 2 (CB2) and opioid growth factor receptor (OGFR) gene expressions have a positive influence on the length of overall survival (OS; p = 0.029, resp. p = 0.01). Conversely, high delta opioid receptor gene expression shortened OS (p = 0.043). Multivariate modelling indicated that high CB2 and OGFR expression improved OS (HR = 0.538, p = 0.011, resp. HR = 0.435, p = 0.001), while high OPRD receptor expression shortened OS (HR = 2.264, p = 0.002). Morphine analgesia, CB2, and OGFR cancer tissue gene expression thus improved CSS resp. OS after radical PDAC surgery, whereas delta opioid receptor expression shortened OS.

[Safety and monitoring of patient-controlled intravenous analgesia : Clinical practice in German hospitals]

BACKGROUND

Patient-controlled intravenous analgesia (PCIA) is a well-established technique in acute pain management and available in most German hospitals. Despite its widespread use, information on current clinical practice is limited. This investigation evaluated clinical practice and monitoring as well as PCIA-associated adverse events and critical incidents in German hospitals.

METHODS

An invitation to participate in this online-survey was sent to 995 heads of anesthesiology departments belonging to the "German Society of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine".

RESULTS

Of the departments receiving the link, 244 took part (response rate 25%). PCIA was used in 193 of these hospitals (79%). All the following statements relate to the hospitals in which PCIA was used. Piritramide was the most frequently used opioid. In parallel with PCIA, additional nonopioid analgesics were used in 94% of the hospitals, and in 38%, additional slow-release oral opioids were used. Parenteral opioids were administered by the ward staff in 4% of the hospitals. In 75% of hospitals, there were standardized indications for PCIA therapy, with almost two thirds of respondents stating that PCIA was the technique of second choice if regional procedures were contraindicated or failed. In all, 76% of the hospitals had an acute pain service. Twenty-four percent of the hospitals regularly used PCIA in non-surgical patients. In pediatric patients, PCIA was used in 62 hospitals (32%). Only 31% of the hospitals reported the use of standardized protocols for the specific monitoring of patients' vital signs on general wards, exceeding general care. Of the department, 158 (82%) reported adverse events in connection with the use of PCIA within the six-month period preceding the survey (most frequently due to patients' noncompliance [52%], dislocated intravenous lines [41%], communication errors [16%], administration of additional analgesics [16%] and/ or sedatives [14%], problems with the pump [16%], programming errors [9%], incorrect opioid concentration in the reservoir [8%], non-observance of contraindications [7%], incorrect dosing [6%] and self-dosing by the patient [4%] or by third parties [3%], filling the reservoir with thewrong medication [2%]; and other problems [5%]). Only 35 of the hospitals (18%) reported no problems associated with PCIA therapy. Seventy-five of the 193 respondents (39%) stated that at least one critical incident had occurred in the context of the use of PCIA. This resulted in a total of 335 cases out of an estimate of 50.000 patients treated with PCIA. The respondents classified these as follows: I) 273 incidents requiring a prolonged stay in the recovery room, but without further complications, II) 58 requiring transfer to the intensive care unit, but without further complications, III) three resulting in permanent harm to the patient and IV) one resulting in the death of the patient. A comparison of the monitoring standards for PCIA showed that critical incidents were reported less frequently in hospitals with less intensive monitoring, and more frequently in hospitals with higher monitoring standards.

CONCLUSION

PCIA is a frequently used analgesic technique in German hospitals. There were many differences in how PCIA therapy was applied and monitored on general wards. Adverse events occurred to a significant extent, with a considerable part of them, which might be preventable. Critical incidents were perceived more often when standards for monitoring on general wards were higher. Consented current recommendations regarding treatment and monitoring standards as well as the systematic recording of complications when using PCIA are pending.

[Pain management in departments of internal medicine : Results of a national survey on structures and processes of care]

Hintergrund und Ziel der Arbeit

Seit Jahren werden Defizite der Qualität der Schmerztherapie im Krankenhaus beschrieben. Ziel der vorliegenden Untersuchung war es, Strukturen und Prozesse des Schmerzmanagements in internistischen Abteilungen darzustellen.

Material und Methoden

Die Datenerfassung erfolgte mittels eines standardisierten Telefoninterviews (nichtuniversitäre Abteilungen); bei universitären Abteilungen separat mittels eines Onlinefragebogens (SurveyMonkey®).

Ergebnisse

Daten von 139 nichtuniversitären Abteilungen (Rücklauf: 21 %) und 33 universitären Abteilungen (davon 21 vollständig beantwortete Fragebögen, Rücklauf 17 % bzw. 11 %) wurden erhoben. 441 von 619 kontaktierten nichtuniversitären Abteilungen lehnten die Teilnahme ausdrücklich ab, am häufigsten mit der Begründung, es bestünde kein Interesse am Thema Schmerzmanagement. In den 172 teilnehmenden Einrichtungen wurde Schmerz als eigenständiger Parameter in 89 % der nichtuniversitären Abteilungen (96 % universitär) regelmäßig während der Visite erfasst; schriftliche Behandlungsstandards zur Schmerztherapie lagen in 57 % der nichtuniversitären Abteilungen vor (54 % universitär). In 76 % der nichtuniversitären Krankenhäuser (100 % universitär) stand auch für die internistischen Patienten ein Akutschmerzdienst zur Mitbehandlung zur Verfügung, schriftliche Vereinbarungen zur Zusammenarbeit lagen bei 35 % vor (18 % universitär).

Diskussion

Die berichtete Umsetzung des Schmerzmanagements war in den teilnehmenden Abteilungen gut. Gleichwohl sind die Ergebnisse bei niedriger Teilnahme und häufiger Ablehnung mit der Begründung einer fehlenden Relevanz nur eingeschränkt aussagekräftig. Die erfassten Daten reflektieren daher vermutlich eine erhebliche positive Selektion und sind nicht als repräsentativ für das Schmerzmanagement in der inneren Medizin zu werten.

[Delegation of medical activities in acute pain therapy]

Acute pain management is an interprofessional and interdisciplinary task and requires a good and trustful cooperation between stakeholders. Despite provisions in Germany according to which medical treatment can only be rendered by a formally qualified physician ("Arztvorbehalt"), a physician does not have to carry out every medical activity in person. Under certain conditions, some medical activities can be delegated to medical auxiliary personnel but they need to be (1) instructed, (2) supervised and (3) checked by the physician himself; however, medical history, diagnostic assessment and evaluation, indications, therapy planning (e.g. selection, dosage), therapeutic decisions (e. g. modification or termination of therapy) and obtaining informed consent cannot be delegated. With respect to drug therapy, monitoring of the therapy remains the personal responsibility of the physician, while the actual application of medication can be delegated. From a legal perspective, the current practice needs to be stressed about what is within the mandatory requirements and what is not when medical activities are delegated to non-medical staff. The use of standards of care improves treatment quality but like any medical treatment it must be based on the physician's individual assessment and indications for each patient and requires personal contact between physician and patient. Delegation on the ward and in acute pain therapy requires the authorization of the delegator to give instructions in the respective setting. The transfer of non-delegable duties to non-medical personnel is regarded as medical malpractice.

[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.

Current practice of acute pain management in children-a national follow-up survey in Germany

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to summarize the current standard practices for acute pain management in children in Germany and the implementation of these procedures. The last survey on acute pain management in children was performed in 1999, highlighting the need for an up to date review.

METHODS

A questionnaire was mailed to German departments of anesthesiology (n = 885), asking for structures and processes of acute pain management in children. Results were compared between hospitals with and without an acute pain service and with and without a pediatric department.

RESULTS

Of the 407 responding hospitals (response rate of 46%), 342 treated children younger than 14 years. These were considered for analysis. Of the 342 hospitals, 42% contained either a general pediatric department or a department of pediatric surgery, and the majority of the responding hospitals had an acute pain service (83%). Pain intensities were measured at least once per shift in 40% of the institutions, and at least once or twice a day in 27%. Of the institutions, 31% did not document pain scores regularly, without any difference between hospitals with or without a pediatric department. Standard operating procedures for acute pain management existed in 68% of the hospitals, with large differences in content and length. Opioids were administered to children in 85% of the hospitals. Nonopioid analgesics were the first choice baseline analgesics in most hospitals. Peripheral regional and epidural analgesia were performed in children in 18% and 8% of the hospitals, respectively (21%/16% with a paediatric department, 16%/1% without; P < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Current practice of pediatric pain management varied widely and the recommendations of guidelines, like regular pain management, were frequently not met. However, improvements could be observed since 1999, for example, an increase in regular pain measurements (4% vs 67%). Furthermore, pain management in hospitals running a pediatric department had a higher degree of organization, and more sophisticated analgesic techniques.

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.

[Inpatient acute pain management in German hospitals: results from the national survey "Akutschmerzzensus 2012"]

BACKGROUND

In 2007, the German national guidelines on "Treatment of acute perioperative and post-traumatic pain" were published. The aim of this study was to describe current structure and process data for acute pain management in German hospitals and to compare how the guidelines and other initiatives such as benchmarking or certification changed the healthcare landscape in the last decade.

METHODS

All directors of German departments of anesthesiology according to the DGAI ("Deutschen Gesellschaft für Anästhesiologie und Intensivmedizin", German Society for Anesthesiology and Intensive Care) were mailed a standardized questionnaire on structures and processes of acute pain management in their hospitals.

RESULTS

A total of 403 completed questionnaires (46 %) could be evaluated. Of hospitals, 81 % had an acute pain service (ASD), whereby only 45 % met defined quality criteria. Written standards for acute pain management were available in 97 % of the hospitals on surgical wards and 51 % on nonsurgical wards. In 96 %, perioperative pain was regularly recorded (generally pain at rest and/or movement, pain-related functional impairment in 16 % only). Beside these routine measurements, only 38 % of hospitals monitored pain for effectiveness after acute medications. Often interdisciplinary working groups and/or pain managers are established for hospital-wide control. As specific therapy, the patient-controlled analgesia and epidural analgesia are largely prevalent (> 90 % of all hospitals). In the last decade, intravenous and oral opioid administration of opioids (including slow release preparations) has become established in acute pain management.

CONCLUSION

The survey was representative by evaluating 20 % of all German hospitals. The organizational requirements for appropriate pain management recommended by the German guidelines for acute pain recommended have been established in the hospital sector in recent years. However, the organizational enforcement for acute pain management in nonsurgical areas is not adequate yet, compared to the perioperative care. In all hospitals modern medication and invasive techniques are widely available.

[IT-based clinical pathway as a routine tool in trauma surgery]

BACKGROUND

Today clinical pathways are established as a basis for the operational and organizational structure of surgical, interventional and conservative treatment in many hospitals. In our study we evaluate the establishment and systematic applicability of IT-based clinical pathways in a tertiary care facility.

METHODS

We evaluate and compare the treatment of coxarthrosis with hip joint endoprosthesis either following an IT-based clinical pathway or without clinical pathway.

RESULTS

All patients who had received a hip joint endoprosthesis from 1 January 2006 to 31 October 2009 were included. The duration of stay is significantly longer in the group without pathway. Furthermore there was a significant increase in the documentation of wound inspection after surgery in the "pathway patients". The preoperative urinalysis was done significantly more often in the pathway group.

CONCLUSION

IT-based clinical pathways are applicable for routine use in trauma departments. For certain surgical procedures they are a suitable management device, even in a tertiary care facility. Clinical pathways lead to an improved operational structure of medical treatment and moreover to a complete and continuous documentation through the electronic file.

[Anesthesiological acute pain therapy in Germany: telephone-based survey]

INTRODUCTION

The last survey of anesthesiological acute pain therapy in Germany was conducted in 1999. Since then new organisational as well as therapeutic aspects have developed. Amongst others the operation and procedures key (OPS) figure 8-919 complex acute pain therapy has been introduced in the German medical billing system, with the restriction that it cannot currently be redeemed. There is an ongoing debate on the role of epidural analgesia in acute pain therapy and new oral medication concepts have been established. Therefore a survey of the present state of acute pain therapy in Germany was conducted.

METHODS

Based on a list of all 1,356 hospitals in Germany a randomized list of 412 hospitals was generated. Out of these 412 hospitals those with anesthesiology departments (378 hospitals) were contacted via telephone and asked to participate in the survey. Out of the 378 hospitals 285 (75.4 %) agreed to take part. The survey consisted of a questionnaire containing closed and open questions regarding organisational and therapeutic aspects of acute pain therapy. The ethics committee of the University of Regensburg rated the survey as not being subject to approval due to the lack of personal patient data.

RESULTS

Of the participating hospitals 183 (64.2 %) had an acute pain service (APS) and of these 107 (58.5 %) met the quality criteria of the OPS 8-919. This figure however, was only consistently documented by 40 (37 %) APSs. Epidural analgesia (EA) was offered by 275 (96.5 %) hospitals and patient-controlled intravenous analgesia (PCA) by 255 (89.5 %). Likewise, 255 (89.5 %) hospitals used controlled-released opioids in acute pain therapy. Concerning EA, the medications most used were sufentanil as an opioid and ropivacaine as a local anesthetic in255 (92.7 %) of the hospitals with EA for sufentanil and 253 (92 %] for ropivacaine. An EA was offered on regular wards in 240 (87.3 %) hospitals. Uncertainty existed about concrete limits for coagulation values before removal of an epidural catheter. The opioid most utilized in PCA was piritramide with some hospitals using morphine or oxycodone (92.2 %, 9.4 % and 9.4 %, respectively). Other opioids, such as hydromorphone and tramadol were rarely used and remifentanil was not used at all. Oral medication was widely used with metamizole being the non-opioid analgesic and oxycodone/naloxone the controlled-release opioid being prescribed the most. New antiepileptic drugs, such as gabapentin or pregabalin were rarely employed in acute pain therapy.

CONCLUSIONS

Since 1999 the number of hospitals that have implemented an APS has risen from 36.1 % to 64.2 %. The lack of consistent documentation of the OPS 8-919 will probably not increase the likelihood that it will become redeemable in the near future. Certain therapy methods, such as EA and PCA were still well established with oral therapy gaining in significance. The uncertainty regarding limits for coagulation values before removal of an epidural catheter could perhaps be reduced by a statement from the German Society of Anesthesia and Intensive Care.

Postoperative analgesia in children - current practice in Germany

German departments of anaesthesia were surveyed to determine current practice of postoperative pain management in children. The response rate of the survey was 58.6%: Questionnaires of 383 departments in which paediatric surgery was performed could be analyzed. 37.3% operated an acute pain service (APS). In 58.8% of the hospitals, postoperative pain management in children was mainly performed by surgeons or pediatricians. Anaesthesiologists or an APS were in charge for pain management in children in 38.6% of the institutions. Non-opioid analgesics were the drugs most widely used (93.4%), whereas i.v. opioids were never used in 20.9% of the hospitals and used less than once a week in 28.7%. The intramuscular route was chosen at least occasionally by 27.7% of the respondents. Peripheral and central regional techniques were performed in most of the departments, however, frequency of use varied considerably between hospitals running or not running an APS. The majority performed the techniques of regional anaesthesia less than once a week. The basic primary quality criterion of pain therapy, a regular measurement and documentation of pain scores, was performed in only 4% of the institutions. Paediatric pain management does not meet quality criteria and standards of care already established in adults. In the future, additional education of the medical staff considering analgesic techniques and measurement of pain scores has to be emphasized.

[Quality of postoperative pain therapy in Austria: national survey of all departments of anesthesiology]

BACKGROUND

Despite increasingly sophisticated concepts of perioperative pain therapy, such as increased use of combined regional anesthesia techniques, the renaissance of ketamine and dipyrone or the use of oral opioids, no significant improvement has been achieved in postoperative pain therapy since 1995. About 300,000 of the approximately 700,000 patients undergoing major surgery each year in Austria experience moderate to severe postoperative pain. The aim of this study was therefore to assess the nationwide status of perioperative acute pain management in postoperative recovery rooms and surgical wards in order to identify potential areas for improvement.

METHODS

In 2006 the directors of all Austrian anesthesiology departments (n=125, 100%) were contacted and asked to give detailed information on the status of acute pain management of each individual hospital in Austria using a standardized questionnaire. Data of each individual department were derived from quality control and self-assessment of each department. No patients were questioned. The return rate was 96% (n=120) due to intensive personal contact in cases of missing data.

RESULTS

In this nationwide survey 120 anesthesiology departments participated together accounting for a total of 757,895 operations per year. Of the patients 63.6% were informed preoperatively on the available regimens of acute pain management. In 81% of patients perioperative pain therapy consisted of a multimodal therapeutic approach, 58.6% of the departments used international guidelines and 39.7% worked with international guidelines adapted to local requirements. In 88% of patients a detailed prescription for postoperative pain therapy was available when transferred to the surgical ward. Surgical wards were equipped with routine pain therapy protocols in 28% another 20% of wards had special pain therapy protocols for individual operations. In 22% of cases pain assessment was repeated 3-4 times per day and in 33.9% postoperative pain was assessed only once twice per day. Pain assessments were recorded in the patient charts in 60.7% of cases. If changes to the pain therapy regimen were required anesthesiologists were involved in only 14.3% of cases. In addition an acute pain service was available only in 39.2% of Austrian anesthesiology departments.

CONCLUSIONS

Although the multimodal approach to acute pain therapy is widely used and standardized therapeutic regimens are well established in the majority of anesthesiology and surgical wards, there still remains room for improvement. Pain assessment is generally barely adequate and written documentation of pain assessment is missing almost completely. In addition, almost two thirds of hospitals in Austria are still lacking an acute pain service.

[Quality assurance in acute pain therapy : Development of software for the acute pain service]

A detailed documentation system is essential for an effectively working acute pain service. Patient-related documentation aids the physician with check lists and algorithms and may thus further improve clinical practice. As adequate software was missing, we developed a database that was first adapted to the in-house conditions, but can also be adjusted to other surroundings. By integrating "one-click documentation" and new codes for clinical observations, a user-friendly software was created that notably improved the quality of documentation. In the first test period more than 30,000 ward rounds were collected, and a considerably improved documentation quality could be achieved.

The quality of pain management in German hospitals

BACKGROUND

The Pain-Free Hospital Project was initiated in 2003 with the aim of improving pain management throughout Germany. We assessed the current state of pain management in German hospitals.

METHODS

From 2004 to 2006, data were obtained anonymously from 2252 patients who had undergone surgery, and 999 who had been treated non-surgically, in a total of 25 hospitals. They were interviewed about the intensity of pain they had experienced and about the effectiveness of its treatment.

RESULTS

No pain at all was reported by 12.4% of patients who had undergone surgery and by 16.7% of the non-surgically treated patients. Moderate to severe pain at rest was reported by 29.5% of the surgical group and 36.8% of the non-surgical group. More than 50% of the overall group reported pain on movement. 55% of the surgical group, and 57% of the non-surgical group, were dissatisfied with their pain management. Peak pain tended to occur outside normal working hours. No analgesic treatment at all was given to 39% of patients in the non-surgical group, even though they were in pain; the corresponding figure for the surgical group was 15% (a significant difference, p<0.001). Inadequately effective pain management was reported by 45.6% of patients in the non-surgical group and 29.6% in the operative group (again, a significant difference. Cancer patients were treated more often with potent opioids.

CONCLUSION

Severe postoperative pain is still too common among hospitalized patients, particularly pain that is induced by movement. Patients being treated on non-surgical wards also often suffer severe pain needlessly. Pain management seems to be worse for non-surgical patients (cancer patients excepted) than for surgical patients: waiting times for medication are longer, and ineffective medications are given more often. On the other hand, a number of hospitals provide positive examples of the potential effectiveness of pain management for both surgical and non-surgical patients.

[Implementation of standardized postoperative pain therapy for orthopaedic patients. Comparison between unsystematic and standardized pain therapy]

BACKGROUND

The painless clinic and postoperative pain therapy are currently major issues in the management of surgical procedures. The aim of this study was to evaluate the benefit of a standardized pain therapy on the postoperative pain level after orthopaedic procedures.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We investigated two different groups of patients who underwent an orthopaedic surgical procedure. Group 1 (n = 249) received a pain therapy which was based on an individual and surgery-dependent concept whereas group 2 (n = 243) was treated with a standardized pain therapy concept. The effect of the treatment was monitored with a VAS-based protocol.

RESULTS

Up to day 9 after surgery there was a significant difference between the two groups in regard to the postoperative pain. The patients of group 2 had less pain but had more unwanted side effects caused by the pain therapy during the first 3 days after surgery. Mobility and mental disposition were positively affected.

CONCLUSION

The implementation of a standardized pain therapy is successful in reducing postoperative pain. Mobility and mental disposition are also influenced positively. As a consequence the incidence of unwanted side effects is rising.

Quality improvement in postoperative pain management: results from the QUIPS project

INTRODUCTION

Acute postoperative pain management is still far from satisfactory despite the availability of high-quality guidelines and advanced pain management techniques.

METHODS

An outcome-oriented project called QUIPS (Quality Improvement in Postoperative Pain Management) was developed, consisting of standardized data acquisition and an analysis of quality and process indicators.

RESULTS

After validation of the questionnaire, a total of 12 389 data sets were collected from 30 departments in six participating hospitals. Improved outcomes (reduction in pain intensity) were observed in four of the six hospitals. The most painful operations, in the patients' judgment, were traumatological and orthopedic procedures, as well as laparoscopic appendectomy. Traditional process indicators, such as routine pain documentation, were only poorly correlated with outcomes.

DISCUSSION

QUIPS shows that outcomes in postoperative pain management can be measured and compared in routine clinical practice. This may lead to improved care. QUIPS reveals which operations are the most painful. Quality improvement initiatives should use as few resources as possible, measure the quality of the outcomes, and provide rapid feedback. Structural and process parameters should be continuously reevaluated to determine their suitability as indicators of quality.

Mikrovaskuläre Knochentransplantation im Kindesalter

Apart from the perioperative care in children undergoing microvascular bone transplantation, postoperative pain therapy plays an important role in avoiding the development of chronic pain. Additionally perfusion of the transplant can possibly be improved by sympathicolysis provided by a continuous peripheral nerve block. We report the case of a 7-year-old boy with neurofibromatosis type I who underwent an autologous fibula transplantation due to an aplastic left radius. The perioperative pain management was performed via a preoperatively placed axillary plexus catheter combined with a proximal sciatic nerve catheter. Via both catheters a continuous postoperative infusion of 0.1% ropivacaine (3 ml/h) was performed. Within the first 5 postoperative days complete pain relief at rest could be achieved.

Fentanyl HCl iontophoretic transdermal system (ITS): clinical application of iontophoretic technology in the management of acute postoperative pain

The fentanyl HCl iontophoretic transdermal system (fentanyl ITS) is a novel patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) system that has been approved in the USA and Europe for the management of acute, moderate-to-severe postoperative pain. This system extends the applicability of transdermal drug delivery to acute pain management, allowing patients to self-administer pre-programmed doses of fentanyl non-invasively through the use of iontophoretic technology. Iontophoresis is the process by which an electric current is used to drive ionized drug molecules across the skin and into the systemic circulation. Results of a recent US clinical trial found the fentanyl ITS to provide pain control equivalent to a standard regimen of morphine i.v. PCA, with a similar incidence of opioid-related adverse events. The fentanyl ITS may offer a number of clinical advantages over existing PCA modalities. Its method of drug delivery avoids the risk of complications from needle-related injuries and infection, and its pre-programmed electronics eliminate the potential for manual programming errors and excessive dosing. In addition, the compact size of the system could enable greater patient mobility following surgery. The fentanyl ITS has the potential to become a valuable option in the management of acute postoperative pain.

Grenzen der An�sthesie

The demographic development and ongoing improvement of surgical techniques result in an increasing number of high risk elderly patients undergoing surgery. The anesthesiologist has an important role within the management of these patients, because apart from the present illness resulting in a surgical intervention the anesthesiologist has to assess and treat the pre-existing medical disorders in the perioperative period. In many cases the pre-existing medical disorders and the medications needed for their treatment are more important within the anesthesiological management than the operation to be performed. Apart from the preoperative assessment of the patients risk in combination with a possible optimization of the therapy of the comorbidities, the intra- and postoperative management of these high risk patients has an important influence on the postoperative rehabilitation of these patients. The adequate perioperative anesthesiological management can result in the avoidance of intensive care treatment. A very often underestimated topic is the sufficient perioperative pain treatment of these high risk elderly patients.

Neurologische Komplikationen und Wirkverlust unter intrathekaler Schmerztherapie

In a new guideline issued by the German Association for the Study of Pain, intrathecal opioid therapy is described as proven to be effective with relatively few side effects. We reviewed this statement by analysis of the available literature and critical evaluation of the clinical course in a few of our own patients (n=3). In these cases (as well as in a further eight patients), explantation and a switch to oral opioids led to distinctly better alleviation of pain and abatement of the unwanted effects. The problems we discuss do not appear to be rare instances, but by all means complications that are frequently described. The long-term efficacy of intrathecal opioids has not been adequately verified; moreover, their potency is not high. The frequency of undesired events is comparable to that of oral opioid medication, but serious neurological complications are possible. To avoid dose escalations and to recognize neurological complications in time, diligent monitoring by the surgeon or an experienced pain center is essential.

[Organization model for postoperative pain management in a basic-care hospital]

Small hospitals often lack the financial and personnel resources to realize innovative postoperative pain management concepts. This is not-as shown here-an absolute contradiction. The regular measurement of pain and its documentation by ward nurses as well as the appropriate prescription of analgesics play a key role in our concept. The joint establishment of guidelines, information sessions and the on-going dialog between the various professional groups guarantees the necessary consensus of all specialists involved in postoperative pain control. If an anesthetist is available 24 h a day, a nurse-based acute pain service (APS) becomes available for managing patients with patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) systems. The use of PCA and the performance of pain visits at regular intervals increase patient comfort and satisfaction. In addition, it can contribute to reduced hospitalization time in the context of fast-track rehabilitation programs. In our opinion, embedding the measures in a quality management program has a valuable catalytic effect, although implementation takes at least 1-2 years.

Enquête sur les pratiques d'analgésie après thoracotomie

OBJECTIVE

To estimate qualitatively and quantitatively analgesic methods used after thoracotomy.

METHODS

Postal questionnaire addressed to all French public (34 academic institutions, 37 public hospitals) and private hospitals (60), which routinely perform pulmonary surgery.

RESULTS

Analysis of the questionnaires related only to those coming from academic institutions (rate of response of 85%) and from private hospitals (60%). Intravenous patient-controlled analgesia, thoracic epidural analgesia and intrathecal analgesia are the most frequently suggested techniques of analgesia. Thoracic epidural analgesia is more frequently suggested in private hospitals than in academic institutions (77% vs. 55%, NS). There is no significant difference between academic institutions and private hospitals regarding the practised analgesic technique. Analysis of the practices of thoracic epidural analgesia and of intrathecal analgesia in particular showed limited impact of guidelines concerning preoperative administration of anticoagulants in 15-20% of the centres. Only six (in the academic institutions) to 18% (in the private hospitals) of the patients receiving thoracic epidural analgesia were hospitalised in a surgical ward. Thoracic epidural analgesia is continued generally for more than 48 h; there is however a significant difference between centres since epidural analgesia is continued longer in academic institutions than in private hospitals.

CONCLUSION

Intravenous patient-controlled analgesia and thoracic epidural analgesia are the most commonly analgesic techniques used after thoracotomy for pulmonary surgery. In the latter case, most centres choose to maintain these patients in high dependency units.

Impact of CYP2D6 genotype on postoperative tramadol analgesia

Genetic polymorphisms result in absent enzyme activity of CYP2D6 (poor metabolizers, PM) in about 10% of the Caucasian population. This study investigates whether the PM genotype has an impact on the response to tramadol analgesia in postoperative patients. A prospective study design was used and 300 patients recovering from abdominal surgery were enrolled. After titration of an individual loading dose, patients could self-administer 1 ml bolus doses of the drug combination tramadol 20 mg/ml, dipyrone 200 mg/ml and metoclopramide 0.4 mg/ml via patient-controlled analgesia (PCA). Patients' genotype was analyzed considering the most prevalent PM associated CYP2D6 mutations using a real-time PCR and hybridization based genotyping method. Demographic data, surgery related variables, pain scores, analgesic consumption and need for rescue medication were compared between extensive metabolizers (EM) and PM. The primary outcome criterion 'response' was defined as responder or non-responder status by the need for rescue medication and patients' satisfaction at the final interview. Demographic and surgery related data were comparable between EM (n=241) and PM (n=30). The percentage of non-responders was significantly higher in the PM group (46.7%) compared with the EM group (21.6%; p=0.005). Tramadol loading dose amounted to 108.2+/-56.9 and 144.7+/-22.6 mg (p<0.001) in EM and PM, respectively. More patients displaying the PM genotype needed rescue medication in the recovery room and during PCA period than patients with at least one wild type allele (21.6 versus 43.3%, p=0.02). PM for CYP2D6 showed a lower response rate to postoperative tramadol analgesia than EM. Therefore, CYP2D6 genotype has an impact on analgesia with tramadol. Pharmacogenetics may explain some of the varying response to pain medication in postoperative patients.