Background Long-term opioid use, which may have significant individual and societal impacts, has been documented in up to 20% of patients after trauma or orthopaedic surgery. The objectives of this scoping review were to systematically map the research on strategies aiming to prevent chronic opioid use in these populations and to identify knowledge gaps in this area. Methods This scoping review is reported according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR) Checklist. We searched seven databases and websites of relevant organizations. Selected studies and guidelines were published between January 2008 and September 2021. Preventive strategies were categorized as: system-based, pharmacological, educational, multimodal, and others. We summarized findings using measures of central tendency and frequency along with p-values. We also reported the level of evidence and the strength of recommendations presented in clinical guidelines. Results A total of 391 studies met the inclusion criteria after initial screening from which 66 studies and 20 guidelines were selected. Studies mainly focused on orthopaedic surgery (62,1%), trauma (30.3%) and spine surgery (7.6%). Among system-based strategies, hospital-based individualized opioid tapering protocols, and regulation initiatives limiting the prescription of opioids were associated with statistically significant decreases in morphine equivalent doses (MEDs) at 1 to 3 months following trauma and orthopaedic surgery. Among pharmacological strategies, only the use of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and beta blockers led to a significant reduction in MEDs up to 12 months after orthopaedic surgery. Most studies on educational strategies, multimodal strategies and psychological strategies were associated with significant reductions in MEDs beyond 1 month. The majority of recommendations from clinical practice guidelines were of low level of evidence. Conclusions This scoping review advances knowledge on existing strategies to prevent long-term opioid use in trauma and orthopaedic surgery patients. We observed that system-based, educational, multimodal and psychological strategies are the most promising. Future research should focus on determining which strategies should be implemented particularly in trauma patients at high risk for long-term use, testing those that can promote a judicious prescription of opioids while preventing an illicit use, and evaluating their effects on relevant patient-reported and social outcomes.

To examine 1) pain management strategies within the care trajectory of orthopaedic trauma patients and patients' perception of their effectiveness, 2) adverse effects (AEs) associated with pharmacological treatments, particularly opioids and cannabis, and 3) patients' perceptions of strategies that should be applied after an orthopaedic trauma and support that they should obtain from health professionals for their use. Patients and Methods: This study was conducted with orthopaedic trauma patients in a level 1 trauma center. A convergent mixedmethods design was used. Data on pain experience, pain management strategies used and AEs were collected with self-administered questionnaires at hospital discharge (T1) and at 3 months after injury (T2). Patients' preferences about the pain management strategies used, the required support and AEs were further examined through semi-structured individual interviews at the same time measures. Descriptive statistics and thematic analyses were performed.Results: Seventy-one patients were recruited and 30 individual interviews were undertaken. Pharmacological pain management strategies used at T1 and T2 were mainly opioids (95.8%; 20.8%) and acetaminophen (91.5%; 37.5%). The most frequently applied non-pharmacological strategies were sleep (95.6%) and physical positioning (89.7%) at T1 and massage (46.3%) and relaxation (32.5%) at T2. Findings from quantitative and qualitative analyses highlighted that non-pharmacological strategies, such as comfort, massage, distraction, and physical therapy, were perceived as the most effective by participants. Most common AEs related to opioids were dry mouth (78.8%) and fatigue (66.1%) at T1 and insomnia (30.0%) and fatigue (20.0%) at T2. Dry mouth (28.6%) and drowsiness (14.3%) were the most reported AEs by patients using recreational cannabis. An important need for information at hospital discharge and for a personalized follow-up was identified by participants during interviews. Conclusion: Despite its AEs, we found that opioids are still the leading pain management strategy after an orthopaedic trauma and that more efforts are needed to implement non-pharmacological strategies. Cannabis was taken for recreational purposes but patients also used it for pain relief. Support from health professionals is needed to promote the adequate use of these strategies.

No abstract

Background:In situ simulation shows promise as an effective training tool for trauma; however, its disruptive nature is a major downside. Although the benefits of in situ simulation in trauma have been described, the potential perceived harms of running an unscheduled simulation using working staff are unknown. The aim of this study is to assess trauma team members' perceptions regarding the value of in situ simulation relative to its perceived impact on patient care. Methods: We conducted a longitudinal survey study including all members of the multidisciplinary trauma team at the Halifax Infirmary, a level 1 trauma centre in Nova Scotia. Following an in situ simulation, participants were given a 10-question survey with answers on a 5-point Likert scale. Results: A total of 61 surveys were collected. Survey respondents were grouped into allied health (nurses, paramedics, respiratory therapists; 44%), learners (residents and medical students; 44%) and other (staff physicians, those who did not specify their role; 12%). Respondents felt that participating in the in situ simulation delayed (28%) or compromised patient care (5%) infrequently. No respondents felt that patients were harmed. In situ simulation was felt to identify important safety issues (70%), improve trauma team communication (89%) and improve trauma patient care (89%). The in situ simulation was considered enjoyable (92%) and was identified as a good educational experience (95%). It was felt by participants that simulations should continue to be done in situ in the trauma bay rather than in a sim laboratory (54%). Conclusion:The trauma in situ simulation program at the Halifax Infirmary is not felt to cause delays or compromise patient care. The program is considered to be a good learning opportunity that identifies safety issues and improves patient care. Epidemiology of submersion injuries inCanadian children and adolescents: 1990-2018.