A Mixed-Methods Study of the Effect of Abdominal Binders on Opioid Use and Postoperative Pain After Cesarean Birth

ObjectiveTo compare levels of postoperative oxycodone use and incisional pain between two randomized groups—an intervention and a control.DesignMixed-methods design; quantitative data achieved via a randomized controlled trial, with qualitative data collected on binder use. The primary variable was oxycodone (in milligrams) required during the first 48 hours after birth, and the secondary variable was incisional pain levels measured on Postoperative Days 1 and 2.SettingAcute-care community hospital in Wheat Ridge, Colorado, and an acute care urban hospital in Denver, Colorado.ParticipantsA total of 220 individuals in the postpartum period after having cesarean birth.Interventions/MeasurementsParticipants were randomized to the intervention group (binder) or the control group (no binder). Data were collected on opioid usage for the first 48 hours. Participants in both groups were asked to rate their incisional pain on Postoperative Day 1 (24 hours after birth) and Postoperative Day 2 (48 hours after birth). Participants in the binder group were also asked to provide feedback on their experience wearing the binder.ResultsA total of 196 participants completed the study. The overall amount of oxycodone taken by individuals in the binder group was lower than that in the control group, but the difference was not statistically significant (p = .10). Pain scores in the binder group were significantly lower on Day 2 compared with the control group (p = .002). The majority of individuals in the binder group provided positive feedback about their experience wearing the binder.ConclusionIndividuals routinely receive medications to assist with pain management postoperatively. Because of growing concerns related to the nation’s opioid addiction crisis, there is interest in using multimodal treatments to achieve adequate pain control for individuals postoperatively. Abdominal binders are a low-cost intervention to assist with pain management and, given the results of this study, seem like a reasonable option to consider.     

Priorities for content for a short-course on postoperative care relevant for low- and middle-income countries: an e-Delphi process with training facilitators

Most surgical and anaesthetic mortality and morbidity occurs postoperatively, disproportionately affecting low- and middle-income countries. Various short courses have been developed to improve patient outcomes in low- and middle-income countries, but none specifically to address postoperative care and complications. We aimed to identify key features of a proposed short-course addressing this topic using a Delphi process with low- and middle-income country anaesthesia providers trained as short-course facilitators. An initial questionnaire was co-developed from literature review and exploratory workshops to include 108 potential course features. Features included content; teaching method; appropriate participants; and appropriate faculty. Over three Delphi rounds (panellists numbered 86, 64 and 35 in successive cycles), panellists indicated which features they considered most important. Responses were analysed by geographical regions: Africa, the Americas, south-east Asia and Western Pacific. Ultimately, panellists identified 60, 40 and 54 core features for the proposed course in each region, respectively. There were high levels of consensus within regions on what constituted core course content, but not between regions. All panellists preferred the small group workshop teaching method irrespective of region. All regions considered anaesthetists to be key facilitators, while all agreed that both anaesthetists and operating theatre nurses were key participants. The African and Americas regional panels recommended more multidisciplinary healthcare professionals for participant roles. Faculty from high-income countries were not considered high priority. Our study highlights variability between geographical regions as to which course features were perceived as most locally relevant, supporting regional adaptation of short-course design rather than a one-size-fits-all model.     

Atrial fibrillation after cardiac surgery: A systematic review and meta-analysis

ObjectiveNew-onset postoperative atrial fibrillation (POAF) after cardiac surgery is common, with rates up to 60%. POAF has been associated with early and late stroke, but its association with other cardiovascular outcomes is less known. The objective was to perform a meta-analysis of the studies reporting the association of POAF with perioperative and long-term outcomes in patients with cardiac surgery.MethodsWe performed a systematic review and a meta-analysis of studies that presented outcomes for cardiac surgery on the basis of the presence or absence of POAF. MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library were assessed; 57 studies (246,340 patients) were selected. Perioperative mortality was the primary outcome. Inverse variance method and random model were performed. Leave-one-out analysis, subgroup analyses, and metaregression were conducted.ResultsPOAF was associated with perioperative mortality (odds ratio [OR], 1.92; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.58-2.33), perioperative stroke (OR, 2.17; 95% CI, 1.90-2.49), perioperative myocardial infarction (OR, 1.28; 95% CI, 1.06-1.54), perioperative acute renal failure (OR, 2.74; 95% CI, 2.42-3.11), hospital (standardized mean difference, 0.80; 95% CI, 0.53-1.07) and intensive care unit stay (standardized mean difference, 0.55; 95% CI, 0.24-0.86), long-term mortality (incidence rate ratio [IRR], 1.54; 95% CI, 1.40-1.69), long-term stroke (IRR, 1.33; 95% CI, 1.21-1.46), and longstanding persistent atrial fibrillation (IRR, 4.73; 95% CI, 3.36-6.66).ConclusionsThe results suggest that POAF after cardiac surgery is associated with an increased occurrence of most short- and long-term cardiovascular adverse events. However, the causality of this association remains to be established.     

Patient navigation across the cancer care continuum: An overview of systematic reviews and emerging literature

Patient navigation is a strategy for overcoming barriers to reduce disparities and to improve access and outcomes. The aim of this umbrella review was to identify, critically appraise, synthesize, and present the best available evidence to inform policy and planning regarding patient navigation across the cancer continuum. Systematic reviews examining navigation in cancer care were identified in the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), PubMed, Embase, Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health (CINAHL), Epistemonikos, and Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO) databases and in the gray literature from January 1, 2012, to April 19, 2022. Data were screened, extracted, and appraised independently by two authors. The JBI Critical Appraisal Checklist for Systematic Review and Research Syntheses was used for quality appraisal. Emerging literature up to May 25, 2022, was also explored to capture primary research published beyond the coverage of included systematic reviews. Of the 2062 unique records identified, 61 systematic reviews were included. Fifty-four reviews were quantitative or mixed-methods reviews, reporting on the effectiveness of cancer patient navigation, including 12 reviews reporting costs or cost-effectiveness outcomes. Seven qualitative reviews explored navigation needs, barriers, and experiences. In addition, 53 primary studies published since 2021 were included. Patient navigation is effective in improving participation in cancer screening and reducing the time from screening to diagnosis and from diagnosis to treatment initiation. Emerging evidence suggests that patient navigation improves quality of life and patient satisfaction with care in the survivorship phase and reduces hospital readmission in the active treatment and survivorship care phases. Palliative care data were extremely limited. Economic evaluations from the United States suggest the potential cost-effectiveness of navigation in screening programs.     

Hirschsprung-associated inflammatory bowel disease: A multicenter study from the APSA Hirschsprung disease interest group

Background/PurposeA small number of Hirschsprung disease (HD) patients develop inflammatory bowel disease (IBD)-like symptoms after pullthrough surgery. The etiology and pathophysiology of Hirschsprung-associated IBD (HD-IBD) remains unknown. This study aims to further characterize HD-IBD, to identify potential risk factors and to evaluate response to treatment in a large group of patients.MethodsRetrospective study of patients diagnosed with IBD after pullthrough surgery between 2000 and 2021 at 17 institutions. Data regarding clinical presentation and course of HD and IBD were reviewed. Effectiveness of medical therapy for IBD was recorded using a Likert scale.ResultsThere were 55 patients (78% male). 50% (n = 28) had long segment disease. Hirschsprung-associated enterocolitis (HAEC) was reported in 68% (n = 36). Ten patients (18%) had Trisomy 21. IBD was diagnosed after age 5 in 63% (n = 34). IBD presentation consisted of colonic or small bowel inflammation resembling IBD in 69% (n = 38), unexplained or persistent fistula in 18% (n = 10) and unexplained HAEC >5 years old or unresponsive to standard treatment in 13% (n = 7). Biological agents were the most effective (80%) medications. A third of patients required a surgical procedure for IBD.ConclusionMore than half of the patients were diagnosed with HD-IBD after 5 years old. Long segment disease, HAEC after pull through operation and trisomy 21 may represent risk factors for this condition. Investigation for possible IBD should be considered in children with unexplained fistulae, HAEC beyond the age of 5 or unresponsive to standard therapy, and symptoms suggestive of IBD. Biological agents were the most effective medical treatment.Level of EvidenceLevel 4