Comparison of postoperative and outpatient opioid use in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis patients treated with posterior spinal fusion surgery and vertebral body tethering.

IF 1.6 Q3 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY
Natalie S Pulido, Todd A Milbrandt, A Noelle Larson
{"title":"Comparison of postoperative and outpatient opioid use in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis patients treated with posterior spinal fusion surgery and vertebral body tethering.","authors":"Natalie S Pulido, Todd A Milbrandt, A Noelle Larson","doi":"10.1007/s43390-024-01014-7","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Surgical treatments for adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS) include posterior spinal fusion (PSF) and vertebral body tethering (VBT), but there is limited data that compares pain between these groups. We aimed to compare postoperative pain between these patients through inpatient opioid use and opioid prescriptions post-discharge.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A retrospective review of patients diagnosed with AIS who underwent PSF or VBT surgery was reviewed to determine LOS, inpatient opioid use, and opioids prescribed post-discharge. Only PSF patients who received liposomal bupivacaine and intrathecal (IT) hydromorphone, and VBT patients who received a paravertebral catheter of lidocaine and in addition to IT hydromorphone were included. Opioid amounts were reported as oral morphine equivalents (OMEs).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of 198 AIS patients that met inclusion, there were 89 PSF and 109 VBT patients. PSF patients had an increased LOS by 0.6 days compared to VBT patients (p < 0.001). Patients in the PSF group were administered a mean of 30.0 OMEs/day compared with the VBT group who received 12.5 OMEs/day (p < 0.001). At discharge, PSF patients were initially prescribed a mean of 227.7 OMEs while VBT patients' mean prescription was 139.7 (p < 0.001). PSF patients received more refills (Χ<sup>2</sup> (1, n = 198) = 26.8, p < .001) and had a higher mean total of outpatient OMEs prescribed when compared to VBT patients (359.4 vs 185.8, p < 0.001).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>In AIS patients undergoing surgical correction, those who underwent PSF had longer LOS, received more inpatient OMEs, and were prescribed more OMEs both at initial discharge and total as an outpatient, when compared to VBT patients.</p><p><strong>Level of evidence: </strong>Level III: (retrospective cohort study).</p>","PeriodicalId":21796,"journal":{"name":"Spine deformity","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Spine deformity","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s43390-024-01014-7","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: Surgical treatments for adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS) include posterior spinal fusion (PSF) and vertebral body tethering (VBT), but there is limited data that compares pain between these groups. We aimed to compare postoperative pain between these patients through inpatient opioid use and opioid prescriptions post-discharge.

Methods: A retrospective review of patients diagnosed with AIS who underwent PSF or VBT surgery was reviewed to determine LOS, inpatient opioid use, and opioids prescribed post-discharge. Only PSF patients who received liposomal bupivacaine and intrathecal (IT) hydromorphone, and VBT patients who received a paravertebral catheter of lidocaine and in addition to IT hydromorphone were included. Opioid amounts were reported as oral morphine equivalents (OMEs).

Results: Of 198 AIS patients that met inclusion, there were 89 PSF and 109 VBT patients. PSF patients had an increased LOS by 0.6 days compared to VBT patients (p < 0.001). Patients in the PSF group were administered a mean of 30.0 OMEs/day compared with the VBT group who received 12.5 OMEs/day (p < 0.001). At discharge, PSF patients were initially prescribed a mean of 227.7 OMEs while VBT patients' mean prescription was 139.7 (p < 0.001). PSF patients received more refills (Χ2 (1, n = 198) = 26.8, p < .001) and had a higher mean total of outpatient OMEs prescribed when compared to VBT patients (359.4 vs 185.8, p < 0.001).

Conclusion: In AIS patients undergoing surgical correction, those who underwent PSF had longer LOS, received more inpatient OMEs, and were prescribed more OMEs both at initial discharge and total as an outpatient, when compared to VBT patients.

Level of evidence: Level III: (retrospective cohort study).

求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.20
自引率
18.80%
发文量
167
期刊介绍: Spine Deformity the official journal of the?Scoliosis Research Society is a peer-refereed publication to disseminate knowledge on basic science and clinical research into the?etiology?biomechanics?treatment?methods and outcomes of all types of?spinal deformities. The international members of the Editorial Board provide a worldwide perspective for the journal's area of interest.The?journal?will enhance the mission of the Society which is to foster the optimal care of all patients with?spine?deformities worldwide. Articles published in?Spine Deformity?are Medline indexed in PubMed.? The journal publishes original articles in the form of clinical and basic research. Spine Deformity will only publish studies that have institutional review board (IRB) or similar ethics committee approval for human and animal studies and have strictly observed these guidelines. The minimum follow-up period for follow-up clinical studies is 24 months.
×
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