PubMed Health⌕ Search
Home/Archive/PubMed

PubMed · 15907649

Recent developments in patient-controlled analgesia.

Klaus A Lehmann
View original source ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

Patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) has become the gold standard for acute pain management since it was first introduced 20 years ago, and its merits have been discussed in quite a large number of publications. This review summarizes the more recent developments, such as new application devices and strategies, including intranasal, spinal, and regional PCA; patient-controlled sedation; experience with children and elderly people; and some data from chronic pain situations. Analyzing PCA literature from 2001 onwards confirms the author's long belief that the PCA principle ("WYNIWYG": what you need is what you get) was the most important aspect of a patient-controlled strategy, more or less independent of the type of drug or machine. Discovering this principle has changed the understanding of pain and suffering.

Explore related subjects

Analgesia, Patient-ControlledCost-Benefit AnalysisHumansNeoplasmsPainTreatment OutcomeComparative StudyJournal ArticleReview

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Klaus A Lehmann. 2005. Recent developments in patient-controlled analgesia.. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpainsymman.2005.01.005

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

PubMed2006

Patient controlled opioid analgesia versus conventional opioid analgesia for postoperative pain.

BACKGROUND: Patients may control postoperative pain by self-administration of intravenous opioids using devices designed for this purpose (patient controlled analgesia or PCA). A 1992 meta-analysis by Ballantyne found a strong patient preference for PCA over conventional analgesia but disclosed no differences in analgesic consumption or length of postoperative hospital stay. Although Ballantyne's meta-analysis found that PCA did have a small but statistically significant benefit upon pain intensity, Walder's review in 2001 did not find a significant differences in pain intensity and pain relief between PCA and conventionally treated groups. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the efficacy of PCA versus conventional analgesia (such as a nurse administering an analgesic upon a patient's request) for postoperative pain control. SEARCH STRATEGY: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were identified from the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library 2004, Issue 3), MEDLINE (1966 to 2004), and EMBASE (1994 to 2004). Additional reports were identified from the reference lists of retrieved papers. SELECTION CRITERIA: RCTs of PCA versus conventional analgesia that employed pain intensity as a primary or secondary outcome were selected. These trials included RCTs that compared PCA without a continuous background infusion versus conventional parenteral analgesic regimens. Studies that explicitly stated they involved patients with chronic pain were excluded. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Trials were scored using the Oxford Quality Scale. Meta-analyses were performed of outcomes that included analgesic efficacy assessed by a Visual Analog Scale (VAS), analgesic consumption, patient satisfaction, length of stay and adverse effects. A sufficient number of the retrieved trials reported these parameters to permit meta-analyses. MAIN RESULTS: Fifty-five studies with 2023 patients receiving PCA and 1838 patients assigned to a control group met inclusion criteria. PCA provided better pain control and greater patient satisfaction than conventional parenteral 'as-needed' analgesia. Patients using PCA consumed higher amounts of opioids than the controls and had a higher incidence of pruritus (itching) but had a similar incidence of other adverse effects. There was no difference in the length of hospital stay. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: This review provides evidence that PCA is an efficacious alternative to conventional systemic analgesia for postoperative pain control.

Analgesia, Patient-Controlled↗
PubMed2006

Microcurrent skin patches for postoperative pain control in total knee arthroplasty: a pilot study.

Pain control following painful orthopaedic procedures such as total knee arthroplasty (TKA) is an ongoing challenge, as current pain management techniques often result in under-medication and/or complications. In a study designed to test the effect of the micro-current skin patch (MCT) on pain relief in patients following TKA, we followed 24 patients, randomly divided into two groups, one group receiving MCT plus tramadol hydrochloride (tramadol) for pain relief and a control group receiving only tramadol, for 10 days postoperatively. Tramadol was given intramuscularly in increment doses of 100 mg, as needed, for the duration of the study period. Pain was assessed daily using a visual analogue score (VAS). Other parameters, including the effect of MCT on the dose of tramadol needed for pain relief, the degree of wound healing measured at the end of the follow-up period, category of the wound 10 days postoperatively (1, 2 or 3) and total drain fluid volume, were also assessed. During the 10-day postoperative period there was a progressive decrease in pain in patients of both groups, however the patients of the MCT group showed a consistently lower VAS throughout the observation period, most markedly on those follow-up days with the highest pain scores in patients of the control group. This effect was monitored on the basis of the average dose of tramadol administered per day: 200.0+/-7.0 mg/day in the control group and 63.3+/-15.8 mg/day in the MCT group. Wound healing was better with the application of the MCT patch: grade 1 wounds were observed in 50% of the patients of the MCT group as compared to 8.3% in control group. The total drain volume was lower in patients of the MCT group compared to the controls (1020.8+/-211.6 and 1170.8+/-243.5 ml, respectively). None of the patients indicated that they wished to discontinue MCT therapy. This pilot study shows that MCT therapy led to better pain control with a markedly lower need for tramadol as compared to the control group. This better pain control was accompanied by a better healing of the wound and a lower drain volume.

Analgesia, Patient-Controlled↗