The implementation of intrathecal morphine for caesarean delivery into clinical practice, and assessment of its impact on patient-reported quality of recovery using the ObsQoR-10-Dutch scale: A single-centre cohort study.

IF 6.8 2区 医学 Q1 ANESTHESIOLOGY
European Journal of Anaesthesiology Pub Date : 2025-04-01 Epub Date: 2025-01-29 DOI:10.1097/EJA.0000000000002127
Oscar F C van den Bosch, Mienke Rijsdijk, Suzanne E Rosier, Lottie van Baal, Timme P Schaap, Pervez Sultan, Wolfgang Bühre
{"title":"The implementation of intrathecal morphine for caesarean delivery into clinical practice, and assessment of its impact on patient-reported quality of recovery using the ObsQoR-10-Dutch scale: A single-centre cohort study.","authors":"Oscar F C van den Bosch, Mienke Rijsdijk, Suzanne E Rosier, Lottie van Baal, Timme P Schaap, Pervez Sultan, Wolfgang Bühre","doi":"10.1097/EJA.0000000000002127","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Optimising a mother's quality of recovery following caesarean delivery is of paramount importance as it facilitates maternal care of the newborn and affects physical, psychological and emotional well being. Intrathecal morphine (ITM) reduces postoperative pain and may improve quality of recovery: however its widespread use is limited.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To assess the effects of implementing ITM for caesarean delivery on postoperative quality of recovery.</p><p><strong>Study design: </strong>Single-centre observational before-after study.</p><p><strong>Setting: </strong>Tertiary university hospital, the Netherlands, January 2023 until April 2024.</p><p><strong>Study population: </strong>Patients who underwent caesarean delivery under spinal anaesthesia.</p><p><strong>Intervention: </strong>Patients recruited before implementation of ITM ( n  = 55) received patient-controlled intravenous analgesia with morphine or continuation of epidural analgesia previously used for labour ('pre-ITM group'). Patients recruited after implementation of ITM ( n  = 47) received ITM 100 μg and oral morphine tablets 10 mg as needed ('ITM group').</p><p><strong>Outcomes: </strong>Primary outcome was the score on the Obstetric Quality of Recovery (ObsQoR-10-Dutch) questionnaire (0 to 100). Secondary outcomes included ObsQoR-10 subscores, length of stay, opioid consumption and self-reported general health score (0 to 100).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Protocol adherence for ITM was 98%. Quality of recovery improved significantly [ObsQoR-10 scores pre-ITM 65 ± 16 vs. ITM 74 ± 13 points, mean difference 9.0 (95% CI, 3.1 to 15] points, P  = 0.002], with improvement in pain scores, physical comfort, independence and psychological wellbeing. In multivariate analysis, the improvement was 6.3 (95% CI, 0.37 to 12.2] points, which was statistically significant but did not reach the predefined threshold for clinical relevance. There was, however, an improvement in self-reported general health score (57 ± 18 vs. 68 ± 17, P  = 0.002), median [IQR] length of hospital stay (41 [36 to 51] vs. 37 [32 to 49] h, P  = 0.032) and median [IQR] opioid consumption (52 [35 to 73] vs. 0 [0 to 0] mg, P  < 0.001).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Implementing ITM for caesarean delivery resulted in moderate improvements in obstetric recovery and reduced opioid consumption. Cautious interpretation is warranted given the nonrandomised design of this implementation study. Our findings support the use of ITM in a multimodal analgesia strategy for patients undergoing caesarean delivery.</p>","PeriodicalId":11920,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Anaesthesiology","volume":" ","pages":"332-339"},"PeriodicalIF":6.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11872268/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Journal of Anaesthesiology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/EJA.0000000000002127","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/29 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ANESTHESIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Optimising a mother's quality of recovery following caesarean delivery is of paramount importance as it facilitates maternal care of the newborn and affects physical, psychological and emotional well being. Intrathecal morphine (ITM) reduces postoperative pain and may improve quality of recovery: however its widespread use is limited.

Objective: To assess the effects of implementing ITM for caesarean delivery on postoperative quality of recovery.

Study design: Single-centre observational before-after study.

Setting: Tertiary university hospital, the Netherlands, January 2023 until April 2024.

Study population: Patients who underwent caesarean delivery under spinal anaesthesia.

Intervention: Patients recruited before implementation of ITM ( n  = 55) received patient-controlled intravenous analgesia with morphine or continuation of epidural analgesia previously used for labour ('pre-ITM group'). Patients recruited after implementation of ITM ( n  = 47) received ITM 100 μg and oral morphine tablets 10 mg as needed ('ITM group').

Outcomes: Primary outcome was the score on the Obstetric Quality of Recovery (ObsQoR-10-Dutch) questionnaire (0 to 100). Secondary outcomes included ObsQoR-10 subscores, length of stay, opioid consumption and self-reported general health score (0 to 100).

Results: Protocol adherence for ITM was 98%. Quality of recovery improved significantly [ObsQoR-10 scores pre-ITM 65 ± 16 vs. ITM 74 ± 13 points, mean difference 9.0 (95% CI, 3.1 to 15] points, P  = 0.002], with improvement in pain scores, physical comfort, independence and psychological wellbeing. In multivariate analysis, the improvement was 6.3 (95% CI, 0.37 to 12.2] points, which was statistically significant but did not reach the predefined threshold for clinical relevance. There was, however, an improvement in self-reported general health score (57 ± 18 vs. 68 ± 17, P  = 0.002), median [IQR] length of hospital stay (41 [36 to 51] vs. 37 [32 to 49] h, P  = 0.032) and median [IQR] opioid consumption (52 [35 to 73] vs. 0 [0 to 0] mg, P  < 0.001).

Conclusions: Implementing ITM for caesarean delivery resulted in moderate improvements in obstetric recovery and reduced opioid consumption. Cautious interpretation is warranted given the nonrandomised design of this implementation study. Our findings support the use of ITM in a multimodal analgesia strategy for patients undergoing caesarean delivery.

应用obsqor -10荷兰量表评估剖宫产鞘内吗啡对患者报告的恢复质量的影响。
背景:优化剖宫产后母亲的恢复质量是至关重要的,因为它有利于新生儿的产妇护理,并影响身体,心理和情绪健康。鞘内吗啡(ITM)可减轻术后疼痛,提高恢复质量,但其广泛使用受到限制。目的:评价ITM对剖宫产术后恢复质量的影响。研究设计:单中心观察前后研究。地点:荷兰第三大学医院,2023年1月至2024年4月。研究人群:在脊髓麻醉下剖腹产的患者。干预:在实施ITM之前招募的患者(n = 55)接受患者控制的吗啡静脉镇痛或继续以前用于分娩的硬膜外镇痛(“ITM前组”)。实施ITM后招募的患者(n = 47)给予ITM 100 μg,并按需口服吗啡片10 mg(“ITM组”)。主要研究参数/终点:主要结局为产科康复质量(ObsQoR-10-Dutch)问卷得分(0 - 100)。次要结局包括ObsQoR-10评分、住院时间、阿片类药物消费和自我报告的一般健康评分(0 - 100)。结果:ITM的方案依从性为98%。康复质量明显改善[治疗前ObsQoR-10评分65±16分,治疗后74±13分,平均差9.0分(95% CI, 3.1 ~ 15), P = 0.002],疼痛评分、身体舒适、独立性和心理健康均有改善。在多变量分析中,改善为6.3 (95% CI, 0.37 ~ 12.2)点,具有统计学意义,但未达到预先设定的临床相关性阈值。然而,自我报告的一般健康评分(57±18比68±17,P = 0.002)、中位[IQR]住院时间(41[36 ~ 51]比37[32 ~ 49]小时,P = 0.032)和中位[IQR]阿片类药物消耗(52[35 ~ 73]比0 [0 ~ 0]mg, P结论:实施ITM对剖宫产可适度改善产科恢复和减少阿片类药物消耗。考虑到本实施研究的非随机设计,谨慎的解释是有必要的。我们的研究结果支持ITM用于剖宫产患者的多模式镇痛策略。
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
CiteScore
6.90
自引率
11.10%
发文量
351
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: The European Journal of Anaesthesiology (EJA) publishes original work of high scientific quality in the field of anaesthesiology, pain, emergency medicine and intensive care. Preference is given to experimental work or clinical observation in man, and to laboratory work of clinical relevance. The journal also publishes commissioned reviews by an authority, editorials, invited commentaries, special articles, pro and con debates, and short reports (correspondences, case reports, short reports of clinical studies).
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信