| Title |
Retrospective analysis of quality improvement when using liposome bupivacaine for postoperative pain control
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Pain Research, April 2016
|
| DOI | 10.2147/jpr.s102305 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Nicole M King, Albin S Quiko, James G Slotto, Nicholas C Connolly, Robert J Hackworth, Justin W Heil |
| Abstract |
Liposome bupivacaine, a prolonged-release bupivacaine formulation, recently became available at the Naval Medical Center San Diego (NMCSD); before availability, postsurgical pain for large thoracic/abdominal procedures was primarily managed with opioids with/without continuous thoracic epidural (CTE) anesthesia. This retrospective chart review was part of a clinical quality initiative to determine whether postsurgical outcomes improved after liposome bupivacaine became available. Data from patients who underwent laparotomy, sternotomy, or thoracotomy at NMCSD from May 2013 to May 2014 (after liposome bupivacaine treatment became available) were compared with data from patients who underwent these same procedures from December 2011 to May 2012 (before liposome bupivacaine treatment became available). Collected data included demographics, postoperative pain control methods, opioid consumption, perioperative pain scores, and lengths of intensive care unit and overall hospital stays. Data from 182 patients were collected: 88 pre-liposome bupivacaine (laparotomy, n=52; sternotomy, n=26; and thoracotomy, n=10) and 94 post-liposome bupivacaine (laparotomy, n=49; sternotomy, n=31; and thoracotomy, n=14) records. Mean hospital stay was 7.0 vs 5.8 days (P=0.009) in the pre- and post-liposome bupivacaine groups, respectively, and mean highest reported postoperative pain score was 7.1 vs 6.2 (P=0.007), respectively. No other significant between-group differences were observed for the overall population. In the laparotomy subgroup, there was a reduction in the proportion of patients who received CTE anesthesia post-liposome bupivacaine (22% [11/49] vs 35% [18/52] pre-liposome bupivacaine). Surgeons and anesthesiologists have changed the way they manage postoperative pain since the time point that liposome bupivacaine was introduced at NMCSD. Our findings suggest that utilization of liposome bupivacaine may be a useful alternative to epidural anesthesia. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 50% |
| Unknown | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 50% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 21 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 21 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 4 | 19% |
| Student > Bachelor | 3 | 14% |
| Other | 3 | 14% |
| Researcher | 3 | 14% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 2 | 10% |
| Other | 3 | 14% |
| Unknown | 3 | 14% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 9 | 43% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 3 | 14% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 2 | 10% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 1 | 5% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 1 | 5% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 5 | 24% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 23 April 2016.
All research outputs
#15,169,543
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Pain Research
#1,054
of 1,979 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#158,753
of 314,725 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Pain Research
#14
of 16 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,979 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.2. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 314,725 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 16 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.