-
Pain Physician Nov 2019Opioid medications are frequently used effectively for analgesia in acute settings, however, they are associated with dependence and addiction, and were implicated in...
BACKGROUND
Opioid medications are frequently used effectively for analgesia in acute settings, however, they are associated with dependence and addiction, and were implicated in 47,600 American fatalities in 2017. Evidence suggests that despite guidelines and professional body recommendations, acute prescribing remains highly variable. Educational interventions targeting prescribers have potential to optimize prescribing in-line with evidence-based best practice.
OBJECTIVES
To identify the objective impacts of education interventions on opioid prescribing in the acute care setting.
STUDY DESIGN
A systematic literature review.
SETTING
The electronic databases MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane for works published until December 31, 2018. Bibliographies of relevant studies and the gray literature were also searched.
METHODS
Databases were searched for interventional studies (clinical trials and pre- and poststudies). Studies describing an educational intervention delivered to clinicians and reporting at least one objective measure of opioid use in the acute care setting were included. Studies reporting only subjective outcomes and those focused on chronic pain or set in primary care were excluded. Two reviewers (RB, TB) extracted data and assessed the quality of included studies using the Downs and Black Tool.
RESULTS
Nine studies met inclusion criteria; all used pre- and postdesigns. Three studies described stand-alone education, and the others described multifaceted interventions. All 9 interventions significantly reduced at least one of the following: high-risk agent use including meperidine use by up to 71%; total or daily dosage of opioids at discharge, including median morphine milligram equivalence (MME) from 90 mg to 45 mg per patient; and quantity of medications such as oxycodone supplied to patients, halved in one study from 6,170 expected to 2,932 supplied tablets. No increase in pain complaints or prescription refill requests were reported in those studies assessing these outcomes. The longest study examined prescribing 15 months after education delivery, reporting sustained practice changes.
LIMITATIONS
Overall study quality was fair to poor. Significant heterogeneity in settings, patient groups, methodologies, and outcomes prevented pooled quantitative analysis. No studies examined all available opioid agents or formulations.
CONCLUSIONS
These findings support prescriber education as an effective strategy to reduce opioid use and optimize prescribing in acute settings. Further research, particularly high quality randomized studies, describing the impact of education on all available opioid formulations and total MME is required. Reviewing the existing literature has offered useful models that can be implemented to improve care with opioid prescribing in acute settings.
KEY WORDS
Opioids, education, physician education, prescriber education, opioid education, opioid prescribing, systematic review, prescriptions, prevention.
Topics: Analgesics, Opioid; Drug Prescriptions; Humans; Opioid-Related Disorders; Oxycodone; Pain; Practice Patterns, Physicians'; Primary Health Care
PubMed: 31775401
DOI: No ID Found -
Scientific Reports Nov 2017The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis is to evaluate the pros and cons of adjuvant low dose intrathecal meperidine for spinal anaesthesia. We searched... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis is to evaluate the pros and cons of adjuvant low dose intrathecal meperidine for spinal anaesthesia. We searched electronic databases for randomized controlled trials using trial sequential analysis (TSA) to evaluate the incidence of reduced rescue analgesics, shivering, pruritus, nausea and vomiting when applying adjuvant intrathecal meperidine. Twenty-eight trials with 2216 patients were included. Adjuvant intrathecal meperidine, 0.05-0.5 mg kg, significantly reduced incidence of shivering (relative risk, RR, 0.31, 95% confidence interval, CI, 0.24 to 0.40; TSA-adjusted RR, 0.32, 95% CI, 0.25 to 0.41). Intrathecal meperidine also effectively reduced need for intraoperative rescue analgesics (RR, 0.27, 95% CI, 0.12 to 0.64; TSA-adjusted RR, 0.27, 95% CI, 0.08 to 0.91) and the incidence of pruritus was unaffected (RR, 2.31, 95% CI, 0.94 to 5.70; TSA-adjusted RR, 1.42, 95% CI, 0.87 to 2.34). However, nausea and vomiting increased (RR, 1.84, 95% CI, 1.29 to 2.64; TSA-adjusted RR, 1.72, 95% CI, 1.33 to 2.23; RR, 2.23, 95% CI, 1.23 to 4.02; TSA-adjusted RR,1.96, 95% CI, 1.20 to 3.21). Under TSA, these results provided a sufficient level of evidence. In conclusion, adjuvant low dose intrathecal meperidine effectively attenuates spinal anaesthesia-associated shivering and reduces rescue analgesics with residual concerns for the nausea and vomiting.
Topics: Anesthesia, Spinal; Female; Humans; Injections, Spinal; Male; Meperidine; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Shivering
PubMed: 29127294
DOI: 10.1038/s41598-017-14917-5 -
Brazilian Journal of Anesthesiology... 2019The importance and benefits of breastfeeding for the babies and mothers are well established and documented in the literature. However, it is frequent that lactating...
INTRODUCTION
The importance and benefits of breastfeeding for the babies and mothers are well established and documented in the literature. However, it is frequent that lactating mothers need to undergo general or spinal anesthesia and, due to the lack of information, many of them interrupt breastfeeding after anesthesia. There are limited data available regarding anesthetics transfer to breast milk. This review aims to develop some considerations and recommendations based on available literature.
METHODS
A systematic search of the literature was conducted by using the following health science databases: Embase, Lilacs, Pubmed, Scopus, and Web of Science. The latest literature search was performed on April 6, 2018. Additional literature search was made via the World Health Organization's website. We used the following terms for the search strategy: “Anesthesia” and “Breastfeeding”, and their derivatives.
RESULTS
In this research, 599 registers were found, and 549 had been excluded by different reasons. Fifty manuscripts have been included, with different designs of studies: prospective trials, retrospective observational studies, reviews, case reports, randomized clinical trials, case–control, and website access. Small concentrations of the most anesthetic agents, are transferred to the breast milk; however, their administration seem to be safe for lactating mothers when administered as a single dose during anesthesia and this should not contraindicate the breastfeeding. On the other hand, high-doses, continuous or repeated administration of drugs increase the risk of adverse effects on neonates, and should be avoided. Few drugs, such as diazepam and meperidine, produce adverse effects on breastfed babies even in single doses. Dexmedetomidine seems to be safe if breastfeeding starts 24 h after discontinuation of the drug.
CONCLUSIONS
Most of the anesthetic drugs are safe for nursing mothers and offer low risk to the breastfed neonates when administered in single-dose. However, high-dose and repeated administration of drugs significantly increase the risk of adverse effects on neonates. Moreover, diazepam and meperidine should be avoided in nursing women. Finally, anesthesiologists and pediatricians should consider individual risk/benefit, with special attention to premature neonates or babies with concurrent diseases since they are more susceptible to adverse effects.
Topics: Anesthesia; Anesthetics; Breast Feeding; Dose-Response Relationship, Drug; Female; Humans; Infant; Infant, Newborn; Lactation; Milk, Human; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Time Factors
PubMed: 30651201
DOI: 10.1016/j.bjan.2018.11.006 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Jan 2019Laparoscopy is a common procedure used to diagnose and treat various gynaecological conditions. Shoulder-tip pain (STP) as a result of the laparoscopy occurs in up to... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Laparoscopy is a common procedure used to diagnose and treat various gynaecological conditions. Shoulder-tip pain (STP) as a result of the laparoscopy occurs in up to 80% of women, with potential for significant morbidity, delayed discharge and readmission. Interventions at the time of gynaecological laparoscopy have been developed in an attempt to reduce the incidence and severity of STP.
OBJECTIVES
To determine the effectiveness and safety of methods for reducing the incidence and severity of shoulder-tip pain (STP) following gynaecological laparoscopy.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the following databases: Cochrane Gynaecology and Fertility (CGF) Specialised Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Studies Online (CRSO), MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO and CINAHL from inception to 8 August 2018. We also searched the reference lists of relevant articles and registers of ongoing trials.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of interventions used during or immediately after gynaecological laparoscopy to reduce the incidence or severity of STP.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. Primary outcomes: incidence or severity of STP and adverse events of the interventions; secondary outcomes: analgesia usage, delay in discharge, readmission rates, quality-of-life scores and healthcare costs.
MAIN RESULTS
We included 32 studies (3284 women). Laparoscopic procedures in these studies varied from diagnostic procedures to complex operations. The quality of the evidence ranged from very low to moderate. The main limitations were risk of bias, imprecision and inconsistency.Specific technique versus "standard" technique for releasing the pneumoperitoneumUse of a specific technique of releasing the pneumoperitoneum (pulmonary recruitment manoeuvre, extended assisted ventilation or actively aspirating intra-abdominal gas) reduced the severity of STP at 24 hours (standardised mean difference (SMD) -0.66, 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.82 to -0.50; 5 RCTs; 670 participants; I = 0%, low-quality evidence) and reduced analgesia usage (SMD -0.53, 95% CI -0.70 to -0.35; 4 RCTs; 570 participants; I = 91%, low-quality evidence). There appeared to be little or no difference in the incidence of STP at 24 hours (odds ratio (OR) 0.87, 95% CI 0.41 to 1.82; 1 RCT; 118 participants; low-quality evidence).No adverse events occurred in the only study assessing this outcome.Fluid instillation versus no fluid instillationFluid instillation is probably associated with a reduction in STP incidence (OR 0.38, 95% CI 0.22 to 0.66; 2 RCTs; 220 participants; I = 0%, moderate-quality evidence) and severity (mean difference (MD) (0 to 10 visual analogue scale (VAS) scale) -2.27, 95% CI -3.06 to -1.48; 2 RCTs; 220 participants; I = 29%, moderate-quality evidence) at 24 hours, and may reduce analgesia usage (MD -12.02, 95% CI -23.97 to -0.06; 2 RCTs; 205 participants, low-quality evidence).No study measured adverse events.Intraperitoneal drain versus no intraperitoneal drainUsing an intraperitoneal drain may reduce the incidence of STP at 24 hours (OR 0.30, 95% CI 0.20 to 0.46; 3 RCTs; 417 participants; I = 90%, low-quality evidence) and may reduce analgesia use within 48 hours post-operatively (SMD -1.84, 95% CI -2.14 to -1.54; 2 RCTs; 253 participants; I = 90%). We are uncertain whether it reduces the severity of STP at 24 hours, as the evidence was very low quality (MD (0 to 10 VAS scale) -1.85, 95% CI -2.15 to -1.55; 3 RCTs; 320 participants; I = 70%).No study measured adverse events.Subdiaphragmatic intraperitoneal local anaesthetic versus control (no fluid instillation, normal saline or Ringer's lactate)There is probably little or no difference between the groups in incidence of STP (OR 0.72, 95% CI 0.42 to 1.23; 4 RCTs; 336 participants; I = 0%; moderate-quality evidence) and there may be no difference in STP severity (MD -1.13, 95% CI -2.52 to 0.26; 1 RCT; 50 participants; low-quality evidence), both measured at 24 hours. However, the intervention may reduce post-operative analgesia use (SMD-0.57, 95% CI -0.94 to -0.21; 2 RCTs; 129 participants; I = 51%, low-quality evidence).No adverse events occurred in any study.Local anaesthetic into peritoneal cavity (not subdiaphragmatic) versus normal salineLocal anaesthetic into the peritoneal cavity may reduce the incidence of STP at 4 to 8 hours post-operatively (OR 0.23, 95% CI 0.06 to 0.93; 2 RCTs; 157 participants; I = 56%; low-quality evidence). Our other outcomes of interest were not assessed.Warmed, or warmed and humidified CO versus unwarmed and unhumidified COThere may be no difference between these interventions in incidence of STP at 24 to 48 hours (OR 0.81 95% CI 0.45 to 1.49; 2 RCTs; 194 participants; I = 12%; low-quality evidence) or in analgesia usage within 48 hours (MD -4.97 mg morphine, 95% CI -11.25 to 1.31; 1 RCT; 95 participants; low-quality evidence); there is probably little or no difference in STP severity at 24 hours (MD (0 to 10 VAS scale) 0.11, 95% CI -0.75 to 0.97; 2 RCTs; 157 participants; I = 50%; moderate-quality evidence).No study measured adverse events.Gasless laparoscopy versus CO insufflationGasless laparoscopy may be associated with increased severity of STP within 72 hours post-operatively when compared with standard treatment (MD 3.8 (0 to 30 VAS scale), 95% CI 0.76 to 6.84; 1 RCT; 54 participants, low-quality evidence), and there may be no difference in the risk of adverse events (OR 2.56, 95% CI 0.25 to 26.28; 1 RCT; 54 participants; low-quality evidence).No study measured the incidence of STP.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
There is low to moderate-quality evidence that the following interventions are associated with a reduction in the incidence or severity, or both, of STP, or a reduction in analgesia requirements for women undergoing gynaecological laparoscopy: a specific technique for releasing the pneumoperitoneum; intraperitoneal fluid instillation; an intraperitoneal drain; and local anaesthetic applied to the peritoneal cavity (not subdiaphragmatic).There is low to moderate-quality evidence that subdiaphragmatic intraperitoneal local anaesthetic and warmed and humidified insufflating gas may not make a difference to the incidence or severity of STP.There is low-quality evidence that gasless laparoscopy may increase the severity of STP, compared with standard treatment.Few studies reported data on adverse events. Some potentially useful interventions have not been studied by RCTs of gynaecological laparoscopy.
Topics: Acetaminophen; Analgesics; Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal; Carbon Dioxide; Diclofenac; Drainage; Female; Gynecologic Surgical Procedures; Gynecological Examination; Humans; Incidence; Insufflation; Laparoscopy; Meperidine; Pain Measurement; Pain, Procedural; Pirinitramide; Pneumoperitoneum; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Shoulder Pain
PubMed: 30699235
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD011101.pub2 -
British Journal of Anaesthesia Jan 2000For a systematic review of postoperative analgesic efficacy and adverse effects of single doses, injected or oral, of pethidine and ketorolac compared with placebo, we... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
For a systematic review of postoperative analgesic efficacy and adverse effects of single doses, injected or oral, of pethidine and ketorolac compared with placebo, we sought published randomized studies in moderate to severe postoperative pain. Information on summed pain intensity or pain relief outcomes over 4-6 h was extracted and converted to dichotomous information to produce the number of patients with at least 50% pain relief. This was used to calculate the relative benefit and number-needed-to-treat (NNT) for one patient to achieve at least 50% pain relief. Minor and major adverse effect data were extracted and summarized. For pethidine 100 mg i.m., eight randomized, controlled studies met the inclusion criteria, with 203 patients given pethidine and 161 placebo. The NNT to produce at least 50% pain relief was 2.9 (95% confidence interval 2.3-3.9). At this dose, pethidine produced significantly more drowsiness and dizziness than placebo, with numbers-needed-to-harm (NNH) of 2.9 (2.2-4.4) and 7.2 (4.8-14), respectively. For ketorolac, 14 reports met the inclusion criteria (six i.m. and eight oral). Most i.m. information (176 patients) was available for the 30 mg dose, which had an NNT of 3.4 (2.5-4.9). Most oral information was available for the 10 mg dose, which had an NNT of 2.6 (2.3-3.1). Oral ketorolac 10 mg was consistently at least as effective as ketorolac 30 mg i.m. Only with oral ketorolac 10 mg were there significantly more adverse effects than with placebo, with an NNH for any adverse effect of 7.3 (4.7-17).
Topics: Acute Disease; Analgesics, Opioid; Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal; Humans; Ketorolac; Meperidine; Pain, Postoperative; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 10740547
DOI: 10.1093/oxfordjournals.bja.a013381