Many issues and questions have been raised with today's surgical practice, which is heavily reliant on use of opioid pain relievers as the primary method of controlling postoperative pain.1 The current sentiment regarding the surging fear of opioid usage is not entirely justified when considering specific situations. These situations involve clinically relevant disease processes, surgical interventions, and other traumatic injuries, which can all warrant opioid usage.1 Opioids can be an effective tool for pain control, but also come with unfavorable side effects and the possibility of addiction, which may outweigh their potential benefits.2 , 3
Multimodal pain management is a method that has been discussed for years and recently gained widespread popularity, employing a safer approach to pain control.4 The goal of multimodal pain control is to use many different medications and techniques that will decrease opioid usage by attacking pain receptors from different methods and help deliver effective pain relief. Following total joint arthroplasty also known as replacement, effective pain management has a significant impact on recovery, outcomes, and the patient experience.5 , 6 Each phase of care for this patient population has different challenges and concerns, which warrants an interdisciplinary approach with standardized best practice protocols.7 These protocols need to have the ability to identify when variations in care are necessary for patient-specific care.8
The techniques employed during anesthesia are the cornerstone of these protocols. The surgeon's involvement and engagement sets the tone throughout the entire surgical process. The variety and timing of opioid and nonopioid medications plays a significant role during the postoperative phase.9 , 10 Education throughout the entire perioperative process is crucial to the patient and their support system to promote engagement and preparedness for surgery.10–12
Changes in health care clearly influence how care will be delivered. Payors such as the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS), private, and worker compensation insurances are all pushing for a shift toward grading performance of surgeons and hospitals on the quality of care for certain services.14 , 15 The CMS has begun bundle payment models with some voluntary and some mandatory areas.
The ultimate aim of these programs is to reduce the cost of care and increase the quality of the outcomes.16 Private insurers are reviewing data to designate facilities as Centers of Excellence (COE), which will become their preferred surgical sites/facilities and lead to only approving their patients to have surgery at a COE site. Other bundle payment models will be releasing information to the public on the quality of services provided by each hospital to assist the patient with making an informed decision about where to have elective surgery.17 The health care providers who have good outcomes, decreased complications, and cost-effective techniques will benefit financially. Those health care providers with the highest costs of care and poor outcomes may be penalized and need to pay back money based on their performance as compared with other providers in their region.14 , 18
In addition, in a final ruling beginning in 2018, the CMS has removed total knee arthroplasty (TKA) from the inpatient-only list.19 This will open the door for outpatient or ambulatory total knee replacement, which means Medicare will cover same-day TKA. This change has repercussions for all joint replacement programs across the country. Ambulatory surgical centers will be gearing up for this business. The ambulatory centers are preparing for these changes and need to consider obvious hurdles such as effective management of the continuum, monitoring, educating, and pain control for this population.20
To complicate the issue, The Joint Commission (TJC), the regulatory body, has released guidelines effective January 1, 2018. These guidelines change the requirements related to pain assessment and management for inpatient care.21 Health care changes are heavily based directly on monetary drivers and regulatory requirements of care. Changes in the standards of care by TJC will push organizations to look for ways to address this requirement. Organizations need to review how pain is being managed currently across all inpatient hospital settings. During CMS and TJC onsite evaluations of performance, focused surgical tracers are performed. Organizations have their pathways, policies, evidence-based practice, competencies of staff, assessment of pain and interventions, orders from providers, and alternative approaches to pain management with nonpharmacological interventions reviewed and inspected.22
APPROACH ACROSS THE CONTINUUM OF CARE
Standardized care protocols ensure proper coordinated care throughout the continuum.23 Each phase and member of the interdisciplinary team has specific responsibilities and focus points. One common trait of successful programs is effective communication and appreciation for each discipline making up the team.24 The continuum of care for total joint replacement is considered to start in the orthopedist's office, which is commonly referred to as the orthopedic consult phase. This is the time during which the surgery is suggested and the patient decides to move forward with joint replacement. A plan of care should be determined for pain management prior to surgery to address the patient's perceived needs. The patient's history and experience with opioids, not just in terms of addiction, will assist the physician's clinical decision-making with developing a pain management plan.5 If necessary, adjustments can be made after surgery to meet the patient's need.25
The next phase of the continuum involves preoperative assessment and risk stratification to mitigate inherent risk of surgery. The intraoperative and postoperative phases flow into the follow-up phase, when the patient is home continuing the necessary outpatient rehabilitation.25 , 26
Building order sets based on evidence-based research and practice with developed protocols is essential.7 , 27 Order sets need to be specific for both hip and knee replacement. The order sets for preoperative and postoperative phases of care should have targeted elements for each phase, ensuring that required standardized care is delivered consistently.28 Standardized care means that each total hip or knee replacement will receive the same exact care with every patient, despite numerous surgeons at a facility.29
Programs benefit greatly from having a surgeon as an advocate or champion to facilitate “buy-in,” encouraging other surgeons to become involved with the program. Involvement of all surgeons will help make future changes and improve adherence to best practice. Establishing critical elements from the clinical practice guidelines to achieve for all patients is important and can assist with the development and/or modification of existing pathways.30
The protocol must be able to adjust for the needs of the individual patient. All patients should start within a standardized protocol to ensure consistency is achieved with this surgical population.31 The protocol should involve assessments for risk stratification to identify when a deviation from protocol is required. An individual's situation involves his or her medical history, ambulating status, social factors, and preoperative pain regimen.32 , 33
Patient preference can play a role in the course of their treatment plan.32 , 33 Their thoughts and opinions should be involved with the development of their pain management strategy. These preferences can have an effect on patients' ability to effectively self-manage their pain control during the follow-up phase of care.32 , 33
Care cannot be given like a “happy meal approach” with only 3 choices. Successful pain management that covers all situations cannot use a regimented approach. Once a program has standardized practice established, they can better address the individualized needs of each patient. Poor identification of these patients can lead to potential problems with impact on care, extending length of stay, and increasing the risk of complications. Patient-specific models of approach are not only helpful but critical to delivering high-quality care on a consistent basis.8 , 34 , 35
This multimodal pain management method can focus benefits on the older population, who are typically receiving joint replacements. The elderly are highly susceptible to confusion and delirium following surgery. This confusion is multifactorial resulting from the anesthesia received during the procedure, postoperative narcotic medication usage, the slower rate at which drugs are metabolized, and simply being in the hospital, which can be considered a foreign place to the elderly, therefore increasing confusion.36–38 Monitoring for early signs of delirium from the interdisciplinary team is important. Delirium negatively impacts ambulating status, increases risk of injury, and delays needed care. A comprehensive assessment of the patient, cognitive screening, vital signs, laboratory work, involving kidney function, comprehensive blood count with differential, and urine analysis/culture sensitives are some of the tests needed to determine delirium.36 , 39 , 40 When delirium is determined, safety intervention measures must be considered with the degree of delirium to prevent injury. These interventions might include reduction in environmental stimuli, frequent rounding with reorientation, encouraging family members or support system visits, and usage of bed or chair alarm for safety. Adjusting pain management for the patient should include consideration of removing opioids or restricting their use. Delirium has been shown to contribute to longer length of stay, higher costs of care, and potentially lead to poor surgical outcome.37 , 41 , 42
CHRONIC OPIOID POPULATION
The patient who has built up a tolerance to opioids preoperatively represents a major challenge. The chronic use opioid patient, or patient with a history of substance abuse, can be a difficult patient for pain management following surgery.3 , 43 , 44 Early identification of these patients is vital to direct patient-specific intervention and handling before surgery. It is imperative to create a pain plan before surgery with the involvement of anesthesia, the patient, and any other practitioners caring for the patient postoperatively.5 , 45 , 46 Maintaining a patient's current pain medication regimen before surgery and adding additional pain medications to their regimen in the postoperative phase will assist in controlling pain levels.4 , 47 Some research suggests that long-term usage of opioids leads patients to build up a tolerance, potentially causing a state of opioid-induced hyperalgesia. This state affects the body's relationship and interaction with opioids to cause the same amount of pain medication to not relieve pain, but in fact make pain worse.48 , 49 Understanding each condition of opioid sensitivity is important for clinical staff and the patient to effectively manage pain levels to have a positive outcome after surgery.8 , 50
One aspect of multimodal approach to pain involves administration of various combinations of analgesic medications at numerous time points during the course of surgery. Effective pain management after total joint replacement can be achieved with a mixture of medications used during the preoperative (nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs [NSAIDs], cyclooxygenase-2 [COX-2] inhibitors, and gabapentinoids), intraoperative (opioids, local anesthetics, and antiemetic combinations), and postoperative phases of care (opioids, NSAIDs, COX-2 inhibitors, gabapentinoids, and acetaminophen).4 Nonpharmacological interventions will help supplement physical therapy interventions, achieve additional pain management options in conjunction with medications.21
“The biggest game changer in total joint replacement in recent years is anesthesia,” stated Dr Richard W. Cohen, of Trinity Health System of Georgia.
Say hi to your anesthesiologist
The most important member of the orthopedic steering committee is the anesthesiologist.51 Orthopedic surgeons have an obvious impact on a patient's outcome. Their knowledge and skill in utilizing the latest advancements such as the use of minimally invasive incision, muscle-sparing surgical technique, improved computer imaging, patient-specific implants, and the use of robotic assisted surgery positively improve patient outcomes.51–55 However, the anesthesiologist is more than just the person “knocking you out during the procedure.” Rather your anesthesiologist is the person centralized on the interdisciplinary team to influence on a positive patient outcome. Effective anesthesia during the surgical case has immediate impact on decreasing pain, and minimizing adverse effects in the patient's first 24 hours.56 This is especially significant for the patient to achieve early mobilization with physical therapy on same day of surgery and into postoperative day 1, truly “starting on the correct foot.”57 , 58
Impact from the operating room
For intraoperative anesthetic management of a total joint replacement, the patient will receive either general anesthesia or neuraxial anesthesia. Neuraxial anesthesia consists of a spinal anesthetic, an epidural, or a combination of spinal and epidural anesthesia.37 During a spinal anesthetic, the cerebrospinal fluid surrounding the spinal cord is accessed by placing a needle into the intrathecal space. A limited volume of local anesthetic is delivered through this needle. The anesthetic will inhibit the propagation of neural signals from those nerves that are surrounded with this medication. Clinically, the patient will experience motor weakness and lack of sensation below the level of injection. In contrast to the spinal anesthetic, the epidural anesthetic is performed by injecting local anesthetic into the space just outside of the dura. A catheter can also be threaded into this space, which allows for the continuous administration of local anesthetics, both intraoperatively and postoperatively.59
In addition to the local anesthetic, a dose of preservative-free morphine can also be injected into the intrathecal space, allowing for continued pain relief in the postoperative period.60 Side effects of this medication include increased nausea, vomiting, pruritus, respiratory depression, and urinary retention.
For patients receiving general anesthesia, an induction agent, such as propofol, is used in addition to neuromuscular blocking drugs, such as rocuronium. An endotracheal tube or similar device is most often placed and the patient is mechanically ventilated. If a neuraxial technique is employed, a local anesthetic, such as a bupivacaine, is injected into the cerebrospinal fluid, causing loss of motor and sensory function below the level of injection. This technique is most often combined with intravenous (IV) sedation throughout the procedure.9 , 59
Breaking from tradition
Historically, general anesthesia has been the more common type of anesthesia employed during total joint arthroplasty surgery. A study by Memtsoudis et al,9 reviewed 528 495 entries of patients undergoing primary hip or knee arthroplasty between 2006 and 2010.9 Of those entries, 382 236 records included anesthesia-type used, 11% received neuraxial anesthesia, 14.2% had combined neuraxial-general anesthesia, and 74.8% of the patients received general anesthesia. This study found that patients receiving neuraxial anesthesia had significantly lower 30-day mortality (0.10, 0.10, and 0.18%; P < .001), as was the incidence of decreased length of stay, cost, and inhospital complications. This decrease with inhospital complications included reductions in pulmonary embolism, pulmonary compromise, pneumonia, cerebrovascular events, and acute renal failure.9 , 60
The trend to use less narcotic medications to treat postoperative pain continues to increase, and multimodal analgesic regimens are increasingly becoming part of total joint replacement protocols (refer to the Figure). One component of these protocols includes the use of peripheral nerve blocks, typically performed with the use of ultrasound guidance. Under ultrasound guidance, a local anesthetic is delivered by injection so that the medication surrounds the nerve. The local anesthetic blocks the pain signals from traveling back to the brain. Benefits to the patient include less postoperative narcotic consumption, increased participation with physical therapy, fewer side effects including nausea and vomiting, and improved patient satisfaction. The 2 most commonly performed blocks are the femoral nerve block and the adductor canal nerve block.61
The femoral nerve supplies sensation to the anterior portion of the thigh as well as allows for knee extension by the 4 quadriceps muscles, sartorius and pectineus. Blockade of this nerve provides postoperative pain control following a TKA. It can however cause knee extensor mechanism weakness, which can lead to an increased risk of falls in the postoperative period.61 A similar block, often performed for postoperative pain management following TKA, is the adductor canal block. This nerve block targets the saphenous nerve, as it courses through the adductor canal. The saphenous nerve is a branch of the femoral nerve and provides sensation to the medial lower aspect of the leg and the superior pole of the patella. It is purely a sensory nerve and therefore decreases the risk of falls associated with the femoral nerve block.
One meta-analysis by Jiang et al62 included 11 randomized controlled trials for a total of 675 patients comparing an adductor canal nerve block to a block done with saline for patients undergoing TKA. Those patients whose block was performed with local anesthetic had statistically significant less postoperative narcotic consumption as compared with those patients with a saline block (P < .001) and had less pain at rest or during activity. Many studies have been performed to compare the femoral nerve block with the adductor canal nerve block. One such meta-analysis by Kuang et al63 included 9 randomized controlled trials with 609 patients. They found that, as compared with the femoral nerve block group, the adductor canal block group had no significant differences in pain scores at rest, with mobilization, rescue opioid consumption, patient satisfaction, and hospital length of stay. Patients in the adductor canal group also had better quadriceps muscle strength and mobilization ability. From this meta-analysis, it appears that both blocks provide equivalent postoperative pain control; however, the adductor canal block is better at preserving quadriceps strength.63
Peripheral nerve blocks can be performed as either single-shot injections or insertion of a catheter. The advantage of catheter placement is that it allows for the continuous administration of local anesthetics to the nerve and therefore continued pain control. One study by Hanson et al64 demonstrated reduced opioid consumption in patients receiving an adductor canal catheter and continuous local anesthetic infusion as compared with placebo. This study also showed benefits in terms of quadriceps strength, distance ambulated, and pain scores.65 Complications of placing a catheter are both minor and severe. Minor complications include catheter migration, obstruction, dislodgement, and leaking of local anesthetics. Major complications are rare but include infection, nerve injury, and hematoma.66
Another modality of pain control is local infiltration analgesia. This can be offered by itself or in combination with a peripheral nerve block. Local infiltration analgesia consists of injecting medications around or within the joint (periarticular or intra-articular, respectively). Medications that are commonly used include narcotics, NSAIDs, and local anesthetics. A meta-analysis performed by Seangleulur et al70 demonstrated that, when compared with placebo, patients who received a periarticular injection had lower pain scores, opioid consumption, and postoperative nausea and vomiting. They also had higher range of motion at 24 hours postoperatively and shorter length of stay as compared with placebo.70
NSAIDs and COX-2 inhibitors
NSAIDs are among the most commonly prescribed medications in the United States, with nearly 70 million prescriptions every year.71 NSAIDs provide their antipyretic, anti-inflammatory, and analgesic effects by limiting prostaglandin production in peripheral tissues. Traditional NSAIDs inhibit the activity of both COX-1 and COX-2 enzymes. COX-1 is ubiquitous in the body, therefore affecting body tissue. COX-2 enzyme is found more specifically in acute or chronic inflammatory tissue. Use of selective COX-2 inhibitors reduces the adverse effects of gastric mucosa and decreases inhibition of prostaglandin production in the gastrointestinal tract, therefore reducing the risk of stomach bleeding.72 Some surgeons are concerned about the use of NSAIDs prior to surgery due to a decrease in platelet aggregation and the potential increase in bleeding time.73 Consequently, NSAIDs are commonly discontinued 7 to 10 days before surgery to reduce perioperative bleeding.74 Currently, celecoxib is the only available FDA-approved COX-2 inhibitor in the United States. Despite inconsistent evidence of increases in cardiac morbidity with COX-2 usage, pain relief with improved gastric tolerance remains the foundation for the benefit of selective COX-2 inhibition75 (refer to the Table 72–75 , 77 , 78 , 83 , 85–88).
Gabapentinoids (gabapentin and pregabalin)
Pregabalin and its predecessor gabapentin were first developed as anticonvulsant medications. They are thought to act on the alpha-2-delta subunit of the presynaptic voltage-gated calcium channels in the central nervous system, thereby decreasing neurotransmitter release.76 Neuropathic pain is found in approximately 12.7% of patients after TKA. Use of pregabalin in the perioperative period decreases neuropathic pain, minimizes opioid consumption, and lessens sleep disturbance. Pregabalin also demonstrates synergistic effects with COX-2 inhibitors.77 , 78 Side effects of gabapentinoids include dizziness and somnolence with long-term use.
Opioids bind to 3 opioid receptors (mu, kappa, and delta). They are located in the central nervous system, which causes inhibition of ascending pain pathways, altering the perception of and response to pain. Opioids also produce general central nervous system depression.79 , 80 Complications and side effects from opioid medications have been extensively studied. They affect numerous organ functions, including digestive, nociceptive, immune, hormonal, psychomotor, urinary, cardiac, respiratory, and musculoskeletal. As such, a wide array of adverse effects can occur including nausea, vomiting, constipation, sedation, dizziness, respiratory depression, physical dependence, tolerance, immunosuppression, fatigue, urinary depression, and hypotension.81
Compared with the IV route, oral opioids provide equivalent anesthesia and time to mobilization in total joint arthroplasty patients,82 but with fewer side effects.83 Oral opioids are available in immediate-release and controlled-release formulations. Immediate-release formulations tend to provide inconsistent pain relief due to delays in administration and failure to reach constant therapeutic plasma concentrations. Sustained-release preparations have more constant bioavailability,84 providing longer-lasting basal analgesia and minimizing the need for rescue IV narcotics. The Acute Pain Management Guideline Panel currently recommends a fixed dosing schedule for all patients requiring opioid medications for more than 48 hours postoperatively85 (refer to the Table).
Tramadol is a synthetic centrally acting opioid agonist and inhibits the reuptake of serotonin and norepinephrine.86 Tramadol has gained popularity because of the low incidence of respiratory and gastrointestinal side effects compared with opioid medications.84 However, it is a less potent analgesic and reserved for mild to moderate pain.85
Acetaminophen is one of the most common analgesics in the postoperative setting.87 Although its exact mechanism of action is not fully known, acetaminophen is thought to act predominately in the central nervous system through serotonin, opioid, eicosanoid, and nitric oxide pathways.88 While hepatotoxicity is the primary side effect, dosages with this complication have exceeded 4 g daily.85 , 88 Although the 650-mg dose is most common, the 1000-mg dose has been reported to be more effective in some patients.84 Since the Food and Drug Administration approval of IV acetaminophen in the United States, the safety and efficacy of 1-g IV acetaminophen every 6 hours in adult inpatients up to 5 days postoperatively has been shown85 , 87 (refer to the Table). However, the advantages of IV acetaminophen are offset by its high cost, which limits its wide use in multimodal analgesia.71 Based on available clinical and economic evidence, oral acetaminophen continues to be an essential component of multimodal analgesia, with the IV formulation limited to patients who are unable to tolerate oral medications.
Nonpharmacological intervention can be an effective way to treat pain without taking more pain medication.50 , 89 The nature of the surgery and the inflammatory process immediately following can increase pain levels. Increased pain levels decrease the ability of the patient to ambulate, perform exercises, and function independently.90 , 91 Nonpharmacological means, in conjunction with medications, can decrease the effects of pain.5 , 21 , 56 If there is a focus on the treatment of the physiological pain, interventions toward treatment of the psychological pain should be used.92 , 93
Dealing with psychological pain through stress management and anxiety reduction can be controlled with the practice of meditation, guided imagery, and cognitive-behavioral therapy.94–96 While some of these techniques are not embraced by everyone, many find them effective. Realizing there is a mind-body connection can be a helpful tool in pain management protocols.97 , 98 Meditation following surgery is a low-touch, high-reward activity with a minimal amount of training needed to gain benefit.99 Conversations promoting this method should encompass the power of the body and its resilience and that meditation can help build up the natural internal pain relievers and activation of brain function toward controlling pain.99 , 100 Meditation can be quick and easy with the use of tools such as a smartphone application or through use of the Internet. Patients do not have to attend a class or go to a specialist; they simply sit back, relax and listen, and train their mind. Guided imagery is a method of distraction and refocusing of one's mind.101 This holistic approach has shown to help reduce pain levels and anxiety. This cost-effective modality can have positive impact on the outcome of patients with total joint arthroplasty with minimal effort and no possible negative side effect.101 , 102
An oldie but a goodie
Quite simply, the longest and most conservative treatment of orthopedic injury was and still is RICE (rest, ice, compression, and elevation).36 Using ice, elevating, and perhaps using compression stockings and/or sequential compression devices all help with decreasing the negative effects of the inflammatory process.5 , 30 , 103 The impact of elevation and cold therapy has been found to reduce pain and swelling after arthroscopy and arthroplasty surgery.5 , 103 , 104 Promotion and use of this modality can and should begin in the hospital and continue after the transition to home. Some hospitals are requiring patients to purchase units and/or rent for home usage.
Interventions to consider
The use of alternative means of managing patients' pain with nonpharmacological intervention, such as mind-body and tactile-base approaches, can be considered for reducing pain and anxiety postoperatively. Other nonpharmacological interventions to consider for pain management protocols could include acupuncture,105 , 106 massage therapy,107 transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation,108–110 acupressure,98 and aromatherapy.111 These treatments depend on resources however and the specialists to provide care, patient preference, and the ability to fit or be added into existing protocols. Any means of decreasing pain in this population is key and should be considered with supporting clinical evidence.
Patient education is imperative throughout the entire perioperative process for total joint replacement.12 Without education of the complete process, and promotion of self-management activities for this patient population and/or their support system, might lead to a patient being unprepared for surgery.12 , 13 , 112–114 An unprepared patient increases the chances of poor outcomes and possible complications.11 , 115
At St Charles Hospital, it is mandatory for all patients with total joint arthroplasty to attend a preoperative education class and encourage their support system or caregiver to attend as well.12 , 13 , 114 The class sets expectations of care, explains the process, the purpose for many activities and items used in the hospital, discharge planning, and encourages self-management behaviors to improve chances for a positive outcome while reducing fears of surgery.12 , 13 , 116 It is essential for patients to take responsibility for their involvement and care, self-management, to have a successful outcome after surgery.117 An area of focus should involve developing realistic expectations of surgical pain.21 , 118 The framework used to explain postoperative pain should be carefully crafted to avoid instilling fear, but to strengthen confidence of the comprehensive program and how patients can be involved, which is an element of cognitive-behavioral therapy.94 , 95 , 119 Explaining the protocol thoroughly will help prepare and create understanding of methods to control pain, and the reason why patients' involvement is necessary and at times crucial.3 , 119 , 120 Education addressed the approach for each phase of care and all elements involved with their special distinctions4 , 7 (refer to the Figure). Setting the foundation will help secure patient involvement and offer the understanding that is needed for each patient upon his or her discharge to home.16 , 18 , 112 Education should be delivered in a continuous progression to meet the individual needs of patients and where they are in the postoperative phase of rehabilitation. The teach-back method is one of the best forms of education for patient retention of information.112 , 121 , 123 In addition, nonpharmacological interventions need to be heavily encouraged.89 , 92 , 97
Education is a continuous process
Following joint arthroplasty, patients have to move, but unfortunately pain can limit movement. This is a challenging new experience for most patients.90 , 91 The patients' surgeon, physical therapists, and nurses face this difficult part of the surgical journey daily with their patients, at times facing a steep learning curve on St Charles Hospital's Orthopedic Unit.25 , 36 Key to improving pain levels is educating patients to be proactive and not reactive to high pain levels.122 This leads to optimal management of pain.112 Understanding that pain medication is a tool to be used and the way to use this tool properly and safely is important.122 Walking patients through situations preoperatively and encouraging positive focus postoperatively keeps patients on the correct path.5 , 7 , 123
Without a certain degree of effective pain control, patients will not be able to fully participate with physical therapy or ambulate fully.4 , 6 After surgery, time is of the essence and plays a factor with determining success. Timeliness is important when it comes to acute postoperative total knees and gaining range of motion before adhesions (scar tissue) form and limit movement.6 , 90 , 91 , 124 The ability to control pain levels is a comfort measure, yet it is also a necessity to help improve ambulation status and successful surgical outcome.14 , 24 , 125 , 120
Reduce the risk
In most cases joint replacement is an elective surgery, meaning there is time to optimize, and reduce risk for the patient. Optimization is a challenging aspect in today's total joint replacement world. Numerous programs are coming up with interesting ways to tackle risk factors.5 , 16 , 126 The first step is risk stratification, which determines the population that represents a higher risk of complications and could lead to poor outcomes.33 , 35 Using a standardized evidence-based assessment tool is important and this tool should begin prior to or during the orthopedic consultation phase regarding surgery.25 , 27 , 32 , 127 Modifiable risk factors should be targeted with specific interventions. Reduction with this at-risk population is a key to drive positive outcomes, reduce readmission, and complications of surgery.28 , 32 , 128 Direct referral into self-management education classes and/or referral into a perioperative medical evaluation can be a part of this effort.117
Prior to surgery an element of optimization is having the patient's home assessed by a health care professional to determine how safe patients' living environment is in order to reduce injury and to increase preparedness. At this time recommendations can be made to increase the safety of the living environment for the patient to return home quickly after surgery. The patient and support system can be educated on items of preparedness for all aspects of care, support, and areas to be concerns. There are a limited number of programs across the country utilizing this service in the preoperative phase of care to affect outcomes and safety.
Other education focus points:
- TJC's slogan of encouraging patients to Speak Up can be a useful motto, encouraging patients to voice concerns or opinions in all aspects of their care. Promoting the patient to be proactive with their concerns can help prevent poor or untimely care.129
- Hourly rounding helps identify status of pain levels and the need for possible intervention, but the patient holds the keys in communicating accurate pain levels.130
- Promoting healthy eating, preoperative and postoperative, can promote healing.27 , 131
- Use of nonpharmacological intervention, such as ice therapy and elevation to decrease edema, helps to decrease pain and aid in ambulation.30 , 89
- Reference materials, access to videos on general care topics, available on the Internet, can be low-touch educational support for patients at home.11 , 117 , 118
- Patient navigation can be an effective approach in the follow-up phase of care to track patient progress, re-educate on important plan of care, use teach-back method of education and clarification, and a point of contact for questions or concerns in addition to the surgeon's office. Patients are encouraged to call the doctor with any questions or concerns; however, they can have very minor questions, for example, “how long should I leave ice on the surgical area?” Some patients might feel this is not a vitally important question to call the surgeon. Giving the patient a primary contact person or patient navigator at the hospital for support and guidance can be important for compliance to postoperative protocols.11 , 117 , 118 , 132
DATA IS KING
Programs need to continuously assess the effectiveness of their standardized pathways, order sets, and the program's ability to identify when it is necessary to change the course of individualized care.16 , 18 , 25 Maintaining a grasp on research and best practice in the orthopedic field helps identify where improvement is needed, which helps ensure the best possible care. Understanding the performance improvement cycle will assist programs in always striving to provide the best care through the usage of data.133 , 134
Track your progress
Tracking data is the true way to assess and determine performance, the effectiveness of measures, and overall quality of the program. Without using data all thoughts and concepts of performance are based on word and expert opinion.133 , 135 Simply stating that an organization does a great job with early mobilization does not prove how well patients are progressing with ambulating the same day of surgery. Without tracking this measure of success there is no validity in performance.
Electronic medical record systems have helped open the door to a possible gold mine of data to deepening understanding. Programs now need to use their data to their advantage. Some in the health care fields are under the misconception that finding out their facility is performing poorly, especially when they were under the impression that their performance was excellent, is detrimental.28 , 30 , 136 Data should be used to help identify barriers, correct and improve performance, and eliminate personal or administrative feelings of failure.
Grasping a baseline of data on historical performance or a comparison baseline can build understanding of the current status or effectiveness as compared with other programs137; however outliers can skew the data.8 , 24 , 25 , 135 Every program should set aside 1 month every year as a review of current clinical practice guidelines and annual comprehensive data review for the previous year.25 Data should be tracked and used to drive interventions and should be discussed at each orthopedic meeting.25 , 112 , 137 Adherence to current evidence-based practice through chart reviews helps ensure there is no variation from protocol. Goals should be quarterly and yearly to push the program forward. Areas to track and trend, such as programmatic opioid usage, and the way the medication is administration (oral verses IV) should be identified in a goal to improve care for patients, stockholders, and engagement of all members of the team.22 , 138
Other factors that influence a patient's perception of pain:
- Sleep: amount, consistency, quality, continuous positive airway pressure usage for sleep apnea patients.139
- IV fluid management to maintain proper hydration levels.140
- Postoperative nausea and vomiting.4 , 9
- Studies have shown that anxiety level and history of depression are indicators for possible poor outcomes and/or 30-day hospital readmissions. The emotional status of the patients affects their perception of pain levels.123 , 141 , 142
- Ethnic/religious/cultural background influence.142 , 143
- Social support surrounding the patient.114 , 143
- Higher body mass index affects the patient's ability to transfer and ambulate.33 , 35 , 144
- History of deformity/fracture (traumatic injury)/revision joint replacement.30 , 145 , 146
- Ambulating status, weakness/endurance.32 , 147 , 148
- Surgery to joint or surrounding joint—needing more surgical intervention during the joint replacement.32 , 149
Limitations of this article and issues that our program is currently addressing include different elements throughout each phase of care. Medication choices are constantly reviewed and new considerations frequently occur to improve care. Both Caldolor (ibuprofen) and Dyloject (diclofenac sodium), NSAID non-opioid pain relievers, are being considered for use with total joint arthroplasty and many other types of surgical procedures.73 There is apprehension with using these medications, for example, expense of the medications, limited research, no defined usage recommendations with timing and number of doses, and the choice of route for IV vs oral medications. An additional limitation comes from the patient's insurance coverage of medications. Postoperatively, the protocol calls for certain brand name nonopioid pain relievers to be prescribed. But often the insurance company limits or restricts the patients' options to having access to these nonopioids due to the expense of these drugs leaving the patients many times with the only option of choosing opioid pain relievers.
Orthopedics and analgesia are interdependent. Finding the best technique for analgesia plays an essential role in pain management. During the intraoperative phase of care, use of the peripheral nerve block allows 2 options with (1) a single shot or (2) continuous delivery of a numbing agent through a catheter surrounding a neurological region to decrease pain sensations, therefore having the most benefit to the total joint arthroplasty patient. Delivering medication into the body via a catheter can be an effective way of decreasing pain, but the potential risk of damage to tissue, making this method a concern.
Improvement of the patient's physical state can influence the pain management plan. Research involving the amount of preoperative exercise to optimize the patient's physical state, in order to assist in recovery after surgery, can help improve positive outcomes. Despite the lack of strong clinical research on defined protocols, experts have attempted to create a solution for preoperative total joint arthroplasty preparation with strength and endurance programs. A limitation to the strength and endurance program is patient's insurance coverage, which typically only covers a certain amount of physical therapy sessions for a calendar year. Further research is needed on developing a preoperative strength and endurance program to improve outcomes.
Developing a comprehensive program to treat and manage patients' surgical pain following total joint arthroplasty is a challenging task. The utilization of many different methods resulting in the reduction of opioids, working together in a synergistic way, is the true core of multimodal pain control. The dedicated interdisciplinary team can accomplish this task through individualized focus on the development of the patient's pain management plan using the multimodal approach. Achieving the goal of safe, effective pain management, in this population, will lead to improved outcomes, patient satisfaction, and enhancing functional life of patients.
1. US Department of Health and Human Resources. The opioid epidemic: by the numbers. http://www.hhs.gov/opioids/
. Published 2016. Accessed December 12, 2017.
2. Morris P, Mir H. The opioids
epidemic: impact on orthopedic surgery. J Am Acad Orthop Surg. 2015;23(9):e267–e271.
3. American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons. Opioid use, misuse, and abuse in orthopaedic practice. http://www.AAOS.org
. Published 2015. Accessed December 12, 2017.
4. Halawi M, Grant S, Bolognesi M. Multimodal analgesia for total joint arthroplasty
. Orthopedics. 2015;38(7):e616–25.
6. Gan TJ. Poorly controlled postoperative pain: prevalence, consequences, and prevention. J Pain Res. 2017;10:2287–2298. doi:10.2147/JPR.S144066.
7. Gutowski CJ, Parvizi J, Purtill JJ. Protocol-based arthroplasty: less is more. Orthopedics. 2015;38:631.
8. Mayer M, Naylor J, Harris I, et al Evidence base and practice variation in acute care processes for knee and hip arthroplasty surgeries. PLoS One. 2017;12(7):e0180090.
9. Memtsoudis S, Sun X, Sharrock N, et al Perioperative comparative effectiveness of anesthetic technique in orthopedic patients. Anesthesiology. 2013;118(5):1046–1058.
10. Webb C, Mariano E. Best multimodal analgesic protocol for total knee arthroplasty. Pain Manag. 2015;5(3):185–196.
11. Kearney M, Jennrich M, Lyons S, Robinson R, Berger B. Effects of preoperative education on patient outcomes after joint replacement surgery. Orthop Nurs. 2011;30(6):391–396.
12. Mazaleski A. Postoperative total joint replacement
class for support persons: enhancing patient and family centered care using a quality improvement model. Orthop Nurs. 2011;30(6):361–366.
13. McDonald S, Page M, Beringer K, Wasiak J, Sprowson A. Preoperative education for hip or knee replacement. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2014;(5):CD003526.
16. Dummit L, Kahvecioglu D, Gu Q, et al Association between hospital participation in a medicare bundled payment initiative and payments and quality outcomes for lower extremity joint replacement episodes. JAMA. 2016;316(12):1267–1278.
17. Mehrotra A, Sloss EM, Hussey PS, Adams JL, Lovejoy S, SooHoo NF. Evaluation of a Centers of Excellence program for knee and hip replacement. Med Care. 2013;51(1):28–36. doi:10.1097/MLR.0b013e3182699407.
18. Dundon J, Bosco J, Slover J, Yu S, Sayeed Y, Iorio R. Improvement in total joint replacement
quality metrics: year one versus year three of the bundled payments for care improvement initiative. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2016;98(23):1949–1953.
20. Lovett-Carter D, Sayeed Z, Abaab L, Pallekonda V, Mihalko W, Saleh K. Impact of outpatient total joint replacement
on postoperative outcomes. Orthop Clin North Am. 2018;49(1):35–44.
22. The Joint Commission. Accreditation Standards: Provision of Care: PC.02.03.01 Treatment and Services. http://www.jointcommsion.org
. Published 2018. Accessed January 12, 2018.
23. Bozic KJ, Maselli J, Pekow PS, Lindenauer PK, Vail TP, Auerbach AD. The influence of procedure volumes and standardization of care on quality and efficiency in total joint replacement
surgery. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2010;92:2643–2652.
24. Bendetti MG, Sarti D, Bonfiglioli S, Mariani E. Setting, clinical pathways, fast-track and rehabilitation following primary knee arthroplasty: a literature review. Open Rehabil J. 2015;8(1):17–24.
26. Smetana G. Preoperative medical evaluation of the healthy patient. http://UpToDate.com
. Published December 2013. Accessed January 30, 2014.
27. Gooch K, Marshall D, Arnett G, et al Comparative effectiveness of alternative clinical pathways for primary hip and knee joint replacement patients: a pragmatic randomized, controlled trial. Osteoarthritis Cartilage. 2012;20(10):1086–1094.
28. Chaurasia A, Garson L, Kain Z, Schwarzkopf R. Outcomes of a joint replacement surgical home model clinical pathway. Biomed Res Int. 2014;2014:296302.
29. Elder K, Lemon S, Costello T. Increasing compliance with national quality measures for stroke through use of a standard order set. Am J Health System Pharm. 2015;72(11, suppl 1):S6–S10.
30. Garson L, Schwarzkopf R, Vakharia S, et al Implementation of a total joint replacement
-focused perioperative surgical home: a management case report. Anesth Analg. 2014;118:1081.
31. Kash B, Zhang Y, Cline K, Menser T, Miller T. The perioperative surgical home (PSH): a comprehensive review of US and non-US studies shows predominantly positive quality and cost outcomes. Milbank Q. 2014;92(4):796–821.
32. Winemaker M, Petruccelli D, Kabali C, de Beer J. Not all total joint replacement
patients are created equal: preoperative factors and length of stay in hospital. Can J Surg. 2015;58(3):160–166.
33. Lavand'homme P, Thienpont E. Pain after total knee arthroplasty: a narrative review focusing on the stratification of patients at risk for persistent pain. Bone Joint J. 2015;97-B:45.
34. Van Herck P, Vanhaecht K, Sermeus W, et al Key interventions and outcomes in joint arthroplasty clinical pathways: a systematic review. J Eval Clin Pract. 2010;16(1):39–49.
35. Clement RC, Gray CM, Kheir MM, et al Will Medicare readmission penalties motivate hospitals to reduce arthroplasty readmissions? J Arthroplasty. 2017;32:709–713.
36. Mohanty S, Rosenthal R, Russell M, Neuman M, Ko C, Esnaola N. Optimal Perioperative Management of the Geriatric Patient: A Best Practices Guideline from the American College of Surgeons NSQIP and the American Geriatrics Society. J Am Coll Surg. 2016;222(5):930–947.
37. Liu J, Yuan W, Wang X, et al Peripheral nerve blocks versus general anesthesia
for total knee replacement in elderly patients on the postoperative quality of recovery. Clin Interv Aging. 2014;9:341–350. doi:10.2147/CIA.S56116.
38. Grealish L, Chaboyer W. Older, in hospital and confused—the value of nursing care in preventing falls in older people with cognitive impairment. Int J Nurs Stud. 2015;52(8):1285–1287.
39. Bagri A, Rico A, Ruiz J. Evaluation and management of the elderly patient at risk for postoperative delirium. Clin Geriatr Med. 2008;24(4):667–686.
40. Gemert van LA, Schuurmans MJ. The Neecham Confusion Scale and the Delirium Observation Screening Scale: capacity to discriminate and ease of use in clinical practice. Biomed Central Nurs. 2007;6:3. doi:10.1186/1472-6955-6-3.
41. Bukata S, Kates S, O'Keefe R. Short-term and long-term orthopaedic issues in patients with fragility fractures. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2011;469(8):2225–2236.
42. Merkow RP, Ju MH, Chung JW, et al Underlying reasons associated with hospital readmission following surgery in the United States. J Am Med Assoc. 2015;313(5):483–495.
43. Myrick K. Improving follow-up after fragility fractures: an evidence-based initiative. Orthop Nurs. 2011;30(3):174–181.
44. Zywiel MG, Stroh DA, Lee SY, Bonutti PM, Mont MA. Chronic opioid use prior to total knee arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2011;93:1988.
45. Mahathanaruk M, Hitt J, de LeonCasasola O. Perioperative management of the opioid tolerant patient for orthopedic surgery. Anesthesiol Clin. 2014;32(4):923–932.
47. Huxtable C, Roberts L, Somogyi A, MacIntyre P. Acute pain management in opioid-tolerant patients: a growing challenge. Anaesth Intensive Care. 2011;39(5):804–823.
48. Shah S, Kapoor S, Durkin B. Analgesic management of acute pain in the opioid-tolerant patient. Curr Opin Anesthesiol. 2015;28(4):398–402.
49. Roeckel L, Le Coz G, Gavériaux-Ruff C, Simonin F. Opioid-induced hyperalgesia: cellular and molecular mechanisms. Neuroscience. 2016;338:160–182.
51. Holt N. Trends in healthcare and the role of the anesthesiologist in the perioperative surgical home—the US perspective. Curr Opin Anesthesiol. 2014;27(3):371–376.
52. Oussedik S, Abdel MP, Cross MB, Haddad FS. Alignment and fixation in total knee arthroplasty: changing paradigms. Bone Joint J. 2015;97-B:16.
53. Schotanus M, Schoenmakers D, Sollie R, Kort N. Patient-specific instruments for total knee arthroplasty can accurately predict the component size as used peroperative. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2017;25(12):3844–3848.
54. Siddiqi A, Hardaker WM, Eachempati KK, Sheth NP. Advances in computer-aided technology for total knee arthroplasty. Orthopedics. 2017;40(6):338–352.
55. Jacofsky D, Allen M. Robotics in arthroplasty: a comprehensive review. J Arthroplasty. 2016;31(10):2353–2363.
56. Cullom C, Weed J. Anesthetic and analgesic management for outpatient knee arthroplasty. Curr Pain Headache Rep. 2017;21(5):23.
57. Yong-Hao P, Peck-Hoon O. Association of early ambulation with length of stay and costs in total knee arthroplasty. Am J Phys Med Rehabil. 2014;93(11):962–970.
58. Guerra M, Singh P, Taylor N. Early mobilization of patients who have had a hip or knee joint replacement reduces length of stay in hospital: a systematic review. Clin Rehabil. 2015;29(9):844–854.
59. Hu S, Zhang Z, Hua Y, Li J, Cai Z. A comparison of regional and general anaesthesia for total replacement of the hip or knee: a meta-analysis. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2009;91(7):935–942.
60. Rathmell JP, Pino CA, Taylor R, Patrin T, Viani BA. Intrathecal morphine for postoperative analgesia: a randomized, controlled, dose-ranging study after hip and knee arthroplasty. Anesth Analg. 2003;97:1452.
61. Thacher RR, Hickernell TR, Grosso MJ, et al Decreased risk of knee buckling with adductor canal block versus femoral nerve block in total knee arthroplasty: a retrospective cohort study. Arthroplast Today. 2017;3(4):281–285. doi:10.1016/j.artd.2017.02.008.
62. Jiang X, Wang Q, Wu C, Tian W. Analgesic efficacy of adductor canal block in total knee arthroplasty: a meta analysis and systematic review. Orthop Surg. 2016;8(3):294–300. doi:10.1111/os.12268.
63. Kuang MJ, Ma JX, Fu L, He WW, Zhao J, Ma XL. Is adductor canal block better than femoral nerve block in primary total knee arthroplasty? A GRADE analysis of the evidence through a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Arthroplasty. 2017;32(10):3238–3248.e3.
64. Hanson NA, et al Continuous ultrasound-guided adductor canal block for total knee arthroplasty: a randomized, double-blind trial. Anesth Analg. 2014; 118(6):1370–1377.
65. Sogbein O, Sondekoppam R, Howard J, et al Ultrasound-guided motor-sparing knee blocks for postoperative analgesia following total knee arthroplasty: a randomized blinded study. J Bone Joint Surg, Am. 2017;99(15):1274–1281.
66. Ilfeld BM. Continuous peripheral nerve blocks: a review of the published evidence. Anesth Analg. 2011;113:904.
67. Abdelmalak B. Anesthesiologist's guide to perioperative glycemic management. ASA Refresher Courses Anesthesiol. 2014;42:1–11.
68. Amanatullah D, Pallante G, Chalmers B, Pagnano M, Sierra R. Perioperative management in total knee arthroplasty. Curr Orthop Pract. 2015;26(3):217–223.
69. Danninger T, Opperer M, Memtsoudis S. Perioperative pain control after total knee arthroplasty: an evidence based review of the role of peripheral nerve blocks. World J Orthop. 2014;5(3):225–232. doi:10.5312/wjo.v5.i3.225.
70. Seangleulur A, Vanasbodeekul P, Prapaitrakool S, et al The efficacy of local infiltration analgesia in the early postoperative period after total knee arthroplasty: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur J Anaesthesiol. 2016;33(11):816–831.
71. Abdul-Hadi O, Parvizi J, Einhorn T, et al Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs in orthopaedics. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2009;91(8):2020–2027.
72. Lane J. Anti-inflammatory medications: selective COX-2 inhibitors. J Am Acad Orthop Surg. 2002;10(2):75–78.
73. Souter AJ, Fredman B, White PF. Controversies in the perioperative use of nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs. Anesth Analg. 1994;79:1178.
74. Robinson M, Christie J, Malcon-Smith N. Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, perioperative blood loss, and transfusion requirements in elective hip arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty. 1993;8:607–610.
75. Frampton J, Keating G. Celecoxib: a review of its use in the management of arthritis and acute pain. Drugs. 2007;67(16):2433–2472.
76. O'Connor A, Dworkin R. Treatment of neuropathic pain: an overview of recent guidelines. Am J Med. 2009;122(10):S22–32.
77. Mathiesen O, Jacobsen LS, Holm HE, et al Pregabalin and dexamethasone for postoperative pain control: a randomized controlled study in hip arthroplasty. Br J Anaesth. 2008;101:535.
78. Lee J, Chung K, Choi C. The effect of a single dose of preemptive pregabalin administered with COX-2 inhibitor: a trial in total knee arthroplasty. J Arthrop. 2015;30(1):38–42.
79. Basbaum AI, Bautista DM, Scherrer G, Julius D. Cellular and molecular mechanisms of pain. Cell. 2009;139:267.
80. Vanderah T. Pathophysiology of pain. Med Clin North Am. 2007;91(1):1–12.
81. Benyamin R, Trescot A, Vallejo R, et al Opioid complications and side effects. Pain Physician. 2008;11:S105–S120.
82. Rothwell M, Pearson D, Dunn G, et al Oral oxycodone offers equivalent analgesia to intravenous patient-controlled analgesia after total hip replacement: a randomized, single-centre, non-blinded, non-inferiority study. Br J Anaesth. 2011;106(6):865–872.
83. Horlocker TT, Kopp SL, Pagnano MW, Hebl JR. Analgesia for total hip and knee arthroplasty: a multimodal pathway featuring peripheral nerve block. J Am Acad Orthop Surg. 2006;14(3):126–135.
84. Colucci R, Swanton R, Thomas G, Kaiko R. Relative variability in bioavailability of oral controlled release formulations of oxycodone and morphine. Am J Ther. 2001;8(4):231–236.
85. Sinatra R, Torres J, Bustos A. Pain management after major orthopaedic surgery: current strategies and new concepts. J Am Acad Orthop Surg. 2002;10(2):117–129.
86. Scott L, Perry C. Tramadol: a review of its use in perioperative pain. Drugs. 2000;60(1):139–176.
87. Candiotti K, Bergese S, Viscusi E, Singla S, Royal M, Singla N. Safety of multiple-dose intravenous acetaminophen in adult inpatients. Pain Med. 2010;11(12):1841–1848.
88. Smith H. Potential analgesic mechanisms of acetaminophen. Pain Physician. 2009;12(1):269–280.
89. Wu PI, Meleger A, Witkower A, Mondale T, Borg-Stein J. Nonpharmacologic options for treating acute and chronic pain. PM R. 2015;7:S278–S294.
92. Abraha I, Cruz-Jentoft A, Soiza R, O'Mahony D, Cherubini A. Evidence of and recommendations for non-pharmacological interventions for common geriatric conditions: the SENATOR-ONTOP systematic review protocol. BMJ Open. 2015;5(1):e007488.
93. Kearney D, Simpson T, Malte C, Felleman B, Martinez M, Hunt S. Mindfulness-based stress reduction in addition to usual care is associated with improvements in pain, fatigue, and cognitive failures among veterans with gulf war illness. Am J Med. 2016;129(2):204–214.
94. Cherkin D, Sherman K, Turner J. Mindfulness-based stress reduction vs cognitive behavioral therapy for chronic low back pain—reply. J Am Med Assoc. 2016;316(6):663–664.
95. Stewart M, Karlin B, Kerns R, et al National dissemination of cognitive-behavioral therapy for chronic pain in veterans: therapist and patient-level outcomes. Clin J Pain. 2015;31(8):722–729.
96. Rolving N, Nielsen C, Christensen F, Holm R, Bünger C, Oestergaard L. Preoperative cognitive behavioural intervention improves in-hospital mobilisation and analgesic use for lumbar spinal fusion patients. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2016;17:217.
97. Grossman P, Niemann L, Schmidt S, Walach H. Mindfulness-based stress reduction and health benefits. A meta-analysis. J Psychosom Res. 2004;57(1):35–43.
98. Kobak K, Wolitzky-Taylor K, Craske M, Rose R. Therapist training on cognitive behavior therapy for anxiety disorders using internet-based technologies. Cognit Ther Res. 2017;41(2):252–265.
99. Zeidan F, Emerson NM, Farris SR, et al Mindfulness meditation-based pain relief employs different neural mechanisms than placebo and sham mindfulness meditation-induced analgesia. J Neurosci. 2015;35:15307.
100. Lever Taylor B, Cavanagh K, Strauss C. The effectiveness of mindfulness-based interventions in the perinatal period: a systematic review and meta-analysis. PLoS One. 2016;11(5):e0155720.
101. Carpenter J, Hines S, Lan V. Guided imagery for pain management in postoperative orthopedic patients: an integrative literature review. J Holist Nurs. 2017;35(4):342–351.
102. Swain N, Trevena J. A comparison of therapist-present or therapist-free delivery of very brief mindfulness and hypnosis for acute experimental pain. N Z J Psychol. 2014;43(3):22–28.
103. Hilleren-Listerud A. Graduated compression stocking and intermittent pneumatic compression device length selection. Clin Nurse Spec. 2009;23(1):21–24.
104. Delgado R, York A, Crawford P, et al Assessing the quality, efficacy, and effectiveness of the current evidence base of active self-care complementary and integrative medicine therapies for the management of chronic pain: a rapid evidence assessment of the literature. Pain Med. 2014;15(suppl 1):S9–S20.
105. Crespin D, Griffin K, Dusek J, et al Acupuncture provides short-term pain relief for patients in a total joint replacement
program. Pain Med. 2015;16(6):1195–1203.
106. Sherman L. Acupuncture reduces use of opioids
after knee surgery. J Chinese Med. 2017:70.
107. Forward J, Greuter N, Crisall S, Lester H. Effect of structured touch and guided imagery for pain and anxiety in elective joint replacement patients–a randomized controlled trial: M-TIJRP. Perm J. 2015;19(4):18–28.
108. Coutaux A. Non-pharmacological treatments for pain relief: TENS and acupuncture. Joint Bone Spine. 2017;84(6):657–661.
109. Breit R, Van der Wall H. Transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation for postoperative pain relief after total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty. 2004;19(1):45–48.
110. Nnoaham K, Kumbang J. Transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) for chronic pain. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2008;(3):CD003222.
111. Lim Y, Yobas P, Chen H. Efficacy of relaxation intervention on pain, self-efficacy, and stress-related variables in patients following total knee replacement surgery. Pain Manag Nurs. 2014;15(4):888–896.
112. Stowers M, Lemanu D, Coleman B, Hill A, Munro J. Review article: perioperative care in enhanced recovery for total hip and knee arthroplasty. J Orthop Surg (Hong Kong). 2014;22(3):383–392.
113. Scott N, McDonald D, Breusch S, et al The use of enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) principles in Scottish orthopaedic units—an implementation and follow up at 1 year, 2010-2011: a report from the Musculoskeletal Audit, Scotland. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 2013;133(1):117–124.
114. Zeineddine H, El-Othmani M, Sayeed Z, Chambers M, Saleh K. Patient centeredness in total joint replacement
: beyond the slogan. Orthop Clin North Am. 2016;47(4):697–706.
115. Clarke H, Timm V, Goldberg B, Hattrup S. Preoperative patient education
reduces in hospital falls after total knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2012;470(1):244–249.
116. Scott CE, Bugler KE, Clement ND, Mac-Donald D, Howie CR, Biant LC. Patient expectations of arthroplasty of the hip and knee. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2012;94(7):974–981. doi:10.1302/0301-620X.94B7.28219.
118. Ingadóttir B, Zoëga S. Role of patient education
in postoperative pain management. Nurs Stand. 2017;32(2):50–63.
119. Barry M. The effect of preoperative education on postoperative pain after joint surgery: an integrative literature review. Creat Nurs. 2017;23(1):42–46.
120. Cordts G, Grant M, Brandt L, Mears S. A qualitative and quantitative needs assessment of pain management for hospitalized orthopedic patients. Orthopedics. 2011;34(8):581.
121. Centrella-Nigro A, Alexander C. Using the teach-back method in patient education
to improve patient satisfaction. J Contin Educ Nurs. 2017;48(1):47–52.
122. Hyde YM, Kautz DD. Enhancing health promotion during rehabilitation through information-giving, partnership-building, and teach-back. Rehabil Nurs. 2014;39:178.
123. Sjöling M, Nordahl G, Olofsson N, Asplund K. The impact of preoperative information on state anxiety, postoperative pain and satisfaction with pain management. Patient Educ Couns. 2003;51(2):169–176.
124. Mahomed NN, Liang MH, Cook EF, et al The importance of patient expectations in predicting functional outcomes after total joint arthroplasty
. J Rheumatol. 2002;29:1273.
125. Jones S, Alnaib M, Kokkinakis M, Wilkinson M, St Clair Gibson A, Kader D. Pre-operative patient education
reduces length of stay after knee joint arthroplasty. Ann R Coll Surg Engl. 2011;93(1):71–75.
127. Vetter T, Uhler L, Bozic K. Value-based healthcare: Preoperative Assessment and Global Optimization (PASS-GO): improving value in total joint replacement
care. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2017;475(8):1958–1962.
128. Walters T, Mariano E, Clark J. Perioperative surgical home and the integral role of pain medicine. Pain Med. 2015;16(9):1666–1672.
130. Mitchell M, Lavenberg J, Trotta R, Umscheid C. Hourly rounding to improve nursing responsiveness: a systematic review. J Nurs Adm. 2014;44(9):462–472.
131. Everhart J, Altneu E, Calhoun J. Medical comorbidities are independent preoperative risk factors for surgical infection after total joint arthroplasty
. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2013;471(10):3112–3119.
132. McMurray A, Cooper H. The nurse navigator: an evolving model of care. Collegian. 2017;24(2):205–212.
133. Flanagan S, Whiteson J, Hall G, Standaert C. Physical medicine and rehabilitation value in bundled payment for total joint replacement
and cardiac surgery: the rusk experience. PM R. 2017;9(11):1167–1170.
134. Beaulé P, Roffey D, Poitras S. Continuous quality improvement in orthopedic surgery: changes and implications with health system funding reform. Can J Surg. 2016;59(3):149–150.
135. Wyszewianski L. Basic concepts of healthcare quality. In: Joshi MS, Ransom ER, Nash DB, Ransom SB eds. The Healthcare Quality Book: Vision, Strategy, and Tools. 3rd ed. Chicago, IL: Health Administration Press;2014:31–53.
136. The Joint Commission. Specifications manual for national hospital quality measures. http://www.qualitynet.org
. Accessed October 19, 2017.
137. Soohoo N, Lieberman J, Farng E, Park S, Jain S, Ko CY. Development of quality of care indicators for patients undergoing THR/TKR. BMJ Qual Saf. 2011;20:153–157.
138. Naal F, Impellizzeri F, Lenze U, Wellauer V, von Eisenhart-Rothe R, Leunig M. Clinical improvement and satisfaction after total joint replacement
: a prospective 12 month evaluation on the patients' perspective. Qual Life Res. 2015;24(12):2917–2925.
139. Manning B, Kearns S, Bohl D, Edmiston T, Sporer S, Levine B. Prospective assessment of sleep quality before and after primary total joint replacement
. Orthopedics. 2017;40(4):e636–e640.
140. Miller T, Roche A, Mythen M. Fluid management and goal-directed therapy as an adjunct to Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS). Can J Anaesth. 2015;62(2):158–168.
141. Gold H, Slover J, Joo L, Bosco J, Iorio R, Oh C. Association of depression with 90-day hospital readmission after total joint arthroplasty
. J Arthroplasty. 2016;31(11):2385–2388.
142. Kirby-Nolan MM. The intertwined concepts of culture, ethics and pain management on medical missions. Pain Manag Nurs. 2016;17:92–93.
143. Moorehouse M, Doenges M, Murr A. Nursing Care Plans: Guidelines for Individualizing Client Care Across the Life Span. 9th ed. Philadelphia, PA: FA Davis Company; 2014.
144. Järvenpää J, Kettunen J, Kröger H, Miettinen H. Obesity may impair the early outcome of total knee arthroplasty. Scand J Surg. 2010;99(1):45–49.
145. Kunutsor SK, Whitehouse MR, Blom AW, Beswick AD, INFORM Team. Patient-related risk factors for periprosthetic joint infection after total joint arthroplasty
: a systematic review and meta-analysis. PLoS One. 2016;11:e0150866.
147. Hunt L, Ben-Shlomo Y, Blom A, et al 90 day mortality after 409,096 total hip replacements for osteoarthritis, from the National Joint Registry for England and Wales: a retrospective analysis. Lancet. 28, 2013;382(9898):1097–1104.
148. Ayers D, Franklin P, Ploutz-Snyder R, Boisvert C. Total knee replacement outcome and coexisting physical and emotional illness. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2005;440(1):157–161.
149. Lewis G, Rice D, McNair P, Kluger M. Predictors of persistent pain after total knee arthroplasty: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Br J Anaesth. 2015;114(4):551–561.