2
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: not found
      • Article: not found

      Racial Disparities in Postpartum Pain Management :

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
      Bookmark
          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

          <div class="section"> <a class="named-anchor" id="S1"> <!-- named anchor --> </a> <h5 class="title" id="d375614e106">Objective:</h5> <p id="P1">To evaluate racial and ethnic differences in women’s postpartum pain scores, inpatient opioid administration, and discharge opioid prescriptions. </p> </div><div class="section"> <a class="named-anchor" id="S2"> <!-- named anchor --> </a> <h5 class="title" id="d375614e111">Methods:</h5> <p id="P2">We conducted a retrospective cohort study of all deliveries at a single, high-volume tertiary care center from December 1, 2015, through November 30, 2016. Women were included if they self-identified as non-Hispanic white, non-Hispanic black, or Hispanic, were at least 18 years of age, and did not have documented allergies to non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs or morphine. Medical records were queried for three outcomes: 1) patient-reported postpartum pain score (on a scale of 0 to 10) at discharge (dichotomized &lt;5 or ≥5); 2) inpatient opioid dosing during postpartum hospitalization (reported as morphine milligram equivalents per postpartum day); and 3) receipt of an opioid prescription at discharge. The associations between each of these outcomes and maternal race–ethnicity were assessed using multivariable logistic regression models with random effects to account for clustering by discharge physician. A sensitivity analysis was conducted in which women of different race and ethnicity were matched using propensity scores. </p> </div><div class="section"> <a class="named-anchor" id="S3"> <!-- named anchor --> </a> <h5 class="title" id="d375614e116">Results:</h5> <p id="P3">A total of 9,900 postpartum women were eligible for analysis. Compared to non-Hispanic white women, Hispanic and non-Hispanic black women had significantly greater odds of reporting a pain score of ≥ 5 (aOR 1.61; 95% 1.26 to 2.06 and aOR 2.18; 95% 1.63 to 2.91, respectively), but received significantly fewer inpatient morphine milligram equivalents/day (aβ −5.03; 95% CI −6.91 to −3.15 and aβ −3.54; 95% CI −5.88 to −1.20, respectively). Additionally, Hispanic and non-Hispanic black women were significantly less likely to receive an opioid prescription at discharge (aOR 0.80; 95% CI 0.67 to-0.96 and aOR 0.78; 95% CI 0.62 to 0.98) compared to non-Hispanic white women. Results of the propensity score analysis largely corroborated those of primary analysis, with the exception that the difference in inpatient morphine milligram equivalents/day between non-Hispanic white and non-Hispanic black women did not reach statistical significance. </p> </div><div class="section"> <a class="named-anchor" id="S4"> <!-- named anchor --> </a> <h5 class="title" id="d375614e121">Conclusion:</h5> <p id="P4">Hispanic and non-Hispanic black women experience disparities in pain management in the postpartum setting that cannot be explained by less perceived pain. </p> </div><p id="P5">Hispanic and non-Hispanic black women experience postpartum disparities in pain management that cannot be explained by less perceived pain. </p>

          Related collections

          Most cited references13

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: found
          Is Open Access

          Cut-Off Points for Mild, Moderate, and Severe Pain on the Numeric Rating Scale for Pain in Patients with Chronic Musculoskeletal Pain: Variability and Influence of Sex and Catastrophizing

          Objectives: The 0–10 Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) is often used in pain management. The aims of our study were to determine the cut-off points for mild, moderate, and severe pain in terms of pain-related interference with functioning in patients with chronic musculoskeletal pain, to measure the variability of the optimal cut-off points, and to determine the influence of patients’ catastrophizing and their sex on these cut-off points. Methods: 2854 patients were included. Pain was assessed by the NRS, functioning by the Pain Disability Index (PDI) and catastrophizing by the Pain Catastrophizing Scale (PCS). Cut-off point schemes were tested using ANOVAs with and without using the PSC scores or sex as co-variates and with the interaction between CP scheme and PCS score and sex, respectively. The variability of the optimal cut-off point schemes was quantified using bootstrapping procedure. Results and conclusion: The study showed that NRS scores ≤ 5 correspond to mild, scores of 6–7 to moderate and scores ≥8 to severe pain in terms of pain-related interference with functioning. Bootstrapping analysis identified this optimal NRS cut-off point scheme in 90% of the bootstrapping samples. The interpretation of the NRS is independent of sex, but seems to depend on catastrophizing. In patients with high catastrophizing tendency, the optimal cut-off point scheme equals that for the total study sample, but in patients with a low catastrophizing tendency, NRS scores ≤ 3 correspond to mild, scores of 4–6 to moderate and scores ≥7 to severe pain in terms of interference with functioning. In these optimal cut-off schemes, NRS scores of 4 and 5 correspond to moderate interference with functioning for patients with low catastrophizing tendency and to mild interference for patients with high catastrophizing tendency. Theoretically one would therefore expect that among the patients with NRS scores 4 and 5 there would be a higher average PDI score for those with low catastrophizing than for those with high catastrophizing. However, we found the opposite. The fact that we did not find the same optimal CP scheme in the subgroups with lower and higher catastrophizing tendency may be due to chance variability.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: found
            Is Open Access

            Racial-Ethnic Disparities in Opioid Prescriptions at Emergency Department Visits for Conditions Commonly Associated with Prescription Drug Abuse

            Prescription drug abuse is a growing problem nationally. In an effort to curb this problem, emergency physicians might rely on subjective cues such as race-ethnicity, often unknowingly, when prescribing opioids for pain-related complaints, especially for conditions that are often associated with drug-seeking behavior. Previous studies that examined racial-ethnic disparities in opioid dispensing at emergency departments (EDs) did not differentiate between prescriptions at discharge and drug administration in the ED. We examined racial-ethnic disparities in opioid prescription at ED visits for pain-related complaints often associated with drug-seeking behavior and contrasted them with conditions objectively associated with pain. We hypothesized a priori that racial-ethnic disparities will be present among opioid prescriptions for conditions associated with non-medical use, but not for objective pain-related conditions. Using data from the National Hospital Ambulatory Medical Care Survey for 5 years (2007–2011), the odds of opioid prescription during ED visits made by non-elderly adults aged 18–65 for ‘non-definitive’ conditions (toothache, back pain and abdominal pain) or ‘definitive’ conditions (long-bone fracture and kidney stones) were modeled. Opioid prescription at discharge and opioid administration at the ED were the primary outcomes. We found significant racial-ethnic disparities, with non-Hispanic Blacks being less likely (adjusted odds ratio ranging from 0.56–0.67, p-value < 0.05) to receive opioid prescription at discharge during ED visits for back pain and abdominal pain, but not for toothache, fractures and kidney stones, compared to non-Hispanic whites after adjusting for other covariates. Differential prescription of opioids by race-ethnicity could lead to widening of existing disparities in health, and may have implications for disproportionate burden of opioid abuse among whites. The findings have important implications for medical provider education to include sensitization exercises towards their inherent biases, to enable them to consciously avoid these biases from defining their practice behavior.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              False alarms and pseudo-epidemics: the limitations of observational epidemiology.

              Most reported associations in observational clinical research are false, and the minority of associations that are true are often exaggerated. This credibility problem has many causes, including the failure of authors, reviewers, and editors to recognize the inherent limitations of these studies. This issue is especially problematic for weak associations, variably defined as relative risks (RRs) or odds ratios (ORs) less than 4. Such associations, commonly reported in the medical literature, are more likely to be attributable to bias than to causal association. All observational research has bias (which can include selection, information, and confounding bias). Hence, detection of small associations falls below the discriminatory ability of observational studies. In general, unless RRs in cohort studies exceed 2 to 3 or ORs in case-control studies exceed 3 or 4, associations in observational research findings should not be considered credible. However, these guidelines are not foolproof: strong (yet spurious) associations can result when large amounts of bias are present. Only in a properly performed randomized controlled trial, free of bias, should small associations merit attention. Better training and more circumspection on the part of investigators, tougher editorial standards on the part of journals, and hefty skepticism on the part of referees and readers are necessary to avoid the dangers of false alarms, pseudo-epidemics, and their unfortunate consequences.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Obstetrics & Gynecology
                Obstetrics & Gynecology
                Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health)
                0029-7844
                2019
                December 2019
                : 134
                : 6
                : 1147-1153
                Article
                10.1097/AOG.0000000000003561
                6905121
                31764723
                d407702f-69e8-44a8-a9ed-97236e6819e6
                © 2019
                History

                Comments

                Comment on this article