Gender, age and ethnic aspects of analgesia in acute abdominal pain: is analgesia even across the groups?

Analgesia Administration by Sex Among Pediatric Emergency Department Patients with Abdominal Pain

Background

There is conflicting data about sex-based differences in the treatment of acute pain in the ED. Little is known about sex-based disparities in analgesia in pediatric ED patients.

Objectives

Our objective was to determine whether analgesic administration rates differ between female and male pediatric patients presenting to the ED with abdominal pain.

Methods

We conducted a retrospective cohort study of ED patients 5-21 years old with abdominal pain between 6/1/19 and 6/30/21. The primary outcome was receipt of any analgesia, and secondary outcomes were receipt of opioid analgesia and time to receipt of analgesia. Multivariable regression models were fitted for each outcome.

Results

We studied 1,087 patients; 681 (63%) were female with a median age of 17 years (IQR 13, 19) and 406 (37%) were male with a median age of 14 years (IQR 9, 18). 371 female patients (55%) and 180 male patients (44%) received any analgesia. 132 female patients (19%) and 83 male patients (20%) received opioid analgesia. In multivariate analyses, female patients were equally likely to receive any analgesia (OR 1.30, 95% CI 0.97 - 1.74, p = 0.07), but time to analgesia was 14% longer (GMR 1.14, 95% CI 1.00 - 1.29, p = 0.04). Non-White patients were 32% less likely to receive opioids (OR 0.68, 95% CI 0.47 - 0.97, p = 0.04).

Conclusions

Female pediatric ED patients were equally likely to receive any analgesia as male patients, but their time to analgesia was longer. Non-White patients were less likely to receive opioid analgesia than White patients.

Sex-related differences in opioid administration in the emergency department: a population-based study

BACKGROUND

Sex differences in pain experience and expression may influence ED pain management. Our objective was to evaluate the effect of sex on ED opioid administration.

METHODS

We conducted a multicentre population-based observational cohort study using administrative data from Calgary's four EDs between 2017 and 2018. Eligible patients had a presenting complaint belonging to one of nine pain categories or an arrival pain score >3. We performed multivariable analyses to identify predictors of opioid administration and stratified analyses by age, pain severity and pain category.

RESULTS

We studied 119 510 patients (mean age 47.4 years; 55.4% female). Opioid administration rates were similar for men and women. After adjusting for age, hospital site, pain category, ED length of stay and pain severity, male sex was not a predictor of opioid treatment (adjusted OR (aOR)=0.93; 95% CI 0.85 to 1.02). However, men were more likely to receive opioids in the categories of trauma (aOR=1.58, 95% CI 1.40 to 1.78), flank pain (aOR=1.24, 95% CI 1.11 to 1.38), headache (aOR=1.18, 95% CI 1.03 to 1.34) and abdominal pain (aOR=1.11, 95% CI 1.08 to 1.18). Pain category appears to be a strong determinant of opioid administration, especially back pain (aOR=6.56, 95% CI 5.99 to 7.19) and flank pain (aOR=6.04, 95% CI 5.48 to 6.65). There was significant variability in opioid provision by ED site (aOR 0.76 to 1.24).

CONCLUSIONS

This population-based study demonstrated high variability in opioid use across different settings. Overall, men and women had similar likelihood of receiving opioids; however men with trauma, flank pain, headache and abdominal pain were much more likely to receive opioids. ED physicians should self-examine their analgesic practices with respect to possible sex biases, and departments should introduce evidence-based, indication-specific analgesic protocols to reduce practice variability and optimise opioid analgesia.

Is There Gender Discrimination in Acute Renal Colic Pain Management? A Retrospective Analysis in an Emergency Department Setting

BACKGROUND

Pain is a widespread problem, affecting both men and women; studies have found that women in the emergency department receive analgesic medication and opioids less often compared with men.

AIMS

The aim of this study was to examine the administration and management of analgesics by the medical/paramedical staff in relation to the patients' gender, and thereby to examine the extent of gender discrimination in treating pain.

DESIGN

This is a single-center retrospective cohort study that included 824 patients.

SETTINGS

Emergency department of tertiary hospital in Israel.

PARTICIPANTS/SUBJECTS

The patients stratified by gender to compare pain treatments and waiting times between men and women in renal colic complaint.

METHODS

As an acute pain model, we used renal colic with a nephrolithiasis diagnosis confirmed by imaging. We recorded pain level by Visual Analog Scale (VAS) scores and number of VAS examinations. Time intervals were calculated between admissions to different stations in the emergency department. We recorded the number of analgesic drugs administered, type of drugs prescribed, and drug class (opioids or others).

RESULTS

A total of 824 patients (414 women and 410 men) participated. There were no significant differences in age, ethnicity, and laboratory findings. VAS assessments were higher in men than in women (6.43 versus 5.90, p = .001, respectively). More men than women received analgesics (68.8% versus 62.1%, p = .04, respectively) and opioids were prescribed more often for men than for women (48.3 versus 35.7%, p = .001). The number of drugs prescribed per patient was also higher in men compared with women (1.06 versus 0.93, p = .03). A significant difference was found in waiting time length from admission to medical examination between non-Jewish women and Jewish women.

CONCLUSIONS

We found differences in pain management between genders, which could be interpreted as gender discrimination. Yet these differences could also be attributed to other factors not based on gender discrimination but rather on gender differences.

Clinical protocols for adults with acute abdominal pain in Australian emergency departments

RATIONALE, AIMS AND OBJECTIVES

Patients with acute abdominal pain are a common presentation in hospital emergency departments; however, international studies have demonstrated that hospitals often lack clinical protocols to guide care. This study aimed to investigate whether Australian hospital emergency departments have acute abdominal pain clinical protocols, identify hospital-level predictors of the presence of these clinical protocols, and assess the quality of protocols.

METHODS

A survey was sent to all Australian hospitals with emergency departments, collecting data on hospital characteristics and the presence of acute abdominal pain clinical protocols. Participating hospitals (n = 73, 26% response rate) were also asked to provide a copy of these protocols. The quality of these protocols was assessed using Appraisal of Guidelines for REsearch & Evaluation (AGREE) II.

RESULTS

Slightly more than half (n = 40) of the hospitals surveyed had acute abdominal pain clinical protocols, while 16 had a general pain protocol. In binomial logistic regression, two independent variables were related to the presence of a protocol, geographic region (P = 0.008) and advanced practice nurses/nurse practitioners' presence on staff (P = 0.024). The mean score for the overall quality assessment of these protocols was 4.2 on a seven-point Likert scale; in terms of the six domains of quality, "Clarity of presentation" and "Scope and purpose" were highest. The overall quality of clinical protocols increased with remoteness, χ² (3) = 8.341, P = 0.039, and was lower in hospitals with medical staff on site (U = 2.5, P = 0.007).

CONCLUSION

There is a documented standard for pain management of acute abdominal pain in about three quarters of participating Australian emergency departments. The use and quality of clinical protocols is influenced by the physical location of hospitals and staff and skill mix of clinicians.

Neuroleptanalgesia for acute abdominal pain: a systematic review

Background

Acute abdominal pain (AAP) comprises up to 10% of all emergency department (ED) visits. Current pain management practice is moving toward multi-modal analgesia regimens that decrease opioid use.

Objective

This project sought to determine whether, in patients with AAP (population), does administration of butyrophenone antipsychotics (intervention) compared to placebo, usual care, or opiates alone (comparisons) improve analgesia or decrease opiate consumption (outcomes)?

Methods

A structured search was performed in Cochrane CENTRAL, CINAHL, Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects, Directory of Open Access Journals, Embase, IEEE-Xplorer, Latin American and Caribbean Health Sciences Literature, Magiran, PubMed, Scientific Information Database, Scopus, TÜBİTAK ULAKBİM, and Web of Science. Clinical trial registries (ClinicalTrials.gov, World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, and Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry), relevant bibliographies, and conference proceedings were also searched. Searches were not limited by date, language, or publication status. Studies eligible for inclusion were prospective randomized clinical trials enrolling patients (age ≥18 years) with AAP treated in acute care environments (ED, intensive care unit, postoperative). The butyrophenone must have been administered either intravenously or intra-muscularly. Comparison groups included placebo, opiate only, corticosteroids, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, or acetaminophen.

Results

We identified 7,217 references. Six studies met inclusion criteria. One study assessed ED patients with AAP associated with gastroparesis, whereas five studies assessed patients with postoperative AAP: abdominal hysterectomy (n=4), sleeve gastrectomy (n=1). Three of four studies found improvements in pain intensity with butyrophenone use. Three of five studies reported no change in postoperative opiate consumption, while two reported a decrease. One ED study reported no change in patient satisfaction, while one postoperative study reported improved satisfaction scores. Both extrapyramidal side effects (n=3) and sedation (n=3) were reported as unchanged.

Conclusion

Based on available evidence, we cannot draw a conclusion on the efficacy or benefit of neuroleptanalgesia in the management of patients with AAP. However, preliminary data suggest that it may improve analgesia and decrease opiate consumption.

Laparoscopic Ventral Hernia Repair in South Auckland, New Zealand-A Retrospective Review

BACKGROUND

Ethnic disparities in surgical care and outcomes have been previously reported in studies for other surgical procedures. In addition, it has been reported that ethnic differences in postoperative analgesia exist. We aimed to determine ethnic disparities in postoperative outcomes, total opioid analgesia use, and complication rates of all patients who underwent a laparoscopic ventral hernia repair (LVHR) at our institution over a 3-y period.

METHODS

A retrospective review of all patients who underwent an LVHR at Counties Manukau Health from January 1, 2013, to December 31, 2015, was performed in line with the Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology statement.

RESULTS

A total of 267 ventral hernias were repaired in 254 patients at Counties Manukau Health over the study period, of which most were primary umbilical ventral hernias. The majority of patients in our cohort were New Zealand European and male. Major complications, as per the Clavien-Dindo classification grade 3 and above, were observed in six patients with no deaths (2.4%). There were no statistically significant ethnic disparities in length of stay, receipt of opioid analgesia, and rates of complication observed after linear regression modeling after adjustment for confounding factors.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study showed that the majority of patients who had a ventral hernia repaired at our institution were mostly New Zealand European and male. Although significant ethnic disparities in patient characteristics were observed, these were not associated with ethnic disparities in postoperative outcomes after an LVHR.

A Multicenter Evaluation of Emergency Department Pain Care Across Different Types of Fractures

Objectives

To identify differences in emergency department (ED) pain-care based on the type of fracture sustained and to examine whether fracture type may influence the more aggressive analgesic use previously demonstrated in older patients.

Design

Secondary analysis of retrospective cohort study.

Setting

Five EDs (four academic, one community) in the United States.

Participants

Patients (1,664) who presented in January, March, July, and October 2009 with a final diagnosis of fracture (774 long bone [LBF], 890 shorter bone [SBF]).

Measurements

Primary-predictor was type of fracture (LBF vs. SBF). Pain-care process outcomes included likelihood of analgesic administration, opioid-dose, and time to first analgesic. General estimating equations were used to control for age, gender, race, baseline pain score, triage acuity, comorbidities and ED crowding. Subgroup analyses were conducted to analyze age-based differences in pain care by fracture type.

Results

A larger proportion of patients with LBF (30%) were older (>65 years old) compared to SBF (13%). Compared with SBF, patients with LBF were associated with greater likelihood of analgesic-administration (OR = 2.03; 95 CI = 1.58 to 2.62; P  < 0.001) and higher opioid-doses (parameter estimate = 0.268; 95 CI = 0.239 to 0.297; P  < 0.001). When LBF were examined separately, older-patients had a trend to longer analgesic wait-times (99 [55-163] vs. 76 [35-149] minutes, P  = 0.057), but no other differences in process outcomes were found.

Conclusion

Long bone fractures were associated with more aggressive pain care than SBF. When fracture types were examined separately, older patients did not appear to receive more aggressive pain care. This difference should be accounted for in further research.

A Multicenter Evaluation of the Impact of Sex on Abdominal and Fracture Pain Care

BACKGROUND

Previous studies examining sex-based disparities in emergency department (ED) pain care have been limited to a single pain condition, a single study site, and lack rigorous control for confounders.

OBJECTIVE

A multicenter evaluation of the effect of sex on abdominal pain (AP) and fracture pain (FP) care outcomes.

RESEARCH DESIGN

A retrospective cohort review of ED visits at 5 US hospitals in January, April, July, and October 2009.

SUBJECTS

A total of 6931 patients with a final ED diagnosis of FP (n=1682) or AP (n=5249) were included.

MEASURES

The primary predictor was sex. The primary outcome was time to analgesic administration. Secondary outcomes included time to medication order, and the likelihood of receiving an analgesic and change in pain scores 360 minutes after triage: Multivariable models, clustered by study site, were conducted to adjust for race, age, comorbidities, initial pain score, ED crowding, and triage acuity.

RESULTS

On adjusted analyses, compared with men, women with AP waited longer for analgesic administration [AP women: 112 (65-187) minutes, men: 96 (52-167) minutes, P<0.001] and ordering [women: 84 (41-160) minutes, men: 71 (32-137) minutes, P<0.001], whereas women with FP did not (Administration: P=0.360; Order: P=0.133). Compared with men, women with AP were less likely to receive analgesics in the first 90 minutes (OR=0.766; 95% CI, 0.670-0.875; P<0.001), whereas women with FP were not (P=0.357).

DISCUSSION

In this multicenter study, we found that women experienced delays in analgesic administration for AP, but not for FP. Future research and interventions to decrease sex disparities in pain care should take type of pain into account.

Time of admission, gender and age: challenging factors in emergency renal colic - a preliminary study

BACKGROUND

Nephrolithiasis is a relatively common problem and a frequent Emergency Department (ED) diagnosis in patients who present with acute flank/abdominal pain. The pain management in these patients is often challenging.

OBJECTIVES

To investigate the most effective dose of morphine with the least side effects in emergency renal colic patients.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

150 renal colic patients who experienced a pain level of 4 or greater, based on visual analog scale (VAS) at admission time were included. Pain was scored on a 100 mm VAS (0 = no pain, 100 = the worst pain imagined). When patients arrived at ED, a physician would examine the patients and assessed initial pain score, then filled a questionnaire according to the patient information. Patients were assigned to receive 2.5 mg morphine sulfate intravenously. We monitored patients' visual analog scale (VAS), and adverse events at different time points (every 15 minutes) for 90 minutes. Additional doses of intravenous morphine (2.5 mg) were administered if the patient still had pain. (Max dose: 10 mg). The cumulative dose of morphine, defined as the total amount of morphine prescribed to each patient during the 90 minutes of the study, was recorded. Patients were not permitted to use any nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs as coadjuvant analgesics during the study period. Subjects with inadequate pain relief at 90 minutes received rescue morphine and were excluded from the study. The primary end point in this study was pain relief at 90 minutes, defined as either VAS<40 or decrease of 50% or more as compared to the initial VAS. The secondary objective was to detect the occurrence of adverse effects at any time points in ED.

RESULTS

The studied patients consisted of 104 men and 46 women with the mean age of 43 ±14 years (range, 18 to 75 years). There was no statistically significant difference between the mean age and gender differences in pain response. Rescue analgesia at 30 minutes were given in 54.5% receiving morphine. The average time to painless was 35 minutes. But there were no statistically significant differences between the mean age and gender differences in pain response (P > 0.05). Older patients responded sooner to morphine than the young. Most of the patients had a pain score of 90 -100 (77.3 %) at the beginning that was reduced to 29.4% during the 30 minutes follow up. During the first hour, we found that 94.7% of the patients had no pain or significant pain reduction and only 2.1% of the patients still had pain.

CONCLUSIONS

We conclude that there were no significant differences among the gender, time of admission and side - effects in renal colic patients in response to morphine.