Regional Anesthesia Techniques for Shoulder Surgery in High-Risk Pulmonary Patients.

Patients with pre-existing pulmonary conditions are at risk for experiencing perioperative complications and increased morbidity. General anesthesia has historically been used for shoulder surgery, though regional anesthesia techniques are increasingly used to provide anesthesia and improved pain control after surgery. Relative to regional anesthesia, patients who undergo general anesthesia may be more prone to risks of barotrauma, postoperative hypoxemia, and pneumonia. High-risk pulmonary patients, in particular, may be exposed to these risks of general anesthesia. Traditional regional anesthesia techniques for shoulder surgery are associated with high rates of phrenic nerve paralysis which significantly impairs pulmonary function. Newer regional anesthesia techniques have been developed, however, that provide effective analgesia and surgical anesthesia while having much lower rates of phrenic nerve paralysis, thereby preserving pulmonary function.

Patient perceptions of pain management and opioid use prior to hip arthroplasty.

OBJECTIVE: Qualitative assessment investigating patients' perceptions related to opioids including their role in pain control, risks, and handling and disposal prior to undergoing hip replacement. DESIGN: A prospective, cross-sectional survey study. SETTING: Large urban teaching hospital specializing in orthopedic surgery affiliated with Weill Cornell Medical College. PARTICIPANTS: Patients aged 18-80, English-speaking, without recent or chronic opioid use, and planning to undergo primary total hip replacement. A total of 128 patients were enrolled and completed the study. INTERVENTION: A 27-item interview evaluating perceptions on opioid-related -topics. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Responses to interview questions were documented by research assistant. RESULTS: Most patients believe that there should be minimal or no pain with the use of opioids, though they also agree that opioids should be limited to pain that interferes with function or activity. Patients generally appreciate risks of addiction with opioids but are less familiar with risks associated with sleep apnea and sedatives. Minority of patients understand that the use of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) in combination with opioids would effectively reduce pain. Majority of patients were unsure of how to properly store and dispose of opioids. CONCLUSIONS: Qualitative assessment demonstrates that patients may benefit from education and discussion specifically about pain expectations, the role of opioids in treating pain, multimodal analgesia, and proper storage and disposal.

Effectiveness of Perioperative Opioid Educational Initiatives: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Opioids are the most commonly prescribed analgesics in the United States. Current guidelines have proposed education initiatives to reduce the risk of chronic opioid consumption, yet there is lack of efficacy data on such interventions. Our study evaluates the impact of perioperative opioid education on postoperative opioid consumption patterns including opioid cessation, number of pills consumed, and opioid prescription refills. METHODS: The MEDLINE/PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, Scopus, and Google Scholar databases were systematically searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) assessing the impact of perioperative educational interventions (using either paper- or video-based instruments regarding pain management and drug-induced side effects) on postoperative opioid patterns compared to standard preoperative care among patients undergoing elective surgery. Our end points were opioid consumption (number of pills used), appropriate disposal of unused opioids, opioid cessation (defined as no use of opioids), and opioid refills within 15 days, 6 weeks, and 3 months. RESULTS: In total, 11 RCTs fulfilled the inclusion criteria, totaling 1604 patients (804 received opioid education, while 800 received standard care). Six trials followed patients for 15 days after surgery, and 5 trials followed patients up to 3 months. After 15 days, the opioid education group consumed a lower number of opioid pills than those in the control group (weighted mean difference [WMD], -3.39 pills; 95% confidence interval [CI], -6.40 to -0.37; P =.03; I2 = 69%) with no significant difference in overall opioid cessation (odds ratio [OR], 0.25; 95% CI, 0.04-1.56; P = .14; I2 = 83%). Likewise, perioperative opioid education did not have significant effects on opioid cessation at 6 weeks (OR, 0.69; 95% CI, 0.45-1.05; P = .10; I2 = 0%) and 3 months (OR, 0.59; 95% CI,0.17-2.01; P = .10; I2 = 0%) after surgery, neither reduced the need for opioid refills at 15 days (OR, 0.57; 95% CI, 0.28-1.15; P = .12; I2 = 20%) and 6 weeks (OR, 1.08; 95% CI, 0.59-1.98; P = .80; I2 = 37%). There was no statistically significant difference in the rate of appropriate disposal of unused opioids between both groups (OR, 1.99; 95% CI, 0.66-6.00; P = .22; I2 = 71%). Subgroup analysis by type of educational intervention showed a statistical reduction of opioid consumption at 15 days when implementing multimedia/audiovisual strategies (4 trials: WMD, -4.05 pills; 95% CI, -6.59 to -1.50; P = .002; I2 = 45%), but there was no apparent decrease when using only paper-based strategies (2 trials: WMD, -2.31 pills; 95% CI, -12.21 to 7.59; P = .65; I2 = 80%). CONCLUSIONS: Perioperative educational interventions reduced the number of opioid pills consumed at 15 days but did not demonstrate a significant effect on opioid cessation or opioid refills at 15 days, 6 weeks, and 3 months. Further randomized trials should focus on evidence-based educational interventions with strict homogeneity of material to draw a more definitive recommendation.

Peripheral nerve block anesthesia/analgesia for patients undergoing primary hip and knee arthroplasty: recommendations from the International Consensus on Anesthesia-Related Outcomes after Surgery (ICAROS) group based on a systematic review and meta-analysis of current literature.

BACKGROUND: Evidence-based international expert consensus regarding the impact of peripheral nerve block (PNB) use in total hip/knee arthroplasty surgery. METHODS: A systematic review and meta-analysis: randomized controlled and observational studies investigating the impact of PNB utilization on major complications, including mortality, cardiac, pulmonary, gastrointestinal, renal, thromboembolic, neurologic, infectious, and bleeding complications.Medline, PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library including Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, NHS Economic Evaluation Database, were queried from 1946 to August 4, 2020.The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation approach was used to assess evidence quality and for the development of recommendations. RESULTS: Analysis of 122 studies revealed that PNB use (compared with no use) was associated with lower ORs for (OR with 95% CIs) for numerous complications (total hip and knee arthroplasties (THA/TKA), respectively): cognitive dysfunction (OR 0.30, 95% CI 0.17 to 0.53/OR 0.52, 95% CI 0.34 to 0.80), respiratory failure (OR 0.36, 95% CI 0.17 to 0.74/OR 0.37, 95% CI 0.18 to 0.75), cardiac complications (OR 0.84, 95% CI 0.76 to 0.93/OR 0.83, 95% CI 0.79 to 0.86), surgical site infections (OR 0.55 95% CI 0.47 to 0.64/OR 0.86 95% CI 0.80 to 0.91), thromboembolism (OR 0.74, 95% CI 0.58 to 0.96/OR 0.90, 95% CI 0.84 to 0.96) and blood transfusion (OR 0.84, 95% CI 0.83 to 0.86/OR 0.91, 95% CI 0.90 to 0.92). CONCLUSIONS: Based on the current body of evidence, the consensus group recommends PNB use in THA/TKA for improved outcomes. RECOMMENDATION: PNB use is recommended for patients undergoing THA and TKA except when contraindications preclude their use. Furthermore, the alignment of provider skills and practice location resources needs to be ensured. Evidence level: moderate; recommendation: strong.

A Comprehensive Enhanced Recovery Pathway for Rotator Cuff Surgery Reduces Pain, Opioid Use, and Side Effects.

BACKGROUND: Patients often have moderate to severe pain after rotator cuff surgery, despite receiving analgesics and nerve blocks. There are many suggested ways to improve pain after rotator cuff surgery, but the effects of adopting a pathway that includes formal patient education, a long-acting nerve block, and extensive multimodal analgesia are unclear. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: (1) Does adoption of a clinical pathway incorporating patient education, a long-acting nerve block, and preemptive multimodal analgesia reduce the worst pain during the first 48 hours after surgery compared with current standard institutional practices? (2) Does adoption of the pathway reduce opioid use? (3) Does adoption of the pathway reduce side effects and improve patient-oriented outcomes? METHODS: From September 2018 to January 2020, 281 patients scheduled for arthroscopic ambulatory rotator cuff surgery were identified for this paired sequential prospective cohort study. Among patients in the control group, 177 were identified, 33% (58) were not eligible, for 11% (20) staff was not available, 56% (99) were approached, 16% (29) declined, 40% (70) enrolled, and 40% (70) were analyzed (2% [4] lost to follow-up for secondary outcomes after postoperative day 2). For patients in the pathway cohort, 104 were identified, 17% (18) were not eligible, for 11% (11) staff was not available, 72% (75) were approached, 5% (5) declined, 67% (70) enrolled, and 67% (70) were analyzed (3% [3] lost to follow-up for secondary outcomes after postoperative day 2). No patients were lost to follow-up for primary outcome; for secondary outcomes, four were lost in the control group and three in the pathway group after postoperative day 2 (p = 0.70). The initial 70 patients enrolled received routine care (control group), and in a subsequent cohort, 70 patients received care guided by a pathway (pathway group). Of the 205 eligible patients, 68% (140) were included in the analysis. This was not a study comparing two tightly defined protocols but rather a study to determine whether adoption of a pathway would alter patient outcomes. For this reason, we used a pragmatic (real-world) study design that did not specify how control patients would be treated, and it did not require that all pathway patients receive all components of the pathway. We developed the pathway in coordination with a group of surgeons and anesthesiologists who agreed to apply the pathway as much as was viewed practical for each individual patient. Patients in both groups received a brachial plexus nerve block with sedation. Major differences between the pathway and control groups were: detailed patient education regarding reasonable pain expectations with a goal of reducing opioid use (no formal educational presentation was given to the control), a long-acting nerve block using bupivacaine with dexamethasone (control patients often received shorter-acting local anesthetic without perineural dexamethasone), and preemptive multimodal analgesia including intraoperative ketamine, postoperative acetaminophen, NSAIDs, and gabapentin at bedtime, with opioids as needed (control patients received postoperative opioids but most did not get postoperative NSAIDS and no controls received gabapentin or separate prescriptions for acetaminophen). The primary outcome was the numerical rating scale (NRS) worst pain with movement 0 to 48 hours after block placement. The NRS pain score ranges from 0 (no pain) to 10 (worst pain possible). The minimum clinically important difference (MCID) [12] for NRS that was used for calculation of the study sample size was 1.3 [18], although some authors suggest 1 [13] or 2 [5] are appropriate; if we had used an MCID of 2, the sample size would have been smaller. Secondary outcomes included NRS pain scores at rest, daily opioid use (postoperative day 1, 2, 7, 14), block duration, patient-oriented pain questions (postoperative day 1, 2, 7, 14), and patient and physician adherence to pathway. RESULTS: On postoperative day 1, pathway patients had lower worst pain with movement (3.3 ± 3.1) compared with control patients (5.6 ± 3.0, mean difference -2.7 [95% CI -3.7 to -1.7]; p < 0.001); lower scores were also seen for pain at rest (1.9 ± 2.3 versus 4.0 ± 2.9, mean difference -2.0 [95% CI -2.8 to -1.3]; p < 0.001). Cumulative postoperative opioid use (0-48 hours) was reduced (pathway oral morphine equivalent use was 23 ± 28 mg versus 44 ± 35 mg, mean difference 21 [95% CI 10 to 32]; p < 0.01). The greatest difference in opioid use was in the first 24 hours after surgery (pathway 7 ± 12 mg versus control 21 ± 21 mg, mean difference -14 [95% CI -19 to -10]; p < 0.01). On postoperative day 1, pathway patients had less interference with staying asleep compared with control patients (0.5 ± 1.6 versus 2.6 ± 3.3, mean difference -2.2 [95% CI -3.3 to -1.1]; p < 0.001); lower scores were also seen for interference with activities (0.9 ± 2.3 versus 1.9 ± 2.9, mean difference -1.1 [95% CI -2 to -0.1]; p = 0.03). Satisfaction with pain treatment on postoperative day 1 was higher among pathway patients compared with control patients (9.2 ± 1.7 versus 8.2 ± 2.5, mean difference 1.0 [95% CI 0.3 to 1.8]; p < 0.001). On postoperative day 2, pathway patients had lower nausea scores compared with control patients (0.3 ± 1.1 versus 1 ± 2.1, mean difference -0.7 [95% CI -1.2 to -0.1]; p = 0.02); lower scores were also seen for drowsiness on postoperative day 1 (1.7 ± 2.7 versus 2.6 ± 2.6, mean difference -0.9 [95% CI - 1.7 to -0.1]; p = 0.03). CONCLUSION: Adoption of the pathway was associated with improvement in the primary outcome (pain with movement) that exceeded the MCID. Patients in the pathway group had improved patient-oriented outcomes and fewer side effects. This pathway uses multiple analgesic drugs, which may pose risks to elderly patients, in particular. Therefore, in evaluating whether to use this pathway, clinicians should weigh the effect sizes against the potential risks that may emerge with large scale use, consider the difficulties involved in adapting a pathway to local practice so that pathway will persist, and recognize that this study only enrolled patients among surgeons and the anesthesiologists that advocated for the pathway; results may have been different with less enthusiastic clinicians. This pathway, based on a long-lasting nerve block, multimodal analgesia, and patient education can be considered for adoption. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level II, therapeutic study.

Educating Patients Regarding Pain Management and Safe Opioid Use After Surgery: A Narrative Review.

In recent years, there have been escalating concerns related to the opioid epidemic. With a steadily increasing opioid supply, it is critical to provide proper education to patients who are prescribed these medications. Education should be emphasized as a means of ensuring safe use and potentially as a strategy for curbing the opioid supply. Patients who undergo surgery are frequently prescribed opioids for postoperative pain; however, the content and delivery of information related to usage is inconsistent and often inadequate. Lack of education on postoperative pain management and opioid use places patients at risk for poor compliance and worse pain control. Furthermore, patients are often not properly educated on opioid-related side effects and risks or about safe behaviors when taking medications. The majority of patients are also not informed about how to store and dispose of leftover medications. Patients who are prescribed opioids require education preoperatively to cover the topics of pain management, opioid-related side effects, and risks, storage, and disposal. Evidence from various studies demonstrates that educational interventions improve knowledge and potentially lead to safer behaviors and reduced opioid use. Education can be provided in various formats with each having unique advantages and limitations.

Anaesthetic care of patients undergoing primary hip and knee arthroplasty: consensus recommendations from the International Consensus on Anaesthesia-Related Outcomes after Surgery group (ICAROS) based on a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Evidence-based international expert consensus regarding anaesthetic practice in hip/knee arthroplasty surgery is needed for improved healthcare outcomes. METHODS: The International Consensus on Anaesthesia-Related Outcomes after Surgery group (ICAROS) systematic review, including randomised controlled and observational studies comparing neuraxial to general anaesthesia regarding major complications, including mortality, cardiac, pulmonary, gastrointestinal, renal, genitourinary, thromboembolic, neurological, infectious, and bleeding complications. Medline, PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library including Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, NHS Economic Evaluation Database, from 1946 to May 17, 2018 were queried. Meta-analysis and Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach was utilised to assess evidence quality and to develop recommendations. RESULTS: The analysis of 94 studies revealed that neuraxial anaesthesia was associated with lower odds or no difference in virtually all reported complications, except for urinary retention. Excerpt of complications for neuraxial vs general anaesthesia in hip/knee arthroplasty, respectively: mortality odds ratio (OR): 0.67, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.57-0.80/OR: 0.83, 95% CI: 0.60-1.15; pulmonary OR: 0.65, 95% CI: 0.52-0.80/OR: 0.69, 95% CI: 0.58-0.81; acute renal failure OR: 0.69, 95% CI: 0.59-0.81/OR: 0.73, 95% CI: 0.65-0.82; deep venous thrombosis OR: 0.52, 95% CI: 0.42-0.65/OR: 0.77, 95% CI: 0.64-0.93; infections OR: 0.73, 95% CI: 0.67-0.79/OR: 0.80, 95% CI: 0.76-0.85; and blood transfusion OR: 0.85, 95% CI: 0.82-0.89/OR: 0.84, 95% CI: 0.82-0.87. CONCLUSIONS: Recommendation: primary neuraxial anaesthesia is preferred for knee arthroplasty, given several positive postoperative outcome benefits; evidence level: low, weak recommendation. RECOMMENDATION: neuraxial anaesthesia is recommended for hip arthroplasty given associated outcome benefits; evidence level: moderate-low, strong recommendation. Based on current evidence, the consensus group recommends neuraxial over general anaesthesia for hip/knee arthroplasty. TRIAL REGISTRY NUMBER: PROSPERO CRD42018099935.