Search

The PROSPECT (PROcedure SPEcific Postoperative Pain ManagemenT) Working Group is a global collaboration of surgeons and anaesthesiologists formulating procedure-specific recommendations for pain management after common operations. Total knee arthroplasty (TKA) is associated with significant postoperative pain that is difficult to treat. Nevertheless, pain control is essential for rehabilitation and to enhance recovery.To evaluate the available literature and develop recommendations for optimal pain management after unilateral primary TKA.A narrative review based on published systematic reviews, using modified PROSPECT methodology.A literature search was performed in EMBASE, MEDLINE, PubMed and Cochrane Databases, between January 2014 and December 2020, for systematic reviews and meta-analyses evaluating analgesic interventions for pain management in patients undergoing TKA.Each randomised controlled trial (RCT) included in the selected systematic reviews was critically evaluated and included only if met the PROSPECT requirements. Included studies were evaluated for clinically relevant differences in pain scores, use of nonopioid analgesics, such as paracetamol and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and current clinical relevance.A total of 151 systematic reviews were analysed, 106 RCTs met PROSPECT criteria. Paracetamol and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory or cyclo-oxygenase-2-specific inhibitors are recommended. This should be combined with a single shot adductor canal block and peri-articular local infiltration analgesia together with a single intra-operative dose of intravenous dexamethasone. Intrathecal morphine (100 μg) may be considered in hospitalised patients only in rare situations when both adductor canal block and local infiltration analgesia are not possible. Opioids should be reserved as rescue analgesics in the postoperative period. Analgesic interventions that could not be recommended were also identified.The present review identified an optimal analgesic regimen for unilateral primary TKA. Future studies to evaluate enhanced recovery programs and specific challenging patient groups are needed.

Acute pain services (APS) have developed over the past 35 years. Originally implemented solely to care for patients with regional catheters or patient-controlled analgesia after surgery, APS have become providers of care throughout the perioperative period, with some institutions even taking the additional step toward providing outpatient services for patients with acute pain. Models vary considerably in terms of tasks and responsibilities, staffing, education, protocols, quality, and financing. Many challenges face today's APS, including the increasing number of patients with preexisting chronic pain, intake of analgesics and opioids before surgery, substance-dependent patients needing special care, shorter hospital stays, early discharge of patients in need of further analgesic treatment, prevention and treatment of chronic postsurgical pain, minimization of adverse events, and side effects of treatment. However, many APS lack a clear-cut definition of their structures, tasks, and quality. Development of APS in the future will require us to face urgent questions, such as, "What are meaningful outcome variables?" and, "How do we define high quality?" It is obvious that focusing exclusively on pain scores does not reflect the complexity of pain and recovery. A broader approach is needed-a common concept of surgical and anesthesiological services within a hospital (eg, procedure-specific patient pathways as indicated by the programs "enhanced recovery after surgery" or the "perioperative surgical home"), with patient-reported outcome measures as one central quality criterion. Pain-related functional impairment, treatment-induced side effects, speed of mobilization, as well as return to normal function and everyday activities are key.

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

ispartof: ANAESTHESIA vol:76 issue:9 pages:1282-1282 ispartof: location:England status: published

Current evidence shows that the benefits of epidural analgesia (EA) are not as impressive as believed in the past, while the risks of adverse effects and serious complications are greater than previously estimated. There are many reasons for the decreasing role of epidural technique in clinical practice (table). Indeed, EA can cause harm and hinder early mobilization in enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) programmes. Some ERAS interventions are complex, confusing, sometimes contradictory and apparently unimplementable. In spite of much hype and after almost 25 years, the originator of the concept has described the current status of ERAS as 'far from good'. Outpatient surgery setup has been a remarkable success for many major surgical procedures, and it predates ERAS and appears to be a simpler and better model for reducing postoperative morbidity and hospitalization times. Systematic reviews of comparative studies have shown that less invasive and safer but equally effective alternatives to EA are available for almost all major surgical procedures. These include: paravertebral block, peripheral nerve blocks, catheter wound infusion, periarticular local infiltration analgesia, preperitoneal catheters and transversus abdominis plane block. Increasingly, these non-EA methods are being used as surgeon-delivered regional analgesia (RA) techniques. This encouraging trend of active surgeon participation, with anaesthesiologist collaboration, will undoubtedly improve the decades-old twin problems of underused RA techniques and undertreated postoperative pain. The continued use of EA at any institution can only be justified by results from its own audits; however, regrettably only very few institutions perform such regular audits.

Hallux valgus repair is associated with moderate-to-severe postoperative pain. The aim of this systematic review was to assess the available literature and develop recommendations for optimal pain management after hallux valgus repair. A systematic review using PROcedure SPECific Postoperative Pain ManagemenT (PROSPECT) methodology was undertaken. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published in the English language from inception of database to December 2019 assessing postoperative pain using analgesic, anesthetic, and surgical interventions were identified from MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane Database, among others. Of the 836 RCTs identified, 55 RCTs and 1 systematic review met our inclusion criteria. Interventions that improved postoperative pain relief included paracetamol and non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs or cyclo-oxygenase-2 selective inhibitors, systemic steroids, ankle block, and local anesthetic wound infiltration. Insufficient evidence was found for the use of gabapentinoids or wound infiltration with extended release bupivacaine or dexamethasone. Conflicting evidence was found for percutaneous chevron osteotomy. No evidence was found for homeopathic preparation, continuous local anesthetic wound infusion, clonidine and fentanyl as sciatic perineural adjuncts, bioabsorbable magnesium screws, and plaster slippers. No studies of sciatic nerve block met the inclusion criteria for PROSPECT methodology due to a wider scope of included surgical procedures or the lack of a control (no block) group. The analgesic regimen for hallux valgus repair should include, in the absence of contraindication, paracetamol and a non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug or cyclo-oxygenase-2 selective inhibitor administered preoperatively or intraoperatively and continued postoperatively, along with systemic steroids, and postoperative opioids for rescue analgesia.

In 2014, the American Society of Regional Anesthesia and Pain Medicine in collaboration with the European Society of Regional Anaesthesia and Pain Therapy convened a group of experts to compare pathways for anesthetic and analgesic management for patients undergoing total knee arthroplasty in North America and Europe and to develop a practice pathway. This review is intended to be an analysis of the current literature to assist individuals and institutions in designing a pathway for total knee arthroplasty that is based on existing evidence and expert recommendation and may be customized according to individual settings.

Post-operative pain management protocols may be optimised by examining procedure-specific evidence and outcomes. This recognition led to the formation of the PROcedure-SPECific Pain ManagemenT (PROSPECT) collaboration of anaesthesiologists and surgeons. The aim of PROSPECT is to provide practical and evidence-based recommendations to prevent and treat post-operative pain after specific surgical procedures, thereby overcoming the limitations of generic, non-specific guidelines. Updates in the methodology of PROSPECT in 2017 have placed an increased emphasis on the clinical relevance of studies, including a focus on interventions in the context of multimodal analgesia strategies and consideration of risks and benefits of interventions in specific surgical settings. Evidence-based reviews of analgesic measures, including advice on surgical techniques and adjuvants after diverse surgical procedures, have been completed by the PROSPECT collaboration and are accessible on the website (www.postoppain.org) and published in the peer-reviewed literature. These reviews continue to identify significant gaps in clinically relevant research on post-operative analgesia and are possibly leading to a closing of some of these gaps.

BACKGROUND: Significant pain can be experienced after laparoscopic cholecystectomy. This systematic review aims to formulate PROSPECT (PROcedure SPECific Postoperative Pain ManagemenT) recommendations to reduce postoperative pain after laparoscopic cholecystectomy. METHODS: Randomised controlled trials published in the English language from January 2006 (date of last PROSPECT review) to December 2017, assessing analgesic, anaesthetic, or operative interventions for laparoscopic cholecystectomy in adults, and reporting pain scores, were retrieved from MEDLINE and Cochrane databases using PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) search protocols. PROSPECT methodology was used, and recommendations were formulated after review and discussion by the PROSPECT group (an international group of leading pain specialists and surgeons). RESULTS: Of 1988 randomised controlled trials identified, 258 met the inclusion criteria and were included in this review. The studies were of mixed methodological quality, and quantitative analysis was not performed because of heterogeneous study design and how outcomes were reported. CONCLUSIONS: We recommend basic analgesic techniques: paracetamol + NSAID or cyclooxygenase-2 specific inhibitor + surgical site local anaesthetic infiltration. Paracetamol and NSAID should be started before or during operation with dexamethasone (GRADE A). Opioid should be reserved for rescue analgesia only (GRADE B). Gabapentanoids, intraperitoneal local anaesthetic, and transversus abdominis plane blocks are not recommended (GRADE D) unless basic analgesia is not possible. Surgically, we recommend low-pressure pneumoperitoneum, postprocedure saline lavage, and aspiration of pneumoperitoneum (GRADE A). Single-port incision techniques are not recommended to reduce pain (GRADE A). ispartof: Br J Anaesth vol:121 issue:4 pages:787-803 ispartof: location:England status: published

Cognitive side-effects such as emergence agitation (EA), postoperative delirium (POD) and postoperative cognitive dysfunction (POCD) are not infrequently complicating the postoperative care especially in elderly and fragile patients. The aim of the present survey was to gain insight regarding concern and interest in prevention and treatment strategies for postoperative delirium and dysfunction, and the use of EEG-based depth-of-anaesthesia monitoring possibly reducing the risk for cognitive side effects among anaesthesia personnel. Methods A web-based validated questionnaire was sent to all Swedish anaesthesiologists and nurse anaesthetists during summer 2013. The questionnaire consisted of 3 sections, subjective preferences, routines and practices related to the perioperative handling of EA, POD, POCD. Results The response rate was 52%. Cardiovascular/pulmonary risks where assessed as importance by 98, 97% of responders while 69% considered the risk of neurocognitive side-effects important. When asked explicitly around cognitive side-effects 89%, 37% and 44% assessed awareness, POC and POD respectively of importance. EEG-based depth-of-anaesthesia monitors were used in 50% of hospitals. The responders were not convinced about the benefits of such monitors even in at-risk patients. Structured protocols for the management of postoperative cognitive side-effects were available only in few hospitals. Conclusion Swedish anaesthesia personnel are concerned about the risk of postoperative cognitive side-effects but are more concerned about cardiovascular/pulmonary risks, pain, PONV and the rare event of awareness. Most respondents were not convinced about the use of depth-of-anaesthesia monitors. There is a need to improve knowledge around risk factors, prevention and management of postoperative cognitive side effects., Highlights • We found that routines around postoperative cognitive side effects were infrequently in place. • We found that Swedish anaesthesia personnel have a sceptic view on depth-of-anaesthesia monitors. • Depth-of-anaesthesia monitors were not commonly used even in at risk patients. • There is a need for improvement in the attitude towards postoperative cognitive side effects.

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.

Postoperative pain management relevant for specific surgical procedures is debated. The importance of evaluating pain with consideration given to type of surgery and the patient’s perspective has been emphasized. In this prospective cohort study, we analysed outcome data from 607 patients in the international PAIN OUT registry for assessment and comparison of postoperative pain outcome within the 24 first hours after laparoscopic and open colonic surgery. Patients from the laparoscopic group scored minimum pain at a higher level than the open group (P=0.012). Apart from minimum pain, no other significant differences in patient reported outcomes were observed. Maximum pain scores >3 were reported from 77% (laparoscopic) and 68% (open) patients (mean ≥ 5 in both groups). Pain interference with mobilization was reported by 87–93% of patients. Both groups scored high levels of patient satisfaction. In the open group, a higher frequency of patients received a combination of general and regional anaesthesia, which had an impact of the minimum pain score. Our results from registry data indicate that surgical technique does not influence the quality of postoperative pain management during the first postoperative day if adequate analgesia is given.

Adequate postoperative analgesia is a prerequisite for successful ambulatory surgery and remains a challenge. The problem of pain at home may be increasing because previously inpatient surgical procedures are becoming ambulatory and it is expected that the number and complexity of ambulatory surgical procedures will continue to increase. In 1998, we described the use of surgical-site and perineural catheter techniques that allowed patients to self-administer local anesthetics through disposable, elastomeric pumps for pain management at home. In recent years, availability of improved elastometric and other lightweight pump devices, the general trend of avoiding strong opioids and the preference for non-opioid analgesic techniques has led to increasing use of this technique after a variety of ambulatory surgical procedures. The two most common techniques are perineural and wound catheter infusions (WCI). Current evidence suggests that both are effective, although comparative studies are lacking. Perineural techniques are highly effective but are technically challenging and require labor-intensive and expensive home care that can be provided only in specialized centers. Disappointing past experience with implementation of perineural catheter techniques in inpatients suggests that it is unrealistic to expect their routine use in most ambulatory centers. Surgical-site catheter technique is a simpler, safer, and less expensive alternative and therefore more likely to gain widespread use. Only controlled comparisons can show whether the current belief about the superiority of ambulatory perineural techniques over WCI is justified. Such studies should address technical failures, side effects, home care of the medically unsupervised or undersupervised patient, and cost-effectiveness to demonstrate which of the 2 techniques is most appropriate for a particular procedure.

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.

This study was done to assess the efficacy of a perineural catheter for pain relief following carpal tunnel release (CTR). Sixty-six patients undergoing open CTR under local anaesthesia (LA) were randomly divided into three groups: Groups A and B had a perineural catheter and Group C served as non-blinded control group. Postoperative pain relief was by self-administration of either ropivacaine (Group A) or saline (Group B) via an elastometric pump and by oral paracetamol in Group C. Patients in Group A had a significantly greater difference in summed pain intensity than Group B. Fewer patients in Group A requested supplementary analgesics than in Group C. Patient satisfaction was higher in Group A than in Group B on day 1. However better analgesia was not associated with better functional recovery.

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.

Survey results continue to reveal that postoperative pain is insufficiently managed throughout Europe and the rest of the world. However, the efficient use of existing resources, as well as the introduction of novel technologies, may aid in its improvement. Use of an acute pain service has the potential to improve pain management through specialized patient care and utilization of effective analgesic techniques. Multimodal analgesic techniques, which include adjuvant non-opioids and/or regional analgesic techniques, can provide effective analgesia and reduce the amount of systemic opioids (or obviate the need) for postoperative pain management. Patient-controlled analgesia modalities may also offer improvements to pain management, as in practice they provide pain relief superior to the intermittent administration of bolus doses of opioids. A novel patient-controlled analgesia modality that has been approved by the European Medicines Evaluation Agency (EMEA) for the treatment of acute, moderate-to-severe pain is the needle-free, pre-programmed fentanyl HCl iontophoretic transdermal system. This system was shown in a recent US clinical trial to be comparable in efficacy to a standard regimen of morphine intravenous patient-controlled analgesia. Adverse events associated with the use of the fentanyl iontophoretic transdermal system are generally similar to those experienced by patients using intravenous morphine patient-controlled analgesia. Considerations regarding the selection of patients for treatment with the fentanyl iontophoretic transdermal system are similar to those with other patient-controlled analgesia modalities; sufficient upper limb mobility and alertness are required to operate the system. Utilization of the fentanyl iontophoretic transdermal system, together with the guidance of an effective acute pain service, may lead to improvements in postoperative pain management.

One of the most significant changes in surgical practice during the last two decades has been the growth of ambulatory surgery. Adequate postoperative analgesia is a prerequisite for successful ambulatory surgery. Recent studies have shown that large numbers of patients suffer from moderate to severe pain during the first 24-48 hr. The success of fast-tracking depends to a considerable extent on effective postoperative pain management routines and the cost saving of outpatient surgery may be negated by unanticipated hospital admission for poorly treated pain. Depending on the intensity of postoperative pain current management includes the use of analgesics such as paracetamol, NSAIDs including coxibs and tramadol as single drugs or in combination as part of balanced (multimodal) analgesia. However, in the ambulatory setting many patients suffer from pain at home in spite of multimodal analgesic regimens. Sending patients home with perineural, incisional, and intra-articular catheters is a new and evolving area of postoperative pain management. Current evidence suggests that these techniques are effective, feasible and safe in the home environment if appropriate patient selection routines and organization for follow-up are in place.

Summary Fear of severe pain after surgery is one of the main concerns of many patients who undergo surgery. There seems to be some justification for this fear. Several recent publications show that the management of postoperative pain is still suboptimal in many institutions. Undertreated postoperative pain may delay discharge and recovery and result in poor rehabilitation and outcomes. Currently, a variety of opioid and non-opioid-based analgesic techniques are used to treat pain. Opioid analgesics, regardless of the route of administration, are associated with a high incidence of adverse effects. In recent years, there has been a great increase in the use of regional anaesthesia techniques for surgery and postoperative pain management. Catheter techniques are increasingly used in in-patients and ambulatory surgery patients to achieve prolonged pain relief lasting several days. The techniques available for postoperative analgesia include neuraxial (central) blocks, peripheral nerve blocks, wound infiltration techniques, intraperitoneal, intra-articular, and intrabursal techniques. There is overwhelming evidence that epidural technique provides superior analgesic efficacy; however, its effects on reducing morbidity and mortality are controversial. Perineural catheter techniques provide better analgesia and fewer side effects when compared with opioid analgesia and are a good alternative to the more invasive epidural technique, particularly for major orthopaedic extremity surgery. There is good evidence that a simple technique of wound catheter infusion of local anaesthetic provides effective analgesia after a variety of surgical procedures with reduced side effects and high patient satisfaction. With the availability of portable pumps, the technique can be used on ambulatory basis.

Postoperative pain has been poorly managed for decades. Recent surveys from USA and Europe do not show any major improvement. Persistent postoperative pain is common after most surgical procedures, and after thoracotomy and mastectomy, about 50% of patients may experience it. Opioids remain the mainstay of postoperative pain treatment in spite of strong evidence of their drawbacks. Multimodal analgesic techniques are widely used but new evidence is disappointing. Regional anaesthetic techniques are the most effective methods to treat postoperative pain. Current evidence suggests that epidural analgesia can no longer be considered the 'gold standard'. Perineural techniques are good alternatives for major orthopaedic surgery but remain underused. Infiltrative techniques with or without catheters are useful for almost all types of surgery. Simple surgeon-delivered local anaesthetic techniques such as wound infiltration, preperitoneal/intraperitoneal administration, transversus abdominis plane block and local infiltration analgesia can play a significant role in improvement of postoperative care, and the last of these has changed orthopaedic practice in many institutions. Current postoperative pain management guidelines are generally 'one size fits all'. It is well known that pain characteristics such as type, location, intensity and duration vary considerably after different surgical procedures. Procedure-specific postoperative pain management recommendations are evidence based, and also take into consideration the role of anaesthetic and surgical techniques, clinical routines and risk-benefit aspects. The role of acute pain services to improve pain management and outcome is well accepted but implementation seems challenging. The need for upgrading the role of surgical ward nurses and collaboration with surgeons to implement enhanced recovery after surgery protocols with regular audits to improve postoperative outcome cannot be overstated.

SummaryBackground and objectives: Postoperative pain is a common problem following ambulatory breast augmentation surgery. This study was performed to compare standard of care (oral analgesics) with patient-controlled incisional regional analgesia (PCRA) for postoperative pain management at home for 48 h. A second aim was to compare the analgesic efficacy of ropivacaine 0.25% vs. 0.5%. Methods: Surgery was performed under local anaesthesia and monitored anesthesia care. Sixty adults (ASA 1–2) were randomized to one of two groups. Patients in Group PCRA could self-administer ropivacaine 0.25% 10 mL in the left breast and ropivacaine 0.5% in the right breast. Patients in Group T (tablets) received our standard of care treatment, i.e. oral paracetamol 1 g four times a day and oral ibuprofen 500 mg three times a day. Parameters measured included: analgesic requirements (in post-anesthesia care unit, PACU and post-discharge), pain intensity (visual analogue scale), patient satisfaction, global analgesia, side-effects, and quality of recovery. Results: Pain scores were significantly lower in Group PCRA compared to Group T at all time periods (P < 0.05). No differences were found in pain scores between the right and left breasts. Significantly more patients in Group T requested analgesics in the recovery unit (27 vs. 7; P = 0.001) and also at home (20 vs. 11; P < 0.02). More patients in the tablet group had nausea and vomiting (10 vs. 3; P < 0.05). Global analgesia on day 2 was significantly better in PCRA group; however, patient satisfaction was similar in both groups. More patients in the tablet group had sleep disturbance and woke up at night due to pain. Conclusions: Pain relief after ambulatory breast augmentation is superior with incisional PCRA when compared to oral analgesic combination of paracetamol and ibuprofen. Incisional PCRA was associated with minimal side-effects and less sleep disturbance. There was no difference in the analgesic efficacy between ropivacaine 0.25% and 0.5%.

Abdominal hysterectomy is associated with moderate to severe postoperative pain. We randomly divided 40 patients (ASA status I-II) undergoing elective abdominal hysterectomy into 2 groups: group P received an infusion of normal saline 5 mL/h via a catheter placed intraperitoneally at the end of surgery, and group L received 0.25% levobupivacaine 12.5 mg/h (5 mL/h). Ketobemidone was administered IV via a patient-controlled analgesia pump as a rescue analgesic in all patients. The catheter was removed after 24 h. Incisional pain, deep pain, and pain on coughing were assessed 1, 2, 3, 4, 8, 16, and 24 h after surgery by using a visual analog scale. Ketobemidone consumption during 0-72 h was recorded. Time to sit, walk, eat, and drink; home discharge; and plasma concentrations of levobupivacaine were also determined. Pain at the incision site, deep pain, and pain on coughing were all significantly less in group L compared with group P at 1-2 h after surgery. After 4 h, the mean visual analog scale pain scores at rest and during coughing remained

In recent years, the use of regional anaesthesia techniques for surgery, obstetrics and post operative pain management have increased in popularity. The combined spinal-epidural (CSE) technique has attained widespread popularity for patients undergoing major surgery below the umbilicus who may require prolonged and effective postoperative analgesia. The CSE technique is now well established in several institutions. This chapter includes the clinical experience, advantages and potential problems, and discusses future perspectives of the CSE technique.

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

Advances in anesthetic and surgical techniques, along with escalating health care costs, have resulted in an ever-increasing number of surgical procedures being performed on a day-case basis worldwide. Since the proportion of surgery done on an outpatient basis is increasing, and since early discharge and patient satisfaction are important goals, pain management is receiving greater attention. 1 Rapid recovery after the use of new, short-acting anesthetic agents has led to the concept of fasttracking and by-passing the postanesthetic care unit (PACU). 2 However, the success of fast-tracking will depend to a considerable extent on effective postoperative pain management routines with simple methods. The potential cost saving of outpatients surgery may be negated by unanticipated hospital admission for poorly treated pain. © 2003 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

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 ...

Background The aim of this randomized, double-blinded study was to compare the analgesic efficacy of bupivacaine versus ropivacaine brachial plexus analgesia after ambulatory hand surgery. An additional aim was to study the feasibility and safety of patient-controlled regional analgesia (PCRA) outside the hospital. Methods Sixty patients scheduled for ambulatory hand surgery underwent surgery with axillary plexus blockade. After surgery, the plexus catheter was connected to an elastomeric, disposable "homepump," containing 100 ml of either 0.125% bupivacaine or 0.125% ropivacaine. When patients experienced pain, they self-administered 10 ml of the study drug. Analgesic efficacy of PCRA was evaluated by self-assessment of pain intensity by visual analog scale (VAS) and verbal scale. Patients recorded adverse effects, technical problems, use of rescue analgesic tablets, and overall satisfaction. A follow-up telephone call was made the day after surgery. Results Visual analog scale scores decreased after each treatment in both groups, but there were no significant differences between the two drugs. One patient in each group took rescue dextropropoxyphene tablets. In both groups, 87% patients expressed their desire to have the same treatment again. On the day of surgery, significantly more patients were satisfied with ropivacaine PCRA. None of the patients had any signs or symptoms of local anesthetic toxicity or catheter infection. Conclusions This double-blinded study has demonstrated the feasibility of self-administration of local anesthetic to manage postoperative pain outside the hospital. Ropivacaine and bupivacaine provided effective analgesia, and patient satisfaction with PCRA was high. Patient selection, follow-up telephone call, and 24-h access to anesthesiology services are prerequisites for PCRA at home.

To evaluate the safety and applicability of two local anesthetic (LA) solutions self-administered for pain treatment after inguinal hernia repair (IHR) by balloon-pumps via catheters placed in the surgical wound. Effectiveness of analgesia was also compared.Two groups of patients for IHR were included in the randomized, double-blind study. An epidural catheter was placed in the surgical wound, tunneled subcutaneously and connected to a balloon-pump containing either 0.25% bupivacaine (B) or 0.25% ropivacaine (R). Postoperatively, the patient self-administered the LA into the wound. Administration could be repeated after 20 min. If moderate to severe pain still persisted, rescue medication (piritramid) was given intravenously. The variables recorded in both groups were: visual analogue scale (VAS), pain scores at rest and with movement, number of applications, wound healing, patients' satisfaction.During the first 24 hr, median number of LA applications in 26 B patients was 4 (range 1-6) and in 25 R patients 3 (range 1-5). Both groups showed low VAS pain scores: less than 2 at rest, less than 4 with movement. Eighty percent of patients of each group would choose this type of analgesia again. Two patients from B Group and three from R Group needed rescue medication. No wound infection was observed. There were no statistically significant differences between the groups.Self-administration of the LA solution via a catheter in the surgical wound is an effective method of pain relief after IHR with little side-effects.

Emergence agitation following anesthesia in children is not uncommon. It is, although generally self-limiting, associated with both patient and parents distress. We conducted a national survey around the management of behavioral and neurocognitive disturbances after surgery/anesthesia including a case scenario about a child at risk for emergence reaction. Premedication with clonidine or midazolam would have been used 58 and 37% of responders respectively. A propofol based anesthesia was the most common anesthetic technique, however sevoflurane or desflurane was an option for 45 and 8% of responders. Before awakening 65% would have administered an opioid, 48% a low-dose of propofol and 25% clonidine. Sign or symptoms of behavioral disturbance was not assessed by standardize assessment tools. A majority of Swedish anesthesia personnel would undertake some preventive action when handling a child at risk for an emergence reaction, the preventive measure differed and it seems as there is an obvious room for further improvements.

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.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.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.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.

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.

Study Objective: To assess recovery in children undergoing myringotomy and anesthetized using sevoflurane or halothane with special reference to the phenomenon of excitation reported in previous studies. Design: Prospective, randomized, single-blind study. Setting: Regional (district general) hospital. Patients: 60 healthy, physical status I children (aged 3 to 8 years) presenting for elective outpatient myringotomy. Interventions: The children were premedicated with midazolam and paracetamol and randomly allocated to one of two groups: Group H were induced with halothane (0.5% to 5%) and Group S with sevoflurane (1% to 8%). Anesthesia was maintained with oxygen (FIO 2 = 0.33), nitrous oxide, and the study drug. No opioids were administered during surgery. Postoperatively, propofol was given (1 mg/kg) if the child was crying and uncontrollable on the excitation scale for >5 minutes. Total analgesic consumption and side effects were recorded. Measurements and Main Results: Postoperatively, the following parameters were recorded: time to eye opening, excitation, pain, time to sit unaided, time to drink water, time to walk, and time to discharge home. No differences were found in the demographic data, duration of anesthesia and operation, time to loss of eyelash reflex, time to waking up, incidence of postoperative excitation (7% and 8% in the sevoflurane and halothane groups respectively), pain, or postoperative nausea and vomiting. The ability to sit and walk, and the time to discharge home (mean 60.4 min vs. 67.1 min, respectively) was similar between the groups. Conclusions: Although some studies have reported a high incidence of excitation following sevoflurane anaesthesia, we found no differences between halothane and sevoflurane. This finding could be due to the midazolam given as premedication as well as minimal postoperative pain in these children.

We compared in a prospective, randomized, double-blinded study the analgesic efficacy of three drugs in 120 ASA I and II patients scheduled to undergo ambulatory hand surgery with IV regional anesthesia. At discharge, oral analgesic tablets were prescribed as follows: tramadol 100 mg every 6 h, metamizol 1 g every 6 h, and paracetamol (acetaminophen) 1 g every 6 h. Rescue medication consisted of oral dextropropoxyphene 100 mg on demand. Analgesic efficacy was evaluated by self-assessment of pain intensity by visual analog score at six different time intervals during the 48-h study period. Patients also recorded global pain relief on a 5-grade scale, total number of study and rescue analgesic tablets, frequency and severity of adverse effects, sleep pattern, and overall satisfaction. None of the study drugs alone provided effective analgesia in all patients. The percentage of patients who required supplementary analgesics was 23% with tramadol, 31% with metamizol, and 42% with acetaminophen. Tramadol was the most effective analgesic, as evidenced by low pain scores, least rescue medication, and fewest number of patients with sleep disturbance. However, the incidence of side effects was also increased with tramadol. Seven patients (17.5%) withdrew from the study because of the severity of nausea and dizziness associated with the use of tramadol. Metamizol and acetaminophen provided good analgesia in about 70% and 60% of patients, respectively, with a decreased incidence of side effects. Despite receiving oral analgesic medication, up to 40% of patients undergoing hand surgery experienced inadequate analgesia in this controlled trial. Although tramadol was more effective, its use was associated with the highest frequency and intensity of adverse effects and the most patient dissatisfaction. Metamizol and acetaminophen provided good analgesia with a small incidence of side effects. For patients undergoing ambulatory hand surgery, postoperative pain can last longer than 2-3 days, and there is a need for both better education before the procedure and oral analgesic therapy at home.

To assess the efficacy and safety of wound instillation of ropivacaine, when administered via a patient-controlled elastometric pump, 50 term parturients undergoing cesarean delivery were enrolled into this prospective, placebo-controlled, double-blinded study. In all cases, a standard spinal anesthetic was administered. After the surgery, a multihole 20-gauge epidural catheter (B. Braun, Melsungen, Germany) was placed above the fascia such that the tip was sited at the point that demarcated 50% of the length of the surgical wound. Thereafter, the catheter was connected to the elastometric pump. According to a computer-generated randomization schedule, the pump was filled with either ropivacaine 0.2% (Ropivacaine Group) or an equal volume of sterile water (Control Group). Postoperatively, patient-controlled analgesia was administered via the elastometric pump. During the first 6 postoperative hours, a coinvestigator administered "rescue" morphine (2 mg, IV). Thereafter, "rescue" dipyrone (1 g) was administered on patient request. In a subset of 10 patients, blood ropivacaine levels were assessed. Compared with the Control Group, significantly fewer patients in the Ropivacaine Group received "rescue" morphine (92% vs. 48%, respectively) (P

Combining regional and general anaesthesia can have many advantages, particularly in patients undergoing major thoracic, abdominal or orthopaedic surgery. The use of regional anaesthetic techniques in anaesthetized children is an accepted standard of care, because needle and procedure phobias are very common and can result in severe anxiety, an inability to cooperate and sudden unpredictable movement. Epidural local anaesthetics have the potential of attenuating sympathetic hyperactivity, maintaining bowel peristalsis, sparing the use of opioids, and facilitating postoperative feeding and out-of-bed activity. Catheter techniques allow excellent and prolonged postoperative analgesia using epidural or peripheral nerve blocks. However, the superiority of regional techniques for hip fracture surgery and carotid endarterectomy has been disputed in several recent studies. As part of the combination technique, epidural block may in fact decrease blood flow in free flap surgery by a steal phenomenon, and increase intrapulmonary shunting during one-lung ventilation. The present review focuses on the use of a combination of regional and general anaesthesia for a variety of surgical procedures. It also compares the two anaesthetic techniques in elderly patients. The review is based on studies published during the past year.

Peripheral nerve blocks are simple to perform, provide excellent analgesia, and have a historical record of safety. Many blocks are capable of providing excellent analgesia over a limited field and with minimal systemic effect. Infiltration with local anesthetics modulates pain at the peripheral level by inhibiting the transmission of nociceptive impulses from the site of injury. The technique is generally considered to be simple, safe, and inexpensive. The main limitation to its widespread use is the need for repeated administration due to the short analgesic effect of a single dose. In general, appropriate blocks exist for almost all areas of the body. Because analgesic requirements and duration of a single-dose local anesthetic vary greatly, patients could be expected to obtain better analgesia if they could control the amount and timing of local analgesic medication by PCRA. A new technique is described that allows the patient to self administer a prescribed dose of local anesthetic at home. Copyright © 2000 by W.B. Saunders Company

Background and Objectives. Morphine and nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs (NSAID) have been found to be effective in relieving postoperative pain. The goal of this study was to determine whether ketorolac alone or in combination with morphine provides superior pain relief following arthroscopy performed with local anesthesia (LA). Methods. This was a randomized, double-blind, prospective, study in 100 healthy patients from 15 to 60 years of age. Knee arthroscopy was performed with LA using 40 mL prilocaine (5 mg/mL) with adrenaline (4 μg/mL). At the end of the operation, a catheter was inserted intra-articularly, and one of the following solutions diluted to a total volume of 40 mL was injected: group P (40 mL normal saline), group M (3 mg morphine), group K30 (30 mg ketorolac), group K60 (60 mg ketorolac), and group KM (3 mg morphine + 30 mg ketorolac). Visual analog scale (VAS) pain scores (0-100 mm) were measured preoperative and at 30, 60, 90, 120 minutes postoperative and thereafter 4, 8, 24, and 48 hours at rest and on movement of the knee. The total number of distalgesic tablets (325 mg paracetamol + 32.5 mg dextropropoxyphene) consumed during the 48 hours postoperative was recorded. Results. Significant differences in VAS pain scores were seen between group P and group KM at 4, 8, and 24 hours (P Conclusions. The combination of 3 mg morphine plus 30 mg ketorolac provided significantly better analgesia than either placebo alone or morphine alone. This result could be a synergistic effect.

Despite unprecedented interest in understanding pain mechanisms and pain management, a significant number of patients continue to experience unacceptable pain after surgery. Recent surveys show that there has been no apparent improvement since an early study in 1952 (15). It is increasingly clear that the solution to the problems of postoperative pain management lies not so much in the development of new techniques but in developing an organization to exploit existing expertise. The most obvious components of an acute pain team include anesthesiologists, surgeons, nurses, and physiotherapists. Protocols encourage consistent standards of safe and effective care and should be used as a framework to individualize treatment. The concept of skilled pain therapists collaborating to provide improved postoperative analgesia within the framework of an organized APS appears to be universally applicable. Acute pain service models have been described from the United States, the United Kingdom, Germany, Switzerland, and Sweden. The U.S. model, which consists of anesthesiologist-based comprehensive pain management teams, is quite effective but is more expensive, and it is not transferable to Europe. A recent United Kingdom survey showed that there is a large degree of variation in what is thought to constitute an APS in the U.K. (16). A nurse-based anesthesiologist-supervised APS in which pain is evaluated in every patient who undergoes surgery has been developed in Sweden. Pain above 3 on the 10-grade VAS is promptly treated. Clearly, neither the anesthesiologist nor the APN guarantees good pain management on wards. In this low-cost model, the role of the anesthesiologist is to teach and train ward nurses, to supervise the APN, and to select patients for special pain therapies such as epidural, PCA, and peripheral nerve blocks. All senior anesthesiologists (section chiefs) working in the operating room are part of this APS. The means of providing satisfactory analgesia are already present in most hospitals. Careful planning and a multidisciplinary approach to pain management will ensure that resources are optimally utilized, and the quality of pain management is consistently maintained.