Peripartal pain perception and pain therapy: introduction and validation of a questionnaire as a quality instrument.

BACKGROUND: Labor pain is difficult to measure. The aim of this proof-of-concept study is to implement and test a questionnaire assessing pain sensation during and after vaginal deliveries. Its key aspect is a highly standardized survey of patient-reported outcome (PRO) by staff not involved in routine care. METHODS: Between January and November 2015 339 women were assessed 24-48 h after spontaneous or operative-vaginal delivery of a singleton. German language skills were a prerequisite to participate. The test-retest reliability was calculated in 38 women 24-36 and 48-72 h postpartum between July and October 2017. Primiparae after spontaneous delivery and multiparae with no history of operative deliveries were compared in a subgroup analysis. RESULTS: Maximum labor pain and post-partum pain were reported a median of 9 [8-10] and 4 [3-6]. Higher ratings were associated with younger age, higher gestational ages, infant's biometrics, and the duration of laboring. Only regional analgesia tended to reduce pain perception (NRS 8 vs. 9). Higher-degree injuries were associated with less pain postpartum. The questionnaire proved to be reliable in most aspects (Cronbach's α > 0.6 for 19/21 questions) and showed an acceptable content and criterion validity (Cohen correlation > ± 0.3, interrelation between items). CONCLUSION: Labor is a very painful experience, irrespective of previous obstetric history. Ratings indicate inadequateness of treatment except for patients receiving preventive postoperative pain management. Systematic postpartum pain assessment, hence, is still a pending issue. Adjustments will be made concerning language skills and specific questions on effectiveness of analgesia otherwise good reliability and validity of the questionnaire were proven.

[Oxycodone, piritramide and tramadol for the management of postoperative pain : A registry study on use and effectiveness in clinical routine]. / Oxycodon, Piritramid und Tramadol zur postoperativen Schmerztherapie : Eine Registerstudie zur Verwendung und Wirksamkeit.

BACKGROUND: In the context of improving perioperative pain management and shortening hospital stays, potent oral analgesics, such as slow release opioids, are gaining increasingly in importance. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to compare the use and effectiveness of different opioids in postoperative pain treatment in Germany. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Using data from the QUIPS database, the records of 5249 patients were evaluated. The total study population was divided into four groups: group 1 (10 mg oxycodone with or without naloxone 5 mg), group 2 (20 mg oxycodone with or without naloxone 10 mg), group 3 (piritramide) and group 4 (tramadol). Maximum pain intensity, pain-related interference with sleep and respiration, vomiting, postoperative fatigue, desire for more pain treatment and satisfaction with pain management were evaluated. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION: The differences in pain intensity were statistically significant between groups. Patients with piritramide reported more pain, more interference with sleep and respiration and more fatigue compared to those from the other groups. In the group with 10 mg oxycodone, the desire for additional pain medication was the lowest. Postoperative vomiting and satisfaction with pain management differed significantly between the four groups. Procedure-specific analysis has shown that differences between sub-groups were also significant following cholecystectomy and total knee arthroplasty. CONCLUSIONS: In summary, our findings suggest that postoperative pain treatment with slow release oral oxycodone does not show disadvantages compared to tramadol or piritramide with regard to pain-related impairments and opioid-induced side effects. This hypothesis needs to be further analyzed in controlled studies.

Objectively measured activity is not associated with average pain intensity 1 week after surgery: A cross-sectional study.

BACKGROUND: Measures of physical activity and pain-related patient-reported outcomes are important components of patient recovery after surgery. However, little is known about their association in the early post-operative period. This study aims to increase this knowledge. Our primary objective was to determine the association between average pain intensity and activity (in steps) 1 week after surgery. Secondary objectives were the association of activity with other patient-reported outcomes, age, sex, comorbidities and body mass index. METHODS: Data were obtained from the PROMPT sub-project of IMI-PainCare. Patients after breast and endometriosis-related surgery, sternotomy and total knee arthroplasty completed pain-related outcomes questionnaires and wore an ActiGraph activity-tracking device. We correlated steps with average pain intensity on post-operative days 6 and 7. Secondary analyses were done using correlations and t-tests. RESULTS: In 284 cases, there was no statistically significant correlation between steps and average pain intensity. In addition, none of the 28 secondary analyses showed a statistically significant result. CONCLUSIONS: Pain-related patient-reported outcome measures and physical activity are separate entities. Both should be measured after surgery to assess patient recovery and to identify treatment deficiencies. SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENT: Measuring recovery is a multi-dimensional challenge. After surgery, clinicians need to be aware that neither pain intensity nor activity levels tell the whole story. Each can hint to problems and treatment requirements.

Quality of analgesic care in labor: A cross-sectional study of the first national register-based benchmarking system.

OBJECTIVE: Unlike other types of acute pain, labor pain is considered physiological. Due to the heterogeneous management during labor, there is a lack of intention to define quality of care of peripartal analgesia. This study presents the first results of the national register for this evaluation. METHODS: This prospective cross-sectional study, conducted in five different German level-three hospitals, included women after vaginal childbirth between January 2020 and January 2022. A validated questionnaire was completed 24 h postpartum, including information about labor pain, satisfaction, and expectations regarding analgesia. Data were centrally recorded with obstetric records using the database of the QUIPS (Quality Improvement in Postoperative Pain Management) Project. RESULTS: A total of 514 women were included. On an 11-point Numerical Rating Scale, pain intensity during labor was severe (8.68 ± 1.8) while postpartal pain was 3.9 (±2.1). The second stage of labor was considered the most painful period. Only 62.6% of the parturients obtained pharmacological support, with epidural being the most effective (reduction of 3.8 ± 2.8 points). Only epidural (odds ratio [OR] 0.22) and inhalation of nitrous oxide (OR 0.33) were protective for severe pain. In benchmarking, a relation between satisfaction, pain intensity, and the use of epidural was found; 40.7% of the women wished they had received more analgesic support during labor. CONCLUSION: This study highlights deficiencies in analgesic management in high-level perinatal centers, with more than 40% of parturients considering actual practices as insufficient and wishing they had received more analgesic support, despite the availability of analgesic options. Using patient-reported outcomes can guarantee qualitative tailored analgesic care in women.

PAIN OUT: the making of an international acute pain registry.

BACKGROUND: About 240 million patients undergo surgery every year, worldwide. Roughly 50% of these patients report clinically significant pain. Numerous barriers impede provision of adequate management. Lack of evidence about appropriateness and effectiveness of interventions is one. A registry can provide such information, eventually facilitating better management. This paper reports the development and feasibility of PAIN OUT, the first international acute pain registry, established with funds from the European Commission, and presents preliminary analysis to illustrate the nature of investigations that registry data make possible. METHODS: On the first postoperative day, 6347 adult patients undergoing orthopaedic or general surgery, in 11 medical centres in Europe and Israel, provided Patient Reported Outcomes (PROs) using a validated questionnaire. Clinical data were abstracted from the patient's chart. RESULTS: Feasibility worked well. Over a period of 1 year, surveyors accrued targeted data sets and entered them into an online browser. Collaborators could receive online feedback comparing their findings about PROs against anonymized findings from other centres. Missing data for the majority of variables were low. Despite considerable variability between institutions, a large number of patients were treated according to the generic, evidence-based recommendations we assessed. However, this was not sufficient to result in acceptable outcomes for the majority of patients. CONCLUSION: The initial development of PAIN OUT has been achieved. From 2013, it continues as a not-for-profit academic project, open to clinicians and researchers worldwide. The International Association for Study of Pain and PAIN OUT will work together to maintain, disseminate and develop the registry.