Postoperative pain after parotid surgery-comparison between superficial/total parotidectomy and extracapsular dissection: a prospective observational study.

PURPOSE: To evaluate postoperative pain and discomfort after parotid surgery with regard to different surgical approaches. METHODS: This clinical study was carried out at a single tertiary referral center (2021-2022) and included 2 groups of adult patients (mean age 56.6 ± 12.7 vs. 53.4 ± 14.1 years) following elective parotid surgery due to a parotid tumor of any entity. The first group (SP/TP group) consisted of 31 patients after superficial parotidectomy (SP) or total parotidectomy (TP) (n = 31). The second group (ECD group) included all patients who had undergone extracapsular dissection (ECD) (n = 51). Primary endpoints comprised pain on ambulation as well as maximum and minimum pain (NRS 0-10) on the first three postoperative days (PODs). A neuropathic pain component (evaluated on POD 1 and 3), the analgesic score (collected from the patient file on POD 1-3), treatment-related side-effects/pain-associated impairments, and patient satisfaction (all measured on the 1st POD) were defined as secondary endpoints. Patients were surveyed using the standardized and validated "Quality Improvement in Postoperative Pain Treatment" (QUIPS) questionnaire and the painDETECT® questionnaire. Comparisons were performed using independent t tests, Wilcoxon tests, and χ2 tests, and the respective effect sizes were calculated. RESULTS: Looking at the first postoperative day, patients of both groups (SP/TP vs. ECD) reported comparable pain on ambulation (2.8 ± 2.0 vs. 2.6 ± 1.8; p = 0.628, r = 0.063), maximum (3.5 ± 2.2 vs. 3.5 ± 2.3; p = 0.992, r = 0.002) and minimum pain (1.1 ± 1.04 vs. 1.0 ± 1.2; p = 0.206, r = 0.157). Furthermore, there were no significant differences in pain-related restrictions or pain medication requirement. The patients in both groups were equally satisfied with their pain therapy (p = 0.282, R = 0.135). The sum score of the painDETECT® questionnaire delivered clearly negative (< 12) results on average (POD1: 6.81; POD3: 6.59); no significant difference between the groups was found (p = 0.991, R2 < .001). CONCLUSION: Neither surgical technique on the parotid gland was significantly superior to the other in terms of postoperative pain perception. Overall, postoperative pain can be classified as mild to moderate following parotid surgery. A neuropathic pain component could be excluded for the acute postoperative phase. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The study was registered in the German Registry for Clinical Studies (DRKS) (application No.: DRKS00016520).

No Success without Effort: Follow-Up at Six Years after Implementing a Benchmarking and Feedback Concept for Postoperative Pain after Total Hip Arthroplasty.

BACKGROUND: Total hip arthroplasty (THA) is still ranked among the operations with the highest postoperative pain scores. Uncontrolled postsurgical pain leads to prolongated hospital stays, causes more frequent adverse reactions and can induce chronical pain syndromes. In 2014, we implemented a standardized, multidisciplinary pain management concept with continuous benchmarking at our tertiary referral center by using the "Quality Improvement in Postoperative Pain Management" (QUIPS) program with excellent results over a period of two years. The initial study ended in 2016 and we aimed to evaluate if it was possible to obtain the excellent short-term results over a period of six years without any extra effort within the daily clinical routine. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In a retrospective study design, we compared postoperative pain, side effects and functional outcome after primary THA for 2015 and 2021, using validated questionnaires from the QUIPS project. In contrast to the implementation of the pain management concept in 2014, the weekly meetings of the multidisciplinary health care team and special education for nurses were stopped in 2021. Data assessment was performed by an independent pain nurse who was not involved in pain management. RESULTS: Altogether, 491 patients received primary THA in 2015 and 2021 at our tertiary referral center. Collected data revealed significantly worse maximum and activity-related pain (both p < 0.001) in combination with significantly higher opioid consumption in comparison to implementation in 2015. Though the patients reported to be less involved in pain management (p < 0.001), the worse pain scores were not reflected by patient satisfaction which remained high. While the participation rate in this benchmarking program dropped, we still fell behind in terms of maximum and activity-related pain in comparison to 24 clinics. CONCLUSION: Significantly worse pain scores in combination with higher opioid usage and a lower hospital participation rate resemble a reduced awareness in postoperative pain management. The significantly lower patient participation in pain management is in line with the worse pain scores and indirectly highlights the need for special education in pain management. The fact patient satisfaction appeared to remain high and did not differ significantly from 2015, as well as the fact we still achieved an acceptable ranking in comparison to other clinics, highlight the value of the implemented multidisciplinary pain management concept.

No clinically significant difference in postoperative pain and side effects comparing conventional and enhanced recovery total hip arthroplasty with early mobilization.

INTRODUCTION: Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) leads to less morbidity, faster recovery, and, therefore, shorter hospital stays. The expected increment of primary total hip arthroplasty (THA) in the U.S. highlights the need for sufficient pain management. The favorable use of short-lasting spinal anesthesia enables early mobilization but may lead to increased opioid consumption the first 24 h (h) postoperatively. METHODS: In a retrospective study design, we compared conventional THA with postoperative immobilization for two days (non-ERAS) and enhanced recovery THA with early mobilization (ERAS group). Data assessment took place as part of the "Quality Improvement in Postoperative Pain Treatment project" (QUIPS). Initially, 2161 patients were enrolled, resulting in 630 after performing a matched pair analysis for sex, age, ASA score (American-Society-of-Anesthesiology) and preoperative pain score. Patient-reported pain scores, objectified by a numerical rating scale (NRS), opioid consumption and side effects were evaluated 24 h postoperatively. RESULTS: The ERAS group revealed higher activity-related pain (p = 0.002), accompanied by significantly higher opioid consumption (p < 0.001). Maximum and minimum pain as well as side effects did not show significant differences (p > 0.05). CONCLUSION: This study is the first to analyze pain scores, opioid consumption, and side effects in a matched pair analyses at this early stage and supports the implementation of an ERAS concept for THA. Taking into consideration the early postoperative mobilization, we were not able to detect a difference regarding postoperative pain. Although opioid consumption appeared to be higher in ERAS group, occurrence of side effects ranged among comparable percentages.

Pain management after tonsillectomy-by demand or by-the-clock-is there a difference?

PURPOSE: To improve pain management after tonsillectomy (TE) by comparing individual analgesic management by demand versus a fixed-scheduled analgesic treatment protocol in a prospective trial. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Forty consecutive patients received individual pain treatment by demand (control group) followed by 40 patients who were treated by a fixed-scheduled four-staged escalating analgesic protocol (intervention group) after TE. Minimum and maximum pain as well as pain on ambulation (NRS 0-10) on the first postoperative day were defined as primary objectives. Secondary endpoints comprised the analgesic score, treatment-related side effects/pain-associated impairments, wish for more pain medication, and patient satisfaction. Patients were surveyed using the standardized and validated "Quality Improvement in Postoperative Pain Treatment" (QUIPS) questionnaire. RESULTS: Patients of the control group reported comparable minimum (2.03 ± 1.42 vs 2.38 ± 1.79, P = 0.337, r = 0.110) and maximum pain (6.65 ± 2.10 vs 6.93 ± 1.86, P = 0.536, r = 0.07) and pain on ambulation (4.73 ± 2.26 vs 5.18 ± 2.19, P = 0.370, r = 0.10) compared to the intervention group. Patients in both groups were comparably well satisfied with the pain treatment (7.53 ± 2.40 vs 7.73 ± 2.30, P = 0.704, r = 0.04), experienced similar side effects and functional impairments (P > 0.050, Φ < 0.3), and did not ask for much more analgesic medication (P = 0.152, Φ = 0.160). CONCLUSION: Pain control following TE was not distinctly affected by applying a fixed-scheduled analgesic treatment protocol compared to individual analgesic therapy. In conclusion, analgesic treatment after TE remains unsatisfying. Consequently, further efforts are needed to achieve a standardized and effective approach to the underlying pathophysiological causes of pain following TE.

The Prognostic Importance of ctDNA in Rectal Cancer: A Critical Reappraisal.

The treatment of locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC) has evolved during the last decades, but recurrence remains a problem. Circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) may result in an individualized treatment approach with improved survival and quality of life, but diverging results impede further development. In this systematic review, we addressed the quality of reporting and its impact on the interpretation of ctDNA results. We performed a systematic literature search using subject headings and search terms related to ctDNA and rectal cancer. The Quality of Prognostic Studies (QUIPS) tool was used to assess bias. Nine studies, with substantial heterogeneity, were included in the analysis. Three out of nine articles had moderate or high risk of bias. No association was found between treatment response and ctDNA status at baseline. There was a negative association between ctDNA positivity at baseline, before and after surgery and survival. The ctDNA status may be of importance to the long-term prognosis, but the area of research is new and is short of dedicated studies. There is an obvious need for standardization in ctDNA research, and the issue should be addressed in future research.

Postoperative Pain Assessment in Patients Undergoing Functional Endoscopic Sinus Surgery for Chronic Rhinosinusitis: A Prospective Observational Study.

Post-operative pain management after functional endoscopic sinus surgery for chronic rhinosinusitis is a field with lack of proper guidance and research. Aim of this study was to study post-operative pain and its management. In this prospective observational study 52 patients undergoing functional endoscopic sinus surgery were examined using Quality Improvement in Post-operative Pain Management (QUIPS) questionnaire post-operatively on 1st day, 2nd day and day of 1st follow up permitting standard assessment of all pain related parameters, outcome, and process parameters. Pain was relatively low after surgery throughout with nominal increase on 2nd day and relatively diminishing on 1st follow up day. Positive pain counselling and many other factors affect pain and related parameters in the patients. Opioid analgesics can be effectively avoided in these patients and pain management protocol should be established for all surgeries along with judicious use of analgesics and proper use of positive pain counselling.

Postoperative pain after tonsillectomy - the value of standardized analgesic treatment protocols.

OBJECTIVE: To alleviate pain after tonsillectomy (TE) with escalating gradual treatment protocols in a prospective trial. MATERIALS & METHODS: Following TE, 83 consecutive adult patients were treated with two different four-staged escalating analgesic protocols. Metamizole served as basic medication in protocol 1 (PT1; n = 44), whereas with protocol 2 (PT2; n = 39) ibuprofen was applied as baseline analgesic. Both protocols were escalated according to the patient´s needs to metamizole and ibuprofen vice versa and additional weak to strong opioids. The primary efficacy endpoint was defined as the minimum and maximum pain as well as pain on ambulation (NRS, 0-10). Secondary endpoints comprised analgesic score, patient satisfaction and treatment-related side-effects. RESULTS: Both patient groups exhibited similar demographic characteristics (PT1: Ø 28.8 years; 64% ♀ and PT2: Ø 26.6 years; 56% ♀). Maximum pain (6.7 ±â€¯1.9 vs. 7.6 ±â€¯1.6, t(81) = -2.254, p = 0.027) and pain on ambulation (5.0 ±â€¯1.8 vs. 5.8 ±â€¯1.8, t(81) = -2.114, p = 0.038) were significantly higher with PT2. 68.2% of patients with PT1 needed an escalation of analgesic treatment compared to 100% with PT2 (p < 0.001). The opioid consumption was also significantly higher with PT2 (43.2% vs. 71.8%, p < 0.001). There were no significant differences regarding functional impairments, side-effects and patient satisfaction (7.0 ±â€¯2.0 vs. 7.4 ±â€¯2.4, t(79) = -0.897, p = 0.373). CONCLUSION: Both treatment protocols yielded in a high degree of patient satisfaction but dissatisfactory pain relief following TE. Metamizole can be recommended as a basic medication allowing for improved pain relief. Reported pain intensities were independent of the amount of opioid intake. Further research is mandatory to standardize and improve analgesic treatment after TE.

[Oxycodone, piritramide and tramadol for the management of postoperative pain : A registry study on use and effectiveness in clinical routine]. / Oxycodon, Piritramid und Tramadol zur postoperativen Schmerztherapie : Eine Registerstudie zur Verwendung und Wirksamkeit.

BACKGROUND: In the context of improving perioperative pain management and shortening hospital stays, potent oral analgesics, such as slow release opioids, are gaining increasingly in importance. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to compare the use and effectiveness of different opioids in postoperative pain treatment in Germany. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Using data from the QUIPS database, the records of 5249 patients were evaluated. The total study population was divided into four groups: group 1 (10 mg oxycodone with or without naloxone 5 mg), group 2 (20 mg oxycodone with or without naloxone 10 mg), group 3 (piritramide) and group 4 (tramadol). Maximum pain intensity, pain-related interference with sleep and respiration, vomiting, postoperative fatigue, desire for more pain treatment and satisfaction with pain management were evaluated. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION: The differences in pain intensity were statistically significant between groups. Patients with piritramide reported more pain, more interference with sleep and respiration and more fatigue compared to those from the other groups. In the group with 10 mg oxycodone, the desire for additional pain medication was the lowest. Postoperative vomiting and satisfaction with pain management differed significantly between the four groups. Procedure-specific analysis has shown that differences between sub-groups were also significant following cholecystectomy and total knee arthroplasty. CONCLUSIONS: In summary, our findings suggest that postoperative pain treatment with slow release oral oxycodone does not show disadvantages compared to tramadol or piritramide with regard to pain-related impairments and opioid-induced side effects. This hypothesis needs to be further analyzed in controlled studies.

Cranio-maxillofacial reconstruction with microvascular radialis flaps-parameters and correlations of postoperative pain management.

OBJECTIVES: Postoperative pain management is of highest interest for patients undergoing maxillofacial surgery including microvascular reconstructive surgery. Currently, there is a lack of information regarding process and outcome of postoperative pain management after microvascular reconstruction. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In a prospective clinical study, 31 adults were evaluated on the first postoperative day following microvascular reconstruction with a radial forearm flap using the standardized questionnaire of the Germany-wide project Quality Improvement in Postoperative Pain Management (QUIPS). It enables a standardized assessment of patients' characteristics, pain parameters, outcome and pain therapy process parameters. RESULTS: Pain management consisted predominately of premedication with midazolam, sufentanil and metamizol intraoperatively, piritramid in the intensive care unit and metamizol, tramadol and fentanyl patches on ward. Nineteen patients (61.3 %) showed inadequate pain management with pain levels ≥4. Among other significant relations, patients exhibiting an age below the median presented significant higher levels of pain under strain (p = .041) and maximum pain (p = .006) as well as rate of breathing (p = .009) and mood (p = .006) disturbance. Performance of pain counselling showed specific impact on pain under strain (p = .008), maximum pain (p = .004) and satisfaction with pain intensity (p = .001). Whether microvascular reconstruction was performed with primary or secondary intention or performance of a neck dissection did not show significant influence. CONCLUSIONS: QUIPS helped us to adequately evaluate the procedure-specific quality of postoperative management following microvascular reconstruction with a radial forearm flap. It helped us to identify a surprisingly high amount of inadequate pain management. Postoperative pain levels seem to be primarily influenced by the performed reconstruction. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Establishment of a continuous and procedure-specific evaluation of postoperative pain levels should help to avoid inadequate pain management, which is widely prevalent according to the literature and our study. Preoperative pain counselling is essential and should be procedure specific to be its best.

Pain on the first postoperative day after head and neck cancer surgery.

Postoperative pain within the first 24 h after head and neck cancer (HNC) surgery was assessed. Factors influencing postoperative pain were identified. In a prospective cohort single center study 145 HNC patients rated their pain on the first postoperative day using questionnaires of the German-wide project Quality Improvement in Postoperative Pain Treatment (QUIPS) including numeric rating scales (NRS, 0-10) for the determination of patient's pain on ambulation, his maximal and minimal pain. QUIPS allowed a standardized assessment of patients' characteristics and pain-related parameters. The influence of these parameters on the patients' postoperative pain was estimated by univariate and multivariate statistical analysis. One-third had already pain prior to the surgical intervention. Overall, the mean pain on ambulation, maximal pain and minimal pain were 2.55 ± 2.36, 3.18 ± 2.86, and 1.38 ± 2.86 (NRS), respectively. 53 % of the patients had maximal pain scores >3. Multivariate analysis revealed independent predictors for more postoperative pain on ambulation: intensity of chronic preoperative pain, usage of non-opioids on ward, and existence of pain documentation on ward. Intensity of chronic preoperative pain and usage of non-opioids on ward were independent risk factors for more maximal pain. Intensity of chronic preoperative pain was independently associated to more minimal pain. Concerning pain management side effects, the risk for drowsiness increased with longer time of surgery. Postoperative pain after HNC surgery is highly variable and seems often to be unnecessarily high. Many patients seem to receive less analgesia than needed or ineffective analgesic drug regimes.

Quality improvement in postoperative pain management: results from the QUIPS project.

INTRODUCTION: Acute postoperative pain management is still far from satisfactory despite the availability of high-quality guidelines and advanced pain management techniques. METHODS: An outcome-oriented project called QUIPS (Quality Improvement in Postoperative Pain Management) was developed, consisting of standardized data acquisition and an analysis of quality and process indicators. RESULTS: After validation of the questionnaire, a total of 12 389 data sets were collected from 30 departments in six participating hospitals. Improved outcomes (reduction in pain intensity) were observed in four of the six hospitals. The most painful operations, in the patients' judgment, were traumatological and orthopedic procedures, as well as laparoscopic appendectomy. Traditional process indicators, such as routine pain documentation, were only poorly correlated with outcomes. DISCUSSION: QUIPS shows that outcomes in postoperative pain management can be measured and compared in routine clinical practice. This may lead to improved care. QUIPS reveals which operations are the most painful. Quality improvement initiatives should use as few resources as possible, measure the quality of the outcomes, and provide rapid feedback. Structural and process parameters should be continuously reevaluated to determine their suitability as indicators of quality.