Search

Background: Opioid analgesic use before total hip or knee arthroplasty has been associated with worse postoperative outcomes. This pilot study aimed to examine the feasibility of a telehealth-based pharmacist-partnered opioid tapering intervention before elective primary hip or knee arthroplasty and its potential effectiveness compared with usual care., Methods: This study was conducted at seven hospitals in New South Wales, Australia. Eligible patients were those aged ≥ 18 years, scheduled to undergo primary hip or knee arthroplasty for osteoarthritis and taking opioid analgesics pre-operatively. The intervention group participated in an opioid tapering telehealth service, a partnership between a pharmacist and general practitioner, for 3 months pre-operatively up to the day of surgery, while the control group received usual care. The primary outcomes of the study were to investigate the feasibility of the intervention (i.e. adherence to treatment) and potential effectiveness in decreasing baseline daily opioid dose by > 50% before surgery., Results: Between December 2021 and June 2023, 70 patients were recruited and assigned randomly to the intervention group (n = 35) or control group (n = 35). Baseline characteristics were similar between groups. Thirty patients in each group completed their allocated treatment. All patients allocated to the intervention group completed at least one appointment with a pharmacist, with the median (IQR [range]) being 2 (1-4 [1-6]) appointments. The number of patients who successfully decreased their baseline daily opioid dose by ≥ 50% before surgery was 27/30 in the intervention group compared with 5/30 in the usual care group (p < 0.001)., Conclusions: The findings of this pilot study support the feasibility of a telehealth-delivered, pharmacist-partnered opioid tapering service for patients scheduled for primary hip or knee arthroplasty. A broader multicentre study to examine the effectiveness of this intervention on clinical outcomes is warranted., (© 2024 The Author(s). Anaesthesia published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of Association of Anaesthetists.)

Modified-release opioids are often prescribed for the management of moderate to severe acute pain following total hip and knee arthroplasty, despite recommendations against their use due to increasing concerns regarding harm. The primary objective of this multicentre study was to examine the impact of modified-release opioid use on the incidence of opioid-related adverse events compared with immediate-release opioid use, among adult inpatients following total hip or knee arthroplasty. Data for total hip and knee arthroplasty inpatients receiving an opioid analgesic for postoperative analgesia during hospitalisation were collected from electronic medical records of three tertiary metropolitan hospitals in Australia. The primary outcome was the incidence of opioid-related adverse events during hospital admission. Patients who received modified with or without immediate-release opioids were matched to those receiving immediate-release opioids only (1:1) using nearest neighbour propensity score matching with patient and clinical characteristics as covariates. This included total opioid dose received. In the matched cohorts, patients given modified-release opioids (n = 347) experienced a higher incidence of opioid-related adverse events overall, compared with those given immediate-release opioids only (20.5%, 71/347 vs. 12.7%, 44/347; difference in proportions 7.8% [95%CI 2.3-13.3%]). Modified-release opioid use was associated with an increased risk of harm when used for acute pain during hospitalisation after total hip or knee arthroplasty., (© 2023 The Authors. Anaesthesia published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of Association of Anaesthetists.)

Prescription of modified-release opioids for acute postoperative pain is widespread despite evidence to show their use may be associated with an increased risk of adverse effects. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to examine the available evidence on the safety and efficacy of modified-release, compared with immediate-release, oral opioids for postoperative pain in adults. We searched five electronic databases from 1 January 2003 to 1 January 2023. Published randomised clinical trials and observational studies on adults who underwent surgery which compared those who received oral modified-release opioids postoperatively with those receiving oral immediate-release opioids were included. Two reviewers independently extracted data on the primary outcomes of safety (incidence of adverse events) and efficacy (pain intensity, analgesic and opioid use, and physical function) and secondary outcomes (length of hospital stay, hospital readmission, psychological function, costs, and quality of life) up to 12 months postoperatively. Of the eight articles included, five were randomised clinical trials and three were observational studies. The overall quality of evidence was low. Modified-release opioid use was associated with a higher incidence of adverse events (n = 645, odds ratio (95%CI) 2.76 (1.52-5.04)) and worse pain (n = 550, standardised mean difference (95%CI) 0.2 (0.04-0.37)) compared with immediate-release opioid use following surgery. Our narrative synthesis concluded that modified-release opioids showed no superiority over immediate-release opioids for analgesic consumption, length of hospital stay, hospital readmissions or physical function after surgery. One study showed that modified-release opioid use is associated with higher rates of persistent postoperative opioid use compared with immediate-release opioid use. None of the included studies reported on psychological function, costs or quality of life., (© 2023 The Authors. Anaesthesia published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of Association of Anaesthetists.)

This study aims to summarize the effectiveness of organizational interventions on appropriate opioid prescribing for noncancer pain upon hospital discharge. A systematic search was conducted on 6 electronic databases by 2 independent reviewers. We included original research articles reporting on quantitative outcomes of organizational interventions targeting appropriate opioid prescribing on hospital discharge. Quality assessment was performed by 2 independent reviewers. The protocol for this review was prospectively registered on PROSPERO (ID: CRD42020156104). Out of 173 full texts assessed for eligibility, 43 were included in this review. The majority of studies had a moderate to serious risk of bias (33 out of 43). Most of the studies implemented a multifaceted organizational intervention (16 studies). Other interventions included guideline implementation, prescriber education and default opioid-prescribing quantity changes in electronic medical records. Multiple studies found that the dissemination of patient-specific and procedure-specific guidelines reduced the quantity of opioids prescribed by 44 to 57%. Prescriber education provided with feedback was implemented in 4 studies and resulted in a 33 to 44% decrease in prescribing rates. Lowering the default quantities in the electronic medical records produced a 40% decrease in opioids prescribed in 1 study. Guideline implementation, prescriber education and default opioid-prescribing quantity changes all appear effective in improving the appropriate prescribing of opioids on hospital discharge. However, the extent of reduction of opioid prescribing upon hospital discharge after the implementation of multifaceted intervention strategies appears similar to that of simpler interventions which require fewer resources., (© 2022 The Authors. British Journal of Clinical Pharmacology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of British Pharmacological Society.)

Introduction: Opioid utilization has increased fourfold over the past two decades among developed countries. Previous studies have found that opioid-related adverse drug events (ORADEs) are strongly associated with adverse clinical outcomes in hospitalized patients. The Society of Hospital Medicine in the United States recently published a Consensus Statement regarding opioid safety and suggested that extra caution is needed when using opioids in patients with risk factors for ORADEs. This systematic review aimed to summarize common patient risk factors for ORADEs in hospitalized patients., Methods: Five databases were searched including Medline, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, International Pharmaceutical Abstracts, and Scopus. Search themes include opioids, adverse drug events, and acute care settings. Original full-text studies that were published and identified patient risk factors for ORADEs in hospitalized patients were included., Results: A total of 16 observational studies were included, with only two studies considered as poor quality. Seven studies focused on severe ORADEs including over-sedation and respiratory depression. Common patient risk factors for severe ORADEs included comorbidities (eg, sleep apnea and renal diseases), concurrent use of sedatives, and prior opioid exposure. Nine studies focused on a combination of general ORADEs and common patient risk factors included advanced age, male gender, comorbidities (eg, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and neurologic disorders), concurrent use of sedating medications, and prior opioid exposure., Conclusions: Successful identification of patient risk factors for ORADEs summarized by this systematic review could benefit clinicians when deciding on the appropriateness of opioid therapy in hospital patients. Future studies could focus on developing a validated risk assessment tool based on these risk factors., (© 2022 Pharmacotherapy Publications, Inc.)

Aims: The aim of this study was to determine the conversion dose ratio between continuous infusion metaraminol and norepinephrine in critically ill patients with shock., Methods: A retrospective cohort study was conducted in adult patients with shock admitted to an intensive care unit from 29 October 2018 to 30 October 2019 and who transitioned from metaraminol monotherapy to norepinephrine monotherapy. Mean arterial pressure (MAP) and infusion doses for both drugs were collected at hourly intervals; 2 hours before to 5 hours after switching from metaraminol monotherapy to norepinephrine monotherapy. The conversion dose ratio was defined as the ratio of metaraminol (μg.kg -1 .min -1) : norepinephrine (μg.kg -1 .min -1 ) required to achieve a similar MAP., Results: A total of 43 out of 144 eligible patients were included. The median age was 68 years (IQR 56-76) and 22 (51%) were male. There was no significant difference between the baseline MAP during metaraminol monotherapy (median 71 mm Hg, IQR 66-76) and the post-transition MAP during norepinephrine monotherapy (median 70 mm Hg, IQR 66-73) (P = .09). The median conversion dose ratio between metaraminol and norepinephrine was 13 (IQR 7-24). In the sensitivity analyses, the median conversion dose ratio using the maximum and the mean norepinephrine infusion dose was 8 (IQR 5-16) and 12 (IQR 8-23), respectively., Conclusion: A conversion dose ratio of 10:1 (metaraminol μg.kg -1 .min -1 :norepinephrine μg.kg -1 .min -1 ) may be used in critically ill patients with shock to account for ease of calculations and variability of the conversion ratio in the primary and sensitivity analyses., (© 2021 British Pharmacological Society.)

Objective: To compare succinylcholine and rocuronium regarding mortality in patients with traumatic brain injury (TBI) who are intubated in the emergency department (ED)., Methods: This was a retrospective cohort study conducted in an academic ED in the United States. Adult patients with TBI who underwent rapid sequence intubation (RSI) in the ED with rocuronium or succinylcholine between October 2010 and October 2014 were included. The main outcome of interest was in-hospital mortality. Subjects were stratified based on severity of injury using head abbreviated injury scores. The high-severity group had a severe or critical head injury (score 4 or higher); the low-severity group had a less than severe head injury (score lower than 4)., Main Results: The final study cohort included 233 patients who were underwent RSI with succinylcholine (149 patients) or rocuronium (84 patients). In patients who received rocuronium, mortality was 22% (12/54) and 23% (7/30) in the low-severity and high-severity categories, respectively (difference 1%, 95% confidence interval [CI] -18% to 20%). In patients who received succinylcholine, mortality was 14% (14/103) and 44% (20/46) in the low-severity and high-severity categories, respectively (difference 30%, 95% CI 14-46). In the multivariate analysis after adjusting for important confounders, there was no significant association between succinylcholine and mortality in the low-severity category (odds ratio [OR] 0.75, 95% CI 0.29-1.92). However, in patients in the high-severity category, succinylcholine was associated with increased mortality compared with rocuronium (OR 4.10, 95% CI 1.18-14.12)., Conclusions: In severely brain-injured patients undergoing RSI in the ED, succinylcholine was associated with increased mortality compared with rocuronium., (© 2016 Pharmacotherapy Publications, Inc.)

Abstract Compilations of articles important to the pharmacist practicing in the emergency department have not been published. Consistent with other specialty areas of practice, a collection of important literature is valuable for both the new and experienced clinician. A diverse breadth of medical problems are represented that were felt to be the most pertinent issues facing the emergency medicine pharmacist; however, it is not intended to be a complete representation of available literature.

Study Objective: To determine the effect of a short-acting, inhaled β(2)-adrenergic receptor agonist, albuterol sulfate, administered by nebulization, on cardiovascular function and sympathetic activity in healthy individuals., Design: Prospective, placebo-controlled, single-blind, crossover study., Setting: University research center., Subjects: Seventeen healthy subjects., Intervention: After a screening visit to rule out cardiovascular abnormalities and anemia, each subject participated in two more separate visits. At the second visit, they were administered a single dose of either nebulized albuterol sulfate 2.5 mg diluted in 3 ml of normal saline or placebo (3 ml of normal saline). One week later, subjects returned for their third visit and received the other treatment., Measurements and Main Results: At the two study visits, before and 30, 60, and 90 minutes after administration of albuterol or placebo, we measured plasma catecholamine levels (epinephrine and norepinephrine), cardiac output, heart rate, and systolic and diastolic blood pressure, and we calculated stroke volume, mean arterial pressure, and systemic vascular resistance (SVR). Inhaled placebo resulted in no significant change overall in any of the measured or calculated cardiovascular parameters. Compared with baseline values, albuterol administration after 30, 60, and 90 minutes, increased cardiac output (mean ± SD 4.2 ± 1.1, 4.4 ± 1.3, and 4.3 ± 1.1 L/min, respectively, vs 3.6 ± 1.0 L/min) and stroke volume (51 ± 15, 56 ± 14, and 56 ± 13 ml, respectively, vs 46 ± 12 ml), did not significantly change blood pressure, and decreased SVR (1401 ± 432, 1393 ± 424, and 1384 ± 391 dynes•sec/cm(5), respectively, vs 1661 ± 453 dynes•sec/cm(5)) (p<0.05 for all comparisons). Heart rate was significantly changed with both albuterol and placebo, but only at 30 minutes after treatment. Albuterol, but not placebo, also increased plasma norepinephrine levels., Conclusion: In these healthy subjects, administration of a nebulized β(2)-agonist resulted in enhanced ventricular function and a decrease in SVR, suggesting peripheral vasodilation. In addition, the increase in norepinephrine level with albuterol, but not placebo, may have important implications in patients with known cardiovascular disease.

Study Objectives: To compare opioid requirements in opioid-tolerant and opioid-naïve patients after total knee arthroplasty, and to compare pain scores, sedation scores, and adverse effects between the groups., Design: Prospective, observational study., Setting: Academic medical center., Patients: Twenty-nine patients aged 18 years or older who underwent elective total knee arthroplasty between October 1, 2005, and June 31, 2007., Measurements and Main Results: Patients were classified on the basis of their daily opioid consumption during the week before surgery: those who required 10 mg or less of oral morphine equivalent were considered opioid naïve (20 patients), and those who required at least 30 mg of oral morphine equivalent were opioid tolerant (nine patients). Postoperative opioid consumption, pain scores, sedation scores, and adverse effects were compared between the two groups up to 48 hours after discharge from the postanesthesia care unit (PACU). Postoperative opioid consumption (in intravenous morphine equivalents) was significantly greater in the opioid-tolerant group than in the opioid-naïve group in the PACU (median 56 vs 8.2 mg, p=0.0013), during the first 24 hours after discharge from the PACU (108 vs 20.5 mg, p=0.0004), and 24-48 hours after discharge from the PACU (152.3 vs 25 mg, p=0.0001). Pain scores, assessed by using a verbal numeric scale from 0-10, were significantly greater in the opioid-tolerant group than in the opioid-naïve group during the first 24 hours after discharge from the PACU (5.9 vs 4.1, p=0.03). We observed no significant difference in pain scores during the other time periods studied. Sedation scores and adverse effects were similar between groups., Conclusion: After total knee arthroplasty, patients tolerant to opioids required significantly more opioids in the PACU and up to 48 hours after discharge from the PACU than did opioid-naïve patients. Opioid-tolerant patients also experienced greater pain during the first 24 hours after discharge from the PACU; however, sedation scores and adverse effects did not appear to be significantly different at any of the time periods studied. Clinicians need to be aggressive with pain management immediately after surgery and ensure that patients restart any opioid treatment at home as soon as possible.

Study Objective: To compare the effectiveness of common laxatives in producing a bowel movement in patients admitted to a medical intensive care unit (MICU)., Design: Retrospective medical record review., Setting: MICU of an academic medical center., Patients: Ninety-five patients admitted to the MICU from July 1-October 31, 2004., Measurements and Main Results: Fifty patients satisfied the inclusion criteria. Patient-specific data such as age, weight, sex, length of MICU stay, Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation (APACHE) II score, dietary intake, opioid intake, laxative intake, and bowel movements were recorded during the first 96 hours of admission. Logistic regression analysis was used to compare patients who did and did not have a bowel movement. Of the 50 patients, 25 did not have a bowel movement during the first 96 hours of MICU admission. Patients given a stimulant laxative (senna, bisacodyl) and/or an osmotic laxative (lactulose, milk of magnesia) were more likely to have a bowel movement (odds ratio [OR] 26.6, 95% confidence interval [CI] 3.2-221, p=0.002). Opioid intake, expressed as logarithmic morphine equivalents, was negatively associated with occurrence of a bowel movement (OR 0.76, 95% CI 0.59-0.97, p=0.027). Disease severity, as determined by APACHE II score, was also negatively associated with a bowel movement (OR 0.84, 95% CI 0.7-0.99, p=0.04)., Conclusion: Critically ill patients have a high frequency of constipation, and opioid therapy is a significant risk factor. Routine administration of stimulant or osmotic laxatives should be considered for this patient population.