This study aimed to investigate the efficacy and safety of transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) in postoperative acute pain control. PubMed, Scopus, and Cochrane Library were searched on 1–8 December 2022, for randomized controlled trials on the analgesic effects of TENS. The outcomes were pain intensity and opioid use (primary), and postoperative (PO) adverse events, blood pressure, and the duration of hospital stay (secondary); PROSPERO CRD42022333335. A total of 40 articles were included in the meta-analysis. Pain intensity at rest and during coughing for all types of surgeries combined was lower in the TENS group (standardized mean difference (SMD) = −0.51 [−0.61, −0.41], p < 0.00001, 29 studies, and −1.28 [−2.46, −0.09], p-value = 0.03, six studies, respectively). There was a statistically significant decrease in morphine requirements, as well as in the incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting, dizziness, and pruritus. There was no difference between the groups in postoperative pain intensity during walking, in blood pressure, and only a borderline difference in the length of hospital stay. The subgroup analysis by surgery type did not show significant differences between the groups in pain severity at rest. Thus, TENS has a potential for pain control and postoperative recovery outcomes.

Background: Perioperative disorders of neurocognitive function are a set of heterogeneous conditions, which include transient post-operative delirium (POD) and more prolonged post-operative cognitive dysfunction (POCD). Since the number of annually performed surgical procedures is growing, we should identify which type of anesthesia is safer for preserving neurocognitive function. The purpose of this study was to compare the effect of general anesthesia (GA) and regional anesthesia (RA) in patients undergoing surgical procedures under general anesthesia and regional anesthesia. Material and methods: We searched for randomized controlled studies, which studied post-operative cognitive outcomes after general and regional anesthesia in the adult patient population. Results: Thirteen articles with 3633 patients: the RA group consisted of 1823 patients, and the GA group of 1810 patients, who were selected for meta-analysis. The overall effect of the model shows no difference between these two groups in terms of risk for post-operative delirium. The result is insensitive to the exclusion of any study. There was no difference between RA and GA in terms of post-operative cognitive dysfunction. Conclusions: There was no statistically significant difference between GA and RA in the incidence of POD. There was no statistically significant difference in the incidence of POCD per-protocol analysis, psychomotor/attention tests (preoperative/baseline, post-operative), memory tests (postoperatively, follow up), mini-mental state examination score 24 h postoperatively, post-operative reaction time three months postoperatively, controlled oral word association test, and digit copying test. There were no differences in the incidence of POCD in general and regional anesthesia at one week postoperatively, three months postoperatively, or total events (one week or three months). The incidence of post-operative mortality also did not differ between two groups.

Since pain is common in many diseases, it is important to summarize the precise prevalence data on pain and high-impact pain, which frequently worsens the quality of life and work activities. This umbrella review aims to estimate the prevalence of pain among patients with different chronic diseases/conditions. We followed the PRISMA guidelines. We identified the following areas addressing the prevalence of pain: (1) pain in cancer patients; (2) neurodegenerative diseases; (3) chronic heart failure; (4) chronic obstructive pulmonary disease; (5) chronic kidney diseases; (6) liver diseases and failure; (7) nursing home seniors; and (8) postamputation (phantom) pain. We included systematic reviews and meta-analyses that reported pain in patients from the mentioned populations. The prevalence of pain in chronic diseases is high, in some cases even higher than the cardinal symptoms of these diseases/conditions. Most patients who suffer from any of these diseases/conditions can develop chronic pain at later stages. Pain in chronic diseases does not receive enough attention and is not properly managed. Future studies are warranted to establish a more precise prevalence of chronic pain and develop better methods of pain screening, detection, and management.

Background: Neurocognitive alterations in the perioperative period might be caused by a wide variety of factors including pain, blood loss, hypotension, hypoxia, micro- and macroemboli, cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB), reperfusion damage, and surgery itself, and all are risk factors for developing postoperative delirium (POD) and postoperative cognitive dysfunction (POCD). The objective of this study was to evaluate the effect of ketamine on neurocognitive dysfunction after anesthesia. Methods: We conducted a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing ketamine use (experimental group) with placebo (controls). Results: The model favors the control group over the experimental group in terms of frequency of hallucinations (the risk ratio with 95% CI is 1.54 [1.09, 2.19], p-value = 0.02), the number of patients readmitted within 30 days (RR with 95% CI is 0.25 [0.09, 0.70]), and the number of adverse events (overall RR with 95% CI is 1.31 [1.06, 1.62]). In terms of morphine consumption, the model favors the experimental group. Conclusion: There was no statistically significant difference in incidences of postoperative delirium, vasopressor requirement, and fentanyl consumption between the ketamine and control groups. However, hallucinations were more frequently reported in the ketamine group.

Background: Over the past few decades, critical care has seen many advancements. These advancements resulted in a considerable increase in the prevalence of chronically critically ill patients requiring prolonged medical care, which led to a massive increase in healthcare utilization. Methods: We performed a search for suitable articles using PubMed and Google Scholar from the inception of these databases to 15 May 2021. Results: Thirty-four articles were included in the review and analyzed. We described the following characteristics and problems with chronic critically ill patient management: the patient population, remote monitoring, the monitoring of physiological parameters in chronic critically ill patients, the anatomical location of sensors, the barriers to implementation, and the main technology-related issues. The main challenges in the management of these patients are (1) the shortage of caretakers, (2) the periodicity of vital function monitoring (e.g., episodic measuring of blood pressure leads to missing important critical events such as hypertension, hypotension, and hypoxia), and (3) failure to catch and manage critical physiological events at the right time, which can result in poor outcomes. Conclusions: The prevalence of critically ill patients is expected to grow. Technical solutions can greatly assist medical personnel and caregivers. Wearable devices can be used to monitor blood pressure, heart rate, pulse, respiratory rate, blood oxygen saturation, metabolism, and central nervous system function. The most important points that should be addressed in future studies are the performance of the remote monitoring systems, safety, clinical and economic outcomes, as well as the acceptance of the devices by patients, caretakers, and healthcare professionals.

The objective of this study was to compare the outcomes of the ultrasound- and fluoroscopy-guided techniques in the management of back pain. Using PubMed, Scopus, and the Cochrane Library, we searched randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published before May 2023, which reported relevant data on the topic. The effectiveness of the ultrasound-guided (US-guided) and fluoroscopy-guided (FL-guided) approaches for back pain management was compared in terms of postoperative pain intensity, postoperative functional outcomes, and postoperative complications. Subgroup analyses were conducted for different postoperative periods. Eight studies were included in the analysis. There was no significant difference in post-procedural pain relief at one week, two weeks, one month, two months, and three months between the US-guided and FL-guided interventions for back pain management (SMD with 95% CI is −0.01 [−0.11, 0.10]), p = 0.91, I² = 0%). In terms of the postoperative functional outcomes assessed by the “Oswestry Disability Index” (ODI) functionality score, the model tends to favor the FL-guided injections over the US-guided injections (SMD with 95% CI: 0.13 [−0.00, 0.25], p = 0.05, I² = 0). Finally, the US-guided and FL-guided injections did not show significantly different results in terms of postoperative complications (RR with 95% CI is 0.99 [0.49, 1.99], p = 0.97, I² = 0). The subgroup analysis also did not demonstrate differences between the US-guided and FL-guided techniques in the following outcomes: vasovagal reaction, transient headache, and facial flushing. There was no significant difference between the US-guided and FL-guided injections for treating back pain in terms of postoperative pain intensity and complications. Still, the model tends to favor the FL-guided injections over the US-guided injections in terms of functionality.