Association of Multimodal Pain Control with Patient-Reported Outcomes in Children Undergoing Surgery

IntroductionOur aim was to describe practices in multimodal pain management at US children's hospitals and evaluate the association between non-opioid pain management strategies and pediatric patient-reported outcomes (PROs).MethodsData were collected as part of the 18-hospital ENhanced Recovery In CHildren Undergoing Surgery (ENRICH-US) clinical trial. Non-opioid pain management strategies included use of preoperative and postoperative non-opioid analgesics, regional anesthetic blocks, and a biobehavioral intervention. PROs included perioperative nervousness, pain-related functional disability, health-related quality of life (HRQoL). Associations were analyzed using multinomial logistic regression models.ResultsAmong 186 patients, 62 (33%) received preoperative analgesics, 186 (100%) postoperative analgesics, 81 (44%) regional anesthetic block, and 135 (73%) used a biobehavioral intervention. Patients were less likely to report worsened as compared to stable nervousness following regional anesthetic block (relative risk ratio [RRR]:0.31, 95% confidence interval [CI]:0.11–0.85), use of a biobehavioral technique (RRR:0.26, 95% CI:0.10–0.70), and both in combination (RRR:0.08, 95% CI:0.02–0.34). There were no associations of non-opioid pain control modalities with pain-related functional disability or HRQoL.ConclusionUse of postoperative non-opioid analgesics have been largely adopted, while preoperative non-opioid analgesics and regional anesthetic blocks are used less frequently. Regional anesthetic blocks and biobehavioral interventions may mitigate postoperative nervousness in children.Level of evidenceIII.     

The Optimal Primary Treatment for Pediatric Perianal Abscess and Anal Fistula: A Systemic Review and Meta-Analysis

BackgroundPerianal abscesses and anal fistulas are common. The principle of intention-to-treat has not been considered in previous systemic reviews. Thus, the comparison between primary and post-recurrence management was confused, and the recommendation of primary treatment is obscure. The current study aims to identify the optimal initial treatment for pediatric patients.MethodsUsing PRISMA guidelines, studies were identified from MEDLINE, EMBASE, PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Google Scholar without any language or study design restriction. The inclusion criteria include original articles or articles with original data, studies of management for a perianal abscess with or without anal fistula, and patient age of <18 years. Patients with local malignancy, Crohn's disease, or other underlying predisposing conditions were excluded. Studies without analyzing recurrence, case series of <5, and irrelevant articles were excluded in the screening stage. Of the 124 screened articles, 14 articles had no full texts or detailed information. Articles written in a language other than English or Mandarin were translated by Google Translation first and confirmed with native speakers. After the eligibility process, studies that compared identified primary managements were then included in the qualitative synthesis.ResultsThirty-one studies involving 2507 pediatric patients met the inclusion criteria. The study design consisted of two prospective case series of 47 patients and retrospective cohort studies. No randomized control trials were identified. Meta-analyses for recurrence after initial management were performed with a random-effects model. Conservative treatment and drainage revealed no difference (Odds ratio [OR], 1.222; 95% Confidential interval [CI]: 0.615–2.427, p = 0.567). Conservative management had a higher risk of recurrence than surgery without statistical significance (OR 0.278, 95% CI: 0.109–0.707, p = 0.007). Compared with incision/drainage, surgery can prevent recurrence remarkably (OR 4.360, 95% CI: 1.761–10.792, p = 0.001). Subgroup analysis of different approaches within conservative treatment and operation was not performed for lacking information.ConclusionStrong recommendations cannot be made due to the lack of prospective or randomized controlled studies. However, the current study based on real primary management supports initial surgical intervention for pediatric patients with perianal abscesses and anal fistula to prevent recurrence.Level of evidenceType of study: Systemic review; Evidence level: Level II.     

The effect of massage therapy on pain after surgery: A comprehensive meta-analysis

BackgroundFindings on the usefulness of massage therapy (MT) in postoperative pain management are often inconsistent among studies.ObjectivesThis study’s aim is to conduct a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCT) to clarify the effects of massage therapy in the treatment of postoperative pain.MethodsThree databases (PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials) were searched for RCTs published from database inception through January 26, 2021. The primary outcome was pain relief. The quality of RCTs was appraised with the Cochrane Collaboration risk of bias tool. The random-effect model was used to calculate the effect sizes and standardized mean difference (SMD) with 95 % confidential intervals (CIs) as a summary effect. The heterogeneity test was conducted through I². Subgroup and sensitivity analyses were used to explore the source of heterogeneity. Possible publication bias was assessed using visual inspection of funnel plot asymmetry.ResultsThe analysis included 33 RCTs and showed that MT is effective in reducing postoperative pain (SMD, −1.32; 95 % CI, −2.01 to −0.63; p = 0.0002; I² = 98.67 %). A similar significant effect was found for both short (immediate assessment) and long terms (assessment performed 4–6 weeks after the MT). Remarkably, we found neither the duration per session nor the dose had an impact on the effect of MT and there seemed to be no difference in the effects of different MT types. In addition, MT seemed to be more effective for adults. Furthermore, MT had better analgesic effects on cesarean section and heart surgery than orthopedic surgery.LimitationsPublication bias is possible due to the inclusion of studies in English only. Additionally, the included studies were extremely heterogeneous. Double-blind research on MT is difficult to implement, and none of the included studies is double-blind. There was some heterogeneity and publication bias in the included studies. In addition, there is no uniform evaluation standard for the operation level of massage practitioners, which may lead to research implementation bias.ConclusionsMT is effective in reducing postoperative pain in both short and long terms.