Expectation-setting and patient education about pain control in the perioperative setting: A qualitative study

Objective: Interventions aimed at limiting opioid use are widespread. These are most often targeted toward prescribers or health systems. Patients’ perspectives are too often absent during the creation of such interventions. This qualitative study aims to understand patient experiences with education about perioperative pain control, from preoperative expectation-setting to post-operative pain control strategies and ultimately opioid disposal.Design: We performed semistructured interviews focused on patient experiences in the perioperative period. Content from interview transcripts was analyzed using a constant comparative method.Setting: All participants underwent surgery at a single, academic tertiary-care center.Participants: Adult patients who had a general surgery operation in the prior 60 days.Outcome measure: Key themes from interviews about perioperative pain management, specifically related to preoperative expectation-setting and post-operative education.Results: Patients identified gaps in communication and education in three main areas: preoperative expectation setting of post-operative pain; post-operative pain control strategies, including use of opioid medications; and the importance of appropriate opioid disposal. Failure to set expectations led to either significant patient anxiety preoperatively or poor preparation for home discharge. Poor education on pain control strategies led to misinformation on when and how to use opioids. Lack of education on opioid disposal led to most participants failing to properly dispose of leftover medication.Conclusions: Gaps in education surrounding post-operative pain and opioid use can lead to patient anxiety, inappropriate use of opioids, and poor disposal rates of leftover medications. Future interventions aimed at patient education to improve pain management and opioid stewardship should be created with an understanding of patient experiences and perceptions.

Postoperative satisfaction following lumbar spinal fusion surgery: patient expectation versus actuality

OBJECTIVEDue to the reported benefits associated with minimally invasive spine surgery (MIS), patients seeking out minimally invasive surgery may have higher expectations regarding their outcomes. In this study the authors aimed to assess the effects of preoperative expectations and postoperative outcome actuality, and the difference between the two, on postoperative satisfaction following MIS for lumbar fusion procedures.METHODSPatients scheduled for either a 1- or 2-level lumbar fusion MIS were administered confidential surveys preoperatively and at 6 months postoperatively. The surveys administered preoperatively consisted of 2 parts: preoperative patient-reported outcomes (PROs), including the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), visual analog scale (VAS) back pain, and VAS leg pain, and expected postoperative PROs. The surveys administered 6 months postoperatively consisted of 2 parts: postoperative PROs and satisfaction. Preoperative symptoms, expected postoperative symptoms, and actual postoperative symptoms were compared using paired t-tests. Pearson correlation was used to compare the association between 1) postoperative change in PROs and satisfaction, 2) expectation and satisfaction, 3) expectation-actuality discrepancy and satisfaction, and 4) actuality and satisfaction.RESULTSIn total, 101 patients completed all surveys. Patients expected to improve in all PROs from baseline, except for ODI personal care, in which they expected to get worse after surgery. In actuality, patients improved in all PROs from baseline, except for ODI personal care, in which they did not demonstrate improvement or worsening. Patients did not surpass any expectations regarding PRO improvement. The association between patient satisfaction and postoperative change was strong for the VAS back pain score, while ODI and VAS leg pain scores showed moderate correlations. Preoperative expectation and postoperative satisfaction demonstrated weak to moderate correlations for all outcome measures. All 3 PROs demonstrated moderate correlation between patient satisfaction and the expectation-actuality discrepancy. All 3 PROs demonstrated strong correlations between satisfaction and actual postoperative outcomes, with ODI having the strongest correlation.CONCLUSIONSIn this observational study, the authors determined that the actual postoperative results following surgery were strongly correlated with patient satisfaction, while the patients’ expectation, the expectation-actuality discrepancy, and the postoperative improvement did not demonstrate strong correlations for all patient-reported outcome measures utilized in this study. The investigation results suggest that the most important indicator of how satisfied patients feel following surgery may be the actual outcome itself, rather than the preoperative expectation or the degree to which the expected result was met.

Simultaneous Incidental Parathyroid Carcinoma and Intrathyroid Parathyroid Gland in Suspected Renal Failure Induced Hyperparathyroidism

Hyperparathyroidism is a common disorder affecting more than hundreds of thousands of people annually. While most commonly secondary to an adenoma, it may also arise from four-gland hyperplasia or malignancy. In the case of primary hyperparathyroidism, the number of glands involved may be unknown prior to surgery. In contrast, the metabolic disorder associated with renal failure induced hyperparathyroidism ensures a hyperplasia picture. Despite the uniform hyperplasia seen in tertiary disease and the preoperative expectation for four-gland exploration, our case demonstrates the continued need for a surgeon's vigilance during dissection to identify all glands and appropriately use intraoperative parathyroid hormone (PTH) testing. In addition, while intraoperative PTH assessment is an effective method for confirming adequacy of treatment for hyperparathyroidism, only surgical pathology can confirm malignancy, which should be considered with PTH levels > 1,000. The case also underscores the importance of comprehensive surgery management and mindful interpretation of intraoperative PTH levels in the management of hyperparathyroidism. Standard surgical technique includes complete exploration of the central compartment, and thyroid lobectomy when the aforementioned exploration fails to reveal the necessary parathyroid tissue, especially with a persistently elevated PTH. Without a standardized progressive compartment exploration and judicious use of intraoperative hormone testing, intrathyroidal parathyroid glands can be missed.