Effect of a comfort scale compared with a pain numerical rate scale on opioids consumption in postanaesthesia care unit: the COMFORT study

IF 9.1 1区 医学 Q1 ANESTHESIOLOGY British journal of anaesthesia Pub Date : 2024-09-07 DOI:10.1016/j.bja.2024.06.029
{"title":"Effect of a comfort scale compared with a pain numerical rate scale on opioids consumption in postanaesthesia care unit: the COMFORT study","authors":"","doi":"10.1016/j.bja.2024.06.029","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>The way that pain is assessed in the PACU could impact on postoperative pain and analgesic consumption. However, there is currently no evidence to support this speculation. The authors hypothesised that using a comfort scale reduces postoperative opioid consumption when compared with a standard numerical rating scale (NRS) to evaluate pain in the PACU.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>In this cluster-randomised trial, patients were assessed using either a comfort scale (comfort group) or a pain NRS (NRS group). The primary outcome was the opioid consumption in the PACU. The main secondary outcomes were postoperative pain, nausea and vomiting, length of stay in the PACU, and satisfaction.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>Of 885 randomised patients, 860 were included in the analysis. Opioid consumption in the PACU was comparable in the comfort and NRS groups (median [interquartile range [IQR] 0 (0–5) <em>vs</em> 0 (0–6); <em>P</em>=0.2436), irrespective of the type of surgical procedure. The majority of patients did not need any postoperative opioid (59% in the comfort group and 56% in the NRS group, <em>P</em>=0.2260). There was no difference in postoperative pain, nausea and vomiting, time to reach an Aldrete score ≥9 after extubation, and global satisfaction.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>Using a comfort scale to assess pain in the PACU did not spare any opioid compared with use of a standard NRS. Further studies focusing on patients at risk of increased postoperative opioid consumption are necessary.</p></div><div><h3>Clinical trial registration</h3><p><span><span>NCT05234216</span><svg><path></path></svg></span>.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":9250,"journal":{"name":"British journal of anaesthesia","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":9.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"British journal of anaesthesia","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0007091224004008","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ANESTHESIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background

The way that pain is assessed in the PACU could impact on postoperative pain and analgesic consumption. However, there is currently no evidence to support this speculation. The authors hypothesised that using a comfort scale reduces postoperative opioid consumption when compared with a standard numerical rating scale (NRS) to evaluate pain in the PACU.

Methods

In this cluster-randomised trial, patients were assessed using either a comfort scale (comfort group) or a pain NRS (NRS group). The primary outcome was the opioid consumption in the PACU. The main secondary outcomes were postoperative pain, nausea and vomiting, length of stay in the PACU, and satisfaction.

Results

Of 885 randomised patients, 860 were included in the analysis. Opioid consumption in the PACU was comparable in the comfort and NRS groups (median [interquartile range [IQR] 0 (0–5) vs 0 (0–6); P=0.2436), irrespective of the type of surgical procedure. The majority of patients did not need any postoperative opioid (59% in the comfort group and 56% in the NRS group, P=0.2260). There was no difference in postoperative pain, nausea and vomiting, time to reach an Aldrete score ≥9 after extubation, and global satisfaction.

Conclusions

Using a comfort scale to assess pain in the PACU did not spare any opioid compared with use of a standard NRS. Further studies focusing on patients at risk of increased postoperative opioid consumption are necessary.

Clinical trial registration

NCT05234216.

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
舒适度量表与疼痛数字评分量表对麻醉后护理病房阿片类药物消耗量的影响:COMFORT 研究。
背景:在 PACU 中评估疼痛的方式可能会对术后疼痛和镇痛药的消耗产生影响。然而,目前还没有证据支持这一推测。作者假设,与标准数字评分量表(NRS)相比,使用舒适度量表评估 PACU 中的疼痛可减少术后阿片类药物的用量:在这项分组随机试验中,采用舒适量表(舒适组)或疼痛 NRS(NRS 组)对患者进行评估。主要结果是 PACU 的阿片类药物消耗量。主要次要结果是术后疼痛、恶心和呕吐、在 PACU 的住院时间以及满意度:在 885 名随机患者中,有 860 人被纳入分析。无论手术类型如何,舒适组和 NRS 组在 PACU 中的阿片类药物消耗量相当(中位数[四分位数间距[IQR] 0 (0-5) vs 0 (0-6); P=0.2436)。大多数患者术后无需使用阿片类药物(舒适组为59%,NRS组为56%,P=0.2260)。在术后疼痛、恶心和呕吐、拔管后达到Aldrete评分≥9分的时间以及总体满意度方面没有差异:结论:与使用标准 NRS 相比,在 PACU 使用舒适度量表评估疼痛并不会减少阿片类药物的用量。有必要针对术后阿片类药物用量增加风险的患者开展进一步研究:临床试验注册:NCT05234216。
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
13.50
自引率
7.10%
发文量
488
审稿时长
27 days
期刊介绍: The British Journal of Anaesthesia (BJA) is a prestigious publication that covers a wide range of topics in anaesthesia, critical care medicine, pain medicine, and perioperative medicine. It aims to disseminate high-impact original research, spanning fundamental, translational, and clinical sciences, as well as clinical practice, technology, education, and training. Additionally, the journal features review articles, notable case reports, correspondence, and special articles that appeal to a broader audience. The BJA is proudly associated with The Royal College of Anaesthetists, The College of Anaesthesiologists of Ireland, and The Hong Kong College of Anaesthesiologists. This partnership provides members of these esteemed institutions with access to not only the BJA but also its sister publication, BJA Education. It is essential to note that both journals maintain their editorial independence. Overall, the BJA offers a diverse and comprehensive platform for anaesthetists, critical care physicians, pain specialists, and perioperative medicine practitioners to contribute and stay updated with the latest advancements in their respective fields.
期刊最新文献
A resuscitation tool for major obstetric haemorrhage: a nomogram that expresses quantitative blood loss relative to effective circulating blood volume. Balanced electrolyte solution with 1% glucose as intraoperative maintenance fluid in infants: a prospective study of glucose, electrolyte, and acid-base homeostasis. It is time to take a broader equity lens to highlight health inequalities in people with pain. The role of wearable technology in home-based prehabilitation: a scoping review. Corrigendum to "Effect of prolonged sedation with dexmedetomidine, midazolam, propofol, and sevoflurane on sleep homeostasis in rats" [Br J Anaesth 132 (2024) 1248-1259].
×
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