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

[Perioperative Pain Management - Patient Information, Informed Consent and Discharge Management]

Many surgical procedures are followed by postoperative pain. Acute pain should be treated optimally for medical and ethical reasons. Different psychological, physical, interventional and pharmacological methods are employed in a procedure specific and institution specific matter. For optimum patient care, implementation of acute pain management concepts in recommendations on quality management in German hospitals and outpatient clinics was enacted in September 2020 by Gemeinsamer Bundessausschuss (G-BA). Implementation of discharge management had already been enacted in 2017 for structured prescription of medication after hospital discharge, among other things. On the other hand, new national and international developments require a new weighting of pharmacotherapy in particular. Examples include debates on the safe use of metamizol and the opioid crisis in the US. To address these issues adjustments in informed consent and patient information and education are necessary. This includes also the information and education of caregivers. This article describes the legal framework, technical solutions and the impact of placebo and nocebo effects on doctor-patient communication.

Patient Empowerment Reduces Pain in Geriatric Patients After Gynecologic Onco-Surgery: Subgroup Analysis of a Prospective Randomized Controlled Clinical Trial

PURPOSE

This study aimed to determine the effect of patient empowerment on acute postoperative pain. This research was part of the Patient Empowerment and Risk-Assessed Treatment to Improve Outcome in the Elderly After Onco-Surgery Trial.

DESIGN

This research was a prospective randomized controlled interventional study.

METHODS

Patients who underwent gynecologic onco-surgery were included in this analysis of demographic data, basic characteristics, pain intensity by numeric rating scale, and mode of pain therapy. The intervention included provision of detailed information booklet and patient diary.

FINDINGS

Ninety-one patients were enrolled (treatment group, n = 51; control group, n = 40). With the same medications, pain on the first postoperative day was significantly less severe in the treatment group than in the control group (P = .03). On multivariate logistic regression, patient empowerment had a significant effect on pain intensity (odds ratio, 3.46; 95% confidence interval, 1.35 to 8.86; P = .01). The number needed to treat to decrease pain from severe to mild (numeric rating scale, 5 to 10 to 0 to 4) was 4.35.

CONCLUSIONS

Patient empowerment significantly reduces postoperative pain in elderly patients undergoing gynecologic cancer surgery.

Psychological interventions for acute pain after open heart surgery

BACKGROUND

This is an update of a Cochrane review previously published in 2014. Acute postoperative pain is one of the most disturbing complaints in open heart surgery, and is associated with a risk of negative consequences. Several trials investigated the effects of psychological interventions to reduce acute postoperative pain and improve the course of physical and psychological recovery of participants undergoing open heart surgery.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the efficacy of psychological interventions as an adjunct to standard care versus standard care alone or standard care plus attention control in adults undergoing open heart surgery for pain, pain medication, psychological distress, mobility, and time to extubation.

SEARCH METHODS

For this update, we searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, and PsycINFO for eligible studies up to February 2017. We used the 'related articles' and 'cited by' options of eligible studies to identify additional relevant studies. We checked lists of references of relevant articles and previous reviews. We searched the ProQuest Dissertations and Theses Full Text Database, ClinicalTrials and the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform to identify any unpublished material or ongoing trials. We also contacted the authors of primary studies to identify any unpublished material. In addition, we wrote to all leading heart centres in Germany, Switzerland, and Austria to check whether they were aware of any ongoing trials.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials comparing psychological interventions as an adjunct to standard care versus standard care alone or standard care plus attention in adults undergoing open heart surgery.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors (SZ and SK) independently assessed trials for eligibility, estimated the risk of bias and extracted all data. We calculated effect sizes for each comparison (Hedges' g) and meta-analysed data using a random-effects model. We assessed the evidence using GRADE and created 'Summary of findings' tables.

MAIN RESULTS

We added six studies to this update. Overall, we included 23 studies (2669 participants).For the majority of outcomes (two-thirds), we could not perform a meta-analysis since outcomes were not measured, or data were provided by one trial only.No study reported data on the number of participants with pain intensity reduction of at least 50% from baseline. Only one study reported data on the number of participants below 30/100 mm on the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) in pain intensity (very low-quality evidence). Psychological interventions did not reduce pain intensity in the short-term interval (g 0.39, 95% CI -0.18 to 0.96, 2 studies, 104 participants, low-quality evidence), medium-term interval (g -0.02, 95% CI -0.24 to 0.20, 4 studies, 413 participants, moderate-quality evidence) or in the long-term interval (g 0.05, 95% CI -0.20 to 0.30, 2 studies, 200 participants, moderate-quality evidence).No study reported data on median time to re-medication or on number of participants re-medicated. Only two studies provided data on postoperative analgesic use in the short-term interval, showing that psychological interventions did not reduce the use of analgesic medication (g 1.18, 95% CI -2.03 to 4.39, 2 studies, 104 participants, low-quality evidence). Studies revealed that psychological interventions reduced mental distress in the medium-term (g 0.37, 95% CI 0.13 to 0.60, 13 studies, 1388 participants, moderate-quality evidence) and likewise in the long-term interval (g 0.32, 95% CI 0.10 to 0.53, 14 studies, 1586 participants, moderate-quality evidence). Psychological interventions did not improve mobility in the medium-term interval (g 0.23, 95% CI -0.22 to 0.67, 3 studies, 444 participants, low-quality evidence), nor in the long-term interval (g 0.09, 95% CI -0.10 to 0.28, 4 studies, 458 participants, moderate-quality evidence). Only two studies reported data on time to extubation, indicating that psychological interventions reduced the time to extubation (g 0.56, 95% CI 0.08 to 1.03, 2 studies, 154 participants, low-quality evidence).Overall, the very low to moderate quality of the body of evidence on the efficacy of psychological interventions for acute pain after open heart surgery cannot be regarded as sufficient to draw robust conclusions.Most 'Risk of bias' assessments were low or unclear. We judged selection bias (random sequence generation) and attrition bias to be mostly low risk for included studies. However, we judged the risk of selection bias (allocation concealment), performance bias, detection bias and reporting bias to be mostly unclear.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

In line with the conclusions of our previous review, there is a lack of evidence to support or refute psychological interventions in order to reduce postoperative pain in participants undergoing open heart surgery. We found moderate-quality evidence that psychological interventions reduced mental distress in participants undergoing open heart surgery. Given the small numbers of studies, it is not possible to draw robust conclusions on the efficacy of psychological interventions on outcomes such as analgesic use, mobility, and time to extubation respectively on adverse events or harms of psychological interventions.

[Psychological prophylaxis training for coping with postoperative pain. Long-term effects]

INTRODUCTION

The present study was performed to investigate the effect of multidimensional psychological prophylaxis training focusing on coping with cognitive-emotional pain on recovery within the first 12 months after surgery. The training included the following three components: (1) education about pain, analgesia and psychological aspects of coping with pain, (2) training for coping with pain and (3) body-centered relaxation.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

In the study 48 young male patients (surgical correction of a chest malformation) were assessed 1 day before surgery, at discharge and 3, 6 and 12 months postoperatively concerning postoperative pain intensity and pain disability as well as pain anxiety, pain catastrophizing and pain hypervigilance. Additionally, 24 of these patients received training on cognitive-emotional coping with pain 1 day before surgery and 1-3 days after surgery (each session 1 h).

RESULTS

The proportion of patients with clinically relevant improvement was significantly higher in the training group compared to the control group. This was the case for acute pain intensity (approximately 1 week after surgery), pain disability 3 months later and pain anxiety 12 months after surgery.

CONCLUSION

The resurgence of pain anxiety after 12 months could only be found in the control group and could be due to the upcoming surgical removal of the transsternal metal implant. The prophylaxis training can therefore be seen as a protective factor for long-term management of surgery-related consequences and future pain experiences.

Psychological interventions for acute pain after open heart surgery

BACKGROUND

Acute postoperative pain is one of the most disturbing complaints in open heart surgery, and is associated with a risk of negative consequences. Several trials investigated the effects of psychological interventions to reduce acute postoperative pain and improve the course of physical and psychological recovery of participants undergoing open heart surgery.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the efficacy of psychological interventions as an adjunct to standard care versus standard care alone or standard care plus attention in adults undergoing open heart surgery on pain, pain medication, mental distress, mobility, and time to extubation.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library 2013, Issue 8), MEDLINE (1946 to September 2013), EMBASE (1980 to September 2013), Web of Science (all years to September 2013), and PsycINFO (all years to September 2013) for eligible studies. We used the 'related articles' and 'cited by' options of eligible studies to identify additional relevant studies. We also checked lists of references of relevant articles and previous reviews. We also searched the ProQuest Dissertations and Theses Full Text Database (all years to September 2013) and contacted the authors of primary studies to identify any unpublished material.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials comparing psychological interventions as an adjunct to standard care versus standard care alone or standard care plus attention in adults undergoing open heart surgery.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors (SK and JR) independently assessed trials for eligibility, estimated the risk of bias and extracted all data. We calculated effect sizes for each comparison (Hedges' g) and meta-analysed data using a random-effects model.

MAIN RESULTS

Nineteen trials were included (2164 participants).No study reported data on the number of participants with pain intensity reduction of at least 50% from baseline. Only one study reported data on the number of participants below 30/100 mm on the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) in pain intensity. Psychological interventions have no beneficial effects in reducing pain intensity measured with continuous scales in the medium-term interval (g -0.02, 95% CI -0.24 to 0.20, 4 studies, 413 participants, moderate quality evidence) nor in the long-term interval (g 0.12, 95% CI -0.09 to 0.33, 3 studies, 280 participants, low quality evidence).No study reported data on median time to remedication or on number of participants remedicated. Only one study provided data on postoperative analgesic use. Studies reporting data on mental distress in the medium-term interval revealed a small beneficial effect of psychological interventions (g 0.36, 95% CI 0.10 to 0.62, 12 studies, 1144 participants, low quality evidence). Likewise, a small beneficial effect of psychological interventions on mental distress was obtained in the long-term interval (g 0.28, 95% CI 0.05 to 0.51, 11 studies, 1320 participants, low quality evidence). There were no beneficial effects of psychological interventions on mobility in the medium-term interval (g 0.23, 95% CI -0.22 to 0.67, 3 studies, 444 participants, low quality evidence) nor in the long-term interval (g 0.29, 95% CI -0.14 to 0.71, 4 studies, 423 participants, low quality evidence). Only one study reported data on time to extubation.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

For the majority of outcomes (two-thirds) we could not perform a meta-analysis since outcomes were not measured, or data were provided by one trial only. Psychological interventions have no beneficial effects on reducing postoperative pain intensity or enhancing mobility. There is low quality evidence that psychological interventions reduce postoperative mental distress. Due to limitations in methodological quality, a small number of studies, and large heterogeneity, we rated the quality of the body of evidence as low. Future trials should measure crucial outcomes (e.g. number of participants with pain intensity reduction of at least 50% from baseline) and should focus to enhance the quality of the body of evidence in general. Altogether, the current evidence does not clearly support the use of psychological interventions to reduce pain in participants undergoing open heart surgery.

[Perioperative pain therapy]

Scientific studies have proven without doubt that an optimized perioperative pain therapy will improve patient comfort, reduce postoperative complications, enhance postoperative recovery and shorten the length of postoperative hospital stay. It is necessary to incorporate the acute pain therapy into a perioperative multimodal and interdisciplinary therapeutic concept. Local or regional anesthesia will provide the best analgesic effect after surgery and should be considered in all patients. Optimal treatment of patients with peripheral nerve blocks, spinal or epidural analgesia should be treated by a specialized acute pain service. However, only 15-20% of all surgical cases will be taken care of by such a pain service. Therefore, most surgical patients will only receive adequate analgesia if surgeons are familiar with the principles of postoperative pain therapy. Regular assessment of pain perception is the cornerstone of optimized pain therapy. Furthermore, pain assessment will allow the administration and to some extent dosage of analgesic therapy to be delegated to nursing personnel.

[Impact of preoperative patient education on postoperative pain in consideration of the individual coping style]

OBJECTIVE

the German guideline for the treatment of acute perioperative and post-traumatic pain (S3-Leitlinie zur Behandlung akuter perioperativer und posttraumatischer Schmerzen) recommends giving preoperative information about postoperative pain and how to influence it. It is expected that the effect of preoperative information is modified by psychological characteristics of the patient. One of these psychological characteristics is the individual coping style. The purpose of the study is to evaluate whether or not patients benefit from preoperative education in relation to their level of negative coping style.

METHODS

the study is based on a 2×2 factorial experimental design with the experimental factor "treatment" (education vs control condition) and the factor "negative coping style" (high vs low). After informed consent 96 patients undergoing abdominal or vascular surgery were enrolled in the study. Outcomes were pain intensity, pain quality and psychic state. They were assessed by using numerical rating scales and psychometric methods of self-assessment. The data were collected preoperatively and on the first to third postoperative day.

RESULTS

patients who received preoperative education experience a greater reduction in postoperative pain than patients without preoperative education do (ES=0.48). The risk for stronger pain (NRS>3) on the third postoperative day is decreased (2.1 vs 14.6%). The influence of negative coping style is altogether minimal.

CONCLUSIONS

preoperative patient information has positive effects on the postoperative development of pain. Patient information is a valuable addition to the drug pain treatment. The application can be recommended regardless of the level of the patients' negative coping style.