Dataset Information

Opioid patient controlled analgesia use during the initial experience with the IMPROVE PCA trial: a phase III analgesic trial for hospitalized sickle cell patients with painful episodes.

ABSTRACT: Opioid analgesics administered by patient-controlled analgesia (PCA)are frequently used for pain relief in children and adults with sickle cell disease (SCD) hospitalized for persistent vaso-occlusive pain, but optimum opioid dosing is not known. To better define PCA dosing recommendations,a multi-center phase III clinical trial was conducted comparing two alternative opioid PCA dosing strategies (HDLI—higher demand dose with low constant infusion or LDHI—lower demand dose and higher constant infusion) in 38 subjects who completed randomization prior to trial closure. Total opioid utilization (morphine equivalents,mg/kg) in 22 adults was 11.6 ± 2.6 and 4.7 ± 0.9 in the HDLI andin the LDHI arms, respectively, and in 12 children it was 3.7 ± 1.0 and 5.8 ± 2.2, respectively. Opioid-related symptoms were mild and similar in both PCA arms (mean daily opioid symptom intensity score: HDLI0.9 ± 0.1, LDHI 0.9 ± 0.2). The slow enrollment and early study termination limited conclusions regarding superiority of either treatment regimen. This study adds to our understanding of opioid PCA usage in SCD. Future clinical trial protocol designs for opioid PCA may need to consider potential differences between adults and children in PCA usage.

SUBMITTER: Dampier CD

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4573530 | biostudies-literature | 2011 Dec

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Opioid patient controlled analgesia use during the initial experience with the IMPROVE PCA trial: a phase III analgesic trial for hospitalized sickle cell patients with painful episodes.

Dampier Carlton D CD Smith Wally R WR Kim Hae-Young HY Wager Carrie Greene CG Bell Margaret C MC Minniti Caterina P CP Keefer Jeffrey J Hsu Lewis L Krishnamurti Lakshmanan L Mack A Kyle AK McClish Donna D McKinlay Sonja M SM Miller Scott T ST Osunkwo Ifeyinwa I Seaman Phillip P Telen Marilyn J MJ Weiner Debra L DL

American journal of hematology 20110922 12

Opioid analgesics administered by patient-controlled analgesia (PCA)are frequently used for pain relief in children and adults with sickle cell disease (SCD) hospitalized for persistent vaso-occlusive pain, but optimum opioid dosing is not known. To better define PCA dosing recommendations,a multi-center phase III clinical trial was conducted comparing two alternative opioid PCA dosing strategies (HDLI—higher demand dose with low constant infusion or LDHI—lower demand dose and higher constant in ...[more]

PMID: 21953763

Similar Datasets

Project description:The hallmark of sickle cell disease (SCD) is pain from a vaso-occlusive crisis. Although ambulatory pain accounts for most days in pain, pain is also the most common cause of hospitalization and is typically treated with parenteral opioids. The evidence base is lacking for most analgesic practice in SCD, particularly for the optimal opioid dosing for patient-controlled analgesia (PCA), in part because of the challenges of the trial design and conduct for this rare disease.The purpose of this report is to describe our Network's experiences with protocol development, implementation, and analysis, including overall study design, the value of pain assessments rather than 'crisis' resolution as trial endpoints, and alternative statistical analysis strategies.The Improving Pain Management and Outcomes with Various Strategies (IMPROVE) PCA trial was a multisite inpatient randomized controlled trial comparing two PCA-dosing strategies in adults and children with SCD and acute pain conducted by the SCD Clinical Research Network. The specified primary endpoint was a 25-mm change in a daily average pain intensity using a Visual Analogue Scale, and a number of related pain intensity and pain interference measures were selected as secondary efficacy outcomes. A time-to-event analysis strategy was planned for the primary endpoint.Of 1116 individuals admitted for pain at 31 participating sites over a 6-month period, 38 were randomized and 4 withdrawn. The trial was closed early due to poor accrual, reflecting a substantial number of challenges encountered during trial implementation.While some of the design issues were unique to SCD or analgesic studies, many of the trial implementation challenges reflected the increasing complexity of conducting clinical trials in the inpatient setting with multiple care providers and evolving electronic medical record systems, particularly in the context of large urban academic medical centers.Complicated clinical organization of many sites likely slowed study initiation. More extensive involvement of research staff and site principal investigator in the clinical care operations improved site performance. During the subsequent data analysis, alternative statistical approaches were considered, the results of which should inform future efficacy assessments and increase future trial recruitment success by allowing substantial reductions in target sample size.A complex randomized analgesic trial was initiated within a multisite disease network seeking to provide an evidence base for clinical care. A number of design considerations were shown to be feasible in this setting, and several pain intensity and pain interference measures were shown to be sensitive to time- and treatment-related improvements. While the premature closure and small sample size precluded definitive conclusions regarding treatment efficacy, this trial furnishes a template for design and implementation considerations that should improve future SCD analgesic trials.

Project description:ImportanceAlthough effective agents are available to prevent painful vaso-occlusive episodes of sickle cell disease (SCD), there are no disease-modifying therapies for ongoing painful vaso-occlusive episodes; treatment remains supportive. A previous phase 3 trial of poloxamer 188 reported shortened duration of painful vaso-occlusive episodes in SCD, particularly in children and participants treated with hydroxyurea.ObjectiveTo reassess the efficacy of poloxamer 188 for vaso-occlusive episodes.Design, setting, and participantsPhase 3, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicenter, international trial conducted from May 2013 to February 2016 that included 66 hospitals in 12 countries and 60 cities; 388 individuals with SCD (hemoglobin SS, SC, S-β0 thalassemia, or S-β+ thalassemia disease) aged 4 to 65 years with acute moderate to severe pain typical of painful vaso-occlusive episodes requiring hospitalization were included.InterventionsA 1-hour 100-mg/kg loading dose of poloxamer 188 intravenously followed by a 12-hour to 48-hour 30-mg/kg/h continuous infusion (n = 194) or placebo (n = 194).Main outcomes and measuresTime in hours from randomization to the last dose of parenteral opioids among all participants and among those younger than 16 years as a separate subgroup.ResultsOf 437 participants assessed for eligibility, 388 were randomized (mean age, 15.2 years; 176 [45.4%] female), the primary outcome was available for 384 (99.0%), 15-day follow-up contacts were available for 357 (92.0%), and 30-day follow-up contacts were available for 368 (94.8%). There was no significant difference between the groups for the mean time to last dose of parenteral opioids (81.8 h for the poloxamer 188 group vs 77.8 h for the placebo group; difference, 4.0 h [95% CI, -7.8 to 15.7]; geometric mean ratio, 1.2 [95% CI, 1.0-1.5]; P = .09). Based on a significant interaction of age and treatment (P = .01), there was a treatment difference in time from randomization to last administration of parenteral opioids for participants younger than 16 years (88.7 h in the poloxamer 188 group vs 71.9 h in the placebo group; difference, 16.8 h [95% CI, 1.7-32.0]; geometric mean ratio, 1.4 [95% CI, 1.1-1.8]; P = .008). Adverse events that were more common in the poloxamer 188 group than the placebo group included hyperbilirubinemia (12.7% vs 5.2%); those more common in the placebo group included hypoxia (12.0% vs 5.3%).Conclusions and relevanceAmong children and adults with SCD, poloxamer 188 did not significantly shorten time to last dose of parenteral opioids during vaso-occlusive episodes. These findings do not support the use of poloxamer 188 for vaso-occlusive episodes.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01737814.

Project description:ImportanceThe overprescription of opioids to surgical patients is recognized as an important factor contributing to the opioid crisis. However, the value of prescribing opioid analgesia (OA) vs opioid-free analgesia (OFA) after postoperative discharge remains uncertain.ObjectiveTo investigate the feasibility of conducting a full-scale randomized clinical trial (RCT) to assess the comparative effectiveness of OA vs OFA after outpatient general surgery.Design, setting, and participantsThis parallel, 2-group, assessor-blind, pragmatic pilot RCT was conducted from January 29 to September 3, 2020 (last follow-up on October 2, 2020). at 2 university-affiliated hospitals in Montreal, Quebec, Canada. Participants were adult patients (aged ≥18 years) undergoing outpatient abdominal (ie, cholecystectomy, appendectomy, or hernia repair) or breast (ie, partial or total mastectomy) general surgical procedures. Exclusion criteria were contraindications to drugs used in the trial, preoperative opioid use, conditions that could affect assessment of outcomes, and intraoperative or early complications requiring hospitalization.InterventionsPatients were randomized 1:1 to receive OA (around-the-clock nonopioids and opioids for breakthrough pain) or OFA (around-the-clock nonopioids with increasing doses and/or addition of nonopioid medications for breakthrough pain) after postoperative discharge.Main outcomes and measuresMain outcomes were a priori RCT feasibility criteria (ie, rates of surgeon agreement, patient eligibility, patient consent, treatment adherence, loss to follow-up, and missing follow-up data). Secondary outcomes included pain intensity and interference, analgesic intake, 30-day unplanned health care use, and adverse events. Between-group comparison of outcomes followed the intention-to-treat principle.ResultsA total of 15 surgeons were approached; all (100%; 95% CI, 78%-100%) agreed to have patients recruited and adhered to the study procedures. Rates of patient eligibility and consent were 73% (95% CI, 66%-78%) and 57% (95% CI, 49%-65%), respectively. Seventy-six patients were randomized (39 [51%] to OA and 37 [49%] to OFA) and included in the intention-to-treat analysis (mean [SD] age, 55.5 [14.5] years; 50 [66%] female); 40 (53%) underwent abdominal surgery, and 36 (47%) underwent breast surgery. Seventy-five patients (99%; 95% CI, 93%-100%) adhered to the allocated treatment; 1 patient randomly assigned to OFA received an opioid prescription. Seventeen patients (44%) randomly assigned to OA consumed opioids after discharge. Seventy-three patients (96%; 95% CI, 89%-99%) completed the 30-day follow-up. The rate of missing questionnaires was 37 of 3724 (1%; 95% CI, 0.7%-1.4%). All the a priori RCT feasibility criteria were fulfilled.Conclusions and relevanceThe findings of this pilot RCT support the feasibility of conducting a robust, full-scale RCT to inform evidence-based prescribing of analgesia after outpatient general surgery.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04254679.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Acute painful episodes are the clinical hallmark of sickle cell disease and have been linked to morbidity and mortality in the sickle cell population. DESIGN AND METHODS:We undertook exploratory proteomic studies on paired plasma samples collected from a cohort of 26 adult sickle cell patients during steady state and on the first day of an acute painful episode. We screened for changes in abundance of specific protein peaks via surface-enhanced laser desorption/ionization time of flight mass spectrometry (SELDI-TOF MS), and confirmed the identify of candidate protein peaks by specific immunoassays. RESULTS:The levels of hemoglobin, hematocrit, total protein, and albumin were lower and the levels of lactate dehydrogenase and absolute reticulocytes higher during acute painful episodes than during the steady state. Surface-enhanced laser desorption/ionization time of flight mass spectrometry spectral analysis consistently showed a mass-to-charge peak at 11.7 kDa with elevated intensities during acute painful episodes, which correlated significantly with the serum amyloid A immunoassay. Serum amyloid A levels were significantly elevated during acute painful episodes, especially in four patients with marked end-organ complications of such episodes. A second, recurring peak, less abundant during acute painful episodes, was present at 28.1 kDa; this peak was correlated significantly with immunoassay measurements of apolipoprotein A1. CONCLUSIONS:On the average, plasma serum amyloid A rises and apolipoprotein AI falls during acute painful episodes. The serum amyloid A/apolipoprotein AI ratio increased in 81% of the patients during acute painful episodes, potentially making it a useful objective marker of such episodes. We propose that these protein alterations, known to contribute to endothelial dysfunction in other settings, might do likewise acutely in acute painful episodes and present a new target for therapeutic intervention in sickle cell disease. (ClincalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT00081523).

Project description:UnlabelledWe conducted a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, crossover study at a single center in South Africa, to ascertain whether amitriptyline is an effective analgesic for painful HIV-associated sensory neuropathy of moderate to severe intensity in: i) antiretroviral drug naive individuals, and ii) antiretroviral drug users. 124 HIV-infected participants (antiretroviral drug naive = 62, antiretroviral drug users = 62) who met the study criteria for painful HIV-associated sensory neuropathy were randomized to once-daily oral amitriptyline (titrated to a median: interquartile range of 50: 25-50 mg) or placebo for six weeks, followed by a three-week washout period and subsequent treatment crossover. The primary outcome measure was change from baseline in worst pain intensity of the feet (measured by participant self-report using an 11-point numerical pain rating scale) after six weeks of treatment. 122 of 124 participants completed all study visits and were included in the analysis of the primary outcome. In the antiretroviral drug-naive group (n = 61) there was no significant difference in the mean change in pain score from baseline after six weeks of treatment with placebo or amitriptyline [amitriptyline: 2.8 (SD 3.3) vs. placebo: 2.8 (3.4)]. Similarly, there was no significant difference in the change in pain score after six weeks of treatment with placebo or amitriptyline in the antiretroviral drug-user group (n = 61) [amitriptyline: 2.7 (3.3) vs. placebo: 2.1 (2.8)]. Controlling for period effects and treatment order effects did not alter the outcome of the analyses. Nor did analyzing the intention-to-treat cohort (missing data interpolated using baseline observation carried forward) alter the outcome of the analyses. In summary, amitriptyline, at the doses used here, was no more effective than an inactive placebo at reducing pain intensity in individuals with painful HIV-associated sensory neuropathy of moderate to severe intensity, irrespective of whether they were on antiretroviral therapy or not.Trial registrationISRCTN 54452526.

Project description:BACKGROUND:This is an updated version of the original Cochrane review published in Issue 4, 2006. Patients may control postoperative pain by self administration of intravenous opioids using devices designed for this purpose (patient controlled analgesia or PCA). A 1992 meta-analysis by Ballantyne et al found a strong patient preference for PCA over non-patient controlled analgesia, but disclosed no differences in analgesic consumption or length of postoperative hospital stay. Although Ballantyne's meta-analysis found that PCA did have a small but statistically significant benefit upon pain intensity, a 2001 review by Walder et al did not find statistically significant differences in pain intensity or pain relief between PCA and groups treated with non-patient controlled analgesia. OBJECTIVES:To evaluate the efficacy and safety of patient controlled intravenous opioid analgesia (termed PCA in this review) versus non-patient controlled opioid analgesia of as-needed opioid analgesia for postoperative pain relief. SEARCH METHODS:We ran the search for the previous review in November 2004. For this update, we searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL 2014, Issue 12), MEDLINE (1966 to 28 January 2015), and EMBASE (1980 to 28 January 2015) for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in any language, and reference lists of reviews and retrieved articles. SELECTION CRITERIA:We selected RCTs that assessed pain intensity as a primary or secondary outcome. These studies compared PCA without a continuous background infusion with non-patient controlled opioid analgesic regimens. We excluded studies that explicitly stated they involved patients with chronic pain. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS:Two review authors independently extracted data, which included demographic variables, type of surgery, interventions, efficacy, and adverse events. We graded each included study for methodological quality by assessing risk of bias and employed the GRADE approach to assess the overall quality of the evidence. We performed meta-analysis of outcomes that included pain intensity assessed by a 0 to 100 visual analog scale (VAS), opioid consumption, patient satisfaction, length of stay, and adverse events. MAIN RESULTS:Forty-nine studies with 1725 participants receiving PCA and 1687 participants assigned to a control group met the inclusion criteria. The original review included 55 studies with 2023 patients receiving PCA and 1838 patients assigned to a control group. There were fewer included studies in our updated review due to the revised exclusion criteria. For the primary outcome, participants receiving PCA had lower VAS pain intensity scores versus non-patient controlled analgesia over most time intervals, e.g., scores over 0 to 24 hours were nine points lower (95% confidence interval (CI) -13 to -5, moderate quality evidence) and over 0 to 48 hours were 10 points lower (95% CI -12 to -7, low quality evidence). Among the secondary outcomes, participants were more satisfied with PCA (81% versus 61%, P value = 0.002) and consumed higher amounts of opioids than controls (0 to 24 hours, 7 mg more of intravenous morphine equivalents, 95% CI 1 mg to 13 mg). Those receiving PCA had a higher incidence of pruritus (15% versus 8%, P value = 0.01) but had a similar incidence of other adverse events. There was no difference in the length of hospital stay. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS:Since the last version of this review, we have found new studies providing additional information. We reanalyzed the data but the results did not substantially alter any of our previously published conclusions. This review provides moderate to low quality evidence that PCA is an efficacious alternative to non-patient controlled systemic analgesia for postoperative pain control.

Dataset Information

Opioid patient controlled analgesia use during the initial experience with the IMPROVE PCA trial: a phase III analgesic trial for hospitalized sickle cell patients with painful episodes.

Publications

Opioid patient controlled analgesia use during the initial experience with the IMPROVE PCA trial: a phase III analgesic trial for hospitalized sickle cell patients with painful episodes.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets