+1 Recommend
1 collections
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Can consistent benchmarking within a standardized pain management concept decrease postoperative pain after total hip arthroplasty? A prospective cohort study including 367 patients

      Read this article at

          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.



          The number of total hip replacement surgeries has steadily increased over recent years. Reduction in postoperative pain increases patient satisfaction and enables better mobilization. Thus, pain management needs to be continuously improved. Problems are often caused not only by medical issues but also by organization and hospital structure. The present study shows how the quality of pain management can be increased by implementing a standardized pain concept and simple, consistent, benchmarking.


          All patients included in the study had undergone total hip arthroplasty (THA). Outcome parameters were analyzed 24 hours after surgery by means of the questionnaires from the German-wide project “Quality Improvement in Postoperative Pain Management” (QUIPS). A pain nurse interviewed patients and continuously assessed outcome quality parameters. A multidisciplinary team of anesthetists, orthopedic surgeons, and nurses implemented a regular procedure of data analysis and internal benchmarking. The health care team was informed of any results, and suggested improvements. Every staff member involved in pain management participated in educational lessons, and a special pain nurse was trained in each ward.


          From 2014 to 2015, 367 patients were included. The mean maximal pain score 24 hours after surgery was 4.0 (±3.0) on an 11-point numeric rating scale, and patient satisfaction was 9.0 (±1.2). Over time, the maximum pain score decreased (mean 3.0, ±2.0), whereas patient satisfaction significantly increased (mean 9.8, ±0.4; p<0.05). Among 49 anonymized hospitals, our clinic stayed on first rank in terms of lowest maximum pain and patient satisfaction over the period.


          Results were already acceptable at the beginning of benchmarking a standardized pain management concept. But regular benchmarking, implementation of feedback mechanisms, and staff education made the pain management concept even more successful. Multidisciplinary teamwork and flexibility in adapting processes seem to be highly important for successful pain management.

          Related collections

          Most cited references 16

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Chronic postsurgical pain in Europe: An observational study.

          Chronic postsurgical pain (CPSP) is an important clinical problem. Prospective studies of the incidence, characteristics and risk factors of CPSP are needed.
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Postoperative pain treatment after total hip arthroplasty: a systematic review.

            Treatment of postoperative pain should rely on results from randomized controlled trials and meta-analyses of high scientific quality. The efficacy of a particular intervention may depend on the type of surgical procedure, which supports the reporting of "procedure-specific" interventions. The aim of this systematic review was to document the procedure-specific evidence for analgesic interventions after total hip arthroplasty (THA). This PRISMA-compliant and PROSPERO-registered review includes randomized placebo-controlled trials (RCTs) of medication-based analgesic interventions after THA. Endpoints were postoperative opioid consumption, pain scores (rest and during mobilization), adverse events, and length of hospital stay. Fifty-eight trials with 19 different interventions were retrieved. High risk of bias, substantial differences in assessment-tools and criteria for pain, irregular reporting of adverse events, considerable differences in supplemental analgesic consumption, and basic analgesic regimens generally characterized trials. Meta-analyses of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, local infiltration analgesia, intrathecal opioids, and lumbar plexus block provided a 24-hour intravenous morphine-sparing effect of 14.1 (95 % confidence interval: 8.0-20.2) mg, 7.5 (3.7-11.3) mg, 19.8 (14.9-24.7) mg, and 11.9 (6.4-17.3) mg, respectively. Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and lumbar plexus block were demonstrated to provide reductions in postoperative pain scores. Intrathecal opioids increased pruritus, and lumbar plexus block reduced nausea and pruritus. The GRADE-rated quality of evidence ranged from low to very low throughout the analyses. This review demonstrated, that some analgesic interventions may have the capacity to reduce mean opioid requirements and/or mean pain intensity compared with controls, but the available randomized placebo-controlled trials does not allow a designation of a "best proven intervention" for THA.
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Benchmarking as a tool of continuous quality improvement in postoperative pain management.

              Quality of acute pain management is far from being satisfactory. These deficits are not caused by the complexity of the medical problem but by difficulties in organization and hospital structures, sand procedures. Continuous quality improvement is a recommended tool to overcome such difficulties and to increase quality in the long run. This study reports the implementation of benchmarking-based continuous quality improvement to improve postoperative pain management at a university hospital. A specialised pain nurse interviewed patients of three surgical departments on the first day after surgery, and continuously assessed process and outcome quality parameters. A multidisciplinary team of anaesthetists, surgeons, nurses and pharmacists implemented a regular procedure of data analysing and internal benchmarking. Results and suggested improvements were fed back to the healthcare teams. From 1998 to 2002, 6,756 patients were assessed. Average pain on ambulation and maximal pain were 3.7 +/- 2.4 and 5.0 +/- 2.5 (mean +/- SD) on a 11-point numeric rating scale. Pain intensity at rest was 1.9 +/- 1.8. Over time, pain intensity on ambulation decreased (P = 0.022) whereas maximal pain and pain at rest remained unchanged. There was an increase in the number of patients who received non-opioid analgesia (P < 0.001). A continuous quality improvement process could be established and is now successfully used in clinical routine. Cornerstones of this project were frequent assessments of process and outcome parameters, regular benchmarking and implementation of feedback mechanisms. Changes in organization of medical management and multidisciplinary teamwork seem to be more important than medical or technical aspects.

                Author and article information

                J Pain Res
                J Pain Res
                Journal of Pain Research
                Journal of Pain Research
                Dove Medical Press
                19 December 2016
                : 9
                : 1205-1213
                [1 ]Department of Orthopedics, University Medical Center Regensburg
                [2 ]Clinic for anesthesia, Asklepios Klinikum Bad Abbach, Bad Abbach
                [3 ]Centre for Clinical Studies, University Medical Center Regensburg, Regensburg
                [4 ]Department of Anesthesiology and Intensive Care, Jena University Hospital, Jena, Germany
                Author notes
                Correspondence: Achim Benditz, Department of Orthopedics, University Medical Center Regensburg, Asklepios Klinikum Bad Abbach, Kaiser-Karl-V-Allee 3, 93077 Bad Abbach, Germany, Tel +49 17 2833 0955, Fax +49 94 0518 4828, Email achim.benditz@ 123456ukr.de
                © 2016 Benditz et al. This work is published and licensed by Dove Medical Press Limited

                The full terms of this license are available at https://www.dovepress.com/terms.php and incorporate the Creative Commons Attribution – Non Commercial (unported, v3.0) License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/). By accessing the work you hereby accept the Terms. Non-commercial uses of the work are permitted without any further permission from Dove Medical Press Limited, provided the work is properly attributed.

                Original Research


                Comment on this article