Anaesthesia and Intensive Care最新文献

Opioids are commonly prescribed to manage pain after surgery. However, excessive supply on discharge can increase patients' risk of persistent opioid use and contribute to the reservoir of unused opioids in the community that may be misused. This study aimed to evaluate the use of opioids in Australian surgical patients after discharge and patient satisfaction with the provision of opioid information after discharge. This prospective cohort study was conducted at a tertiary referral and teaching hospital. Surgical patients were called 7-28 days after discharge to identify their opioid use and the information that they received after discharge. In total, 66 patients responded. Most patients underwent orthopaedic surgery (45.5%; 30/66). The median days of opioids supplied on discharge was 5 (IQR 3-5). In total, 40.9% (27/66) of patients had >50% of their opioids remaining. Patients undergoing orthopaedic surgery were less likely to have >50% of their opioids remaining (P = 0.045), whilst patients undergoing urological or renal surgeries were significantly more likely (P = 0.009). Most patients recalled receiving information about their opioids (89.4%; 59/66). However, the majority (51.5%; 34/66) did not recall receiving any information about the signs of opioid toxicity and interactions between opioids and alcohol. In conclusion, around 40% of patients had more than half of their opioid supply remaining after they ceased taking their opioid. Although most patients recalled receiving information about their opioids, more than half did not recall receiving any information about the signs of opioid toxicity or interactions between opioids and alcohol.

Opioid analgesics prescribed for the management of acute pain following orthopaedic surgery may lead to unintended long-term opioid use and associated patient harms. This study aimed to examine the prevalence of opioid use at 90 days after elective orthopaedic surgery across major city, regional and rural locations in New South Wales, Australia. We conducted a prospective, observational cohort study of patients undergoing elective orthopaedic surgery at five hospitals from major city, regional, rural, public and private settings between April 2017 and February 2020. Data were collected by patient questionnaire at the pre-admission clinic 2-6 weeks before surgery and by telephone call after 90 days following surgery. Of the 361 participants recruited, 54% (195/361) were women and the mean age was 67.7 years (standard deviation 10.1 years). Opioid use at 90 or more days after orthopaedic surgery was reported by 15.8% (57/361; 95% confidence interval (CI) 12.2-20%) of all participants and ranged from 3.5% (2/57) at a major city location to 37.8% (14/37) at an inner regional location. Predictors of long-term postoperative opioid use in the multivariable analysis were surgery performed at an inner regional location (adjusted odds ratio 12.26; 95% CI 2.2-68.24) and outer regional location (adjusted odds ratio 5.46; 95% CI 1.09-27.50) after adjusting for known covariates. Long-term opioid use was reported in over 15% of patients following orthopaedic surgery and appears to be more prevalent in regional locations in Australia.

There are few data on current trends in pain management for thoracic surgery in Australia and New Zealand. Several new regional analgesia techniques have been introduced for these operations in the past few years. Our survey aimed to assess current practice and perceptions towards various modalities of pain management for thoracic surgery among anaesthetists in Australia and New Zealand. A 22-question electronic survey was developed and distributed in 2020 with the assistance of the Australian and New Zealand College of Anaesthetists Cardiac Thoracic Vascular and Perfusion Special Interest Group. The survey focused on four key domains-demographics, general pain management, operative technique, and postoperative approach. Of the 696 invitations, 165 complete responses were obtained, for a response rate of 24%. Most respondents reported a trend away from the historical standard of thoracic epidural analgesia, with a preference towards non-neuraxial regional analgesia techniques. If representative of anaesthetists in Australia and New Zealand more widely, this trend may result in less exposure of junior anaesthetists to the insertion and management of thoracic epidurals, potentially resulting in reduced familiarity and confidence in the technique. Furthermore, it demonstrates a notable reliance on surgically or intraoperatively placed paravertebral catheters as the primary analgesic modality, and suggests the need for future studies assessing the optimal method of catheter insertion and perioperative management. It also gives some insight into the current opinion and practice of the respondents with regard to formalised enhanced recovery after surgery pathways, acute pain services, opioid-free anaesthesia, and current medication selection.

SummaryOpioids are often used to provide postsurgical analgesia but may cause harm if used inappropriately. We introduced an opioid stewardship program in three Melbourne hospitals to reduce the inappropriate use of opioids after patient discharge. The program had four pillars: prescriber education, patient education, a standardised quantity of discharge opioids, and general practitioner (GP) communication. Following introduction of the program, we undertook this prospective cohort study. The study aimed to describe post-program discharge opioid prescribing, patient opioid use and handling, and the impact of patient demographics, pain and surgical treatment factors on discharge prescribing. We also evaluated compliance with the program components. We recruited 884 surgical patients from the three hospitals during the ten-week study period. Discharge opioids were dispensed to 604 (74%) patients, with 20% receiving slow-release opioids. Junior medical staff undertook 95% of discharge opioid prescribing, which was guideline-compliant for 78% of patients. Of the patients discharged with opioids, a GP letter was sent for only 17%. Follow-up at two weeks was successful in 423 (70%) patients and in 404 (67%) at three months. At the three-month follow-up, 9.7% of patients reported ongoing opioid use; in preoperatively opioid naïve patients, the incidence was 5.5%. At the two-week follow-up, only 5% reported disposal of excess opioids, increasing to 26% at three months. Ongoing opioid therapy at three months in our study cohort (9.7%; 39/404) was associated with preoperative opioid consumption and higher pain scores at the three-month follow-up. The introduction of the opioid stewardship program resulted in highly guideline-compliant prescribing, but hospital-to-GP communication was uncommon and opioid disposal rates were low. Our findings suggest that opioid stewardship programs can improve postoperative opioid prescribing, use and handling, but the realisation of these gains will require effective program implementation.

Deterioration after major surgery is common, with many patients experiencing a medical emergency team (MET) activation. Understanding the triggers for MET calls may help design interventions to prevent deterioration. We aimed to identify triggers for MET activation in non-cardiac surgical patients. A retrospective cohort study of adult patients who experienced a postoperative MET call at a single tertiary hospital was undertaken. The trigger and timing of each MET call and patient characteristics were collected.Four hundred and one MET calls occurred after 23,258 surgical procedures, a rate of 1.7% of all non-cardiac surgical procedures, accounting for 11.7% of all MET calls over the study period. Hypotension (41.4%) was the most common trigger, followed by tachycardia (18.5%), altered conscious state (11.0%), hypoxia (10.0%), tachypnoea (5.7%), 'other' (5.7%), clinical concern (4.0%), increased work of breathing (1.5%) and bradypnoea (0.7%). Cardiac and/or respiratory arrest triggered 1.2% of MET activations. Eighty-six percent of patients had a single MET call, 10.2% had two, 1.8% had three and one patient (0.3%) had four. The median interval between post-anaesthetic care unit (PACU) discharge and MET call was 14.7 h (95% confidence interval 4.2 to 28.9 h). MET calls resulted in intensive care unit (ICU) admission in 40 patients (10%), while 82% remained on the ward, 4% had a MET call shortly after ICU discharge and returned there, 2% returned to theatre, and 2% went to a high dependency unit.Hypotension was the most common trigger for MET calls after non-cardiac surgery. Deterioration frequently occurred within 24 h of PACU discharge. Future research should focus on prevention of hypotension and tachycardia after surgery.

The cerebrospinal fluid volume affects the block height of spinal anaesthesia. Laminectomy of the lumbar spine may result in increased lumbosacral cerebrospinal fluid volume. This study aimed to test the hypothesis that the lumbosacral cerebrospinal fluid volume of patients with a history of lumbar laminectomy would be larger than that of patients with normal lumbar spine anatomy using magnetic resonance imaging. Lumbosacral spine magnetic resonance images of 147 patients who underwent laminectomy at the L2 vertebrae or below (laminectomy group) and 115 patients without a history of spinal surgery (control group) were retrospectively reviewed. The lumbosacral cerebrospinal fluid volumes between the L1-L2 intervertebral disc level and the end of the dural sac were measured and compared between the two groups. The mean (standard deviation) lumbosacral cerebrospinal fluid volume was 22.3 (7.8) ml and 21.1 (7.4) ml in the laminectomy and control groups, respectively (mean difference 1.2 ml; 95% confidence interval -0.7 to 3.0 ml; P = 0.218). In the prespecified subgroup analysis according to the number of laminectomy levels, patients who underwent more than two levels of laminectomy exhibited slightly larger lumbosacral cerebrospinal fluid volume (n = 17, 30.5 (13.5) ml) compared with those who underwent two (n = 40, 20.7 (5.6) ml; P = 0.014) or one level of laminectomy (n = 90, 21.4 (6.2) ml; P = 0.010) and the control group (21.1 (7.4) ml; P = 0.012). In conclusion, the lumbosacral cerebrospinal fluid volume did not differ between patients who underwent lumbar laminectomy and those without a history of laminectomy. However, patients who underwent laminectomy at more than two levels had a slightly larger volume of lumbosacral cerebrospinal fluid than those who underwent less extensive laminectomy and those without a history of lumbar spine surgery. Further studies are warranted to confirm the subgroup analysis findings and elucidate the clinical implications of such differences in the lumbosacral cerebrospinal fluid volume.