PATIENT SATISFACTION AND COST ANALYSIS OF ANALGESIA MANAGEMENT FOR POST-OPERATIVE PROCEDURES IN HTAA: PCA VS. CONVENTIONAL METHOD

  • Siti Norsyuhada Ramli Department Basic Medical Sciences, Kulliyyah of Nursing
  • Muhammad Alif Mazlan Department Basic Medical Sciences, Kulliyyah of Nursing
  • Afzan Mat Yusof Human Molecular and Cellular Biology Research Cluster (iMoleC), International Islamic University Malaysia, Jalan Sultan Ahmad Shah Bandar Indera Mahkota 25200 Kuantan, Pahang, Malaysia.
  • Muhammad Lokman Md. Isa Human Molecular and Cellular Biology Research Cluster (iMoleC), International Islamic University Malaysia, Jalan Sultan Ahmad Shah Bandar Indera Mahkota 25200 Kuantan, Pahang, Malaysia.
Keywords: Patient-controlled analgesia, post-operative, pain management, cost effective, patient’s satisfaction

Abstract

Acute pain service (APS) offer several techniques to the post-operative patient in controlling and relieving the pain such as intravenous infusion, patient-controlled analgesia, epidural infusion, subcutaneous or intramuscular injection and intrathecal administration. The effectiveness of and satisfaction towards APS is not clearly defined. Therefore, the aim of this study is to conduct the cost analysis and comparison between these techniques and patient satisfaction. The study design for cost analysis was retrospective study. The means of the data were calculated based on Integration Store of Hospital Tengku Ampuan Afzan records. In addition, the evaluation of patient’s satisfaction was conducted by using a cross-sectional study design. The mean of the data was calculated and analysed by using Chi-square test. The total cost required to prepare PCA for post-operative patient was the highest with RM 8810.98.  Meanwhile, the cost for subcutaneous morphine injection, epidural infusion and peripheral block injection were RM 2.11, RM 5323.95 and RM 4.95 respectively. However, when taking into the aspect of patient’s satisfaction, PCA has the highest level of excellent performance with 54.6% compare to EDA (33%) and BLOCK (12.4%) with the p-value is less than 0.05. In conclusion, every drug has its own side effects. As the healthcare provider, it is a need to ensure drugs that were given to the patients are at the very minimum risk of having the side effects. Based on the findings of this study, it could be said that both drugs have lower percentage of people experienced the side effect after treated with the drugs. Therefore, the future study should be more focusing on the side effect of the drugs used. In terms of cost spent for the methods, the PCA regimen is more likely expensive compared to the conventional methods. However, based on survey among the patients, PCA-treated patients expressed higher satisfaction compared to the conventional regimen of pain management.

References

1. James DN Guidelines for the provision of anaesthetic services. Anaesthesia services for acute pain management. 2014.

2. Chang AM, Cheung TH, Ip WP. Patient-controlled analgesia versus conventional intramuscular injection: a cost effectiveness analysis. J. Adv. Nurs 2004;46:531-41.

3. Wickstrom, KE. Postoperative pain management: predictors, barriers and outcome. J Clin Nurs 2008.

4. Madeira I, Frada R, Marvao J, et al. (2009). Morphine patient-controlled analgesia for postoperative analgesia in patients who have transplanted cadaver donor kidneys. Transplant Proc. 2011; 43(1):125-30.

5. Walder B, Schafer M, Henzi I, et al. Efficacy and safety of patient-controlled opioid analgesia for acute postoperative pain: a quantitative systemic review. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand 2001;45: 795-804.

6. Weatherspoon D. Pain Scale: What It Is and How to Use It [Internet]. Healthline. 2017 [cited 8 July 2019]. Available from: https://www.healthline.com/health/pain-scale

7. Munro AJ, Long GT, Sleigh JW, Stat D. Nurse-Administered Subcutaneous Morphine Is a Satisfactory Alternative to Intravenous Patient-Controlled Analgesia Morphine After Cardiac Surgery. 1998;7–11.

8. Hudcova J, McNicol ED, Quah CS, et al. patient controlled opioid analgesia versus conventional opioid analgesia for postoperative pain. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2006;(4):CD003348.

9. Aging changes in the senses: MedlinePlus Medical Encyclopedia [Internet]. Medlineplus.gov. 2019 [cited 8 July 2019]. Available from: https://medlineplus.gov/ency/article/004013.htm

10. Ozalp G, Sarioglu R, Tuncel G, et al. Preoperative emotional states in patients with breast cancer and postoperative pain. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand 2003; 47(1):26-9.

11. Vivian HYI, Abrishami A, Peng PWH, et al. Predictors of postoperative pain and analgesic consumption: a qualitative systematic review. Anesthesiology 2009; 111: 657–77.

12. Traub RJ, Ji Y. NIH Public Access. Front Neuroendocrinol. 2014;34(4):1–40.

13. Apfelbaum JL, Chen C, Gan TJ, et al. Postoperative pain experience: results from a national survey suggest postoperative pain continues to be undermanaged. Anesth Analg 2003;97: 534–540.

14. Alabas OA, Tashani OA, Tabasam G, Johnson MI. Gender role affects experimental pain responses : A systematic review with meta-analysis. 2012;16:1211–23.

15. Bremner S, Webster F, Katz J, et al. A qualitative descriptive study: older adults’ postoperative pain medication usage after total knee arthroplasty. J Opioid Manag. 2012;8(3):145-52.

16. Keita H, Geachan N, Dahmani S, et al. Comparison between patient-controlled analgesia and subcutaneous morphine in elderly patients after total hip replacement. Br. J. Anaesth. 2003; 90(1):53-57.

17. Tilleul P, Aissou M, Bocquet F, et al. Cost-effectiveness analysis comparing epidural, patient-controlled intravenous morphine, and continuous wound infiltration for postoperative pain management after open abdominal surgery. Br. J. Anaesth. 2012;1-8.
Published
2019-04-01
How to Cite
Siti Norsyuhada Ramli, Muhammad Alif Mazlan, Afzan Mat Yusof, & Muhammad Lokman Md. Isa. (2019). PATIENT SATISFACTION AND COST ANALYSIS OF ANALGESIA MANAGEMENT FOR POST-OPERATIVE PROCEDURES IN HTAA: PCA VS. CONVENTIONAL METHOD. Malaysian Journal of Public Health Medicine, 19(2), 78-95. Retrieved from http://mjphm.org/index.php/mjphm/article/view/174