Effect of patient-controlled analgesia on pulmonary complications after coronary artery bypass grafting

Sternotomy Wound Infiltration With Liposomal Versus Plain Bupivacaine for Postoperative Analgesia After Elective Cardiac Surgery

OBJECTIVES

Poor pain control after cardiac surgery can be associated with postoperative complications, longer recovery, and development of chronic pain. The authors hypothesized that adding liposomal bupivacaine (LB) to plain bupivacaine (PB) will provide better and long-lasting analgesia when used for wound infiltration in median sternotomy.

STUDY DESIGN

Prospective, randomized, and double-blinded clinical trial.

SETTING

Single institution, tertiary care university hospital.

PARTICIPANTS

Adult patients who underwent elective cardiac surgery through median sternotomy.

INTERVENTIONS

A single surgeon performed wound infiltration of LB plus PB or PB into the sternotomy wound, chest, and mediastinal tube sites.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

Patients were followed up for 72 hours for pain scores, opioid consumption, and adverse events. Sixty patients completed the study for analysis (LB group [n = 29], PB group [n = 31]). Patient characteristics, procedural variables, and pain scores measured at specific intervals from 4 hours until 72 hours postoperatively did not reveal any significant differences between the groups. Mixed-model regression showed that the trend of mean pain scores at movement in the LB group was significantly (p = 0.01) lower compared with the PB group. Opioid consumption over 72 hours was not significantly different between the 2 groups (oral morphine equivalents; median [interquartile range], 139 [73, 212] mg in LB v 105 [54, 188] mg in PB, p = 0.29). Recovery characteristics and adverse events were comparable.

CONCLUSIONS

LB added to PB for sternotomy wound infiltration during elective cardiac surgery did not significantly improve the quality of postoperative analgesia.

Effects of local intraoperative epidural use of triamcinolone acetonide-soaked Gelfoam on postoperative outcomes in patients undergoing posterolateral lumbar spinal fusion surgery: a randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind trial

OBJECTIVE

Prior evidence has supported the use of local intraoperative epidural steroids in lumbar discectomy for improvements in postoperative pain and outcomes. However, currently there is a paucity of data regarding the efficacy of local epidural steroids in spinal fusion procedures. The present investigation aimed to evaluate the impact of local epidural administration of triamcinolone acetonide-soaked Gelfoam on postoperative pain and patient-reported outcomes in patients undergoing instrumented posterolateral lumbar spinal fusion.

METHODS

In this randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial, patients were randomly divided into two groups (treatment and control). Patients in the treatment group received a Gelfoam carrier soaked in 1 ml of triamcinolone acetonide (40 mg), which was placed over the nerve roots in the epidural space before the closure. Patients in the control group received a Gelfoam carrier soaked in normal saline in a similar fashion to the treatment group. Patients were followed up during their hospital stay and at 4 and 12 weeks postoperatively. The primary outcome measure was early postoperative visual analog scale (VAS) scores for pain both at rest and with movement.

RESULTS

A total of 100 patients were recruited in this study and were randomly allocated to the treatment or control group. No significant difference was found in baseline demographic, clinical, and surgical characteristics between the two groups. Postoperative VAS scores for pain both at rest and with movement were comparable between the treatment and control groups. Cumulative morphine consumption, length of hospital stay, and incidence of postoperative complications such as surgical site infection were also similar between the two groups. There was no significant difference in patient-reported outcomes including VAS scores for back and leg pain as well as the Oswestry Disability Index at 4 and 12 weeks postoperatively. The proportion of patients who achieved a minimum clinically important difference for patient-reported outcomes were also similar between the two groups.

CONCLUSIONS

In contrast to the existing literature on the beneficial use of local intraoperative epidural steroids in conventional lumbar discectomy, the present study did not demonstrate such significant efficacy for the use of local epidural steroids in instrumented posterolateral lumbar spinal fusion. However, there is still a lack of evidence in this regard and further high-quality clinical trials are required to evaluate the efficacy of local epidural steroids in this group of patients.

Intravenous paracetamol infusion and tramadol as agents for post operative pain relief in urosurgical patient: A randomized control trial

Analgesia is one of the most important consideration in perioperative setting as it determines the recovery and discharge of a patient. Among the drugs used for analgesia, non steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and opioids are the most commonly used ones in the current scenario. The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy of intravenous (IV) paracetamol and IV tramadol in alienating pain postoperatively. 100 adult patients of ASA grade I & II in the age group of 25-55 years were randomized into two groups of 50 patients , scheduled for elective urosurgical procedures and  were administered IV paracetamol and IV tramadol 30 minutes before the completion of surgery for postoperative analgesia and assessment was done with visual analog scale (VAS)score. In the present study, both the drugs showed effective pain relief. The onset of analgesia is faster in tramadol group. In paracetamol group, the onset of analgesia was slightly delayed but pain scores significantly decreased after 60 min, and this was observed up to 6 h with a statistically significant decrease in post operative nausea vomiting( PONV )with paracetamol group . 

Intrathecal Morphine Following Lumbar Fusion: A Randomized, Placebo-Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND

Despite the potential for faster postoperative recovery and the ease of direct intraoperative injection, intrathecal morphine is rarely provided in lumbar spine surgery.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the safety and efficacy of intrathecal morphine following lumbar fusion.

METHODS

We randomly assigned 150 patients undergoing elective instrumented lumbar fusion to receive a single intrathecal injection of morphine (0.2 mg) or placebo (normal saline) immediately prior to wound closure. The primary outcome was pain on the visual-analogue scale during the first 24 h after surgery. Secondary outcomes included respiratory depression, treatment-related side effects, postoperative opioid requirements, and length of hospital stay. An intention-to-treat, repeated-measures analysis was used to estimate outcomes according to treatment in the primary analysis.

RESULTS

The baseline characteristics of the 2 groups were similar. Intrathecal morphine reduced pain both at rest (32% area under the curves [AUCs] difference, P < .01) and with movement (22% AUCs difference, P < .02) during the initial 24 h after surgery. The risk of respiratory depression was not increased by intrathecal morphine (hazard ratio, 0.86; 95% confidence interval, 0.44 to 1.68; P = .66). Although postoperative opioid requirements were reduced with intrathecal morphine (P < .03), lengths of hospital stay were similar (P = .32). Other than a trend towards increased intermittent catheterization among patients assigned to intrathecal morphine (P = .09), treatment-related side effects did not significantly differ. The early benefits of intrathecal morphine on postoperative pain were no longer apparent after 48 h.

CONCLUSION

A single intrathecal injection of 0.2 mg of morphine safely reduces postoperative pain following lumbar fusion.

Nonsteroidal Anti-Inflammatory Drugs and Clinical Outcomes in Patients Undergoing Coronary Artery Bypass Surgery

BACKGROUND

Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are commonly used in perioperative pain management of patients undergoing coronary artery bypass graft surgery. However, the association of periprocedural use of NSAIDs and clinical outcomes after coronary artery bypass graft is understudied.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective analysis using pooled data from 2 multicenter randomized controlled trials (PREVENT IV [n = 3014] and MEND-CABG II [n = 3023]). Rates of death, death or myocardial infarction, and death, myocardial infarction, or stroke in the 30 days following coronary artery bypass graft surgery were compared in patients using or not using perioperative NSAIDs. Inverse probability of treatment weighting and Cox proportional hazards regression models were used to adjust for confounding.

RESULTS

A total of 5887 patients were studied. Median age was 65 years, 78% were male, and 91% were White. NSAIDs were used in 2368 (40.2%) patients. The majority of patients (1822 [30.9%]) received NSAIDs after coronary artery bypass graft surgery; 289 (4.9%) used them prior to and after the surgery; and 257 (4.4) received NSAIDs prior to the surgery only. Adjusted 30-day outcomes were similar in patients receiving and not receiving NSAIDs (death: hazard ratio [HR] 1.18; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.48-2.92; death or myocardial infarction: HR 0.87; 95% CI, 0.42-1.79; death, myocardial infarction, or stroke: HR 0.87; 95% CI, 0.46-1.65).

CONCLUSION

In this pooled data analysis, perioperative NSAID use was common among patients undergoing coronary artery bypass graft surgery and was not associated with an increased short-term risk for major adverse clinical outcomes.

Randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled trial comparing two multimodal opioid-minimizing pain management regimens following transsphenoidal surgery

OBJECTIVE Pain control is an important clinical consideration and quality-of-care metric. No studies have examined postoperative pain control following transsphenoidal surgery for pituitary lesions. The study goals were to 1) report postoperative pain scores following transsphenoidal surgery, 2) determine if multimodal opioid-minimizing pain regimens yielded satisfactory postoperative pain control, and 3) determine if intravenous (IV) ibuprofen improved postoperative pain scores and reduced opioid use compared with placebo. METHODS This study was a single-center, randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled intervention trial involving adult patients with planned transsphenoidal surgery for pituitary tumors randomized into 2 groups. Group 1 patients were treated with scheduled IV ibuprofen, scheduled oral acetaminophen, and rescue opioids. Group 2 patients were treated with IV placebo, scheduled oral acetaminophen, and rescue opioids. The primary end point was patient pain scores (visual analog scale [VAS], rated 0-10) for 48 hours after surgery. The secondary end point was opioid use as estimated by oral morphine equivalents (OMEs). RESULTS Of 136 patients screened, 62 were enrolled (28 in Group 1, 34 in Group 2). The study was terminated early because the primary and secondary end points were reached. Baseline characteristics between groups were well matched except for age (Group 1, 59.3 ± 14.4 years; Group 2, 49.8 ± 16.2 years; p = 0.02). Mean VAS pain scores were significantly different, with a 43% reduction in Group 1 (1.7 ± 2.2) compared with Group 2 (3.0 ± 2.8; p < 0.0001). Opioid use was significantly different, with a 58% reduction in Group 1 (26.3 ± 28.7 mg OME) compared with Group 2 (62.5 ± 63.8 mg OME; p < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS Multimodal opioid-minimizing pain-management protocols resulted in acceptable pain control following transsphenoidal surgery. IV ibuprofen resulted in significantly improved pain scores and significantly decreased opioid use compared with placebo. Postoperative multimodal pain management, including a nonsteroidal antiinflammatory medication, should be considered after surgery to improve patient comfort and to limit opioid use. Clinical trial registration no.: NCT02351700 (clinicaltrials.gov) ■ CLASSIFICATION OF EVIDENCE Type of question: therapeutic; study design: randomized, controlled trial; evidence: Class III.

Osteopathic Manipulative Treatment Improves Heart Surgery Outcomes: A Randomized Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND

Controlling sternal pain after heart surgery is important to reduce the risk of postoperative complications, but pain is often undertreated because of contraindications and side effects of analgesic drugs. Recently, osteopathic manipulative treatment (OMT) was demonstrated to reduce pain in different clinical contexts, suggesting its potential utility after cardiac surgery. The aim of this open-label, controlled study is to assess whether OMT contributes to sternal pain relief and improves postoperative outcomes.

METHODS

Eighty post-sternotomy adult inpatients were randomly allocated one to one to receive a standardized cardiorespiratory rehabilitation program alone (control group) or combined with OMT. Pain intensity and respiratory functional capacity were quantified by the Visual Analogue Scale score and by a standardized breathing test, at the start and end of rehabilitation.

RESULTS

At the start of rehabilitation, the control group and the OMT group had similar Visual Analogue Scale median scores (controls 4, interquartile range [IQR]: 2 to 5; OMT 4, IQR: 3 to 5; p = not significant) and mean inspiratory volumes (controls 825 ± 381 mL; OMT 744 ± 291 mL; p = not significant). At the end of rehabilitation, the OMT group had a lower Visual Analogue Scale median score (controls 3, IQR: 2 to 4; OMT 1, IQR: 1 to 2; p < 0.01) and higher mean inspiratory volume (controls 1,400 ± 588 mL; OMT 1,781 ± 633 mL; p < 0.01). The analgesic drug intake was similar in the two groups. The hospitalization was shorter in the OMT group than in the control group (19.1 ± 4.8 versus 21.7 ± 6.3 days; p < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

The combination of standard care with OMT is effective in inducing pain relief and functional recovery, and significantly improves the management of patients after heart surgery with sternotomy.

Variable Definitions: Implications for the Prediction of Pulmonary Complications after Adult Cardiac Surgery

AIM

The aim of this paper was to review the implications that variable definitions have for the prediction of post-operative pulmonary complications after cardiac surgery.

METHOD

A review of the literature from 1980 to 2002. Selected studies demonstrated an original attempt to examine multivariate associations between pre, intra or post-operative antecedents and pulmonary outcomes in patients undergoing coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG). Reports that described the validation of established clinical prediction rules, testing interventions or research conducted in non-human cohorts were excluded from this review.

RESULTS

Consistently, variable factor and outcome definitions are combined for the development of multivariate prediction models that subsequently have limited clinical value. Despite being prevalent there are very few attempts to examine post-operative pulmonary complications (PPC) as endpoints in isolation. The trajectory of pulmonary dysfunction that precedes complications in the post-operative context is not clear. As such there is little knowledge of post-operative antecedents to PPC that are invariably excluded from model development.

CONCLUSION

Multivariate clinical prediction rules that incorporate antecedent patient and process factors from the continuum of cardiovascular care for specific pulmonary outcomes are recommended. Models such as these would be useful for practice, policy and quality improvement.

Risk factors for postoperative pulmonary complications in coronary artery bypass graft surgery patients

Background

Despite numerous advances in anesthesia, surgical techniques, and postoperative care for coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) surgery, postoperative pulmonary complications (PPCs) still account for postoperative morbidity.

Objective

To determine current risk factors for PPCs in CABG surgery patients.

Methods

A retrospective cohort design was used. Health records were reviewed for patients ( n=315) who had CABG surgery at a large quaternary healthcare center over a 4 month period. Pre-, peri-, and postoperative risk factors for PPCs were recorded as binary variables. Data were further assessed according to PPCs and non-PPCs using logistic regression models.

Results

PPCs occurred in 99.4% of this CABG surgical cohort. Atelectasis, pleural effusion, atelectasis with pleural effusion, and pneumonia were the most frequent PPCs post CABG surgery. Age >65 years, diabetes, and ASA classification N3 were found to be related to the presence of atelectasis. No significant risk factors were related to the development of pleural effusion or atelectasis with pleural effusion. Postoperative pneumonia was associated with previous myocardial infarction, ventilation >10 h, and hospital stay >5 days. History of bronchitis and COPD were related to postoperative pneumothorax; history of heart failure, COPD, and other lung diseases were related to postoperative pulmonary edema.

Conclusion

These findings contribute to the understanding of PPCs in post-CABG surgery patients and assist in identification of patients at risk for developing PPCs.

Initial Perioperative Care of the Cardiac Surgical Patient

Recently, changes in the management of cardiac patients have allowed earlier discharge from the cardiac recovery area and reduced hospital length of stay. These changes have been drien by a need to reduce the cost of cardiac surgery and imrove efficiency. This change has been both financially sucessful and safe for patients. To allow for this success, a joint effort is required between the departments of cardiac surgery and anesthesiology involving the preoperative, intraoperative and postoperative treatment of these patients. Through recogition of suitable candidates, modifications in anesthetic techique, and appropriate postoperative management, the goal of extubation within 6 hours of admission to the cardiac recovery area can be achieved. Changes in intraoperative and early postoperative management of cardiac surgical patients are discussed. Specific recovery models are reviewed with disussion of the parallel and integrated models. Methods of preicting prolonged extubation times and intensive care unit length of stay are also discussed. Initial management of the cardiac patient in the cardiac recovery area is presented with a more in-depth review of specific complications: stroke, atril fibrillation, blood loss, left ventricular dysfunction, and pulonary dysfunction.

Pulmonary Complications After Cardiac Surgery

Over the past two decades there has been a steady evolution in the practice of adult cardiac surgery with the introduction of “off-pump” surgery. However, respiratory complications remain a leading cause of postcardiac surgical morbidity and can prolong hospital stays and increase costs. The high incidence of pulmonary complications is in part due to the disruption of normal ventilatory function that is inherent to surgery in the thoracic region. Furthermore, patients undergoing such surgery often have underlying illnesses such as intrinsic lung disease (e.g., chronic obstructive pulmonary disease) and pulmonary dysfunction secondary to cardiac disease (e.g., congestive heart failure) that increase their susceptibility to postoperative respiratory problems. Given that many patients undergoing cardiac surgery are thus susceptiple to pulmonary complications, it is remarkable that more patients do not suffer from them during and after cardiac surgery. This is to a large degree because of advances in anesthetic, surgical and critical care that, for example, have reduced the physiological insults of surgery (e.g., better myocardial preservation techniques) and streamlined care in the immediate postoperative period (e.g., early extubation). Moreover, the development of minimally invasive surgery and nonbypass techniques are further evidence of the attempts at reducing the homeostatic disruptions of cardiac surgery. This review examines the available information on the incidences, consequences, and treatments of postcardiac surgery respiratory complications.

A prospective time-series quality improvement trial of a standardized analgesia protocol to reduce postoperative pain among neurosurgery patients

OBJECTIVE The inclusion of the pain management domain in the Hospital Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (HCAHPS) survey now ties patients' perceptions of pain and analgesia to financial reimbursement for inpatient stays. Therefore, the authors wanted to determine if a quality improvement initiative centered on a standardized analgesia protocol could significantly reduce postoperative pain among neurosurgery patients. METHODS The authors implemented a 10-month, prospective, interrupted time-series trial of a quality improvement initiative. The intervention consisted of a multimodal, interdepartmental, standardized analgesia protocol with process improvements from preadmission to discharge. All neurosurgical-floor patients participated in the quality improvement intervention, with data collected on a systematically randomly sampled subset of 96 patients for detailed analysis. Patient-reported numeric rating scale pain on the first postoperative day (POD) served as the primary outcome. RESULTS Implementation of the analgesia protocol resulted in improved preoperative and postoperative documentation of pain (p < 0.001) and improved use of multimodal analgesia, including use of NSAIDs (p < 0.009) and gabapentin (p < 0.027). This intervention also correlated with a 32% reduction in reported pain on the 1st POD for all neurosurgical patients (mean pain scale scores 4.31 vs 2.94; p = 0.000) and a 43% reduction among spinal surgery patients (mean pain scale scores 5.45 vs 3.10; p = 0.036). After controlling for covariates, implementation of the protocol was a significant predictor of lowered postoperative pain (p = 0.05) on the 1st POD. This reduction in pain correlated with protocol compliance (p = 0.028), and a significant decrease in the monthly number of naloxone doses suggests improved safety (mean dose ± SD 1.5 ± 1.0 vs 0.33 ± 0.5; p = 0.04). Furthermore, a significant and persistent reduction in the pain management component of the HCAHPS scores suggests a durability of results extending beyond the life of the study (72.1% vs 82.0%; p = 0.033). CONCLUSIONS The implementation of a standardized analgesia protocol can significantly reduce postoperative pain among neurosurgical patients while increasing safety. Given the current climate of patient-centered outcomes, this study has broad implications for the continuum of care model proposed in the Affordable Care Act. Clinical trial registration no.: NCT01693588 ( clincaltrials.gov ).

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

BACKGROUND

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

OBJECTIVES

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

SEARCH METHODS

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

SELECTION CRITERIA

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

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

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

MAIN RESULTS

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

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

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

Comparison of the effects of lornoxicam versus diclofenac in pain management after cardiac surgery: A single-blind, randomized, active-controlled study

BACKGROUND

Inadequate pain management after cardiac surgery may result 10 in increased morbidity and length of hospital stay. Although opioids are the mainstay of postoperative analgesia, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) may be used instead to avoid the adverse effects (AEs) associated with opioids. Lornoxicam is a newly developed NSAID, the use of which is increasing. However, lornoxicam has not been studied for use in pain management after cardiac surgery.

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to compare the efficacy and tolerability 10 of lornoxicam and diclofenac sodium, an NSAID well established for use in pain management after major surgery, in pain management after coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG).

METHODS

This single-blind, randomized, active-controlled study was conducted 10 at the Gaziantep University Hospital, Gaziantep, Turkey. Adult patients scheduled to undergo valve or CABG surgery for the first time were included. Patients were premedicated with diazepam 10 mg PO at 10 PM on the evening before surgery. General anesthesia was induced using fentanyl, midazolam, and propofol, and maintained using fentanyl and isoflurane in pure oxygen. After extubation and when they stated that they felt pain, patients were randomly assigned to 1 of 2 treatment groups: lornoxicam 8 mg IM q8h or diclofenac 75 mg IM q12h, for 48 hours. Meperidine 1 mg/kg IM was given for additional analgesia when needed (rescue medication). Pain relief was assessed using an I1-point visual analog scale (0 = no pain to 10 = worst pain imaginable) immediately before the first injection (baseline), and at 15 and 30 minutes and 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 12, 18, 24, and 48 hours after the first injection. Sedation was assessed using a 5-point scale (0 = awake and alert to 4 = deep sedation) at the same time points. Tolerability was assessed by monitoring of AEs using patient interview and laboratory analyses.

RESULTS

Forty patients were enrolled in the study (30 men, 10 women; 10 mean [SD] age, 54.4 [11.1 ] years; 20 patients per treatment group). The demographic and clinical characteristics and mean baseline pain relief scores were statistically similar between the 2 treatment groups. The mean pain relief scores at 15 and 30 minutes were statistically similar to baseline values in the 2 treatment groups. However, the mean pain relief scores at ≥1 hour after the first injection were significantly lower compared with baseline values (both groups, P < 0.05 at time points ≥1 hour). No significant between-group differences in mean pain relief scores were found at any time point. The overall mean pain relief scores were statistically similar between the 2 treatment groups. The mean sedation scores were significantly higher at 30 minutes, 1 hour, and 2 hours after the first injection in the diclofenac group compared with the lornoxicam group (all, P < 0.05). No AEs were observed. The need for rescue medication was statistically similar between the 2 treatment groups (lornoxicam, 2 patients; diclofenac, 3 patients).

CONCLUSIONS

In this study of adult patients who underwent CABG, the efficacy 10 of lornoxicam and diclofenac were similar in postoperative pain management. Both study drugs were well tolerated.

Patient perspectives of patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) and methods for improving pain control and patient satisfaction

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to (1) identify patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) attributes that negatively impact patient satisfaction and ability to control pain while using PCA and (2) obtain data on patient perceptions of new PCA design features.

METHODS

We conducted a prospective survey study of postoperative pain control among patients using a PCA device. The survey was designed to evaluate patient satisfaction with pain control, understanding of PCA, difficulties using PCA, lockout-period management, and evaluation of new PCA design features.

RESULTS

A total of 350 eligible patients completed the survey (91%). Patients who had difficulties using PCA were less satisfied (P < 0.001) and were more likely to feel unable to control their pain (P < 0.001). Satisfaction and self-reported ability to control pain were not affected by patient education about the PCA. Forty-nine percent of patients reported not knowing if they would receive medicine when they pushed the PCA button, and of these, 22% believed that this uncertainty made their pain worse. The majority of patients preferred the proposed PCA design features for easier use, including a light on the button, making it easier to find (57%), and a PCA button that vibrates (55%) or lights up (70%), alerting the patient that the PCA pump is able to deliver more medicine.

CONCLUSIONS

A majority of patients, irrespective of their satisfaction with PCA, preferred a new PCA design. Certain attributes of current PCA technology may negatively impact patient experience, and modifications could potentially address these concerns and improve patient outcomes.

Preoperative mild cognitive dysfunction predicts pulmonary complications after coronary artery bypass graft surgery

OBJECTIVES

In elderly patients with mild cognitive impairment, noncompliance with respiratory exercises, ineffective expectoration, reluctance in mobilization, and difficulty in learning the use of drugs such as inhalers were observed in the early postoperative period after coronary artery bypass graft surgery. It was hypothesized that respiratory complications may be more frequent in these patients, and so the postoperative respiratory complications in patients with preoperative mild cognitive impairment were compared with the postoperative respiratory complications of a control group.

DESIGN

A prospective cohort control.

SETTING

A university hospital.

PARTICIPANTS

Patients undergoing elective coronary artery bypass graft surgery.

INTERVENTIONS

Investigators separated 48 patients>70 years old who were scheduled for elective coronary artery bypass graft surgery into two groups: patients with preoperative mild cognitive impairment (group A, n = 25) and patients with no cognitive impairment (control group; group B, n = 23). The patients' cognitive status was evaluated preoperatively by the Montreal Cognitive Assessment test.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

Pulmonary functions and respiratory complications were evaluated via chest x-rays and spirometry tests preoperatively and postoperatively. A significant difference was observed between the groups, particularly with regard to atelectasis and prolonged ventilation (p<0.001 and p<0.05). No significant impairment was observed in the spirometry tests of the control group. However, a significant deterioration was observed in the postoperative spirometry tests of patients with preoperative mild cognitive impairment.

CONCLUSIONS

This study suggested that mild cognitive impairment was associated with pulmonary complications after coronary artery bypass graft surgery.

WITHDRAWN: Patient controlled intravenous opioid analgesia versus continuous epidural analgesia for pain after intra-abdominal surgery

BACKGROUND

There are two common techniques for postoperative pain control after intra-abdominal surgery: patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) with intravenous opioids and continuous epidural analgesia (CEA). It is uncertain which method has better pain control and fewer adverse effects.

OBJECTIVES

The objective of this review was to compare PCA opioid therapy with CEA for pain control after intra-abdominal surgery in terms of analgesic efficacy, side effects, patient satisfaction and surgical outcome by meta-analysis of the relevant trials.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL (The Cochrane Library Issue 4, 2002), MEDLINE (January 1966 to October 2002), EMBASE (January 1988 to October 2002), and reference lists of articles. We also contacted researchers in the field.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomized controlled trials of adult patients after intra-abdominal surgery comparing the effect of two pain control regimens in terms of analgesic efficacy and side effects. In the patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) group the patient should be able to operate the device himself. In the continuous epidural analgesia group there was no PCA device.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently assessed trial quality and extracted data. Study authors were contacted for additional information. Adverse effects information was collected from the trials.

MAIN RESULTS

Nine studies involving 711 participants were included. The PCA group had a higher pain visual analogue scale than the CEA group during 6, 24 and 72 hour periods. The weighted mean difference and 95% confidence interval of resting pain was 1.74 (95% CI 1.30 to 2.19), 0.99 (95% CI 0.65 to 1.33), and 0.63 (95% CI 0.24 to 1.01), respectively. The length of hospital stay and other adverse effects were not statistically different except that the incidence of pruritus was lower in the PCA group, odds ratio of 0.27 (95% CI 0.11 to 0.64).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

CEA is superior to opioid PCA in relieving postoperative pain for up to 72 hours in patients undergoing intra-abdominal surgery, but it is associated with a higher incidence of pruritus. There is insufficient evidence to draw comparisons about the other advantages and disadvantages of these two methods of pain relief.

Pain management in laparoscopic donor nephrectomy: a review

The management of postoperative pain is a key to patient early recovery, in particular, where the surgery was performed to benefit another human being. In recent years it has been recognized that multimodal analgesic methods are superior for postoperative pain relief. It is also imperative to remember that inadequately managed acute postoperative pain opens the doorway to possible suffering from chronic postoperative pain later. Although the laparoscopic donor nephrectomy has reduced the disincentives associated with open surgery, still significant percentage of donors suffers from postoperative pain. In the UK, patient-controlled analgesic system (PCAS) using morphine for postoperative pain relief is being used in majority of the transplant centres. Though opioids provide good analgesia, they are far from being an ideal analgesic due to their adverse effects. This paper pragmatically looks in depth on different modalities of pain management in patients undergoing laparoscopic live donor nephrectomy.

[Evaluation of the postoperative acute pain after heart surgery]

INTRODUCTION

Pain is one of the main symptoms reported by patients who have had heart surgery.

OBJECTIVES

To describe the pain and explain the possible association among demographics, psychological and biological variables of the patients subjected to heart surgery with pain intensity during the postoperative in the ICU.

PATIENTS AND METHOD

A descriptive, longitudinal study conducted between February 2008 and January 2009 on patients subjected to heart surgery with admission to the ICU of the Hospital of Navarra was conducted. A preoperatory interview was made with registration of sociodemographic, biological and psychological variables. Pain intensity was monitored during the first 48 hours of ICU stay with the Verbal Numeric Scale (VNS) of pain. Accepted level of significance was p<0.05.

RESULTS

A sample of 69 patients with mean age of 62, 26% women and 74% men was included. A superior statistical association was found between postoperative pain levels for age<65 years, bypass grafting with internal mammary artery and preoperatory anxiety variables. There was a significant increase in analgesic consumption for incomes>1400 €/month, bypass grafting with internal mammary artery and preoperatory anxiety.

CONCLUSIONS

Postoperative pain after heart surgery show significant individual variability. In our study, age, bypass grafting with internal mammary artery and preoperatory anxiety were shown as predictive variables of postoperative pain in patients undergoing heart surgery.

Prophylactic control of post-operative nausea and vomiting using ondansetron and ramosetron after cardiac surgery

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of ondansetron and ramosetron in the reduction of post-operative nausea and vomiting (PONV) associated with patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) after cardiac surgery.

METHODS

A total of 320 patients scheduled for elective cardiac surgery were enrolled. Patients were randomly assigned to one of four treatment regimens (n=80 in each group): no prophylactic antiemetics (group P); intravenous (i.v.) ondansetron 4 mg at the end of surgery and 12 mg added to PCA (group O); i.v. ramosetron 0.3 mg at the end of surgery and no antiemetics added to PCA (group R1); and i.v. ramosetron 0.3 mg at the end of surgery and 0.6 mg added to PCA (group R2).

RESULTS

The incidence of PONV during the 48-h post-operative period was lower in groups O (46%), R1 (54%), and R2 (35%) compared with group P (71%, P<0.001). The incidence and severity of nausea were lower in groups O, R1, and R2 than in group P during the 24-h post-operative period, whereas the incidence and severity of nausea during 24-48 h after surgery were lower in groups O and R2, but not in group R1, than in group P. Compared with group P (53%), the frequency of rescue antiemetic usage was significantly lower in groups O (34%) and R2 (29%), but not in group R1 (43%).

CONCLUSION

The addition of either ondansetron or ramosetron to PCA can reduce the incidence of PONV during 48 h after cardiac surgery.

The effects of pre-emptive analgesia with bupivacaine on acute post-laminectomy pain

INTRODUCTION

This is a prospective, non-randomized, hospital-based, case-controlled, clinical trial to assess the efficacy of perineural infiltration with bupivacaine at the related neural root for acute pain relief after lumbar laminectomy.

METHOD

Fifty-one patients undergoing unilateral one spinal level (lumbar 4) hemi-partial laminectomy were included in the study. In 22 of the patients (Group 2), bupivacaine was infiltrated onto the neural root immediately after the exposure; the 29 patients in the control group (Group 1) were not infiltrated. All patients were monitored post-operatively regarding pain determination using a visual analog scale, and the exact time of analgesic requirement during the first post-operative day was noted. Total analgesic dose given during the first post-operative day was also recorded.

RESULTS

The patients who received bupivacaine infiltration intraoperatively onto the neural root (Group 2) had a statistically significantly longer time to first analgesia request (P < 0.001) and also required significantly less analgesic when compared to the control group (Group 1) (P < 0.001). Perineural bupivacaine infiltration extended the early post-operative analgesic period. While the pain was not completely suppressed, the bupivacaine infiltration helped to manage the post-operative pain more effectively.

CONCLUSION

Our data suggests that pre-emptive analgesia via perineural infiltration of bupivacaine is a simple, and effective method for post-operative acute pain relief.

Continuous incisional infusion of local anesthetic in pediatric patients following open heart surgery

AIM

To determine the efficacy and safety of a continuous subcutaneous local anesthetic (LA) infusion in pediatric patients following open heart surgery.

BACKGROUND

The use of a continuous LA infusion has been shown to be beneficial following adult cardiac surgery. To date there are no studies in the pediatric population.

METHODS/MATERIALS

Using a prospective, randomized, and double blind design, we compared LA, either 0.25% levobupivacaine or bupivacaine (Treatment Group) to saline (Placebo Group) delivered subcutaneously via a continuous infusion for 72 h after open heart surgery in 72 patients. Requirements for postoperative analgesics and pain scores were recorded for 72 h and plasma levels of local anesthetic were measured. Secondary outcomes measures included time to first oral intake, time to first bowel movement, time to urinary catheter removal, length of stay, requirements for antiemetics and additional sedation.

RESULTS

Total morphine requirements over the first 24 h were less in the Treatment Group than the Placebo Group (0.05 mg x kg(-1) vs 0.2 mg x kg(-1), P = 0.007); this was true for all patient groups except those patients weighing less than 6.3 kg. The number of patients requiring no morphine was greater in the Treatment Group (7/35 vs 1/37, P = 0.02). The Treatment Group also received less midazolam, lorazepam, and ketorolac than the Placebo Group over 72 h due to the reduced clinical need for these agents in patients weighing less than 31 kg. There were no differences in secondary outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

A continuous incisional infusion of LA reduced postoperative analgesic requirement and sedative use in pediatric patients undergoing a median sternotomy incision. Dosed at a maximum rate of 0.4 mg x kg(-1) x h(-1), a continuous incisional infusion of LA is effective and safe for up to 72 h, with plasma levels of local anesthetic well below the toxic threshold.

Analgesia best practice after cardiac surgery

Sources of pain after cardiac surgery include sternotomy, rib retraction, conduit harvest, and drain tubes sites. An analgesic regimen should consider individual patient characteristics, including age, preoperative history of pain and response to analgesics, comorbidities, and psychologic state. Intraoperative and postoperatively administered opioids remain the mainstay of therapy, but adjunctive analgesics such as paracetamol, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and tramadol, and regional techniques, can reduce opioid consumption and opioid-induced respiratory depression. This may facilitate earlier tracheal extubation, mobilization, and recovery.

Comparison of remifentanil and fentanyl for postoperative pain control after abdominal hysterectomy

PURPOSE

In this randomized, double-blind study, we investigated the analgesic efficacy and side effects of continuous constant-dose infusions of remifentanil after total abdominal hysterectomy and compared it to fentanyl.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Fifty-six adult female patients scheduled for elective total abdominal hysterectomy were enrolled in this study. Patients were randomly assigned to two groups according to fentanyl (group F, n=28) or remifentanil (group R, n=28) for postoperative analgesia. Patients in group F were given fentanyl intravenously with an infusion rate of fentanyl 0.5 microg/kg/hr; group R was given remifentanil with an infusion rate of remifentanil 0.05 microg/kg/min for 2 days. Pain intensity at rest, occurrence of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV), dizziness, pruritus, and respiratory depression were assessed 1 hr after arrival at the post-anesthesia care unit, at 6; 12; 24; and 48 hr post-operation and 6 hr post-infusion of the study drug. Pain was evaluated by using visual analogue scale (VAS; 0-10). The time that patients first requested analgesics was recorded as well as additional analgesics and antiemetics.

RESULTS

There were no significant differences in VAS, time to first postoperative analgesics, and additional analgesics between the 2 groups. The incidences and severities of PONV and opioid related side effects were not different between the groups; however, there were 3 episodes (10.7%) of serious respiratory depression in group R.

CONCLUSION

Continuous infusion technique of remifentanil did not reveal any benefits compared to fentanyl. Furthermore, it is not safe for postoperative analgesia in the general ward.

Pre-emptive infiltration of levobupivacaine is superior to at-closure administration in lumbar laminectomy patients

This is a prospective, randomized, controlled trial that compared the efficacy of different protocols of local tissue infiltration with levobupivacaine or levobupivacaine-methylprednisolone at the surgical site for pain relief after lumbar discectomy. The objective of the study was to determine the efficacy of preemptive wound infiltration with levobupivacaine and levobupivacaine-methylprednisolone at the surgical site for pain relief. Patients usually suffer significant pain after lumbar discectomy. Wound infiltration with local anesthetics with or without corticosteroids is one method to address this. A total of 100 patients were randomly allocated to five equal groups as follows: Group I had the musculus multifidi near the operated level infiltrated with 30 mL 0.25% levobupivacaine and 40 mg methylprednisolone just before wound closure; Group II had the same region infiltrated with 30 mL 0.25% levobupivacaine alone before closure; Group III had this region infiltrated with 30 mL 0.25% levobupivacaine and 40 mg methylprednisolone before the incision was made; in Group IV this region was infiltrated with 30 mL 0.25% levobupivacaine alone before incision; and in Group C (controls) this region was infiltrated with 30 mL 0.9% NaCl just before wound closure. Demographics, vital signs, postoperative pain scores and morphine usage were recorded. All four treatment groups showed significantly better results than the control group for most parameters. The treated groups had lower parenteral opioid requirements after surgery, lower incidences of nausea and shorter hospital stays. Further, the data indicate that, compared with infiltration of these drugs at wound closure, preemptive injection of levobupivacaine or levobupivacaine-methylprednisolone into the muscle near the operative site provides more effective analgesia after lumbar discectomy. Our data suggest that preemptive infiltration of the wound site with levobupivacaine alone or combined with methylprednisolone provides effective pain control with reduced opiate dose after unilateral lumbar discectomy.

Improving processes of care in patient-controlled analgesia: the impact of computerized order sets and acute pain service patient management

BACKGROUND

In an effort to combat opioid induced side effects within the first 24 h of patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) induction, it has been recommended that care be provided by an Acute Pain Treatment Service (APS) and that computerized PCA order sets with patient monitoring requirements be implemented. To date, there are few published studies on the role of computerized order sets or APS in improving the quality and safety of pediatric PCA use. This retrospective analysis sought to determine if the implementation of computerized order sets would increase appropriate monitoring and problem recognition.

METHODS

Analysis included 536 patients prescribed PCA in one of three ways: an anesthesia order set with APS support (n = 285), a general PCA order set (n = 95), or no order set (n = 156). We analyzed the use of order sets by unit; the incidence of appropriate monitoring (> or =12 recordings within 24 h) of respiratory rate, oxygen saturation, and sedation level and the recognition of low respiration rate and low oxygen saturation between the types of PCA order.

RESULTS

We found a significant difference in type of PCA order used by unit. Appropriate documentation of respiratory rate and oxygen saturation occurred significantly more often if the order set with APS was used. Low respiration rate was also recognized significantly more frequently (P < or = 05) in the APS order set group.

CONCLUSIONS

These findings show that use of a computerized PCA order set with monitoring requirements and an APS can increase monitoring and documentation of important vital signs and increase identification of potential negative events.

Intravenous paracetamol as adjunctive treatment for postoperative pain after cardiac surgery: a double blind randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and opioids are routinely used after cardiac surgery in order to mitigate postoperative pain; however, these drugs are burdened by side effects. Tramadol and paracetamol are believed to be lacking in such side effects. The aim of this study was to examine the efficacy of intravenous paracetamol as an adjunctive analgesic to a tramadol-based background analgesia after cardiac surgery.

METHODS

A total of 113 patients participated in this single center, placebo-controlled, double-blind, randomized trial. Fifty-six patients were randomized to receive paracetamol and 57 to placebo. Intravenous study drug (1 g) was administered 15 min before the end of surgery and every 6h for 72 h. Standard analgesia (tramadol) and anti-emetic prophylactic regimen (ondansetron) were available to both patient groups. Postoperative pain was evaluated by visual analog scale, and it was measured at rest and during a deep breath. A rescue dose of 2-5 mg of intravenous morphine was administered whenever the VAS score was greater than 3.

RESULTS

Baseline characteristics were equivalent between the two groups. At 12, 18, 24 h after the end of operation, patients who received paracetamol had significantly less pain at rest (p=0.0041, 0.0039, 0.0044, respectively); after this time the two groups did not differ. During a deep breath the difference was significant only at 12 h (p=0.0040). Paracetamol group required less cumulative morphine than placebo group (48 mg vs 97 mg) even if the difference did not reach statistical significance (p=0.274).

CONCLUSIONS

In patients undergoing cardiac surgery, intravenous paracetamol in combination with tramadol provides effective pain control.

Clinical Staff Resource Use With Intravenous Patient-Controlled Analgesia in Acute Postoperative Pain Management: Results From a Multicenter, Prospective, Observational Study

The purpose of this study was to evaluate hospital resource utilization associated with intravenous patient-controlled analgesia (IV-PCA), with a focus on nursing, pharmacy, and central supply/engineering time spent from a hospital perspective. Data were collected during a multicenter (29 sites), prospective observational study in the United States of subjects who underwent total knee replacement (TKR), total hip replacement (THR), or abdominal hysterectomy (AH) and were administered analgesia through IV PCA for the management of acute postoperative pain. Nursing staff recorded the IV PCA-related tasks they performed for a subject and the duration of time required to perform each task from initial IV PCA set-up to discontinuation. Hospital administrators, nursing managers, central supply/engineering staff, and pharmacy directors were interviewed to obtain data regarding other IV PCA labor resource use. The distribution of surgery type among the 457 subjects was 31.1% THR, 35.9% TKR, and 33.0% AH. The average duration of IV PCA use was 32.6 hours. Nurses reported having to perform an average of 39.6 IV PCA-related tasks, which required an average of 67.4 minutes. The most common IV PCA-related tasks were evaluating pump use and settings, assessing the IV site, evaluating and addressing analgesia side effects, instructing/reinstructing the subject on use, administering supplemental pain medications, assisting with self-care or moving the subject, and assisting the subject with use of the button. Pharmacists reported that they spend approximately 7.9 minutes and pharmacy technicians spend approximately 9.8 minutes, per subject daily course of IV PCA therapy, on the following tasks: checking and verifying the order, doing inventory of the analgesia, preparing the analgesia (ie, filling reservoirs), checking the analgesia, and delivering the analgesia to the nursing units. In addition, pharmacists and RNs spend an average of 47.3 and 40.7 minutes per year in IV PCA-related training. Intravenous patient-controlled analgesia postoperative care requires coordination and involvement of numerous hospital departments. It is labor intensive and involves numerous time-consuming tasks, oversight of IV PCA, and ongoing training. Alternative methods of patient-controlled pain management with similar efficacy that reduces labor resource utilization may be warranted.

Sedation and analgesia in the intensive care unit

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Sedation and analgesia are important means of providing care for the critically ill patient.

RECENT FINDINGS

It is now clear that posttraumatic stress disorders resulting from an intensive care unit stay may be prevented by the right level of sedation. New drug developments but also recent findings in new ventilation strategies allow for a sedation management that is better tailored to an individual's need. Most importantly, regular definition of the appropriate level of sedation and analgesia as well as monitoring of the desired level will help to avoid over- and undersedation and may ultimately improve the outcome of the patient and reduce costs.

SUMMARY

Sedation and analgesia are now regarded as an integral part of treatment on the intensive care unit instead of being an unpleasant but necessary and minor issue. The importance of monitoring the level of sedation and analgesia has only recently been realized. It remains to be shown that new management strategies including an evaluation of the patient, planned interventions and the choice of drugs will further improve the care for the critically ill.

Patient-controlled analgesia in the management of postoperative pain

Patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) is a delivery system with which patients self-administer predetermined doses of analgesic medication to relieve their pain. Since its introduction in the early 1980s, the daily management of postoperative pain has been extensively optimised. The use of PCA in hospitals has been increasing because of its proven advantages over conventional intramuscular injections. These include improved pain relief, greater patient satisfaction, less sedation and fewer postoperative complications. All PCA modes contain the following variables: initial loading dose, demand dose, lockout interval, background infusion rate and 1-hour or 4-hour limits. Morphine is the most studied and most commonly used intravenous drug for PCA. In spite of the fact that it is the 'first choice' for PCA, other opioids have been successfully used for this option. The most observed adverse effects of opioid-based PCA are nausea and vomiting, pruritus, respiratory depression, sedation, confusion and urinary retention. Although intravenous PCA is the most studied route of PCA, alternative routes have extensively been described in the literature. PCA by means of peridural catheters and peripheral nerve catheters are the most studied. Recently, transdermal PCA has been described. The use of peripheral or neuraxial nerve blocks is recommended to avoid the so called opioid tolerance observed with the intravenous administration of opioids. Numerous studies have shown the superiority of epidural PCA to intravenous PCA. The beneficial postoperative effects of epidural analgesia are more apparent for high-risk patients or those undergoing higher risk procedures. PCA with peripheral nerve catheters results in increased postoperative analgesia and satisfaction for surgery on upper and lower extremities. Serious complications occur rarely with these catheters. With the introduction of an Acute Pain Service, management of postoperative pain can be improved. This will also help to minimise adverse effects related to PCA and to avoid lethal mishaps.

Management of postthoracotomy pain: acute and chronic

Given the discomfort of thoracic surgical incisions, thoracic surgeons must understand and use contemporary multimodality pain treatments. Acute postthoracotomy pain not only causes psychologic distress to the patient but also has detrimental effects on pulmonary function and postoperative mobility, leading to increased morbidity. By choosing the most appropriate and least traumatic surgical incision, adhering to meticulous surgical techniques, and avoiding intercostal nerve injury or rib fractures, surgeons can minimize postoperative pain. Aggressive perioperative and postoperative pain management is best accomplished with use of an epidural anesthetic and covering breakthrough pain with an IV-PCA. Alternatively, an infusion system for continuous administration of local anesthetics directly in the subpleural plane, posterior to the intercostal incision, also provides excellent pain control. Again, use of an IV-PCA as adjuvant therapy is recommended. With careful planning, severe pain and its negative impact on thoracic surgical patients can be prevented.

Monitorización del dolor. Recomendaciones del grupo de trabajo de analgesia y sedación de la SEMICYUC

In critically ill patients, pain is frequently underestimated and so insufficiently managed. Psychological, haemodynamic and neuroendocrine responses, secondary to untreated pain, could produce morbidity and even increases in patient mortality. All members of the intensive care team must have abilities to assess and to manage pain. The evaluation of pain in the critically ill patient is very difficult but extremely important. Self-reported pain is the starting point for treatment. The pain scores recommended are, VAS (visual analogue scale) and NRS (numeric rating scale) in communicative patients and Campbell scale in uncommunicative patients. Adequate and regular patient assessment leads to improved pain control. Scores higher than 3 points should not be permitted. A pain-free Intensive Care Unit should be a quality standard healthcare aim.

Patient controlled opioid analgesia versus conventional opioid analgesia for postoperative pain

BACKGROUND

Patients may control postoperative pain by self-administration of intravenous opioids using devices designed for this purpose (patient controlled analgesia or PCA). A 1992 meta-analysis by Ballantyne found a strong patient preference for PCA over conventional analgesia but disclosed no differences in analgesic consumption or length of postoperative hospital stay. Although Ballantyne's meta-analysis found that PCA did have a small but statistically significant benefit upon pain intensity, Walder's review in 2001 did not find a significant differences in pain intensity and pain relief between PCA and conventionally treated groups.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the efficacy of PCA versus conventional analgesia (such as a nurse administering an analgesic upon a patient's request) for postoperative pain control.

SEARCH STRATEGY

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were identified from the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library 2004, Issue 3), MEDLINE (1966 to 2004), and EMBASE (1994 to 2004). Additional reports were identified from the reference lists of retrieved papers.

SELECTION CRITERIA

RCTs of PCA versus conventional analgesia that employed pain intensity as a primary or secondary outcome were selected. These trials included RCTs that compared PCA without a continuous background infusion versus conventional parenteral analgesic regimens. Studies that explicitly stated they involved patients with chronic pain were excluded.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Trials were scored using the Oxford Quality Scale. Meta-analyses were performed of outcomes that included analgesic efficacy assessed by a Visual Analog Scale (VAS), analgesic consumption, patient satisfaction, length of stay and adverse effects. A sufficient number of the retrieved trials reported these parameters to permit meta-analyses.

MAIN RESULTS

Fifty-five studies with 2023 patients receiving PCA and 1838 patients assigned to a control group met inclusion criteria. PCA provided better pain control and greater patient satisfaction than conventional parenteral 'as-needed' analgesia. Patients using PCA consumed higher amounts of opioids than the controls and had a higher incidence of pruritus (itching) but had a similar incidence of other adverse effects. There was no difference in the length of hospital stay.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

This review provides evidence that PCA is an efficacious alternative to conventional systemic analgesia for postoperative pain control.

Postoperative effects of opioid analgesics administered via continuous perfusion and patient controlled analgesia after open heart surgery

Critical care nurses and physicians are familiar with the principles of patient controlled analgesia and the opioid analgesics' regimens and observations necessary for pain control in the postoperative cardiac surgical patients. The objective of the study was to compare the effects of morphine, fentanyl, meperidine, remifentanil and tramadol which were administered by patient controlled analgesia and continuous intravenous infusion combination on the various parameters. This study was designed as prospective randomised trial. Fifty patients undergone open heart surgery with sternotomy were entered equally into five randomized groups. Visual analog scale was used by researcher nurse to assess the patient' pain status. Respiratory rate, heart rate and blood gases (pO2, pCO2, SaO2), radial arterial blood pressures were measured in the first 24 hrs postoperatively. Bolus requirements were determined by physicians and side effects of the analgesics were documented. Fentanyl group showed statistically higher levels of mean pO2 (p=0.002). Meperidine had the lowest number of bolus doses (p=0.001). There were no significant differences between the groups for pain management except higher visual analog scales on tramadol. Headache, stomach-ache and, palpitations were observed in our patients. Remifentanil, meperidine, fentanyl and morphine showed similar effect with each other for pain relief except tramadol.