Patient attitudes regarding pca and associated costs.

PURPOSE: To determine patients' knowledge and attitudes towards patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) costs through the use of our acute pain service quality assurance (QA) programme. METHODS: Quality Assurance questionnaires were distributed to all patients receiving PCA opioids for > 12 hr. Patients were asked to note the presence of side effects (nausea/vomiting, pruritus, urinary retention), to indicate their satisfaction with regard to their pain relief, follow-up assessments, treatment of side effects, and to recall the previous method of pain relief and their satisfaction with it. Patients were also asked to estimate the total cost of PCA (0-$50, $50-100, $100-200, > $200), and what amount if any they would be willing to pay (0-$50, $50-100, $100-200, > $200). Results obtained over a recent four month period were reviewed. RESULTS: One hundred and thirty-three questionnaires were distributed and 103 (77%) were returned. The percentage of patients rating their satisfaction as very good or excellent was 86% for pain relief, 96% for follow-up, 71% for side effect treatment, but only 43% for their previous surgical pain relief (P < 0.001). The distribution of cost estimates was 10% $50-100, 37% $100-200 and 53% > $200 with 60% willing to pay a portion of this cost. Those willing to pay were more likely to have had very good or excellent pain relief (94% vs 71%, P < 0.05) and treatment of side effects (71% vs 48%, P < 0.05) than those not willing to pay. CONCLUSIONS: Patients continue to be highly satisfied with PCA therapy and are aware of the costs involved. A majority of patients were willing to pay to obtain this service if necessary. Patients who had poorer pain relief and less efficacious treatment of their side effects were less willing to pay.

Postoperative cognitive impairment in the elderly. Choice of patient-controlled analgesia opioid.

This study evaluated the safety and cognitive impact of patient-controlled analgesia with fentanyl compared to patient-controlled analgesia with morphine among elderly postoperative patients. In addition, two screening tests for cognitive impairment, the Mini Mental Status Exam and the Short Portable Mental Status Questionnaire, were compared. Ninety-six elderly patients were randomly allocated to receive patient-controlled analgesia with either fentanyl or morphine following hip or knee arthroplasty. Patients were evaluated postoperatively for clinical confusion, cognitive function test results, adequacy of analgesia, drug use and complications. Fentanyl produced less depression in postoperative cognitive function compared to morphine. The incidence of clinical confusion was not statistically different between groups (4.3% for fentanyl versus 14.3% for morphine). Fentanyl patients used more opioid based on a dose ratio of 100:1 suggesting that this dose ratio is inadequate. The incidence of urinary retention was lower in the fentanyl group. A poor agreement between the two tests of cognitive impairment mandates caution when peri-operative cognitive function is compared using different tests.

Bupivacaine 0.125% improves continuous postoperative epidural fentanyl analgesia after abdominal or thoracic surgery.

The addition of 0.125% and 0.25% bupivacaine to continuous postoperative epidural infusions of fentanyl, in a 10 micrograms.ml-1 concentration, were studied in 39 patients following abdominal or thoracic surgery in prospective, random, double-blind fashion. Patients received an initial bolus of 0.1 ml.kg-1 of the the study solution and an infusion of 6 ml.hr-1 which was titrated to maintain analgesia (VAS < 40). Assessments of pain (VAS), pulmonary function (pH, PaCO2), and bowel function (time to flatus or po fluids) were made until the second post-operative morning. There was a difference among the three groups in analgesia (means VAS scores) over time (P < 0.01), with the fentanyl-alone group producing less analgesia than the 0.125% bupivacaine group (P < 0.01). There was no difference in the average infusion rates, postoperative pulmonary function, or bowel function. The incidence of side effects including somnolence, nausea and vomiting, and pruritus was also similar. Fewer patients in the 0.125% bupivacaine group than in the 0.25% group developed a transient sensory loss to pinprick and ice (3 vs 10, P < 0.001). Four patients in both bupivacaine groups had leg weakness, those in the 0.125% were all a Bromage 1 score, while in the 0.25% group one had a Bromage 1, one a Bromage 2, and two Bromage 3 scores. The addition of 0.125% bupivacaine improves the analgesia of epidural infusions of fentanyl (10 microgms.ml(-1)) when used following abdominal or thoracic surgery and results in minimal sensorimotor disturbance.

Bupivacaine 0.1% does not improve post-operative epidural fentanyl analgesia after abdominal or thoracic surgery.

Epidural infusions of fentanyl, in a 10 micrograms.ml-1 concentration, combined with bupivacaine 0.1% were compared with epidural infusions of fentanyl alone for postoperative analgesia following abdominal or thoracic surgery. There were no detectable differences between the two groups in analgesia (mean visual analogue scale pain scores ranging between 15-35 mm), average infusion rates of 7-9 ml.hr-1, and serum fentanyl concentrations which reached 1-2 ng.ml-1. There was no difference in postoperative pulmonary function (pH, PaCO2, SaO2), or bowel function (time to flatus or po fluids). The incidence of side-effects including somnolence, nausea and vomiting, pruritus and postural hypotension was also similar. Of the patients receiving fentanyl and bupivacaine 0.1%, three developed a transient unilateral sensory loss to pinprick and ice, and two of these patients had unilateral leg weakness equal to a Bromage 1 score. The addition of bupivacaine 0.1% does not improve epidural infusions of fentanyl using a 10 micrograms.ml-1 concentration following abdominal or thoracic surgery.

Low-dose bupivacaine does not improve postoperative epidural fentanyl analgesia in orthopedic patients.

Epidural infusions of 10 micrograms/mL fentanyl combined with low-dose bupivacaine (0.1%) were compared with epidural infusions of fentanyl alone for postoperative analgesia after total knee joint replacement. There were no detectable differences between the two groups in analgesia (visual analogue scale ranging between 15 and 40 mm), infusion rates (which averaged 7-9 mL/h), or serum fentanyl levels (which reached 1-2 ng/mL). The incidence of side effects, including nausea, vomiting, and pruritus, was also similar. Of the patients receiving fentanyl and low-dose bupivacaine, one developed a transient unilateral motor and sensory loss, and one developed significant hypotension and respiratory depression. The addition of low-dose bupivacaine does not improve epidural fentanyl infusion analgesia after knee surgery and may increase morbidity.