Impact of opioid-free analgesia on pain severity and patient satisfaction after discharge from surgery: multispecialty, prospective cohort study in 25 countries

Background: Balancing opioid stewardship and the need for adequate analgesia following discharge after surgery is challenging. This study aimed to compare the outcomes for patients discharged with opioid versus opioid-free analgesia after common surgical procedures.Methods: This international, multicentre, prospective cohort study collected data from patients undergoing common acute and elective general surgical, urological, gynaecological, and orthopaedic procedures. The primary outcomes were patient-reported time in severe pain measured on a numerical analogue scale from 0 to 100% and patient-reported satisfaction with pain relief during the first week following discharge. Data were collected by in-hospital chart review and patient telephone interview 1 week after discharge.Results: The study recruited 4273 patients from 144 centres in 25 countries; 1311 patients (30.7%) were prescribed opioid analgesia at discharge. Patients reported being in severe pain for 10 (i.q.r. 1-30)% of the first week after discharge and rated satisfaction with analgesia as 90 (i.q.r. 80-100) of 100. After adjustment for confounders, opioid analgesia on discharge was independently associated with increased pain severity (risk ratio 1.52, 95% c.i. 1.31 to 1.76; P < 0.001) and re-presentation to healthcare providers owing to side-effects of medication (OR 2.38, 95% c.i. 1.36 to 4.17; P = 0.004), but not with satisfaction with analgesia (beta coefficient 0.92, 95% c.i. -1.52 to 3.36; P = 0.468) compared with opioid-free analgesia. Although opioid prescribing varied greatly between high-income and low- and middle-income countries, patient-reported outcomes did not.Conclusion: Opioid analgesia prescription on surgical discharge is associated with a higher risk of re-presentation owing to side-effects of medication and increased patient-reported pain, but not with changes in patient-reported satisfaction. Opioid-free discharge analgesia should be adopted routinely

Reducing the environmental impact of surgery on a global scale: systematic review and co-prioritization with healthcare workers in 132 countries

Abstract Background Healthcare cannot achieve net-zero carbon without addressing operating theatres. The aim of this study was to prioritize feasible interventions to reduce the environmental impact of operating theatres. Methods This study adopted a four-phase Delphi consensus co-prioritization methodology. In phase 1, a systematic review of published interventions and global consultation of perioperative healthcare professionals were used to longlist interventions. In phase 2, iterative thematic analysis consolidated comparable interventions into a shortlist. In phase 3, the shortlist was co-prioritized based on patient and clinician views on acceptability, feasibility, and safety. In phase 4, ranked lists of interventions were presented by their relevance to high-income countries and low–middle-income countries. Results In phase 1, 43 interventions were identified, which had low uptake in practice according to 3042 professionals globally. In phase 2, a shortlist of 15 intervention domains was generated. In phase 3, interventions were deemed acceptable for more than 90 per cent of patients except for reducing general anaesthesia (84 per cent) and re-sterilization of ‘single-use’ consumables (86 per cent). In phase 4, the top three shortlisted interventions for high-income countries were: introducing recycling; reducing use of anaesthetic gases; and appropriate clinical waste processing. In phase 4, the top three shortlisted interventions for low–middle-income countries were: introducing reusable surgical devices; reducing use of consumables; and reducing the use of general anaesthesia. Conclusion This is a step toward environmentally sustainable operating environments with actionable interventions applicable to both high– and low–middle–income countries

Efficacy of combined ultrasound guided anterior and posterior rectus sheath block for postoperative analgesia following umbilical hernia repair: Randomized, controlled trial

Background: Anatomical variations in the thoracic nerves T7 to T11was found in up to 30% of the population as the anterior cutaneous branch of the nerves are formed before the rectus sheath and so do not penetrate the posterior wall of the rectus sheath. Posterior rectus sheath block was found to be effective for perioperative analgesia. We tested the efficacy of addition of anterior rectus sheath block to capture the anterior cutaneous branch of intercostal nerves as they emerge from the rectus muscle in anterior rectus sheath. Method: Sixty-three ASA I/II adult patients listed for elective umbilical hernia repair were randomly allocated in one of three groups: Bupivacaine hydrochloride 0.25% was injected by ultrasound guided bilateral posterior rectus sheath in Group I (PRSB) and bilateral anterior and posterior rectus sheath in Group II (APRSB). Group III received bilateral anterior and posterior rectus sheath block using isotonic saline. Twenty-four hours postopetrative morphine consumption, Intraoperative rescue fentanyl dose, equivalent morphine dose in the recovery unit and first morphine dose were recorded. The quality of analgesia is assessed by Visual Analogue Scale for 24 h. Results: Mean intraoperative rescue fentanyl dose was 19.23 ± 4.96 μg, 15.28 ± 2.75 μg and 12.85 ± 3.65 μg in control, PRSB and APRSB groups respectively (P < 0.001). The mean opioid consumptions in PACU was PRSB 3.47 ± 0.13 mg, APRSB 2.91 ± 0.15 mg and control 4.04 ± 0.56 mg respectively (P < 0.001). Significant difference in intraoperative rescue fentanyl was found between PRSB and APRSB group (P = 0.020). Also statistically significant difference was found between PRSB and APRSB groups in 24 h morphine consumption (P = 0.034). Conclusion: Addition of ultrasound anterior rectus sheath block together with posterior rectus sheath block added more significant analgesia than if we perform posterior rectus sheath alone. This was evidenced by decrease in Intraoperative rescue fentanyl, PACU morphine analgesia, 24 h morphine and pain assessment score

Characteristics and outcomes of COVID-19 patients admitted to hospital with and without respiratory symptoms

Background: COVID-19 is primarily known as a respiratory illness; however, many patients present to hospital without respiratory symptoms. The association between non-respiratory presentations of COVID-19 and outcomes remains unclear. We investigated risk factors and clinical outcomes in patients with no respiratory symptoms (NRS) and respiratory symptoms (RS) at hospital admission. Methods: This study describes clinical features, physiological parameters, and outcomes of hospitalised COVID-19 patients, stratified by the presence or absence of respiratory symptoms at hospital admission. RS patients had one or more of: cough, shortness of breath, sore throat, runny nose or wheezing; while NRS patients did not. Results: Of 178,640 patients in the study, 86.4&nbsp;% presented with RS, while 13.6&nbsp;% had NRS. NRS patients were older (median age: NRS: 74 vs RS: 65) and less likely to be admitted to the ICU (NRS: 36.7&nbsp;% vs RS: 37.5&nbsp;%). NRS patients had a higher crude in-hospital case-fatality ratio (NRS 41.1&nbsp;% vs. RS 32.0&nbsp;%), but a lower risk of death after adjusting for confounders (HR 0.88 [0.83-0.93]). Conclusion: Approximately one in seven COVID-19 patients presented at hospital admission without respiratory symptoms. These patients were older, had lower ICU admission rates, and had a lower risk of in-hospital mortality after adjusting for confounders