Clinical Update on Patient-Controlled Analgesia for Acute Postoperative Pain

There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

Abstract

Patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) is an effective method for controlling acute pain, including postoperative pain in adults and in children from five years of age, pain resulting from labor, trauma, or other medical situations, or chronic and malignant pain. The treatment consists of a mini-computer-controlled infusion pump permitting the administration of on-demand, continuous, or combined doses of analgesic (mainly opioid) variations in response to therapy, which allows pain to be significantly controlled. Intravenous (IV)-PCA minimizes individual pharmacodynamics and pharmacokinetic differences and is widely accepted as a reference method for mild or severe postoperative pain. IV-PCA is the most studied route of PCA; other delivery methods have been extensively reported in the literature. In addition, IV-PCA usually voids the gap between pain sensation and analgesic administration, permitting better recovery and fewer side effects. The most commonly observed complications are nausea and vomiting, pruritus, respiratory depression, sedation, confusion and urinary retention. However, human factors such as pharmacy preparation and device programming can also be involved in the occurrence of these complications, while device failure is much less of an issue.

Related collections

Most cited references 74

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: not found

The revised International Association for the Study of Pain definition of pain: concepts, challenges, and compromises

Srinivasa N. Raja, Daniel B. Carr, Milton Cohen … (2020)

The current International Association for the Study of Pain (IASP) definition of pain as "An unpleasant sensory and emotional experience associated with actual or potential tissue damage, or described in terms of such damage" was recommended by the Subcommittee on Taxonomy and adopted by the IASP Council in 1979. This definition has become accepted widely by health care professionals and researchers in the pain field and adopted by several professional, governmental, and nongovernmental organizations, including the World Health Organization. In recent years, some in the field have reasoned that advances in our understanding of pain warrant a reevaluation of the definition and have proposed modifications. Therefore, in 2018, the IASP formed a 14-member, multinational Presidential Task Force comprising individuals with broad expertise in clinical and basic science related to pain, to evaluate the current definition and accompanying note and recommend whether they should be retained or changed. This review provides a synopsis of the critical concepts, the analysis of comments from the IASP membership and public, and the committee's final recommendations for revisions to the definition and notes, which were discussed over a 2-year period. The task force ultimately recommended that the definition of pain be revised to "An unpleasant sensory and emotional experience associated with, or resembling that associated with, actual or potential tissue damage," and that the accompanying notes be updated to a bulleted list that included the etymology. The revised definition and notes were unanimously accepted by the IASP Council early this year.

0 comments Cited 894 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: found

Is Open Access

Preoperative predictors of poor acute postoperative pain control: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Michael Yang, Rebecca Hartley, Alexander A. Leung … (2019)

Objectives Inadequate postoperative pain control is common and is associated with poor clinical outcomes. This study aimed to identify preoperative predictors of poor postoperative pain control in adults undergoing inpatient surgery. Design Systematic review and meta-analysis Data sources MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL and PsycINFO were searched through October 2017. Eligibility criteria Studies in any language were included if they evaluated postoperative pain using a validated instrument in adults (≥18 years) and reported a measure of association between poor postoperative pain control (defined by study authors) and at least one preoperative predictor during the hospital stay. Data extraction and synthesis Two reviewers screened articles, extracted data and assessed study quality. Measures of association for each preoperative predictor were pooled using random effects models. Results Thirty-three studies representing 53 362 patients were included in this review. Significant preoperative predictors of poor postoperative pain control included younger age (OR 1.18 [95% CI 1.05 to 1.32], number of studies, n=14), female sex (OR 1.29 [95% CI 1.17 to 1.43], n=20), smoking (OR 1.33 [95% CI 1.09 to 1.61], n=9), history of depressive symptoms (OR 1.71 [95% CI 1.32 to 2.22], n=8), history of anxiety symptoms (OR 1.22 [95% CI 1.09 to 1.36], n=10), sleep difficulties (OR 2.32 [95% CI 1.46 to 3.69], n=2), higher body mass index (OR 1.02 [95% CI 1.01 to 1.03], n=2), presence of preoperative pain (OR 1.21 [95% CI 1.10 to 1.32], n=13) and use of preoperative analgesia (OR 1.54 [95% CI 1.18 to 2.03], n=6). Pain catastrophising, American Society of Anesthesiologists status, chronic pain, marital status, socioeconomic status, education, surgical history, preoperative pressure pain tolerance and orthopaedic surgery (vs abdominal surgery) were not associated with increased odds of poor pain control. Study quality was generally high, although appropriate blinding of predictor during outcome ascertainment was often limited. Conclusions Nine predictors of poor postoperative pain control were identified. These should be recognised as potentially important factors when developing discipline-specific clinical care pathways to improve pain outcomes and to guide future surgical pain research. PROSPERO registration number CRD42017080682.

0 comments Cited 89 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: not found

Patient controlled opioid analgesia versus non-patient controlled opioid analgesia for postoperative pain

Ewan D. McNicol, Jana Hudcova, McKenzie Ferguson (2015)

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.