Evidence-Based Strategies for the Prevention of Chronic Post-Intensive Care and Acute Care-Related Pain

Educational needs and preferences of adult patients with acute pain: a mixed-methods systematic review

ABSTRACT

Many patients experience acute pain, which has been associated with numerous negative consequences. Pain education has been proposed as a strategy to improve acute pain management. However, studies report limited effects with educational interventions for acute pain in adults, which can be explained by the underuse of the person-centered approach. Thus, we aimed to systematically review and synthetize current evidence from quantitative, qualitative and mixed-methods studies describing patients' needs and preferences for acute pain education in adults. We searched original studies and gray literature in 7 databases, from January 1990 to October 2023. Methodological quality was assessed with the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool. A total of 32 studies were included (n = 1847 patients), two-thirds of which were qualitative studies of high methodological quality. Most of the studies were conducted over the last 15 years in patients with postsurgical and posttraumatic pain, identified as White, with a low level of education. Patients expressed the greatest need for education when it came to what to expect in pain intensity and duration, as well how to take the medication and its associated adverse effects. The most frequently reported educational preferences were for in-person education while involving caregivers and to obtain information first from physicians, then by other professionals. This review has highlighted the needs and preferences to be considered in pain education interventions, which should be embedded in an approach cultivating communication and partnership with patients and their caregivers. The results still need to be confirmed with different patient populations.

Nociception assessment with videopupillometry in deeply sedated intensive care patients: Discriminative and criterion validations

BACKGROUND

Nociceptive assessment in deeply sedated patients is challenging. Validated instruments are lacking for this unresponsive population. Videopupillometry is a promising tool but has not been established in intensive care settings.

AIM/OBJECTIVE

To test the discriminate validity of pupillary dilation reflex (PDR) between non-noxious and noxious procedures for assessing nociception in non-neurological intensive care unit (ICU) patients and to test the criterion validity of pupil dilation using recommended PDR cut-off points to determine nociception.

METHODS

A single-centre prospective observational study was conducted in medical-surgical ICU patients. Two independent investigators performed videopupillometer measurements during a non-noxious and a noxious procedure, once a day (up to 7 days), when the patient remained deeply sedated (Richmond Agitation-Sedation Scale score: -5 or -4). The non-noxious procedures consisted of a gentle touch on each shoulder and the noxious procedures were endotracheal suctioning or turning onto the side. Bivariable and multivariable general linear mixed models were used to account for multiple measurements in same patients. Sensitivity and specificity, and areas under the curve of the receiver operating characteristic curve were calculated.

RESULTS

Sixty patients were included, and 305 sets of 3 measurements (before, during, and after), were performed. PDR was higher during noxious procedures than before (mean difference between noxious and non-noxious procedures = 31.66%). After testing all variables of patient and stimulation characteristics in bivariable models, age and noxious procedures were kept in the multivariable model. Adjusting for age, noxious procedures (coefficient = -15.14 (95% confidence interval = -20.17 to -15.52, p < 0.001) remained the only predictive factor for higher pupil change. Testing recommended cut-offs, a PDR of >12% showed a sensitivity of 65%, and a specificity of 94% for nociception prediction, with an area under the receiver operating curve of 0.828 (95% confidence interval = 0.779-0.877).

CONCLUSIONS

In conclusion, PDR is a potentially appropriate measure to assess nociception in deeply sedated ICU patients, and we suggest considering its utility in daily practices.

REGISTRATION

This study was not preregistered in a clinical registry.

TWEETABLE ABSTRACT

Pupillometry may help clinicians to assess nociception in deeply sedated ICU patients.

Pain Management Strategies After Orthopaedic Trauma: A Mixed-Methods Study with a View to Optimizing Practices

PURPOSE

To examine 1) pain management strategies within the care trajectory of orthopaedic trauma patients and patients' perception of their effectiveness, 2) adverse effects (AEs) associated with pharmacological treatments, particularly opioids and cannabis, and 3) patients' perceptions of strategies that should be applied after an orthopaedic trauma and support that they should obtain from health professionals for their use.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

This study was conducted with orthopaedic trauma patients in a level 1 trauma center. A convergent mixed-methods design was used. Data on pain experience, pain management strategies used and AEs were collected with self-administered questionnaires at hospital discharge (T1) and at 3 months after injury (T2). Patients' preferences about the pain management strategies used, the required support and AEs were further examined through semi-structured individual interviews at the same time measures. Descriptive statistics and thematic analyses were performed.

RESULTS

Seventy-one patients were recruited and 30 individual interviews were undertaken. Pharmacological pain management strategies used at T1 and T2 were mainly opioids (95.8%; 20.8%) and acetaminophen (91.5%; 37.5%). The most frequently applied non-pharmacological strategies were sleep (95.6%) and physical positioning (89.7%) at T1 and massage (46.3%) and relaxation (32.5%) at T2. Findings from quantitative and qualitative analyses highlighted that non-pharmacological strategies, such as comfort, massage, distraction, and physical therapy, were perceived as the most effective by participants. Most common AEs related to opioids were dry mouth (78.8%) and fatigue (66.1%) at T1 and insomnia (30.0%) and fatigue (20.0%) at T2. Dry mouth (28.6%) and drowsiness (14.3%) were the most reported AEs by patients using recreational cannabis. An important need for information at hospital discharge and for a personalized follow-up was identified by participants during interviews.

CONCLUSION

Despite its AEs, we found that opioids are still the leading pain management strategy after an orthopaedic trauma and that more efforts are needed to implement non-pharmacological strategies. Cannabis was taken for recreational purposes but patients also used it for pain relief. Support from health professionals is needed to promote the adequate use of these strategies.

The Effect of Psychological Interventions on the Prevention of Chronic Pain in Adults: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

Up to 50% of patients develop high-impact chronic pain after an acute care experience and many psychological variables have been identified in this process. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials to assess the effect of psychological interventions within 3 months after pain onset.

METHODS

We searched databases for articles published from databases inceptions until July 2019. We used standardized mean differences with 95% confidence intervals to assess treatment effect.

RESULTS

In all, 18 trials were found eligible; 11 of which were included in the meta-analyses. Trials were mainly performed in back pain patients in the middle to late adulthood. Regarding pain intensity, the effect of psychological interventions compared with standard treatments was nonsignificant at 3, 6, and 12 months. We found a moderate significant effect size in favor of psychological interventions compared with standard treatments with regard to disability at 12 months and a small significant effect with regard to coping with pain at 3 months when compared with information alone. Most of meta-analysis findings were associated with a low level of evidence.

DISCUSSION

This systematic review and meta-analysis showed no significant effect of psychological interventions on pain intensity. A positive and significant trend related to these interventions was shown on disability and coping with pain, when compared with standard treatment and information, respectively. However, these findings must be interpreted with caution considering the limited sample of trials. More rigorous randomized controlled trials performed in patients with a high-risk psychological profile are required to elucidate the efficacy of psychological interventions in preventing chronic pain.