Subarachnoid and intravenous PCA versus bolus administration for postoperative pain relief in orthopaedic patients

Systematic review of the effectiveness of nursing interventions in reducing or relieving post-operative pain

Objectives  The primary objective of this systematic review was to assess the effectiveness of nursing interventions for the relief/reduction of post-operative pain when compared with either standard care or other nursing interventions. Inclusion criteria  Types of studies This review included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and other quasi-randomised experimental research designs. Types of participants Adults treated for post-operative pain in an acute care hospital. Types of interventions Interventions included in the review were only those directly administered by nursing staff such as: (i) administration of analgesia: including oral, intramuscular injection, patient controlled analgesia, epidural; (ii) pre-operative patient education; (iii) assessment and documentation of intensity of pain at regular intervals; (iv) protocols, clinical pathways or flow-sheets used in the management of pain; and (v) non-pharmacological interventions such as massage and relaxation. Types of outcome measures The primary outcome was the relief or reduction of post-operative pain. Other measures included analgesia consumption, patient satisfaction and length of hospital stay. Search strategy  Search terms were chosen after reviewing text words and MeSH terms in relevant articles and databases. A search for published and unpublished research covering the period 1985-2004 (inclusive) was conducted, using 11 major electronic databases. Reference lists of retrieved articles were hand searched. The search was restricted to reports published in English. Assessment of quality  The methodological quality of eligible studies was appraised by two independent reviewers, using a standardised critical appraisal tool. Differences in opinion were decided by consensus after discussion with a third investigator. Data extraction and analysis  Data were extracted from the studies that met the criteria for methodological quality. Two reviewers independently extracted data for each study, using a standardised extraction tool. Results from homogeneous RCTs where possible were pooled in meta-analysis using RevMan4.2 software program. If the studies were clinically or statistically heterogeneous, the results are discussed in a narrative form. Non-randomised studies are also discussed in narrative form. Results  Overall, there is no strong evidence to support the use of any intervention even though a few interventions showed some benefits. However, evidence for these benefits was often based on single studies. Most of the included studies showed that there was no difference between the interventions and the usual care with both being found equally effective. Implications for practice  There was no strong evidence to support a particular practice. No intervention was found to be harmful; however, this does not presume to be evidence of safety. When there are two similarly effective interventions nurses need to weigh the possible positive and negative of the intervention including side effects, risk of adverse events, cost and patient preference. Other considerations include variations in patients' past pain experiences, type of surgery, many different analgesics. Although there were no controlled trials to support assessment and documentation, professionally and legally, documentation is required.

Feasibility of infusion pumps for continuous spinal administration of local anesthetics in post-operative pain therapy

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

For completion of perioperative care and for general ethical considerations, any intraoperatively used catheter technique should be utilizable for post-operative pain therapy. Continuous spinal anesthesia (CSA) is an established form of local anesthetic application. However, for its use in post-operative therapy, infusion pumps are required that are technically able to deliver low rates and are distinctive in design to avoid possible pump or medication swaps. Because of a lack of devices specifically designed for CSA, we investigated the potential deployability of infusion pumps for post-operative pain therapy via CSA microcatheters, which were originally designed and approved for different applications.

METHODS

The accuracy of infusion rates of three different pumps was measured in a liquor model environment. Furthermore, we investigated safety and user-friendliness by interviewing 30 anesthesiologists and 15 pain nurses.

RESULTS

Except for the first hour of infusion, all pumps provided comparable and adequate flow profiles. However, interviews revealed significant risk factors for all pumps in terms of swapping devices, lines or medications and misprogramming the units.

DISCUSSION

All pumps tested were technically able to deliver accurate flow rates; however, because the non-CSA-specific design involves the risk of medication overdosage and syringe swaps, none of the systems tested can be recommended for routine use in post-operative CSA, irrespective of the fact that it was an off-label application anyway. Therefore, to ensure patient safety, continuous spinal administration of local anesthetics via microcatheters is a questionable method of post-operative pain therapy as long as non-specific pumps are used.

Systematic review of the effectiveness of nursing interventions in reducing or relieving post-operative pain

OBJECTIVES

The primary objective of this systematic review was to assess the effectiveness of nursing interventions for the relief/reduction of post-operative pain when compared with either standard care or other nursing interventions.

INCLUSION CRITERIA

Types of studies This review included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and other quasi-randomised experimental research designs. Types of participants Adults treated for post-operative pain in an acute care hospital. Types of interventions Interventions included in the review were only those directly administered by nursing staff such as: (i) administration of analgesia: including oral, intramuscular injection, patient controlled analgesia, epidural; (ii) pre-operative patient education; (iii) assessment and documentation of intensity of pain at regular intervals; (iv) protocols, clinical pathways or flow-sheets used in the management of pain; and (v) non-pharmacological interventions such as massage and relaxation. Types of outcome measures The primary outcome was the relief or reduction of post-operative pain. Other measures included analgesia consumption, patient satisfaction and length of hospital stay.

SEARCH STRATEGY

Search terms were chosen after reviewing text words and MeSH terms in relevant articles and databases. A search for published and unpublished research covering the period 1985-2004 (inclusive) was conducted, using 11 major electronic databases. Reference lists of retrieved articles were hand searched. The search was restricted to reports published in English.

ASSESSMENT OF QUALITY

The methodological quality of eligible studies was appraised by two independent reviewers, using a standardised critical appraisal tool. Differences in opinion were decided by consensus after discussion with a third investigator.

DATA EXTRACTION AND ANALYSIS

Data were extracted from the studies that met the criteria for methodological quality. Two reviewers independently extracted data for each study, using a standardised extraction tool. Results from homogeneous RCTs where possible were pooled in meta-analysis using RevMan 4.2 software program. If the studies were clinically or statistically heterogeneous, the results are discussed in a narrative form. Non-randomised studies are also discussed in narrative form.

RESULTS

Overall, there is no strong evidence to support the use of any intervention even though a few interventions showed some benefits. However, evidence for these benefits was often based on single studies. Most of the included studies showed that there was no difference between the interventions and the usual care with both being found equally effective.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

There was no strong evidence to support a particular practice. No intervention was found to be harmful; however, this does not presume to be evidence of safety. When there are two similarly effective interventions nurses need to weigh the possible positive and negative of the intervention including side effects, risk of adverse events, cost and patient preference. Other considerations include variations in patients' past pain experiences, type of surgery, many different analgesics. Although there were no controlled trials to support assessment and documentation, professionally and legally, documentation is required.

Regional Anaesthesia in the Elderly

The number of elderly patients presenting for anaesthesia and surgery has increased exponentially in recent years. Regional anaesthesia is frequently used in elderly patients undergoing surgery. Although the type of anaesthesia (general versus regional anaesthesia) has no substantial effect on perioperative morbidity and mortality in any age group; it intuitively makes sense that elderly patients would benefit from regional anaesthesia because they remain minimally sedated throughout the procedures and awaken with excellent postoperative pain control. However, a multitude of factors influence the outcome, such as the type, duration and invasiveness of the operation, co-existing medical and mental status of the patient and the skill and expertise of the anaesthesiologist and surgeon. These factors make it difficult to decide if and when one technique is equivocally better than another. Thus, it is more important to optimise the overall management of the patient during the perioperative period and, in most cases, it is the quality of the anaesthetic administered rather than the type of anaesthetic which is most important. Sedatives used for regional anaesthesia in the elderly should be short acting, easy to administer, have a low adverse effect profile and high safety margin. Midazolam, lorazepam, ketamine, propofol and low-dose opioids have been successfully used for sedation in the elderly. Aging affects the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of local anaesthetics, composition and characteristics of tissues and organs within the body, and physiological functions of the body. Changes in the systematic absorption, distribution and clearance of local anaesthetics lead to an increased sensitivity, decreased dose requirement and a change in the onset and duration of action in the elderly. Decreases in neural population, neural conduction velocity and inter-Schwann cell distance can lead to an increased sensitivity to local anaesthetics in the elderly. The addition of an opioid and epinephrine (adrenaline) has been shown to be useful in central neuraxial blockade. Epinephrine also can prolong the duration of peripheral nerve blocks. However, caution must be exercised as epinephrine has the potential for causing ischaemic neurotoxicity in peripheral nerves. Regional anaesthesia appears to be safe and beneficial in elderly patients; however, every anaesthetic administered must be assessed on a case-by-case basis and particular consideration should be given to the health status of the patient, the operation being performed and the expertise of the anaesthesiologist.

Continuous spinal anesthesia/analgesia vs. single-shot spinal anesthesia with patient-controlled analgesia for elective hip arthroplasty

BACKGROUND

In total hip replacement surgery several anesthesiological techniques can be used. In this study we compared continuous spinal anesthesia (CSA) and postoperative analgesia vs. single-shot spinal anesthesia (SPA) and postoperative patient-controlled intravenous analgesia with morphine (SPA).

METHODS

In a prospective randomized study, 68 patients, ASA I-III, between 50 and 85 years of age were allocated to these two groups. Quality of analgesia, hemodynamic stability and technical difficulties, as well as incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) and post dural puncture headache (PDPH), were recorded during a 24-h period.

RESULTS

Visual analog scale (VAS) scores were significantly lower in the CSA group from 3 h post operation (P < 0.05). Mean arterial pressure dropped by 21 +/- 11 mmHg in the CSA group and 29 +/- 14 in the SPA group during induction (P < 0.05). Technical difficulties and incidence of PDPH were similar in both groups. Postoperative nausea and vomiting was lower in the CSA group (P < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Continuous spinal anesthesia/analgesia is a very practicable method providing better postoperative analgesia and better hemodynamic stability during anesthesia induction than SPA followed by morphine PCA analgesia after total hip replacement surgery.

Orthopaedic surgery in the elderly

The orthopaedic surgeon brings to the operating room some of the greatest challenges for the anaesthesiologist. Various factors, such as age, health status, disease process, type and extent of operative procedure, provide differing circumstances, which an anaesthesiologist is obliged to cope with. This contrasts to other surgical specialities in which patient factors and operative procedures are much more predictable. The number of older patients in orthopaedics is steadily growing, and the anaesthesiologist has to take all measures to permit an early and efficient rehabilitation, a concept which is now widely recognized for improving the success of orthopaedic surgical procedures. Factors which may hinder this concept are post-operative pain, central nervous system dysfunction, fatigue, deep sedation, delayed enteral feeding and absorption. There is no evidence that regional anaesthesia without the use of the continuous regional analgesic technique decreases morbidity and mortality as compared to general anaesthesia, in this context. However, the advantages of continuous analgesia through a perineural spinal or epidural catheter are promising and deserve further investigation. The concept of the optimal post-operative multimodal regimen needs to be defined. The application of NSAID and paracetamol is an integral part of this concept, and the dose of opioids should be titrated to the lowest efficient dose needed. Thus, this chapter discusses the different controversies and future trends of anaesthesia with regard to the elderly in orthopaedic surgery.

Efficacy and safety of patient-controlled opioid analgesia for acute postoperative pain. A quantitative systematic review

BACKGROUND

The usefulness of intravenous patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) with opioids for postoperative analgesia is not well defined.

METHODS

We systematically searched (MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, bibliographies, any language, to January 2000) for randomised trials comparing opioid-based PCA with the same opioid given intramuscularly, intravenously, or subcutaneously. Weighted mean differences (WMD) for continuous data, relative risks (RR) and numbers-needed-to-treat (NNT) for dichotomous data were calculated with 95% confidence intervals (CI) using fixed and random effects models.

RESULTS

Data from 32 trials were analysed: 22 (1139 patients) were with morphine, five (682) with pethidine, three (184) with piritramide, one (47) with nalbuphine and one (20) with tramadol. In three morphine and one pethidine trial (352 patients), more patients preferred PCA (89.7% vs. 65.8%, RR 1.41 (95%CI 1.11 to 1.80), NNT 4.2). Combined dichotomous data on pain intensity and relief, and the need for rescue analgesics from eight morphine, one pethidine, one piritramide, and one nalbuphine trial (691 patients), were in favour of PCA (RR 1.22 (1.00 to 1.50), NNT 8). In two morphine trials (152), pulmonary complications were more frequently prevented with PCA (100% vs. 93.3%, RR 1.07 (1.01 to 1.14), NNT 15). There was equivalence for cumulative opioid consumption, pain scores, duration of hospital stay, and opioid-related adverse effects.

CONCLUSION

These trials provide some evidence that in the postoperative pain setting, PCA with opioids, compared with conventional opioid treatment, improve analgesia and decrease the risk of pulmonary complications, and that patients prefer them.