Indian Journal of Anaesthesia  
About us | Editorial board | Search | Ahead of print | Current Issue | Past Issues | Instructions
Home | Login  | Users Online: 630  Print this pageEmail this pageSmall font sizeDefault font sizeIncrease font size    




 
 Table of Contents    
EDITORIAL
Year : 2018  |  Volume : 62  |  Issue : 7  |  Page : 491-492  

Acute pain service: Round the clock vigilance


Department of Anesthesiology, Critical Care and Pain, Tata Memorial Centre, Homi Bhabha National Institute, Mumbai, Maharashtra, India

Date of Web Publication11-Jul-2018

Correspondence Address:
P N Jain
Department of Anesthesiology, Critical Care and Pain, Tata Memorial Centre, Homi Bhabha National Institute, Mumbai, Maharashtra
India
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None


DOI: 10.4103/ija.IJA_471_18

Rights and Permissions

How to cite this article:
Jain P N. Acute pain service: Round the clock vigilance. Indian J Anaesth 2018;62:491-2

How to cite this URL:
Jain P N. Acute pain service: Round the clock vigilance. Indian J Anaesth [serial online] 2018 [cited 2018 Nov 13];62:491-2. Available from: http://www.ijaweb.org/text.asp?2018/62/7/491/236452



Perioperative pain is still “a little big issue” during the first 3 days after surgery as the intensity of pain is variable due to its subjective experience. A survey from the United States of America (USA) showed that approximately 86% of patients experienced pain after surgery, 75% had moderate-to extreme pain during the immediate postsurgical period, with 74% continuing to experience these levels of pain after discharge. Despite heightened awareness and clinical advancements in pain management, there has been little improvement in post-surgical analgesia as measured by this survey.[1]

Good postoperative analgesia is not only important from a humanitarian point of view but has been hypothesized to be associated with better surgical outcome. Development of minimally invasive surgeries such as laparoscopic and robotic surgery also stems from the same logic to facilitate faster recovery and early discharge. Current evidence shows that unrelieved postoperative pain leads to chronic pain conditions. Although the first acute pain service (APS) started in USA in 1988, the concept of APS received credence after the report of the Royal College of Surgeons of England and the College of Anaesthetists in September 1990. The Report made several important recommendations to improve education in analgesia, systematically record pain regularly after operation, and establish acute pain teams in all major hospitals.[2] It is interesting to note that nursing staff was found to be the only major additional staffing requirement to lead the development of the service, besides equipment and pharmacy support depending on the patient workload, case mix, type of hospital, and availability of anaesthesiology residents. Thereafter, a surge of APS emerged in developed countries and presently >95% hospitals have an APS. Anaesthesiologists lead the APS team and decide about the analgesic modality, management of side effects, and patient safety. However, the job profile of each member of the team still unclear. APS includes patient assessment, modality of analgesic delivery system, documentation of records, patient education, audits, and the predefined performance criteria for its evaluation. A survey was conducted among anaesthesiologists in India in 2015 to determine the current status of APS. Only 68 anaesthesiologists reported an existence of an APS in their hospital. Fifty percent of them did not have any written pain protocols and 60% did not have any regular measurement of pain.[3] With the availability of ultrasound guidance for precisely blocking the various nerve plexuses [4],[5] involving upper and lower limbs and the transversus abdominis plane, erector spinae, rectus sheath blocks, patients are monitored by the concerned anaesthesiologists in the postoperative period. However, the amount of training and education of residents and nurses staff with adherence to available APS guidelines still have a long way to go. At present, the jury is still out on whether the age-old central neuraxial techniques such as thoracic epidural analgesia can be replaced by these other regional analgesic techniques. A good regional anaesthesia service provides the APS with a safe and appropriate application of analgesic techniques, thus improving the postoperative pain satisfaction and the hospital experience as a whole. Even when using regional analgesia techniques, anaesthesiologists should assess the patient and be should be vigilant to the details of patient's organ functions, the relevant technique used and the inherent limitations, as well as complications and their expeditious management. Errors of patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) prescriptions and infusion devices, either disposable or reusable, can be mitigated by continuous monitoring of such patients. They can not be considered as “fix and forget” machines. Infusion pump failure events are rare, but reported, and can jeopardize the safety of patients. In this issue of the Journal, Ray et al.[6] have reported a case of overrun of elastomeric pump infusion in a 10-month-old child, fortunately without any harm to the patient. All relevant instructions of elastomeric infusers should be strictly adhered to while using these devices and close monitoring and documentation is advisable. Unfortunately, the standard of regional anaesthesia services is not well defined or structured and their functionality is quite variable. Regional anaesthesia targets the noxious transduction, anti-inflammatory drugs target inflammation, and the spinal neuraxial opioids target central sensitization in addition to endogenous pain modulation. Anticonvulsants as adjuvants mitigate hypersensitivity via diverse mechanisms. In postoperative settings, APS combines several such interventions for “multimodal analgesia.” Although the practice of APS is three decades old, its exact impact on surgical outcome is still debated. However, constant vigilance is essential in preventing complications and enhancing patient safety.



 
   References Top

1.
Gan TJ, Habib AS, Miller TE, White W, Apfelbaum JL. Incidence, patient satisfaction, and perceptions of post-surgical pain: Results from a US national survey Current Med Res Opin 2014;30:149-60.  Back to cited text no. 1
    
2.
The Royal College of Surgeons of England and the College of Anaesthetists. September 1990. Commission on the Provision of Surgical Services. Report of the Working Party on Pain after Surgery.  Back to cited text no. 2
    
3.
Jain P, Bakshi SG, Thota RS. Acute pain services in India: A glimpse of the current scenario. J Anesthsiol Clin Phamacol 2015;31:554-5.  Back to cited text no. 3
    
4.
Wahal C, Kumar A, Pyati S. Advances in regional anaesthesia: A review of current practice, newer techniques and outcomes. Indian J Anaesth 2018;62:94-102.  Back to cited text no. 4
[PUBMED]  [Full text]  
5.
Garg R, Bhan S, Vig S. Newer regional analgesia interventions (fascial plane blocks) for breast surgeries: Review of literature. Indian J Anaesth 2018;62:254-62.  Back to cited text no. 5
[PUBMED]  [Full text]  
6.
Ray S, Agrawal B, Dias R, Dave N. Elastomeric pumps: How cautious should we be? Indian J Anaesth 2018;62:558-9.  Back to cited text no. 6
  [Full text]  




 

Top
 
  Search
 
    Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
    Access Statistics
    Email Alert *
    Add to My List *
* Registration required (free)  

 
  In this article
    References

 Article Access Statistics
    Viewed713    
    Printed8    
    Emailed0    
    PDF Downloaded365    
    Comments [Add]    

Recommend this journal