Preoperative Opioid Use is Independently Associated With Increased Costs and Worse Outcomes After Major Abdominal Surgery.

OBJECTIVE: To explore the clinical and financial implications of preoperative opioid use in major abdominal surgery. BACKGROUND: Opioids are increasingly used to manage chronic pain, and chronic opioid users are challenging to care for perioperatively. Given the epidemic of opioid-related morbidity and mortality, it is critical to understand how preoperative opioid use impacts surgical outcomes. METHODS: This was an analysis of nonemergent, abdominopelvic surgeries from 2008 to 2014 from a single center within the Michigan Surgical Quality Collaborative clinical registry database. Preoperative opioid use (binary exposure variable) was retrospectively queried from the home medication list of the preoperative evaluation. Our primary outcome was 90-day total hospital costs. Secondary outcomes included hospital length of stay, 30-day major complication rates, discharge destination, and 30-day hospital readmission rates. Analyses were risk-adjusted for case complexity and patient-specific risk factors such as demographics, insurance, smoking, comorbidities, and concurrent medication use. RESULTS: In all, 2413 patients met the inclusion criteria. Among them, 502 patients (21%) used opioids preoperatively. After covariate adjustment, opioid users (compared with those who were opioid-naïve) had 9.2% higher costs [95% confidence interval (CI) 2.8%-15.6%; adjusted means $26,604 vs $24,263; P = 0.005), 12.4% longer length of stay (95% CI 2.3%-23.5%; adjusted means 5.9 vs 5.2 days; P = 0.015), more complications (odds ratio 1.36; 95% CI 1.04-1.78; adjusted rates 20% vs 16%; P = 0.023), more readmissions (odds ratio 1.57; 95% CI 1.08-2.29; adjusted rates 10% vs 6%; P = 0.018), and no difference in discharge destination (P = 0.11). CONCLUSIONS: Opioid use is common before abdominopelvic surgery, and is independently associated with increased postoperative healthcare utilization and morbidity. Preoperative opioids represent a potentially modifiable risk factor and a novel target to improve quality and value of surgical care.

Variation in Intraoperative Opioid Administration by Patient, Clinician, and Hospital Contribution.

Importance: The opioid crisis has led to scrutiny of opioid exposures before and after surgical procedures. However, the extent of intraoperative opioid variation and the sources and contributing factors associated with it are unclear. Objective: To analyze attributable variance of intraoperative opioid administration for patient-, clinician-, and hospital-level factors across surgical and analgesic categories. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cohort study was conducted using electronic health record data collected from a national quality collaborative database. The cohort consisted of 1 011 268 surgical procedures at 46 hospitals across the US involving 2911 anesthesiologists, 2291 surgeons, and 8 surgical and 4 analgesic categories. Patients without ambulatory opioid prescriptions or use history undergoing an elective surgical procedure between January 1, 2014, and September 11, 2020, were included. Data were analyzed from January 2022 to July 2023. Main Outcomes and Measures: The rate of intraoperative opioid administration as a continuous measure of oral morphine equivalents (OMEs) normalized to patient weight and case duration was assessed. Attributable variance was estimated in a hierarchical structure using patient, clinician, and hospital levels and adjusted intraclass correlations (ICCs). Results: Among 1 011 268 surgical procedures (mean [SD] age of patients, 55.9 [16.2] years; 604 057 surgical procedures among females [59.7%]), the mean (SD) rate of intraoperative opioid administration was 0.3 [0.2] OME/kg/h. Together, clinician and hospital levels contributed to 20% or more of variability in intraoperative opioid administration across all analgesic and surgical categories (adjusting for surgical or analgesic category, ICCs ranged from 0.57-0.79 for the patient, 0.04-0.22 for the anesthesiologist, and 0.09-0.26 for the hospital, with the lowest ICC combination 0.21 for anesthesiologist and hosptial [0.12 for the anesthesiologist and 0.09 for the hospital for opioid only]). Comparing the 95th and fifth percentiles of opioid administration, variation was 3.3-fold among anesthesiologists (surgical category range, 2.7-fold to 7.7-fold), 4.3-fold among surgeons (surgical category range, 3.4-fold to 8.0-fold), and 2.2-fold among hospitals (surgical category range, 2.2-fold to 4.3-fold). When adjusted for patient and surgical characteristics, mean (square error mean) administration was highest for cardiac surgical procedures (0.54 [0.56-0.52 OME/kg/h]) and lowest for orthopedic knee surgical procedures (0.19 [0.17-0.21 OME/kg/h]). Peripheral and neuraxial analgesic techniques were associated with reduced administration in orthopedic hip (51.6% [95% CI, 51.4%-51.8%] and 60.7% [95% CI, 60.5%-60.9%] reductions, respectively) and knee (48.3% [95% CI, 48.0%-48.5%] and 60.9% [95% CI, 60.7%-61.1%] reductions, respectively) surgical procedures, but reduction was less substantial in other surgical categories (mean [SD] reduction, 13.3% [8.8%] for peripheral and 17.6% [9.9%] for neuraxial techniques). Conclusions and Relevance: In this cohort study, clinician-, hospital-, and patient-level factors had important contributions to substantial variation of opioid administrations during surgical procedures. These findings suggest the need for a broadened focus across multiple factors when developing and implementing opioid-reducing strategies in collaborative quality-improvement programs.

Feasibility and Acceptability of the Pain Profile, a Clinical Questionnaire Aimed at Improving Pain Care.

Purpose: Despite being one of the most common medical complaints, chronic pain is difficult to manage due to ineffective communication between providers and patients and time restraints during appointments. Patient-centered questionnaires have the potential to optimize communication by assessing a patient's pain history, prior treatments, and associated comorbidities to develop an effective treatment plan. This study aimed to analyze the feasibility and acceptability of a pre-visit clinical questionnaire aimed at improving communication and pain care. Patients and Methods: The "Pain Profile" questionnaire was piloted across two specialty pain clinics in a large academic medical center. Patient and provider surveys were conducted with patients who completed the Pain Profile questionnaire and providers who use it in practice. Surveys consisted of multiple-choice and open-ended questions regarding the helpfulness, usability, and implementation of the questionnaire. Descriptive analyses of patient and provider surveys were conducted. Qualitative data were analyzed using matrix framework-based coding. Results: A total of 171 patients and 32 clinical providers completed the feasibility and acceptability surveys. 77% of patients (N= 131) found the Pain Profile helpful in communicating their pain experiences and 69% of providers (N= 22) found it helpful in guiding clinical decisions. The section that assessed the impact of pain was rated most helpful by patients (4/5) while the open-ended section asking patients to describe their pain history was rated least helpful by patients and providers (3.7/5 and 4.1/5, respectively). Both patients and providers provided suggestions to future iterations of the Pain Profile, including the addition of opioid risk and mental health screening tools. Conclusion: The Pain Profile questionnaire was feasible and acceptable in a pilot study at a large academic site. Future testing in a large-scale, fully powered trial is needed to assess the effectiveness of the Pain Profile in optimizing communication and pain management.

Phenotypic features of patients with complex regional pain syndrome compared with those with neuropathic pain.

INTRODUCTION: We hypothesized that patients with complex regional pain syndrome (CRPS) would describe a more negative pain phenotype including higher pain severity, more neuropathic pain descriptors, more centralized pain symptoms, poorer physical function, and more affective distress when compared with patients with neuropathic pain of the extremities not meeting CRPS criteria. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This was a retrospective cross-sectional study conducted at a tertiary pain center. The sample included 212 patients who met Budapest Criteria for CRPS and 175 patients with neuropathic pain of the extremities who did not meet criteria. All patients completed a packet of questionnaires before their initial visit containing validated outcome measures assessing pain severity, pain interference, physical functioning, depression, anxiety, and catastrophizing. RESULTS: Patients with CRPS reported higher physical disability (p=0.022) and more neuropathic pain symptoms (p=0.002) than patients not meeting CRPS criteria, but the groups did not otherwise differ significantly. There were no significant differences in pain severity or affective distress, despite power analyses suggesting the ability to detect small to medium effect sizes (d=0.29; w=0.14). Subanalyses of differences in neuropathic pain symptoms revealed that patients with CRPS, compared with patients not meeting CRPS criteria, were more likely to report pain with light touch (p=0.003), sudden pain attacks (p=0.003), pain with cold or heat (p=0.002), sensation of numbness (p=0.042), and pain with slight pressure (p=0.018). DISCUSSION: Counter to our hypothesis, the present study suggests that patients with CRPS do not have a worse clinical phenotype compared with patients not meeting CRPS criteria, with the exception of higher physical disability and more neuropathic pain symptoms. This corresponds to recent evidence that patients with CRPS are similar to other patient populations with chronic pain.

Prevalence of Preoperative Opioid Use and Characteristics Associated With Opioid Use Among Patients Presenting for Surgery.

Importance: Patterns of preoperative opioid use are not well characterized across different surgical services, and studies in this patient population have lacked important self-reported data of pain and affect. Objectives: To assess the prevalence of preoperative opioid use and the characteristics of these patients in a broadly representative surgical cohort. Design, Setting, and Participants: Cross-sectional, observational study of patients undergoing surgery at a tertiary care academic medical center. Data were collected as a part of large prospective institutional research registries from March 1, 2010, through April 30, 2016. Exposures: Preoperative patient and procedural characteristics, including prospectively assessed self-reported pain and functional measures. Main Outcomes and Measures: Patient-reported opioid use before surgery. Results: Of the total 34 186 patients recruited (54.2% women; mean [SD] age, 53.1 [16.1] years), preoperative opioid use was reported in 7894 (23.1%). The most common opioids used were hydrocodone bitartrate (4685 [59.4%]), tramadol hydrochloride (1677 [21.2%]), and oxycodone hydrochloride (1442 [18.3%]). Age of 31 to 40 years (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 1.26; 95% CI, 1.10-1.45), tobacco use (former use aOR, 1.32 [95% CI, 1.22-1.42]; current use aOR, 1.62 [95% CI, 1.48-1.78]), illicit drug use (aOR, 1.74; 95% CI, 1.16-2.60), higher pain severity (aOR, 1.33; 95% CI, 1.31-1.35), depression (aOR, 1.22; 95% CI, 1.12-1.33), higher Fibromyalgia Survey scores (aOR, 1.06, 95% CI, 1.05-1.07), lower life satisfaction (aOR, 0.95, 95% CI, 0.93-0.96), and more medical comorbidities (American Society of Anesthesiology score aOR, 1.47 [95% CI, 1.37-1.58]; Charlson Comorbidity Index aOR, 1.29 [95% CI, 1.18-1.41]) were all independently associated with preoperative opioid use. Preoperative opioid use was most commonly reported by patients undergoing orthopedic (226 [65.1%]) and neurosurgical spinal (596 [55.1%]) procedures and least common among patients undergoing thoracic procedures (244 [15.7%]). After adjusting for patient characteristics, the patients undergoing lower extremity procedures were most likely to report preoperative opioid use (aOR, 3.61; 95% CI, 2.81-4.64), as well as those undergoing pelvic (excluding hip) (aOR, 3.09; 95% CI, 1.88-5.08), upper extremity (aOR, 3.07; 95% CI, 2.12-4.45), and spinal or spinal cord (aOR, 2.68; 95% CI, 2.15-3.32) procedures, with the group undergoing intrathoracic surgery as the reference group. Conclusions and Relevance: In this large study of preoperative opioid use that includes patient-reported outcome measures, more than 1 in 4 patients presenting for surgery reported opioid use. These data provide important insights into this complicated patient population that would appear to help guide future preoperative optimization and perioperative opioid-weaning interventions.

Trends and predictors of opioid use after total knee and total hip arthroplasty.

Few studies have assessed postoperative trends in opioid cessation and predictors of persistent opioid use after total knee arthroplasty (TKA) and total hip arthroplasty (THA). Preoperatively, 574 TKA and THA patients completed validated, self-report measures of pain, functioning, and mood and were longitudinally assessed for 6 months after surgery. Among patients who were opioid naive the day of surgery, 8.2% of TKA and 4.3% of THA patients were using opioids at 6 months. In comparison, 53.3% of TKA and 34.7% of THA patients who reported opioid use the day of surgery continued to use opioids at 6 months. Patients taking >60 mg oral morphine equivalents preoperatively had an 80% likelihood of persistent use postoperatively. Day of surgery predictors for 6-month opioid use by opioid-naive patients included greater overall body pain (P = 0.002), greater affected joint pain (knee/hip) (P = 0.034), and greater catastrophizing (P = 0.010). For both opioid-naive and opioid users on the day of surgery, decreases in overall body pain from baseline to 6 months were associated with decreased odds of being on opioids at 6 months (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] = 0.72, P = 0.050; aOR = 0.62, P = 0.001); however, change in affected joint pain (knee/hip) was not predictive of opioid use (aOR = 0.99, P = 0.939; aOR = 1.00, P = 0.963). In conclusion, many patients taking opioids before surgery continue to use opioids after arthroplasty and some opioid-naive patients remained on opioids; however, persistent opioid use was not associated with change in joint pain. Given the growing concerns about chronic opioid use, the reasons for persistent opioid use and perioperative prescribing of opioids deserve further study.

Preoperative ultra-rapid opiate detoxification for the treatment of post-operative surgical pain.

Over the past two decades, the prescription of high dose opiate therapy has continued to accelerate in an attempt to treat patients with chronic pain. This presents a substantial challenge when patients on high dose opiate therapy require surgery, as opiate pain relief is a cornerstone of postoperative pain management. These patients have exceptionally challenging pain to control. This is likely due to downregulation of existing opiate receptors and the reluctance of clinicians to increase doses of opiates to exceptionally high levels to facilitate pain relief. We hypothesize that using the method of ultra-rapid opiate detoxification (UROD), it would be possible to rapidly increase the number of opiate receptors and return patients to a more naive state, which would be susceptible to exogenous opiate administration. Validation of this hypothesis is supported by two mechanisms, the first of which are reports of patients that underwent UROD for opiate addition that subsequently suffer respiratory arrests when beginning to rapidly abuse opiates shortly after treatment. Additionally there are data demonstrating the tapering of opiate therapy prior to elective surgery results in better pain control. In conclusion, we hypothesize that patients on chronic high dose opiates could obtain substantially better pain relief if they underwent UROD prior to surgery. This technique could be administered shortly before surgery and may dramatically improve the patients' recoveries.

The association between incentive spirometry performance and pain in postoperative thoracic epidural analgesia.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Effective use of postoperative incentive spirometry improves patient outcomes but is limited by pain after thoracic and upper abdominal surgery. Thoracic epidurals are frequently used to provide analgesia and attenuate postoperative pulmonary dysfunction. We hypothesized that, in patients with thoracic epidurals for thoracic and abdominal surgery, high pain scores would be associated with poorer incentive spirometry performance, even when accounting for other variables. METHODS: Retrospective study of 468 patients who underwent upper abdominal or thoracic surgery using postoperative thoracic epidural analgesia between June 1, 2009, and August 31, 2013, at a single tertiary academic center. The association between incentive spirometry performance and pain was assessed as the primary outcome. Other independent predictors of incentive spirometry performance were also identified. RESULTS: Postoperative incentive spirometry performance was found to be inversely proportional to pain score, which correlated significantly stronger with deep breathing pain compared with pain at rest (-0.33 vs -0.14 on postoperative day 1; -0.23 vs -0.12 on postoperative day 2). Pain with deep breathing was independently associated with poorer incentive spirometry performance in the multivariable linear regression model (P < 0.0001), as was increasing age, female sex, thoracic surgery, and higher American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) physical status score. CONCLUSIONS: The present study suggests that pain with deep breathing is more indicative of thoracic epidural efficacy than is pain at rest. Furthermore, incentive spirometry performance could be used as another indicator of thoracic epidural efficacy. This may be particularly useful in patients reporting high pain scores postoperatively.

Building the case for enhanced recovery protocols in living kidney donors.

BACKGROUND: Enhanced recovery protocols align with the current advantages of laparoscopic donor nephrectomy and may continue to decrease disincentives to donation. METHODS: In this single-center retrospective analysis, we compare the outcomes of the first 60 living kidney donors enrolled in our enhanced recovery program (ERP) to those patients treated before implementation of the protocol. In addition to improved coordination of care, highlights of the ERP bundle included the use of transversus abdominus plane block, preoperative carbohydrate loading and narcotic free pain regimens. Chi-square and Student t test were used where appropriate. RESULTS: Postoperative median length of stay decreased from 2.0 to 1.0 days (P<0.01) after protocol initiation. Overall narcotic use also decreased by nearly 50% (45.6 vs. 21.3; P<0.01), whereas pain scores remained similar (3.97 vs. 3.87; P=ns). Average time to incision was longer in the enhanced recovery group as compared to the standard protocol group (51 vs 42 min; P<0.05) by 9 min. CONCLUSION: Implementation of an ERP for living kidney donors was associated with reduced LOS and decreased narcotic use after donor nephrectomy. This study suggests that ERPs may offer a framework for decreasing disincentives for donation and optimize patient satisfaction.

Perioperative opioid usage: avoiding adverse effects.

SUMMARY: Opioids remain the most common analgesic tool for the surgeon, owing to their cost-effectiveness in both the inpatient and outpatient setting. Aside from these attributes, opioids have significant side effects that are associated with morbidity and mortality. Specifically, obese patients, patients with sleep apnea, and the elderly may be at an increased risk of experiencing sedation and respiratory depression in response to opioids. Opioid reduction strategies prove useful for decreasing total opioid dose and, in turn, their associated adverse effects. Such strategies may include adjuvant nonopioid analgesics such as α-2 agonists, gabapentinoids, and N-methyl-D-aspartate receptor agonists as well as local, regional, or neuraxial anesthesia and modification of surgical technique where possible for operative patients. Patients may also present to surgeons while taking chronic opioids, including high-dose opioids and opioid agonist/antagonists. These clinical scenarios are associated with extreme challenges in postoperative analgesic management. With all opioid prescribing, other sedative medications should be limited or avoided as the risk for additive sedation is significant. This review aims to describe systematic methods to reduce opioid side effects and identify specific risk-reduction strategies within each risk group.

Regional and Neuraxial Analgesia for Plastic Surgery: Surgeon's and Anesthesiologist's Perspectives.

SUMMARY: Regional and neuraxial analgesic techniques are components of a concerted effort to better manage perioperative pain in the surgical patient. These techniques are routinely used in a host of surgical specialties and are now beginning to gain traction in plastic surgery. An improved understanding of the utility and limitations of available analgesic techniques in perioperative pain management is crucial for effective patient care. The purpose of this article is to provide an overview of regional and neuraxial analgesic techniques relevant to plastic surgery procedures of the trunk.

Reports of chronic pain in childhood and adolescence among patients at a tertiary care pain clinic.

UNLABELLED: Although chronic pain in childhood can last into adulthood, few studies have evaluated the characteristics of adults with chronic pain who report childhood chronic pain. Thus, 1,045 new patients (mean age, 49.5 ± 15.4) at an academic tertiary care pain clinic were prospectively evaluated using validated self-report questionnaires. Patients also responded to questions about childhood pain. We found that almost 17% (n = 176) of adult chronic pain patients reported a history of chronic pain in childhood or adolescence, with close to 80% indicating that the pain in childhood continues today. Adults reporting childhood chronic pain were predominantly female (68%), commonly reported widespread pain (85%), and had almost 3 times the odds of meeting survey criteria for fibromyalgia (odds ratio [OR] = 2.94, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 2.04-4.23) than those denying childhood chronic pain. Similarly, those with childhood pain had twice the odds of having biological relatives with chronic pain (OR = 2.03, 95% CI = 1.39-2.96) and almost 3 times the odds of having relatives with psychiatric illness (OR = 2.85, 95% CI = 1.97-4.11). Lastly, compared to patients who did not report childhood chronic pain, those who did were more likely to use neuropathic descriptors for their pain (OR = 1.82, 95% CI = 1.26-2.64), have slightly worse functional status (B = -2.12, t = -3.10, P = .002), and have increased anxiety (OR = 1.77, 95% CI = 1.24-2.52). PERSPECTIVE: Our study revealed that 1 in 6 adult pain patients reported pain that dated back to childhood or adolescence. In such patients, evidence suggested that their pain was more likely to be widespread, neuropathic in nature, and accompanied by psychological comorbidities and decreased functional status.