Comparing modalities of opioid education in patients undergoing total knee arthroplasty: a randomized pilot trial.

analgesics, opioid pain, postoperative patient education as topic regional anesthesia

Journal

Regional anesthesia and pain medicine
ISSN: 1532-8651
Titre abrégé: Reg Anesth Pain Med
Pays: England
ID NLM: 9804508

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
26 Sep 2024
Historique:
received: 22 05 2024
accepted: 19 08 2024
medline: 27 9 2024
pubmed: 27 9 2024
entrez: 26 9 2024
Statut: aheadofprint

Résumé

Patients undergoing total knee arthroplasty (TKA) experience significant postoperative pain and routinely require opioids, yet they often lack knowledge regarding appropriate use and handling of these medications. Evidence suggests that educational interventions in various formats may help reinforce proper usage and improve postoperative pain control. The aim of this study is to compare the institution standard of care (webinar) with two novel educational interventions-one in-person and the other a video recording-that focus specifically on the use of opioids and pain control. This prospective, randomized pilot study included 42 patients undergoing TKA. Patients were randomized into one of three groups: (1) webinar: 50 min virtual session standard of care at Hospital for Special Surgery (HSS), (2) in-person education, or (3) video education. The primary outcomes of this study were the number of opioid refill requests through postoperative day (POD) 30 and POD 60. The secondary outcomes evaluated Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) pain scores, opioid consumption in oral morphine equivalents (OME), surveys on medication usage and opioid knowledge, reported medication storage and disposal. We hypothesize that the novel educational interventions, presented either in-person or by video, will lead to a decrease in opioid refills within 60 days compared with current education delivered through virtual webinar. No significant differences were found among groups in the number of opioid refill requests, average NRS pain score, or OME consumption at any time point. Opioid refill requests ranged from 0% to 16.7% at POD 30 (Fisher's exact test, p=0.625) and from 0% to 8.3% at POD 60 (p=1.000). The median opioid refill request was zero requests per group from POD 21 to 60 (webinar 0 (0.0, 0.0), in-person 0 (0.0, 0.0), video 0 (0.0, 0.0), Kruskal-Wallis test, p=0.381). Average NRS pain scores were 5 or below for all groups on POD 1, 7 and 14. By POD 7, all groups had an average daily intake OME of 14 or below. Overall, patients in each group did well with postoperative pain management after TKA and had minimal opioid refill requests. There were no statistically significant differences in outcomes of NRS pain scores or opioid usage among groups suggesting that educational interventions were similarly effective. As a pilot trial, study demonstrated successful recruitment and retention of participants, and important feedback was elicited from patients regarding education, as well. Of note, this was a pilot study and was likely underpowered to detect a difference. NCT05593341.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND BACKGROUND
Patients undergoing total knee arthroplasty (TKA) experience significant postoperative pain and routinely require opioids, yet they often lack knowledge regarding appropriate use and handling of these medications. Evidence suggests that educational interventions in various formats may help reinforce proper usage and improve postoperative pain control. The aim of this study is to compare the institution standard of care (webinar) with two novel educational interventions-one in-person and the other a video recording-that focus specifically on the use of opioids and pain control.
METHODS METHODS
This prospective, randomized pilot study included 42 patients undergoing TKA. Patients were randomized into one of three groups: (1) webinar: 50 min virtual session standard of care at Hospital for Special Surgery (HSS), (2) in-person education, or (3) video education. The primary outcomes of this study were the number of opioid refill requests through postoperative day (POD) 30 and POD 60. The secondary outcomes evaluated Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) pain scores, opioid consumption in oral morphine equivalents (OME), surveys on medication usage and opioid knowledge, reported medication storage and disposal. We hypothesize that the novel educational interventions, presented either in-person or by video, will lead to a decrease in opioid refills within 60 days compared with current education delivered through virtual webinar.
RESULTS RESULTS
No significant differences were found among groups in the number of opioid refill requests, average NRS pain score, or OME consumption at any time point. Opioid refill requests ranged from 0% to 16.7% at POD 30 (Fisher's exact test, p=0.625) and from 0% to 8.3% at POD 60 (p=1.000). The median opioid refill request was zero requests per group from POD 21 to 60 (webinar 0 (0.0, 0.0), in-person 0 (0.0, 0.0), video 0 (0.0, 0.0), Kruskal-Wallis test, p=0.381). Average NRS pain scores were 5 or below for all groups on POD 1, 7 and 14. By POD 7, all groups had an average daily intake OME of 14 or below.
CONCLUSIONS CONCLUSIONS
Overall, patients in each group did well with postoperative pain management after TKA and had minimal opioid refill requests. There were no statistically significant differences in outcomes of NRS pain scores or opioid usage among groups suggesting that educational interventions were similarly effective. As a pilot trial, study demonstrated successful recruitment and retention of participants, and important feedback was elicited from patients regarding education, as well. Of note, this was a pilot study and was likely underpowered to detect a difference.
TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER BACKGROUND
NCT05593341.

Identifiants

pubmed: 39327049
pii: rapm-2024-105701
doi: 10.1136/rapm-2024-105701
pii:
doi:

Banques de données

ClinicalTrials.gov
['NCT05593341']

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Informations de copyright

© American Society of Regional Anesthesia & Pain Medicine 2024. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.

Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts

Competing interests: None declared.

Auteurs

Miriam Sheetz (M)

Department of Anesthesiology, Critical Care & Pain Management, Hospital for Special Surgery, New York, New York, USA.

Angela Puglisi (A)

Department of Anesthesiology, Critical Care & Pain Management, Hospital for Special Surgery, New York, New York, USA.

Mark Trentalange (M)

Department of Anesthesiology, Critical Care & Pain Management, Hospital for Special Surgery, New York, New York, USA.
Department of Anesthesiology, James J Peters VA Medical Center, New York, New York, USA.

Julia Reichel (J)

Department of Anesthesiology, Critical Care & Pain Management, Hospital for Special Surgery, New York, New York, USA.

Brian Chalmers (B)

Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Adult Reconstruction and Joint Replacement, Hospital for Special Surgery, New York, NY, USA.

Alejandro Gonzalez Della Valle (A)

Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Adult Reconstruction and Joint Replacement, Hospital for Special Surgery, New York, NY, USA.

Alexandra Sideris (A)

Department of Anesthesiology, Critical Care & Pain Management, Hospital for Special Surgery, New York, New York, USA.
Pain Prevention Research Center, Hospital for Special Surgery, New York, NY, USA.

Bradley H Lee (BH)

Department of Anesthesiology, Critical Care & Pain Management, Hospital for Special Surgery, New York, New York, USA leeb@hss.edu.
Department of Anesthesiology, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, New York, USA.

Classifications MeSH