Postdischarge Pain Management After Thoracic Surgery: A Patient-Centered Approach.

BACKGROUND: Postoperative analgesia is paramount to recovery after thoracic surgery, and opioids play an invaluable role in this process. However, current 1-size-fits-all prescribing practices produce large quantities of unused opioids, thereby increasing the risk of nonmedical use and overdose. This study hypothesized that patient and perioperative characteristics, including 24-hour before-discharge opioid intake, could inform more appropriate postdischarge prescriptions after thoracic surgery. METHODS: This prospective observational cohort study was conducted in 200 adult thoracic surgical patients. The cohort was divided into 3 groups on the basis of 24-hour before-discharge opioid intake in morphine milligram equivalents (MME): (1) no (0 MME), (2) low (>0 to ≤22.5 MME), or (3) high (>22.5 MME) before-discharge opioid intake. Logistic regression was used to analyze the association of patient and perioperative characteristics with self-reported after-discharge opioid use. RESULTS: Univariate analysis showed that preoperative opioid use, 24-hour before-discharge acetaminophen and gabapentinoid intake, and 24-hour before-discharge opioid intake were associated with higher after-discharge opioid use. Multivariable modeling demonstrated that 24-hour before-discharge opioid intake was most significantly associated with after-discharge opioid use. For example, compared with patients who took high amounts of opioids before discharge, patients who took no opioids before discharge were 99% less likely to take a high amount of opioids after discharge compared with taking none (odds ratio, 0.011; 95% confidence interval, 0.003 to 0.047; P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Assessment of 24-hour before-discharge opioid intake may inform patient requirements after discharge. Opioid prescriptions after thoracic surgery can thereby be targeted on the basis of anticipated needs.

Predicting Opioid Use Following Discharge After Cesarean Delivery.

PURPOSE: Although cesarean delivery is the most common surgical procedure in the United States, postoperative opioid prescribing varies greatly. We hypothesized that patient characteristics, procedural characteristics, or both would be associated with high vs low opioid use after discharge. This information could help individualize prescriptions. METHODS: In this prospective cohort study, we quantified opioid use for 4 weeks following hospital discharge after cesarean delivery. Predischarge characteristics were obtained from health records, and patients self-reported total opioid use postdischarge on weekly questionnaires. Opioid use was quantified in milligram morphine equivalents (MMEs). Binomial and Poisson regression analyses were performed to assess predictors of opioid use after discharge. RESULTS: Of the 233 patients starting the study, 203 (87.1%) completed at least 1 questionnaire and were included in analyses (86.3% completed all 4 questionnaires). A total of 113 patients were high users (>75 MMEs) and 90 patients were low users (≤75 MMEs) of opioids postdischarge. The group reporting low opioid use received on average 44% fewer opioids in the 24 hours before discharge compared with the group reporting high opioid use (mean = 33.0 vs 59.3 MMEs, P <.001). Only a minority of patients (11.4% to 15.8%) stored leftover opioids in a locked location, and just 31 patients disposed of leftover opioids. CONCLUSIONS: Knowledge of predischarge opioid use can be useful as a tool to inform individualized opioid prescriptions, help optimize nonopioid analgesia, and reduce opioid use. Additional studies are needed to evaluate the impact of implementing such measures on prescribing practices, pain, and functional outcomes.

Neostigmine Versus Sugammadex for Reversal of Neuromuscular Blockade and Effects on Reintubation for Respiratory Failure or Newly Initiated Noninvasive Ventilation: An Interrupted Time Series Design.

BACKGROUND: Pulmonary complications related to residual neuromuscular blockade lead to morbidity and mortality. Using an interrupted time series design, we tested whether proportions of reintubation for respiratory failure or new noninvasive ventilation were changed after a system-wide transition of the standard reversal agent from neostigmine to sugammadex. METHODS: Adult patients undergoing a procedure with general anesthesia that included pharmacologic reversal of neuromuscular blockade and admission ≥1 night were eligible. Groups were determined by date of surgery: August 15, 2015 to May 10, 2016 (presugammadex), and August 15, 2016 to May 11, 2017 (postsugammadex). The period from May 11, 2016 to August 14, 2016 marked the institutional transition (washout/wash-in) from neostigmine to sugammadex. The primary outcome was defined as a composite of reintubation for respiratory failure or new noninvasive ventilation. Event proportions were parsed into 10-day intervals in each cohort, and trend lines were fitted. Segmented logistic regression models appropriate for an interrupted time series design and adjusting for potential confounders were utilized to evaluate the immediate effect of the implementation of sugammadex and on the difference between preintervention and postintervention slopes of the outcomes. Models containing all parameters (full) and only significant parameters (parsimonious) were fitted and are reported. RESULTS: Of 13,031 screened patients, 7316 patients were included. The composite respiratory outcome occurred in 6.1% of the presugammadex group and 4.2% of the postsugammadex group. Adjusted odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for the composite respiratory outcome were 0.795 (95% CI, 0.523-1.208) for the immediate effect of intervention, 0.986 (95% CI, 0.959-1.013) for the difference between preintervention and postintervention slopes in the full model, and 0.667 (95% CI, 0.536-0.830) for the immediate effect of the intervention in the parsimonious model. CONCLUSIONS: The system-wide transition of the standard pharmacologic reversal agent from neostigmine to sugammadex was associated with a reduction in the odds of the composite respiratory outcome. This observation is supported by nonsignificant within-group time trends and a significant reduction in intercept/level from presugammadex to postsugammadex in a parsimonious logistic regression model adjusting for covariates.

Progressive Increase in Scholarly Productivity of New American Board of Anesthesiology Diplomates From 2006 to 2016: A Bibliometric Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Improving research productivity is a common goal in academic anesthesiology. Initiatives to enhance scholarly productivity in anesthesiology were proposed more than a decade ago as a result of emphasis on clinical work. We hypothesized that American Board of Anesthesiology diplomates certified from 2006 to 2016 would be progressively more likely to have published at least once during this time period. METHODS: A complete list of 17,332 new diplomates was obtained from the American Board of Anesthesiology for the years 2006 to 2016. These names were queried using PubMed, and the number of publications up to and including the diplomate's year of primary certification was recorded. Descriptive statistics and logistic regression analysis were used to analyze the association of the year of primary certification and whether a diplomate had published at least once. RESULTS: The percentage of American Board of Anesthesiology diplomates with ≥1 publication at the time of primary certification increased from 14.9% to 29.3% from 2006 to 2016. The mean number of publications per diplomate more than doubled from 0.31 to 0.79. Logistic regression analysis revealed the year of primary certification as significantly associated with having ≥1 publication (P < .001). Using 2006 as the reference year, odds of having published at least once were higher in the years 2010 to 2016, with the highest odds ratio of having a article published occurring in 2016: 2.359 (confidence interval, 1.978-2.812; P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Publications by new diplomates of the American Board of Anesthesiology have increased between 2006 and 2016. Whether the observed increase in publications could reflect efforts to stimulate interest in academic objectives during training remains to be proven.

Gender differences in career development awards in United States' anesthesiology and surgery departments, 2006-2016.

BACKGROUND: Although the status of women in anesthesiology has advanced by many measures, obtaining career development funding remains challenging. Here, we sought to compare the characteristics of funded career development awards from the National Institutes of Health (NIH) between the specialties of anesthesiology and surgery. We hypothesized that the two groups differ in percentage of faculty with awards, gender distribution among principal investigators, as well as the number of awards promoting diversity. METHODS: The NIH grant-funding database RePORT was queried for career development awards for the years 2006-2016 using the filters "Anesthesiology" and "Surgery." Grants were characterized based on the gender of the principal investigator and whether the funding opportunity announcement indicated promotion of underrepresented minorities (URM). The 2016 Association of American Medical Colleges (AAMC) report on "Distribution of U.S. Medical School Faculty by Sex and Rank" was used to adjust comparisons according to baseline gender distributions in anesthesiology and surgery departments. Cohorts were characterized using descriptive methods and compared using Chi-square or Fisher's exact test. RESULTS: Based on our AAMC data query, in 2016, the number of women faculty members at the instructor or assistant professor level in U.S. medical schools was 2314 (41%) for anesthesiology and 2281 (30%) for surgery. Between 2006 and 2016, there were 88 career development grants awarded to investigators in anesthesiology departments compared to 261 in surgery departments. Of the grantees in each specialty, 29 (33%) were women in anesthesiology and 72 (28%) in surgery (P = 0.344). Awards to promote URM were identified for two grants (2%) in anesthesiology and nine grants (3%) in surgery (P = 0.737). Faculty members in surgery were more likely to receive an award than in anesthesiology (P < 0.0001), and women were less likely to receive an award than men (P = 0.026). CONCLUSIONS: The major difference between US anesthesiology and surgery departments is that the number of faculty career development awards is significantly higher in surgery departments. Future efforts should aim to identify the reasons for such differences in order to inform strategies that can improve the likelihood for junior faculty members to receive career development funding.

Animal experimental research design in critical care.

BACKGROUND: Limited translational success in critical care medicine is thought to be in part due to inadequate methodology, study design, and reporting in preclinical studies. The purpose of this study was to compare reporting of core features of experimental rigor: blinding, randomization, and power calculations in critical care medicine animal experimental research. We hypothesized that these study design characteristics were more frequently reported in 2015 versus 2005. METHODS: We performed an observational bibliometric study to grade manuscripts on blinding, randomization, and power calculations. Chi-square tests and logistic regression were used for analysis. Inter-rater agreement was assessed using kappa and Gwet's AC1. RESULTS: A total of 825 articles from seven journals were included. In 2005, power estimations were reported in 2%, randomization in 35%, and blinding in 20% (n = 482). In 2015, these metrics were included in 9, 47, and 36% of articles (n = 343). The increase in proportion for the metrics tested was statistically significant (p < 0.001, p = 0.002, and p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Only a minority of published manuscripts in critical care medicine journals reported on recommended study design steps to increase rigor. Routine justification for the presence or absence of blinding, randomization, and power calculations should be considered to better enable readers to assess potential sources of bias.

Vitamin C in sepsis.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: This narrative review summarizes recent insights into the role of vitamin C in sepsis. RECENT FINDINGS: Septic shock remains a major source of morbidity and mortality in critically ill patients. Although many nutritional supplements have previously been tested unsuccessfully, vitamins are still being explored as a therapeutic option in septic patients. In particular, vitamin C-containing regimens as adjunctive therapy in sepsis have received much attention. SUMMARY: In-vitro evidence supports a critical role for vitamin C in cellular mechanisms relevant to the pathophysiology of sepsis. However, whether this justifies therapeutic use of vitamin C in septic patients remains uncertain.

Opioid Use and Storage Patterns by Patients after Hospital Discharge following Surgery.

INTRODUCTION: Opioid-based analgesic therapy represents a cornerstone of pain management after surgery. The recent rise in opioid sales and opioid overdoses suggests it is important to maximize the safety of opioid prescribing after surgery. Given that patients may live with other family members in the home, safe storage and appropriate disposal of excess opioids after hospital discharge are necessary to prevent unintended secondary exposures. Identifying characteristics of patients who are likely to be prescribed excess opioids after surgery may enable more targeted prescription practices and safety interventions. Our study aimed to elucidate patient-reported opioid use patterns and modes of home storage of opioids among patients discharged home after Cesarean section (C-section) and thoracic surgery. Specifically, we sought to identify characteristics of patients who reported using about half or more versus less of the opioids prescribed to them for use after hospital discharge. METHODS: For this cohort study, we developed a survey on quality of analgesia following hospital discharge, amounts of opioids taken relative to the amount prescribed, reasons for not taking all prescribed medications, and storage and disposal methods for leftover opioids. Adult patients, who had C-section or thoracic surgery at a tertiary academic medical center, were given a web-based self-administered survey after discharge. Descriptive statistics (means and standard deviations, proportions) were used to describe the study sample and survey results. Comparisons between patients who reported taking about half or more versus less of the opioids prescribed to them for use after hospital discharge were made using unpaired t-tests, Mann-Whitney tests, and Chi-square tests as appropriate. RESULTS: The majority (53%) of respondents after C-section (N = 30) reported taking either no or very few (less than 5) prescribed opioid pills; 83% reported taking half or less; and 17% of women, reported taking all or nearly all (5 or fewer pills left over) of their opioid prescription. In a cohort of patients after thoracic surgery (n = 31) 45% reported taking either no or very few (5 or less) prescribed opioid pills; 71% reported taking half or less; and 29% of patients reported taking all or nearly all (5 or fewer pills left over) of their opioid prescription. In both cohorts, use of opioids while hospitalized was higher in the group reporting using about half or more of prescribed opioids after discharge. Leftover opioids were stored in an unlocked location in 77% and 73% of cases following C-section and thoracic surgery, respectively. CONCLUSION: Our findings from surveys in two distinct patient populations at a single academic medical center suggest that current opioid prescribing practices for pain management at hospital discharge following Cesarean section and thoracic surgery may not account for individual patients' analgesic requirements. Excess opioid pills are commonly stored in unsecured locations and represent a potential source for non-medical opioid use and associated morbidity and mortality in patients and their families. Research to develop goal-directed and patient-centered post-discharge opioid prescription practices and encourage opioid safety practices after surgery is needed.