Addition of liposomal bupivacaine to standard bupivacaine versus standard bupivacaine alone in the supraclavicular brachial plexus block: a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: The analgesic effect of adding liposomal bupivacaine to standard bupivacaine in supraclavicular brachial plexus block is not known. We hypothesized that addition of liposomal bupivacaine would reduce acute postoperative pain compared to standard bupivacaine alone. METHODS: A randomized controlled trial was conducted. Patients and outcome assessors were blinded. Eighty patients undergoing distal radial fracture fixation under regional anesthesia with supraclavicular brachial plexus block were randomized into two groups. The liposomal bupivacaine (LB-BPB) group received 10ml of 0.5% plain bupivacaine immediately followed by 10ml of 1.33% liposomal bupivacaine (n=40). The standard bupivacaine (S-BPB) group received 20ml of 0.5% plain bupivacaine (n=40). The primary outcome was weighted area under curve (AUC) numerical rating scale (NRS) pain score at rest over the first 48 hours after surgery. Secondary outcomes included AUC scores for pain with movement, overall benefit with analgesia score (OBAS) and other functional scores. RESULTS: For the primary outcome, LB-BPB group was associated with statistically significantly lower AUC pain score at rest (0.6 vs 1.4, p-value < 0.001) in the first 48 hours. Of the secondary outcomes, no difference between treatment groups reached statistical significance with the exception of AUC score for pain with movement (2.3 vs 3.7, adjusted p-value < 0.001) and OBAS (1.1 vs 1.7, adjusted p-value = 0.020) in the first 48 hours, as well as NRS pain score at rest (0.5 vs 1.9, adjusted p-value < 0.001) and with movement (2.7 vs 4.9, adjusted p-value < 0.001) on postoperative day (POD) 1. Differences in NRS pain scores on POD2, POD3 and POD4 did not reach the level of statistical significance. There were no statistically significant differences in sensory function. CONCLUSION: Liposomal bupivacaine given via supraclavicular brachial plexus block reduced pain at rest in the early postoperative period.

A validation study of the Cantonese Chinese version of short form McGill pain questionnaire 2 in Cantonese-speaking patients with chronic pain in Hong Kong.

OBJECTIVE: The study tests the reliability and validity of the Cantonese Chinese version of Short Form McGill Pain Questionnaire 2 (SF-MPQ-2-CC). METHODS: The original Short Form McGill Pain Questionnaire (SF-MPQ-2) was translated into Cantonese Chinese version. Cantonese-speaking chronic pain patients from three pain centers in Hong Kong were recruited and asked to complete SF-MPQ-2-CC, validated Chinese versions of Identification Pain questionnaire (ID Pain), Pain Catastrophizing Scale (PCS), and Short Form Health Survey (SF-36) for evaluation of convergent and divergent validity, 2 weeks apart for evaluation of internal consistency. RESULTS: A total of 333 and 197 participants completed the first and second set of questionnaires, respectively. SF-MPQ-2-CC was shown to have excellent internal consistency, with an overall Cronbach's alpha value of 0.933. The overall correlation coefficient was 0.875 that shows good test-retest reliability. Construct validity was evaluated using confirmatory factor analysis, where a seconder-order factor model demonstrated a good fit with our data (χ2 = 826.51, p < 0.001, CFI = 0.92, TLI = 0.908, RMSEA = 0.097; SRMR = 0.063; error terms adjusted). SF-MPQ-2-CC also showed good convergent validity with Chinese versions of ID Pain (neuropathic pain) and PCS (continuous pain), and divergent validity was shown by a negative correlation with Chinese version of SF-36. CONCLUSIONS: Our study demonstrated that SF-MPQ-2-CC is a valid and reliable pain assessment tool for Cantonese-speaking patients in Hong Kong with a wide range of chronic pain conditions. It also helps to identify the presence of neuropathic pain and negative pain cognition among respondents.

Analgesic Effect of Buprenorphine for Chronic Noncancer Pain: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.

BACKGROUND: Buprenorphine is a partial agonist at the µ-opioid receptor and an antagonist at the delta and kappa opioid receptors. It has high affinity and low intrinsic activity at the µ-opioid receptor. Buprenorphine demonstrates no ceiling effect for clinical analgesia, but demonstrates this for respiratory depression and euphoria. It may provide effective analgesia while producing less adverse effects, making it a promising opioid analgesic. A systematic review and meta-analysis were performed to examine the analgesic efficacy of buprenorphine for patients with chronic noncancer pain. METHODS: PubMed, MEDLNE, Embase, and the Cochrane Library were searched up to January 2022. Randomized controlled trials were included if they compared buprenorphine versus placebo or active analgesic in patients with chronic noncancer pain, where pain score was an outcome. Nonrandomized controlled trials, observational studies, qualitative studies, case reports, and commentaries were excluded. Two investigators independently performed the literature search, study selection, and data collection. A random-effects model was used. The primary outcome was the effect of buprenorphine on pain intensity in patients with chronic noncancer pain based on standardized mean difference (SMD) in pain score. Quality of evidence was assessed using the Grade of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach. RESULTS: Two separate literature searches were conducted for patients with and without opioid use disorder (OUD). Only one study met the search criteria for those with OUD. Fourteen randomized controlled trials were included for those without OUD. Buprenorphine was associated with reduced pain score (SMD = -0.368, P < .001, I 2 = 89.37%) compared to placebo or active analgesic. Subgroup meta-analyses showed statistically significant differences in favor of buprenorphine versus placebo (SMD = -0.404, P < .001), for chronic low back pain (SMD = -0.383, P < .001), when administered via the transdermal route (SMD = -0.572, P = .001), via the buccal route (SMD = -0.453, P < .001), with length of follow-up lasting <12 weeks (SMD = -0.848, P < .05), and length of follow-up lasting 12 weeks or more (SMD = -0.415, P < .001). There was no significant difference when compared to active analgesic (SMD = 0.045, P > .05). Quality of evidence was low to moderate. CONCLUSIONS: Buprenorphine was associated with a statistically significant and small reduction in pain intensity compared to placebo. Both the transdermal and buccal routes provided pain relief. There was more evidence supporting its use for chronic low back pain.

Efficacy of Peripheral Nerve Field Stimulation for the Management of Chronic Low Back Pain and Persistent Spinal Pain Syndrome: A Narrative Review.

OBJECTIVES: Various approaches have been developed with a view to treating the back pain component in patients with chronic low back pain (CLBP) and persistent spinal pain syndrome (PSPS). Emerging evidence shows that peripheral nerve field stimulation (PNFS) may be an efficacious therapeutic modality against axial low back pain. Hence, the aim of the review was to evaluate the analgesic efficacy and safety of PNFS, when used alone or as an adjunct to spinal cord stimulation (SCS), for managing CLBP and PSPS. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A comprehensive search for clinical studies on PNFS and PNFS + SCS used for the management of CLBP and/or PSPS was performed using PubMed, EMBASE, MEDLINE via Proquest, and Web of Science. RESULTS: A total of 15 studies were included, of which four were randomized controlled trials (RCTs), nine were observational studies, and two were case series. For patients receiving PNFS, a significant decrease in back pain intensity and analgesic consumption, together with a significant improvement in physical functioning, was observed upon implant of the permanent system. Meanwhile, the addition of PNFS to SCS in refractory cases was associated with a significant reduction in back and leg pain, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: This review suggests that PNFS, when used alone or in combination with SCS, appears to be effective in managing back pain. However, high-quality evidence that supports the long-term analgesic efficacy and safety is still lacking. Hence, RCTs with a larger patient population and of a longer follow-up duration are warranted.

Supportive care and symptom management in patients with advanced hematological malignancies: a literature review.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Recent advances have led to cure or long-term disease control for patients with hematological malignancy (HM). Unfortunately, some of them still have poor prognoses and are often associated with significant symptom burden and poor quality of life for patients and families. These patients usually require supportive care including red blood cell and platelet transfusion, due to disease itself and the oncological treatment, apart from their symptom management. However, there is currently lack of the literatures review in these aspects. The objective of this review is to summarize practical supportive care recommendations for physicians or nurses practicing in palliative care (PC)/hematology-oncology unit, starting with core approaches in use of blood products for anemia and thrombocytopenia, management of tumor lysis syndrome, PC and oncology nursing care. METHODS: Evidence for this review was obtained from a search of the Cochrane database, PubMed, guidelines of European Society of Medical Oncology, British society of Hematology, American Society of Clinical Oncology, National Comprehensive Cancer Network and peer-reviewed journal articles. KEY CONTENT AND FINDINGS: For asymptomatic cancer patients who are anaemic, a threshold of haemoglobin level of 7 g/dL is considered to be safe and generally favored for blood transfusion. 'Single-unit' red cell transfusion is safer and at least as effective as 'double-unit' transfusion. Prophylactic platelet transfusion should be given to stable patients without bleeding and with platelet count less than 10×109/L. In febrile patients, the threshold is lifted to 20×109/L. There are also recommendations for the use of blood products during COVID-19 pandemic. In general, HM patients were more prone to painful infections when compared with solid cancer patients. Thus, antibiotics to treat underlying infections should be applied whenever possible and as required to control pain. CONCLUSIONS: This narrative review showed the recent literatures in the supportive care and symptom management of advanced HM patients. However, it is limited by some of the 'evidence-based' recommendations for interventions (including symptom management) based on early phase of HM populations rather than those receiving end-of-life care.

Multi-Component Care Bundle in Geriatric Fracture Hip for Reducing Post-Operative Delirium.

BACKGROUND: Delirium in elderly orthopaedic patients poses an enormous medical, social and financial burden to the healthcare system, and causes significant distress to patients and their caregivers. We examined whether a Multi-component Care Bundle (MCB) could reduce the incidence of post-operative delirium (POD) in fractured hip patients. METHODS: An observational study was conducted, analyzing 154 patients (mean age ± SD, 85 ± 7.8, 68% women) admitted to Queen Mary Hospital with hip fracture. Half of the patients were cared for in the control group before MCB was introduced, which included installation of orientation aids, introduction of a Caregiver Empowerment Program, and incorporation of ultrasound-guided Fascia Iliaca Block (FIB) into the analgesia protocol. RESULTS: There were fewer patients with POD in the MCB group, compared with the control group (18/76, 23.4% v 34/76, 44.2%, p = 0.006). Patients in MCB group consumed less opioid ( 4/77 v 13/77, p = 0.048), experienced less post-operative dizziness (2/77, 2.6% v 13/77, 16.9%, p = 0.003) and had a shorter median day to start walking post-operatively (day 1 [IQR 1-2] vs day 2 [IQR 2-3]; p = 0.001) than the control group. Length of stay was not affected. CONCLUSION: MCB effectively reduces POD, postoperative dizziness, opioid consumption, and days to start mobilization postoperatively.

Preoperative dexamethasone for pain relief after total knee arthroplasty: A randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Corticosteroids can reduce pain but the optimal dose and safety profiles are still uncertain. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to evaluate two different doses of dexamethasone for pain management and their side effects after total knee arthroplasty. DESIGN: A prospective randomised, controlled trial. SETTING: A tertiary teaching hospital in Hong Kong. PATIENTS: One hundred and forty-six patients were randomly allocated to one of three study groups. INTERVENTIONS: Before operation, patients in group D8, D16 and P received dexamethasone 8 mg, dexamethasone 16 mg and placebo (0.9% saline), respectively. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome was postoperative pain score. Secondary outcomes were opioid consumption, physical parameters of the knees and side effects of dexamethasone. RESULTS: Compared with placebo, group D16 patients had significantly less pain during maximal active flexion on postoperative day 3 [-1.3 (95% CI, -2.2 to -0.31), P = 0.005]. There was also a significant dose-dependent trend between pain scores and dexamethasone dose (P = 0.002). Compared with placebo, patients in group D16 consumed significantly less opioid [-6.4 mg (95% CI, -11.6 to -1.2), P = 0.025] and had stronger quadriceps power on the first three postoperative days (all P < 0.05). They also had significantly longer walking distance on postoperative day 1 [7.8 m ([95% CI, 0.85 to 14.7), P = 0.023] with less assistance during walking on the first two postoperative days (all P < 0.029) and significantly better quality-of-recovery scores on postoperative day 1 (P = 0.018). There were significant dose-dependent trends between all the above parameters and dexamethasone dose (all P < 0.05). No significant differences were found in the incidence of chronic pain or knee function 3, 6 and 12 months postoperatively. CONCLUSION: Dexamethasone 16 mg given before total knee arthroplasty led to a reduction in postoperative pain, less opioid consumption, stronger quadriceps muscle power, better mobilisation and better overall quality-of-recovery after operation. No long-term improvement in reduction in pain and function of the knee was found. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02767882.

An Audit of Changes in Outcomes of Acute Pain Service: Evolution Over the Last 2 Decades.

Acute pain services (APS) have evolved over time. Strategies nowadays emphasize multimodal analgesic regimes using a combination of nonopioid adjuvant analgesic drugs, peripheral nerve blocks, and local anaesthetic wound infiltration where appropriate. APS should be assessed over time to evaluate changes in outcomes which form the basis for future development. In this audit, data of patients under APS care in Queen Mary hospital, Hong Kong, between 2009 and 2012 were analyzed and compared with data from a previous audit between 1992 and 1995. The use of patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) was increased (from 69.3% to 86.5%, P < 0.001), while the use of epidural analgesia reduced (from 25.3% to 8.3%, P < 0.001) significantly. Although postoperative pain scores did not improve, PCA opioid consumption and the incidence of analgesia-related side effects were significantly less (all P < 0.001). More patients graded their postoperative analgesic techniques used as good when the results from these 2 audit periods were compared (P < 0.001 and P = 0.001 for PCA and epidural analgesia, respectively). In conclusion, there has been a change in analgesic management techniques, but there has been no improvement in overall pain relief. While changes over time have led to improvement in important parameters such as the incidence of side effects and patient satisfaction, further and continuous efforts and improvements are warrant to reduce acute pain relief and suffering of the patients after the surgery.