PURPOSE: To review the effectiveness of continuous regional analgesia (CRA) via wound catheters after abdominal surgery in a district general hospital (Wanganui, New Zealand). METHODS: Retrospective review of postoperative analgesia after CRA via wound catheters was introduced (April 2008 to December 2008). Pain scores, HDU stay, opiate use and complications were recorded. RESULTS: Fifty-four patients' notes have been reviewed after elective and emergency laparotomies. Twenty-seven had WC (± patient controlled analgesia [PCA]), 15 had PCA only, 12 had epidural (± PCA). Resting pain scores were nil or zero in 18/27 (66.7%) wound catheter, 9/15 (60%) PCA and 5/12 (41.7%) epidural patients. Moderate/severe pain on movement was scored in patients 5/27 (18.5%) with wound catheter, 6/15 (40%) with PCA, 5/12 (41.7%) with epidural catheters. A single PCA syringe lasted over 24 hours in 18/27 (66.7%) wound catheter, 6/15 (40%) PCA, and 5/8 (63%) epidural + PCA patients. Eight adverse effects were seen; 4 wound infections (2 wound catheter, 1 PCA, 1 epidural patient) and 4 blockages of epidural catheters in epidural group. No adverse effect was found directly related to the WC. CONCLUSIONS: Continuous regional analgesia via wound catheters provides effective and safe postoperative analgesia for surgical patients in a small district general hospital. Used as part of a multimodal approach it allows easy step-down from HDU to surgical wards. This technique has been readily accepted over the year by theatre, HDU, ward, and anaesthetics colleagues.
PURPOSE: To review the effectiveness of continuous regional analgesia (CRA) via wound catheters after abdominal surgery in a district general hospital (Wanganui, New Zealand). METHODS: Retrospective review of postoperative analgesia after CRA via wound catheters was introduced (April 2008 to December 2008). Pain scores, HDU stay, opiate use and complications were recorded. RESULTS: Fifty-four patients' notes have been reviewed after elective and emergency laparotomies. Twenty-seven had WC (± patient controlled analgesia [PCA]), 15 had PCA only, 12 had epidural (± PCA). Resting pain scores were nil or zero in 18/27 (66.7%) wound catheter, 9/15 (60%) PCA and 5/12 (41.7%) epidural patients. Moderate/severe pain on movement was scored in patients 5/27 (18.5%) with wound catheter, 6/15 (40%) with PCA, 5/12 (41.7%) with epidural catheters. A single PCA syringe lasted over 24 hours in 18/27 (66.7%) wound catheter, 6/15 (40%) PCA, and 5/8 (63%) epidural + PCA patients. Eight adverse effects were seen; 4 wound infections (2 wound catheter, 1 PCA, 1 epidural patient) and 4 blockages of epidural catheters in epidural group. No adverse effect was found directly related to the WC. CONCLUSIONS: Continuous regional analgesia via wound catheters provides effective and safe postoperative analgesia for surgical patients in a small district general hospital. Used as part of a multimodal approach it allows easy step-down from HDU to surgical wards. This technique has been readily accepted over the year by theatre, HDU, ward, and anaesthetics colleagues.