BackgroundThe past two decades have witnessed an epidemic of opioid use disorder (OUD) in the USA, resulting in catastrophic loss of life secondary to opioid overdoses. Medication treatment of opioid use disorder (MOUD) is effective, yet barriers to care continue to result in a large proportion of untreated individuals. Optimal analgesia can be obtained in patients with MOUD within the perioperative period. Anesthesiologists and pain physicians can recommend and consider initiating MOUD in patients with suspected OUD at the point of care; this can serve as a bridge to comprehensive treatment and ultimately save lives.MethodsThe Board of Directors of the American Society of Regional Anesthesia and Pain Medicine, American Society of Anesthesiologists, American Academy of Pain Medicine, American Society of Addiction Medicine and American Society of Health System Pharmacists approved the creation of a Multisociety Working Group on Opioid Use Disorder, representing the fields of pain medicine, addiction, and pharmacy health sciences. An extensive literature search was performed by members of the working group. Multiple study types were included and reviewed for quality. A modified Delphi process was used to assess the literature and expert opinion for each topic, with 100% consensus being achieved on the statements and each recommendation. The consensus statements were then graded by the committee members using the United States Preventive Services Task Force grading of evidence guidelines. In addition to the consensus recommendations, a narrative overview of buprenorphine, including pharmacology and legal statutes, was performed.ResultsTwo core topics were identified for the development of recommendations with >75% consensus as the goal for consensus; however, the working group achieved 100% consensus on both topics. Specific topics included (1) providing recommendations to aid physicians in the management of patients receiving buprenorphine for MOUD in the perioperative setting and (2) providing recommendations to aid physicians in the initiation of buprenorphine in patients with suspected OUD in the perioperative setting.ConclusionsTo decrease the risk of OUD recurrence, buprenorphine should not be routinely discontinued in the perioperative setting. Buprenorphine can be initiated in untreated patients with OUD and acute pain in the perioperative setting to decrease the risk of opioid recurrence and death from overdose.

Our study demonstrates that a postoperative ketamine infusion at 0.2 mg/kg/hour in addition to opioids results in a statistically significant reduction of "average" pain scores in patients undergoing surgery who take opioids for chronic pain. However, "least" and "worst" pain scores and the amount of opioid used postoperatively did not differ between groups. Thus, the use of a postoperative ketamine infusion at 0.2 mg/kg/hour provides limited benefit in improving pain management for this challenging population.

The use of local anesthetics to reduce acute postoperative pain has a long history, but recent reports have not been systematically reviewed. In addition, the need to include only those clinical studies that meet minimum standards for randomization and blinding must be adhered to. In this review we have applied stringent clinical study design standards to identify publications on the use of perioperative local anesthetics. We first examined several types of peripheral nerve blocks, covering a variety of surgical procedures, and second, for effects of intentionally administered IV local anesthetic (lidocaine) for suppression of postoperative pain. Thirdly, we have examined publications in which vascular concentrations of local anesthetics were measured at different times after peripheral nerve block procedures, noting the incidence when those levels reached ones achieved during intentional IV administration. Importantly, the very large number of studies using neuraxial blockade techniques (epidural, spinal) has not been included in this review but will be dealt with separately in a later review. The overall results showed a strongly positive effect of local anesthetics, by either route, for suppressing postoperative pain scores and analgesic (opiate) consumption. In only a few situations were the effects equivocal. Enhanced effectiveness with the addition of adjuvants was not uniformly apparent. The differential benefits between drug delivery before, during, or immediately after a surgical procedure are not obvious, and a general conclusion is that the significant antihyperalgesic effects occur when the local anesthetic is present during the acute postoperative period, and its presence during surgery is not essential for this action.

approved the creation of a Multisociety Working Group on Opioid Use Disorder (OUD), representing the fields of pain medicine, addiction and pharmacy health sciences. An extensive literature search was performed, and a modified Delphi process was used to assess the literature and expert opinion for each topic, with 100% consensus being achieved on the statements and each recommendation. The consensus statements were then graded by the committee members using the US Preventive Services Task Force grading of evidence guidelines. Two core topics were identified for the development of recommendations, with both topics achieving 100% consensus: (1) providing recommendations to aid physicians in the management of patients receiving buprenorphine for medication treatment of OUD in the perioperative setting and (2) providing recommendations to aid physicians in the initiation of buprenorphine in patients with suspected OUD in the perioperative setting. To decrease the risk of OUD recurrence, buprenorphine should not be routinely discontinued in the perioperative setting. Buprenorphine can be initiated in untreated patients with OUD and acute pain in the perioperative setting to decrease the risk of opioid recurrence and death from overdose.

No abstract

Background A 6-month opioid use educational program consisting of webinars on pain assessment, postoperative and multimodal pain opioid management, safer opioid use, and preventing addiction coupled with on-site coaching and monthly assessments reports was implemented in 31 hospitals. The authors hypothesized the intervention would measurably reduce and/or prevent opioid-related harm among adult hospitalized patients compared to 33 nonintervention hospitals. Methods Outcomes were extracted from medical records for 12 months before and after the intervention start date. Opioid adverse events, evaluated by opioid overdose, wrong substance given or taken in error, naloxone administration, and acute postoperative respiratory failure causing prolonged ventilation were the primary outcomes. Opioid use in adult patients undergoing elective hip or knee arthroplasty or colorectal procedures was also assessed. Differences-in-differences were compared between intervention and nonintervention hospitals. Results Before the intervention, the incidence ± SD of opioid overdose, wrong substance given, or substance taken in error was 1 ± 0.5 per 10,000 discharges, and naloxone use was 117 ± 13 per 10,000 patients receiving opioids. The incidence of respiratory failure was 42 ± 10 per 10,000 surgical discharges. A difference-in-differences of –0.2 (99% CI, –1.1 to 0.6, P = 0.499) per 10,000 in opioid overdose, wrong substance given, or substance taken in error and –13.6 (99% CI, –29.0 to 0.0, P = 0.028) per 10,000 in respiratory failure was observed postintervention in the intervention hospitals; however, naloxone administration increased by 15.2 (99% CI, 3.8 to 30.0, P = 0.011) per 10,000. Average total daily opioid use, as well as the fraction of patients receiving daily opioid greater than 90 mg morphine equivalents was not different between the intervention and nonintervention hospitals. Conclusions A 6-month opioid educational intervention did not reduce opioid adverse events or alter opioid use in hospitalized patients. The authors’ findings suggest that despite opioid and multimodal analgesia awareness, limited-duration educational interventions do not substantially change the hospital use of opioid analgesics. Editor’s Perspective What We Already Know about This Topic What This Article Tells Us That Is New

Results indicate that use of the PainCAS electronic pain assessment improves documentation of chart elements in clinic notes and is associated with increased discussion of key, pain-relevant topics during the clinical visit.

No abstract