AIMS:We investigated the effects of relaxation, music, and the combination of relaxation and music on postoperative pain, across and between two days and two activities (ambulation and rest) and across ambulation each day. This secondary analysis of a randomized controlled trial was conducted from 1995 to 1997.BACKGROUND:After surgery, patients do not always receive sufficient relief from opioids and may have undesired side-effects. More complete relief (10-30%) was found recently with adjuvant interventions of relaxation, music, and their combination. Comparison of effects between days and treatments have not been examined longitudinally.METHODS:With a repeated measures design, abdominal surgery patients (n = 468) in five US hospitals were assigned randomly to one of four groups; relaxation, music, their combination, and control. With institutional approval and written informed consent, subjects were interviewed and taught interventions preoperatively. Postoperative testing was at ambulation and rest on days 1 and 2 using visual analogue (VAS) sensation and distress of pain scales.RESULTS:Multivariate analysis indicated that although pain decreased by day 2, interventions were not different between days and activities. They were effective for pain across ambulation on each day, across ambulation and across rest over both days (all P < 0.001), and had similar effects by day and by activity.CONCLUSION:Nurses can safely recommend any of these interventions for pain on both postoperative days and at both ambulation and rest.

BACKGROUND:Improvement in patient outcome and reduced use of medical resources may result from using epidural anesthesia and analgesia as compared with general anesthesia and intravenous opioids, although the relative importance of intraoperative versus postoperative technique has not been studied. This prospective, double-masked, randomized clinical trial was designed to compare alternate combinations of intraoperative anesthesia and postoperative analgesia with respect to postoperative outcomes in patients undergoing surgery of the abdominal aorta.METHODS:One hundred sixty-eight patients undergoing surgery of the abdominal aorta were randomly assigned to receive either thoracic epidural anesthesia combined with a light general anesthesia or general anesthesia alone intraoperatively and either intravenous or epidural patient-controlled analgesia postoperatively (four treatment groups). Patient-controlled analgesia was continued for at least 72 h. Protocols were used to standardize perioperative medical management and to preserve masking intraoperatively and postoperatively. A uniform surveillance strategy was used for the identification of prospectively defined postoperative complications. Outcome evaluation included postoperative hospital length of stay, direct medical costs, selected postoperative morbidities, and postoperative recovery milestones.RESULTS:Length of stay and direct medical costs for patients surviving to discharge were similar among the four treatment groups. Postoperative outcomes were similar among the four treatment groups with respect to death, myocardial infarction, myocardial ischemia, reoperation, pneumonia, and renal failure. Epidural patient-controlled analgesia was associated with a significantly shorter time to extubation (P = 0.002). Times to intensive care unit discharge, ward admission, first bowel sounds, first flatus, tolerating clear liquids, tolerating regular diet, and independent ambulation were similar among the four treatment groups. Postoperative pain scores were also similar among the four treatment groups.CONCLUSIONS:In patients undergoing surgery of the abdominal aorta, thoracic epidural anesthesia combined with a light general anesthesia and followed by either intravenous or epidural patient-controlled analgesia, offers no major advantage or disadvantage when compared with general anesthesia alone followed by either intravenous or epidural patient-controlled analgesia.

Psychometric properties of the Sensation and Distress of Pain Visual Analogue Scales (VAS) are compared to dual numerical rating scales (NRS) with data from a randomized controlled trial of postoperative patients. On postoperative days 1 and 2, 15-minute test-retest reliability was .73 to .82 for the VAS and slightly lower for the NRS, r = .72 to .78, while convergent validity of the scales ranged from r = .90 to .92; construct validity of sensation and distress ranged from r = .72 to .85; and discriminant validity was lower, r = .65 to .78. Both instruments were significantly associated with pain reduction following treatment, p < .05 to .01. The VAS scores were significantly lower, p < .01 to .001, and more evenly distributed than NRS scores. It is recommended that the VAS be used in research to produce continuous scores that are more suited to parametric analysis.

Pain sensation and distress in 38 intestinal surgical patients were moderate to severe on postoperative day 1, ranging from 34 to 49 mm and 33 to 45 mm, respectively, on 100-mm scales. During ambulation, both increased from baseline to post-ambulation, P < 0.01. Half of the patients reported severe pain not relieved by analgesics, and although 44% learned a relaxation technique in the past, only 8% used one for pain after this surgery. Pain disturbed the sleep of 34% of the patients, and pain was related to respiratory, intestinal, febrile, and other complications in 18 (47%) subjects. Attentive analgesic use and nonpharmacologic therapies are recommended.

Two cases of inadvertent dural puncture in patients at high risk for dural puncture headache are presented. These patients were managed with an immediate epidural blood patch through a catheter placed at another level with placement of this catheter occurring immediately following the dural puncture. Following the blood patch, the patients were anesthetized with the epidural catheter being used for supplementation of the general anesthetic and for postoperative pain management. Neither patient required further management of a dural puncture headache nor did it appear that the blood interfered with the patients receiving adequate postoperative analgesia through the use of this epidural catheter.

The aim of this randomized controlled trial was to determine the effect of jaw relaxation, music and the combination of relaxation and music on postoperative pain after major abdominal surgery during ambulation and rest on postoperative days 1 and 2. Opioid medication provided for pain, following abdominal surgery, does not always give sufficient relief and can cause undesired side effects. Thus, additional interventions such as music and relaxation may provide more complete relief. Previous studies have found mixed results due to small sample sizes and other methodological problems. In a rigorous experimental design, 500 subjects aged 18-70 in five Midwestern hospitals were randomly assigned by minimization to a relaxation, music, relaxation plus music, or control group. Interventions were taught preoperatively and tested postoperatively. The same amount of time was spent with subjects in the control group. Pain was measured with the visual analogue sensation and distress of pain scales. Demographic and surgical variables, and milligrams of parenteral or oral opioids in effect at the time of testing were not significantly different between the groups, nor did they correlate with pain scores. Controlling for pretest sensation and distress, orthogonal a priori contrasts and multivariate analysis of covariance indicated that the three treatment groups had significantly less pain than the controls, (P = 0.028-0.000) which was confirmed by the univariate analysis of covariance (P = 0.018-0.000). Post hoc multivariate analysis revealed that the combination group had significantly less sensation and distress of pain than the control group on all post-tests (P = 0.035-0.000), and the relaxation and music groups had significantly less on all tests (P = 0.022-0.000) except after ambulation. At post ambulation those using relaxation did not have significantly less pain than the controls on both days and those using music did not on day 1, although there were some univariate effects. A corresponding significant decrease in mastery of the interventions from pre to post ambulation suggests the need for reminders to focus on the intervention during this increased activity. Physicians and nurses preparing patients for surgery and caring for them afterward, should encourage patients to use relaxation and music as adjuvants to medication for postoperative pain.

This study was designed to determine and compare the dose-response characteristics, speed of onset, and relative potency of single-dose epidural fentanyl (F) and sufentanil (S) for postoperative pain relief. Eighty women undergoing cesarean section (C/S) with epidural 2% lidocaine with epinephrine (1:200,000) were randomly assigned to receive double-blind epidural administration of F (25, 50, 100, or 200 micro g) or S (5, 10, 20, or 30 micro g) (n = 10 per group) upon complaint of pain postoperatively. Visual analog scales (VAS, 0-100 mm) were used to assess pain and sedation at baseline; at 3, 6, 9, 12, 15, 20, 25, 30, 45, and 60 min; and every 30 min until further analgesia was requested. The study was terminated at 30 min if satisfactory analgesia was not achieved. Side effects were recorded. A dose-response was demonstrated for both opioids. F 25 micro g and S 5 micro g were ineffective, with significantly fewer women achieving VAS scores <10 mm (P < 0.05 compared with F 100 or 200 micro g and S 20 or 30 micro g). F 100 and 200 micro g and S 20 and 30 micro g all achieved VAS scores <10 mm in all women with no differences in time to 50% reduction in VAS (mean 11-16 min) and no differences in duration of analgesia (mean 117-138 min). The 50% and 95% effective dose values for each opioid to achieve a VAS score <10 mm were F 33 micro g and 92 micro g and S 6.7 micro g and 17.5 micro g. There were no differences among groups in sedation scores or side effects. Our data suggest that the relative analgesic potency of epidural S:F is approximately 5 and that there are no differences between the opioids in the onset, duration, and effectiveness of analgesia when equianalgesic doses are administered postoperatively after lidocaine anesthesia for C/S. (Anesth Analg 1997;85:365-71)

OBJECTIVES:To determine the effect of shortened hospital stay after radical retropubic prostatectomy on costs, adverse surgical outcomes, and patient satisfaction.METHODS:The effect of changes in preoperative counseling, perioperative care, and analgesic management on hospital length of stay; mean cost per case and cost per hospital day; and 30-day complication, hospital readmission, and mortality rates were analyzed for a consecutive sample of 374 patients undergoing radical prostatectomy between July 1989 and November 1995. Satisfaction with length of stay, analgesic regimen, and surgical outcome was assessed in a random subset of 150 patients by anonymous questionnaire.RESULTS:Length of stay (LOS) was shortened from a median 7 to 2 nights after surgery during the study (P < 0.0001), whereas the acute complication, 30-day readmission, and 30-day mortality rates remained constant. Reducing LOS resulted in a 43% decrease in mean cost per case while mean cost per day increased by 22% to 35%. Overall patient satisfaction was high, with 83.5% of patients rating LOS as "just right" and 89.2% reporting they were "satisfied" or "very satisfied" with their pain control after surgery.CONCLUSIONS:Shortened LOS after radical retropubic prostatectomy can be accomplished safely and can meet with high levels of patient satisfaction while significantly reducing hospital-related costs. The potential for further incremental reductions in cost with reductions in LOS to less than 2 nights appears to be small, and future efforts at cost reduction for this procedure should center on decreasing the intensity of care during hospitalization.

Background and Objectives. Thoracotomy is associated with pain and compromised pulmonary function. Intercostal nerve blocks (INB) and subarachnoid morphine (SM) act on different portions of the pain pathway. Each is effective for post-thoracotomy pain relief. The combination of these two modalities in relieving post-thoracotomy pain and improving postoperative pulmonary function has not been investigated. Methods. In a double-blind study, 20 patients undergoing lateral thoracotomy for lung resection were randomized to receive 0.5 mg SM preoperatively and INB with bupivacaine (INB+) prior to wound closure or 0.5 mg SM with INB using saline (INB-). Visual analog scale pain scores at rest, with cough, and with movement of the ipsilateral arm, forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1), and forced vital capacity (FVC) were measured at 4, 24, 48, and 72 hours after the operation. Opioid use was measured during the initial 24 hours after the operation. Results. At 4 hours, the INB+ group demonstrated better FEV1 (56.6% vs. 40.4% of baseline, P < .05) and FVC values (54.6% vs. 39.6% of baseline, P < .05) and less resting and cough pain (P < .05). However, FEV1 continued to decline in the INB+ group at 24 hours to lower than the INB- group although pain scores were similar beyond 4 hours. Opioid usage during the first 24 hours was similar (INB-, 16.7 mg vs. INB+, 13.2 mg, P = .7). Conclusions. Although postoperative INB provided modest improvements in pain and pulmonary function when used as an adjuvant to 0.5 mg SM for post-thoracotomy analgesia, the benefits were transient. The authors do not recommend adding INB for patients undergoing lateral thoracotomy who receive 0.5 mg SM.

Background and Objectives. The authors studied the efficacy of sufentanil patient-controlled epidural analgesia (PCEA) for postoperative analgesia after cesarean delivery and compared these results to a morphine intravenous-patient-controlled-analgesia (IV-PCA) regimen. Methods. Fifty patients were randomized into two groups to receive sufentanil PCEA or morphine IV-PCA after cesarean delivery under epidural anesthesia. Visual-analog-scale pain scores (0-100 mm: 0 mm = no pain, 100 mm = worst pain), sedation, side effects, recovery times, and patient satisfaction were assessed through 4 p.m. on postoperative day (POD) 2. Results. Analgesia was similar in the two groups, except following the initial physician-administered loading dose when pain was rated significantly lower by patients in the PCEA group at 30 minutes (6 +/-2 mm versus 38 +/- 6 nun; P < .01) and at 2 hours (7 +/- 2 mm versus 27 +/- 5 mm; P < .05). Sedation was rated lower by patients in the PCEA group at 2 hours (P < .05). The incidence of nausea and vomiting was similar in both groups. The incidence of pruritus requiring treatment was greater in the PCEA group (57% versus 12%; P < .01). Length of hospitalization was not different. Patients were equally satisfied in both groups. Conclusions. Although sufentanil PCEA provided satisfactory sustained postoperative analgesia, sufentanil PCEA appears to offer no clear advantage over morphine IV-PCA beyond the effects of the initial physician-administered loading dose.

Background: Opioids, although effective postoperative analgesics, are associated with undesirable side effects. In an attempt to determine whether adjuvant, nonopioid medication would permit a reduction of the amount of fentanyl required for postoperative analgesia, the efficacy of ketorolac, an injectable nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drug, was studied as an adjuvant to fentanyl patient-controlled epidural analgesia (PCEA) for postoperative pain management following radical retropubic prostatectomy.Methods: Forty patients were randomized into two groups to receive fentanyl PCEA and either ketorolac 30 mg intra-muscularly every 6 h after an initial dose of 60 mg (n = 20) or placebo (n = 20) for 72 h. Visual analogue scale pain scores (0-100 mm; 0 mm = no pain; 100 mm = worst pain), sedation, fentanyl usage, gastrointestinal function, complications, blood loss, and temperature were assessed four times each day.Results: Visual analogue scale (VAS) pain scores at rest were lower in the ketorolac group during the first 4 h (P < 0.01), but were similar thereafter. Global VAS pain scores with activity were lower in the ketorolac group on postoperative day 1 (23 +/- 4 vs. 39 +/- 6; P < 0.05) and postoperative day 2 (17 +/- 3 vs. 29 +/- 4; P < 0.05). Bladder spasm pain occurred less frequently in the ketorolac group (1 vs. 9 patients; P < 0.05). Fentanyl usage was less in the ketorolac group throughout the study (33 +/- 3 vs. 50 +/- 6 mug/h, 0-24 h; 20 +/- 2 vs. 36 +/- 6 mug/h, 24-48 h; 12 +/- 2 vs. 24 +/- 6 mug/h, 48-72 h; P < 0.05). Sedation scores and side effects were similar, except on postoperative day 3 when nausea was less frequent in the ketorolac group (0 vs. 6 patients; P < 0.05). Recovery of gastrointestinal function occurred sooner in the ketorolac group as determined hy first bowel sounds (26 +/- 3 vs. 38 +/- 4 h; P < 0.05), first clear liquids (51 +/- 2 vs. 65 +/- 3 h; P < 0.01), and first regular meal (95 +/- 4 vs. 110 +/- 4 h; P < 0.05). There was no significant difference in blood loss, transfusion requirement, hematocrit, platelet count, or temperature. There was high overall satisfaction in both groups, hut fewer patients in the ketorolac group rated pain with walking as usually or always painful (1 vs. 9 patients; P < 0.05).Conclusions: Ketorolac is a beneficial adjuvant to fentanyl PCEA for postoperative pain management after radical retropubic prostatectomy.

PURPOSE:This study was undertaken to determine the efficacy of celiac plexus block (CPB) as a method of providing analgesia for percutaneous biliary drainage (PBD).PATIENTS AND METHODS:Thirty-two patients scheduled to undergo PBD were prospectively assigned randomly into placebo (30 mL of normal saline) and treatment (30 mL of 0.25% bupivacaine) CPB groups. Each patient received .03 mg/kg of midazolam for premedication before PBD and had access to a patient-controlled analgesia pump during the procedure. The pump was set to deliver 0.2 mg of midazolam and 25 micrograms of fentanyl per dose with a 3-minute lockout time. Vital signs, including heart rate and blood pressure, were continuously monitored during the procedure and recorded for comparison with baseline values. Patients completed a 10-point visual analogue pain scale following completion of their procedure.RESULTS:Patients in the placebo and treatment groups self-administered a mean of 2.0 and 1.85 mg of midazolam, respectively (P = .40), and a mean of 247 and 231 micrograms of fentanyl, respectively (P = .40). On a 10-point pain scale, the mean postprocedure versus preprocedure elevation in pain was 2.1 points in the placebo group versus 1.6 points in the treatment group (P = .60). Overall, the degree of satisfaction with the analgesia was equal in both groups.CONCLUSION:This study indicates that CPB is not an effective means of providing additional visceral pain relief over and above that which can be accomplished with self-administered intravenous medication for patients who undergo PBD.