Acute postoperative pain management techniques, their efficacy and complications after major gastrointestinal and hepato-pancreato-biliary cancer surgeries: An observational study.

IF 1.2 Q3 SURGERY
Journal of perioperative practice Pub Date : 2024-06-01 Epub Date: 2024-02-12 DOI:10.1177/17504589231224563
Reshma Ambulkar, Satya Kumar Moharana, Sohan Lal Solanki, Bindiya G Salunke, Vandana Agarwal
{"title":"Acute postoperative pain management techniques, their efficacy and complications after major gastrointestinal and hepato-pancreato-biliary cancer surgeries: An observational study.","authors":"Reshma Ambulkar, Satya Kumar Moharana, Sohan Lal Solanki, Bindiya G Salunke, Vandana Agarwal","doi":"10.1177/17504589231224563","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Patients undergoing major gastrointestinal (GI) surgery including hepato-pancreato-biliary (HPB) surgeries have large incisions, which cause severe acute postoperative pain that, if untreated, is associated with a higher incidence of postoperative morbidity and delayed recovery.</p><p><strong>Methodology: </strong>Our study included all patients who underwent elective major upper GI and HPB surgeries from 1 January 2018 to 31 December 2018. The patients were divided into two groups: the epidural and the non-epidural group. The average and worst pain scores at rest and movement were compared between both groups. We also studied the effect of pain relief in the two groups and associated postoperative outcomes, resumption of feeding, ambulation, hospital stay and intensive care unit stay.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 566 patients were included in the study, out of which 490 received epidurals, and the rest, 76, belonged to the non-epidural group (transversus abdominis plane, rectus sheath block or no regional analgesia technique). The median average pain score at rest and movement was 2.0 and 3.0, respectively, in the epidural and non-epidural groups. The postoperative outcomes showed no statistical difference.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The epidural group and the non-epidural group had similar pain scores, and the postoperative outcomes were also comparable.</p>","PeriodicalId":35481,"journal":{"name":"Journal of perioperative practice","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of perioperative practice","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/17504589231224563","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/2/12 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Patients undergoing major gastrointestinal (GI) surgery including hepato-pancreato-biliary (HPB) surgeries have large incisions, which cause severe acute postoperative pain that, if untreated, is associated with a higher incidence of postoperative morbidity and delayed recovery.

Methodology: Our study included all patients who underwent elective major upper GI and HPB surgeries from 1 January 2018 to 31 December 2018. The patients were divided into two groups: the epidural and the non-epidural group. The average and worst pain scores at rest and movement were compared between both groups. We also studied the effect of pain relief in the two groups and associated postoperative outcomes, resumption of feeding, ambulation, hospital stay and intensive care unit stay.

Results: A total of 566 patients were included in the study, out of which 490 received epidurals, and the rest, 76, belonged to the non-epidural group (transversus abdominis plane, rectus sheath block or no regional analgesia technique). The median average pain score at rest and movement was 2.0 and 3.0, respectively, in the epidural and non-epidural groups. The postoperative outcomes showed no statistical difference.

Conclusion: The epidural group and the non-epidural group had similar pain scores, and the postoperative outcomes were also comparable.

大型胃肠道和肝胰胆肿瘤手术后的急性术后止痛技术、其疗效和并发症:一项观察性研究。
背景:接受胃肠道(GI)大手术(包括肝胰胆(HPB)手术)的患者切口较大,术后会出现剧烈的急性疼痛,如不及时治疗,术后发病率和恢复延迟的发生率较高:我们的研究纳入了2018年1月1日至2018年12月31日期间所有接受择期上消化道大手术和HPB手术的患者。患者分为两组:硬膜外组和非硬膜外组。比较了两组患者在休息和运动时的平均和最严重疼痛评分。我们还研究了两组患者的镇痛效果以及相关的术后结果、恢复进食、行走、住院时间和重症监护室住院时间:研究共纳入了 566 名患者,其中 490 人接受了硬膜外麻醉,其余 76 人属于非硬膜外麻醉组(腹横肌平面、直肌鞘阻滞或无区域镇痛技术)。硬膜外麻醉组和非硬膜外麻醉组在休息和运动时的平均疼痛评分中位数分别为 2.0 和 3.0。术后结果无统计学差异:结论:硬膜外麻醉组和非硬膜外麻醉组的疼痛评分相似,术后效果也相当。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of perioperative practice
Journal of perioperative practice Nursing-Medical and Surgical Nursing
CiteScore
1.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
59
期刊介绍: The Journal of Perioperative Practice (JPP) is the official journal of the Association for Perioperative Practice (AfPP). It is an international, peer reviewed journal with a multidisciplinary ethos across all aspects of perioperative care. The overall aim of the journal is to improve patient safety through informing and developing practice. It is an informative professional journal which provides current evidence-based practice, clinical, management and educational developments for practitioners working in the perioperative environment. The journal promotes perioperative practice by publishing clinical research-based articles, literature reviews, topical discussions, advice on clinical issues, current news items and product information.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信