Patient engagement and prescription opioid use in perioperative pain management.

OBJECTIVE: To examine (1) patient perceptions regarding their engagement and the engagement of their families in perioperative pain management, (2) demographic and clinical characteristics associated with perceived patient and family engagement, and (3) the association between perceived patient and family engagement and patient outcomes. DESIGN: A prospective, observational study. SETTING: The Personalized Pain Program (PPP) at the Johns Hopkins Hospital in Baltimore, Maryland. PARTICIPANTS: Patients having more than one visit to the PPP. INTERVENTIONS: n/a. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Since the inception of the PPP, patients were surveyed prior to each clinic visit to assess their pain severity and interference using the Brief Pain Inventory. Starting August 22, 2018, two additional questions were added to the survey to assess patient perceptions of their engagement and the engagement of their families in perioperative pain management. In addition, electronic medical records were reviewed to collect data on daily opioid consumption during the first and last PPP visits presurgery and post-surgery. RESULTS: The final analysis included 511 survey responses from 155 patients. Perceived engagement of the patient in perioperative pain management improved over time (p < .001) and was significantly associated with reduction in prescription opioid consumption after surgery (coef = 12.7, SE = 5.8, p = .031). CONCLUSIONS: Surgical patients and their family members should be actively engaged in perioperative pain management to improve prescription opioid use and the quality and safety of perioperative care.

Feasibility of patient-reported diagnostic errors following emergency department discharge: a pilot study.

OBJECTIVES: The National Academy of Medicine identified diagnostic error as a pressing public health concern and defined failure to effectively communicate the diagnosis to patients as a diagnostic error. Leveraging Patient's Experience to improve Diagnosis (LEAPED) is a new program for measuring patient-reported diagnostic error. As a first step, we sought to assess the feasibility of using LEAPED after emergency department (ED) discharge. METHODS: We deployed LEAPED using a cohort design at three EDs within one academic health system. We enrolled 59 patients after ED discharge and queried them about their health status and understanding of the explanation for their health problems at 2-weeks, 1-month, and 3-months. We measured response rates and demographic/clinical predictors of patient uptake of LEAPED. RESULTS: Of those enrolled (n=59), 90% (n=53) responded to the 2-week post-ED discharge questionnaire (1 and 3-month ongoing). Of the six non-responders, one died and three were hospitalized at two weeks. The average age was 50 years (SD 16) and 64% were female; 53% were white and 41% were black. Over a fifth (23%) reported they were not given an explanation of their health problem on leaving the ED, and of those, a fourth (25%) did not have an understanding of what next steps to take after leaving the ED. CONCLUSIONS: Patient uptake of LEAPED was high, suggesting that patient-report may be a feasible method of evaluating the effectiveness of diagnostic communication to patients though further testing in a broader patient population is essential. Future research should determine if LEAPED yields important insights into the quality and safety of diagnostic care.