Article Text

Download PDFPDF
Comparing modalities of opioid education in patients undergoing total knee arthroplasty: a randomized pilot trial
  1. Miriam Sheetz1,
  2. Angela Puglisi1,
  3. Mark Trentalange1,2,
  4. Julia Reichel1,
  5. Brian Chalmers3,
  6. Alejandro Gonzalez Della Valle3,
  7. Alexandra Sideris1,4 and
  8. Bradley H Lee1,5
  1. 1Department of Anesthesiology, Critical Care & Pain Management, Hospital for Special Surgery, New York, New York, USA
  2. 2Department of Anesthesiology, James J Peters VA Medical Center, New York, New York, USA
  3. 3Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Adult Reconstruction and Joint Replacement, Hospital for Special Surgery, New York, NY, USA
  4. 4Pain Prevention Research Center, Hospital for Special Surgery, New York, NY, USA
  5. 5Department of Anesthesiology, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, New York, USA
  1. Correspondence to Dr Bradley H Lee; leeb{at}hss.edu

Abstract

Background Patients undergoing total knee arthroplasty (TKA) experience significant postoperative pain and routinely require opioids, yet they often lack knowledge regarding appropriate use and handling of these medications. Evidence suggests that educational interventions in various formats may help reinforce proper usage and improve postoperative pain control. The aim of this study is to compare the institution standard of care (webinar) with two novel educational interventions—one in-person and the other a video recording—that focus specifically on the use of opioids and pain control.

Methods This prospective, randomized pilot study included 42 patients undergoing TKA. Patients were randomized into one of three groups: (1) webinar: 50 min virtual session standard of care at Hospital for Special Surgery (HSS), (2) in-person education, or (3) video education. The primary outcomes of this study were the number of opioid refill requests through postoperative day (POD) 30 and POD 60. The secondary outcomes evaluated Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) pain scores, opioid consumption in oral morphine equivalents (OME), surveys on medication usage and opioid knowledge, reported medication storage and disposal. We hypothesize that the novel educational interventions, presented either in-person or by video, will lead to a decrease in opioid refills within 60 days compared with current education delivered through virtual webinar.

Results No significant differences were found among groups in the number of opioid refill requests, average NRS pain score, or OME consumption at any time point. Opioid refill requests ranged from 0% to 16.7% at POD 30 (Fisher’s exact test, p=0.625) and from 0% to 8.3% at POD 60 (p=1.000). The median opioid refill request was zero requests per group from POD 21 to 60 (webinar 0 (0.0, 0.0), in-person 0 (0.0, 0.0), video 0 (0.0, 0.0), Kruskal-Wallis test, p=0.381). Average NRS pain scores were 5 or below for all groups on POD 1, 7 and 14. By POD 7, all groups had an average daily intake OME of 14 or below.

Conclusions Overall, patients in each group did well with postoperative pain management after TKA and had minimal opioid refill requests. There were no statistically significant differences in outcomes of NRS pain scores or opioid usage among groups suggesting that educational interventions were similarly effective. As a pilot trial, study demonstrated successful recruitment and retention of participants, and important feedback was elicited from patients regarding education, as well. Of note, this was a pilot study and was likely underpowered to detect a difference.

Trial registration number NCT05593341.

  • analgesics, opioid
  • pain, postoperative
  • patient education as topic
  • regional anesthesia

Data availability statement

Data are available on reasonable request.

Statistics from Altmetric.com

Request Permissions

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

Data availability statement

Data are available on reasonable request.

View Full Text

Footnotes

  • Contributors MS: study design, data collection, manuscript preparation and final approval. AP: data collection, data interpretation, manuscript preparation and final approval. MT: data analysis, data interpretation, manuscript preparation and final approval. JR: study design, data collection, manuscript preparation and final approval. BC: study design, data interpretation, manuscript preparation and final approval. AGDV: study design, data interpretation, manuscript preparation and final approval. AS: study design, data interpretation, manuscript preparation and final approval. BHL: guarantor, study design, data analysis, data interpretation, manuscript preparation and final approval.

  • Funding Hospital for Special Surgery Anesthesiology Research Fund. The use of REDCap is supported for the institution by grant number UL1 TR 002384 from the National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences (NCATS) of the National Institutes of Health (NIH).

  • Competing interests None declared.

  • Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.

  • Supplemental material This content has been supplied by the author(s). It has not been vetted by BMJ Publishing Group Limited (BMJ) and may not have been peer-reviewed. Any opinions or recommendations discussed are solely those of the author(s) and are not endorsed by BMJ. BMJ disclaims all liability and responsibility arising from any reliance placed on the content. Where the content includes any translated material, BMJ does not warrant the accuracy and reliability of the translations (including but not limited to local regulations, clinical guidelines, terminology, drug names and drug dosages), and is not responsible for any error and/or omissions arising from translation and adaptation or otherwise.