Electronic health record interventions to reduce postoperative pregabalin prescribing: a quality improvement initiative.

IF 3.3 3区 医学 Q1 ANESTHESIOLOGY
Sarah Tierney, Ahmed Abbas, Kiran Mysore, Christopher Pysyk, Ian Zunder, Michael Verret, Durotolu Adeleke, Daniel I McIsaac
{"title":"Electronic health record interventions to reduce postoperative pregabalin prescribing: a quality improvement initiative.","authors":"Sarah Tierney, Ahmed Abbas, Kiran Mysore, Christopher Pysyk, Ian Zunder, Michael Verret, Durotolu Adeleke, Daniel I McIsaac","doi":"10.1007/s12630-025-03045-8","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Perioperative gabapentinoids may not provide meaningful analgesia and can have significant adverse events. Our objective was to estimate the association of two electronic health record (EHR) interventions with pregabalin prescribing by the acute pain service (APS) at a multi-site academic health sciences network.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted a quality improvement initiative using a retrospective observational cohort and a quasi-experimental interrupted time series design. Following a baseline period (19 January 2021-19 January 2022), we introduced a Best Practice Advisory that warned of pregabalin's risks for sedation or respiratory depression. On 19 June 2022, pregabalin was removed as a standard checkbox in the APS orders. The primary outcome was the proportion of patients receiving pregabalin during their APS admission. The balancing measure was the highest postoperative day one pain score. Analysis used segmented regression in an interrupted time series design to estimate the immediate (level) change, trend (slope), and total counterfactual differences, controlling for the preintervention trend.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We included 10,667 patients (5,559 preintervention, 2,271 postintervention 1, and 2,837 postintervention 2). Preintervention, 1,284 APS admissions had a pregabalin order (23.1%) compared with 379 (16.7%) after intervention 1 and 490 (17.3%) after intervention 2. Our interrupted time series analysis did not identify significant immediate, trend, or total counterfactual differences associated with the interventions (intervention 1, total counterfactual P = 0.76; intervention 2, total counterfactual P = 0.11). Only the preintervention trend (-0.2% per week, 95% confidence interval, -0.5 to -0.1) was significantly different (P < 0.001). No changes in pain intensity scores occurred despite decreased pregabalin use over time.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>We did not identify a significant association of EHR interventions with pregabalin prescribing. Nevertheless, a continued downtrend in pregabalin prescribing was not associated with worsening acute pain.</p>","PeriodicalId":56145,"journal":{"name":"Canadian Journal of Anesthesia-Journal Canadien D Anesthesie","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Canadian Journal of Anesthesia-Journal Canadien D Anesthesie","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s12630-025-03045-8","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ANESTHESIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: Perioperative gabapentinoids may not provide meaningful analgesia and can have significant adverse events. Our objective was to estimate the association of two electronic health record (EHR) interventions with pregabalin prescribing by the acute pain service (APS) at a multi-site academic health sciences network.

Methods: We conducted a quality improvement initiative using a retrospective observational cohort and a quasi-experimental interrupted time series design. Following a baseline period (19 January 2021-19 January 2022), we introduced a Best Practice Advisory that warned of pregabalin's risks for sedation or respiratory depression. On 19 June 2022, pregabalin was removed as a standard checkbox in the APS orders. The primary outcome was the proportion of patients receiving pregabalin during their APS admission. The balancing measure was the highest postoperative day one pain score. Analysis used segmented regression in an interrupted time series design to estimate the immediate (level) change, trend (slope), and total counterfactual differences, controlling for the preintervention trend.

Results: We included 10,667 patients (5,559 preintervention, 2,271 postintervention 1, and 2,837 postintervention 2). Preintervention, 1,284 APS admissions had a pregabalin order (23.1%) compared with 379 (16.7%) after intervention 1 and 490 (17.3%) after intervention 2. Our interrupted time series analysis did not identify significant immediate, trend, or total counterfactual differences associated with the interventions (intervention 1, total counterfactual P = 0.76; intervention 2, total counterfactual P = 0.11). Only the preintervention trend (-0.2% per week, 95% confidence interval, -0.5 to -0.1) was significantly different (P < 0.001). No changes in pain intensity scores occurred despite decreased pregabalin use over time.

Conclusion: We did not identify a significant association of EHR interventions with pregabalin prescribing. Nevertheless, a continued downtrend in pregabalin prescribing was not associated with worsening acute pain.

电子健康记录干预减少术后普瑞巴林处方:质量改进倡议。
目的:围手术期加巴喷丁类药物可能不能提供有意义的镇痛,并可能有显著的不良事件。我们的目的是评估两种电子健康记录(EHR)干预与一个多站点学术健康科学网络的急性疼痛服务(APS)处方普瑞巴林的关系。方法:我们采用回顾性观察队列和准实验中断时间序列设计进行了质量改进。在基线期(2021年1月19日至2022年1月19日)之后,我们引入了最佳实践咨询,警告普瑞巴林镇静或呼吸抑制的风险。2022年6月19日,普瑞巴林作为APS订单中的标准复选框被删除。主要结局是在APS入院期间接受普瑞巴林的患者比例。平衡指标为术后第一天最高疼痛评分。分析在中断时间序列设计中使用分段回归来估计即时(水平)变化、趋势(斜率)和总反事实差异,控制干预前趋势。结果:我们纳入10,667例患者(干预前5,559例,干预后2,271例,干预后2,837例)。干预前,1284例APS入院患者有普瑞巴林订单(23.1%),干预1后379例(16.7%),干预2后490例(17.3%)。我们的中断时间序列分析没有发现与干预相关的显著直接、趋势或总反事实差异(干预1,总反事实P = 0.76;干预2,总反事实P = 0.11)。只有干预前趋势(每周-0.2%,95%可信区间,-0.5至-0.1)有显著差异(P结论:我们没有发现EHR干预与普瑞巴林处方有显著关联。然而,普瑞巴林处方的持续下降趋势与急性疼痛的恶化无关。
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
8.50
自引率
7.10%
发文量
161
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: The Canadian Journal of Anesthesia (the Journal) is owned by the Canadian Anesthesiologists’ Society and is published by Springer Science + Business Media, LLM (New York). From the first year of publication in 1954, the international exposure of the Journal has broadened considerably, with articles now received from over 50 countries. The Journal is published monthly, and has an impact Factor (mean journal citation frequency) of 2.127 (in 2012). Article types consist of invited editorials, reports of original investigations (clinical and basic sciences articles), case reports/case series, review articles, systematic reviews, accredited continuing professional development (CPD) modules, and Letters to the Editor. The editorial content, according to the mission statement, spans the fields of anesthesia, acute and chronic pain, perioperative medicine and critical care. In addition, the Journal publishes practice guidelines and standards articles relevant to clinicians. Articles are published either in English or in French, according to the language of submission.
×
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