Comparing Post-operative Opioid Consumption before and after a Patient-Controlled Analgesia Shortage: A Re-evaluation of Safety and Effectiveness.

IF 0.9 Q3 ANESTHESIOLOGY Journal of Pain & Palliative Care Pharmacotherapy Pub Date : 2023-12-01 Epub Date: 2023-09-05 DOI:10.1080/15360288.2023.2250334
Lena Zoma, Renee Alexander Paxton, Michelle Dehoorne, Christopher Giuliano
{"title":"Comparing Post-operative Opioid Consumption before and after a Patient-Controlled Analgesia Shortage: A Re-evaluation of Safety and Effectiveness.","authors":"Lena Zoma, Renee Alexander Paxton, Michelle Dehoorne, Christopher Giuliano","doi":"10.1080/15360288.2023.2250334","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>This retrospective cohort study aimed to compare post-surgical opioid consumption before and after a PCA (patient-controlled analgesia) shortage. The study evaluated patients who received PCA <i>vs.</i> nurse-administered opioid analgesia (non-PCA). Two hundred and twenty-four patients ≥18 years who were initiated on analgesia within 24 h of surgery were included. The primary outcome was opioid consumption in average daily oral morphine milliequivalents (MME). The results showed that patients in the PCA group had increased MME consumption (162 ± 100.4 <i>vs.</i> 70.7 ± 52.8, <i>p</i> < 0.01), increased length of hospital stay (4.2 <i>vs.</i> 3.2 days, <i>p</i> < 0.01), and increased frequency of nausea (33 <i>vs.</i> 17.9%, <i>p</i> < 0.01). After controlling for confounding factors, the PCA group utilized significantly more opioids (84.6 MME/day, <i>p</i> < 0.01) than the non-PCA group. There was no difference in pain AUC/T (0.19 ± 0.07 <i>vs.</i> 0.21 ± 0.08, <i>p</i> = 0.07) and average opioid prescribing upon discharge (150 [77.5-360] <i>vs.</i> 90 [77.5-400], <i>p</i> = 0.64) between the PCA group and non-PCA group, respectively. These results question the routine use of PCA in post-operative patients due to the increased risk of opioid consumption, longer length of hospital stay, and higher incidence of nausea.</p>","PeriodicalId":16645,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Pain & Palliative Care Pharmacotherapy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.9000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Pain & Palliative Care Pharmacotherapy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/15360288.2023.2250334","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/9/5 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ANESTHESIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This retrospective cohort study aimed to compare post-surgical opioid consumption before and after a PCA (patient-controlled analgesia) shortage. The study evaluated patients who received PCA vs. nurse-administered opioid analgesia (non-PCA). Two hundred and twenty-four patients ≥18 years who were initiated on analgesia within 24 h of surgery were included. The primary outcome was opioid consumption in average daily oral morphine milliequivalents (MME). The results showed that patients in the PCA group had increased MME consumption (162 ± 100.4 vs. 70.7 ± 52.8, p < 0.01), increased length of hospital stay (4.2 vs. 3.2 days, p < 0.01), and increased frequency of nausea (33 vs. 17.9%, p < 0.01). After controlling for confounding factors, the PCA group utilized significantly more opioids (84.6 MME/day, p < 0.01) than the non-PCA group. There was no difference in pain AUC/T (0.19 ± 0.07 vs. 0.21 ± 0.08, p = 0.07) and average opioid prescribing upon discharge (150 [77.5-360] vs. 90 [77.5-400], p = 0.64) between the PCA group and non-PCA group, respectively. These results question the routine use of PCA in post-operative patients due to the increased risk of opioid consumption, longer length of hospital stay, and higher incidence of nausea.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
比较患者自控镇痛短缺前后的术后阿片类药物消耗:安全性和有效性的再评估。
这项回顾性队列研究旨在比较PCA(患者自控镇痛)短缺前后的术后阿片类药物消耗。该研究评估了接受PCA与护士给药阿片类镇痛(非PCA)的患者。纳入24例手术后24小时内开始镇痛的≥18岁患者。主要终点是平均每日口服吗啡毫当量(MME)的阿片类药物消耗。结果显示,PCA组患者的MME消耗增加(162±100.4比70.7±52.8,p vs。3.2天,p vs。17.9%, p p vs。分别为(0.21±0.08,p = 0.07)和(150 [77.5-360]vs. 90 [77.5-400], p = 0.64)。由于阿片类药物消耗风险增加、住院时间延长和恶心发生率增加,这些结果对术后患者常规使用PCA提出了质疑。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.60
自引率
9.10%
发文量
40
期刊最新文献
Editorial: Reasons for Conflicting Evidence Regarding Use of Platelet-Rich Plasma (PRP). The Effectiveness of Tramadol in Pain Relief in Chronic Diseases: A Review Based on Clinical Trials. Changes in Pain and Mental Health Symptoms Associated with Prescribed Medicinal Cannabis Use: A One-Year Longitudinal Study. Correction. Comparison of Cannabis-Based Medicinal Product Formulations for Fibromyalgia: A Cohort Study.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1