-
International Emergency Nursing Sep 2018This paper reports a systematic literature review evaluating the impact and quality of pain management associated with nurse initiated analgesia in patients presenting...
AIM
This paper reports a systematic literature review evaluating the impact and quality of pain management associated with nurse initiated analgesia in patients presenting to the emergency department (ED).
BACKGROUND
Pain is a major presenting complaint for individuals attending the ED. Timely access to effective analgesia continues to be a global concern in the ED setting; emergency nurses are optimally positioned to improve detection and management of pain.
DESIGN
Systematic review.
DATABASES AND DATA TREATMENT
Four databases - CINAHL, EMBASE, Medline, ProQuest - the Cochrane Library and the National Institute of Clinical Excellence were searched from date of inception to December 2017; with no language restrictions applied. Studies were identified using predetermined inclusion criteria. Data were extracted and summarised and underwent evaluation using published valid criteria.
RESULTS
Twelve articles met inclusion, comprising a wide range of analgesics and administration routes to manage mild to severe pain. Overall study quality was high; 7 studies included a form of comparison group. Patient outcome measures included time to analgesia (n = 12; 100%), change in pain score (n = 6; 50.0%); adverse events (n = 6; 50.0%); patient satisfaction (n = 5; 41.7%) and documenting pain assessment (n = 2; 16.7%).
CONCLUSION
Nurse-initiated analgesia was associated with safe, timely and effective pain relief.
Topics: Analgesia; Emergency Service, Hospital; Humans; Nurse's Role; Pain; Pain Management; Patient Satisfaction; Time Factors; Time-to-Treatment
PubMed: 29885907
DOI: 10.1016/j.ienj.2018.05.003 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Feb 2020Many women would like to avoid pharmacological or invasive methods of pain management in labour and this may contribute towards the popularity of complementary methods... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Many women would like to avoid pharmacological or invasive methods of pain management in labour and this may contribute towards the popularity of complementary methods of pain management. This review examined evidence about the use of acupuncture and acupressure for pain management in labour. This is an update of a review last published in 2011.
OBJECTIVES
To examine the effects of acupuncture and acupressure for pain management in labour.
SEARCH METHODS
For this update, we searched Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth's Trials Register, (25 February 2019), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (the Cochrane Library 2019, Issue 1), MEDLINE (1966 to February 2019), CINAHL (1980 to February 2019), ClinicalTrials.gov (February 2019), the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platfory (ICTRP) (February 2019) and reference lists of included studies.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Published and unpublished randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing acupuncture or acupressure with placebo, no treatment or other non-pharmacological forms of pain management in labour. We included all women whether nulliparous or multiparous, and in spontaneous or induced labour. We included studies reported in abstract form if there was sufficient information to permit assessment of risk of bias. Trials using a cluster-RCT design were eligible for inclusion, but quasi-RCTs or cross-over studies were not.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently assessed trials for inclusion and risk of bias, extracted data and checked them for accuracy. We assessed the certainty of the evidence using the GRADE approach.
MAIN RESULTS
We included 28 trials with data reporting on 3960 women. Thirteen trials reported on acupuncture and 15 trials reported on acupressure. No study was at a low risk of bias on all domains. Pain intensity was generally measured on a visual analogue scale (VAS) of 0 to 10 or 0 to 100 with low scores indicating less pain. Acupuncture versus sham acupuncture Acupuncture may make little or no difference to the intensity of pain felt by women when compared with sham acupuncture (mean difference (MD) -4.42, 95% confidence interval (CI) -12.94 to 4.09, 2 trials, 325 women, low-certainty evidence). Acupuncture may increase satisfaction with pain relief compared to sham acupuncture (risk ratio (RR) 2.38, 95% CI 1.78 to 3.19, 1 trial, 150 women, moderate-certainty evidence), and probably reduces the use of pharmacological analgesia (RR 0.75, 95% CI 0.63 to 0.89, 2 trials, 261 women, moderate-certainty evidence). Acupuncture may have no effect on assisted vaginal birth (very low-certainty evidence), and probably little to no effect on caesarean section (low-certainty evidence). Acupuncture compared to usual care We are uncertain if acupuncture reduces pain intensity compared to usual care because the evidence was found to be very low certainty (standardised mean difference (SMD) -1.31, 95% CI -2.14 to -0.49, 4 trials, 495 women, I = 93%). Acupuncture may have little to no effect on satisfaction with pain relief (low-certainty evidence). We are uncertain if acupuncture reduces the use of pharmacological analgesia because the evidence was found to be very low certainty (average RR 0.72, 95% CI 0.60 to 0.85, 6 trials, 1059 women, I = 70%). Acupuncture probably has little to no effect on assisted vaginal birth (low-certainty evidence) or caesarean section (low-certainty evidence). Acupuncture compared to no treatment One trial compared acupuncture to no treatment. We are uncertain if acupuncture reduces pain intensity (MD -1.16, 95% CI -1.51 to -0.81, 163 women, very low-certainty evidence), assisted vaginal birth or caesarean section because the evidence was found to be very low certainty. Acupuncture compared to sterile water injection We are uncertain if acupuncture has any effect on use of pharmacological analgesia, assisted vaginal birth or caesarean section because the evidence was found to be very low certainty. Acupressure compared to a sham control We are uncertain if acupressure reduces pain intensity in labour (MD -1.93, 95% CI -3.31 to -0.55, 6 trials, 472 women) or assisted vaginal birth because the evidence was found to be very low certainty. Acupressure may have little to no effect on use of pharmacological analgesia (low-certainty evidence). Acupressure probably reduces the caesarean section rate (RR 0.44, 95% CI 0.27 to 0.71, 4 trials, 313 women, moderate-certainty evidence). Acupressure compared to usual care We are uncertain if acupressure reduces pain intensity in labour (SMD -1.07, 95% CI -1.45 to -0.69, 8 trials, 620 women) or increases satisfaction with pain relief (MD 1.05, 95% CI 0.75 to 1.35, 1 trial, 105 women) because the evidence was found to be very low certainty. Acupressure may have little to no effect on caesarean section (low-certainty evidence). Acupressure compared to a combined control Acupressure probably slightly reduces the intensity of pain during labour compared with the combined control (measured on a scale of 0 to 10 with low scores indicating less pain) (SMD -0.42, 95% CI -0.65 to -0.18, 2 trials, 322 women, moderate-certainty evidence). We are uncertain if acupressure has any effect on the use of pharmacological analgesia (RR 0.94, 95% CI 0.71 to 1.25, 1 trial, 212 women), satisfaction with childbirth, assisted vaginal birth or caesarean section because the certainty of the evidence was all very low. No studies were found that reported on sense of control in labour and only one reported on satisfaction with the childbirth experience.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Acupuncture in comparison to sham acupuncture may increase satisfaction with pain management and reduce use of pharmacological analgesia. Acupressure in comparison to a combined control and usual care may reduce pain intensity. However, for other comparisons of acupuncture and acupressure, we are uncertain about the effects on pain intensity and satisfaction with pain relief due to very low-certainty evidence. Acupuncture may have little to no effect on the rates of caesarean or assisted vaginal birth. Acupressure probably reduces the need for caesarean section in comparison to a sham control. There is a need for further high-quality research that include sham controls and comparisons to usual care and report on the outcomes of sense of control in labour, satisfaction with the childbirth experience or satisfaction with pain relief.
Topics: Acupressure; Acupuncture Therapy; Analgesia, Obstetrical; Female; Humans; Labor Pain; Pain Management; Pregnancy; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 32032444
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD009232.pub2 -
European Journal of Cardio-thoracic... Jun 2014Video-assisted thoracic surgery (VATS) is emerging as the standard surgical procedure for both minor and major oncological lung surgery. Thoracic epidural analgesia... (Review)
Review
Video-assisted thoracic surgery (VATS) is emerging as the standard surgical procedure for both minor and major oncological lung surgery. Thoracic epidural analgesia (TEA) and paravertebral block (PVB) are established analgesic golden standards for open surgery such as thoracotomy; however, there is no gold standard for regional analgesia for VATS. This systematic review aimed to assess different regional techniques with regard to effect on acute postoperative pain following VATS, with emphasis on VATS lobectomy. The systematic review of PubMed, The Cochrane Library and Embase databases yielded 1542 unique abstracts; 17 articles were included for qualitative assessment, of which three were studies on VATS lobectomy. The analgesic techniques included TEA, multilevel and single PVB, paravertebral catheter, intercostal catheter, interpleural infusion and long thoracic nerve block. Overall, the studies were heterogeneous with small numbers of participants. In comparative studies, TEA and especially PVB showed some effect on pain scores, but were often compared with an inferior analgesic treatment. Other techniques showed no unequivocal results. No clear gold standard for regional analgesia for VATS could be demonstrated, but a guide of factors to include in future studies on regional analgesia for VATS is presented.
Topics: Analgesia; Anesthesia, Conduction; Humans; Pain, Postoperative; Pneumonectomy; Thoracic Surgery, Video-Assisted
PubMed: 24288340
DOI: 10.1093/ejcts/ezt525 -
Clinical Orthopaedics and Related... May 2014The perioperative period of major oncologic surgery is characterized by immunosuppression, angiogenesis, and an increased load of circulating malignant cells. It is a... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
The perioperative period of major oncologic surgery is characterized by immunosuppression, angiogenesis, and an increased load of circulating malignant cells. It is a window period in which cancer cells may seed, invade, and proliferate. Thus, it has been hypothesized that the use of regional anesthesia with the goal of reducing surgical stress and opioid and volatile anesthetic consumption would avoid perioperative immune suppression and angiogenesis and ultimately cancer recurrence.
QUESTIONS/PURPOSES
We performed a systematic review of the literature on the use of regional anesthesia and postoperative analgesia to improve cancer-related survival after oncologic surgery. Our primary topic of interest is survival after orthopaedic oncologic surgery, but because that literature is limited, we also have systematically reviewed the question of survival after breast, gastrointestinal, and genitourologic cancers.
METHODS
We searched the PubMed and Embase databases with the search terms: "anesthesia and analgesia", "local neoplasm recurrence", "cancer recurrence", "loco-regional neoplasm recurrence", "disease-free survival", and "cumulative survival rates". Our initial search of the two databases provided 836 studies of which 693 were rejected. Of the remaining 143 studies, only 13 articles qualified for inclusion in this systematic review, based on defined inclusion criteria. All these studies had retrospective design. Due to the high heterogeneity among the identified studies and the complete absence of randomized controlled trials from the literature on this topic, the results of a meta-analysis would be heavily confounded; hence, we instead performed a systematic review of the literature.
RESULTS
No eligible studies addressed the question of whether regional anesthesia and analgesia have an impact on survival after musculoskeletal cancer surgery. Only one relevant clinical study was identified on regional breast cancer survival; it suggested a benefit. The literature on gastrointestinal and genitourinary surgery was larger but mixed, although some preliminary studies do suggest a benefit of regional anesthesia on survival after oncologic surgery in those patient populations.
CONCLUSIONS
Although basic science studies suggest a potential benefit of regional anesthesia and stress response reduction in cancer formation, we found little clinical evidence to support the theory that regional anesthesia and analgesia improve overall patient survival after oncologic surgery.
Topics: Analgesia; Anesthesia, Conduction; Disease Progression; Disease-Free Survival; Humans; Neoplasm Recurrence, Local; Neoplasms; Pain, Postoperative; Risk Factors; Stress, Physiological; Surgical Procedures, Operative; Survival Analysis; Time Factors; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 24081665
DOI: 10.1007/s11999-013-3306-y -
Heart, Lung & Circulation Feb 2020While cardiac catheterisation is typically well tolerated, discomfort and anxiety are commonplace. Sedation using anxiolytic and analgesic medications has the potential...
BACKGROUND
While cardiac catheterisation is typically well tolerated, discomfort and anxiety are commonplace. Sedation using anxiolytic and analgesic medications has the potential to ameliorate such symptoms, however, is variably employed, with lack of standardised regimens and limited evidence.
METHODS
We performed a review of the role of sedation for cardiac catheterisation, including current practices and summarising available evidence relevant to diagnostic and interventional coronary procedures in the cardiac catheterisation laboratory.
RESULTS
Use of sedation and the medication regimens employed are highly variable. Available relevant studies are limited in number and mostly small. Sedation appears to modestly reduce anxiety and pain in most studies. The incidence of radial spasm and the consequent need to alter access site is reduced with procedural sedation. The majority of existing evidence applies to benzodiazepines and opioid use, which appear acceptably efficacious and safe when used with appropriate training and staffing; noting opioid medications reduce the absorption of loading doses of oral anti-platelet drugs.
CONCLUSIONS
In conclusion, benzodiazepines and opioids result a modest reduction in pain, improved patient tolerability and reduced risk of radial artery spasm. The decision on whether to use sedation, and which agent(s) and dose, should be individualised based on patient factors, including need for oral antiplatelet therapy administration. Appropriate staffing and monitoring is essential.
Topics: Analgesia; Cardiac Catheterization; Deep Sedation; Female; Humans; Male; Percutaneous Coronary Intervention
PubMed: 31601511
DOI: 10.1016/j.hlc.2019.08.015 -
BMJ Clinical Evidence Apr 2011Over 85% of women having a vaginal birth suffer some perineal trauma. Spontaneous tears requiring suturing are estimated to occur in at least a third of women in the UK... (Review)
Review
INTRODUCTION
Over 85% of women having a vaginal birth suffer some perineal trauma. Spontaneous tears requiring suturing are estimated to occur in at least a third of women in the UK and US, with anal sphincter tears in 0.5% to 7% of women. Perineal trauma can lead to long-term physical and psychological problems.
METHODS AND OUTCOMES
We conducted a systematic review and aimed to answer the following clinical questions: What are the effects of intrapartum surgical and non-surgical interventions on rates of perineal trauma? What are the effects of different methods and materials for primary repair of first- and second-degree tears and episiotomies? What are the effects of different methods and materials for primary repair of obstetric anal sphincter injuries (third- and fourth-degree tears)? We searched: Medline, Embase, The Cochrane Library, and other important databases up to March 2010 (Clinical Evidence reviews are updated periodically, please check our website for the most up-to-date version of this review). We included harms alerts from relevant organisations such as the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the UK Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA).
RESULTS
We found 38 systematic reviews, RCTs, or observational studies that met our inclusion criteria. We performed a GRADE evaluation of the quality of evidence for interventions.
CONCLUSIONS
In this systematic review we present information relating to the effectiveness and safety of the following interventions: active pushing, spontaneous pushing, and sustained breath-holding (Valsalva) method of pushing; continuous support during labour; conventional suturing; different methods and materials for primary repair of obstetric anal sphincter injuries; episiotomies (midline and mediolateral incisions); epidural analgesia; forceps; methods of delivery ("hands-on" method, "hands poised"); water births; non-suturing of muscle and skin (or perineal skin alone); passive descent in the second stage of labour; positions (supine or lithotomy positions, upright position during delivery); restrictive or routine use of episiotomy; sutures (absorbable synthetic sutures, catgut sutures, continuous sutures, interrupted sutures); and vacuum extraction.
Topics: Analgesia, Epidural; Humans; Labor, Obstetric; Parturition; Perineum; Suture Techniques; Sutures; Vacuum Extraction, Obstetrical; Wound Healing
PubMed: 21481287
DOI: No ID Found -
Annals of Cardiac Anaesthesia 2023Ultrasound-guided erector spinae plane block (ESPB) has been used in many studies for providing opioid-sparing analgesia after various cardiac surgeries. We performed a... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Ultrasound-guided erector spinae plane block (ESPB) has been used in many studies for providing opioid-sparing analgesia after various cardiac surgeries. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials to assess the efficacy of ESPB in cardiac surgeries. We searched PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), and Google Scholar to identify the studies in which ESPB was compared with the control group/sham block in patients undergoing cardiac surgeries. The primary outcomes were postoperative opioid consumption and postoperative pain scores. The secondary outcomes were intraoperative opioid consumption, ventilation time, time to the first mobilization, length of ICU and hospital stay, and adverse events. Out of 607 studies identified, 16 studies (n = 1110 patients) fulfilled inclusion criteria and were used for qualitative and quantitative analysis. Although, 24-hr opioid consumption were comparable in both groups group (MD, -18.74; 95% CI, -46.85 to 9.36, P = 0.16), the 48-hr opioid consumption was significantly less in ESPB group than control ((MD, -11.01; 95% CI, -19.98 to --2.04, P = 0.02). The pain scores at various time intervals and intraoperative opioid consumption were significantly less in ESPB group. Moreover, duration of ventilation, time to the first mobilization, and length of ICU and hospital were also less in ESPB group (P < 0.00001, P < 0.00001, P < 0.00001, and P < 0.0001, respectively). This systematic review and meta-analysis demonstrated that ESPB provides opioid-sparing perioperative analgesia, facilitates early extubation and mobilization, leads to early discharge from ICU and hospital, and has lesser pruritus when compared to control in patients undergoing cardiac surgeries.
Topics: Humans; Analgesics, Opioid; Pain, Postoperative; Airway Extubation; Nerve Block; Analgesia
PubMed: 37470522
DOI: 10.4103/aca.aca_148_22 -
Journal of Minimally Invasive Gynecology 2020To identify the most effective analgesia for women undergoing office hysteroscopy. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVE
To identify the most effective analgesia for women undergoing office hysteroscopy.
DATA SOURCES
We searched Medline, Embase, the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, and the Cochrane Library from inception until August 2019 for studies that investigated the effect of different analgesics on pain control in office hysteroscopy.
METHODS OF STUDY SELECTION
We included randomized controlled trials that investigated the effect of analgesics on pain experienced by women undergoing diagnostic or operative hysteroscopy in an office setting compared with the control group.
TABULATION, INTEGRATION, AND RESULTS
The literature search returned 561 records. Twenty-two studies were selected for a systematic review, of which 16 were suitable for meta-analysis. There was a statistically significant reduction in pain during office hysteroscopy associated with preprocedural administration of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) (standardized mean difference [SMD] -0.72; 95% confidence interval [CI] -1.27 to -0.16), opioids (SMD -0.50; 95% CI -0.97 to -0.03), and antispasmodics (SMD -1.48; 95% CI -1.82 to -1.13), as well as with the use of transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) (SMD -0.99; 95% CI -1.67 to -0.31), compared with the control group. Moreover, similar reduction in pain was observed after office hysteroscopy: NSAIDs (SMD -0.55; 95% CI -0.97 to -0.13), opioids (SMD -0.73; 95% CI -1.07 to -0.39), antispasmodics (SMD -1.02; 95% CI -1.34 to -0.69), and TENS (SMD -0.54; 95% CI -0.95 to -0.12). Significantly reduced pain scores with oral NSAID administration during (SMD -0.87; 95% CI -1.59 to -0.15) and after (SMD -0.56; 95% CI -1.02 to -0.10) office hysteroscopy were seen in contrast to other routes. Significantly more adverse effects were reported with the use of opioids (p <.001) and antispasmodics (p <.001) when compared with the control group, in contrast to NSAIDs (p = .97) and TENS (p = .63).
CONCLUSION
Women without contraindications should be advised to take oral NSAIDs before undergoing office hysteroscopy to reduce pain during and after the procedure. TENS should be considered as an alternative analgesic in women with contraindications to NSAIDs.
Topics: Ambulatory Care; Ambulatory Surgical Procedures; Analgesia; Analgesics; Female; Humans; Hysteroscopy; Minimally Invasive Surgical Procedures; Office Visits; Pain Management; Pain, Postoperative; Pregnancy; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 31982584
DOI: 10.1016/j.jmig.2020.01.008 -
International Braz J Urol : Official... 2017Shock wave lithotripsy (SWL) is the first line treatment modality for a significant proportion of patients with upper urinary tracts stones. Simple analgesics, opioids... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Shock wave lithotripsy (SWL) is the first line treatment modality for a significant proportion of patients with upper urinary tracts stones. Simple analgesics, opioids and non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are all suitable agents but the relative efficacy and tolerability of these agents is uncertain.
OBJECTIVES
To determine the efficacy of the different types of analgesics used for the control of pain during SWL for urinary stones.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Renal Group's Specialised Register, MEDLINE, EMBASE and also hand-searched reference lists of relevant articles (Figure-1). Randomised controlled trials (RCT's) comparing the use of any opioid, simple analgesic or NSAID during SWL were included. These were compared with themselves, each-other or placebo. We included any route or form of administration (bolus, PCA). We excluded agents that were used for their sedative qualities. Data were extracted and assessed for quality independently by three reviewers. Meta-analyses have been performed where possible. When not possible, descriptive analyses of variables were performed. Dichotomous outcomes are reported as relative risk (RR) and measurements on continuous scales are reported as weighted mean differences (WMD) with 95% confidence intervals.
RESULTS
Overall, we included 9 RCTs (539 participants from 6 countries). Trial agents included 7 types of NSAIDs, 1 simple analgesic and 4 types of opioids. There were no significant differences in clinical efficacy or tolerability between a simple analgesic (paracetamol) and an NSAID (lornoxicam). When comparing the same simple analgesic with an opioid (tramadol), both agents provided safe and effective analgesia for the purpose of SWL with no significant differences. There were no significant differences in pain scores between NSAIDs or opioids in three studies. Adequate analgesia could be achieved more often for opioids than for NSAIDs (RR 0.358; 95% CI 043 to 0.77, P=0.0002) but consumed doses of rescue analgesia were similar between NSAIDs and opioids in two studies (P=0.58, >0.05). In terms of tolerability, there is no difference in post-operative nausea and vomiting (PONV) between the groups (RR 0.72, 95% CI 0.24 to 2.17, P=0.55). One study compared outcomes between two types of NSAIDs (diclofenac versus dexketoprofen). There were no significant differences in any of our pre-defined outcomes measures.
CONCLUSION
Simple analgesics, NSAIDs and opioids can all reduce the pain associated with shock wave lithotripsy to a level where the procedure is tolerated. Whilst there are no compelling differences in safety or efficacy of simple analgesics and NSAIDs, analgesia is described as adequate more often for opioids than NSAIDs.
Topics: Analgesia; Analgesics; Analgesics, Opioid; Humans; Lithotripsy; Pain, Postoperative; Urinary Calculi
PubMed: 28338301
DOI: 10.1590/S1677-5538.IBJU.2016.0078 -
The American Journal of Nursing Jun 2014This is a summary of a nursing care-related systematic review from the Cochrane Library. (Review)
Review
This is a summary of a nursing care-related systematic review from the Cochrane Library.
Topics: Adult; Analgesia, Obstetrical; Analgesics; Delivery, Obstetric; Female; Humans; Obstetrical Forceps; Practice Guidelines as Topic
PubMed: 24869580
DOI: 10.1097/01.NAJ.0000450427.12631.dd