Opioid Risk Tool, in-hospital opioid exposure, and opioid demand predict pain outcomes following traumatic injury.

Prescribed opioids are a mainstay pain treatment after traumatic injury, but a subgroup of patients may be at risk for continued opioid use. We evaluated the predictive utility of a traditional screening tool, the Opioid Risk Tool (ORT), and two other measures: average in-hospital milligram morphine equivalents (MME) per day and an assessment of opioid demand in predicting pain outcomes. Assessments of pain-related outcomes (pain intensity, interference, injury-related stress, and need for additional pain treatment) were administered at 2 weeks and 12 months post-discharge in a sample of 34 patients hospitalized for traumatic injury. Bayesian linear models were used to evaluate changes in responses over time as a function of predictors. High-risk ORT, higher MME per day, and greater opioid demand predicted less change in outcomes over time. This report provides first evidence that malleable factors of opioid and opioid demand have utility in predicting pain outcomes following traumatic injury.

An opioid-minimizing multimodal pain regimen reduces opioid exposure and pain in trauma-injured patients at high risk for opioid misuse: Secondary analysis from the mast trial.

BACKGROUND: Screening to identify patients at risk for opioid misuse after trauma is recommended but not commonly used to guide perioperative opioid management interventions. The Multimodal Analgesic Strategies for Trauma trial demonstrated that an opioid-minimizing multimodal pain regimen reduced opioid exposure in a heterogeneous trauma patient population. Here, we assess the efficacy of the Multimodal Analgesic Strategies for Trauma multimodal pain regimen in a critical patient subgroup who screened at high risk for opioid misuse. METHODS: The Multimodal Analgesic Strategies for Trauma trial compared an opioid-minimizing multimodal pain regimen (oral acetaminophen, naproxen, gabapentin, lidocaine patch, as-needed opioid) against an original multimodal pain regimen (intravenous followed by oral acetaminophen, 48-hour celecoxib and pregabalin, followed by naproxen and gabapentin, scheduled tramadol, as-needed opioid), in a randomized trial conducted from April 2018 to March 2019. A total of 631 enrolled patients were classified either as low- or high-risk via the Opioid Risk Tool. Bayesian analyses evaluated the moderating influence of Opioid Risk Tool risk (high/low) on the effect of Multimodal Analgesic Strategies for Trauma multimodal pain regimen (versus original) on opioid exposure (morphine milligram equivalents/day), opioids prescribed at discharge, and pain scores. RESULTS: Multimodal Analgesic Strategies for Trauma multimodal pain regimen effectively reduced morphine milligram equivalents/day in low- and high-Opioid Risk Tool risk groups. Moderation was observed for opioids at discharge and pain scores; Multimodal Analgesic Strategies for Trauma multimodal pain regimen was effective in the high-risk group only (opioids at discharge: 63% vs 77%, relative risk = 0.86, 95% Bayesian credible interval [0.66-1.08], posterior probability (relative risk <1) = 90%; pain scores: b = 3.8, 95% Bayesian credible interval [3.2-4.4] vs b = 4.0, 95% Bayesian credible interval [3.4-4.6], posterior probability (b <0) = 87%). CONCLUSION: This study is the first to show the moderating influence of opioid misuse risk on the effectiveness of an opioid-minimizing multimodal pain regimen. The Opioid Risk Tool was useful in identifying high-risk patients for whom the Multimodal Analgesic Strategies for Trauma multimodal pain regimen is recommended for perioperative pain management.

Randomized Controlled Trial of Surgical Rib Fixation to Nonoperative Management in Severe Chest Wall Injury.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the effectiveness of surgical stabilization of rib fractures (SSRFs) to nonoperative management in severe chest wall injury. BACKGROUND: SSRF has been shown to improve outcomes in patients with clinical flail chest and respiratory failure. However, the effect of SSRF outcomes in severe chest wall injuries without clinical flail chest is unknown. METHODS: Randomized controlled trial comparing SSRF to nonoperative management in severe chest wall injury, defined as: (1) a radiographic flail segment without clinical flail or (2) ≥5 consecutive rib fractures or (3) any rib fracture with bicortical displacement. Randomization was stratified by the unit of admission as a proxy for injury severity. Primary outcome was hospital length of stay (LOS). Secondary outcomes included intensive care unit (ICU) LOS, ventilator days, opioid exposure, mortality, and incidences of pneumonia and tracheostomy. Quality of life at 1, 3, and 6 months was measured using the EQ-5D-5L survey. RESULTS: Eighty-four patients were randomized in an intention-to-treat analysis (usual care = 42, SSRF = 42). Baseline characteristics were similar between groups. The numbers of total fractures, displaced fractures, and segmental fractures per patient were also similar, as were the incidences of displaced fractures and radiographic flail segments. Hospital LOS was greater in the SSRF group. ICU LOS and ventilator days were similar. After adjusting for the stratification variable, hospital LOS remained greater in the SSRF group (RR: 1.48, 95% CI: 1.17-1.88). ICU LOS (RR: 1.65, 95% CI: 0.94-2.92) and ventilator days (RR: 1.49, 95% CI: 0.61--3.69) remained similar. Subgroup analysis showed that patients with displaced fractures were more likely to have LOS outcomes similar to their usual care counterparts. At 1 month, SSRF patients had greater impairment in mobility [3 (2-3) vs 2 (1-2), P = 0.012] and self-care [2 (1-2) vs 2 (2-3), P = 0.034] dimensions of the EQ-5D-5L. CONCLUSIONS: In severe chest wall injury, even in the absence of clinical flail chest, the majority of patients still reported moderate to extreme pain and impairment of usual physical activity at one month. SSRF increased hospital LOS and did not provide any quality of life benefit for up to 6 months.

Multi-modal Analgesic Strategies for Trauma (MAST): protocol for a pragmatic randomized trial.

BACKGROUND: Pain management after injury is critically important for functional recovery. Although opioids have been a mainstay for treatment of pain, they are associated with adverse events and may contribute to long-term use or abuse. Opioid-minimizing multimodal pain regimens have the potential to reduce exposure to opioids without compromising pain control. This article details an ongoing clinical trial comparing two pill-based, opioid-minimizing, multimodal pain strategies. METHODS: This is a single-center, parallel-group, randomized, controlled comparative effectiveness trial comparing two multimodal pain regimens in adult trauma patients. All patients 16 years and older admitted to the Red Duke Trauma Institute are eligible unless they are pregnant, a prisoner, under observation status, or a non-acute trauma patient. At admission to the trauma service, patients are enrolled and randomized to one of two multimodal pain regimens. The primary outcome is opioid use, measured by morphine milligram equivalents per patient per day. The secondary outcomes include pain scores, ventilator days, hospital and intensive care unit lengths of stay, occurrence of opioid-related complications, hospital and pharmacy costs, and incidence of hospital discharge with opioid prescription. Outcomes will be compared using Bayesian methods. DISCUSSION: This trial will determine the effectiveness of two multimodal pain treatment strategies on reducing in-hospital opioid exposure in adult trauma patients. Furthermore, it will compare the two strategies on pain control and patient safety. Knowledge gained in this study can improve quality of care at this hospital and other trauma centers regardless of which medication regimen proves superior.