My Pocket of Care.

Meeting patients where they are in their loneliness and pain can help them heal.

A comparison of two different concentrations and infusion rates of ropivacaine in perineural infusion administered at the same total dose for analgesia after foot and ankle surgery: a randomized, double blinded, controlled study.

BACKGROUND: Continuous popliteal nerve block is utilized for postoperative analgesia after foot and ankle surgery. Whether only the total dose of local anesthetic or the combination of concentration and volume determine the characteristics of a continuous popliteal nerve infusion remains currently unknown. We hypothesized a reduction of the incidence of insensate extremity in patients given ropivacaine 0.4% at 4 mL/h compared to patients given ropivacaine 0.2% at 8 mL/h. METHODS: Sixty-four patients scheduled for major foot and ankle surgery requiring a continuous popliteal catheter infusion for postoperative analgesia were studied. Thirty-three patients were randomized to receive a continuous popliteal nerve block with 0.2% (basal 8 mL/h) and thirty-one with 0.4% (basal 4 mL/h) ropivacaine, reaching the same total dose (16 mg/h). The primary outcome was the incidence of persistent sensory block in the distal sciatic nerve distributions in the postoperative period. Secondary outcomes were the incidence of motor block, NRS pain scores at rest in the postoperative period up to 48 hours after surgery, opioid use and related side effects, patients' satisfaction. RESULTS: The incidence of persistent sensory block was similar in patients given 0.2% and in patients receiving 0.4% ropivacaine. The incidence of motor block, postoperative pain scores at rest, use of oral opioids, side effects and patients' satisfaction with the quality of recovery were also similar in both groups. CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest that local anesthetic total dose is the primary determinant of continuous popliteal perineural infusion effects.

Addition of pregabalin to multimodal analgesic therapy following ankle surgery: a randomized double-blind, placebo-controlled trial.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Pregabalin is often used as a perioperative analgesic adjunct; some studies show benefit, but others do not. Adverse effects, such as confusion and sedation, have been attributed to perioperative use of pregabalin. We tested the hypothesis that pregabalin, when used as part of a multimodal analgesic regimen, reduces the duration of moderate to severe pain in the first 24 hrs following foot or ankle surgery. Secondary outcomes included measures of opioid and pregabalin adverse effects. METHODS: Sixty patients scheduled for hospital admission after foot or ankle surgery entered this randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. Patients received a neuraxial anesthetic, a popliteal fossa sciatic nerve block using 30 mL 0.375% bupivacaine with clonidine 100 µg and epinephrine, a saphenous nerve block, postoperative hydromorphone intravenous patient-controlled analgesia, and oral analgesics (oxycodone/acetaminophen). Patients were randomized to receive pregabalin (100 mg preoperatively, then 50 mg every 12 hrs) or a placebo for 3 days. The primary outcome was the number of hours that patients reported moderate to severe pain. RESULTS: Both groups reported a similar number of hours of moderate to severe pain during the first 24 hrs: 4.1 (SD, 4.1) hrs (pregabalin) versus 4.5 (SD, 3.5) hrs (placebo). Pain scores, opioid use, and adverse effects were also similar in both groups. CONCLUSIONS: No clinical benefit was obtained from perioperative administration of pregabalin (100 mg preoperative, then 50 mg every 12 hrs) as part of a multimodal postoperative analgesic regimen following foot and ankle surgery.

Nerve stimulator versus ultrasound guidance for placement of popliteal catheters for foot and ankle surgery.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: To determine whether ultrasound guidance improves the quality of continuous popliteal block when compared with a nerve stimulator after major foot and ankle surgery. DESIGN: Prospective, randomized, double-blinded clinical trial. SETTING: Operating room, Postanesthesia Care Unit (PACU), and hospital wards of a university-affiliated hospital. PATIENTS: 45 ASA physical status 1, 2, and 3 patients undergoing elective major foot and ankle surgery. INTERVENTIONS: Placement of a popliteal sciactic nerve catheter using either nerve stimulator or ultrasound guidance. In the PACU, a continuous infusion of ropivacaine 0.2% was started at a basal rate of 4 mL/hr and adjusted in a standardized fashion to maintain visual analog scale (VAS) pain scores < 4. All patients also received intravenous (IV) patient-controlled analgesia with hydromorphone and oral opioids. MEASUREMENTS: VAS pain scores at rest and with physical therapy, ropivacaine use, opioid use, and opioid-related side effects were recorded. MAIN RESULTS: Cummulative ropivacaine use was lower in patients whose catheter was placed by ultrasound than by nerve stimulator guidance (mean 50 vs 197 mL, P < 0.001). Pain scores at rest and during activity were similar between groups. Cumulative opioid consumption (mean 858 vs 809 mg oral morphine equivalents) and daily frequencies of nausea (5% to 33% vs 0 to 24%) and pruritus (0 to 21% vs 0 to 24%) were similar between groups. Length of hospital stay was similar between groups (3.5 vs 3.7 days). CONCLUSIONS: Ultrasound guidance was associated with less local anesthetic consumption than with the nerve stimulator; however, there was little clinical benefit, as all other outcomes were similar between groups.

A prospective survey of patient-controlled epidural analgesia with bupivacaine and clonidine after total hip replacement: a pre- and postchange comparison with bupivacaine and hydromorphone in 1,000 patients.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Patient-controlled epidural analgesia (PCEA) with bupivacaine and hydromorphone provides high quality analgesia after orthopedic surgery but is associated with a frequent incidence of opioid-related side effects (15%-30%). Epidural clonidine has a different side effect profile, but there are no large surveys documenting its use. We performed this prospective survey to evaluate analgesia and the side effect profile in total hip replacement patients before and after a systematic change from PCEA with bupivacaine/hydromorphone to bupivacaine/clonidine. METHODS: Five hundred consecutive patients received PCEA with 0.06% bupivacaine and hydromorphone (10 mcg/mL) as a previously described prechange control group. The standard analgesic regimen was then systematically changed to 0.06% bupivacaine and clonidine (1 mcg/mL) without changing the PCEA settings or other aspects of perioperative care, and 500 consecutive patients were included as a postchange group. All data were prospectively entered and then abstracted from the electronic medical record. Data collection included daily verbal pain scores (VPS), pruritus, nausea, hypotension, need for IV fluid boluses, sedation, and respiratory depression. An online survey to measure staff satisfaction with the changeover was sent to all participating surgeons, anesthesiologists, physical therapists, and physician's assistants. RESULTS: Patient characteristics were similar between groups. Most patients received central neuraxial anesthesia (99%). The clonidine group had lower VPS at rest (2.3 vs 3.7, P<0.001 with 95% confidence interval [CI] of difference of 1.4 [1.1, 1.7]) on POD0. The incidence of nausea was 10%-11% for clonidine and 13%-15% for hydromorphone. The incidence of pruritus was less with clonidine (1 vs 10%, P<0.01 with 95% CI of difference of 9% [6, 12]). However, the incidence of hypotension (20 vs 11%, P<0.001 with 95% CI of differences 9% [5, 14]) and IV fluid boluses was more frequent with clonidine (36 vs 19%, P<0.001 with 95% CI of differences of 16 [11, 12]). Sixty-five percent of staff completed the online survey, and 70% considered clonidine worse than hydromorphone. CONCLUSION: The systematic changeover from epidural hydromorphone to clonidine produced mixed results without obvious superiority. The VPS at rest was reduced only on postoperative day 0; pruritus was reduced, but hypotension was increased. On the basis of medical staff preference, we discontinued the systematic change and returned to our previous standard solution of bupivacaine and hydromorphone for PCEA after total hip replacement.

Prospective survey of patient-controlled epidural analgesia with bupivacaine and hydromorphone in 3736 postoperative orthopedic patients.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Patient-controlled epidural analgesia(PCEA) has been shown to be superior to intravenous patient-controlled analgesics (PCA) for postoperative analgesia after thoracic, abdominal, pelvic, and lower extremity surgery. However, it is unclear which opioid is optimal for PCEA. Hydromorphone has potential advantages, yet there are no data to establish its efficacy and safety. Thus, we prospectively monitored our patients receiving PCEA with bupivacaine combined with hydromorphone after orthopedic surgery. METHODS: All postoperative patients who received PCEA from March 1 to September 21, 2009, were included. Lumbar PCEA was initiated after central neuraxial anesthesia with 0.06% bupivacaine combined with hydromorphone 10 microg/mL. Initial settings were a bolus dose of 4 mL, lockout interval of 10 mins, and background infusion of 4 mL/hr. Patients were allowed oral analgesics, and meloxicam was routinely administered as an adjunct analgesic. Patients were evaluated twice a day at our Acute Pain Service department. Pain scores, adverse effects, and medications were entered prospectively into the electronic patient record. RESULTS: Verbal pain scores (0Y10) at rest were 3, 3, 3, and 2 on postoperative days 0 to 3. Verbal pain scores with activity were 4, 3, 3, and 3. Most adverse effects were modest to rare (15% pruritus, 10% hypotension,0.08% sedation, and 0% respiratory depression) with the exception of nausea (30%). There were no epidural hematomas or abscesses. Median duration of PCEA was 27 hrs. CONCLUSIONS: Patient-controlled epidural analgesia with bupivacaine and hydromorphone provides effective and safe postoperative analgesia for orthopedic surgery.

Creation of a novel recuperative pain medicine service to optimize postoperative analgesia and enhance patient satisfaction.

Many patients have difficulty with pain control after transition from patient-controlled analgesia modalities to oral analgesics. The creation of a Recuperative Pain Medicine (RPM) service was intended to bridge this gap in pain management at the Hospital for Special Surgery. Specific goals were to improve patient and staff satisfaction with management of postoperative oral analgesics by improving clinical care, administrative policies, and patient and staff education. Primary outcome measures for improved satisfaction were Press Ganey surveys and staff surveys. From inception in Aug 2007 to Dec 2008, RPM has seen 6,305 patients for discharge planning and education and 997 patients for pain management consultation. Administrative and educational accomplishments have included creation of a patient "Helpline" for emergent phone questions regarding postdischarge home pain medications, a policy for prescribing pain medications for home discharge, patient education booklets, a pain management webpage on the Hospital for Special Surgery website, and direct education of staff. Press Ganey measurements of patient satisfaction increased from 87th percentile up to the 99th percentile among peer institutions since the implementation of RPM. Staff satisfaction was 92% positive regarding the RPM service's function and patient management. An RPM appears to be an effective means to optimize postoperative pain management after transition off patient-controlled analgesia devices. Further research is needed to ascertain the exact cost-benefit and potential impact on postoperative quality-of-life measurements.

Comparison of the transarterial axillary block and the ultrasound-guided infraclavicular block for upper extremity surgery: a prospective randomized trial.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: The transarterial axillary block and the ultrasound-guided infraclavicular block are both effective methods of anesthetizing the upper extremity. This study compares these methods with respect to subjective postoperative dysesthesias, block adequacy, patient comfort, and patient satisfaction. METHODS: Two hundred thirty-two patients were randomized to receive an ultrasound-guided infraclavicular block or a transarterial axillary block for upper extremity surgery. Block placement, motor and sensory testing, and block adequacy data were recorded. The subjects were contacted by a blinded research assistant at 2 and 10 days postoperatively to assess for the presence of dysesthesias and pain and to assess patient satisfaction. RESULTS: The 2 techniques were similar with respect to block performance time and adequacy of the block for surgery. There was no significant difference between the blocks in terms of postoperative dysesthesias (23.9% in the axillary group vs 17.1% in the infraclavicular group at 2 days, P = 0.216, and 11.0% vs 6.31% at 10 days, P = 0.214). None of the dysesthesias were permanent. The infraclavicular block had a lower incidence of paresthesias during placement (P = 0.035) and was associated with less pain at the block site (P = 0.010 at 2 days, P = 0.002 at 10 days). More patients were willing to undergo the infraclavicular block as a future anesthetic when compared with the axillary block (P = 0.025 at 10 days). CONCLUSIONS: There is no significant difference between the 2 techniques in terms of adequacy for surgery and subjective postoperative dysesthesias. The ultrasound-guided infraclavicular block is associated with greater patient comfort and willingness to undergo the same anesthetic when compared with the transarterial axillary block.

Ketamine as an adjunct to postoperative pain management in opioid tolerant patients after spinal fusions: a prospective randomized trial.

Management of acute postoperative pain is challenging, particularly in patients with preexisting narcotic dependency. Ketamine has been used at subanesthetic doses as a N-methyl D-aspartate (NMDA) receptor antagonist to block the processing of nociceptive input in chronic pain syndromes. This prospective randomized study was designed to assess the use of ketamine as an adjunct to acute pain management in narcotic tolerant patients after spinal fusions. Twenty-six patients for 1-2 level posterior lumbar fusions with segmental instrumentation were randomly assigned to receive ketamine or act as a control. Patients in the ketamine group received 0.2 mg/kg on induction of general anesthesia and then 2 mcg kg(-1) hour(-1) for the next 24 hours. Patients were extubated in the operating room and within 15 minutes of arriving in the Post Anesthesia Care Unit (PACU) were started on intravenous patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) hydromorphone without a basal infusion. Patients were assessed for pain (numerical rating scale [NRS]), narcotic use, level of sedation, delirium, and physical therapy milestones until discharge. The ketamine group had significantly less pain during their first postoperative hour in the PACU (NRS 4.8 vs 8.7) and continued to have less pain during the first postoperative day at rest (3.6 vs 5.5) and with physical therapy (5.6 vs 8.0). Three patients in the control group failed PCA pain management and were converted to intravenous ketamine infusions when their pain scores improved. Patients in the ketamine group required less hydromorphone than the control group, but the differences were not significant. Subanesthetic doses of ketamine reduced postoperative pain in narcotic tolerant patients undergoing posterior spine fusions.

Clonidine and analgesic duration after popliteal fossa nerve blockade: randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study.

BACKGROUND: We tested the hypothesis that 100 microg clonidine added to 0.375% bupivacaine would prolong the duration of analgesia from popliteal fossa nerve blockade. METHODS: Ninety-nine patients scheduled for hospital admission after foot or ankle surgery entered this randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. Patients received a popliteal fossa block (nerve stimulator technique, via the posterior approach) using 30 mL 0.375% bupivacaine, with epinephrine. Patients were randomized to receive no clonidine, 100 microg clonidine IM, or 100 microg clonidine with bupivacaine for the popliteal block. Patients also received a combined spinal-epidural anesthetic, a saphenous nerve block, and postoperative IV patient-controlled analgesia. The primary outcome was patient-reported duration of analgesia. RESULTS: Duration of analgesia was statistically longer in the block clonidine group (18 +/- 6 h for clonidine with bupivacaine vs 14 +/- 7 h for IM clonidine and 15 +/- 7 h for control, P = 0.016 for control vs clonidine with bupivacaine). Pain scores, analgesic use, and side effects attributable to pain management were similar among groups. CONCLUSIONS: Clonidine significantly prolongs the analgesic duration after popliteal fossa nerve blockade with bupivacaine.

Similar analgesic effect after popliteal fossa nerve blockade with 0.375% and 0.75% bupivacaine.

This study tested the hypothesis that increasing the concentration of bupivacaine from 0.375 to 0.75% would increase the duration of postoperative analgesia by 3 h. Seventy patients scheduled for hospital admission after foot or ankle surgery gave consent to enter this prospective randomized trial. Patients were randomly assigned to receive a popliteal fossa block (posterior approach) using 30 cc of either 0.375% or 0.75% bupivacaine, with epinephrine. Patients also received a neuraxial anesthetic and postoperative intravenous patient-controlled analgesia. Patient characteristics, duration of analgesia, pain scores, use of analgesic medications, and side effects of analgesic therapy were determined. Duration of analgesia was similar with both concentrations of bupivacaine (0.375% 14 +/- 8 h, 0.75% 13 +/- 6 h; mean +/- SD). Pain scores were the same for both groups on the first postoperative day (3 of 10 at rest, 5 with therapy). Analgesic use and side effects attributable to pain management did not differ between groups. In conclusion, postoperative analgesia was not affected by the concentration of bupivacaine used for the nerve block. There was no benefit to increasing the concentration of bupivacaine above 0.375% for single-injection popliteal fossa nerve blockade when performed for postoperative analgesia.