Search

The appropriate use of narcotics for postoperative pain control is controversial because of potential medication-induced complications. The authors sought to determine the effects of narcotics in the pediatric population following cranial vault remodeling operations.A retrospective review was performed on 160 consecutive patients who underwent cranial vault remodeling for craniosynostosis.There was a statistically significant difference in total morphine equivalents in the group that experienced no emesis and those with at least one episode of emesis (0.97 morphine equivalents/kg versus 1.44 morphine equivalents/kg; p = 0.05). There was a statistically significant difference in hospital morphine equivalents in the group with documented respiratory events (average, 2.3 morphine equivalents/kg versus 1.3 morphine equivalents/kg in the nonevent group; p = 0.006). The patients who received dexmedetomidine had a trend toward a decrease in hospital narcotic administration with equivalent pain control (1.2 morphine equivalents/kg versus 1.9 morphine equivalents/kg; p = 0.09). There was a statistically significant positive correlation between total morphine equivalents for the hospitalization and hospital stay ( r = 0.27, p = 0.001). The amount of morphine equivalents used in the first 24 hours was also found to be an independent predictor of a respiratory event ( p = 0.002 by multivariate logistic regression). Independent positive predictors of hospital stay were age ( p0.001), intensive care unit time ( p0.001), and total morphine equivalents for the hospitalization ( p = 0.001) by multivariate analysis with linear regression.The authors' study demonstrates improvement in outcomes with decreased use of narcotics, which establishes that there is a need to further explore postsurgical recovery outcomes with multimodal pain control.Therapeutic, III.

Introduction: Early treatment for hypertension (HTN) portends better outcomes. However, few real-world studies have assessed initial antiHTN regimens and how they differ by baseline blood pressure (BP). We sought to compare initial treatment patterns, stratified by BP, between Medicaid and Medicare recipients. Methods: We performed a cross-sectional study of adults with newly-treated HTN in the One Florida+ Consortium(2012-2020) who had linked claims-EHR data from the treatment initiation visit. Eligible patients were Floridians with Medicaid or Medicare aged ≥18 years, with diagnosed HTN, who filled ≥1 first-line antiHTN class with no evidence of anti HTN fills during the year prior (in which continuous insurance enrollment was required). Baseline BP was categorized per current HTN guidelines, and logistic regression was used to estimate age-adjusted odds of combination vs. monotherapy, per 10 mmHg increase in systolic BP (SBP) or diastolic BP (DBP). Results: We included 2,902 patients (47% Medicaid, 53% Medicare); mean age was 44 (Medicaid) and 67 yrs(Medicare); 60% (64% and 56%, respectively) were women and 42% (57% and 29%, respectively) were Black. Initial antiHTN classes were similar comparing cohorts: ACEI, ARB and thiazide initiation varied little by BP category, in contrast to CCBs and β-blockers (Figure, panels A-B). In age-adjusted analyses, use of initial combination therapy was 40% more likely (OR, 1.40; 95% CI, 1.11, 1.76) among Medicare recipients and inversely related to BP category (panels C-D) among Medicare patients, in which each 10mmHg greater SBP (OR, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.88, 0.97) and DBP (OR 0.82; 95% CI, 0.75, 0.90) had lower odds of combination therapy. Among Medicaid recipients, only SBP associated with combination therapy (OR1.11; 95% CI, 1.03, 1.20). Conclusions: We observed similar initial class patterns among Medicaid & Medicare recipients across baseline BP, but differential use of combination therapy was less likely at higher baseline BP in Medicare recipients, which contrasts current guidance.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Barriers exist in access to kidney transplantation, where minority and patients with low socioeconomic status are less likely to complete transplant evaluation. The purpose of this study was to examine the effectiveness of a transplant center–based patient navigator in helping patients at high risk of dropping out of the transplant evaluation process access the kidney transplant waiting list. DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS & MEASUREMENTS: We conducted a randomized, controlled trial of 401 patients (n=196 intervention and n=205 control) referred for kidney transplant evaluation (January 2013 to August 2014; followed through May 2016) at a single center. A trained navigator assisted intervention participants from referral to waitlisting decision to increase waitlisting (primary outcome) and decrease time from referral to waitlisting (secondary outcome). Time-dependent Cox proportional hazards models were used to determine differences in waitlisting between intervention and control patients. RESULTS: At study end, waitlisting was not significantly different among intervention (32%) versus control (26%) patients overall (P=0.17), and time from referral to waitlisting was 126 days longer for intervention patients. However, the effectiveness of the navigator varied from early (