Ubl, Daniel S.

Background: Evidence-based, procedure-specific guidelines for prescribing opioids are urgently needed to optimize pain relief while minimizing excessive opioid prescribing and potential opioid diversion in our communities. A multidisciplinary panel at our institution recently developed procedure-specific guidelines for discharge opioid prescriptions for common orthopaedic surgical procedures. The purpose of this study was to evaluate postoperative opioid prescription quantities, variability, and 30-day refill rates before and after implementation of the guidelines. Methods: This retrospective cohort study was conducted at a single academic institution from December 2016 to March 2018. Guidelines were implemented on August 1, 2017, with a recommended maximum opioid prescription quantity for 14 common orthopaedic procedures. Patients who underwent these 14 procedures during the period of December 2016 to May 2017 made up the pre-guideline cohort (n = 2,223), and patients who underwent these procedures from October 2017 to March 2018 made up the post-guideline cohort (n = 2,300). Opioid prescription quantities were reported as oral morphine equivalents (OME), with medians and interquartile ranges (IQRs). Four levels were established for recommended prescription maximums, ranging from 100 to 400 OME. Results: In the pre-guideline cohort, the median amount of prescribed opioids across all procedures was 600 OME (IQR, 390 to 863 OME), which decreased by 38% in the post-guideline period, to a median of 375 OME (IQR, 239 to 400 OME) in the post-guideline cohort (p < 0.001). The 30-day refill rate did not change significantly, from a rate of 24% in the pre-guideline cohort to 25% in the post-guideline cohort (p = 0.43). Multivariable analysis demonstrated that guideline implementation was the factor most strongly associated with prescriptions exceeding guideline maximums (odds ratio [OR] = 9.9; p < 0.001). Age groups of <80 years (OR = 2.0 to 2.4; p < 0.001) and males (OR = 1.2; p = 0.025) were also shown to have higher odds of exceeding guideline maximums. Conclusions: Procedure-specific guidelines are capable of substantially decreasing opioid prescription amounts and variability. Furthermore, the absence of change in refill rates suggests that pain control remains similar to pre-guideline prescribing practices. Evidence-based guidelines are a readily employable solution that can drive rapid change in practice and enhance the ability of orthopaedic surgeons to provide responsible pain management.

AbstractBackgroundWith the opioid epidemic in the United States, evaluating opioid prescribing patterns is essential. We evaluated opioids prescribed at discharge following breast surgery and their association with patient factors and pain scores.MethodsWe retrospectively identified adult patients who underwent a mastectomy for cancer at Mayo Clinic sites from January 2010 to December 2016. Pain scores and prescription data were compared across operations and patient factors by univariate and multivariable analyses.ResultsOf 4021 patients, 3782 (94.1%) received an opioid prescription. Median oral milligram morphine equivalents (MME) were similar across all site‐specific procedure groups (medians ranging from 225 to 375) while pain scores ranged from 1 to 4. Patients undergoing bilateral mastectomy (BM) and immediate breast reconstruction (IBR) reported the greatest pain scores. Pain scores did not vary with age or diagnosis for patients undergoing unilateral mastectomy or BM with lymph node surgery and IBR procedures.On multivariable analysis, variables associated with a MME discharge prescription >Q4 values included age, body mass index, site, year, inpatient status, and pain before discharge >3.ConclusionPatient‐reported pain following breast surgery varied by procedure, while MMEs prescribed remained similar. This suggests current opioid prescribing does not reflect intensity of pain and requires further research to optimize discharge opioid prescribing practices.

Objective: The aim of this study was to conduct a prospective, multicenter survey of patients regarding postoperative opioid use to inform development of standardized, evidence-based, procedure-specific opioid prescribing guidelines. Summary of Background Data: Previous work has shown significant variation in the amount of opioids prescribed after elective procedures, calling for optimization of prescribing. Methods: Adults (n = 3412) undergoing 25 elective procedures were identified prospectively from 3 academic centers (March 2017 to January 2018) to complete a 29-question telephone interview survey 21 to 35 days post-discharge (n = 688 not contacted, n = 107 refused). Discharge opioids were converted into Morphine Milligram Equivalents (MMEs). Results: Of the 2486 patients who completed the survey, 91.2% received opioids at discharge [median 225 (interquartile range, IQR 125 to 381) MME]. A median of 43 (0 to 184) MMEs were consumed after discharge with 77.3% of patients having leftover opioids at the time of the survey. In total, 61.5% of prescribed opioids were unused; 31.4% of patients used no opioids, and 52.6% required <50 MME. Overall, 90.6% of patients were satisfied with their postdischarge pain control. While 28.3% reported being prescribed too many opioids, 9.0% felt they were not prescribed enough. Only 9.6% of patients disposed of remaining opioids. Of the 2068 opioid-naive respondents (83.2%), 33.6% consumed no opioids (range 5.2% to 80.0% by procedure) and 57.0% (65.7% nonorthopedic) consumed <50 MME. Utilization data and predictors of low/high opioid consumption informed development of postoperative prescribing guidelines. Conclusion: A large proportion of postoperative patients reported using no or few opioids following discharge. Guidelines were developed to minimize opioid prescribing and identify patients requiring low doses or additional multimodal pain control.

OBJECTIVEPatient-reported outcomes have been increasingly mandated by regulators and payers to evaluate hospital and physician performance. The purpose of this study is to delineate the differences in patient-reported experience of hospital care for cranial and spinal operations.METHODSThe authors selected all patients who underwent inpatient, elective cranial or spinal procedures and completed the Hospital Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (HCAHPS) survey at a single, high-volume, tertiary care institution between October 2012 and September 2015. The association of the surgical procedure and diagnosis with various HCAHPS composite measures, calculated across 9 domains using standard top-box methodology, was investigated. Multivariable logistic regression models were fitted for outcomes that were significant with procedure type and diagnosis group on univariate analysis, adjusting for age, sex, case complexity, overall health rating, and education level.RESULTSA total of 1484 patients met criteria and returned an HCAHPS survey. Overall, patients undergoing a cranial procedure gave top-box (most favorable) scores more often in pain management measure (66.3% vs 59.6%, p = 0.01) compared with those undergoing spine surgery. Furthermore, despite better discharge scores (93.1% vs 87.1%, p < 0.001), spinal patients were less likely to report excellent health (7.4% vs 12.7%). Lastly, patients with a primary diagnosis of brain or spinal tumor compared with those with degenerative spinal disease and those with other neurosurgical diagnoses provided top-box scores more often regarding communication with doctors (82.7% vs 76.4% vs 75.2%, p = 0.04), pain management (71.8% vs 60.9% vs 59.1%, p = 0.002), and global rating (90.4% vs 84.0% vs 87.3%, p = 0.02). On multivariable analysis, spinal patients had significantly lower odds of reporting top-box scores in pain management (OR 0.67, 95% CI 0.52–0.85; p = 0.001), staff responsiveness (OR 0.68, 95% CI 0.53–0.87; p = 0.002), and global rating (OR 0.59, 95% CI 0.42–0.82; p = 0.002), and significantly higher odds of top-box scoring in discharge information (OR 2.15, 95% CI 1.45–3.18; p < 0.001) than cranial patients. Similarly, brain tumor cases were associated with significantly higher odds of top-box scoring in communication with doctors (OR 1.46, 95% CI 1.01–2.12; p = 0.04), pain management (OR 1.81, 95% CI 1.29–2.55; p < 0.001), staff responsiveness (OR 1.88, 95% CI 1.33–2.66; p < 0.001), and global rating (OR 2.00, 95% CI 1.26–3.17; p = 0.003) compared with degenerative spine cases.CONCLUSIONSSignificant differences in patient-reported experience with hospital care exist across different cranial and spine surgery patient populations. Overall, spinal patients, particularly those with degenerative spine disease, rated their health and their hospital experience lower relative to cranial patients. Identifying weaker areas of hospital performance in target populations can stimulate quality initiatives that aim to increase the overall hospital score.

OBJECTIVETemporal lobectomy is a well-established treatment modality for the management of medically refractory epilepsy in appropriately selected patients. The aim of this study was to assess 30-day morbidity and mortality after temporal lobectomy in cases registered in a national database.METHODSA retrospective cohort analysis was conducted using a multiinstitutional surgical registry compiled between 2006 and 2014. The authors identified patients who underwent anterior temporal lobectomy and/or amygdalohippocampectomy for a primary diagnosis of intractable epilepsy. Univariate and multivariable analyses with regard to patient demographics, comorbidities, operative characteristics, and 30-day outcomes were applied.RESULTSA total of 216 patients were included in the study. The median age was 38 years and 46% of patients were male. The median length of stay was 3 days and the 30-day mortality rate was 1.4%. Fourteen patients (6.5%) developed at least one major complication. Return to the operating room was observed in 7 patients (3.2%). Readmission within 30 days and discharge to a location other than home were available for 2011–2014 (n = 155) and occurred in 11% and 10.3% of patients, respectively. Multivariable regression analysis revealed that increasing age was an independent predictor of discharge disposition other than home and that male sex was a significant risk factor for the development of a major complication. Interestingly, the presence of the attending neurosurgeon and a resident during the procedure was significantly associated with decreased odds of prolonged length of stay (i.e., > 75th percentile [5 days]) and discharge to a location other than home.CONCLUSIONSUsing a multiinstitutional surgical registry, 30-day outcome data after temporal lobectomy for medically intractable epilepsy demonstrates a mortality rate of 1.4%, a major complication rate of 6.5%, and a readmission rate of 11%. Temporal lobectomy is an extremely effective therapy for seizures originating there—however, surgical intervention must be weighed against its morbidity and mortality outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Patients with IBD have a higher baseline risk of venous thromboembolism, which further increases with surgery. Therefore, extended venous thromboembolism chemoprophylaxis has been suggested in certain high-risk cohorts. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to determine whether the underlying diagnosis, operative procedure, or both influence the incidence of postoperative venous thromboembolism. DESIGN: This was a retrospective review. SETTINGS: The American College of Surgeons–National Surgical Quality Improvement Project database was analyzed. PATIENTS: The NSQIP database was queried for patients with chronic ulcerative colitis and non-IBD undergoing colorectal resections using surgical Current Procedural Terminology codes modeled after the 3 stages used for the surgical management of chronic ulcerative colitis from 2005 to 2013. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: We measured 30-day postoperative venous thromboembolism risk in patients with chronic ulcerative colitis based on operative stage and risk factors for development of venous thromboembolism. RESULTS: A total of 18,833 patients met inclusion criteria, with an overall rate of venous thromboembolism of 3.8. Among procedure risk groups, venous thromboembolism rates were high risk, 4.4%; intermediate risk, 1.6%; and low risk, 0.7% (across risk groups, p < 0.01). Emergent case subjects exhibited a higher rate of venous thromboembolism than their elective counterparts (6.9% vs 3.1%). Factors significantly associated with venous thromboembolism on adjusted analysis included emergent risk case (adjusted OR = 7.85), high-risk elective case (adjusted OR = 5.07), intermediate-risk elective case (adjusted OR = 2.69), steroid use (adjusted OR = 1.54), and preoperative albumin <3.5 g/dL (adjusted OR = 1.45). LIMITATIONS: Because of its retrospective nature, correlation between procedures and venous thromboembolism risk can be demonstrated, but causation cannot be proven. In addition, data on inpatient and extended venous thromboembolism prophylaxis use are not available. CONCLUSIONS: Emergent status and operative procedure are the 2 highest risk factors for postoperative venous thromboembolism. Extended venous thromboembolism prophylaxis might be appropriate for patients undergoing these high-risk procedures or any emergent colorectal procedures. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/A339.

Background: Unplanned readmission following surgery is a quality metric that helps surgeons assess initiatives targeted at improving patient care. We utilized the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS-NSQIP) database to determine the rates, causes, and predictors of unplanned 30-day readmissions after outpatient elective hand and elbow surgery. Methods: The ACS-NSQIP database was queried using hand-and-elbow-specific Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) codes to retrospectively identify patients who had undergone outpatient hand or elbow surgery in 2012 and 2013. Patients who required an unplanned readmission to the hospital within 30 days were compared with those who were not readmitted. Preoperative patient characteristics, intraoperative variables, complications, and mortality were compared between the cohorts. Cox proportional hazard models were used to determine independent associations with 30-day unplanned readmission. Results: A total of 14,106 outpatient hand or elbow surgery procedures were identified between 2012 and 2013, and 169 (1.2%) of them were followed by an unplanned readmission. The leading causes of readmission included postoperative infections (19.5%), pain (4.7%), thromboembolic events (4.1%), and pulmonary complications (3.0%). The causes of approximately 1/3 of the readmissions were missing from the database, and these readmissions were likely unrelated to the principal procedure. Independent predictors of readmission included an age of 70 to 84 years (hazard ratio [HR] = 2.83, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.67 to 4.78), smoking (HR = 2.23, 95% CI = 1.57 to 3.18), a lower hematocrit (HR = 2.19, 95% CI = 1.38 to 3.46), renal dialysis (HR = 3.32, 95% CI = 1.60 to 6.91), and an elbow procedure (with or without a hand procedure) (HR = 2.19, 95% CI = 1.57 to 3.04). Conclusions: The prevalence of unplanned readmission following outpatient hand and elbow surgery is low. Several modifiable factors, including preoperative smoking and anemia, are associated with unplanned readmission. These data may be helpful in developing quality-control initiatives to target unplanned readmissions following hand and elbow procedures. Level of Evidence: Therapeutic Level IV . See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Abstract BACKGROUND Patients recovering from decompressive laminectomy without fusion may require assistance with activities of daily living and physical/occupational therapy upon hospital discharge. OBJECTIVE To examine comorbidities and perioperative characteristics of patients undergoing lumbar decompression for associations with discharge status using a multicenter database. METHODS A multicenter database was used for this retrospective cohort analysis. Patients admitted from home with degenerative spine disease for lumbar decompression without fusion were included. Thirty-day outcomes and operative characteristics were compared as a function of patient discharge using chi-square and Wilcoxon Rank Sum tests. Multivariable logistic regression was used to determine factors associated with discharge to a nonhome facility. RESULTS Of the 8627 patients included for analysis, 9.7% were discharged to a nonhome facility. On multivariable analysis, age (85+ vs <65, odds ratio [OR] 13.59), number of levels of decompression (3+ vs 1, OR 1.75), African American race vs Non-Hispanic or Hispanic White (OR 1.87), female vs male gender (OR 1.97), body mass index (BMI) (40+ vs 18.5-24.9, OR 1.74), American Society of Anesthesiologists physical classification status (4 vs 1 or 2, OR 2.35), hypertension (OR 1.29), dependent functional status (OR 3.92), diabetes (OR 1.47), smoking (OR 1.40), hematocrit (<35 vs 35+, OR 1.76), international normalized ratio (≥1.3 vs <1.3, OR 2.32), and operative time (3+ h vs <1 h, OR 5.34) were significantly associated with an increased odds of discharge to nonhome facilities. CONCLUSION Preoperative status and operative course variables can influence discharge disposition in lumbar decompression patients. Identifying specific factors that contribute to a greater likelihood of dismissal to skilled facility or rehabilitation unit can further inform both surgeons and patients during preoperative counseling and disposition planning.