Dataset Information

Protocol for a multicenter randomized controlled trial comparing a non-opioid prescription to the standard of care for pain control following arthroscopic knee and shoulder surgery.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Opioids continue to be the analgesic of choice for postoperative pain control following arthroscopic knee and shoulder surgery. Despite their widespread use, there are limited evidence-based clinical practice guidelines for postoperative opioid prescribing. The Non-Opioid Prescriptions after Arthroscopic Surgery in Canada (NO PAin) Trial is a randomized controlled trial (RCT) designed to determine whether a non-opioid analgesia approach to postoperative pain, compared to usual care, reduces oral morphine equivalents (OME) consumed in patients undergoing outpatient knee and shoulder arthroscopy.

Methods

This is a multi-centre, RCT with a target sample size of 200 patients. Adult (18+ years of age) patients undergoing outpatient knee and shoulder arthroscopy will be randomized to a non-opioid postoperative protocol (intervention) or the current standard of care (control). The intervention will consist of a standardized non-opioid analgesic prescription, a limited rescue opioid prescription, and a patient education infographic. The control is defined as the treating surgeons' pre-trial postoperative analgesic regimen. Exclusion criteria include chronic opioid use, concomitant open surgery, contraindications to the prescribed analgesics or ongoing workers compensation/litigation. The primary outcome is OMEs consumed at 6 weeks postoperatively. Secondary outcomes will include patient-reported pain and satisfaction, quantity of OMEs prescribed, number of opioid refills, and any adverse events up to 6 weeks postoperatively. Utilizing the intention to treat principle for all analyses, independent samples t-test and presented with a p-value as well as a mean difference (MD) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) will be performed for primary and secondary outcomes.

Discussion

The ongoing opioid epidemic and overprescribing of opioids in orthopaedics serve as the rationale for this trial. There is a lack of evidence upon which to develop post-operative pain management guidelines for patients undergoing arthroscopic surgery. A prospective evaluation of this relatively inexpensive intervention will demonstrate whether an explicit effort to reduce the number of opioids prescribed results in a reduction in the amount of opioids consumed and help to inform future studies and guidelines.

Trial registration

The NO PAin trial has been prospectively registered with clinicaltrials.gov ( NCT04566250 ).

SUBMITTER: NO PAin Investigators

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8141233 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:ImportanceOpioids are routinely prescribed for postoperative home pain management for most patients in the United States, with limited evidence of the amount needed to be dispensed. Opioid-based treatment often adversely affects recovery. Prescribed opioids increase the risk of chronic opioid use, abuse, and diversion and contribute to the current opioid epidemic.ObjectiveTo evaluate whether after hospital discharge, postsurgical acute pain can be effectively managed with a markedly reduced number of opioid doses.Design, setting, and participantsIn this case-control cohort study, an ultrarestrictive opioid prescription protocol (UROPP) was designed and implemented from June 26, 2017, through June 30, 2018, at a single tertiary-care comprehensive cancer center. All patients undergoing gynecologic oncology surgery were included. Patients undergoing ambulatory or minimally invasive surgery (laparoscopic or robotic approach) were not prescribed opioids at discharge unless they required more than 5 doses of oral or intravenous opioids while in the hospital. Patients who underwent a laparotomy were provided a 3-day opioid pain medication supply at discharge.Main outcomes and measuresTotal number of opioid pain medications prescribed in the 60-day perioperative period, requests for opioid prescription refills, and postoperative pain scores and complications were evaluated. Factors associated with increased postoperative pain, preoperative and postoperative pain scores, inpatient status, prior opioid use, and all opioid prescriptions within the 60-day perioperative window were monitored among the case patients and compared with those from consecutive control patients treated at the center in the 12 months before the UROPP was implemented.ResultsPatient demographics and procedure characteristics were not statistically different between the 2 cohorts of women (605 cases: mean [SD] age, 56.3 [14.5] years; 626 controls: mean [SD] age, 55.5 [13.9] years). The mean (SD) number of opioid tablets given at discharge after a laparotomy was 43.6 (17.0) before implementation of the UROPP and 12.1 (8.9) after implementation (P < .001). For patients who underwent laparoscopic or robotic surgery, the mean (SD) number of opioid tablets given at discharge was 38.4 (17.4) before implementation of the UROPP and 1.3 (3.7) after implementation (P < .001). After ambulatory surgery, the mean (SD) number of opioid tablets given at discharge was 13.9 (16.6) before implementation of the UROPP and 0.2 (2.1) after implementation (P < .001). The mean (SD) perioperative oral morphine equivalent dose was reduced to 64.3 (207.2) mg from 339.4 (674.4) mg the year prior for all opioid-naive patients (P < .001). The significant reduction in the number of dispensed opioids was not associated with an increase the number of refill requests (104 patients [16.6%] in the pre-UROPP group vs 100 patients [16.5%] in the post-UROPP group; P = .99), the mean (SD) postoperative visit pain scores (1.1 [2.2] for the post-UROPP group vs 1.4 [2.3] for pre-UROPP group; P = .06), or the number of complications (29 cases [4.8%] in the post-UROPP group vs 42 cases [6.7%] in the pre-UROPP group; P = .15).Conclusions and relevanceImplementation of a UROPP was associated with a significant decrease in the overall amount of opioids prescribed to patients after gynecologic and abdominal surgery at the time of discharge for all patients, and for the entire perioperative time for opioid-naive patients without changes in pain scores, complications, or medication refill requests.

Project description:ImportanceIn arthroscopic knee and shoulder surgery, there is growing evidence that opioid-sparing protocols may reduce postoperative opioid consumption while adequately addressing patients' pain. However, there are a lack of prospective, comparative trials evaluating their effectiveness.ObjectiveTo evaluate the effect of a multimodal, opioid-sparing approach to postoperative pain management compared with the current standard of care in patients undergoing arthroscopic shoulder or knee surgery.Design, setting, and participantsThis randomized clinical trial was performed at 3 clinical sites in Ontario, Canada, and enrolled 200 patients from March 2021 to March 2022 with final follow-up completed in April 2022. Adult patients undergoing outpatient arthroscopic shoulder or knee surgery were followed up for 6 weeks postoperatively.InterventionsThe opioid-sparing group (100 participants randomized) received a prescription of naproxen, acetaminophen (paracetamol), and pantoprazole; a limited rescue prescription of hydromorphone; and a patient educational infographic. The control group (100 participants randomized) received the current standard of care determined by the treating surgeon, which consisted of an opioid analgesic.Main outcomes and measuresThe primary outcome was postoperative oral morphine equivalent (OME) consumption at 6 weeks after surgery. There were 5 secondary outcomes, including pain, patient satisfaction, opioid refills, quantity of OMEs prescribed at the time of hospital discharge, and adverse events at 6 weeks all reported at 6 weeks after surgery.ResultsAmong the 200 patients who were randomized (mean age, 43 years; 73 women [38%]), 193 patients (97%) completed the trial; 98 of whom were randomized to receive standard care and 95 the opioid-sparing protocol. Patients in the opioid-sparing protocol consumed significantly fewer opioids (median, 0 mg; IQR, 0-8.0 mg) than patients in the control group (median, 40.0 mg; IQR, 7.5-105.0; z = -6.55; P < .001). Of the 5 prespecified secondary end points, 4 showed no significant difference. The mean amount of OMEs prescribed was 341.2 mg (95% CI, 310.2-372.2) in the standard care group and 40.4 mg (95% CI, 39.6-41.2) in the opioid-sparing group (mean difference, 300.8 mg; 95% CI, 269.4-332.3; P < .001). There was no significant difference in adverse events at 6 weeks (2 events [2.1%] in the standard care group vs 3 events [3.2%] in the opioid-sparing group), but more patients reported medication-related adverse effects in the standard care group (32% vs 19%, P = .048).Conclusions and relevanceAmong patients who underwent arthroscopic knee or shoulder surgery, a multimodal opioid-sparing postoperative pain management protocol, compared with standard opioid prescribing, significantly reduced postoperative opioid consumption over 6 weeks.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04566250.

Project description:BackgroundIn recent years, the number of arthroscopic shoulder surgeries has increased given that the intervention is minimally invasive. However, postoperative pain is one of the most common symptoms of patients who undergo arthroscopic surgery. Although pharmacological treatments and brachial plexus blocks for reducing pain are currently used, the adherence rate of interventions is low, and adverse effects often occur. Chimsband, made up of silver and optic fibres, is a novel taping therapy that stimulates patients' acupoints and is expected to relieve pain with few adverse effects. The aim of this study is to explore the effectiveness of Chimsband to relieve pain following arthroscopic shoulder surgery.Methods/designThis is a randomised, parallel, controlled, exploratory clinical trial. Thirty participants who undergo arthroscopic shoulder surgery will be randomly allocated to an intervention or a control group. Both groups will receive 10 sessions of interferential current therapy within a period of 2 weeks, while the intervention group will additionally receive taping therapy after undergoing physical therapy. Two follow-up visits will be scheduled after the last treatment session. The primary outcome variable will be the difference in the visual analogue scale (VAS) scores between baseline and first follow-up evaluation after the end of 10 treatment sessions. The secondary outcomes will be VAS at the end of the second week, shoulder pain and disability index, range of motion, VAS while sleeping, questionnaire of blood stasis pattern identification at two follow-up visits, and number of bands used per visit. Outcomes will be evaluated at baseline, 2 weeks from visit 1 (+ within 6 days) after commencement, and at 4 weeks from visit 1 (+ within 6 days) follow-up.DiscussionThis study will be the first clinical trial to explore the effect and safety of Chimsband on postoperative shoulder pain. It would provide clinical evidence to conduct further taping therapy studies for relieving musculoskeletal pain.Trial registrationKorean Clinical Trial Registry, KCT0002355 . Registered on 13 June 2017.

Project description:Introduction: Acute postoperative pain following knee arthroscopy is common in orthopedic surgeries. Managing pain postoperatively combines usage of opioids and non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs. The aim of this clinical study was to assess the efficacy of two different analgesic treatment regimens: intravenous (IV) ibuprofen and IV ketorolac for the treatment of postoperative pain pertaining to arthroscopic knee surgery. Methods: This was a single center, randomized, double-blind, parallel, active comparator clinical pilot study. Subjects were randomized to receive either IV ibuprofen, administered as two 800 mg doses or IV ketorolac, administered as a single 30 mg dose. Subjects in the ibuprofen group received 800 mg of IV ibuprofen within 2 h prior to surgery and a repeated second dose 4 h after the initial dose if they had not been discharged. Subjects in the ketorolac group received IV ketorolac 30 mg at the end of surgery, as per the manufacturer's recommendations. Pain assessments and opioid consumption data were collected up to 24 h postoperatively. Results: Of 53 randomized subjects, 51 completed the study. There were 20 subjects in the ibuprofen group and 31 subjects in the ketorolac group. The median (IQR) visual analog scale (VAS) pain score at resting upon post-anesthesia care unit (PACU) arrival was 33 (12, 52) vs. 9 (2, 25) (p = 0.0064) for the ketorolac and ibuprofen group, respectively. The median (IQR) visual analog scale (VAS) pain score at movement upon PACU arrival was 38 (20, 61) vs. 15 (6, 31) (p = 0.0018) for the ketorolac and ibuprofen group, respectively. Median VAS pain scores during movement taken at subsequent 30 min intervals in the ibuprofen group were less than half that of those reported in the ketorolac group for up to 90 min after arriving in PACU. The median VAS pain scores at rest and movement in the course of 120 min-24 h after PACU arrival was not statistically significant in both groups. Rescue opioid medication during PACU stay was required in 55.0% (N = 11) and 83.9% (N = 26), with a mean amount of narcotic consumption (oral morphine conversion) of 5.53 ± 5.89 mg vs. 19.92 ± 15.63 mg for the ibuprofen and ketorolac group, respectively (P < 0.001). However, opioid consumption during the first 24 h after PACU discharge was not statistically significant (p-value = 0.637). The mean time to first rescue medication was 77.62 ± 33.03 and 55.78 ± 35.37 for the ibuprofen and ketorolac group, respectively (p-value = 0.0456). There were no significant differences in patient satisfaction and documented adverse events during the first 24 h. Conclusion: This pilot study showed that the use of preemptive IV ibuprofen 800 mg could be considered to reduce postoperative pain and opioid consumption. Future prospective clinical trials using similar regimens should be conducted in order to gain a better understanding of how to best provide perioperative analgesic regimens. Clinical Trial Registration: www.ClinicalTrials.gov, identifier NCT01650519.

Project description:PurposeTo describe the clinical features, treatment, and outcomes in patients with complex region pain syndrome (CRPS) following shoulder surgeries.MethodsThree patients were diagnosed with CRPS according to the Budapest criteria. Patients were followed up prospectively at regular intervals for a minimum of 2 years. Demographic data, clinical symptoms, physical examination findings, treatment received, and outcomes were collected and reported.ResultsThe minimum time interval between surgery and diagnosis was 3 weeks (average, 8 weeks). The index procedures included 2 arthroscopic rotator cuff repairs and 1 open Latarjet. Neurologic pain, muscle spasms, hand and wrist swelling, and joint stiffness were seen in the shoulder, wrist, and hand, but the elbow was spared in all patients. Despite the use of multimodal treatment modalities, the symptoms were refractory to treatment for prolonged periods (range, 6-12 months). Hand and wrist symptoms took an average of 4 months longer than shoulder symptoms to improve. At the latest follow-up (range, 24-26 months), varying degrees of residual hand dysfunction, pain, and inability to make a fist or fully extend the fingers were noted in all 3 patients.ConclusionsCPRS type 1 following shoulder surgery is a disabling condition with a long-protracted clinical course. CRPS can present as early as few weeks after shoulder surgery, with symptoms of neuropathic pain, spasm, and stiffness affecting the entire upper-extremity joints except the elbow. CRPS symptoms resolve earlier in the shoulder compared with the wrist and hand, with pain improving first, followed by recovery of motion and function. Residual stiffness affecting grip function is last to recover and can present up to 2 years after onset of symptoms. Although prompt recognition and multimodal approach are considered the mainstay of treatment, there is no gold standard treatment modality that can reproducibly alter the natural history of CRPS.Level of evidenceIV, therapeutic case series.