Search

Objective: To compare the outcomes of hysterectomy patients who received standard pain management including IV acetaminophen (IV APAP) versus oral APAP., Methods: We performed a retrospective analysis of the Premier Database (January 2012 to September 2015) comparing hysterectomy patients who received postoperative pain management including IV APAP to those who received oral APAP starting on the day of surgery and continuing up to the third post-operative day, with no exclusions based on additional pain management. We compared the groups on length of stay (LOS), hospitalization costs, and average daily morphine equivalent dose (MED). The quarterly rate of IV APAP use for all hospitalizations by hospital was used as an instrumental variable in two-stage least squares regressions also adjusting for patient demographics, clinical risk factors, and hospital characteristics., Results: We identified 22,828 hysterectomy patients including 14,811 (65%) who had received IV APAP. Study subjects averaged 50 and 52 years of age, respectively in the IV APAP and oral APAP cohorts and were predominantly non-Hispanic Caucasians (≥60% in both cohorts). Instrumental variable models found IV APAP associated with 0.8 days shorter hospitalization (95% CI: -0.92 to -0.68, p<0.0001) and $2,449 lower hospitalization costs (95% CI: -$2,902 to -$1,996, p<0.0001). Average daily MED trended lower without statistical significance (-1.41 mg, 95% CI: -3.43 mg to 0.61 mg, p = 0.17)., Conclusions: Compared to oral APAP, managing post-hysterectomy pain with IV APAP is associated with shorter LOS and lower total hospitalization costs., Competing Interests: We also want to openly declare the following competing interests. RNH has received grants and consulting fees from Mallinckrodt Pharmaceuticals. ATP and BL are former employees of Mallinckrodt Pharmaceuticals. EAB and GJW are employees of Mallinckrodt Pharmaceuticals. RDU has served as a consultant for Mallinckrodt Pharmaceuticals and has received grant support for an unrelated study. Additionally, IV acetaminophen is commercialized by Mallinckrodt Pharmaceuticals. These competing interests do not alter our adherence to PLOS ONE policies on sharing data and materials. However, access to the data set used in this analysis is restricted based on a commercial license with Premier and thus cannot be shared.

Objective: To evaluate intravenous (IV) acetaminophen (APAP) vs oral APAP use as adjunctive analgesics in cholecystectomy patients by comparing associated hospital length of stay (LOS), hospital costs, opioid use, and rates of nausea/vomiting, respiratory depression, and bowel obstruction., Methods: We conducted a retrospective analysis of the Premier Database (January 2012 to September 2015) including cholecystectomy patients who received either IV APAP or oral APAP. Differences in LOS, hospitalization costs, mean daily morphine equivalent dose (MED), and potential opioid-related adverse events were estimated. Multivariable logistic regression was performed for the binary outcomes and instrumental variable regressions, using the quarterly rate of IV APAP use for all hospitalizations by hospital as the instrument in two-stage least squares regressions for continuous outcomes. Models were adjusted for patient demographics, clinical risk factors, and hospital characteristics., Results: Among 61,017 cholecystectomy patients, 31,133 (51%) received IV APAP. Subjects averaged 51 and 57 years of age, respectively, in the IV and oral APAP cohorts. In the adjusted models, IV APAP was associated with 0.42 days shorter LOS (95% CI = -0.58 to -0.27; p < .0001), $1,045 lower hospitalization costs (95% CI = -$1,521 to -$569; p < .0001), 2 mg lower average daily MED (95% CI = -3 mg to -0.9 mg; p = .0005), and lower rates of respiratory depression (odds ratio [OR] = 0.89, 95% CI = 0.82-0.97; p = .006), and nausea and vomiting (OR = 0.86, 95% CI = 0.86-0.86; p < .0001)., Conclusions: In patients having cholecystectomy, the addition of IV APAP to perioperative pain management is associated with shorter LOS, lower costs, reduced opioid use, and less frequent nausea/vomiting and respiratory depression compared to oral APAP. These findings should be confirmed in a prospective study comparing IV and oral APAP.

Background: Recovery from obstetrics and gynecology (OB/GYN) surgery, including hysterectomy and cesarean section delivery, aims to restore function while minimizing hospital length of stay (LOS) and medical expenditures., Objective: Our analyses compare OB/GYN surgery patients who received combination intravenous (IV) acetaminophen and IV opioid analgesia with those who received IV opioid-only analgesia and estimate differences in LOS, hospitalization costs, and opioid consumption., Methods: We performed a retrospective analysis of the Premier Database between January 2009 and June 2015, comparing OB/GYN surgery patients who received postoperative pain management with combination IV acetaminophen and IV opioids with those who received only IV opioids starting on the day of surgery and continuing up to the second postoperative day. We performed instrumental variable 2-stage least-squares regressions controlling for patient and hospital covariates to compare the LOS, hospitalization costs, and daily opioid doses (morphine equivalent dose) of IV acetaminophen recipients with that of opioid-only analgesia patients., Results: We identified 225 142 OB/GYN surgery patients who were eligible for our study of whom 89 568 (40%) had been managed with IV acetaminophen and opioids. Participants averaged 36 years of age and were predominantly non-Hispanic Caucasians (60%). Multivariable regression models estimated statistically significant differences in hospitalization cost and opioid use with IV acetaminophen associated with $484.4 lower total hospitalization costs (95% CI = -$760.4 to -$208.4; P = 0.0006) and 8.2 mg lower daily opioid use (95% CI = -10.0 to -6.4), whereas the difference in LOS was not significant, at -0.09 days (95% CI = -0.19 to 0.01; P = 0.07)., Conclusion: Compared with IV opioid-only analgesia, managing post-OB/GYN surgery pain with the addition of IV acetaminophen is associated with decreased hospitalization costs and reduced opioid use.

Background: Recovery from spine surgery is oriented toward restoring functional health outcomes while reducing resource use. Optimal pain management is a key to reaching these objectives. We compared outcomes of spine surgery patients who received standard pain management including intravenous (IV) acetaminophen (APAP) vs. oral APAP., Methods: We performed a retrospective analysis of the Premier database (January 2012 to September 2015) comparing spine surgery patients who received pain management with IV APAP to those who received oral APAP, with no exclusions based on additional pain management. We performed multivariable logistic regression for the discharge and all cause 30-day readmission to the same hospital outcomes and instrumental variable regressions using the quarterly rate of IV APAP use for all hospitalizations by hospital as the instrument in two-stage least squares regressions for length of stay (LOS), hospitalization costs, and average daily morphine equivalent dose (MED) outcomes. Models adjusted for age, gender, race, admission type, 3M All Patient Refined Diagnosis Related Group severity of illness and risk of mortality, hospital size, and indicators for whether the hospital was an academic center and whether it was urban or rural., Results: We identified 112,586 spine surgery patients with 51,835 (46%) having received IV APAP. Subjects averaged 57 and 59 years of age respectively in the IV APAP and oral APAP cohorts and were predominantly non-Hispanic Caucasians and female. In our adjusted models, IV APAP was associated with 0.68 days shorter LOS (95% CI: -0.76 to -0.59, p < .0001), $1175 lower hospitalization costs (95% CI: -$1611 to -$739, p < .0001), 13 mg lower average daily MED (95% CI: -14 mg to -12 mg, p < .0001), 34% lower risk of discharge to a skilled nursing facility (95% CI: 0.63 to 0.69, p < .0001), and 13% less risk of 30-day readmission (95% CI: 0.73 to 1.03)., Conclusions: Compared to oral APAP, managing post-spine-surgery pain with IV APAP is associated with less resource use, lower costs, lower doses of opioids, and improved discharge status.

Introduction: To assess the impact on hospitalization costs of multimodal analgesia (MMA), including intravenous acetaminophen (IV-APAP), versus IV opioid monotherapy for postoperative pain management in patients undergoing orthopedic surgery., Methods: Utilizing the Truven Health MarketScan ® Hospital Drug Database (HDD), patients undergoing total knee arthroplasty (TKA), total hip arthroplasty (THA), or surgical repair of hip fracture between 1/1/2011 and 8/31/2014 were separated into postoperative pain management groups: MMA with IV-APAP plus other IV analgesics (IV-APAP group) or an IV opioid monotherapy group. All patients could have received oral analgesics. Baseline characteristics and total hospitalization costs were compared. Additionally, an inverse probability treatment weighting [IPTW] with propensity scores analysis further assessed hospitalization cost differences., Results: The IV-APAP group (n = 33,954) and IV opioid monotherapy group (n = 110,300) differed significantly (P < 0.0001) across baseline characteristics, though the differences may not have been clinically meaningful. Total hospitalization costs (mean ± standard deviation) were significantly lower for the IV-APAP group than the IV opioid monotherapy group (US$12,540 ± $9564 vs. $13,242 ± $35,825; P < 0.0001). Medical costs accounted for $701 of the $702 between-group difference. Pharmacy costs were similar between groups. Results of the IPTW-adjusted analysis further supported the statistically significant cost difference., Conclusions: Patients undergoing orthopedic surgery who received MMA for postoperative pain management, including IV-APAP, had significantly lower total costs than patients who received IV opioid monotherapy. This difference was driven by medical costs; importantly, there was no difference in pharmacy costs. Generalizability of the results may be limited to patients admitted to hospitals similar to those included in HDD. Dosing could not be determined, so it was not possible to quantify utilization of IV-APAP or ascertain differences in opioid consumption between the 2 groups. This study did not account for healthcare utilization post-discharge.

Introduction: The provision of safe, effective, cost-efficient perioperative inpatient acute pain management is an important concern among clinicians and administrators within healthcare institutions. Overreliance on opioid monotherapy in this setting continues to present health risks for patients and increase healthcare costs resulting from preventable adverse events. The goal of this study was to model length of stay (LOS), potential opioid-related complications, and costs for patients reducing opioid use and adding intravenous acetaminophen (IV APAP) for management of postoperative pain., Methods: Data for this study were de-identified inpatient encounters from The Advisory Board Company across 297 hospitals from 2012-2014, containing 2,238,433 encounters (IV APAP used in 12.1%). Encounters for adults ≥18 years of age admitted for cardiovascular, colorectal, general, obstetrics and gynecology, orthopedics, or spine surgery were included. The effects of reducing opioids and adding IV APAP were estimated using hierarchical statistical models. Costs were estimated by multiplying modeled reductions in LOS or complication rates by observed average volumes for medium-sized facilities, and by average cost per day or per complication (LOS: US$2383/day; complications: derived from observed charges)., Results: Across all surgery types, LOS showed an average reduction of 18.5% (10.7-32.0%) for the modeled scenario of reducing opioids by one level (high to medium, medium to low, or low to none) and adding IV APAP, with an associated total LOS-related cost savings of $4.5 M. Modeled opioid-related complication rates showed similar improvements, averaging a reduction of 28.7% (5.4-44.0%) with associated cost savings of $0.2 M. In aggregate, costs decreased by an estimated $4.7 M for a medium-sized hospital. The study design demonstrates associations only and cannot establish causal relationships. The cost impact of LOS is modeled based on observed data., Conclusions: This investigation indicates that reducing opioid use and including IV APAP for postoperative pain management has the potential to decrease LOS, opioid-related complication rates, and costs from a hospital perspective., Funding: Mallinckrodt Pharmaceuticals.

Introduction: Recovery from orthopedic surgery is oriented towards restoring functional health outcomes while reducing hospital length of stay (LOS) and medical expenditures. Optimal pain management is a key to reaching these objectives. We sought to compare orthopedic surgery patients who received combination intravenous (IV) acetaminophen and IV opioid analgesia to those who received IV opioids alone and compared the two groups on LOS and hospitalization costs., Methods: We performed a retrospective analysis of the Premier Database (Premier, Inc.; between January 2009 and June 2015) comparing orthopedic surgery patients who received post-operative pain management with combination IV acetaminophen and IV opioids to those who received only IV opioids starting on the day of surgery and continuing up to the second post-operative day. The quarterly rate of IV acetaminophen use for all hospitalizations by hospital served as the instrumental variable in two-stage least squares regressions controlling for patient and hospital covariates to compare the LOS and hospitalization costs of IV acetaminophen recipients to opioid monotherapy patients., Results: We identified 4,85,895 orthopedic surgery patients with 1,74,805 (36%) who had received IV acetaminophen. Study subjects averaged 64 years of age and were predominantly non-Hispanic Caucasians (78%) and female (58%). The mean unadjusted LOS for IV acetaminophen patients was 3.2 days [standard deviation (SD) 2.6] compared to 3.9 days (SD 3.9) with only IV opioids (P < 0.0001). Average unadjusted hospitalization costs were $19,024.9 (SD $13,113.7) for IV acetaminophen patients and $19,927.6 (SD $19,578.8) for IV opioid patients (P < 0.0001). These differences remained statistically significant in our instrumental variable models, with IV acetaminophen associated with 0.51 days shorter hospitalization [95% confidence interval (CI) -0.58 to -0.44, P < 0.0001] and $634.8 lower hospitalization costs (95% CI -$1032.5 to -$237.1, P = 0.0018)., Conclusion: Compared to opioids alone, managing post-orthopedic surgery pain with the addition of IV acetaminophen is associated with shorter LOS and decreased hospitalization costs., Funding: Mallinckrodt Pharmaceuticals.