Comparison of the postoperative analgesic efficacies of intravenous acetaminophen and fascia iliaca compartment block in hip fracture surgery: A randomised controlled trial. Issue 10 (October 2019)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Yamamoto, Norio; Sakura, Shinichi; Noda, Tomoyuki; Nishiyama, Akihiro; Dan'ura, Tomoyuki; Matsui, Yuzuru; Ozaki, Toshifumi
• Is Part Of: Injury. Volume 50:Issue 10(2019)
• Page Start: 1689
• Page End: 1693
• Publication Date: 2019-10
• Subjects: Fascia iliaca compartment block -- Intravenous acetaminophen -- Hip fracture -- Postoperative pain -- Control of pain on movement -- Standing -- Randomised controlled trial; Wounds and injuries -- Surgery -- Periodicals; Accidents -- Periodicals; Wounds and Injuries -- surgery -- Periodicals; Lésions et blessures -- Chirurgie -- Périodiques; Electronic journals; Electronic journals; 617.1
• DOI: 10.1016/j.injury.2019.03.008
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0020-1383

Abstract

Highlights: A RCT was conducted to compare the postoperative analgesic efficacy of intravenous acetaminophen and FICB in hip fracture patients. FICB improved postoperative pain on movement compared with intravenous acetaminophen without elevating the complication rate. However, FICB did not reduce the total number of rescue analgesics required or the time to first standing. Abstract: Background: Managing pain during movement after hip fracture surgery is important for achieving earlier hip mobilisation and for preventing postoperative complications. In the present study, we tested the hypothesis that the fascia iliaca compartment block (FICB) would improve postoperative pain on movement compared with intravenous acetaminophen. Methods: In this prospective, randomised, controlled, parallel trial, patients were assigned to either the intravenous acetaminophen or the ultrasound-guided FICB group. Visual analog scale (VAS) pain scores were evaluated at 6, 9, 12, 18, 24 h, 2 days, and 7 days postoperatively. The primary outcome was VAS scores on movement at 24 h after surgery. The secondary outcomes were VAS scores on movement at the other time points, VAS scores at rest, the total number of rescue analgesics required and incidence of delirium during the first 24 h postoperatively, potential drug or block-related complications, and the time to first standing. Results: VAS scores on movement at 24 h after surgery were significantly lower in the FICB group than in the intravenous acetaminophen group [median (the 25th to 75th percentiles), 20 (10–30) vs 40 (30–53); P < 0.01]. The VAS scores on movement at any other time point and the scores at rest at 12 h after surgery were also significantly lower in the FICB group than in the intravenous acetaminophen group. The two groups did not differ in terms of the total number of rescue analgesics required or the incidence of delirium during the first 24 h postoperatively; complications; or the time to first standing. Conclusions: FICB improved postoperative pain on movement compared with intravenous acetaminophen without increasing the complication rate. However, the total number of rescue analgesics required and the time to first standing were not significantly different between the two groups.