Socio-economic disadvantage and utilisation of labour epidural analgesia in Scotland: a population-based study†

Socio-economic deprivation is associated with adverse maternal and childhood outcomes. Epidural analgesia, the gold standard for labour analgesia, may improve maternal well-being. We assessed the association of socio-economic status with utilisation of epidural analgesia and whether this differed when epidural analgesia was advisable for maternal safety. This was a population-based study of NHS data for all women in labour in Scotland between 1 January 2007 and 23 October 2020, excluding elective caesarean sections. Socio-economic status deciles were defined using the Scottish Index of Multiple Deprivation. Medical conditions for which epidural analgesia is advisable for maternal safety (medical indications) and contraindications were defined according to national guidelines. Of 593,230 patients in labour, 131,521 (22.2%) received epidural analgesia. Those from the most deprived areas were 16% less likely to receive epidural analgesia than the most affluent (relative risk 0.84 [95%CI 0.82-0.85]), with the inter-decile mean change in receiving epidural analgesia estimated at -2% ([95%CI -2.2% to -1.7%]). Among the 21,219 deliveries with a documented medical indication for epidural analgesia, the socio-economic gradient persisted (relative risk 0.79 [95%CI 0.75-0.84], inter-decile mean change in receiving epidural analgesia -2.5% [95%CI -3.1% to -2.0%]). Women in the most deprived areas with a medical indication for epidural analgesia were still less likely (absolute risk 0.23 [95%CI 0.22-0.24]) to receive epidural analgesia than women from the most advantaged decile without a medical indication (absolute risk 0.25 [95%CI 0.24-0.25]). Socio-economic deprivation is associated with lower utilisation of epidural analgesia, even when epidural analgesia is advisable for maternal safety. Ensuring equitable access to an intervention that alleviates pain and potentially reduces adverse outcomes is crucial.

Comparison of ultra-low, low and high concentration local anaesthetic for labour epidural analgesia: a systematic review and network meta-analysis

Lumbar epidural is the gold standard for labour analgesia. Low concentrations of local anaesthetic are recommended. This network meta‐analysis investigated whether further reducing the concentration of local anaesthetic can improve maternal and neonatal outcomes without compromising analgesia. We conducted a systematic search of relevant databases for randomised controlled trials comparing high (>0.1%), low (>0.08% to ≤0.1%) or ultra‐low (≤0.08%) concentration local anaesthetic (bupivacaine or equivalent) for labour epidural. Outcomes included mode of delivery, duration of labour and maternal/neonatal outcomes. Bayesian network meta‐analysis with random‐effects modelling was used to calculate odds ratios or weighted mean differences and 95% credible intervals. A total of 32 studies met inclusion criteria (3665 women). The total dose of local anaesthetic received increased as the concentration increased; ultra‐low compared with low (weighted mean difference −14.96 mg, 95% credible interval [−28.38 to −1.00]) and low compared with high groups (weighted mean difference −14.99 [−28.79 to −2.04]), though there was no difference in the number of rescue top‐ups administered between the groups. Compared with high concentration, ultra‐low concentration local anaesthetic was associated with increased likelihood of spontaneous vaginal delivery (OR 1.46 [1.18 to 1.86]), reduced motor block (Bromage score >0; OR 0.32 [0.18 to 0.54]) and reduced duration of second stage of labour (weighted mean difference −13.02 min [−21.54 to −4.77]). Compared with low, ultra‐low concentration local anaesthetic had similar estimates for duration of second stage of labour (weighted mean difference −1.92 min [−14.35 to 10.20]); spontaneous vaginal delivery (OR 1.07 [0.75 to 1.56]; assisted vaginal delivery (OR 1.35 [0.75 to 2.26]); caesarean section (OR 0.76 [0.49 to 1.22]); pain (scale 1–100, weighted mean difference −5.44 [−16.75 to 5.93]); and maternal satisfaction. Although a lower risk of an Apgar score < 7 at 1 min (OR 0.43 [0.15 to 0.79]) was reported for ultra‐low compared with low concentration, this was not sustained at 5 min (OR 0.12 [0.00 to 2.10]). Ultra‐low concentration local anaesthetic for labour epidural achieves similar or better maternal and neonatal outcomes as low and high concentration, but with reduced local anaesthetic consumption.

Component analysis of enhanced recovery pathways for esophagectomy

The objective of this systematic review is to identify key components of enhanced recovery protocols (ERP) that lead to improved length of hospital stay (LOS) following esophagectomy. Relevant electronic databases were searched for studies comparing clinical outcome from esophagectomy followed by a conventional pathway versus ERP. Relevant outcome measures were compared and metaregression was performed to identify the key ERP components associated with reduced in LOS. Thirteen publications were included, ERP was associated with no changes in in-hospital mortality, total complications, anastomotic leak, or pulmonary complications compared with a conventional pathway, however LOS was reduced in the ERP group. Metaregression identified that immediate extubation was associated with reduced LOS (OR = -0.51, 95%CI -0.77 to -0.25; P < 0.01). Several postoperative factors were associated with a significant reduction in length of hospital stay, and in order of most important were (i) gastrograffin swallow ≤5 days (OR = -4.27, 95%CI -4.50 to -4.03); (ii) mobilization on postoperative day ≤1 (OR = -2.49, 95%CI -2.63 to -2.34); (iii) removal of urinary catheter ≤2 days (OR = -0.99, 95%CI -1.15 to -0.84); (iv) oral intake with at least sips of fluid ≤1 day (OR = -0.96, 95%CI -1.24 to -0.68); (v) enteral diet with feeding jejunostomy or gastrostomy ≤ 1 day (OR = -0.57, 95%CI -0.80 to -0.35) and (vi) epidural removal ≤ 4 days (OR = -0.17, 95%CI -0.27 to -0.07). Several core ERP components and principles appear to be associated with LOS reduction. These elements should form a part of the core ERP for the specialty, while surgical teams incorporate other elements through an iterative process.

Acute postoperative pain at rest after hip and knee arthroplasty: severity, sensory qualities and impact on sleep

INTRODUCTION

The management of acute postoperative pain poses a significant challenge in surgical specialities. Despite the prevalence and impact of acute postoperative pain, there is a paucity of published data regarding its occurrence and sensory qualities after joint replacement.

HYPOTHESIS

That a proportion of patients would experience severe acute postoperative pain at rest after total hip replacement (THR) and total knee replacement (TKR).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Pain was assessed preoperatively, and then five times daily for the first three postoperative days in 105 THR and TKR patients. Pain severity was assessed using a pain Visual Analogue Scale and the sensory qualities of pain were assessed using the pain descriptors from the Short-Form McGill Pain Questionnaire.

RESULTS

Median acute pain scores peaked on the first postoperative day, with 58% of TKR patients and 47% of THR patients reporting moderate-severe pain. Preoperative pain was most frequently described as aching, stabbing and sharp, whereas acute postoperative pain was described as aching, heavy and tender. Night pain disturbed between 44-57% of TKR patients and 21-52% of THR patients on postoperative nights 1-3.

DISCUSSION

These findings demonstrate that acute postoperative pain at rest after joint replacement, particularly TKR, is poorly managed, although it does not reach the severity of preoperative pain.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level IV (observational cohort study).

Australia's notifiable diseases status, 1998. Annual report of the National Notifiable Diseases Surveillance System

In 1998 there were 85,096 notifications to the National Notifiable Diseases Surveillance System; slightly lower than in 1997 (89,579). The number of measles cases remained low, and well below the number reported in the outbreak years of 1993 and 1994. Rubella notifications further decreased and remained low in 1998. The Measles Control Campaign from August to November 1998, did not impact significantly on the number of measles or rubella cases reported for 1998. Notifications of Haemophilus influenzae type b reached a record low since surveillance began in 1991, and appeared to have stabilised at a low rate since the introduction of the conjugated vaccine in 1992. The previously reported outbreak of pertussis in 1997 tapered off in early 1998. Food-borne disease, or detection of disease, appeared to be on the rise with an increase in notification rates of campylobacteriosis and salmonellosis. Notifications of hepatitis A decreased, correcting the previous high number of notifications in 1997. Sexually transmissible diseases (STDs) increased. Notifications for chlamydial infection were the highest for all sexually transmitted diseases and third highest for all notifiable diseases. Notifications of gonococcal infection also continued to rise and have doubled since 1991, whilst notifications for syphilis increased slightly after falling steadily over recent years. Arbovirus infections of concern in 1998 were dengue outbreaks in Far North Queensland and the first case of Japanese Encephalitis for mainland Australia, highlighting the importance of surveillance of arboviruses and vectors for their detection and management.

Annual report of the National Influenza Surveillance Scheme, 1998

The National Influenza Surveillance Scheme includes data from sentinel general practice consultations for influenza-like illness, laboratory reports of influenza and absenteeism rates from a national employer. The 1998 season was dominated by an increase in influenza A in all States and Territories and low influenza B activity. All influenza A isolates were characterised as influenza A (H3N2). Peak activity in 1998 was recorded in July and August. Data are coordinated, analysed and disseminated at a national level and published in Communicable Diseases Intelligence during the influenza season.

Indomethacin in rheumatoid arthritis: comparison of oral and rectal dosing

1 Indomethacin 100 mg nightly for 1 week has been administered to 13 patients with rheumatoid arthritis by both oral and rectal routes in a double-blind, randomized, cross-over study. 2 Clinical assessments were performed at 09.00 and 14.00 h on the last 3 days of each active treatment period and compared to the results on the last 2 days of the placebo control period. 3 Indomethacin produced significant improvements in the clinical assessments at both 09.00 and 14.00 h compared to placebo but not differences were seen between the two routes of administration. 4 No significant difference was seen in the side effects experienced in the two periods. 5 The mean (+/- s.e. mean) plasma indomethacin concentration at 09.00 h in the oral period was 200.3 +/- 27.4 ng/ml, not significantly different from that in the suppository period (220.0 +/- 28.9 ng/ml). 6 Indomethacin 100 mg nightly by mouth is as effective as a 100 mg suppository and easier to administer.

The interaction between indomethacin and probenecid. A clinical and pharmacokinetic study

The interaction between indomethacin and probenecid has been studied in 17 patients with rheumatoid arthritis with the use of a specific gas-liquid chromatographic method for the assay of indomethacin in plasma and urine. Probenecid in a dose of 0.5 gm twice daily improved the therapeutic response to indomethacin administered in a dose of 25 mg 3 times daily for a 3-wk period. There was an increase in the mean AUC of indomethacin in plasma from 2,553 +/- 213 hr ng/ml to 4,181 +/- 384 hr ng/ml when probenecid was given, but there was no change in the plasma half-life of indomethacin. There was a reduction in the mean plasma clearance of indomethacin from 174 +/- 21 ml/kg/hr to 107 +/- 14 ml/kg/hr when probenecid was added to the indomethacin therapy and a decrease in the apparent volume of distribution from 0,927 +/- 0.16 L/kg to 0.613 +/- 0.13 L/kg. There was no change in the amount of free indomethacin excreted in the urine during probenecid therapy but there was a reduction in the urinary excretion of free plus glucuronide conjugate of indomethacin from 8,967 +/- 867 microgram/day to 4,760 +/- 674 microgram/day, with a fall in the mean renal clearance of indomethacin glucuronide from 271 +/- 48 ml/min to 126 +/- 57.0 ml/min. The changes in the plasma indomethacin concentration profile during probenecid therapy are due to a decrease in the nonrenal clearance of indomethacin possibly because of reduced biliary clearance.