+ Site Statistics
+ Search Articles
+ PDF Full Text Service
How our service works
Request PDF Full Text
+ Follow Us
Follow on Facebook
Follow on Twitter
Follow on LinkedIn
+ Subscribe to Site Feeds
Most Shared
PDF Full Text
+ Translate
+ Recently Requested

Patient controlled opioid analgesia versus non-patient controlled opioid analgesia for postoperative pain

Patient controlled opioid analgesia versus non-patient controlled opioid analgesia for postoperative pain

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2015(6): Cd003348

This is an updated version of the original Cochrane review published in Issue 4, 2006. 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 et al found a strong patient preference for PCA over non-patient controlled 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, a 2001 review by Walder et al did not find statistically significant differences in pain intensity or pain relief between PCA and groups treated with non-patient controlled analgesia. To evaluate the efficacy and safety of patient controlled intravenous opioid analgesia (termed PCA in this review) versus non-patient controlled opioid analgesia of as-needed opioid analgesia for postoperative pain relief. We ran the search for the previous review in November 2004. For this update, we searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL 2014, Issue 12), MEDLINE (1966 to 28 January 2015), and EMBASE (1980 to 28 January 2015) for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in any language, and reference lists of reviews and retrieved articles. We selected RCTs that assessed pain intensity as a primary or secondary outcome. These studies compared PCA without a continuous background infusion with non-patient controlled opioid analgesic regimens. We excluded studies that explicitly stated they involved patients with chronic pain. Two review authors independently extracted data, which included demographic variables, type of surgery, interventions, efficacy, and adverse events. We graded each included study for methodological quality by assessing risk of bias and employed the GRADE approach to assess the overall quality of the evidence. We performed meta-analysis of outcomes that included pain intensity assessed by a 0 to 100 visual analog scale (VAS), opioid consumption, patient satisfaction, length of stay, and adverse events. Forty-nine studies with 1725 participants receiving PCA and 1687 participants assigned to a control group met the inclusion criteria. The original review included 55 studies with 2023 patients receiving PCA and 1838 patients assigned to a control group. There were fewer included studies in our updated review due to the revised exclusion criteria. For the primary outcome, participants receiving PCA had lower VAS pain intensity scores versus non-patient controlled analgesia over most time intervals, e.g., scores over 0 to 24 hours were nine points lower (95% confidence interval (CI) -13 to -5, moderate quality evidence) and over 0 to 48 hours were 10 points lower (95% CI -12 to -7, low quality evidence). Among the secondary outcomes, participants were more satisfied with PCA (81% versus 61%, P value = 0.002) and consumed higher amounts of opioids than controls (0 to 24 hours, 7 mg more of intravenous morphine equivalents, 95% CI 1 mg to 13 mg). Those receiving PCA had a higher incidence of pruritus (15% versus 8%, P value = 0.01) but had a similar incidence of other adverse events. There was no difference in the length of hospital stay. Since the last version of this review, we have found new studies providing additional information. We reanalyzed the data but the results did not substantially alter any of our previously published conclusions. This review provides moderate to low quality evidence that PCA is an efficacious alternative to non-patient controlled systemic analgesia for postoperative pain control.

Please choose payment method:

(PDF emailed within 0-6 h: $19.90)

Accession: 058512489

Download citation: RISBibTeXText

PMID: 26035341

DOI: 10.1002/14651858.cd003348.pub3

Related references

Patient controlled opioid analgesia versus conventional opioid analgesia for postoperative pain. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2006(4): Cd003348, 2006

Pain therapy after thoracotomies--systemic patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) with opioid versus intercostal block and interpleural analgesia. Anaesthesiologie und Reanimation 22(6): 159-163, 1997

Patient controlled intravenous opioid analgesia versus continuous epidural analgesia for pain after intra-abdominal surgery. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2005(1): Cd004088, 2005

Influence of patient-controlled epidural analgesia versus patient-controlled intravenous analgesia on postoperative pain control and recovery after gastrectomy for gastric cancer: a prospective randomized trial. Gastric Cancer 16(2): 193-200, 2013

Patient controlled analgesia versus patient controlled epidural analgesia for postoperative pain management in elderly patients. Regional Anesthesia and Pain Medicine 30(5): 34-34, 2005

Oral immediate and prolonged release oxycodone for safe and effective patient controlled analgesia after surgery Can opioid for acute postoperative pain be improved by adding a peripheral opioid antagonist?. Scandinavian Journal of Pain 7(1): 25-27, 2015

Pain therapy after thoracoscopic interventions. Do regional analgesia techniques (intercostal block or interpleural analgesia) have advantages over intravenous patient-controlled opioid analgesia (PCA)?. Der Chirurg; Zeitschrift für Alle Gebiete der Operativen Medizen 70(6): 682-689, 1999

Effect of patient-controlled epidural analgesia versus patient-controlled intravenous analgesia on postoperative pain management and short-term outcomes after gastric cancer resection: a retrospective analysis of 3,042 consecutive patients between 2010 and 2015. Journal of Pain Research 11: 1743-1749, 2018

Postoperative pain therapy in minimally invasive direct coronary arterial bypass surgery. I.v. opioid patient-controlled analgesia versus intercostal block. Der Anaesthesist 51(3): 175-179, 2002

Patient-controlled interscalene analgesia versus patient-controlled intravenous analgesia in postoperative analgesia after upper extremity surgery. European Journal of Plastic Surgery 25(3): 149-151, 2002

Postoperative analgesia after major spine surgery: patient-controlled epidural analgesia versus patient-controlled intravenous analgesia. Anesthesia and Analgesia 103(5): 1311-1317, 2006

A Comparison of Patient Controlled Epidural Analgesia With Intravenous Patient Controlled Analgesia for Postoperative Pain Management After Major Gynecologic Oncologic Surgeries: A Randomized Controlled Clinical Trial. Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine 5(5): E29540, 2015

A comparison of opioid-related adverse events with fentanyl iontophoretic transdermal system versus morphine intravenous patient-controlled analgesia in acute postoperative pain. Pain Management 6(1): 19-24, 2016

Differential indications of non-opioid drugs for postoperative analgesia II. Quantification of the analgesic effect of a combination of metamizol plus diclofenac via patient-controlled analgesia. Anasthesiologie, Intensivmedizin, Notfallmedizin, Schmerztherapie 31(4): 216-221, 1996

Efficacy and safety of patient-controlled opioid analgesia for acute postoperative pain. A quantitative systematic review. Acta Anaesthesiologica Scandinavica 45(7): 795-804, 2001