Readiness for Discharge After F&A Surgery Using Peripheral Nerve Blocks

Abstract

Category: Other Introduction/Purpose: Neuraxial anesthesia is often viewed as superior to general anesthesia (GA), but there are concerns that it may prolong length of stay (LOS). Most studies comparing the two anesthesias were performed in the absence of peripheral nerve blocks (PNBs), which when used as an analgesic adjunct may overcome the associated negative side effects of GA and allow decreased LOS. We hypothesized that patients given PNBs and GA would be discharged sooner than patients given PNBs and spinal anesthesia plus sedation, without increased incidence of adverse side effects such as pain, opioid administration and nausea. Methods: A single-center triple-blinded randomized controlled trial of 36 consecutive patients receiving elective F&A surgery predicted to take 1-3 hours under planned PNB with either spinal or GA was performed (see table 1. for demographics).The primary outcome was time to meet criteria for home discharge. The a priori clinically relevant difference with 80% power was determined to be 45 minutes. Patients were assessed after admission to the PACU and at 15-minute intervals thereafter. Once an Aldrete score=9 (scale signifying patient no longer needs intensive monitoring) was obtained, patients were transferred to Phase II and assessed until the post anesthesia discharge scoring system, a home readiness scale, was =9. Actual time to discharge was also recorded.Additional outcomes included a series of baseline characterizations which were assessed pre-and post-operatively, and again during Phase II.The primary outcome was compared using multivariable unconditional quantile regression. Various regressions were performed on secondary outcomes. Results: After adjustment for age and surgical duration, patients given GA plus PNB were ready for discharge from PACU 39 minutes prior to patients given neuraxial anesthesia plus PNB, but this difference did not reach the clinically relevant a priori selected difference of 45 minutes (Table 1). However, the adjusted median time to meet ambulation discharge criteria was 52 minutes fewer (p = 0.003) (Table 1). Patients met discharge criteria substantially sooner than their time until actual discharge which was not different between groups (Table 1). Pain scores at rest were higher among GA patients at 1 hour in the PACU (adjusted difference in means [95% CI]: 2.1 [1.0, 3.2], p < 0.001). Subsequent pain scores and all other secondary outcomes were not different. Conclusion: GA with PNB patients were ready for discharge 39 minutes earlier, but that difference may not be clinically significant. Although patients met criteria for discharge sooner due to a significantly more rapid ability to ambulate, they were not discharged sooner because PACU staff was not acclimated to the earlier readiness and so did not push for earlier discharge. These findings suggest that GA plus PNB leads to earlier discharge with similar side effects as spinal plus PNB. Therefore, the use of GA with PNB for foot and ankle surgeries could save the hospital and the patient time and resources.