Abstract

The role of continuous wound infusion catheters as part of a multimodal analgesia strategy after Caesarean delivery is unclear. We introduced continuous wound infusion catheters to our multimodal analgesia regimen to evaluate the impact on analgesic outcomes after Caesarean delivery.After institutional review board (IRB) approval, a 4-month practice change was instituted as a quality improvement initiative. In addition to multimodal analgesia, continuous wound infusion catheters for up to 3 days were offered on alternate weeks for all women undergoing Caesarean deliveries. The primary outcome was postoperative in-hospital opioid consumption. Secondary outcomes were static and dynamic pain scores at 24 and 72 h, time until first analgesic request, opioid-related side-effects, length of stay, satisfaction (0-100%), and continuous wound infusion catheter-related complications.All women scheduled for Caesarean delivery (n=139) in the 4-month period were included in the analysis, with 70 women receiving continuous wound infusion catheters, and 69 in the control group. Opioid consumption (continuous wound infusion catheter group 11.3 [7.5-61.9] mg morphine equivalents vs control group 30.0 [11.3-48.8] mg morphine equivalents), pain scores (except 24 h resting pain scores which were higher in the control group 2 [1-3] vs 1.5 [0-3] in the continous wound infusion catheters group; P=0.05), side-effects, length of stay, and complications were similar between groups. Satisfaction scores at 24 h were higher with continuous wound infusion catheters (100% [91-100%] vs 90% [86-100%]; P=0.003) with no differences at 72 h. One patient demonstrated symptoms of systemic local anaesthetic toxicity which resolved without significant harm.The addition of continuous wound infusion catheters to a multimodal analgesia regimen for post-Caesarean delivery pain management demonstrated minimal clinically significant analgesic benefits. Future studies are needed to explore the use of continuous wound infusion catheters in populations that may benefit most from this intervention.

View details for DOI 10.1016/j.bjao.2023.100242

View details for PubMedID 38179106

View details for PubMedCentralID PMC10761342