4CPS-169 Comparative analysis of effectiveness between a patient-controlled analgesia morphine device and a sublingual sufentanil tablet system. (March 2019)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Serrano, D; Roig, S; Fernandez, J; Alonso, P
• Is Part Of: European journal of hospital pharmacy. Volume 26(2019)Supplement 1
• Page Start: A148
• Page End: A148
• Publication Date: 2019-03
• Subjects: Pharmacy -- Periodicals; Hospital pharmacies -- Periodicals; 615.1
• DOI: 10.1136/ejhpharm-2019-eahpconf.318
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 2047-9956

Abstract

Abstract : Background: The sublingual sufentanil tablet system (SSTS) (Zalviso) is a new device for the management of postoperative pain. Purpose: To determine patients who may benefit from the use of SSTS compared to the patient-controlled analgesia morphine device (PCA-M). Analyse the effectiveness of SSTS compared to PCA-M. Material and methods: Observational and prospective study carried out in a private 300-bed hospital. The present study consisted of two arms, on the one hand were selected patients with PCA-M and on the other, patients with SSTS. The study period was from September 2017 to March 2018. In the present study were collected the type of surgery and pain intensity with the analogous visual scale of pain (AVS:0: no pain; 10: maximum pain) in various situations: prior to the PCA-M/SSTS and on days 1, 2 and 3 after PCA-M/SSTS. The total AVS value (average of 3 days) of each patient was also determined. The AVS value was determined through a pharmaceutical interview. Study data were analysed with the SPSS program: the difference of means was calculated through the student t -test and the Mann–Whitney U test. Results: Fifty-one patients were collected in the PCA-M group and forty-four in the SSTS group. The average age in the PCA-M group was 55 years, while the average age in the SSTS group was 50 years, with no significant differences between groups. Patients differed significantly between groups in the type of surgery: SSTS has been used more frequently in gynaecological surgery but less in neurosurgery than PCA-M. Groups also differed significantly in gender: SSTS has been administered mostly in females (65%) versus PCA-M (37%). The intensity of the pain prior to the use of the device was AVS 7 for both groups. On the first day after the device was used, the average AVS value in the SSTS group was 5 and in the PCA-M group 6 (P0.24). On days 2 and 3 the intensity of pain was lower in the PCA-M group (AVS 3) compared with the SSTS group (AVS 4) (P0.58). Sum of the AVS average value was 15 in the PCA-M group and 14 in the SSTS group (P0.28). Conclusion: According to the present study, both devices have similar effects in the reduction and management of post-operative pain through the AVS scale. The SSTS group slightly decreases pain faster than the PCA-M group, without significant differences. SSTS has been administered mainly in gynaecology, while the PCA-M device has been administered mainly in neurosurgery. References and/or acknowledgements: Acknowledgement of the anaesthesia service. No conflict of interest.