Analgesic Use Following Bilateral Breast Reduction.

The opioid epidemic in the United States resulted in 42,000 deaths in 2016, 40% of which involved a prescription opioid. It is estimated that 2 million patients become opioid-dependent after elective, ambulatory surgery each year. There has been increased interest in quantifying the need for postoperative narcotic pain medications for a variety of surgical procedures. However, studies have been limited. We sought to quantify the analgesic usage after one of the most common operations performed in plastic surgery, bilateral breast reduction.In this prospective, observational study, sequential breast reduction patients were contacted by telephone on the evening of postoperative days 3 and 7. Patients were queried as to which analgesic medications were used on the day of the phone call. Data relating to dosage, frequency, and satisfaction with pain control were sought. Patients taking chronic narcotics, postoperative complications requiring surgical intervention, and those unable to be reached after multiple attempts were excluded.Complete data were obtained for 40 patients. Narcotic prescriptions were written for oxycodone, hydromorphone and tramadol, with the number prescribed ranging from 0 to 20 tablets. The median total number used was 6 tablets. Eighty percent of patients used a total of 10 tablets or less. Fifty percent of patients were using only nonnarcotic analgesia by postoperative day 3. Patient-reported satisfaction with pain control was overwhelmingly positive, with 95% being either somewhat satisfied or very satisfied with postoperative pain control. Of those taking any medication on postoperative day 3, only half were using a nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID) as part of their pain regimen.The number of tablets prescribed after breast reduction surgery varies considerably, and there is no consensus regarding the appropriate number to prescribe. Currently, few patients use all the medication prescribed to them, indicating a high rate of overprescribing. The overwhelming majority are satisfied with their pain control. Most patients use less than 10 tablets of narcotic pain medication after surgery. Acetaminophen is widely used as an adjunct but NSAIDs remain underutilized. Based on these data, we recommend that breast reduction patient's pain is best managed with acetaminophen, NSAIDs, and expectation management.

Magnetic Resonance Imaging Screening after Silicone Implant Breast Surgery: Patient Survey of Adherence to U.S. Food and Drug Administration Recommendations.

BACKGROUND: The U.S. Food and Drug Administration recommends women with silicone breast implants undergo magnetic resonance imaging surveillance to detect asymptomatic rupture. Screening is costly and often not covered by insurance. The authors assessed awareness of and adherence to these recommendations among patients with silicone breast implants. METHODS: The authors searched electronic medical records for patients aged 18 years or older with silicone breast implants placed between 2011 and 2016. Consenting patients were surveyed by telephone using a standardized script to assess awareness of U.S. Food and Drug Administration recommendations, whether they had undergone magnetic resonance imaging screening, and barriers to testing. Patients who declined to participate or could not be contacted were excluded. Demographics and operative data were collected. Odds ratios were calculated with one-sample 95 percent confidence intervals, and Fisher exact tests of independence were conducted under assumptions of normality. Multivariable logistic regression analysis was performed to test for confounding. RESULTS: Of 370 patients meeting inclusion criteria, 109 consented to participate. Adherence to U.S. Food and Drug Administration recommendations was 5.9 percent (95 percent CI, 0.15 to 28.7 percent). There was no difference in adherence between patients undergoing cosmetic versus reconstructive surgery ( p = 1.00; OR, 0.80; 95 percent CI, 1.17 to 2.93), having health insurance ( p = 0.58), or residing in a county with median annual household income greater than that of the state of residence ( p = 0.33). CONCLUSIONS: A small proportion of respondents had undergone magnetic resonance imaging in accordance with U.S. Food and Drug Administration recommendations. Low adherence highlights a potential limitation of current federal surveillance recommendations. Additional research is needed to better characterize adherence to magnetic resonance imaging surveillance recommendations, identify barriers to implementation, and determine whether this recommendation remains valid.

BREAST-Q Outcomes before and after Bilateral Reduction Mammaplasty.

BACKGROUND: The BREAST-Q is the only questionnaire specific to bilateral breast reduction that was developed according to federal and international standards. Many payors mandate minimum resection weights for preapproval, despite lacking supportive evidence for this practice. This study aimed to assess changes in BREAST-Q scores after bilateral breast reduction, and determine whether compliance with Schnur requirements impacts improvement in patient-reported outcomes. METHODS: Patients presenting for bilateral breast reduction from 2011 to 2017 were asked to complete the BREAST-Q preoperatively and postoperatively. Multivariate regression analysis was performed to isolate factors associated with favorable outcomes. RESULTS: Complete data were available for 238 patients. Mean time to postoperative BREAST-Q was 213 days. Complications occurred in 31 patients (13.0 percent). Mean preoperative BREAST-Q scores were below normative values (p < 0.001), and mean postoperative scores were above normative values (p < 0.001 for Satisfaction with Breasts, Psychosocial Well-being, and Sexual Well-being; and p = 0.05 for Physical Well-being). Postoperative Physical Well-being scores were similar to normative values for resections less than Schnur (p = 0.32), but below norms for resections greater than Schnur (p < 0.0001). On multivariate regression (n = 230), complication and surgeon experience were the only independent predictors of lesser improvement on the Satisfaction with Breasts subscale. CONCLUSIONS: This study is the largest to include both preoperative and postoperative bilateral breast reduction BREAST-Q scores, and to compare multiple subscales to normative data. Scores overwhelmingly increased, regardless of age or Schnur compliance. Complications negatively impacted degree of BREAST-Q improvement. Interestingly, postoperative Physical Well-being was slightly higher in women with non-Schnur-compliant resections. Bilateral breast reduction substantially improves patient welfare, and our data question the validity of insurer-mandated minimum resections. CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic, III.

No date for the PROM: the association between patient-reported health events and clinical coding in primary care.

OBJECTIVE: It is unclear whether data from patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are captured and used by clinicians despite policy initiatives. We examined the extent to which fall risk and urinary incontinence (UI) reported on PROMS and provided to clinicians prior to a patient visit are subsequently captured in the electronic medical record (EMR). Additionally, we aimed to determine whether the use of PROMs and EMR documentation is higher for visits where PROM data was provided to clinicians. DESIGN: We conducted a cross-sectional patient-reported risk assessment survey and semi-structured interviews with clinicians to identify themes related to the use of PROMs. SETTING: Fourteen primary care clinics in the US (eight intervention and six control clinics), between October 2013 and May 2015. PARTICIPANTS: Primary care clinicians and older adult (≥66 years) patients completing a 46-item health risk assessment, including PROMs for fall risk and UI. INTERVENTION: Risk assessment results provided to the clinician or nurse practitioners prior to the clinic visit in intervention clinics; data was not provided in control clinics. MAIN OUTCOME: 1) Agreement between ICD-9 codes of fall risk or UI in the EMR and patient-reports, and 2) clinician experience of PROMs use and impact on coding. RESULTS: A total of 505 older adult patients were included in the study, 176 at control clinics and 329 at intervention clinics. While patient reports of fall risk and UI were readily captured by PROMs, this information was only coded in the EMR between 3% - 14% of the time (poor Kappa agreement). Intervention clinics performed slightly better than control clinics. Clinician interviews (n = 16) revealed low use of PROMs data with multiple barriers cited including poor access to data, high quantity of data, interruption to workflow, and a lack of training on PROMs. CONCLUSIONS: Current strategies of providing PROMs data prior to clinic visits may not be an effective way of communicating important health information to busy clinicians; ultimately resulting in underuse. Better systems of presenting PROMs data, and clinician training on the importance of PROMs and their use, is needed.