Michael Willey, Andrea M Spiker, Matthew R Schmitz, Etienne L Belzile, Rafael J Sierra, John Clohisy, Michael Stover
{"title":"髋臼周围截骨术的围手术期管理:来自锚定小组的当前实践报告、辅助文献和未来研究领域。","authors":"Michael Willey, Andrea M Spiker, Matthew R Schmitz, Etienne L Belzile, Rafael J Sierra, John Clohisy, Michael Stover","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Periacetabular osteotomy (PAO) is a well-established surgical treatment for hip dysplasia, but very few studies report the impact of peri-operative management strategies on early pain and function. The purpose of this study is to describe peri-operative management variability among a group of experienced surgeons and review the literature supporting these practice patterns.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We surveyed 16 surgeons that perform PAO to document various aspects of peri-operative management at four stages: pre-operative, intra-operative, post-operative in the hospital, and at discharge. Our goal was to report current surgical pain management strategies, adjunct medications, type of anesthesia, deep venous thrombosis and heterotopic ossification prophylaxis strategies, initiation of physical therapy, and use of continuous passive motion (CPM). We reviewed current literature to identify studies supporting these perioperative strategies and identify knowledge gaps that would benefit from further investigation.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of the 16 surgeons surveyed, 75% had been in practice greater than 10 years and most had not altered their post-operative protocol for more than 3 years. 15/16 surgeons felt that length of stay could be reduced at their institution with improved peri-operative pain management. 6/16 were considering or had already implemented outpatient PAO as a part of their practice. We found significant variability in the pain medications provided at all peri-operative stages. 14/16 utilized general anesthesia, and many utilized epidural or peripheral nerve blocks. 6/16 surgeons utilized surgical field block (also referred to as periarticular block). These surgeons advocated that surgical field block was an effective intervention with no/minimal complication risk. There is very little literature critically evaluating efficacy of these perioperative management strategies for PAO.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>There is significant practice variability in peri-operative management of PAO surgery. We report various strategies utilized by a group of experienced surgeons and review supporting literature. There are significant knowledge gaps in best surgical pain management strategies, adjunct medications, surgical field blocks, and use of CPM that need further investigation. <b>Level of Evidence: IV</b>.</p>","PeriodicalId":94233,"journal":{"name":"The Iowa orthopaedic journal","volume":"44 1","pages":"159-166"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11195894/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Peri-Operative Management of Periacetabular Osteotomy: A Report of Current Practices from the Anchor Group, Supporting Literature, and Areas for Future Investigation.\",\"authors\":\"Michael Willey, Andrea M Spiker, Matthew R Schmitz, Etienne L Belzile, Rafael J Sierra, John Clohisy, Michael Stover\",\"doi\":\"\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Periacetabular osteotomy (PAO) is a well-established surgical treatment for hip dysplasia, but very few studies report the impact of peri-operative management strategies on early pain and function. The purpose of this study is to describe peri-operative management variability among a group of experienced surgeons and review the literature supporting these practice patterns.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We surveyed 16 surgeons that perform PAO to document various aspects of peri-operative management at four stages: pre-operative, intra-operative, post-operative in the hospital, and at discharge. Our goal was to report current surgical pain management strategies, adjunct medications, type of anesthesia, deep venous thrombosis and heterotopic ossification prophylaxis strategies, initiation of physical therapy, and use of continuous passive motion (CPM). We reviewed current literature to identify studies supporting these perioperative strategies and identify knowledge gaps that would benefit from further investigation.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of the 16 surgeons surveyed, 75% had been in practice greater than 10 years and most had not altered their post-operative protocol for more than 3 years. 15/16 surgeons felt that length of stay could be reduced at their institution with improved peri-operative pain management. 6/16 were considering or had already implemented outpatient PAO as a part of their practice. We found significant variability in the pain medications provided at all peri-operative stages. 14/16 utilized general anesthesia, and many utilized epidural or peripheral nerve blocks. 6/16 surgeons utilized surgical field block (also referred to as periarticular block). These surgeons advocated that surgical field block was an effective intervention with no/minimal complication risk. There is very little literature critically evaluating efficacy of these perioperative management strategies for PAO.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>There is significant practice variability in peri-operative management of PAO surgery. We report various strategies utilized by a group of experienced surgeons and review supporting literature. There are significant knowledge gaps in best surgical pain management strategies, adjunct medications, surgical field blocks, and use of CPM that need further investigation. <b>Level of Evidence: IV</b>.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":94233,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"The Iowa orthopaedic journal\",\"volume\":\"44 1\",\"pages\":\"159-166\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11195894/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"The Iowa orthopaedic journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Iowa orthopaedic journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
背景:髋臼周围截骨术(PAO)是一种行之有效的髋关节发育不良手术治疗方法,但很少有研究报告围手术期管理策略对早期疼痛和功能的影响。本研究旨在描述一组经验丰富的外科医生在围手术期管理方面的差异,并回顾支持这些实践模式的文献:我们调查了 16 位实施 PAO 的外科医生,以记录围手术期管理在四个阶段的各个方面:术前、术中、术后住院和出院。我们的目标是报告当前的手术疼痛管理策略、辅助药物、麻醉类型、深静脉血栓和异位骨化预防策略、物理治疗的启动以及持续被动运动(CPM)的使用情况。我们查阅了现有文献,以确定支持这些围手术期策略的研究,并找出需要进一步调查的知识缺口:结果:在接受调查的 16 位外科医生中,75% 的医生从业时间超过 10 年,大多数医生在超过 3 年的时间里都没有改变过他们的术后方案。15/16的外科医生认为,通过改善围手术期疼痛管理,可以缩短住院时间。6/16 名外科医生正在考虑或已经将门诊 PAO 作为其实践的一部分。我们发现在围手术期各阶段提供的止痛药物存在很大差异。14/16 名外科医生使用了全身麻醉,许多人使用了硬膜外或周围神经阻滞。6/16 名外科医生使用了手术野阻滞(也称为关节周围阻滞)。这些外科医生主张手术野阻滞是一种有效的干预措施,没有/只有很小的并发症风险。很少有文献对这些PAO围手术期管理策略的疗效进行批判性评估:结论:PAO 手术的围手术期管理存在很大的实践差异。我们报告了一组经验丰富的外科医生采用的各种策略,并回顾了相关文献。在最佳手术疼痛管理策略、辅助药物、手术野阻滞和 CPM 的使用等方面还存在很大的知识差距,需要进一步研究。证据级别:四级。
Peri-Operative Management of Periacetabular Osteotomy: A Report of Current Practices from the Anchor Group, Supporting Literature, and Areas for Future Investigation.
Background: Periacetabular osteotomy (PAO) is a well-established surgical treatment for hip dysplasia, but very few studies report the impact of peri-operative management strategies on early pain and function. The purpose of this study is to describe peri-operative management variability among a group of experienced surgeons and review the literature supporting these practice patterns.
Methods: We surveyed 16 surgeons that perform PAO to document various aspects of peri-operative management at four stages: pre-operative, intra-operative, post-operative in the hospital, and at discharge. Our goal was to report current surgical pain management strategies, adjunct medications, type of anesthesia, deep venous thrombosis and heterotopic ossification prophylaxis strategies, initiation of physical therapy, and use of continuous passive motion (CPM). We reviewed current literature to identify studies supporting these perioperative strategies and identify knowledge gaps that would benefit from further investigation.
Results: Of the 16 surgeons surveyed, 75% had been in practice greater than 10 years and most had not altered their post-operative protocol for more than 3 years. 15/16 surgeons felt that length of stay could be reduced at their institution with improved peri-operative pain management. 6/16 were considering or had already implemented outpatient PAO as a part of their practice. We found significant variability in the pain medications provided at all peri-operative stages. 14/16 utilized general anesthesia, and many utilized epidural or peripheral nerve blocks. 6/16 surgeons utilized surgical field block (also referred to as periarticular block). These surgeons advocated that surgical field block was an effective intervention with no/minimal complication risk. There is very little literature critically evaluating efficacy of these perioperative management strategies for PAO.
Conclusion: There is significant practice variability in peri-operative management of PAO surgery. We report various strategies utilized by a group of experienced surgeons and review supporting literature. There are significant knowledge gaps in best surgical pain management strategies, adjunct medications, surgical field blocks, and use of CPM that need further investigation. Level of Evidence: IV.