Search

ispartof: ANAESTHESIA vol:76 issue:9 pages:1280-1281 ispartof: location:England status: published

Background: About 240 million patients undergo surgery every year, worldwide. Roughly 50% of these patients report clinically significant pain. Numerous barriers impede provision of adequate management. Lack of evidence about appropriateness and effectiveness of interventions is one. A registry can provide such information, eventually facilitating better management. This paper reports the development and feasibility of PAIN OUT, the first international acute pain registry, established with funds from the European Commission, and presents preliminary analysis to illustrate the nature of investigations that registry data make possible. Methods: On the first postoperative day, 6347 adult patients undergoing orthopaedic or general surgery, in 11 medical centres in Europe and Israel, provided Patient Reported Outcomes (PROs) using a validated questionnaire. Clinical data were abstracted from the patient’s chart. Results: Feasibility worked well. Over a period of 1 year, surveyors accrued targeted data sets and entered them into an online browser. Collaborators could receive online feedback comparing their findings about PROs against anonymized findings from other centres. Missing data for the majority of variables were low. Despite considerable variability between institutions, a large number of patients were treated according to the generic, evidence-based recommendations we assessed. However, this was not sufficient to result in acceptable outcomes for the majority of patients. Conclusion: The initial development of PAIN OUT has been achieved. From 2013, it continues as a not-for-profit academic project, open to clinicians and researchers worldwide. The International Association for Study of Pain and PAIN OUT will work together to maintain, disseminate and develop the registry.

Rationale, aims and objectives: Management of post‐operative pain is unsatisfactory worldwide. An estimated 240 million patients undergo surgery each year. Forty to 60% of these patients report clinically significant pain. Discrepancy exists between availability of evidence‐based medicine (EBM)‐derived knowledge about management of perioperative pain and increased implementation of related practices versus lack of improvement in patient‐reported outcomes (PROs). We aimed to assist health care providers to optimize perioperative pain management by developing and validating a medical registry that measures variability in care, identifies best pain management practices and assists clinicians in decision making. Methods: PAIN OUT was established from 2009 to 2012 with funding from the European Commission. It now continues as a self‐sustaining, not‐for‐profit project, targeting health care professionals caring for patients undergoing surgery. Results: The growing registry includes data from 40 898 patients, 60 hospitals and 17 countries. Collaborators upload data (demographics, clinical, PROs) from patients undergoing surgery in their hospital/ward into an Internet‐based portal. Two modules make use of the data: (1) online, immediate feedback and benchmarking compares PROs across sites while offline analysis permits in‐depth analysis; and (2) the case‐based clinical decision support system offers practice‐based treatment recommendations for individual patients; it is available now as a prototype. The Electronic Knowledge Library provides succinct summaries on perioperative pain management, supporting knowledge transfer and application of EBM. Conclusion: PAIN OUT, a large, growing international registry, allows use of ‘real‐life’ data related to management of perioperative pain. Ultimately, comparative analysis through audit, feedback and benchmarking will improve quality of care.

Post-operative pain exacts a high toll from patients, families, healthcare professionals and healthcare systems worldwide. PAIN-OUT is a research project funded by the European Union's 7th Framework Program designed to develop effective, evidence-based approaches to improve pain management after surgery, including creating a registry for feedback, benchmarking and decision support. In preparation for PAIN-OUT, we conducted a pilot study to evaluate the feasibility of international data collection with feedback to participating sites. Adult orthopaedic or general surgery patients consented to participate between May and October 2008 at 14 collaborating hospitals in 13 countries. Project staff collected patient-reported outcomes and process data from 688 patients and entered the data into an online database. Project staff in 10 institutions met the enrolment criteria of collecting data from at least 50 patients. The completeness and quality of the data, as assessed by rate of missing data, were acceptable; only 2% of process data and 0.06% of patient-reported outcome data were missing. Participating institutions received access to select items as Web-based feedback comparing their outcomes to those of the other sites, presented anonymously. We achieved proof of concept because staff and patients in all 14 sites cooperated well despite marked differences in cultures, nationalities and languages, and a central database management team was able to provide valuable feedback to all.

Background: Patients’ own assessment of recovery after ambulatory surgery has not been well studied. The aim was to study patients’ self-assessed recovery, the occurrence and time course of post-operative problems in relation to the type of ambulatory surgery.Methods: A questionnaire was filled in by 355 patients at five time points: pre-operative, first day at home, 1, 2 and 4 weeks post-operatively. Consecutive patients who underwent either inguinal hernia repair (IHR), arthroscopic procedures (AS) or cosmetic breast augmentation (CBA) were included.Results: Unplanned return to hospital was rare (3/355). Health care contacts were noted for 9% of the patients during the first week; a total of 70 contacts occurred during the entire period. Pain was the most frequently reported symptom; 40% of the patients reported pain or mobility problems at 1 week, 28% after 2 weeks and 20% after 4 weeks. Pre-operative pain was associated with an increased level of pain during the early post-operative course, in the recovery room and at 1 week post-operatively. IHR was associated with an overall rapid recovery, while AS patients experienced a slower restitution. All AS patients who reported pain after 4 weeks had reported pain problems already pre-operatively. Pain was not present pre-operatively in the CBA group, but was common at 1 and 2 post-operative weeks and was still reported by 11% at 4 weeks.Conclusion: Self-assessed recovery was found to cover several weeks with procedure-specific recovery patterns. Pain and mobility impairment were still frequently reported 4 weeks post-operatively.

Background. The previously developed Postoperative Recovery Profile (PRP) questionnaire is intended for self-assessment of general recovery after surgery. The aim of this study was to further evalu ...

In this article the organization of Acute Pain Service (APS) in Orebro University Hospital will be described in detail. How this organization works and how it is used to improve pain relief and pain relieving methods will also be described. Future ways to improve this organization and postoperative pain will be discussed.

Background: Day surgery is common in paediatric surgical practice. Safe routines including parental and child information in order to optimise care and reduce anxiety are important. Most day surgery units are not specialised in paediatric care, which is why specific paediatric expertise is often lacking. Methods: We studied the practice of paediatric day surgery in Sweden by a questionnaire survey sent to all hospitals, obtaining an 88% response rate. Three specific paediatric cases were enquired for in more detail. Results: The proportion of paediatric day surgery vs. in-hospital procedures was 46%. Seventy-one out of 88 responding units performed paediatric day surgery. All units had anxiolytic pre-medication as a routine in 1-6-year-olds, and in 7-16-year-olds at 60% of the units. Most units performed circumcision and adenoidectomy, while 33% performed tonsillectomy. Anaesthesia induction was intravenous in older children, and also in 1-6-year-olds at 50% of the units. Parental presence at induction was mandatory. Post-operatively, 93% of units routinely assessed pain. Paracetamol and NSAIDs were the most common analgesics, as monotherapy or combined with rescue medication in the recovery as IV morphine. At 42% of units, take-home bags of analgesics were provided, covering 1-3 days of treatment. Pain was the most frequent complaint on follow-up. Micturition difficulties were common after circumcision, nausea after adenoidectomy and nutrition difficulties after tonsillectomy. Conclusions: In Sweden, most day surgery units perform paediatric surgery, most children receive pre-medication, anaesthesia is induced IV and take-home analgesics paracetamol and or NSAIDs are often provided. Still, pain is a common complaint after discharge.

Background: Day surgery is common in paediatric surgical practice. Safe routines including parental and child information in order to optimise care and reduce anxiety are important. Most day surgery units are not specialised in paediatric care, which is why specific paediatric expertise is often lacking.Methods: We studied the practice of paediatric day surgery in Sweden by a questionnaire survey sent to all hospitals, obtaining an 88% response rate. Three specific paediatric cases were enquired for in more detail.Results: The proportion of paediatric day surgery vs. in-hospital procedures was 46%. Seventy-one out of 88 responding units performed paediatric day surgery. All units had anxiolytic pre-medication as a routine in 1–6-year-olds, and in 7–16-year-olds at 60% of the units. Most units performed circumcision and adenoidectomy, while 33% performed tonsillectomy. Anaesthesia induction was intravenous in older children, and also in 1–6-year-olds at 50% of the units. Parental presence at induction was mandatory. Post-operatively, 93% of units routinely assessed pain. Paracetamol and NSAIDs were the most common analgesics, as monotherapy or combined with rescue medication in the recovery as IV morphine. At 42% of units, take-home bags of analgesics were provided, covering 1–3 days of treatment. Pain was the most frequent complaint on follow-up. Micturition difficulties were common after circumcision, nausea after adenoidectomy and nutrition difficulties after tonsillectomy.Conclusions: In Sweden, most day surgery units perform paediatric surgery, most children receive pre-medication, anaesthesia is induced IV and take-home analgesics paracetamol and or NSAIDs are often provided. Still, pain is a common complaint after discharge.

Background: The aim of the study was to evaluate postoperative analgesia and safety of wound instillation of ropivacaine either by a single dose or a patient-controlled regional anaesthesia (PCRA) technique. Methods: In 40 patients undergoing arthroscopic subacromial decompression the surgeon placed a catheter into the subacromial space at the end of the operation. In Phase I (10 patients), ropivacaine 250 mg was injected twice within 1 h. In Phase II, 30 patients were randomised into three groups: group prilocaine-ropivacaine (PR) = 20 ml of 1% prilocaine-epinephrine injected preoperatively into the subacromial bursa + 20 ml of 0.5% ropivacaine infused in the catheter postoperatively; group saline-ropivacaine (SR) = saline-epinephrine (20 ml) preoperatively + 0.5% ropivacaine as in group PR; group saline-saline (SS) = saline-epinephrine (20 ml) preoperatively + saline postoperatively. The PCRA pump was filled with local anaesthetic or saline to allow boluses of 10-ml each, maximum one bolus/h, via the catheter. Pain relief, side-effects and venous plasma concentration of ropivacaine were evaluated during a 24-h-test period. Results: The free plasma concentration of ropivacaine was 0.12 + 0.041 mg l−1 in Phase I. No adverse effects were seen. In Phase II pain at rest and on movement was lower in group PR than in group SS during the first 30 min postoperatively (P

Background: This study was designed to determine whether music (M), or music in combination with therapeutic suggestions (M/TS) could improve the postoperative recovery in the immediate postoperati ...

Purpose: This study was designed to determine whether music or music in combination with therapeutic suggestions in the intra-operative period under general anaesthesia could improve the recovery of hysterectomy patients. Methods: In a double-blind randomised clinical investigation, 90 patients who underwent hysterectomy under general anaesthesia were intra-operatively exposed to music, music in combination with therapeutic suggestion or operation room sounds. The anaesthesia was standardised. Postoperative analgesia was provided by a patient-controlled analgesia (PCA). The pain scores were recorded by means of a visual analogue scale. Nausea, emesis, bowel function, fatigue, well-being and duration of hospital stay were studied as outcome variables. Results: On the day of surgery, patients exposed to music in combination with therapeutic suggestions required less rescue analgesic compared with the controls. Patients in the music group experienced more effective analgesia the first day after surgery and could be mobilised earlier after the operation. At discharge from the hospital patients in the music and music combined with therapeutic suggestion group were less fatigued compared to the controls. No differences were noted in nausea, emesis, bowel function, well-being or length of hospital stay between the groups. Conclusion: This double-blind study has demonstrated that intra-operative music and music in combination with therapeutic suggestions may have some beneficial effects on postoperative recovery after hysterectomy. Further controlled studies are necessary to confirm our results.

Background: The quality of pain relief during the first 48 hours following ambulatory surgery has been poorly documented. This questionnaire study was performed to evaluate the nature and severity of pain after the patient leaves the hospital. Methods: 1100 patients in the age group 5–88 years who underwent ambulatory surgery during a period of 6months were asked to complete a questionnaire 48 h after the end of the operation. In thecase of children, parents were asked to complete a similar questionnaire. The questions were related to pain experienced during the first 48 h after surgery and to the nature andseverity of postoperative complications. Results: A total of 1035 out of the 1100 patients returned the questionnaire, 94.1%. Overall the majority (65%) of patients had only mild pain at home; however, patients undergoing certain types of surgery had moderate-to-severe pain: inguinal hernia surgery (62% patients), orthopaedic surgery (41%), hand surgery (37%) and varicose vein surgery (36%). In these patients the severity of pain did not decrease during the 2-day study period. About 10% patients had more severe pain than they had anticipated, and 20% had difficulty in sleeping at night due to severe pain. Despite this, over 95% of patients were satisfied with man-agement of postoperative pain. Nausea (20%), tiredness (20%) and vomiting (8%) were the commonest complications reported during the first 48 h. A significant association was found between the administration of a general anaesthetic and the incidence of nausea postoperatively. A large number of patients were alone at home after the operation (28.4%); some (3.8%) had no access to a relative or friend in case of need. Conclusion: Our results show that about 35% of day-surgery patients experience moderate-to-severe pain at home in spite of analgesic medication. About 20% of patients had sleep problems due to severe pain. However, only 5% of patients were dissatisfied. Better analgesic techniques are necessary for patients undergoing certain types of surgery. Patient information and follow-up routines need to be improved.