Acute Pain Service: A 10‐Year Experience

Abstract

Background Pain management after surgery is crucial to decrease perioperative morbidity and mortality. Acute pain services (APS) are multidisciplinary teams that represent a modern strategy to address pain inside hospitals. The APS defines and applies pain treatment protocols specific for each surgery. To evaluate the performance of the APS at our institute, we performed a large retrospective cohort study focusing on complications of epidural analgesia and IV opiates. Methods Data from the 10 years of activity of the APS were collected. Pain was assessed using the VAS at rest (VASr) and during movement (VASm) at each daily visit; the presence of side effects and complications was also assessed. Results A total of 17,913 adult patients were followed by APS during the study period. Epidural analgesia was used in 7,776 cases (43%), while 9,239 (52%) patients used IV patient‐controlled analgesia (PCA). A combination of the 2 was used in 87 patients (0.5%). A total of 456 perineural catheters (2.6%) were placed, while 442 patients(2.5%) used other analgesic techniques. We recorded 163 dural punctures during catheter placement, with no epidural hematoma, epidural abscess, or meningitis, and no permanent modification in sensitive or motor functions. Conclusions In our large case series, APS was confirmed safe and effective in treating postoperative pain, using both epidural analgesia and IV PCA with morphine.

<p>Sufentanil Sublingual Tablet System (SSTS) for the management of postoperative pain after major abdominal and gynecological surgery within an ERAS protocol: an observational study</p>

“…These effects were paralleled by an improvement in the quality of sleep. The length of hospital stay was comparable to that observed with IV-PCA in our Acute Pain Service experience 20…”

New insight into the analgesic recipe: A cohort study based on smart patient-controlled analgesia pumps records

“…A series of studies showed that pain intensity and pain relief were highly skewed data that cannot be appropriately reported as means (Moore et al, 2010;Moore et al, 2011). This was confirmed in the 10-year experience of acute pain service in Italy, in which the mean VAS was relatively low in clinical practice because most patients achieved satisfactory pain relief (Deni et al, 2019). Therefore, the percentage and pain intensity of patients with VAS >3 were concealed by the mean VAS; these populations were inclined to withdraw from clinical trials due o analgesic failure, which introduced bias.…”

Propofol total intravenous anaesthesia versus inhalational anaesthesia for acute postoperative pain in patients with morphine patient-controlled analgesia: a large-scale retrospective study with covariate adjustment

“…Although there is a shift towards using more oral and regional analgesia, PCA opioids remains a commonly used analgesic technique [ 22 ]. A survey of over 17000 patients from an acute pain service found that 52% of patients used PCA opioids, while another survey found that PCA was used in 79% of hospitals in Germany [ 23 , 24 ]. PCA opioid is recommended when parenteral opioids are required [ 25 ].…”