RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Current evidence supports that many patients do not use prescribed opioids following reconstructive pelvic surgery, yet it remains unclear if it is feasible to eliminate routine opioid prescriptions without a negative impact on patients or providers. OBJECTIVE: To determine if there is a difference in the proportion of patients discharged without opioids after implementing a bundle of opioid-sparing strategies and tiered prescribing protocol compared to usual care after minimally invasive pelvic reconstructive surgery (transvaginal, laparoscopic, or robotic). Secondary objectives include measures of patient-perceived pain control and provider workload. STUDY DESIGN: The bundle of opioid-sparing strategies and tiered prescribing protocol intervention was implemented as a division-wide evidence-based practice change on August 1, 2022. This retrospective cohort compares a 6-month postintervention (bundle of opioid-sparing strategies and tiered prescribing protocol) cohort to 6-month preintervention (usual care) of patients undergoing minimally invasive pelvic reconstructive surgery. A 3-month washout period was observed after bundle of opioid-sparing strategies and tiered prescribing protocol initiation. We excluded patients <18 years, failure to consent to research, combined surgery with other specialties, urge urinary incontinence or urinary retention procedures alone, and minor procedures not typically requiring opioids. Primary outcome was measured by proportion discharged without opioids and total oral morphine equivalents prescribed. Pain control was measured by pain scores, postdischarge prescriptions and refills, phone calls and visits related to pain, and satisfaction with pain control. Provider workload was demonstrated by phone calls and postdischarge prescription refills. Data were obtained through chart review on all patients who met inclusion criteria. Primary analysis only included patients prescribed opioids according to the bundle of opioid-sparing strategies and tiered prescribing protocol protocol. Two sample t tests compared continuous variables and chi-square tests compared categorical variables. RESULTS: Four hundred sixteen patients were included in the primary analysis (207 bundle of opioid-sparing strategies and tiered prescribing protocol, 209 usual care). Baseline demographics were similar between groups, except a lower proportion of irritable bowel syndrome (13% vs 23%; P<.01) and pelvic pain (15% vs 24.9%; P=.01), and higher history of prior gynecologic surgery (69.1% vs 58.4%; P=.02) in the bundle of opioid-sparing strategies and tiered prescribing protocol cohort. The bundle of opioid-sparing strategies and tiered prescribing protocol cohort was more likely to be discharged without opioids (68.1% vs 10.0%; P<.01). In those prescribed opioids, total oral morphine equivalents on discharge was significantly lower in the bundle of opioid-sparing strategies and tiered prescribing protocol cohort (48.1 vs 81.8; P<.01). The bundle of opioid-sparing strategies and tiered prescribing protocol cohort had a 20.6 greater odds (confidence interval 11.4, 37.1) of being discharged without opioids after adjusting for surgery type, arthritis/joint pain, IBS, pelvic pain, and contraindication to nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs. The bundle of opioid-sparing strategies and tiered prescribing protocol cohort was also less likely to receive a rescue opioid prescription after discharge (1.4% vs 9.5%; P=.03). There were no differences in opioid prescription refills (19.7% vs 18.1%; P=.77), emergency room visits for pain (3.4% vs 2.9%; P=.76), postoperative pain scores (mean 4.7 vs 4.0; P=.07), or patient satisfaction with pain control (81.5% vs 85.6%; P=.21). After bundle of opioid-sparing strategies and tiered prescribing protocol implementation, the proportion of postoperative phone calls for pain also decreased (12.6% vs 21.5%; P=.02). Similar results were identified when nonadherent prescribing was included in the analysis. CONCLUSION: A bundle of evidence-based opioid sparing strategies and tiered prescribing based on inpatient use increases the proportion of patients discharged without opioids after minimally invasive pelvic reconstructive surgery without evidence of uncontrolled pain or increased provider workload.

Asunto(s)

Analgésicos Opioides , Prescripciones de Medicamentos , Dolor Postoperatorio , Pautas de la Práctica en Medicina , Humanos , Analgésicos Opioides/uso terapéutico , Femenino , Dolor Postoperatorio/tratamiento farmacológico , Estudios Retrospectivos , Persona de Mediana Edad , Pautas de la Práctica en Medicina/estadística & datos numéricos , Prescripciones de Medicamentos/estadística & datos numéricos , Procedimientos Quirúrgicos Ginecológicos , Anciano , Adulto , Manejo del Dolor/métodos , Procedimientos de Cirugía Plástica , Procedimientos Quirúrgicos Mínimamente Invasivos , Estudios de Cohortes

RESUMEN

Background and Aim: Transversus abdominis plane (TAP) block and local anesthetic infiltration (LAI) technique are used as part of the multimodal analgesic regimen after abdominal surgery. Postoperative opioid consumption and analgesic efficacy was compared using TAP and LAI techniques in patients undergoing gynecologic surgery in a randomized, controlled clinical trial. Material and Methods: Total of 135 patients scheduled for major gynecological surgeries were allocated into three groups: group T received bilateral TAP block with bupivacaine 0.25%; group I received LAI with 0.25% bupivacaine with epinephrine 5 µ/mL in the peritoneum and abdominal wall, and group C was control group. Anesthesia and postoperative analgesia were standardized. Outcome measures were cumulative and rescue tramadol consumption, numerical rating score (NRS) for pain and side effects in post-anesthesia care unit (PACU) at 4, 8, 12 hours postoperatively. Results: Tramadol consumption, need for rescue analgesia, and NRS for pain between three groups at 4, 8, and 12 hours postoperatively had no statistically significant difference (P < 0.05). In PACU, median tramadol consumption used for rescue analgesia between group T (15 (15-30)) and group C (30 (15-45)) (P = 0.035), and between group T (15 (15-30)) and group I (30 (15-52)) was statistically significant (P = 0.034). In PACU, the percentage of patients having NRS >4 on movement in group C (72%) compared to group T (46.5%) and group I (46.5%) was significant (P = 0.034). No statistically significant difference was observed in the incidence of side effects among study groups (P > 0.05). Conclusion: Except for the immediate postoperative period, neither TAP block nor LAI had added benefit to the multimodal analgesia regimen in patients undergoing gynecological surgeries.

RESUMEN

Opioids play a crucial role in pain management in spite of causing increased hospital morbidity and related costs. It may also cause significant risks such as postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV), sedation, sleep disturbances, urinary retention and respiratory depression (commonly referred to as opioid related adverse effects) in postoperative patients. In order to evade these opioid related side effects and also improve pain management, multimodal analgesia i.e., combination of different analgesics, was introduced more than a decade ago. Both pharmacological and non-pharmacological techniques are available as opioid sparing analgesia. Research from around the world have proved pharmacological techniques ranging from acetaminophen, NSAIDs (non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs), N-methyl-D-aspartate receptor antagonists (NDMA), alpha-2 agonists, anticonvulsants such as gamma aminobutyric acid analogues, beta-blockers, capsaicin, lignocaine infusion to glucocorticoids to be effective. On the other hand, non-pharmacological methods include techniques such as cognitive behavioral therapy, transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS), electroanalgesia, acupuncture and hypnosis. However, research regarding the effect of these non-pharmacological techniques on pain management is still needed.