A Phase II Cluster-Crossover Randomized Trial of Fentanyl versus Morphine for Analgosedation in Mechanically Ventilated Patients.

Rationale: The continuous infusion of fentanyl or morphine is often prescribed to assist with analgesia and sedation (analgosedation) during mechanical ventilation. Objectives: To compare the effect of fentanyl versus morphine on patient-centered outcomes in ventilated patients. Methods: We conducted a cluster-randomized, cluster-crossover trial between July 2019 and August 2020 in two adult ICUs. We compared two continuous infusion regimens (fentanyl versus morphine). One ICU was randomized to the fentanyl-morphine sequence and the other to the morphine-fentanyl sequence. The primary outcome was the number of ventilator-free days at Day 28. Secondary outcomes included, among others, duration of mechanical ventilation in survivors and ICU-free days at Day 28. Measurements and Main Results: Via cluster allocation, we randomized 737 patients. Of these, 56 were excluded because of the opt-out consent process, leaving 681 (344 to fentanyl and 337 to morphine) for primary analysis (median [interquartile range] age, 59 [44-69] years). Median ventilator-free days at Day 28 were 26.1 (20.7-27.3) in the fentanyl versus 25.3 (19.1-27.2) in the morphine group (median difference, 0.79 [95% confidence interval, 0.31 to 1.28], P = 0.001). ICU-free days were greater (P < 0.001) and length of stay in the ICU for survivors shorter (P < 0.001) in the fentanyl group. All other secondary outcomes were not statistically different by treatment group. Conclusions: Among adult patients requiring mechanical ventilation, compared with morphine, fentanyl infusion significantly increased the median number of ventilator-free days at Day 28. The choice of opioid infusion agent may affect clinical outcomes and requires further investigation.

Efficacy and safety of acupuncture combined with analgesics on lung cancer pain: A protocol for systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Lung cancer (LC) is the malignant tumor with the highest incidence in the world, and treatment methods include surgery, radiotherapy, chemotherapy, and immunotherapy. Cancer pain is a common symptom in patients with LC, and the clinical treatment is to relieve it with analgesics. Acupuncture can relieve cancer pain. This study aims to systematically study the efficacy and safety of acupuncture combined with analgesics on cancer pain in patients with LC. METHODS: From the beginning to April 2021, search Medline, Embase, Cochrane Central Controlled Trials Register (Central), China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), Wanfang Database, China Biomedical Literature Database (CBM), and Chinese Science Journal Database (VIP database). Search the international clinical trial registration platform and the Chinese clinical trial registration platform to find ongoing or unpublished trials. The main outcome indicator is the total effective rate of analgesia, and the secondary outcome indicator is pain intensity score and adverse reactions. The RevMan 5.4 software will be used for statistical analysis. RESULTS: This study will provide the latest evidence for acupuncture combined with analgesics to relieve LC pain. CONCLUSION: The conclusion of this study is to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of acupuncture combined with analgesics in alleviating LC pain. INPLASY REGISTRATION NUMBER: INPLASY202150051.

Cannabis and Migraine: It's Complicated.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: The use of cannabis for the treatment of migraine has become an area of interest with the legalization of medical cannabis in the USA. Understanding the mechanisms of cannabinoids, available studies, and best clinical recommendations is crucial for headache providers to best serve patients. RECENT FINDINGS: Patients utilizing medical cannabis for migraine have reported improvement in migraine profile and common comorbidities. Reduction in prescription medication is also common, especially opioids. Side effects exist, with the majority being mild. Not enough data is available for specific dose recommendations, but THC and CBD appear to mediate these observed effects. The purpose of this article is twofold: review the limited research surrounding cannabis for migraine disease and reflect on clinical management experiences to provide recommendations that best capture the potential use of cannabis for migraine.

Analgesic efficacy of morphine sulfate immediate release vs. oxycodone/acetaminophen for acute pain in the emergency department.

OBJECTIVE: Previous research demonstrated that administration of Morphine Sulfate Immediate Release (MSIR) results in similar analgesic efficacy to Oxycodone but with significantly lesser degrees of euphoria and reward. The purpose of this study sit to investigate if MSIR combined with Acetaminophen can serve as an opioid analgesic alternative to Oxycodone combined with acetaminophen (Percocet) for acute pain in the Emergency Department (ED). METHODS: A prospective, randomized, double-blind trial of ED patients aged 18 to 64 years presenting with moderate to severe acute pain as defined by an 11-point numeric rating scale (NRS) with an initial score of ≥5 (0 = no pain and 10 = very severe pain). Patients were randomized to receive either 15 mg MSIR combined with 650 mg of Acetaminophen or 10 mg Oxycodone combined with 650 mg Acetaminophen. Patients were assessed at baseline, 30, 45 and 60 min. The primary outcome was reduction in pain at 60 min. Secondary outcomes include drug likeability and adverse events. RESULTS: 80 patients were enrolled in the study (40 per group). Demographic characteristics were similar between the groups (P > 0.05). Mean NRS pain scores at baseline were 8.44 for the MSIR group and 8.53 for the Percocet group (P = 0.788). Mean pain scores decreased over time but remained similar between the groups: 30 min (6.03 vs. 6.43; P = 0.453), 45 min (5.31 vs. 5.48; P = 0.779), and 60 min (4.22 vs. 4.87; P = 0.346). Reduction in mean NRS pain scores were statistically significant from baseline to 30, 45 and 60 min within each group (P < 0.0001 at each time point for both groups). The largest NRS mean difference was from baseline to 60 min: 4.2 (95% CI: 3.43 to 5.01) for MSIR group and 3.61 (95% CI: 2.79 to 4.43) for Percocet group. No clinically significant changes or any serious adverse events were observed in either group. CONCLUSION: MSIR provides similar analgesic efficacy as Percocet for short-term pain relief in the ED, similar rates of nausea/vomiting, and lower rates of likeability of the drug.

Analgesic efficacy of sufentanil in dressings after surgical treatment of burn wounds.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to assess the analgesic efficacy of sufentanil in dressings after surgical treatment of burn wounds. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Twenty adult patients, who underwent surgical treatment of third-degree burn wounds under general anesthesia, were included. Two of the patients underwent surgery twice. During surgery, patients received 50-100 µg fentanyl every 20-30 min and, after surgery, patients received 100 mg ketoprofen twice daily. Additionally, ten patients (group 1) received 50 µg sufentanil added to the burn wound dressings soaked in octenidine and phenoxyethanol while 10 patients (group 2) received 25 µg sufentanil added to the same dressings. The rescue analgesic, which was administered when pain intensified, was 5 mg subcutaneous morphine. Plasma sufentanil concentrations were assayed at 1, 2, 3, and 6 h after surgery completion and when pain was reported, along with pain intensity evaluation. RESULTS: Sufentanil was not detected in the serum of any patients. Rescue morphine was given during the postoperative period (24 h) in one patient in group 1 (who underwent surgery twice) and three patients in group 2. The mean sufentanil concentration in dressings was higher in group 1 (0.13 ± 0.03) than group 2 (0.06 ± 0.03 µg/mL; p < 0.001). The group 1 patient who received rescue morphine had a sufentanil concentration of 0.10 µg/mL, which was the lowest concentration in group 1. Group 2 patients who received rescue morphine had sufentanil concentrations of at least two-fold lower (0.03-0.05 µg/mL). No adverse effects were observed. CONCLUSIONS: Sufentanil in dressings after burn wound surgery provides effective and safe analgesia and the sufentanil concentration in dressings should be ≥0.10 µg/mL in a solution of octenidine and phenoxyethanol.

Effect of magnesium sulfate on renal colic pain: A PRISMA-compliant meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Magnesium sulfate (MgSO4) is widely used in analgesia for different conditions. Recent randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have evaluated the effects of MgSO4 on renal colic; however, this new evidence has not been synthesized. Thus, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the efficacy and safety of MgSO4 in comparison with control for renal colic. METHODS: PubMed, EMBASE, and Scopus databases were searched from inception to February 2020. We included RCTs that evaluated MgSO4 vs control for patients with renal colic. Data were independently extracted by 2 reviewers and synthesized using a random-effects model. RESULTS: Four studies with a total of 373 patients were analyzed. Intravenous MgSO4 15 to 50 mg/kg did not significantly reduce renal colic pain severity at 15 minutes (mean difference [MD] = 0.35, 95% confidence interval [CI] -0.51 to 1.21; 2 RCTs), 30 minutes (MD = 0.19, 95% CI -0.74 to 1.13; 4 RCTs), and 60 minutes (MD = -0.28, 95% CI -0.72 to 0.16; 3 RCTs) in comparison with controls. In patients who failed to respond to initial analgesics, intravenous MgSO4 15 mg/kg or 2 ml of 50% solution provided similar pain relief to ketorolac or morphine at 30 minutes (P = .90) and 60 minutes (P = .57). No significant hemodynamic changes were observed with short-term use of MgSO4 in these studies. CONCLUSION: MgSO4 provides no superior therapeutic benefits in comparison with control treatments. MgSO4 may be used as a rescue medication in patients not responding to initial analgesics. The short-term use of MgSO4 did not affect hemodynamic values.

Comparison of ibuprofen and piroxicam gel in the treatment of trauma pain: A randomized double-blind trial of geriatric population.

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to compare the analgesic efficacy of topical ibuprofen and topical piroxicam for acute musculoskeletal injuries. METHODS: In this prospective, randomized, controlled, double-blinded study, geriatric patients were assigned to groups to receive either topical ibuprofen (n = 70) or topical piroxicam (n = 69). The first dose of gel was applied in the emergency department and the remaining doses were self-administered at home by the patients thrice daily for 72 h. For each patient, the initial baseline visual analog scale (VAS) score (V 0) was compared with the VAS scores at the 60 min (V1), 120 min (V2), 24 h (V3) and 72 h (V4) time points. The decreases in VAS scores, clinical effectiveness of the treatments, and incidence of adverse events were evaluated. RESULTS: In the topical ibuprofen group, the VAS scores were significantly lower at each measurement time point compared to baseline (p < .001). The results were as follows: V0 -V: 1.08, 95% CI: 0.56-1.61; V0 -V2: 1.09, 95% CI: 0.49-1.69; V0 -V3: 1.44, 95% CI: 0.81-2.07; V0 -V4: 1.59, 95% CI: 0.91-2.26. The mean percentage decrease in the VAS scores in the topical ibuprofen group was significantly higher than that in the topical piroxicam group (p < .001). The clinical effect of treatment was found to be significantly higher for the ibuprofen gel group (p < .001). There was no substantial difference in treatment-related adverse events between the groups (p > .05). CONCLUSION: Ibuprofen gel, which is a safe treatment option for geriatric patients, is more clinically effective than piroxicam gel. Response to Reviewers.

Pharmacological intervention for ambulatory surgery: A protocol for systematic review and network meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: We aim to perform a network meta-analysis (NMA) to quantify and rank-order the efficacy and safety of analgesic medications for ambulatory surgery. METHODS: We will search MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Google Scholar databases to identify all randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of analgesics, beginning from their inception to February 2020. The primary endpoints will be pain score measured using a visual analog scale (VAS) or a numerical rating scale (NRS) at 3 different time points: Phase I recovery, phase II recovery, and recovery at home. Adverse events, including nausea, vomiting, headache, dizziness, arrhythmia, and respiratory depression, will be also assessed.We will conduct NMA and use surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) values and rankograms to present the hierarchy of analgesic medication. A comparison-adjusted funnel plot will be used to assess the presence of small study effects. The quality of the included studies will be assessed using the risk of bias tool 2.0. All statistical analyses will be performed using Stata SE version 15.0. RESULTS: The results of this systematic review and NMA will be published in a peer-reviewed journal. CONCLUSION: This systematic review and NMA will provide comprehensive and convincing evidence regarding analgesic medication for pain after ambulatory surgery. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42018100000.

Effect of Inhaled Cannabis for Pain in Adults With Sickle Cell Disease: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Sickle cell disease (SCD) is characterized by chronic pain and episodic acute pain caused by vasoocclusive crises, often requiring high doses of opioids for prolonged periods. In humanized mouse models of SCD, a synthetic cannabinoid has been found to attenuate both chronic and acute hyperalgesia. The effect of cannabis on chronic pain in adults with SCD is unknown. Objective: To determine whether inhaled cannabis is more effective than inhaled placebo in relieving chronic pain in adults with SCD. Design, Setting, and Participants: This pilot randomized clinical trial included participants with SCD with chronic pain admitted to a single inpatient clinical research center for 2 separate 5-day stays from August 2014 to April 2017. Participants inhaled either vaporized cannabis (4.4% Δ-9-tetrahydrocannabinol to 4.9% cannabidiol) 3 times daily or vaporized placebo cannabis. Pain and pain interference ratings using the Brief Pain Inventory were assessed throughout each 5-day period. Participants with SCD and chronic pain on stable analgesics were eligible to enroll. A total of 90 participants were assessed for eligibility; 56 participants were deemed ineligible, and 34 participants were enrolled. Of these, 7 participants dropped out before randomization. Of 27 randomized participants, 23 completed both treatment arms of the crossover study and were included in the final per protocol analysis. Data analysis was completed in June 2019, with the sensitivity analysis conducted in April 2020. Interventions: Inhalation of vaporized cannabis plant (4.4% Δ-9-tetrahydrocannbinol to 4.9% cannabidiol) or placebo cannabis plant using a vaporizer 3 times daily for 5 days. Main Outcomes and Measures: Daily pain assessed with visual analog scale and Brief Pain Inventory. Results: A total of 23 participants (mean [SD] age, 37.6 [11.4] years; 13 [56%] women) completed the trial. The mean (SD) difference in pain rating assessment between the cannabis and placebo groups was -5.3 (8.1) for day 1, -10.9 (7.0) for day 2, -16.5 (9.2) for day 3, -8.9 (6.7) for day 4, and -8.2 (8.1) for day 5; however, none of these differences were statistically significant. There was no statistically significant mean (SD) difference in pain interference ratings between cannabis and placebo between days 1 and 5 for interference in general activities (day 1: 0.27 [0.35]; day 5: -1.0 [0.5]), walking (day 1: 0.14 [0.73]; day 5: -0.87 [0.63]), sleep (day 1: 0.59 [0.74]; day 5: -1.3 [0.8]), or enjoyment (day 1: 0.23 [0.69]; day 5: -0.91 [0.48]), but there was a statistically significant mean (SD) difference in decrease in interference with mood (day 1: 0.96 [0.59]; day 5: -1.4 [0.6]; P = .02). No differences in treatment-related adverse effects were observed. Use of concomitant opioids was similar during both treatment periods. Conclusions and Relevance: This randomized clinical trial found that, compared with vaporized placebo, vaporized cannabis did not statistically significantly reduce pain and associated symptoms, except interference in mood, in patients with SCD with chronic pain. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01771731.

Deriving harmonised permitted daily exposures (PDEs) for paracetamol (acetaminophen) CAS #: 103-90-2.

In the pharmaceutical industry, cleaning criteria are required for multipurpose manufacturing facilities. These Health Based Exposure Limits (HBELs), also called permitted daily exposures (PDEs) values, are derived from toxicological and pharmacological evaluation of the active pharmaceutical ingredients (APIs). The purpose of this publication is to show an example of how authors from different companies evaluate a generic drug, paracetamol, and discuss different approaches and relevance of the nonclinical studies for deriving PDEs. PDE limits of 25 mg/day for the oral route, and 20 mg/day for the intravenous (i.v.) and inhalation (inhal.) routes, respectively, were established herein. However, it has been already recognised that there are acceptable differences in the PDE calculations, which may be based on data accessibility, company-specific science-policy decisions or expert judgments. These differences can cause up to a 3-fold lower or higher values. If unnecessarily high factors are applied, this would result in a very conservative PDE value and unneeded additional cleaning and higher manufacturing costs. The PDE values presented are considered to be protective against adverse and pharmacological effects observed in clinical trials and in this case, a very long postmarketing period of paracetamol.

Analgesic Outcomes in a Danish Acute Care Hospital Following Electronic Prescribing and Analgesic Self-Administration.

BACKGROUND: Despite the long-term consequences of poorly controlled postoperative pain, inadequate pain control remains a problem. AIMS: To improve the quality of postoperative pain management, the study site, an acute care hospital in Denmark, introduced electronic prescribing with standard order-sets, and allowed patients to self-administer analgesia. This study aimed to describe analgesic prescribing, prescriptions for multimodal analgesia, analgesic administration, and patients' pain experience, in this context. DESIGN: Point-prevalence survey. SETTINGS: One Danish regional hospital. PARTICIPANTS: Consecutive sample of 286 surgical inpatients comprising 65 orthopaedic, 41 gynaecological, 57 urology and 123 gastrointestinal patients. METHODS: We evaluated the quality of postoperative pain management on four postoperative surgical wards using: (1) the Revised American Pain Society Patient Outcome Questionnaire; and (2) patient chart audit. RESULTS: Overall, 89.2% of patients were prescribed a fixed analgesic and 71.7% were prescribed fixed analgesics in multimodal combination. Patterns of multimodal prescribing and administration varied significantly across surgical groups. Patients received 87.7% of available fixed prescriptions and 22.5% of available analgesics prescribed 'as needed'. However, patients' worst pain intensity was high (mean = 5.8/10, SD = 2) and 73.4% reported moderate-to-severe worst pain during the previous 24-hours. Patients who self-administered medications used significantly more fixed-schedule paracetamol (p = .018), non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (p = .001), weak (p = .035) and strong (p < .001) opioids. CONCLUSIONS: The availability of multimodal analgesia was high following the introduction of electronic prescribing. However, gaps remain in the administration of both fixed and 'as needed' analgesics for postoperative patients. Findings suggested that allowing patients to self-administer analgesia may increase compliance with fixed schedule prescriptions.

Comparison of the Analgesic Effect of Ropivacaine with Fentanyl and Ropivacaine Alone in Continuous Epidural Infusion for Acute Herpes Zoster Management: A Retrospective Study.

Background and Objectives: Currently, few studies have reported the effects of opioids during continuous epidural infusion (CEI) to control pain owing to herpes zoster (HZ). This study aimed to retrospectively compare the effectiveness of epidural opioids in the treatment of acute HZ pain. Materials and Methods: We reviewed medical records of 105 patients who were divided into two groups: R group (CEI with ropivacaine) and RF group (CEI with ropivacaine and fentanyl). Clinical efficacy was evaluated using the numeric rating scale (NRS) score for 6 months after the procedures. We compared the percentage of patients with complete remission in each group. We investigated the complication rates during CEI. Results: No significant differences in the NRS scores were observed between the two groups in the 6-month period. The adjusted odds ratio (OR) for patients included in the complete remission was 0.6 times lower in the RF group than in the R group (95% confidence interval: 0.22-1.71, p = 0.35). The OR for complications during CEI was higher in the RF group than in the R group. However, the difference was not statistically significant. Conclusions: No difference was observed in the management of HZ pain and the prevention of postherpetic neuralgia between the two groups. The incidence of complications tended to be higher in the RF group than in the R group.

Comparison of intravenous lidocaine/ketorolac combination to either analgesic alone for suspected renal colic pain in the ED.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: To compare analgesic efficacy and safety of intravenous lidocaine and ketorolac combination to each analgesic alone for ED patients with suspected renal colic. METHODS: We conducted a randomized, double-blind trial comparing analgesic efficacy of a combination of intravenous lidocaine (1.5 mg/kg) and ketorolac (30 mg), to ketorolac (30 mg), and to lidocaine (1.5 mg/kg) in patients aged 18-64 presenting to the ED with suspected renal colic. Primary outcome included difference in pain scores between the groups at 30 min. Secondary outcomes included a comparative reduction in pain scores in each group from baseline to 30 and 60 min as well as rates of adverse events and need for rescue analgesia at 30 and 60 min. RESULTS: We enrolled 150 subjects (50 per group). The difference in mean pain scores at 30 min between Lidocaine and Lidocaine/Ketorolac groups was -2.89 (95% CI: -4.39 to -1.39); between Ketorolac and Lidocaine/Ketorolac group was -0.92 (95% CI: -2.44 to 0.61); and between Ketorolac and Lidocaine was -1.98 (95% CI: -3.69 to -0.27). A comparative percentage of subjects in each group required rescue analgesia at 30 and 60 min. No clinically concerning changes in vital signs were observed. No serious adverse events occurred in either group. Commonly reported adverse effects were dizziness, nausea, and headache. CONCLUSION: The administration of intravenous lidocaine/ketorolac combination to ED patients with suspected renal colic results in better analgesia in comparison to lidocaine alone but provides no analgesic advantages over ketorolac alone. Clinicaltrials.gov Registration: NCT02902770.

Factors influencing the occurrence of neonatal procedural pain.

OBJECTIVES: The objective of this study was to describe the occurrence of neonatal procedural pain and explore the factors that influence the frequency of painful procedures. DESIGN: A descriptive prospective epidemiologic study. SETTING: NICU at a general hospital in China. METHODS: A demographic and diagnosis or illness information questionnaire and an occurrence of procedural pain questionnaire specifically designed for this study were used to record the current status of neonatal procedural pain. The neonatal infant pain scale (NIPS) was used to measure pain intensity. A multiple linear regression model was used to explore the factors influencing the frequency of painful procedures. RESULTS: One hundred and twenty neonates experienced a total of 16,840 painful procedures. Each neonate was exposed to a median (IQR) of 66.5(27,154.75) painful procedures during hospitalization and a median (IQR) of 13(11, 19) painful procedures. All 27 different procedures were considered painful, and 70.37% (19/27) of these procedures caused severe pain. Overall, the mean NIPS score of the 27 procedures was 5.04 ± 1.52 with a range from 0 to 7. Respiratory support, age, and length of hospital stay were factors influencing the frequency of painful procedures. CONCLUSIONS: NICU neonates experience pain at a high frequency and intensity during hospitalization. Respiratory support, age, and length of hospital stay were factors influencing the frequency of painful procedures. Strategies are needed to bridge the gap between practice and the evidence-based guidelines.

Patient Trade-Offs Related to Analgesic Use for Cancer Pain: A MaxDiff Analysis Study.

PURPOSE: Many patients with cancer pain deviate from prescribed analgesic regimens. Our aim was to elicit the trade-offs patients make based on their beliefs about analgesic use and rank utilities (importance scores) using maximum difference (MaxDiff) scaling. We also investigated if there were unique clusters of patients based on their analgesic beliefs. METHODS: This was a secondary analysis of a three-month, prospective observational study. Patients (N = 207) were self-identified African Americans and Whites, >18 years, diagnosed with multiple myeloma or solid tumor, and were prescribed at least one around-the-clock analgesic for cancer pain. MaxDiff analysis allowed us to identify patients utilities. Second, a cluster analysis assisted in ranking how analgesic beliefs differed by groups. Third, clusters were described by comparing key sociodemographic and clinical variables. RESULTS: Participants' beliefs were a significant factor in choices related to analgesic use (chi-square = 498.145, p < .0001). The belief, 'Pain meds keep you from knowing what is going on in your body', had the highest patient endorsement. Two distinct clusters of patients based on analgesic beliefs were identified; 'knowing body' was ranked as top priority for both clusters. The belief that cancer patients become addicted to analgesics was moderately important for both clusters. Severity of side effects was the only key variable significantly different between clusters (p = .043). CONCLUSIONS: Our findings support tailored pain management interventions that attend to individual beliefs about cancer pain and analgesic use. Future research should explore the relationship between analgesic utilities, actual analgesic taking behaviors, and how they impact patients' cancer pain outcomes.

Do Warmed Blankets Change Pain, Agitation, Mood or Analgesic Use Among Nursing Home Residents?

BACKGROUND: Pain, agitation, and thermal discomfort are common symptoms of older adults residing in nursing homes. Nonpharmacologic interventions are recognized as a best practice strategy for people living in nursing homes because of their low adverse effect profile and increased evidence of effectiveness. Warmed blankets have not been empirically tested for use in long-term care. AIMS: The purpose of this quality improvement project was to describe the use of warmed blankets in a nursing home setting and determine if use was associated with changes in pain, agitation, mood, or analgesic use. DESIGN: A pretest posttest design was used along with a comparison of intact groups. SETTINGS: The setting was one 160-bed skilled long-term care facility. PARTICIPANTS/SUBJECTS: There were 141 residents eligible since they did not have a condition that could be worsened by superficial heat. METHODS: Warmed blankets were unfolded and placed over residents with pain, agitation, or thermal discomfort. Short-term pain measures included use of the Revised FACES Pain Scale, the PAINAD (Pain Assessment in Advanced Dementia) scale, and the Brief Agitation Rating Scale. Long-term measures were taken from the electronic medical record. RESULTS: Of the 141 eligible residents, 24.1% (n = 34) received a warmed blanket over the 1- month study period. There were statistically significant decreases in both pain level and agitation among baseline, 20 minutes after application, and the subsequent shift assessments (p < .001). There were also long-term changes in the number of pain complaints (p = .040), severity of pain complaints (p = .009), and as-needed analgesic use (p = .011). There were no statistically significant differences between the treated group and comparison group on any long-term measures. CONCLUSIONS: Warmed blankets are a low-cost intervention with a high potential for bringing comfort to nursing home residents.

Analgesic Effect of Nitrous Oxide/Oxygen Mixture for Traumatic Pain in the Emergency Department: A Randomized, Double-Blind Study.

BACKGROUND: Acute pain is the most common complaint in Emergency Department (ED) admissions, and options for analgesia are limited. Nitrous oxide/oxygen possesses many properties showing it may be an ideal analgesic in the ED. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study is to evaluate the safety and analgesic effect of the fixed nitrous oxide/oxygen mixture for trauma patients in the ED. METHODS: We enrolled 60 patients in this double-blind, randomized study. The treatment group received conventional pain treatment plus a mixture of 65% nitrous oxide/oxygen. The control group received the conventional pain treatment plus oxygen. Primary outcome was the reduction in pain intensity at 5 and 15 min after the start of intervention. Secondary outcomes include adverse events, physiological parameters, and satisfaction from both patients and health care professionals. RESULTS: Initial pain scores for the nitrous oxide/oxygen group (6.0 [5.0-8.0]) and the oxygen group (6.75 [5.0-9.0]) were comparable (p = 0.57). The mean numerical rating scale scores at 5 min were 3.4 ± 1.8 and 7.0 ± 1.8 for nitrous oxide/oxygen and oxygen, respectively (p < 0.01). The mean pain intensity at 15 min in the treatment group was 3.0 ± 1.9, compared with 6.3 ± 2.2 in the control group (p < 0.01). Both patients' (8.0 [7.0-9.0] vs. 4.0 [2.0-6.0], p < 0.01) and physicians' (8.5 [8.0-9.0] vs. 4.0 [3.0-6.0], p < 0.01) satisfaction scores in the treatment group were significantly higher than the oxygen group. No serious adverse events were observed. CONCLUSIONS: This study gives supporting evidence for the safety and effectiveness of using self-administered nitrous oxide/oxygen mixture in the ED for moderate-to-severe traumatic pain.

Multimodal oral analgesia for non-severe trauma patients: evaluation of a triage-nurse directed protocol combining methoxyflurane, paracetamol and oxycodone.

Insufficient analgesia affects around 50% of emergency department patients. The use of a protocol helps to reduce the risk of oligoanalgesia in this context. Our objective was to describe the feasibility and efficacy of a multimodal analgesia protocol (combining paracetamol, oxycodone, and inhaled methoxyflurane) initiated by triage nurse. We performed a prospective, observational study in an emergency department (Grenoble Alpes University Hospital, France) between December 2017 and April 2018. Adult non-severe trauma patients with a numerical pain rating scale (NRS) score ≥ 4 were included. The primary efficacy criterion was the proportion of patients with an NRS score ≤ 3 at 15 min. Pain intensity was measured for 60 min and during radiography. Data on adverse events and satisfaction were recorded. A total of 200 adult patients were included (median [interquartile range (IQR)] age: 32 [23-49] years; 126 men (63%)). Sixty-six patients (33%) reported an NRS score ≤ 3 at 15 min. The time required to achieve a decrease of at least 2 points in the NRS score was 10 (5-20) min. The median [IQR] pain intensity was 4 [2-5] before radiography and 4 [2-6] during radiography. Adverse events were frequent (n = 128, 64%). No serious adverse events were reported. The patients and caregivers reported good levels of satisfaction. The administration of a nurse-driven multimodal analgesia protocol (combining paracetamol, oxycodone, and methoxyflurane) was feasible on admission to the emergency department. It rapidly produced long-lasting analgesia in adult trauma patients.Trial registration: NCT03380247.

BET 1: Green or blue for you? Methoxyflurane (Penthrox) or nitrous oxide/oxygen 50% mixture (Entonox) for the management of acute pain in the ED.

A short-cut review of the literature was carried out to establish whether inhaled methoxyflurane (Penthrox) is comparable or superior with a standard inhalational analgesia for the management of acute pain. Only two papers were identified as suitable for inclusion using the reported search strategy. The author, date and country of publication, patient group studied, study type, relevant outcomes, results and study weaknesses of the best papers are tabulated. It is concluded that both methods of inhaled analgesia appear to be useful options for acute pain in the ED when compared with placebo. No evidence was found to suggest superiority of methoxypenflurane. International studies directly comparing the use of both drugs for in acute trauma are ongoing and will develop the evidence base.