[The status of perioperative pain therapy in Germany. Results of a representative, anonymous survey of 1,000 surgical clinic. Pain Study Group]

Status of inpatient pain therapy using the example of a general and abdominal surgery normal ward - a prospective questionnaire study to review a pain therapy algorithm ("real-world data")

Objectives

The mean pain intensity for inpatient consultations, for example in cancer patients, is known. However, the proportion of necessary consultations in the total volume of patients of a ward or a hospital, the general pain intensity in a surgical ward and the relationship between pain medication, length of stay and therapeutic success are unknown. The aim of the study was to examine surgical patients in a single normal ward subclassified into various groups (-/+ surgery, ICU stay, cancer, consultation for pain therapy etc.) during half a year with regard to their pain. For this purpose, the pain score (NAS) was recorded daily for each patient during the entire hospital stay and the change was assessed over the clinical course.

Methods

In 2017, all consecutive new admissions to a normal ward of general surgery at a university hospital ("tertiary center") were monitored over half a year according to a standardized procedure. Pain severity (measured by the "Numeric rating scale" [NRS] respectively "Visual analogue scale" [VAS]) from admission to discharge was recorded, as well as the length of stay and the administered medication. Patient groups were sub-classified as surgery, intensive care unit, cancer and pain consultation. An algorithm in two parts (part 1, antipyretics and piritramide; part 2, WHO-scheme and psychotropic drugs), which was defined years before between surgeons and pain therapists, was pursued and consequently used as a basis for the evaluation of the therapeutic success.

Results

269 patients were included in the study. The mean pain intensity of all patients at admission was VAS 2.2. Most of the groups (non-cancer, intensive care unit [ICU], non-ICU, surgical intervention (=Operation [OP]), non-OP, pain intensity greater than VAS 3) were significantly reduced in pain at discharge. An exception in this context was patients with cancer-associated pain and, thus, initiated pain consultation.

Conclusions

Since three quarters of the consultation patients also reported cancer pain, it might be possible that the lack of treatment success in both the consultation and cancer groups is associated with cancer in these patients. However, it can be shown that the successfully treated groups (without ICU-based course) had a mean length of stay from 4.2 ± 3.9 up to 8.4 ± 8.1 days (d), while the two unsuccessfully treated groups experienced a longer stay (mean"cancer", 11.1 ± 9.4 d; mean"consulation", 14.2 ± 10.3 d). Twenty-one consultation patients, in whom it had been intended to improve pain intensity, could not be successfully treated despite adapted therapy - this can be considered a consequence of the low number of patients. Since the consultation patients were the only patient group treated with part 2 of the algorithm, it can be concluded that part 1 of the algorithm is sufficient for a mean length of stay up to 9 days. For all patients above this time point, a pain consultation with adaption of medical treatment should be considered.

[Resolution of the Federal Joint Committee on the mandatory introduction and implementation of acute pain management concepts-Importance and consequences for ophthalmology]

Patient-centered and adequate postoperative pain management is an important part of a modern treatment concept and should also be standard in ophthalmology. Due to the "Regulation on the mandatory introduction and implementation of acute pain management concepts for adequate postoperative pain therapy" prescribed by the Federal Joint Committee of the German statutory healthcare system (G-BA), hospitals and outpatient facilities have been required to have regulations on pain management in place since 9 December 2020. It is very likely that the need of pain management in ophthalmic surgery has been systematically underestimated so far and studies on postoperative pain hardly exist. In the opinion of the authors, the decision represents an opportunity to pay more attention to the topic and to develop standards for ophthalmology as well. This article explains the G‑BA decision and the resulting consequences for ophthalmic surgical institutions.

[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.

Efficiency of multimodal anаlgesia in orthopedics and traumatology

Проведене клінічне дослідження на 200 пацієнтах, яким в умовах ортопедо­травматологічного стаціонару виконувалось тотальне ендопротезування кульшового та колінного суглобів, а також металоостеосинтез довгих кісток нижніх кінцівок. Усі хворі були розбиті на 2 підгрупи (по 100 пацієнтів у кожній), де в дослідній групі знеболювання проводилось за методикою мультимодальної аналгезії (з використанням вітчизняних препаратів “Інфулган”, інтраопераційно в операційну рану –“Логнокаїн” та “Налбуфін”), в контрольній знеболювання проводилось за традиційною методикою. Оцінка ефективності післяопераційного знеболювання здійснювалася за шкалою болю ВАШ на 2, 7, 14 та 30 добу після оперативного втручання. Проведене дослідження переконливо доводить ефективність призначення мультимодальної аналгезії в післяопераційному періоді хворих ортопедо­травматологічного профілю. Все це дозволило проводити ранню післяопераційну реабілітацію пацієнтів та забезпечило гарний функціональний результат у всіх прооперованих хворих. Мультимодальна аналгезія є сучасною методикою післяопераційного знеболювання при хірургічному лікуванні пацієнтів після перенесених травм і захворювань опорно­рухового апарату і вимагає ширшого застосування в практиці ортопедів­травматологів України.

[The effects of setting a standard in the acute pain therapy on a ward : Parameters for patient and provider satisfaction and cost structure (STANDAKU)]

BACKGROUND

There is neither a "gold standard" nor commonly approved therapy goals in postoperative pain therapy. In a multi-center study, more than 80% of all patients treated stated that they suffered from postoperative pain. Moreover, patients evaluated the pain therapy as significantly worse than other medical or nursing practices. Therefore, there is a need for optimization in therapy for acute pain.

OBJECTIVES

The goal of our project was to figure out if the introduction of a "pain treatment standard" would increase the satisfaction of patients, physicians, and nurses, and reduce the costs of pain-related medicine.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Overall, 2769 patients and 285 providers (202 nurses and 83 physicians) were polled. The medication costs in ten areas of the ward were evaluated and compared. The providers were offered a training course on the "pain standard" and it was officially introduced onto the wards. After some time, the satisfaction of patients and providers and the use of medicine were recorded again.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

The maximum pain values declared by the patients significantly decreased after the introduction of the "pain standard." The satisfaction with pain therapy significantly increased for the patients and for the providers. The reported minimum pain values of the patients did not change significantly. The costs of pain medicine slightly increased. In general, there was a positive effect of introducing a "pain standard" for patients and providers.

[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.

[Management of postoperative pain in ear-nose-throat surgery]

The degree of pain following different types of ear-nose-throat surgery varies greatly and must be adjusted on an individual basis. Post-operative pain therapy can be classified into basic pain therapy and additive pain therapy (as needed). Effective pain therapy can lead to lower morbidity and to considerable economic advantages. The subjective pain intensity experienced by patient should be the basis for the dose adaptation and is essential for rapid recovery.

[Quality management in acute pain therapy: results from a survey of certified hospitals]

AIM

Systems for and methods of quality management are increasingly being implemented in public health services. The aim of our study was to analyze the current state of the integrated quality management concept "quality management acute pain therapy" of the TÜV Rheinland® (TÜV) after a 5-year project period.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

General characteristics of the participating hospitals, number of departments certified by the TÜV and implementation of structures and processes according to the TÜV guidelines were evaluated by a mail questionnaire. Furthermore, positive and negative aspects concerning the effects of certification were evaluated by the hospitals' representatives of certification.

RESULTS

A total of 36 questionnaires were returned. Since 2006 the number of certified hospitals (2011: n = 48) and surgical departments (2011: n = 202) has increased continuously. The number of certified medical departments is low (2011: n = 39); however, in the last 3 years, it has increased by about 200-300% annually. Standard operative procedures for pain therapy and measurement of pain intensity at regular intervals were implemented in all certified clinics (100%). Although 41% take part in the benchmarking project QUIPS (Quality Improvement in Postoperative Pain Therapy), 24% do not systematically check the quality of the outcome of pain management. Acceptance of the new pain therapy concepts among nursing staff was rated positively (ratio positive:negative 16:1); however, acceptance among physicians was rated negatively (1:15).

CONCLUSION

Certification by the TÜV leads to sustainable implementation of quality management principles. Future efforts should focus on better integration of physicians in acute pain therapy and the development of an integrated tool to measure patients' outcome.

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 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.

[Postoperative pain after ambulatory surgery]

BACKGROUND

Outpatient surgeons were surveyed about the quality of postoperative pain therapy after outpatient interventions.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Of 2,317 outpatient surgeons who received a questionnaire by mail, 419 responded. The return rate was 18.1%. The questionnaire collected data on the operative procedures and methods of anesthesia from 2004 and the analgesics, which were applied in the immediate postoperative period and at home. Methods and contents of quality control were registered.

RESULTS

The respondents indicated that the person responsible for the pain therapy was the surgeon in 74% of the practices, the anesthesiologist in 16%, and both in 10%. The drugs used in the practice were: novaminsulfone (34%), NSAIDs (28%), and opioids (36%). The drugs used for at-home care were: NSAIDs (58%), opioids (43%), novaminsulfone (32%), and mixed analgesics (28%). No analgesics were given by 6%, and 21% prescribed a supplementary antiemetic. Routine pain measurement was performed with pain scales in only 11% of the practices; among the certified practices, 48% performed pain measurement for quality control. Ninety-five percent of the surgeons were satisfied with the pain therapy.

CONCLUSION

This survey shows that the guidelines for acute pain therapy (http://www.awmf.de ) are only partially implemented.

[Implementation of a standardized perioperative pain management concept in three hospitals of a consortium]

BACKGROUND

Provision of sufficient perioperative pain therapy is an obligation in the clinical management of patients suffering from pain. The implementation of a standardized pain management concept was planned to be introduced in the clinical routine. The results of three hospitals are shown.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

The concept included tools which gave information about legal aspects and basic fundamentals of pain relief, management modules regarding agreements on the implementation of perioperative pain therapy, instruments to measure pain intensity, assigning accountability and documentation modules. Questionnaires were carried out according to Picker.

RESULTS

The project revealed that, according to the Picker questionnaire, about 50% of the patients treated in the hospitals had pain, 30-40% still had intensive pain during the stay in hospital and 90% of the patients received pain relief medication within 10 min of the request. More than 78% of the patients thought the hospital staff did their best to relieve the pain and over 92% found the pain treatment adequate.

CONCLUSION

It was possible to implement a standardized perioperative pain therapy concept in three hospitals of a consortium. Whether an adequate pain relief can be improved with the help of standard measurements and documentation, could not be evaluated in this study.

[A multimodal and multidisciplinary postoperative pain management concept]

Under-treatment of acute postoperative pain can lead to chronic pain with neuronal plasticity and result in poor surgical outcomes. A multimodal approach is therefore necessary to reduce postoperative pain by combining various analgesics with a non-pharmacological strategy. The current use of multimodal approaches, even for the management of postoperative pain, can reduce the side effects of pharmaceutical therapy alone as well as reducing the length of hospital stay. Adequate pain control is an important prerequisite for the application of rehabilitation programmes and will thereby influence functional outcome. In addition, patient satisfaction, as a major benchmarking factor after surgical treatment, is significantly influenced by the quality of postoperative pain management.

Quantification of the pain terms hurt, ache and pain among nursing students

The aim of this study was to determine the quantitative meaning nursing students ascribe to the pain terms hurt (ont), ache (värk) and pain (smärta). In total, 549 nursing students filled in a questionnaire including questions about age, gender, and health care work experience. The students were also requested to rate response using a Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) rating for different statements about hurt, ache and pain. The results show that there were significant differences (p < 0.001) between rated intensity of the statements of hurt, ache and pain. There were, however, large variations in the students' ratings of the pain terms; hurt ranged from 3 to 97 mm, ache from 7 to 97 mm and pain from 27 to 100 mm. There were no significant differences between male and female students regarding their ratings of hurt and ache when they were used to describe the worst self-experienced pain. Female students rated their experience of pain significantly higher (p < 0.001) on the VAS compared with male students. There was no significant correlation between previous experience of health care work and rated intensity of hurt, ache and pain. In conclusion, this study shows that there exist significant differences between the pain terms hurt, ache and pain according to a rating on a VAS. However, the results also demonstrate that there are large individual variations in how the students quantify the fictitious patient statements of hurt, ache and pain.

Analgesie in der Kolonchirurgie

BACKGROUND

The goal of our study was to evaluate the morphine-sparing effect of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) following both conventional and laparoscopic colon surgery.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In this prospective, randomized clinical trial, 180 patients were assigned to three groups. Two groups received either paracetamol or parecoxib/valdecoxib in addition to piritramid via patient-controlled or nurse-controlled analgesia pump. Patients in the control group received piritramid only. The total piritramid consumption during hospital stay was recorded.

RESULTS

Total opioid consumption was significantly lower in the two groups who received NSAIDs. Comparing conventional and laparoscopic surgery, the latter group had much lower opioid consumption.

CONCLUSION

The use of NSAIDs following colon surgery significantly reduces postoperative opioid consumption.

[Preoperative pain training. No influence on postoperative pain perception in patients undergoing cardiac surgery]

BACKGROUND

The present research was performed to investigate the influence of preoperative information on pain given by the nursing staff on postoperative pain perception in patients.

METHODS

A randomized controlled interventional study was conducted in 93 patients undergoing cardiac surgery at the University Hospital Erlangen. One day before the surgery all participants were evaluated using the Eysenck Personality Questionnaire, patients of the treatment group were additionally trained by a member of the nursing staff in pain behaviour. After discharge from the intensive care unit the pain experience of the patients was evaluated using standardized questionnaires.

RESULTS

Of the 93 patients, 73 finished the study protocol and were analyzed. The pain experience was not significantly different between the two study groups. Patients with increased levels of neuroticism (characterized by emotional lability) regardless of study group more frequently reported pain values above 3/10.

CONCLUSION

No significant modulation of postoperative pain experience was achieved by preoperative information on pain. However, it cannot be ruled out that this intervention, particularly in view of the reduction in anxiety, may form a significant element of perioperative pain management.

[Postoperative pain relief is an important factor for the patients' selection of a clinic. Results of an anonymous survey]

AIM

The aim of the survey was to elucidate the significance of postoperative pain therapy for the patient and its influence on the choice of hospital.

METHODS

This prospective, anonymous survey of consecutive patients in a general surgical clinic was performed by an independent study nurse.

RESULTS

A total of 161 patients were included; 90% of the surgical patients considered "good pain therapy" as a highly important factor, and three of four patients would admit themselves more likely to a clinic well known for "good pain therapy." If the patients could choose their hospital, factors such as "medical care by the physicians" are most important (rank 1; rank 1 most important, rank 10 most unimportant) followed by quality of "nursing care" (mean rank 2.6) and "good pain therapy" (mean rank 3.6). Older patients (> or = 60 years) preferred a hospital with known "good pain therapy" more often for surgical therapy than younger patients (< 60 years).

CONCLUSION

It can be concluded that postoperative pain relief is an important factor for the patients' selection of a clinic and is influenced by an age of > or = 60 years.

[Psychoreactive disorders after motor vehicle accidents. Is it possible to predict the development of psychoreactive disorders after motor vehicle accidents?]

The aim of this study was to assess common risk factors for the early development of psychoreactive disorders during traumatological treatment and to estimate their predictive potential. The sample consisted of 126 consecutive patients with accidental injuries recruited in an emergency room of the university hospital. We assessed this population 1 week (T1) and-on average-8 months following the accident (T2). At T1 34.5% of all patients indicated moderate and 26.4% strong symptoms of an acute stress disorder; 26.7% of all patients assessed at T2 suffered from severe post-traumatic symptoms. Linear regression analysis, using morbidity status at T2 as the dependent variable, allowed the explanation of 46.2% of the variance. The degree of early acute stress symptoms, injury, and pain intensity contributed significantly to the predictive model. We conclude that a substantial proportion of severely injured accident victims that will develop PTSD can be screened to some degree by the assessment of early stress disorder, the degree of their injury, and pain intensity, enabling secondary prevention of trauma-dependent symptomatology.

Organization, Function, and Implementation of Acute Pain Service

Undertreatment of postoperative pain continues to be a major problem internationally. The solution does not seem to be the development of new analgesic drugs or technologies but the development of an appropriate organization that utilizes existing expertise. Evidence suggests that the introduction of an Acute Pain Service (APS) reduces patients' pain intensity, but other outcome benefits are modest. Although the number of hospitals with an APS is increasing, the literature is unclear about the optimal structure, staffing, and function. There is a need for the development of well-defined APS criteria with which to assess performance and compare with national standards.

Qualitätsmanagement der postoperativen Schmerztherapie

BACKGROUND

A main target of surgical treatment is to minimize postoperative pain. The aim of this study was to evaluate the benefit of quality management on postoperative pain and to improve pain therapy.

METHODS

In a prospective study, postoperative pain was recorded in a total of 700 patients in a general and visceral surgical ward in 2000, 2001, and 2002. Pain was measured on a ten-point visual analogue scale (0 no pain, 10 most severe pain).

RESULTS

Applying the principles of quality management (plan, do, check, act), we analyzed the reasons for high pain scores in detail. After study of the results in 2000, additional recommendations and guidelines for perioperative pain therapy were provided to all the physicians, and the mean visual analogue pain scores decreased by 15% in 2001 and more than 30% in 2002. At baseline, 12% of patients had pain above the threshold of 3 at rest and 5 in motion. These scores could be reduced to 6% and 3% in the two successive years, respectively.

CONCLUSION

A simple pain management system in a general surgical ward led to considerable improvement in postoperative pain scores as assessed by visual analogue scale.

[Postoperative pain therapy in orthopedics]

Postoperative pain management adheres to the principles of a three-step routine according to the WHO recommendations. This routine suggests the combination of a basic non-opioid (step I) with an opioid of low potency (step II) or high potency (step III). Non-opioids are routinely administered prior to an opioid. While i.v. application is the treatment of choice in the immediate postoperative course, a switch to oral pain medication is preferred as early as possible. With oral opioid therapy preference should be given to slow release drugs. Intramuscular application of pain medication has little place in postoperative pain management. In order to lower the need for systemic pain medication, postoperative pain management is supplemented by regional anesthesia administered pre- or intraoperatively. Requirement for pain medication beyond normal or increasing with postoperative time is suggestive of a postsurgical complication. Among the numerous drugs available for postoperative pain management, the physician is advised to confine his selection of pain medication to a limited number in order to gain superior knowledge of effects and side effects of the drugs administered.

Postoperative pain management on surgical wards—impact of database documentation of anesthesia organized services

Postoperative pain management (POPM) should be based on an organization exploiting existing expertise and documenting the outcome of the POPM in each individual patient. The aims of the present study were to evaluate the adequacy of database documentation of POPM of an anesthesia organized, nurse-based, anesthesiologist-supervised acute pain service (APS) on surgical wards and to assess to what extent the information obtained was continuously used to improve practice. From 2890 registered cases in the database (patient controlled analgesia, n = 1975; epidural analgesia [EDA], n = 915), a homogeneous two-year sample of documentation charts from use of EDA for POPM in connection with major, open, abdominal surgical procedures (n = 381) was chosen for detailed analysis. The data charts contained information on patient data, drug dosage, total amount of infused drug, duration of EDA treatment, occurrence of side effects, and patient's level of satisfaction. The database information was easily accessible making assessment of relevant aspects of the routines, including associations between analgesic technique, patient related factors, and satisfaction with the services, immediately available. Only 58% of the data charts were properly completed and fed into the database but the clinical safety of the missing nondatabase documented sample was not found jeopardized. Although the database documentation routines were considered to fulfill basic requirements of data collection and monitoring of the appropriateness of POPM, they were not found to function optimally. The reason seemed to be inadequate feedback of information between the parties involved in the POPM services. The present study stresses the importance of establishing routines for adequate, continuous feedback of recorded audit data from the APS team to the surgical wards for the maintenance of a high level of compliance with accepted guidelines.

Postoperative pain management on surgical wards--do quality assurance strategies result in long-term effects on staff member attitudes and clinical outcomes?

Postoperative pain management (POPM) remains suboptimal on surgical wards in many countries despite the availability of effective analgesics, new technologies for drug administration, and clinical practice guidelines for pain management. The aim of the present study was to assess remaining long-term effects on pain management routines, patient experiences, and staff member attitudes in surgical wards more than 3 years after introduction of a quality assurance program for POPM and compare the findings to those of an organization where a corresponding systematic, entire hospital, quality assurance program had not been completed. A descriptive and comparative design, based on survey data from both patients (N = 110) and staff members (N = 51) on urologic surgery wards, was used. Significant (p <.05 to p <.0002) overall relationships were observed for identified shortages in pain management routines (lack of preoperative information, inadequate preoperative discussions on pain management, wait for pain killer) and reported experience of pain, nausea, or vomiting in the postoperative period. The quality assurance program, anesthesia-based pain services using a nurse-based anesthesiologist-supervised model, resulted in more adequate pain management routines, better patient satisfaction with POPM, and increased confidence in pain management among nurses on the surgical wards. On the basis of the present study it may be concluded that more than 3 years after the introduction of a quality assurance program for POPM in surgical wards, the pain management routines, patient experiences, and staff member attitudes have remained markedly improved and in accordance with the aims of accepted clinical practice guidelines for surgical pain management.

Digest

For this quarter's digest, Professor Christian Herfarth and Dr Thomas Lehnert have selected the best from the April to June 1998 issues of Der Chirurg. A digest from the BJS for the same period, written by Mr Colin Johnson, appears in the German journal.

Current practice in postoperative epidural analgesia: a german survey

We surveyed current German practice in postoperative epidural analgesia (EA). Of 300 questionnaires sent anonymously, 147 (49%) were returned fully completed. A 24-h acute pain service (APS) was offered in 41% of German hospitals. Seventy percent of the large teaching hospitals (>1000 beds) offered an APS, whereas just 9% of the hospitals of <500 beds provided an APS. Small-size hospitals (<200 beds) preferred ropivacaine as the local anesthetic (LA) in contrast to large teaching hospitals using more bupivacaine than ropivacaine. In the general ward setting, 36% of the respondents used plain LA, and 64% combined the LA with an opioid. If ropivacaine was used, 0.2% was the most popular concentration (78%), combined with morphine (17%), fentanyl (14%), or sufentanil (75%). If bupivacaine was used, 0.25% was the preferred concentration (30%), combined with morphine (40%), fentanyl (8%), or sufentanil (60%). On wards, 58% of German anesthetic departments used continuous epidural infusion, 57% bolus doses, and 20% patient-controlled EA mode. We conclude that the availability of a 24-h APS (41%) in German hospitals corresponds favorably to international data. EA with the combination of LAs and opioids was the most common modality in the ward setting.

IMPLICATIONS

We surveyed current German practice in postoperative epidural analgesia. We found that the availability of a 24-h acute pain service (41%) in German hospitals corresponds favorably to international practice. Epidural analgesia with the combination of local anesthetics and opioids was the most common modality in the ward setting.

An experiment of mailing physician surveys on two different issues in joint or separate mail

High response rates from physicians play an important role in obtaining valid data on practice patterns. We wanted to know whether two questionnaires (one on hernia surgery and one on perioperative pain management) should better be sent out in one letter or two separate letters. We randomized 2,393 surgeons who received the two questionnaires either in one letter or by separate mail, in two letters, at a time interval of 4 weeks. The response rate for the separate mailout was not significantly higher when compared to the joint mailout. The differences were 3.3% (95%-CI -0,4% to 7.1%) and 2.2% (95%-CI -1,4% to 5.9%) for the two surveys. Due mainly to higher postage costs, the costs per response were doubled in the separate mailout group (5.85 Euro versus 2.93 Euro). Sending out two surveys separately seems to have only little effect on the response rates.