Procedure-specific and patient-specific pain management for ambulatory surgery with emphasis on the opioid crisis

Reducing Opioid Exposure Following Common Ambulatory Hand Surgery: A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

The opioid epidemic is a health crisis in the United States. Physicians contribute to this problem by overprescribing opioids. Ambulatory hand surgery (AHS) is common in the United States and associated with overprescribing of opioids. Education and guidance regarding the effectiveness of nonopioid compared with opioid interventions for pain management following ambulatory hand procedures are lacking. We assessed the current literature to suggest evidence-based protocols for postoperative analgesia.

METHODS

A systematic review was performed using PubMed, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library. Studies comparing nonopioid with opioid treatments for pain management following AHS were identified. Studies investigating opioid-sparing strategies after AHS were also identified. Evidence was examined to determine efficacy of nonopioid interventions and to provide recommendations for optimal nonopioid protocols and opioid-sparing strategies.

RESULTS

A total of 510 studies were identified in the search with 18 meeting inclusion criteria. High-level evidence demonstrated efficacy of nonopioid interventions for pain management following AHS (levels I and II evidence). Results provided evidence-based guidelines for recommendations of nonopioid treatment protocols and opioid-sparing strategies (levels I and II evidence).

CONCLUSIONS

Our review demonstrated nonopioid interventions are adequate in multiple aspects of pain management compared with opioid treatments. Recommendations were established for two nonopioid treatment protocols, and for an opioid-sparing intervention (levels I and II evidence). The evidence provided in this review should be strongly considered for pain management guidance following AHS and provides a means to decrease opioid overprescribing in the United States.

Modern preoperative evaluation in ambulatory surgery - who, where and how?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Ambulatory surgery is increasingly performed in medically complex patients. This dynamic environment requires new approaches to ensure cost-effective, efficient, and ultimately safe preoperative evaluation of the patient. This review investigates recent advances in the assessment of ambulatory patients, with a special focus on patient screening, digital communication, and multidisciplinary team evaluation.

RECENT FINDINGS

Identifying suitable candidates for ambulatory surgery relies on a variety of medical, surgical, and institutional factors. Identification of high-risk patients and optimization of their treatment can be achieved through multidisciplinary protocols specific to the local institution and in line with current guidelines. Virtual assessment may be sufficient for most patients and provide an efficient evaluation strategy and high patient satisfaction. Prescreening can be supported by preoperative nursing teams.

SUMMARY

The increasing complexity of treatment provided in day surgery offers a unique opportunity to highlight the importance of anesthesiology staff as perioperative caregivers. Preoperative evaluation serves as a central junction to integrate a variety of surgical, medical, and institutional factors to provide safe, satisfactory, and efficient care for patients. Implementing technological innovation to streamline and facilitate this process is paramount.

Pain treatment and prophylaxis on pain

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Also in ambulatory surgery, there will usually be a need for analgesic medication to deal with postoperative pain. Even so, a significant proportion of ambulatory surgery patients have unacceptable postoperative pain, and there is a need for better education in how to provide proper prophylaxis and treatment.

RECENT FINDINGS

Postoperative pain should be addressed both pre, intra- and postoperatively. The management should be with a multimodal nonopioid-based procedure specific guideline for the routine cases. In 10-20% of cases, there will be a need to adjust and supplement the basic guideline with extra analgesic measures. This may be because there are contraindications for a drug in the guideline, the procedure is more extensive than usual or the patient has extra risk factors for strong postoperative pain. Opioids should only be used when needed on top of multimodal nonopioid prophylaxis. Opioids should be with nondepot formulations, titrated to effect in the postoperative care unit and eventually continued only when needed for a few days at maximum.

SUMMARY

Multimodal analgesia should start pre or per-operatively and include paracetamol, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID), dexamethasone (or alternative glucocorticoid) and local anaesthetic wound infiltration, unless contraindicated in the individual case. Paracetamol and NSAID should be continued postoperatively, supplemented with opioid on top as needed. Extra analgesia may be considered when appropriate and needed. First-line options include nerve blocks or interfascial plane blocks and i.v. lidocaine infusion. In addition, gabapentinnoids, dexmedetomidine, ketamine infusion and clonidine may be used, but adverse effects of sedation, dizziness and hypotension must be carefully considered in the ambulatory setting.

Adopting the day surgery default in the provision of lumbar discectomy and decompressive surgery

INTRODUCTION

Provision of day case spinal procedures in the UK is below expected standards and there is a need for the creation of guidance and patient pathways to address this. Here we present a day case lumbar discectomy protocol and evaluate its impact at our institution.

METHODS

A new pathway (incorporating defined selection criteria, patient education, anaesthetic protocol and discharge prescriptions) was implemented for all suitable patients within a single surgeon's cohort. Day case rates for lumbar discectomy were compared before and after implementation. Patient feedback was collated using a patient-reported experience measure.

RESULTS

Eighteen of 23 patients selected as suitable via the pathway successfully underwent day surgery, leading to an increase in lumbar discectomy day case rates from 25% to 69% at our institution. Nearly all patients were satisfied with their experience, although a significant proportion felt provision of postoperative analgesia could be improved.

CONCLUSION

We present a day surgery pathway for lumbar discectomy that is safe and effective. This could be more widely implemented to increase day case rates.

Postdischarge pain, nausea and patient satisfaction after diagnostic and breast-conserving ambulatory surgery for breast cancer: A cross-sectional study

BACKGROUND

The aims of this study were to assess first day postdischarge pain, nausea and patient satisfaction in ambulatory breast cancer surgical patients, after diagnostic and breast conserving procedures.

METHODS

A total of 781 women, aged 18-85 years were included in this prospective, cross-sectional study. All patients received standardized multimodal pain prophylaxis with paracetamol, COX-II inhibitor, dexamethasone and wound infiltration with local anaesthetics. Nausea prophylaxis was provided with ondansetron. Most patients received general anaesthesia with propofol and remifentanil. Data were collected using a validated questionnaire during telephone follow-up on the first postoperative day.

RESULTS

The response rate was 94.5%. NRS ≥ 4 was reported by 5.3% at rest, by 17% during activity and by 30.7% as the worst pain score. Young age was strongly associated with more pain both at rest, during activity and regarding worst pain since discharge. Postdischarge nausea was present in 17.8%, and vomiting in 1.2%. High pain score during activity and higher level of worst pain, were associated with nausea. There was no association between nausea and age, type of anaesthesia, surgical procedure or pain at rest. Patient satisfaction was high (97.8%-99.7%) regarding information, time for discharge and overall satisfaction.

CONCLUSION

Pain scores and incidence of nausea were generally low on the day after surgery. Young age was a strong predictor for postdischarge pain. A high worst pain score and high pain score during the activity were associated with postdischarge nausea. Patient satisfaction was high.

Postoperative pain reduction by pre-emptive N-acetylcysteine: an exploratory randomized controlled clinical trial

BACKGROUND

A new potential target for multimodal pain management is the group-II metabotropic glutamate receptor subtypes, which can be activated by N-acetylcysteine. We investigated whether pre-emptive administration of N-acetylcysteine leads to a reduction in postoperative pain after laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair.

METHODS

Sixty American Society of Anesthesiologists I-II patients scheduled for elective inguinal hernia repair were randomized to receive either N-acetylcysteine (150 mg/kg) or placebo intravenously 1 hour before surgery. The primary outcome was the visual analogue score during movement in the morning (approximately 24 hours) after surgery. Among secondary outcomes were postoperative opioid consumption and safety of intravenous N-acetylcysteine.

RESULTS

In total, 23 patients were analyzed per group. Pain scores were similar at all timepoints with a 24 hours median score of 34 (IQR of 19.0 to 42.5) in the N-acetylcysteine group and a median score of 26 (16.0 to 50.0) in the placebo group. The percentage of patients using opioids after surgery was 22% versus 39% day 1 (p=0.63); 9% versus 26% day 2 (p=0.14); 9% versus 17% day 3 (p=0.35) in the N-acetylcysteine group compared with placebo group. Side effects resembling anaphylactoid reactions in response to the administration of N-acetylcysteine were present in more than half of the patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Without finding important differences between N-acetylcysteine and placebo group in pain scores postoperatively, but with a high percentage of bothersome side effects for the N-acetylcysteine group, we would not recommend the use of pre-emptive intravenous N-acetylcysteine to reduce postoperative pain in laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair patients based on this study.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT03354572.