Division of Heath Research, Faculty of Health and Medicine, Lancaster University, Lancaster, UK.
Department of Anaesthesia and Critical Care, Royal Blackburn Teaching Hospital, Blackburn, UK.
Anaesthesia. 2023 Oct;78(10):1249-1255. doi: 10.1111/anae.16087. Epub 2023 Jul 9.
Adequate postoperative analgesia is a key element of enhanced recovery programmes. Thoracic epidural analgesia is associated with superior postoperative analgesia but can lead to complications. Rectus sheath catheter analgesia may provide an alternative. In a nested qualitative study (within a two-year randomised controlled trial) focussing on the acceptability, expectations and experiences of receiving the interventions, participants (n = 20) were interviewed 4 weeks post-intervention using a grounded theory approach. Constant comparative analysis, with patient and public involvement, enabled emerging findings to be pursued through subsequent data collection. We found no notable differences regarding postoperative acceptability or the experience of pain management. Pre-operatively, however, thoracic epidural analgesia was a source of anticipatory fear and anxiety. Both interventions resulted in some experienced adverse events (proportionately more with thoracic epidural analgesia). Participants had negative experiences of the insertion of thoracic epidural analgesia; others receiving the rectus sheath catheter lacked confidence in staff members' ability to manage the local anaesthetic infusion pump. The anticipation of the technique of thoracic epidural analgesia, and concerns about its impact on mobility, represented an additional, unpleasant experience for patients already managing an illness experience, anticipating a life-changing operation and dealing with concerns about the future. The anticipation of rectus sheath catheter analgesia was not associated with such anxieties. Patients' experiences start far earlier than the experience of the intervention itself through anticipatory anxieties and fears about receiving a technique and its potential implications. Complex pain packages can take on greater meaning than their actual efficacy in relieving postoperative pain. Future research into patient acceptability and experience should not focus solely on efficacy of pain relief but should include anticipatory fears, anxieties and experiences.
充分的术后镇痛是增强康复计划的关键要素。胸段硬膜外镇痛与术后更好的镇痛相关,但可能导致并发症。腹直肌鞘导管镇痛可能是一种替代方法。在一项嵌套的定性研究(在一项为期两年的随机对照试验内)中,重点关注接受干预措施的可接受性、期望和经验,在干预后 4 周,使用扎根理论方法对参与者(n=20)进行了访谈。通过患者和公众参与的恒定性比较分析,使新出现的发现能够通过随后的数据收集进行探讨。我们没有发现关于术后可接受性或疼痛管理体验的显著差异。然而,在术前,胸段硬膜外镇痛是一种预期的恐惧和焦虑的来源。两种干预措施都导致了一些经历过的不良事件(胸段硬膜外镇痛的比例更高)。参与者对胸段硬膜外镇痛的插入有负面体验;其他接受腹直肌鞘导管的人对工作人员管理局部麻醉输注泵的能力缺乏信心。对胸段硬膜外镇痛技术的预期,以及对其对活动能力影响的担忧,代表了患者在已经应对疾病经历、预期改变生活的手术和处理对未来的担忧之外的另一种不愉快的体验。对腹直肌鞘导管镇痛的预期不会带来这种焦虑。患者的体验远远早于干预本身的体验,通过对接受技术及其潜在影响的预期焦虑和恐惧。复杂的疼痛方案可能具有比缓解术后疼痛的实际效果更大的意义。未来关于患者可接受性和体验的研究不应仅关注缓解疼痛的疗效,还应包括预期的恐惧、焦虑和体验。