Objective: The International Patterns of Opioid Prescribing study compares postoperative opioid prescribing patterns in the United States (US) versus the rest of the world. Summary of Background Data: The US is in the middle of an unprecedented opioid epidemic. Diversion of unused opioids contributes to the opioid epidemic. Methods: Patients ≥16 years old undergoing appendectomy, cholecystectomy, or inguinal hernia repair in 14 hospitals from 8 countries during a 6-month period were included. Medical records were systematically reviewed to identify: (1) preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative characteristics, (2) opioid intake within 3 months preoperatively, (3) opioid prescription upon discharge, and (4) opioid refills within 3 months postoperatively. The median/range and mean/standard deviation of number of pills and OME were compared between the US and non-US patients. Results: A total of 4690 patients were included. The mean age was 49 years, 47% were female, and 4% had opioid use history. Ninety-one percent of US patients were prescribed opioids, compared to 5% of non-US patients (P < 0.001). The median number of opioid pills and OME prescribed were 20 (0–135) and 150 (0–1680) mg for US versus 0 (0–50) and 0 (0–600) mg for non-US patients, respectively (both P < 0.001). The mean number of opioid pills and OME prescribed were 23.1 ± 13.9 in US and 183.5 ± 133.7 mg versus 0.8 ± 3.9 and 4.6 ± 27.7 mg in non-US patients, respectively (both P < 0.001). Opioid refill rates were 4.7% for US and 1.0% non-US patients (P < 0.001). Conclusions: US physicians prescribe alarmingly high amounts of opioid medications postoperatively. Further efforts should focus on limiting opioid prescribing and emphasize non-opioid alternatives in the US.

No abstract

Background The Acute Care Surgery (ACS) model was developed as a dedicated service for the provision of 24/7 nontrauma emergency surgical care. This systematic review investigated which components are essential in an ACS model and the state of implementation of ACS models worldwide. Methods A literature search was conducted using PubMed, MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane library, and Web of Science databases. All relevant data of ACS models were extracted from included articles. Results The search identified 62 articles describing ACS models in 13 countries. The majority consist of a dedicated nontrauma emergency surgical service, with daytime on-site attending coverage (cleared from elective duties), and 24/7 in-house resident coverage. Emergency department coverage and operating room access varied widely. Critical care is fully embedded in the original US model as part of the acute care chain (ACC), but is still a separate unit in most other countries. While in most European countries, ACS is not a recognized specialty yet, there is a tendency toward more structured acute care. Conclusions Large national and international heterogeneity exists in the structure and components of the ACS model. Critical care is still a separate component in most systems, although it is an essential part of the ACC to provide the best pre-, intra-and postoperative care of the physiologically deranged patient. Universal acceptance of one global ACS model seems challenging; however, a global consensus on essential components would benefit any healthcare system.