Patients' expectations,experience and acceptability of postoperative analgesia: a nested qualitative study within a randomised controlled trial comparing rectus sheath catheter and thoracic epidural analgesia

Adequate postoperative analgesia is a key element of enhanced recovery programmes. Thoracic epidural analgesia is associated with superior postoperative analgesia but can lead to complications. Rectus sheath catheter analgesia may provide an alternative. In a nested qualitative study (within a two-year randomised controlled trial) focussing on the acceptability, expectations and experiences of receiving the interventions, participants (n = 20) were interviewed 4 weeks post-intervention using a grounded theory approach. Constant comparative analysis, with patient and public involvement, enabled emerging findings to be pursued through subsequent data collection. We found no notable differences regarding postoperative acceptability or the experience of pain management. Pre-operatively, however, thoracic epidural analgesia was a source of anticipatory fear and anxiety. Both interventions resulted in some experienced adverse events (proportionately more with thoracic epidural analgesia). Participants had negative experiences of the insertion of thoracic epidural analgesia; others receiving the rectus sheath catheter lacked confidence in staff members' ability to manage the local anaesthetic infusion pump. The anticipation of the technique of thoracic epidural analgesia, and concerns about its impact on mobility, represented an additional, unpleasant experience for patients already managing an illness experience, anticipating a life-changing operation and dealing with concerns about the future. The anticipation of rectus sheath catheter analgesia was not associated with such anxieties. Patients' experiences start far earlier than the experience of the intervention itself through anticipatory anxieties and fears about receiving a technique and its potential implications. Complex pain packages can take on greater meaning than their actual efficacy in relieving postoperative pain. Future research into patient acceptability and experience should not focus solely on efficacy of pain relief but should include anticipatory fears, anxieties and experiences.     

Obstetric analgesia and anaesthesia in SARS-CoV-2-positive parturients across 10 maternity units in the north-west of England: a retrospective cohort study

Since the start of the COVID-19 pandemic, few studies have reported anaesthetic outcomes in parturients with SARS-CoV-2 infection. We reviewed the labour analgesic and anaesthetic interventions utilised in symptomatic and asymptomatic parturients who had a confirmed positive test for SARS-CoV-2 across 10 hospitals in the north-west of England between 1 April 2020 and 31 May 2021. Primary outcomes analysed included the analgesic/anaesthetic technique utilised for labour and caesarean birth. Secondary outcomes included a comparison of maternal characteristics, caesarean birth rate, maternal critical care admission rate along with adverse composite neonatal outcomes. A positive SARS-CoV-2 test was recorded in 836 parturients with 263 (31.4%) reported to have symptoms of COVID-19. Neuraxial labour analgesia was utilised in 104 (20.4%) of the 509 parturients who went on to have a vaginal birth. No differences in epidural analgesia rates were observed between symptomatic and asymptomatic parturients (OR 1.03, 95%CI 0.64–1.67; p = 0.90). The neuraxial anaesthesia rate in 310 parturients who underwent caesarean delivery was 94.2% (95%CI 90.6–96.0%). The rates of general anaesthesia were similar in symptomatic and asymptomatic parturients (6% vs. 5.7%; p = 0.52). Symptomatic parturients were more likely to be multiparous (OR 1.64, 95%CI 1.19–2.22; p = 0.002); of Asian ethnicity (OR 1.54, 1.04–2.28; p = 0.03); to deliver prematurely (OR 2.16, 95%CI 1.47–3.19; p = 0.001); have a higher caesarean birth rate (44.5% vs. 33.7%; OR 1.57, 95%CI 1.16–2.12; p = 0.008); and a higher critical care utilisation rate both pre- (8% vs. 0%, p = 0.001) and post-delivery (11% vs. 3.5%; OR 3.43, 95%CI 1.83–6.52; p = 0.001). Eight neonates tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 while no differences in adverse composite neonatal outcomes were observed between those born to symptomatic and asymptomatic mothers (25.8% vs. 23.8%; OR 1.11, 95%CI 0.78–1.57; p = 0.55). In women with COVID-19, non-neuraxial analgesic regimens were commonly utilised for labour while neuraxial anaesthesia was employed for the majority of caesarean births. Symptomatic women with COVID-19 are at increased risk of significant maternal morbidity including preterm birth, caesarean birth and peripartum critical care admission.     

不同剂量地佐辛术后镇痛对老年患者肝功能的影响

目的 探讨地佐辛术后镇痛对高龄患者围术期肝功能的影响。方法 选择2018 年1 月～2020 年6 月吉安市中心人民医院麻醉科收治的ASA 分级Ⅱ～Ⅲ级高龄患者80 例，按照随机数字表法，分为A 组、B 组、C 组、D 组，每组各20 例。分别给予0.4 mg/kg、0.5 mg/kg、0.6 mg/kg、0.7 mg/kg 地佐辛进行术后镇痛，评估术后1、2、6、12、24、48 h 患者的疼痛程度[视觉模拟评分法（VAS）]、术后镇静效果（Ramsay 评分法）及肝功能指标（ALT、AST）水平，评价不同剂量的地佐辛术后镇痛对高龄患者围术期肝功能的影响。结果 C 组术后患者不同时间段VAS 疼痛评分低于A 组、B 组、D 组，差异有统计学意义（P＜0.05）；四组患者术后1、2、6 h Ramsay 镇静评分比较，差异有统计学意义（P＜0.05）；但术后12、24、48 h Ramay 镇痛评分比较，差异无统计学意义（P＞0.05）。C 组肝功能指标ALT、AST优于A 组、B 组、D 组，差异有统计学意义（P＜0.05）。结论 高龄患者术后镇痛应用0.6 mg/kg地佐辛对围术期肝功能的影响最小。     

Optimizing Rapid Recovery After Anterior Hip Arthroplasty Surgery: A Comparative Study of Fascia Iliaca Compartment Block and Local Infiltration Analgesia

BackgroundMultimodal pain therapy combining analgesics, local infiltration analgesia (LIA) and peripheral nerve blocks, such as fascia iliaca compartment block (FICB), can improve postoperative pain, nausea and vomiting (PONV) and ambulation in patients undergoing total hip arthroplasty (THA). We hypothesized that addition of FICB would decrease opioid requirements and length of stay (LOS) but could create a motor block.MethodsThis is a single center, prospective, blinded randomized controlled study of 152 patients undergoing elective THA via direct anterior approach from October 2019 till August 2021. Three patient groups were defined: patients receiving only spinal anesthesia (control group, n = 53); spinal anesthesia with LIA perioperatively (n = 50); and spinal anesthesia with FICB on the recovery unit (n = 49). Outcome measures consisted of postoperative pain scores, PONV, length of hospital stay, opioid requirements and mobility.ResultsOverall pain scores were low for all patient groups, with a lower pain score for LIA in comparison to the control group until 4 hours postoperatively (P < .05). Length of hospital stay, postoperative pain, nausea and vomiting (PONV) scores and quadriceps muscle strength did not differ significantly between groups. The control group showed higher scores at 12 hours postoperatively in comparison to FICB regarding rehabilitation potential, use of walking aids and activities of daily living (P < .05), but all groups reached the same endpoint 48 hours postoperatively. The LIA and FICB groups required less opioids until 24 hours postoperatively.ConclusionLIA is a beneficial adjuvant therapy to spinal anesthesia in THA patients as it may decrease pain scores and the need for opioid consumption. Adjuvant FICB only provided lower opioid requirements.     

腰硬联合镇痛及患者自控镇痛对产程及分娩结局的影响

目的 探讨腰硬联合(CSEA)及患者自控镇痛(PCEA)对产程及分娩结局的影响。方法 随机选取2014年1~12月足月待产、无妊娠合并症和并发症初产妇996例,其中503例产妇于活跃期实施CSEA+PCEA镇痛(分娩镇痛组),493例未行分娩镇痛(对照组),分别记录并比较两组产妇各产程时间、子宫收缩、镇痛效果、运动神经阻滞程度、产程中缩宫素的使用率、产后出血率、羊水Ⅲ度污染率、新生儿Apgar评分、产钳助产和剖宫产率。结果 分娩镇痛组第一产程、第二产程较对照组有所延长,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05);第三产程无明显改变;子宫收缩力减弱;分娩镇痛组较对照组镇痛效果显著,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05);运动阻滞程度低;缩宫素使用率、产后出血率、羊水Ⅲ度污染率、及新生儿Apgar评分及产钳助产和剖宫产率两组比较,差异均无统计学意义(P>0.05)。结论 腰硬联合分娩镇痛可能会使第一产程、第二产程延长,对子宫收缩力有一定的影响,但并未增加缩宫素的使用率及产钳助产和剖宫产率,其镇痛效果显著,运动阻滞程度低,对分娩结局无不良影响。     

不同时间电针对直肠癌开腹手术患者围术期应激反应和免疫功能的影响

目的观察不同时点电针对直肠癌开腹手术患者围术期应激反应及免疫功能的影响。方法240例择期行直肠癌根治性开腹手术而住院的患者,随机分为A组、B组、C组、D组,每组60例。A组设为空白对照组,B组于手术前1 d、C组于手术前1 d和麻醉诱导前30 min、D组分别于手术前1 d、麻醉诱导前30 min及手术后1 d行电针。分别于手术前1 d电针前(T1)、麻醉诱导前电针前(T2)、术毕(T3)和手术后1 d电针后(T4)4个时间采集患者空腹外周静脉血,用Sysmex血细胞分析仪对白细胞与中性粒细胞进行计数;ELISA检测急性期C反应蛋白(CRP)与热反应蛋白70(HSP70)以及细胞因子白介素6(IL-6)、干扰素(IFN-g)、白介素4(IL-4)水平,并计算IFN-g与IL-4比值;采用流式细胞仪测定CD4、CD8的细胞含量并计算两者比值。结果HSP70与CRP水平、白细胞数与中性粒细胞数、IL-4与IL-6水平变化趋势均一致,4组T1、T2时间比较,差异无统计学意义(P>0.05);A组与B组T3和T4时间比较,差异无统计学意义(P>0.05);C组、D组T3和T4时间显著低于A组与B组(P<0.05);D组T4时间显著低于C组(P<0.05);4组T2时间与T1时间比较差异无统计学意义(P>0.05),T3时间高于T2时间(P<0.05),T4时间低于T3时间(P<0.05)。IFN-g变化不显著(P>0.05),IFN-g/IL-4、CD4/CD8变化趋势与以上相反。结论电针术前使用对直肠癌患者无显著疗效,但能够减轻术后应激反应和免疫抑制,并且随着电针次数的合理增加疗效更加显著。     

基于VAS评价右美托咪定在宫颈癌根治术后镇痛及术后快速康复中的临床效果

目的:研究右美托咪定在宫颈癌根治术后镇痛及术后快速康复中的临床应用效果。方法:将2015年7月至2018年7月在本院行宫颈癌根治术的86例患者随机分为对照组和观察组各43例。对照组术后镇痛采用舒芬太尼和格拉司琼，观察组术后镇痛加用右美托咪定。采用视觉模拟评分法（VAS）评价患者术后1 h、6 h、12 h、24 h、48 h疼痛情况，采用Ramesay评分法评价患者不同时间点镇静状况，记录并比较两组患者不同时间点收缩压、舒张压、心率及呼吸频率变化，比较两组患者不良反应发生情况。结果:观察组患者术后6 h、12 h、24 h、48 h VAS评分均明显低于对照组（P＜0.05），Ramesay评分均明显高于对照组（P＜0.05）；观察组和对照组患者术后不同时间点呼吸频率比较，差异无统计学意义，但术后6 h、12 h、24 h观察组患者收缩压、心率均明显低于对照组（P＜0.05），术后1 h、6 h观察组患者舒张压明显低于对照组（P＜0.05）；观察组患者恶心呕吐、高血压发生率较对照组明显减低。结论:右美托咪定用于宫颈癌根治术后镇痛，可以提高镇痛镇静效果，稳定患者血流动力学，有助于术后快速康复。