Patient-controlled analgesia vs. conventional intramuscular analgesia following colon surgery. Preoperative PCA teaching program to manage postoperative pain. Cost-effectiveness analysis of patient-controlled analgesia, intramuscular q.i.d. injection and p.r.n. injection for postoperative pain relief. A statistical model for pain in patient-controlled analgesia and conventional intramuscular opioid regimens. Patient-controlled analgesia: a controlled trial. Patient-controlled analgesia: a randomized, prospective comparison between two commercially available PCA pumps and conventional analgesic therapy for postoperative pain. Patient-controlled analgesia: a new concept of postoperative pain relief. A study of pain management: patient controlled analgesia versus intramuscular analgesia. A prospective study of patient-controlled analgesia. Impact on overall hospital course. A randomized comparison of patient-controlled versus standard analgesic requirements in patients undergoing cholecystectomy. Patient-controlled versus conventional analgesia for postsurgical pain relief in adolescents. Patient-controlled analgesia in children and adolescents: a randomized, prospective comparison with intramuscular administration of morphine for postoperative analgesia. Pain control after cesarean birth. Efficacy of patient-controlled analgesia vs traditional therapy (IM morphine). Efficacy of patient-controlled versus conventional analgesia for postoperative pain. Comparison between patient-controlled analgesia and intramuscular meperidine after thoracotomy. How effective is patient-controlled analgesia? A randomized comparison of two protocols for pain relief during oocyte recovery. Pain management in cardiac surgery patients: comparison between standard therapy and patient-controlled analgesia regimen. The effects of three different analgesia techniques on long-term postthoracotomy pain. Patient-Controlled Analgesia Following Vertical Gastroplasty: a Comparison with Intramuscular Narcotics. Psychological characteristics and the effectiveness of patient-controlled analgesia. Nurse-administered subcutaneous morphine is a satisfactory alternative to intravenous patient-controlled analgesia morphine after cardiac surgery. [Patient-controlled postoperative analgesia in orthopedic surgery: epidural PCA versus intravenous PCA]. Patient controlled analgesia and intramuscular injections: a comparisons of patient pain experiences and postoperative outcomes. Patient-controlled analgesia compared with nurse-controlled infusion analgesia after heart surgery. Epidural patient-controlled analgesia: an alternative to intravenous patient-controlled analgesia for pain relief after cesarean delivery. Patient-controlled analgesia: a comparison with nurse-controlled intravenous opioid infusions. Effect of the intensity of transcutaneous acupoint electrical stimulation on the postoperative analgesic requirement. Efficacy and costs of patient-controlled analgesia versus regularly administered intramuscular opioid therapy. Analgesia following major gynecological laparoscopic surgery--PCA versus intermittent intramuscular injection. Patient-controlled analgesia versus intramuscular analgesic therapy. [Efficiency of patient-controlled analgesia versus conventional analgesia in patients after thoracotomy]. Intravenous versus epidural administration of hydromorphone. Effects on analgesia and recovery after radical retropubic prostatectomy. Comparison between patient-controlled analgesia and subcutaneous morphine in elderly patients after total hip replacement. Hydromorphone patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) after coronary artery bypass surgery. Epidural analgesia and intravenous patient-controlled analgesia result in similar rates of postoperative myocardial ischemia after aortic surgery. Impact of patient-controlled analgesia on required nursing time and duration of postoperative recovery. Patient-controlled versus nurse-controlled pain treatment after coronary artery bypass surgery. A comparison of patient-controlled analgesia and bolus PRN intravenous morphine in the intensive care environment. Music does not reduce alfentanil requirement during patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) use in extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy for renal stones. A comparison of patient-controlled and fixed schedule analgesia after orthognathic surgery. Adolescents use patient-controlled analgesia effectively for relief from prolonged oropharyngeal mucositis pain. Patient-controlled analgesia in gynecologic oncology surgery. Ropivacaine epidural anesthesia and analgesia versus general anesthesia and intravenous patient-controlled analgesia with morphine in the perioperative management of hip replacement. Ropivacaine Hip Replacement Multicenter Study Group. A prospective randomized clinical trial on pain control after major abdominal surgery. Intraarticular, epidural, and intravenous analgesia after total knee arthroplasty. Reduction of postoperative morbidity following patient-controlled morphine.
Though patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) has been in use for over a decade, it has been popularized only recently. Conventional techniques of intermittent intramuscular (IM) administration of analgesia have fallen short of meeting the needs of patients following major abdominal surgery. This has prompted a search for methods to improve postoperative pain management. Though PCA has been accepted in many hospitals, few studies comparing conventional IM administration of morphine with PCA have been performed. A prospective randomized study comparing IM- and PCA-administered morphine in 62 patients undergoing colon surgery was performed. A comparison of the efficacy of analgesia and extent of sedation using these approaches shows that PCA allows for analgesia with less sedation and less drug requirement than that of IM administration. No differences were noted in postoperative duration of ileus, duration of hospitalization, and total hospital costs. This study confirms the safety and efficacy of PCA, and should be considered the current optimal method of controlling pain following major colonic surgery. Patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) therapy was designed to provide patients with greater control in managing their pain. However, many patients continue to suffer from moderate to severe pain due to lack of knowledge about how to use PCA therapy. The results of this quasi-experimental study demonstrated that patients who received structured preoperative teaching had statistically significant higher knowledge regarding the use of PCA therapy and more positive attitudes toward using pain medicine. Patients who received the video teaching reported better pain control and satisfaction with pain management 4 and 8 hours following their surgical procedures. We conclude that the intravenous PCA method is a cost-effective technique. Although the PCA device is expensive, the cost-effectiveness analysis should give explicit figures for physicians and the hospital administrators to decide whether they should use the PCA instead of the conventional method. A statistical model was developed: 1) to compare the efficacy of patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) and traditional intramuscular (IM) opioids for pain relief in 40 patients after total knee replacement and, 2) to evaluate pain cycles associated with each technique. Hourly visual analog pain scores were subjected to two-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) and time-series analysis. Hourly verbal analog pain scores were used to determine predominant pain levels. According to ANOVA, PCA was no more effective than were IM opioids. Time-series analyses documented a complete cycle of pain every 5.3 hours in patients receiving IM opioids but no pain cycle with use of PCA. Analysis of PCA verbal analog scores demonstrated self-administration of opioids to "moderate" levels of pain relief with use of PCA, not to complete analgesia. These results suggest that certain patients may not envision complete postoperative analgesia as being possible. Hence, they self-administer opioids for pain relief with PCA according to their expectations. Population characteristics may modify PCA efficacy. These characteristics should be delineated and the use of PCA targeted to appropriate patients. Thirty-six patients undergoing lower abdominal surgery were included in a prospective randomized controlled study to compare the effects of patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) and a standard intramuscular/intravenous treatment (conventional analgesia, CA) of postoperative pain. Morphine was used in both groups. There were no significant differences between the two analgesic regimens in respect of linear analogue pain scores, verbal pain-relief scores, amount of morphine used or side-effects. No treatment-induced alterations in vital values were experienced. Two pumps, 'PA' and 'PB,' with different drug delivery characteristics were available at the time of this study for patient-controlled analgesia (PCA). PB purportedly produces a 'placebo effect' by emitting an audible signal whenever the patient depresses the trigger button. PA emits an audible signal only when the drug is successfully administered into the patient's intravenous line. In a prospective, randomized Latin squares cross-over study, the 2 pumps and conventional therapy were compared for efficacy and cost. Patients in both pump groups used less drug and perceived less pain than those on conventional therapy. However, statistically less anxiety and greater pain relief and patient and nursing satisfaction were reported with PA only. Daily cost including drug, pharmacy and nursing time, pump rental was 33%, PA, versus 23%, PB, more than conventional therapy. Purchase and amortization of the pumps decreases the cost. We conclude that PCA provides superior pain management at minimal additional cost. This report concerns evaluation of patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) in the form of two preliminary investigations. In the first study, the patient-controlled analgesia device, which consists of a pump linked to a timer so that patients can activate intravenous administration of morphine sulfate to themselves during the postoperative period, was used in seven morbidly obese patients. The amount of morphine used during the first 36 hours was found to vary between 32 and 185 mg, with a significant difference in drug usage when related to weight as well as to body surface area. In the second study, morbidly obese patients undergoing gastric bypass operations were prospectively randomized into 12 patients who used the PCA device in the postoperative period and 12 patients who were given standard intramuscular dosages of morphine sulfate. An analgesia and sedation scale was then used to compare the two groups. The patients in the PCA group were able to maintain a state of adequate analgesia without sleep with a significantly greater frequency than were those in the intramuscular injection group. On the basis of answers to a questionnaire given to the patient after 60 hours of morphine analgesia, it was apparent that the PCA group was much more satisfied with that form of postoperative analgesia. It would appear that PCA is an efficacious and safe method of providing for postoperative pain relief. A clinical study examining the efficacy of Patient Controlled Analgesia compared with Intramuscular Analgesia was conducted. Patient Controlled Analgesia (PCA) Therapy was used in a select group of patients after major abdominal surgery. Specific parameters monitored were: total amount of analgesia required, incidence of pulmonary complications, assessment of pain level and sedation, patient activity, nursing time required for administration, safety, cost-effectiveness of both modes of analgesia and length of hospital stay. A questionnaire survey of both patients and nursing staff was done to evaluate responses. Conventional pain management often is inadequate with PRN administration of analgesic drugs due to the unpredictable and uneven patient absorption rate and the individual pain intensity and tolerance. The patient experiences a repetitive cycle of pain and sedation. The patient on PCA therapy is able to titrate his analgesic medication very effectively and maintain a state of analgesia without sedation. He is more responsive and able to participate in the early postoperative rehabilitation phase. The transition to oral medication usually was accomplished at 48 hours postoperative. Previous studies have shown that patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) provides effective pain control in the postoperative patient. To determine the impact of PCA technology on the overall hospital course, we designed a randomized controlled study comparing patients receiving analgesia using PCA infusion (Abbott Lifecare, Abbott Laboratories; Chicago, IL) with patients receiving analgesia by traditional intramuscular or intravenous methods. All patients had undergone elective cholecystectomy. Sixty-nine patients completed the study, 35 received traditional postoperative analgesia, and 34 received analgesia using the PCA infuser. Comparison of both groups demonstrated no significant difference in postoperative bowel activity with both groups receiving liquids on the first postoperative day. There was no significant difference between the two groups with respect to postoperative length of stay (3.4 days for PCA vs 3.6 days for traditional). Patients demonstrated a wide range of analgesic requirement in the first 24 hours but the average of the total analgesic required was higher in the PCA group (average, 29.5 mg) than the traditional group (22.8 mg). Urinary complications occurred more commonly in the group of patients receiving traditional analgesia than in the group of patients receiving analgesia with the PCA device. When compared with patients receiving analgesia by traditional methods, patients receiving the PCA infusion required more analgesia with fewer urinary complications and similar postoperative length of stay. In the current study, 55 patients undergoing elective cholecystectomy were randomly allocated to receive postoperative analgesia (morphine sulfate) administered through either patient-controlled intravenous (PCA) or standard intramuscular (IM) routes. There were no significant differences in length of hospitalization or required dose of morphine sulfate. Patients randomized to PCA reported significantly improved subjective relief from pain and a smaller percentage of time in pain during each of the first two postoperative days. In addition, they reported less sedation and less interference with both postoperative breathing and pulmonary recovery than patients who received IM morphine. Theoretically, PCA regimens can deliver narcotic analgesia at a higher and more varied rate (with fewer side effects) compared with standard IM narcotic delivery, which is more limited by considerations of clinical doses. In PCA dosing, patients should experience less time in pain and sedation. The results of the current study support this premise. We performed a randomized nonblinded, cross-over comparison of patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) with conventional intramuscular analgesia in 10 adolescents (13-18 years) undergoing spinal fusion for idiopathic scoliosis. PCA use afforded more effective pain control (p < 0.02) on a 10-point linear pain intensity scale than did intramuscular injections, while causing an equal amount of sedation and no side effects. PCA appears to be a promising technique for providing postoperative pain relief in this group of adolescents. Further studies are needed to define its role for other pediatric conditions. A randomized, prospective trial of patient-controlled analgesia (PCA), that is, a method of analgesia administration involving a computer-driven pump activated by patients to receive small doses within defined limits was performed in 82 children and adolescents after major orthopedic surgery to compare (1) intramuscularly administered morphine, (2) PCA morphine and (3) PCA morphine with a low-dose continuous morphine infusion (PCA-plus). Patients receiving PCA and PCA-plus had lower pain scores and greater satisfaction than patients receiving intramuscularly administered morphine. The three groups used equal amounts of morphine and most measures of recovery were identical in the groups. In particular, PCA and PCA-plus did not increase the incidence of opioid-related complications, and patients receiving PCA-plus were less sedated than patients receiving intramuscular therapy. We conclude that PCA and PCA-plus are safe and effective methods of pain relief in children and adolescents after orthopedic surgery, are better accepted than intramuscular injections, and do not increase perioperative morbidity. A clinical trial compared the efficacy of a mechanical device to deliver patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) (n = 25) with intramuscularly administered morphine (n = 17) for postcesarean pain management. Hypotheses were: (1) patient-controlled administration of narcotics will be superior (increased satisfaction, reduced pain, decreased sedation, increased ambulation, decreased length of stay), and (2) functional vital capacity will increase post-operatively with PCA. No differences in demographic variables were identified (P = less than or equal to .001). Differences in satisfaction (greater in PCA group, P = less than or equal to .05), ambulation (greater in PCA group, P = less than or equal to .001), amount of medication used (greater in PCA group, P = less than or equal to .001), and sedation level (less in PCA group, P = less than or equal to .05) were identified. No differences in vital capacity were identified. The hypothesis related to the superiority of PCA was accepted, while the association between PCA and increased vital capacity was not supported. The use of mechanical PCA devices provides an effective and safe means of managing postcesarean pain. Patient-controlled i.v. administration and intramuscular administration of morphine sulfate were compared in a crossover study to determine their relative effectiveness in relieving postoperative pain. Twenty adult patients scheduled for abdominal surgery were randomly assigned to one of two groups; one group received i.v. morphine sulfate for 24 hours using a patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) device, after which they were given morphine sulfate i.m. for 24 hours. The treatment order was reversed for the other group. Amount of narcotic administered, respiratory rate, and levels of discomfort, activity, and sedation were assessed by the nursing staff every two hours. At the end of each 24-hour treatment phase, patients ranked their level of pain, amount of pain relief, level of sedation, ability to sleep, and ability to perform pulmonary toilet. Patients were also asked whether they preferred PCA or i.m. analgesic therapy for future surgery. Patients reported significantly less discomfort while using PCA than during i.m. morphine administration. No significant differences in amount of narcotic used, respiratory rate, nausea and vomiting, or levels of activity or sedation were noted for the two regimens. Patients' rankings of the two treatment modes did not differ significantly, but a majority of patients indicated a preference for future use of PCA. In these postoperative patients, administration of i.v. morphine sulfate by PCA was as safe as i.m. administration and possibly more effective in relieving pain. A prospective randomized controlled study was performed to assess the efficacy and safety of patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) in patients undergoing thoracotomy. This method was compared with a conventional pain management technique consisting of regularly scheduled im injections of analgesics. Forty adult patients were randomly assigned to receive intravenous PCA or im meperidine treatment over a 48-hr period after surgery. Care was taken to optimize analgesia in patients of both groups. The McGill Pain Questionnaire, visual analogue and verbal-numeric scales were administered at regular intervals to measure various components of the patients' pain experience, degree of pain relief, adverse side effects and overall treatment efficacy. Functional recovery after surgery was also examined. The results showed good and comparable analgesia with both pain-control methods. However, a greater number of patients receiving im injections required dosage adjustments than in the PCA group. Patients' and nurses' evaluations of overall treatment efficacy also favoured PCA treatment. There were no major group differences in the side effect profile. Recovery pattern was also comparable in the two groups except for the length of hospitalisation. There were fewer long-stay patients in the PCA than in the im group. Meperidine intake was similar in both groups but considerable interpatient variation was seen. In conclusion, PCA is a safe, effective and individualized treatment method for controlling pain after thoracotomy. There appears to be some clinical advantages of PCA over im dosing regimens for analgesia after thoracotomy. Although the conventional method of pain relief during outpatient oocyte recovery involves physician-administered drugs, patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) offers an alternative technique with the potential to give women more control over peroperative analgesia. We conducted a prospective randomized study to compare the effect of fentanyl administered either through a PCA delivery system or by a physician. Thirty-nine women were randomized to PCA during egg collection while 42 were allocated to receive intermittent doses administered by a physician. Pain was evaluated by means of a 100 mm linear analogue scale. The mean (SD) pain score in the PCA group was 38.5 (19.8) while in the other group it was 46.1 (21.3) (P = 0.1). In the PCA group, 64% of women felt very satisfied with their analgesia as compared with 57% in the non-PCA group (P = 0.6). Among the PCA users, 39% of demands were successful. Significantly more fentanyl (97.5 microg) was used in the PCA group than in the other group (84.6 microg) (P = 0.03). Though intraoperative PCA with fentanyl is an effective alternative to physician-administered techniques, many women still feel the need for more analgesia during the procedure. To compare standard nurse-based pain therapy with a patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) regimen.
                Prospective, randomized study.
                Single-institutional, clinical investigation in an urban, university-affiliated hospital.
                Sixty patients undergoing elective first-time cardiac surgery were included.
                In 30 patients, a standard analgesic regimen was used, and in 30 patients, a PCA regimen was used. The perioperative and postoperative management was similar for all patients.
                Degree of sedation, satisfaction, and pain (by visual analog scale [VAS]) was assessed within the first 3 postoperative days. Vital capacity (VC) and forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1) were measured using a portable spirometry system. Cortisol and troponin T (TnT) plasma levels were also measured. The expectation of pain was similar in both groups, and the postoperative pain score was significantly lower in the PCA than in the standard group throughout the study period. Significantly more piritramid was used in the PCA (total, 75.6 +/- 33.4 mg) than in the standard group (total, 20.1 +/- 31.9 mg). VC and FEV1 were significantly lower in the standard group compared with the PCA patients. Cortisol and TnT plasma levels were similar in both groups. Frequency of side effects were similar for both groups.
                Because of the beneficial effects with regard to degree of pain and satisfaction, pain management using PCA systems can be recommended for cardiac surgery patients. It appears to be superior to standard nurse-based pain therapy. In this clinical, randomized, prospective study, we compared the effects of three different analgesia techniques (thoracic epidural analgesia [TEA] with and without preoperative initiation and IV patient-controlled analgesia [IV-PCA]) on postthoracotomy pain in 69 patients. In two groups, a thoracic epidural catheter was inserted preoperatively. Group Pre-TEA had bupivacaine and morphine solution preoperatively and intraoperatively. Postoperative analgesia was maintained with epidural PCA with a similar solution. Group Post-TEA, with no intraoperative medication, had the same postoperative analgesia as Group Pre-TEA plus the bolus dose. Group IV-PCA received only IV-PCA with morphine for postoperative analgesia. Pain was evaluated every 4 h during the first 48 h at rest, cough, and movement. Pre-TEA was associated with decreased pain compared with the other groups. Six months later, the patients were asked about their pain. The incidence and the intensity of pain were most frequent in Group IV-PCA (78%) and were the least in Group Pre-TEA (45%) (Group Pre-TEA versus Group IV-PCA, P = 0.0233; Group Pre-TEA versus Group IV-PCA, P = 0.014). Patients having pain on the second postoperative day had 83% chronic pain. TEA with preoperative initiation is a preferable method in preventing acute and long-term thoracotomy pain.
                Preoperatively initiated thoracic epidural analgesia has the most satisfying results in controlling postthoracotomy pain in the acute and long-term period, and it is associated with a decreased incidence (and intensity) of chronic pain compared with postoperative (epidural or IV) analgesia. Chronic pain has an incidence of 62%. BACKGROUND: patient-controlled analgesia PCA is a rapidly spreading approach to the management of post-operative pain. The suitability of this method for the morbidly obese patient undergoing bariatric surgery has not yet been determined. METHODS: in the present study we randomly compared two groups of patients undergoing silastic ring vertical gastroplasty. One group received PCA (12 patients) and the other (11 patients) received intermittent doses of pethidine intramuscularly. RESULTS: the cumulative morphine use during the first post-operative day was 52.71 +/- 1.83 mg by the PCA group and an equivalent of 24.55 +/- 3.42 mg morphine by the IM pethidine group (p = 0.0002). The analgesic and sedative effects by the PCA were found to be superior. There were no significant differences between the groups in the incidence of side-effects or complications, except a higher, unexplained incidence of wound infection in the PCA group. CONCLUSION: use of PCA in patients undergoing bariatric surgery has obvious advantages and appears to be a safe procedure. We have evaluated the level of state and trait anxiety, neuroticism, extroversion and coping style as predictors of the effectiveness of patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) in 110 patients undergoing total abdominal hysterectomy. After operation patients were allocated to receive pain control with either PCA or i.m. injections (IMI). Pain was assessed using the short form McGill pain questionnaire at 6, 18 and 24 h after operation, and by recording the amount of analgesic consumed in the first 24 h after surgery. Both state anxiety and coping style were significant predictors of postoperative pain, irrespective of the method of analgesia used. Patients using PCA experienced significantly better pain control than those receiving IMI. However, it was those with high levels of state anxiety who experienced the greatest reduction in pain with PCA. In addition to achieving better pain control, patients who received PCA used significantly less analgesia and were discharged earlier than patients who received IMI. There are no comparisons of i.v. patient controlled analgesia (i.v. PCA) versus nurse-administered subcutaneous (NA s.c.) morphine for acute postoperative pain. We undertook a prospective, randomized, controlled clinical trial of 80 cardiac surgical patients to compare i.v. PCA with NA s.c. morphine for postoperative pain control. Visual analog scale (VAS) pain scores at rest and with movement, daily verbal pain relief scores, and side effect profiles were not significantly different. Total morphine requirements in the two groups were not significantly different. A physiotherapist's evaluation of the effectiveness of analgesia for chest physiotherapy revealed no difference between the two groups. We conclude that NA s.c. morphine, administered as required (up to hourly), is a satisfactory alternative to i.v. PCA morphine after cardiac surgery. Implications: In a prospective, randomized study, we have shown that nurse-administered subcutaneous morphine is a satisfactory alternative to i.v. patient-controlled analgesia after cardiac surgery. To evaluate both effectiveness and incidence of side effects of two techniques of postoperative pain treatment: intravenous and epidural PCA.
                Prospective analysis of data from two groups of randomized patients.
                Orthopedic and trauma center.
                Figty ASA class II-III patients undergoing total hip replacement under combined Spinal-Epidural Anesthesia.
                Patients were divided into 2 groups who received different postoperative pain treatment. One group (group PCA) received a patient-controlled intravenous analgesia with morphine 30 mg and ketorolac 90 mg in 100 ml of saline (back-ground infusion 2-4 ml, according to body weith, bolus 1 ml, lockout 5 min, 4 h dose limit 40 ml). PCEA group received a patient-controlled epidural analgesia with morphine 4 mg and bupivacaine 0.125% 100 ml, (background infusion 3-4 ml, according to patient' height, bolus 1 ml, lockout 10 min, 4 h dose limit 25 ml). Postoperative pain intensity was evaluated, through 24 postoperative hours, by a verbal analogue scale (VPS = 0 to 3) and a total pain score (TOTPAR) was calculated for each patient at 6 and 24 postoperative hours. Side effects were recorded and their incidence was obtained for each group. Statistical data analysis was performed by one-way ANOVA and non-parametric tests for ordinal data. Nominal data were analyzed by chi 2 test. p < 0.05 was considered significant.
                Patient receiving PCEA showed a significant (p < 0.005) decrease of incident pain, while VPS at rest was similar in the two groups. TOTPAR VPS was lower (p < 0.05) in PCEA group both at 6 and 24 postoperative hours. Somnolence was observed more often in PCA patients (8% vs 2%; p 0.05), while no significant differences were noted among other side effects incidence.
                Our data show a better control of postoperative pain arising from total hip replacement during PCEA when compared to PCA. It should be emphasized that incident pain is far more decreased by PCEA, so that this technique is particularly indicated when an early postoperative mobilization is required. Despite relatively widespread use of various forms of patient controlled analgesia (PCA), there remain conflicting results in the literature as to the efficacy of PCA. This study was conducted to assess the efficacy and postoperative outcomes of intravenous PCA compared to intramuscular (IM) injections in 73 patients who received major abdominal surgery. These patients were randomly selected and randomly assigned preoperatively to receiving IM or PCA modes of analgesia postoperatively. The following factors were compared: amount of pain; amount of analgesia use; degree of patient satisfaction with pain control both while on parenteral analgesia and after switching to oral; length of time to first ambulation; and length of stay in hospital. Results of the study did not demonstrate a statistically significant difference in any of these, using a P-value of 0.01. The PCA patients took an average of 4.5 hours longer than the IM patients to ambulate postoperatively and the IM patients received at least three times as much antiemetic (P = 0.001). Locus of control was not found to be a major factor in satisfaction or pain levels. Subsequent meta-analyses have also failed to yield significant differences between IM and PCA groups except in patient satisfaction. It is recommended that expansion of PCA programmes with abdominal surgery patients be considered only in cases where there is fiscal advantage or where patient satisfaction can be a driving force. A randomized, controlled clinical trial was conducted on 66 patients undergoing elective cardiac surgery to compare patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) to nurse-controlled analgesia (NCA) with continuous morphine infusion. Hourly assessment of pain (at rest and on movement) using a visual analogue scale (VAS), of respiratory rate, and level of sedation took place for the 24 h following extubation. The incidence of nausea was also recorded. Mean pain scores were calculated, and peak pain and sedation scores, together with lowest respiratory rates, were identified. Morphine consumption was measured at 24 h. No significant differences were found between the groups' scores for pain or sedation. The PCA group had significantly lower respiratory rates (P = 0.02) and a lower incidence of nausea (P = 0.008). The PCA group also consumed significantly more morphine (P = 0.0001). The study suggests a beneficial effect from PCA after cardiac surgery in reducing nausea, compared to NCA. It confirms nurse-controlled infusion analgesia as an effective form of pain relief in an intensive care and high-dependency setting. Epidural administration of an opioid analgesic by means of a patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) system was compared with conventional intravenous PCA for pain relief after cesarean delivery. One hundred seventeen healthy women were randomly assigned to receive hydromorphone either intravenously (IV-PCA) or epidurally (EPI-PCA) after cesarean delivery with epidural bupivacaine for operative anesthesia. The hydromorphone requirements were 3.4 and 4.2 times more in the IV-PCA group on the first (P less than 0.01) and second (P less than 0.01) postoperative days, respectively. The mean number (+/- SD) of PCA demands during the first 24 h after the operation was 105 (+/- 88) for the IV-PCA group and 33 (+/- 48) for the EPI-PCA group (P less than 0.01). This difference was also significant 24-48 h after surgery. Although the EPI-PCA group utilized significantly less opioid medication, pain and sedation scores were similar in the two treatment groups; however, a significantly larger percentage of patients in the IV-PCA group (46% vs 22%) stated that they felt drowsy during the first postoperative day. Pruritus was reported more frequently in the EPI-PCA (67%) than in the IV-PCA (33%) group. Nausea was experienced by only 10% of patients in the IV-PCA and 6% in the EPI-PCA group. There was no evidence of postoperative respiratory depression, with minimal oxygen saturation values of 93% (+/- 3%) and 94% (+/- 1%) in the IV-PCA and EPI-PCA groups, respectively.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS) Patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) with intravenous pethidine was compared with nurse-controlled pethidine infusions for pain relief in 200 patients after major abdominal or thoracic surgery. Pain, level of sedation, nausea and presence of other adverse effects, in addition to cumulative pethidine requirement, were measured for the first 24 hours after surgery. Both groups were similar for age, weight and type of surgery. There was no significant difference between the quality of analgesia achieved in both groups. The frequency and severity of adverse effects was also similar. The cumulative pethidine dose administered to both groups was identical. It is concluded that nurse-controlled opioid infusions are as effective as PCA and may be used as an alternative to PCA where this is either unavailable or unsuitable. Given the inherent side effects associated with both opioid and nonopioid analgesic drugs, a nonpharmacologic therapy that could decrease the need for analgesic medication would be valuable. We designed a sham-controlled study to assess the effect of the intensity of transcutaneous acupoint electrical stimulation (TAES) on postoperative patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) requirement for hydromorphone (HM), the incidence of opioid-related side effects, and the recovery profile after lower abdominal surgery. One hundred one healthy consenting women undergoing lower abdominal procedures with a standardized general anesthetic technique were randomly assigned to one of four postoperative analgesic treatment regimens: Group I (n = 26) PCA only; Group II (n = 25), PCA + sham-TAES (no electrical stimulation); Group III (n = 25), PCA + low-TAES (4-5 mA of electrical stimulation); Group IV (n = 25), PCA + high-TAES (9-12 mA of electrical stimulation). The PCA device was programmed to deliver HM, 0.2-0.4 mg intravenously boluses "on demand," with a minimum lockout interval of 10 min. The TAES skin electrodes were placed at the Hegu acupoint on the nondominant hand and on both sides of the surgical incision. The TAES frequency was set in the dense-and-disperse mode, alternating at 2 Hz and 100 Hz every 3 s, with stimulation of the hand and incision alternated every 6 s. The patients in Groups II-IV were instructed to use TAES every 2 h for 30 min while awake. After discontinuation of PCA, oral pain medications were administered on demand. The postoperative PCA-HM requirement, pain scores, opioid-related side effects, and requirements for antiemetic and antipruritic medication were recorded. High-TAES decreased the HM requirement by 65% and reduced the duration of PCA therapy, as well as the incidence of nausea, dizziness, and pruritus. Low-TAES produced a 34% decrease in the HM requirement compared with only 23% in the "sham" TAES group. We conclude that high-TAES produced a significant decrease in the PCA opioid requirement and opioid-related side effects after low intraabdominal surgery. Many studies have shown the efficacy of patient-controlled analgesia (PCA). However, it is not clear whether PCA has clinical or economic benefits in addition to efficient analgesia. The current study was designed to evaluate these issues by comparing PCA with regularly administered intramuscular injections of opioids after hysterectomy.
                This prospective study included 126 patients who underwent abdominal hysterectomy and were randomly assigned to receive PCA or regularly timed intramuscular injections of morphine during a period of 48 h. Doses were adjusted to provide satisfactory analgesia in both treatment groups. Pain at rest and with movement, functional recovery, drug side effects, and patient satisfaction were measured using rating scales and questionnaires. The costs of PCA and intramuscular therapy were calculated based on personnel time and drug and material requirements.
                Comparable analgesia was observed with the two treatment methods, with no significant differences in the incidence of side effects or patient satisfaction. The medication dosage had to be adjusted significantly more frequently in the intramuscular group than in the PCA patients. The PCA did not favor a faster recuperation time compared with intramuscular therapy in terms of times to ambulation, resumption of liquid and solid diet, passage of bowel gas, or hospital discharge. The results of the economic evaluation, which used a cost-minimization model and sensitivity analyses, showed that PCA was more costly than regular intramuscular injections despite the fact that no costs for the pump were included in the analyses. Cost differences in nursing time favoring PCA were offset by drug and material costs associated with this type of treatment.
                Compared with regularly scheduled intramuscular dosing, PCA is more costly and does not have clinical advantages for pain management after hysterectomy. Because of the comparable outcomes, the general use of PCA in similar patients should be questioned. To compare the use of patient-controlled analgesia to intermittent intramuscular injections of morphine following major gynecological laparoscopic procedures in order to assess differences in level of pain, sedation, episodes of nausea and/or vomiting, hospitalization time and patient satisfaction with their postoperative analgesia.
                Seventy-two patients undergoing major gynecological laparoscopic surgery were randomized to receive either postoperative analgesia via intermittent intramuscular injection of morphine (Group 1) or patient controlled analgesia (PCA-Group 2). All patients received anesthesia via a standardized protocol. Postoperative pain levels were recorded via a 10 cm visual analogue scale, and sedation scores were recorded on a standard PCA form. Episodes of nausea and vomiting were also recorded on the same form.
                There were no statistically significant differences between intramuscular analgesia and PCA for any of the factors studied. Most significantly it was found that most patients ceased to require either form of parenteral analgesia within 24 hours of their procedure, regardless of the operating time.
                It is important for the surgeon to be aware of the effects of postoperative analgesia on his or her patients' level of satisfaction. We do not recommend the use of PCA analgesia following major laparoscopic gynecological surgery. The pharmacy and nursing time requirements, quality of postoperative pain control, and cost of patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) and intramuscular (i.m.) analgesic therapy were studied. All timings were conducted with a stopwatch on a single nursing unit that primarily receives gynecologic surgery patients. The various work elements involved in each type of therapy were timed individually. Both quality of analgesia and cost were evaluated in a prospective, randomized study in hysterectomy patients. I.M. patients received meperidine hydrochloride 75-100 mg every three to four hours as needed. PCA patients had access to morphine sulfate 1 mg or meperidine hydrochloride 10 mg, with a six-minute lockout period. The patients scored their pain every four hours. Direct costs for PCA were calculated as drug cost plus tubing cost plus form cost plus maintenance cost plus depreciation cost. Direct costs for i.m. therapy consisted of the cost of drugs. The total mean nursing time per patient was 16.9 minutes for PCA and 10.7 minutes for i.m. therapy. Pharmacy time per patient was 5.1 minutes longer for PCA than for i.m. therapy. Thirty-six hysterectomy patients (17 i.m. and 19 PCA) were enrolled in the study of pain control and cost. Among i.m. patients, 64% of the pain scores were mild or worse, compared with 40% for PCA patients. The median pain scores were moderate for i.m. patients and mild for PCA patients. Scores tended to be lower for PCA patients at 16 and 20 hours. Although equal numbers of patients in the two groups experienced nausea, i.m. patients needed more doses of antiemetics than PCA patients.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS) The patients received thoracotomy usually suffered from significant severe pain postoperatively, which accompanied with impaired pulmonary function or increased incidences of atelectasis and pneumonia. So adequate analgesia for those patients is indicated. The purpose of this study is to investigate the efficiency of patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) and determine whether it is better than conventional analgesia or not. Twenty-six patients, ASA physical status class I and II, were randomized into two groups: PCA and intramuscular (IM). The effect on pain relief was assessed by a visual analogue pain scale (VAPS) q 4 h postoperatively for two days. Forced vital capacity (FVC) and the questionnaire of nocturnal sleep disturbance by pain were evaluated preoperatively, the first, second postoperative mornings. As result of this study, the patients of PCA group get less pain than IM group after the first and second days of surgery. VAPS values are 3.7 +/- 1.1, 2.8 +/- 0.8 and 6.1 +/- 0.9, 5.3 +/- 1.1 respectively pertaining to PCA and IM groups (p less than 0.05). The patients of IM group get more disturbance of nocturnal sleep than PCA group at initial two nights of postoperation as well (p less than 0.05). It is manifest to look out the significant difference between these two groups in accordance with FVC ratio records of post-surgery vs presurgery at initial two days after surgery on the subject of respiratory function recovery. PCA group are 46.46 +/- 7.29%, 52.25 +/- 8.32% in a condition of more progress on lung function recovery than IM group of 38.13 +/- 10.25%, 42.15 +/- 7.82% (p less than 0.05).(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS) It remains unclear whether epidural administration of hydromorphone results in spinal analgesia or clinical benefit when compared with intravenous administration. Therefore, we undertook this study to determine whether epidural administration of hydromorphone resulted in decreased opioid requirement, improved analgesia, reduced side effects, more rapid return of gastrointestinal function, or shorter duration of hospital stay than intravenous administration.
                Sixteen patients undergoing radical retropubic prostatectomy were randomized in a double-blind manner to receive either intravenous or epidural hydromorphone via patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) for postoperative analgesia. All patients underwent a standardized combined epidural and general anesthetic and all received ketorolac for 72 h postoperatively. To decrease variability, patients were cared for according to a standardized protocol and were deemed ready for discharge according to prospectively defined criteria.
                Patients in the intravenous PCA group required approximately twice as much opioid than the epidural PCA group (P < 0.008), but there were no differences between groups in pain scores or patient satisfaction. Epidural administration resulted in a greater incidence of pruritus (P = 0.02). Gastrointestinal function recovered quickly in all patients with little variation, and there were no differences between groups. All patients were deemed ready for discharge by the third postoperative day, and removal of surgical drains was the last discharge criterion reached in all patients.
                Our results indicate that epidural administration of hydromorphone results in spinally mediated analgesia. However, epidural administration did not provide significant benefits in terms of postoperative analgesia, recovery of gastrointestinal function, or duration of hospitalization. Furthermore, we suggest that radical retropubic prostatectomy no longer be used as a model to assess the effects of analgesic technique on postoperative recovery, because control of discharge criteria revealed that hospital discharge was primarily dependent on removal of surgical drains. The goal of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness on postoperative pain, and cognitive impact, of patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) compared with subcutaneous (s.c.) injections of morphine in elderly patients undergoing total hip replacement (THR).
                Forty patients older than 70 yr were randomly assigned to two different postoperative analgesic techniques for 48 h: i.v. PCA morphine (dose, 1 mg; lockout interval, 8 min; PCA group) or regular s.c. morphine injections (SC group). Postoperative pain was assessed at rest and when moving, using a visual analogue scale (VAS) every 4 h. A Mini Mental Status (MMS) examination was used to assess cognitive functions before surgery, at 2 h, 24 h and 48 h after surgery, and at hospital discharge. Side-effects were also recorded systematically during the first 48 h after surgery.
                The PCA group showed significantly lower pain scores than the SC group both at rest and during mobilization. However, the clinical significance of pain scores was weak. There was no intergroup difference in postoperative MMS scores. The incidence of side-effects was similar in both groups.
                We conclude that in healthy elderly subjects undergoing THR, the flexibility of the analgesic regimen is more important than the route of administration with regard to efficacy, adverse effects and recovery of cognitive function. We conducted a study to compare the effectiveness of patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) technique to conventional analgesic therapy (CAT) after coronary artery bypass graft (CABG). The PCA group received hydromorphone 0.1 mg.hr-1 basal infusion and bolus doses of 0.2 mg Q 5 min (maximum 1.2 mg.hr-1) while the CAT group received morphine 2.5 mg iv Q 30 min prn until extubation followed by prn meperidine 1 mg.kg-1 im Q 4 hr or acetaminophen 325 mg with codeine 30 mg po (1 or 2 tablets) when oral intake was possible. The degree of pain was assessed using a Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) starting after extubation and every 6-8 hr for the next 60 hr. Holter monitoring was initiated one hour after patient arrival in the Intensive Care Unit (ICU) and continued for 72 hr. Other measured variables were pulmonary function, sedation, side effects and total opioid requirements. Results show that the day-to-day VAS pain score decreased in the PCA group (P < 0.001) while it remained unchanged in CAT patients. The PCA patients had lower VAS pain scores at extubation (P < 0.05). During the third postoperative day, the PCA group had a lower VAS pain score, a lower incidence of severe pain defined as a score > 5 on the VAS scale, and a reduced incidence of myocardial ischaemia (P < 0.01). However, there was no difference in the duration, severity, area under the curve (AUC), or heart rate during ischaemic events. Postoperative pulmonary function was abnormal in both groups (NS) with minimal recovery by the fourth day.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS) To assess the role of postoperative analgesia on myocardial ischemia after aortic surgery, we compared intravenous patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) with thoracic epidural analgesia (TEA). One hundred twenty-four patients were prospectively randomized to the PCA or TEA group. In the TEA group, a T6-7 or T7-8 epidural catheter was inserted before the induction of general anesthesia. Within 1 h of the end of surgery, analgesia and 24-h two-channel Holter monitoring were begun. Myocardial ischemia was defined as ST segment depression > or = 1 mm, 0.06 s after the J point, and lasting for more than 1 min. In the PCA group, a bolus of morphine, 0.05 mg/kg, was given, followed by 0.02 mg/kg of morphine on demand every 10 min. Bupivacaine 0.125% and fentanyl 10 microg/mL was used in the TEA group. Analgesics were titrated to maintain a visual analog scale score < or = 3. The overall incidence of myocardial ischemia was 18.4%-18.2% for TEA and 18.6% for PCA (P = not significant). There were no differences between the groups in the total duration of ischemia per patient (22.2 +/- 119.8 min for TEA and 20.5 +/- 99 min for PCA) and the number of episodes per patient (0.69 +/- 2.1 for TEA and 1.2 +/- 4.9 for PCA). Twenty-three patients had an adverse cardiac outcome, although there were no differences between the groups. The postoperative pain control was superior with TEA. In these patients undergoing elective aortic surgery, the use of postoperative TEA did not result in a lower incidence of early myocardial ischemia compared with intravenous PCA with morphine, despite better analgesia with TEA. Implications: Postoperative myocardial ischemia is associated with adverse cardiac outcome. Using Holter monitoring after aortic surgery, this study shows that the use of thoracic epidural analgesia with bupivacaine and fentanyl did not result in a lower incidence of myocardial ischemia compared with intravenous patient-controlled analgesia with morphine. Patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) offers effective postoperative pain management. However, the evidence of economic benefits associated with its use is lacking. Although suggestive, the potential economic advantages of PCA in saving nursing time and shortening hospital stay need objective documentation.
                This study compared the effects of morphine administered by PCA systems with intramuscular (i.m.) morphine injection on patient analgesic response, satisfaction, nursing time requirements, and postoperative recovery in 23 patients undergoing "open" cholecystectomy and 44 patients undergoing lumbar laminectomy and bony fusion. After the operation, patients in the PCA group received 1.5-2 mg morphine with a lockout of 5-10 minutes on demand, whereas those in the i.m. group received 0.15-0.2 mg/kg every 4 hours on demand. Visual analog scale (VAS) pain scores and satisfaction scores were evaluated at 4-hour intervals while nursing time spent on both analgesia-related and non-analgesia-related activities was recorded continuously by a team of independent observers on the ward. Recovery time profile for the return of bowel function, activities of daily living, ambulation without support, and length of hospital stay was also recorded.
                It was found that morphine consumption, VAS, and satisfaction scores were similar in both PCA and i.m. treatment groups following both types of surgery. However, the delay in nurse response to i.m. morphine request ranged from 27.2 +/- to 42.1 +/- 11.8 minutes. The demand of nursing time on analgesia administration was less with PCA. The magnitude of time saving was 10 min/patient/d in cholecystectomy patients and 13 min/patient/d in laminectomy patients. The speed of postoperative patient recovery was similar between the two analgesia groups. Length of hospital stay following cholecystectomy was shorter--92.0 +/- 5.9 hours with PCA versus 128.6 +/- 22.2 hours with i.m. (not statistically significant)--whereas that following laminectomy was not different.
                Data in this study have demonstrated some beneficial effects of PCA on nursing time requirements when it was used following cholecystectomy and lumbar laminectomy at the University of Toronto: however, the magnitude of these benefits was less than previously reported. The effects of PCA on postoperative recovery and hospital stay, however, were not significantly different from i.m. therapy. Pain after coronary artery bypass surgery persists for several days. A continuous intravenous infusion of an opioid adequately accomplishes good pain control in the intensive care unit, but it is often not suitable on the ordinary ward. Patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) with intermittent injections delivered by one of the new devices now available could be an alternative to conventional nurse-controlled analgesia (NCA) based on intermittent injections. The aim was to compare these two techniques with respect to efficacy and the amount of opioid used.
                Forty-eight patients randomly received PCA or NCA with ketobemidone following extubation after coronary artery bypass grafting. Drug consumption, pain assessment with the visual analogue score (VAS) and possible side effects were evaluated from extubation to the end of the second postoperative day.
                On the day of surgery the VAS scores did not differ between the groups. From the afternoon of the first postoperative day the VAS scores were higher in the NCA group with mean values at 3-4 out of 10 as compared with mean values around 2 in the PCA group (P<0.01). During the study period the patients in the PCA group received more ketobemidone as compared with the NCA group, 61.9+/-24.0 mg and 36.3+/-20.2 mg, respectively (P<0.01). Additional oral analgesics were used in 12 of the patients in the NCA group compared with none in the PCA group. The few side effects reported were equally distributed between the two groups.
                PCA treatment after coronary artery bypass surgery resulted in better pain treatment and the use of more opioid without an increase in side effects compared with traditional NCA treatment. We compared the use of patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) morphine and p.r.n. intravenous morphine in an intensive care unit setting. Thirty-eight patients scheduled for admission to the Surgical Intensive Care Unit (SICU) were prospectively randomized to either a PCA group or a p.r.n. intravenous morphine group. Assessments included pain and sedation scores, respiratory rates, pulse oximetry, and morphine utilization. PCA was found to be comparable in safety and efficacy to nurse-administered morphine in the intensive care environment. An unexpected finding was the higher initial morphine utilization seen in the patients utilizing PCA. To evaluate the impact of music on opioid requirements and pain levels during renal lithotripsy using alfentanil patient-controlled analgesia (PCA), we conducted a prospective, blinded, randomized controlled trial. Patients undergoing lithotripsy were instructed in PCA use and asked to rate their anxiety and select their preferred type of music. They were then premedicated with morphine and ketorolac and randomly allocated into two groups. Group 1 (n = 97) had music started 10 min before the procedure and maintained until 10 min after its conclusion. Group 2 (n = 96) had music begun at the conclusion of lithotripsy and continued for 10 min. Pain intensity, alfentanil requirement, side effects, quality of analgesia, patient satisfaction, and acceptance of the technique were evaluated. Demographics, alfentanil requirement, pain levels, side effects, quality of analgesia, and patient satisfaction were similar in both groups. The addition of music did not provide any benefit. This result raises the possibility that some nonpharmacologic therapies have minimal impact in settings where the painful stimulus is moderate to severe and adequate pharmacotherapy is available. The purpose of this prospective study was to compare the effectiveness of patient-controlled intravenous (i.v.) opioid analgesic administration (PCA) with fixed schedule and dosage oral/rectal administration of naproxen, and opioid analgesics intramuscularly/orally as needed (i.m./p.o. prn) for postoperative analgesia over a period of 48 to 56 hours after surgery.
                There were 75 orthognathic patients aged 25.73 +/- 8.01 years, subdivided into three study groups of 25: codeine group (8 males, 17 females); naproxen group (5 males, 20 females) and PCA group (8 male, 17 females). The degree of analgesia was assessed every 4 hours from 8:00 AM to 8:00 PM hours on days 1 and 2 postsurgery using a visual analog scale (VAS). Mean daily and mean overall VAS scores were treated as parametric data and were analyzed accordingly. Mean daily VAS scores also were categorized as comfort days when mean scores were less than 3.0 cm, and as discomfort days when mean scores were equal to or greater than 3.0 cm. ANOVA were used to analyze patient demographics, pain scores, surgical time, fentanyl used during general anaesthesia, analgesic morphine equivalents, and vital signs. Chi-square tests were used to analyze sex, comfort (discomfort) days, and nausea and vomiting. Mean VAS ratings were analyzed using independent t-tests.
                The three groups were matched in demographics, surgical time, fentanyl used, and sex. The PCA group used less than half the amount of morphine equivalent as the codeine group (P = .0001). Both the naproxen and the PCA groups were significantly more comfortable than the codeine group during day 1 and day 2 postsurgery. The codeine group had significantly more episodes of nausea than either the naproxen or the PCA groups.
                In patients undergoing orthognathic surgery, the naproxen and PCA regimens provided better analgesia than the codeine regimen. We compared patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) and continuous infusion (CI) morphine delivery in a randomized controlled trial in adolescents during oropharyngeal mucositis pain after bone marrow transplantation. Results from 20 patients who completed 7 or more days on study (10 PCA, 10 CI) were evaluated. The group means for age, weight and height were comparable. Daily measures were morphine intake, self-report of pain intensity and side effect scores. Over 10 study days, the mean cumulative morphine dose to subjects in each group was 4.94 mg/kg (PCA) vs. 12.17 mg/kg (CI); the difference is significant (P less than 0.01). No significant differences were found between the groups for patient ratings of pain intensity or side effect scores despite the large difference in mean morphine intake, but the PCA group tended to report less intense sedation and less difficulty concentrating. Adolescents can use PCA effectively and safely for 1-3 weeks. Morphine intake of adolescent patients using PCA morphine intake is significantly lower than that of similar patients receiving staff-controlled CI. A prospective comparison of conventional analgesia and patient-controlled analgesia using morphine was conducted. Each patient underwent a major gynecologic oncology procedure and was observed on the post-operative floor. All 192 patients were studied during the first three post-operative days. The findings suggest less total medication and less sedation with equal pain control in the patient-controlled analgesia group. The aim of our study was to compare epidural anesthesia and analgesia (EDA) with ropivacaine versus general anesthesia followed by IV patient-controlled analgesia with morphine (GA/PCA) after hip replacement regarding pain, side effects, and discharge from the postanesthesia care unit. After ethics committee approval, randomization, and informed consent, 90 patients were enrolled. In Group EDA, epidural anesthesia (ropivacaine 10 mg/mL, 15-25 mL) was followed by an epidural infusion (2 mg/mL, 4-6 mL/h for 24 h, plus top-up doses of 6-10 mL for 48 h). GA/PCA patients received general anesthesia (isoflurane/N2O/fentanyl) followed by IV patient-controlled analgesia with morphine postoperatively. Pain was assessed by using visual analog scales (0-100 mm) at rest and during physiotherapy. Pain at rest was less in the EDA (n = 43) group than in the GA/PCA (n = 45) group (at 10 h: 11.8+/-12.9 vs. 28.4+/-17.1 [P< 0.001]; at 24 h: 14.3+/-11.7 vs. 24.0+/-17 [P<0.01]; in 48 h: 14.3+/-9.3 vs. 21.1+/-17.4 [P = 0.1]). Whereas EDA patients were deemed ready for discharge from the postanesthesia care unit earlier than GA/PCA patients (5.6+/-8.9 vs. 39.7+/-41.5 min), the actual discharge time was comparable. The median time for first passage of flatus was shorter in the EDA group than in the GA/PCA group (26 vs. 47 h). Nausea and vomiting were more common in the GA/PCA group than in the EDA group (16% vs. 28% and 11% vs. 22%, respectively), whereas hypotension (11% vs. 4%) and bradycardia (14% vs. 2%) were less frequent. Under the conditions of the present study, EDA with ropivacaine provided pain control after hip replacement superior to that provided by IV patient-controlled analgesia with morphine, particularly during the first 24 h. Both approaches to pain management were equally safe.
                Compared with general anesthesia and postoperative IV patient-controlled analgesia with morphine, epidural anesthesia and analgesia with the new local anesthetic ropivacaine enables patients to be discharged sooner from a postanesthesia care unit and provides superior pain relief during the first 24 h after hip replacement. This study was conducted in order to investigate the advantages and limitations of four analgesic modalities: a) epidural morphine; b) intravenous morphine; c) patient controlled intravenous morphine (patient-controlled analgesia); and d) non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs. Eighty patients undergoing major abdominal surgical procedures were prospectively and randomly treated with one of the above-mentioned analgesic methods. Evaluation of pain perception was done using the visual analogue pain score and the simple descriptive scale 4 hours after the procedure, in the early morning on postoperative day 1 and in the afternoon on postoperative days 1, 2 and 3. The need for supplementary analgesia and the onset of complications, if any, were also evaluated for each patient. Patient-controlled intravenous morphine yielded the best analgesic effect over the entire period. Epidural morphine was more effective in the very early postoperative period compared to modalities (b) and (d). Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, on the other hand, were more effective on the later postoperative days. None of the patients in group C needed supplementary analgesia, as against 20% in group A, 55% in group B and 40% in group D. Patients with hypochondriasis scores > 70 or depression scores > 70 required supplementation of analgesia more often. Morphine proved to be the drug of choice. Drug titration may be modulated in relation to the psychological characteristics of the patient. The best drug titration modality, in fact, is patient-controlled analgesia. After total knee arthroplasty, patients regularly suffer from severe pain. It is unclear whether epidural or systemic pain therapy is superior in terms of postoperative pain relief, patients' comfort and side effects. A new therapeutic approach, intraarticular opioids, has been suggested with the detection of opioid receptors in inflamed tissue. This method has proven suitable for clinical use in small operations (e.g. knee arthroscopy). In this study, we compared epidural analgesia and intraarticular application of morphine plus "on-demand" intravenous analgesia to "on-demand" intravenous analgesia alone.
                Thirty-seven patients, scheduled for total knee arthroplasty, were randomly assigned to three treatment groups: in group 1 (EPI) patients received bolus doses of morphine via an epidural catheter; in group 2 (IA) an intraarticular bolus of 1 mg of morphine was applied at the end of the operation with subsequent use of a patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) pump; group 3 (Control), in which only PCA was provided, served as control for both analgesic procedures. Main outcome measures included visual analogue pain scales, total morphine consumption, and stress hormones.
                No statistically significant differences in visual analogue pain scales could be detected between the three groups. Application of intraarticular morphine did not reduce the amount of analgesics required for postoperative analgesia as compared to intravenous analgesia alone. Application of epidural morphine significantly suppressed beta-endorphine release, but did not significantly influence other stress hormones as compared to the control group.
                Epidural and intravenous analgesia after total knee arthroplasty are equivalent methods of pain relief. In major orthopaedic procedures, application of intraarticular morphine does not reduce analgesic requirements. The present study examined the impact of two methods of pain management on recovery in 38 women undergoing hysterectomy. One group received IV morphine in the recovery room and IM morphine on the ward on a PRN basis (PRN group). In the other group, a loading dose of morphine 8 mg IV was given when the patient first complained of pain and patient-controlled IV morphine (PCA) was initiated and continued for 48 h (PCA group). Both groups received similar amounts of morphine overall, differently distributed over time. The PCA patients received 8 mg.h-1 in the recovery room (approximately 2.5 hrs) and less thereafter. The PRN patients received approximately 2 mg.h-1 for the entire 48-hr period. Pain control was better throughout convalescence and less variable across time with PCA management. Minute ventilation also recovered faster and by day four was 25 per cent above the preoperative baseline in the PCA group. In addition, oral temperature became normal one day earlier, ambulation recovered more rapidly and patients were discharged from hospital earlier. The data suggest that early treatment with relatively high, self-titrated morphine doses may alter the course of the metabolic response to surgery.
This review provides evidence that PCA is an efficacious alternative to conventional systemic analgesia for postoperative pain control.