Citations

BACKGROUND: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) cases continue to surge in the United States with the emergence of new variants. Statewide variability and inconsistency in implementing risk mitigation strategies are widespread, particularly in regards to enforcing mask mandates and encouraging the public to become fully vaccinated. METHODS: This is a cross-sectional study conducted on July 31, 2021, utilizing publicly available data from the Wisconsin Department of Health Services. The authors abstracted data on total COVID-19–related cases, hospitalizations, and deaths in the state of Wisconsin. The primary objective was comparison of total COVID-19–related cases, hospitalizations, and deaths in vaccinated versus unvaccinated people in the state of Wisconsin over a 31-day period (July 2021). Furthermore, we also performed a narrative review of the literature on COVID-19–related outcomes based on mask use and vaccination status. RESULTS: In the state of Wisconsin during July 2021, total COVID-19 cases was 125.4 per 100,000 fully vaccinated people versus 369.2 per 100,000 not fully vaccinated people (odds ratio [OR] = 0.34, 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.33–0.35; P < .001). Total COVID-19 hospitalizations was 4.9 per 100,000 fully vaccinated people versus 18.2 per 100,000 not fully vaccinated people (OR = 0.27, 98% CI, 0.22–0.32; P < .001). Total COVID-19 deaths was 0.1 per 100,000 fully vaccinated people versus 1.1 per 100,000 not fully vaccinated people (OR = 0.09, 95% CI, 0.03–0.29; P < .001). Narrative review of the literature demonstrated high vaccine effectiveness against COVID-19 infection prevention (79%–100% among fully vaccinated people), COVID-19–related hospitalization (87%–98% among fully vaccinated people), and COVID-19–related death (96.7%–98% among fully vaccinated people). Studies have also generally reported that mask use was associated with increased effectiveness in preventing COVID-19 infection ≤70%. CONCLUSIONS: Strict adherence to public mask use and fully vaccinated status are associated with improved COVID-19–related outcomes and can mitigate the spread, morbidity, and mortality of COVID-19. Anesthesiologists and intensivists should adhere to evidence-based guidelines in their approach and management of patients to help mitigate spread.

Background: High-frequency (10-kHz) spinal cord stimulation (SCS) continues to be an emerging therapy in chronic pain management. The same complications that plagued earlier SCS systems may affect newer stimulation technologies, although there is limited data on the type of complications and surgical management of these complications. Objective: The aim of this study was to systematically examine real-world complications associated with 10-kHz SCS reported on the Manufacturer and User Facility Device Experience (MAUDE) database. Materials and Methods: The MAUDE database was queried for entries reported between January 1, 2016 and December 31, 2020. Entries were classified into procedural complications, device-related complications, patient complaints, surgically managed complications, serious adverse events, and/or other complications. Primary outcomes included type and frequency of complications, and surgical management of complications. Results: A total of 1651 entries were analyzed. Most entries were categorized as procedural complications (72.6%), followed by serious adverse events (10.5%), device-related complications (10.5%), and patient complaints (9.9%). Most complications were managed surgically with explant (50.9%) rather than revision (5.0%) or incision/drainage (6.6%). Of procedural complications, the most common entries included non-neuraxial infection (52.9%), new neurological symptoms (14.7%), and dural puncture (9.5%). Of device-related complications, the most common entries included lead damage (41.6%), erosion (18.5%), and difficult insertion (11.5%). Conclusion: This retrospective 5-year analysis of complications from10-kHz SCS provides a real-world assessment of safety data unique for this stimulation modality. This analysis may help inform future clinical decisions, lead to device enhancement and optimization, and improve mitigation of risks to provide safe and efficacious use of 10-kHz SCS.

Electrical stimulation of peripheral nerves has been utilized for a variety of indications for over five decades [...]

BACKGROUND: Intrathecal drug delivery systems (IDDS) have been utilized for over 3 decades for management of chronic pain and spasticity. Patients with IDDS may present for surgical procedures unrelated to the IDDS device, although data are limited regarding perioperative outcomes. METHODS: This is a historical matched cohort study conducted between January 1, 2007 and December 31, 2016 of patients with an opioid-based IDDS versus matched control patients undergoing surgery excluding interventional pain procedures. Patients in the IDDS group were matched with up to 2 patients without an IDDS. Multivariable regression analyses were utilized to assess differences in the primary outcome of cumulative perioperative opioid consumption (ie, intraoperative and postanesthesia care unit [PACU] opioid consumption), and opioid consumption during the first 24 and 72 postoperative hours. Postoperative clinical outcomes were also assessed including escalating oxygen requirements, naloxone administration, pain-sedation mismatch, and perioperative pain service consultation. RESULTS: A total of 321 surgeries were included, 112 with IDDS and 209 controls, with median (interquartile range [IQR]) age of 57 (49–64) years. Compared to matched controls, patients with an IDDS had greater perioperative opioid consumption (median [IQR] oral morphine milligram equivalents [OME] of 110 [60–163] vs 93 [IQR, 53–142]; adjusted multiplicative increase 1.28 [95% confidence interval {CI}, 1.03–1.59]; P = .026). IDDS patients also had greater opioid consumption in the first 24 and 72 postoperative hours (multiplicative increases of 2.23 [95% CI, 1.36–3.63], P = .001, and 2.46 [95% CI, 1.41–4.32], P = .002, respectively). There were no significant differences in postoperative oxygen requirements, naloxone administration, or pain-sedation mismatch. Inpatient pain medicine consultation was more frequent in IDDS patients compared to controls (51.8% vs 6.2%; P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with opioid-based IDDS received more perioperative opioids and were more likely to receive postoperative pain service consultation compared to matched controls. There were no significant differences in clinical safety outcomes, suggesting tolerance for higher opioid doses. Further research is warranted to optimize perioperative outcomes in those with IDDS.

Spinal cord and dorsal root ganglion stimulation are minimally invasive surgical techniques used to treat an array of chronic pain disorders. There is a paucity of data related to defining best practices in these specific patient populations, and historically, providers have relied on consensus committees to opine on the best techniques for patient safety and experience. The most efficacious mechanism of surgical closure—specifically a running suture closure compared to a surgical staple closure—is debated. A retrospective review of 155 patients implanted with either a spinal cord or dorsal root ganglion stimulator between 2017 and 2019 was undertaken to determine if the type of surgical closure was related to degree of postoperative surgical site discomfort. The primary outcome showed no statistically significant difference on postoperative pain scores between the suture (6.0 (IQR 5.0–8.0)) and staple (7.0 (IQR 5.0–8.0)) cohorts at postoperative day (POD) #1 (adjusted β 0.17 (95% CI −0.61 to 0.95), P = 0.670 ). This finding held for postoperative pain scores at POD #10 as well (staples (1.0 (IQR 0.0–4.0)) and suture (2.0 (IQR 0.0–5.0), adjusted β −0.39 (95% CI −1.35 to 0.58), P = 0.432 )). A regression analysis was performed to identify secondary factors impacting postoperative pain scores. Higher preoperative pain score (β 0.50 (95% CI 0.09 to 0.92), P = 0.019 ) and female gender (β 1.09 (95% CI 0.15 to 2.02), P = 0.023 ) were predictive of higher incisional pain scores at POD#10. Increasing age was associated with decreased incisional pain scores at POD#10 (β −0.06 (95% CI −0.09 to −0.03), P < 0.001 ). These findings are of interest to the pain practitioner and may be valuable in preoperative discussions with prospective patients.

AbstractObjectiveWe quantified the representation of female program directors (PDs) and assessed their respective demographics, academic metrics, and program-related characteristics in chronic pain and acute pain medicine fellowship programs accredited by the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME).MethodsWe identified chronic and acute pain PDs on the ACGME website on November 15, 2020. We abstracted data from public databases and performed comparisons of demographics, academic metrics, and program-related characteristics between female and male PDs.ResultsWe identified 111 chronic pain programs and 35 acute pain programs. Overall, there were 35 (31.5%) chronic pain programs with a female PD and 76 (68.5%) chronic pain programs with a male PD. Female chronic pain PDs published fewer peer-reviewed articles (4.0 publications, interquartile range [IQR] = 2.0–12.0) compared with male chronic pain PDs (9.0 publications, IQR = 4.0–27.0; P = 0.050), although there was no difference in the H-index score (3.0 vs 4.0 publications, respectively; P = 0.062) or senior academic rank status (57.1% vs 50.0%, respectively; P = 0.543). There were 10 (28.6%) acute pain programs with a female PD and 25 (71.4%) acute pain programs with a male PD. Similar to the chronic pain cohort, there was no difference in senior academic rank status based on gender in acute pain PDs (50.0% vs 24.0%, respectively; P = 0.227).ConclusionOur study highlights gender differences in the PD role in ACGME-accredited chronic and acute pain fellowships. Female PDs remain underrepresented and have fewer peer-reviewed publications. Senior academic rank status was similar across genders, contradicting the current evidence in academic medicine.