Multidimensional Perioperative Recovery Trajectories in a Mixed Surgical Cohort: A Longitudinal Cluster Analysis Utilizing National Institutes of Health Patient-Reported Outcome Measurement Information System Measures

The Contribution of Sleep Quality and Psychological Factors to the Experience of Within-Day Pain Fluctuations Among Individuals With Temporomandibular Disorders

We assessed the impact of day-to-day sleep quality and psychological variables (catastrophizing, negative affect, and positive affect) to within-day pain fluctuations in 42 females with painful temporomandibular disorders (TMD) using electronic diaries. More specifically, we examined the contribution of these variables to the likelihood of experiencing pain exacerbations defined as 1) an increase of 20 points (or more) in pain intensity on a 0 to 100 visual analog scale from morning to evening, and/or 2) a transition from mild-to-moderate pain over the course of the day; and pain decreases defined as 3) a decrease of 20 points (or more) in pain intensity (visual analog scale) from morning to evening, and/or 4) a reduction from moderate-to-mild pain over the day. The results indicated significantly main effects of sleep on both pain exacerbation outcomes (both P's < .05), indicating that nights with better sleep quality were less likely to be followed by clinically meaningful pain exacerbations on the next day. The results also indicated that days characterized by higher levels of catastrophizing were associated with a greater likelihood of pain exacerbations on the same day (both P's < .05). Daily catastrophizing was the only variable significantly associated with within-day pain decrease indices (both P's < .05). None of the other variables were associated with these outcomes (all P's > .05). These results underscore the importance of addressing patients' sleep quality and psychological states in the management of painful TMD. PERSPECTIVE: These findings highlight the significance of sleep quality and pain catastrophizing in the experience of within-day pain fluctuations among individuals with TMD. Addressing these components through tailored interventions may help to alleviate the impact of pain fluctuations and enhance the overall well-being of TMD patients.

Transitional Pain Service: Optimizing Complex Surgical Patients

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The care of patients with complex postsurgical pain can be challenging and burdensome for the healthcare system. Transitional pain service (TPS) is a relatively new concept and has not been widely adopted in the USA. This article explores the benefits and barriers of transitional pain services and describes the development of a TPS at our institution.

RECENT FINDINGS

Evidence from a few institutions that have adopted TPS has shown decreased postsurgical opioid consumption for patients on chronic opioids and decreased incidence of chronic postsurgical opioid use for opioid-naïve patients. The development of a transitional pain service may improve outcomes for these complex patients by providing longitudinal and multidisciplinary perioperative pain care. In this article, we describe the implementation of a TPS at a tertiary medical center. Our TPS model involves a multidisciplinary team of anesthesiologists, pain psychologists, surgeons, and advanced practice providers. We provide longitudinal care, including preoperative education and optimization; perioperative multimodal analgesic care; and longitudinal follow-up for 90 days post-procedure. With our TPS service, we aim to reduce long-term opioid use and improve functional outcomes for our patients.

Identifying risk factors for poor multidimensional recovery after major surgery: A systematic review

Traditional risk factors used for predicting poor postoperative recovery have focused on postoperative complications, adverse symptoms (nausea, pain), length of hospital stay, and patient quality of life. Despite these being traditional performance indicators of patient postoperative "status," they may not fully define the multidimensional nature of patient recovery. The definition of postoperative recovery is thus evolving to include patient-reported outcomes that are important to the patient. Previous reviews have focused on risk factors for the above traditional outcomes after major surgery. Yet, there remains a need for further study of risk factors predicting multidimensional patient-focused recovery, and investigation beyond the immediate postoperative period after patients are discharged from the hospital. This review aimed to appraise the current literature identifying risk factors for multidimensional patient recovery.

METHODS

A systematic review without meta-analysis was performed to qualitatively summarize preoperative risk factors for multidimensional recovery 4-6 weeks after major surgery (PROSPERO, CRD42022321626). We reviewed three electronic databases between January 2012 and April 2022. The primary outcome was risk factors for multidimensional recovery at 4-6 weeks. A GRADE quality appraisal and a risk of bias assessment were completed.

RESULTS

In total, 5150 studies were identified, after which 1506 duplicates were removed. After the primary and secondary screening, nine articles were included in the final review. Interrater agreements between the two assessors for the primary and secondary screening process were 86% (k = 0.47) and 94% (k = 0.70), respectively. Factors associated with poor recovery were found to include ASA grade, recovery tool baseline score, physical function, number of co-morbidities, previous surgery, and psychological well-being. Mixed results were reported for age, BMI, and preoperative pain. Due to the observational nature, heterogeneity, multiple definitions of recovery, and moderate risk of bias of the primary studies, the quality of evidence was rated from very low to low.

CONCLUSION

Our review found that there were few studies assessing preoperative risk factors as predictors for poor postoperative multidimensional recovery. This confirms the need for higher quality studies assessing risk for poor recovery, ideally with a consistent and multi-dimensional definition of recovery.

Multi-domain biopsychosocial postoperative recovery trajectories associate with patient outcomes following lumbar fusion

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study is to describe and assess the impact of multi-domain biopsychosocial (BPS) recovery on outcomes following lumbar spine fusion. We hypothesized that discrete patterns of BPS recovery (e.g., clusters) would be identified, and then associated with postoperative outcomes and preoperative patient data.

METHODS

Patient-reported outcomes for pain, disability, depression, anxiety, fatigue, and social roles were collected at multiple timepoints for patients undergoing lumbar fusion between baseline and one year. Multivariable latent class mixed models assessed composite recovery as a function of (1) pain, (2) pain and disability, and (3) pain, disability, and additional BPS factors. Patients were assigned to clusters based on their composite recovery trajectories over time.

RESULTS

Using all BPS outcomes from 510 patients undergoing lumbar fusion, three multi-domain postoperative recovery clusters were identified: Gradual BPS Responders (11%), Rapid BPS Responders (36%), and Rebound Responders (53%). Modeling recovery from pain alone or pain and disability alone failed to generate meaningful or distinct recovery clusters. BPS recovery clusters were associated with number of levels fused and preoperative opioid use. Postoperative opioid use (p < 0.01) and hospital length of stay (p < 0.01) were associated with BPS recovery clusters even after adjusting for confounding factors.

CONCLUSION

This study describes distinct clusters of recovery following lumbar spine fusion derived from multiple BPS factors, which are related to patient-specific preoperative factors and postoperative outcomes. Understanding postoperative recovery trajectories across multiple health domains will advance our understanding of how BPS factors interact with surgical outcomes and could inform personalized care plans.