Background
Early mobilization is incorporated into many enhanced recovery pathways. Inadequate analgesia or excessive opioids may restrict postoperative mobilization. The authors tested the hypotheses that in adults recovering from abdominal surgery, postoperative pain and opioid consumption are inversely related to postoperative mobilization, and that postoperative mobilization is associated with fewer potentially related complications.
Methods
The authors conducted a subanalysis of two trials that enrolled adults recovering from abdominal surgery. Posture and movement were continuously monitored for 48 postoperative hours using noninvasive untethered monitors. Mobilization was defined as the fraction of monitored time spent sitting or standing.
Results
A total of 673 patients spent a median [interquartile range] of 7% [3 to 13%] of monitored time sitting or standing. Mobilization time was 1.9 [1.0 to 3.6] h/day for patients with average pain scores 3 or lower, but only 1.2 [0.5 to 2.6] h/day in those with average scores 6 or greater. Each unit increase in average pain score was associated with a decrease in mobilization time of 0.12 (97.5% CI, 0.02 to 0.24; P = 0.009) h/day. In contrast, there was no association between postoperative opioid consumption and mobilization time. The incidence of the composite of postoperative complications was 6.0% (10 of 168) in the lower mobilization quartile, 4.2% (7 of 168) in the second quartile, and 0% among 337 patients in the highest two quartiles (P = 0.009).
Conclusions
Patients recovering from abdominal surgery spent only 7% of their time mobilized, which is considerably less than recommended. Lower pain scores are associated with increased mobility, independently of opioid consumption. Complications were more common in patients who mobilized poorly.
Editor’s Perspective
What We Already Know about This Topic
What This Article Tells Us That Is New
BACKGROUND:
Catheter-based endovascular neurointerventions require deep neuromuscular blocks during the procedure and rapid subsequent recovery of strength to facilitate neurological evaluation. We tested the primary hypothesis that sugammadex reverses deep neuromuscular blocks faster than neostigmine reverses moderate neuromuscular blocks.
METHODS:
Patients having catheter-based cerebral neurointerventional procedures were randomized to: (1) deep rocuronium neuromuscular block with posttetanic count 1 to 2 and 4-mg/kg sugammadex as the reversal agent or (2) moderate rocuronium neuromuscular block with train-of-four (TOF) count 1 during the procedure and neuromuscular reversal with 0.07-mg/kg neostigmine to a maximum of 5 mg. Recovery of diaphragmatic function was assessed by ultrasound at baseline before the procedure and 90 minutes thereafter. The primary outcome—time to reach a TOF ratio ≥0.9 after administration of the designated reversal agent—was analyzed with a log-rank test. Secondary outcomes included time to successful tracheal extubation and the difference between postoperative and preoperative diaphragmatic contraction speed and distance.
RESULTS:
Thirty-five patients were randomized to sugammadex and 33 to neostigmine. Baseline characteristics and surgical factors were well balanced. The median time to reach TOF ratio ≥0.9 was 3 minutes (95% confidence interval [CI], 2-3 minutes) in patients given sugammadex versus 8 minutes (95% CI, 6-10 minutes) in patients given neostigmine. Sugammadex was significantly faster by a median of 5 minutes (95% CI, 3-6 minutes; P < .001). However, times to tracheal extubation and diaphragmatic function at 90 minutes did not differ significantly.
CONCLUSIONS:
Sugammadex reversed deep rocuronium neuromuscular blocks considerably faster than neostigmine reversed moderate neuromuscular blocks. However, times to extubation did not differ significantly, apparently because extubation was largely determined by the time required for awaking from general anesthesia and because clinicians were willing to extubate before full neuromuscular recovery. Sugammadex may nonetheless be preferable to procedures that require a deep neuromuscular block and rapid recovery.
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.