BACKGROUND: There has been a dramatic rise in opioid abuse, and diversion of excess, unused prescriptions is a major contributor. We assess the impact of implementing a new standardized pain care bundle to reduce postoperative opioids in outpatient general surgical procedures. STUDY DESIGN: This study was designed to demonstrate non-inferiority for the primary end point: patientreported average pain in the first 7 postoperative days. We prospectively evaluated 224 patients who underwent laparoscopic cholecystectomy or open hernia repair (inguinal, umbilical) pre-intervention to 192 patients post-intervention. We implemented a multimodal intra-and postoperative analgesic bundle, including promoting co-analgesia, opioid-reduced prescriptions, and patient education designed to clarify patient expectations. Patients completed a brief pain inventory at their first postoperative visit. Groups were compared using chi-square test, Mann-Whitney U test, and independent samples t-test, where appropriate. RESULTS: No difference was seen in average postoperative pain scores in the pre-vs post-intervention groups (2.3 vs 2.1 of 10; p ¼ 0.12). The reported quality of pain control improved postintervention (good/very good pain control in 69% vs 85%; p < 0.001). The median total morphine equivalents for prescriptions filled in the post-intervention group were significantly less (100; interquartile range 75 to 116 pre-intervention vs 50; interquartile range 50 to 50 post-intervention; p < 0.001). Only 78 of 172 (45%) patients filled their opioid prescription in the post-intervention group (p < 0.001), with no significant difference in prescription renewals (3.5% pre-intervention vs 2.6% post-intervention; p ¼ 0.62). CONCLUSIONS: For outpatient open hernia repair and cholecystectomy, a standardized pain care bundle decreased opioid prescribing significantly and frequently eliminated opioid use, while adequately treating postoperative pain and improving patient satisfaction.
BackgroundPatients with uncomplicated biliary disease frequently present to the emergency department for assessment. To improve bedside clinical decision making, biliary point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS) in the emergency department has emerged as a diagnostic tool. The purpose of this study is to analyze the usefulness of POCUS in predicting the need for surgical intervention in biliary disease.MethodsA retrospective study of patients visiting the emergency department who received a biliary POCUS from December 1, 2016 to July 15, 2017 was performed. The physician interpretations of the biliary POCUS scans were collected, as well as data from the electronic health records including lab values, the subsequent use of diagnostic imaging, surgical consultation or intervention, and 28 days follow-up for representation or complication.ResultsTwo hundred and eighty-three patients were identified as having received biliary POCUS. Of the patients referred to general surgery who received biliary POCUS 43% received a cholecystectomy. For the outcome of cholecystectomy, the finding of gallstones on POCUS was 55% sensitive (95% CI 40% to 70%) and 92% specific (95% CI 87% to 95%). A sonographic Murphy’s sign was 16% sensitive (95% CI 7% to 30%) but 95% specific (95% CI 92% to 97%) and, gallbladder wall thickness was 18% sensitive (95% CI 9% to 33%) and 98% specific (95% CI 95% to 99%). Patients who received POCUS but did not proceed to confirmatory radiology department imaging had a shorter length of stay (433 min ± 50 min vs. 309 min ± 30 min, P<0.001).DiscussionPoint-of-care biliary ultrasound performed by emergency physicians provides timely access to diagnostic information. Positive findings of gallstones and increased gallbladder wall thickness are highly predictive of the need for surgical intervention, and use of POCUS is associated with shorter ER visits.Level of evidenceRetrospective cohort study, level III.
BackgroundModern practice guidelines recommend index cholecystectomy (IC) for patients admitted with gallstone pancreatitis (GSP). However, this benchmark has been difficult to widely achieve. Previous work has demonstrated that dedicated acute care surgery (ACS) services can facilitate IC. However, the associated financial costs and economic effectiveness of this intervention are unknown and represent potential barriers to ACS adoption. We investigated the impact of an ACS service at two hospitals before and after implementation on cost effectiveness, patient quality-adjusted life years (QALY) and impact on rates of IC.MethodsAll patients admitted with non-severe GSP to two tertiary care teaching hospitals from January 2008–May 2015 were reviewed. The diagnosis of GSP was confirmed upon review of clinical, biochemical and radiographic criteria. Patients were divided into three time periods based on the presence of ACS (none, at one hospital, at both hospitals). Data were collected regarding demographics, cholecystectomy timing, resource utilization, and associated costs. QALY analyses were performed and incremental cost effectiveness ratios were calculated comparing pre-ACS to post-ACS periods.ResultsIn 435 patients admitted for GSP, IC increased from 16 to 76% after implementing an ACS service at both hospitals. There was a significant reduction in admissions and emergency room visits for GSP after introduction of ACS services (p < 0.001). There was no difference in length of stay or conversion to an open operation. The implementation of the ACS service was associated with a decrease in cost of $1162 per patient undergoing cholecystectomy, representing a 12.6% savings.The time period with both hospitals having established ACS services resulted in a highly favorable cost to quality-adjusted life year ratio (QALY gained and financial costs decreased).ConclusionsACS services facilitate cost-effective management of GSP. The result is improved and timelier patient care with decreased healthcare costs. Hospitals without a dedicated ACS service should strongly consider adopting this model of care.
BACKGROUND Junctional tourniquets have been incorporated into tactical combat casualty care for junctional vascular trauma. They apply external compression to stop blood flow in the groin and axilla. OBJECTIVES The primary outcome was effectiveness in achieving arterial occlusion. Secondary outcomes included time to application and pain scores. DATA SOURCES Medline and EMBASE databases were searched. Study Appraisal and Synthesis Methods A random-effects meta-analysis was conducted to estimate the average effectiveness and time to effective application for each device. RESULTS Eight studies reported the effectiveness of junctional tourniquets in healthy volunteers. The average effectiveness was 52% (95% confidence interval [CI], 15–87%) for the abdominal application of the abdominal aortic and junctional tourniquet (AAJT), 83% (95% CI, 73–89%; 26%) for the junctional Emergency Treatment Tool, 87% (95% CI, 79–92%; 15%) for the SAM junctional tourniquet (SJT), and 95% (95% CI, 90–98%) for the Combat Ready Clamp. The groin application of the AAJT was studied in two articles with 100% in both studies. The average time to application was 101 seconds for the SAM junctional tourniquet (95% CI, 50–152 seconds) and the Combat Ready Clamp (95% CI, 63–139 seconds), while it was 130 seconds (95% CI, 85–176 seconds) for the Junctional Emergency Treatment Tool. The abdominal application of AAJT had an average time to application of 92 and 171 seconds in two studies. LIMITATIONS All studies were conducted in healthy volunteers. CONCLUSION AND IMPLICATIONS Junctional tourniquets may meet a medical need in combat, and in the civilian environment, to control hemorrhage from these difficult injuries. All four Food and Drug Administration–approved devices demonstrate the ability to achieve vascular occlusion in healthy volunteers; however, effectiveness in patient transport has not been evaluated, and outcomes of their use in the field need to be captured and reported. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE Systematic review, level III.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.