Regional anesthesia and pain medicine
-
Reg Anesth Pain Med · Dec 2020
Accessing care in multidisciplinary pain treatment facilities continues to be a challenge in Canada.
Multidisciplinary pain treatment facilities (MPTFs) are considered the optimal settings for the management of chronic pain (CP). This study aimed (1) to determine the distribution of MPTFs across Canada, (2) to document time to access and types of services, and (3) to compare the results to those obtained in 2005-2006. ⋯ Accessibility to public MPTFs continues to be limited in Canada, resulting in lengthy wait times for a first appointment. Community-based MPTFs and virtual care initiatives to distribute pain services into regional and remote communities are needed to provide patients with CP with optimal care.
-
Reg Anesth Pain Med · Dec 2020
ReviewPoint-of-care ultrasound for the pediatric regional anesthesiologist and pain specialist: a technique review.
Point-of-care ultrasound (PoCUS) has been well described for adult perioperative patients; however, the literature on children remains limited. Regional anesthesiologists have gained interest in expanding their clinical repertoire of PoCUS from regional anesthesia to increasing numbers of applications. This manuscript reviews and highlights emerging PoCUS applications that may improve the quality and safety of pediatric care. ⋯ When PoCUS is used, a more rapid institution of problem-specific therapy with improved patient outcomes is demonstrated in the pediatric emergency medicine and critical care literature. Overall, PoCUS saves time, expedites the differential diagnosis, and helps direct therapy when used in infants and children. PoCUS is low risk and should be readily accessible to pediatric anesthesiologists in the operating room.
-
Reg Anesth Pain Med · Dec 2020
ReviewIs the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) in acute pain a good measure of analgesic efficacy in regional anesthesia?
In the field of acute pain medicine research, we believe there is an unmet need to incorporate patient related outcome measures that move beyond reporting pain scores and opioid consumption. The term "minimal clinically important difference" (MCID) defines the clinical benefit of an intervention as perceived by the patient, as opposed to a mathematically determined statistically significant difference that may not necessarily be clinically significant. The present article reviews the concept of MCID in acute postoperative pain research, addresses potential pitfalls in MCID determination and questions the clinical validity of extrapolating MCID determined from chronic pain and non-surgical pain studies to the acute postoperative pain setting. We further suggest the concepts of minimal clinically important improvement, substantial clinical benefit and patient acceptable symptom state should also represent aspirational outcomes for future research in acute postoperative pain management.