Tobacco smoking is associated with adverse health effects, and its relationship to pain is complex. The longitudinal effect of smoking on patients attending a tertiary pain management center is not well established. Using the Collaborative Health Outcomes Information Registry of patients attending the Stanford Pain Management Center from 2013 to 2017, we conducted a propensity-weighted analysis to determine independent effects of smoking on patients with chronic pain. We adjusted for covariates including age, sex, body mass index, depression and anxiety history, ethnicity, alcohol use, marital status, disability, and education. We compared smokers and nonsmokers on pain intensity, physical function, sleep, and psychological and mood variables using self-reported NIH PROMIS outcomes. We also conducted a linear mixed-model analysis to determine effect of smoking over time. A total of 12,368 patients completed the CHOIR questionnaire of which 8584 patients had complete data for propensity analysis. Smokers at time of pain consultation reported significantly worse pain intensities, pain interference, pain behaviors, physical functioning, fatigue, sleep-related impairment, sleep disturbance, anger, emotional support, depression, and anxiety symptoms than nonsmokers (all P < 0.001). In mixed-model analysis, smokers tended to have worse pain interference, fatigue, sleep-related impairment, anger, emotional support, and depression over time compared with nonsmokers. Patients with chronic pain who smoke have worse pain, functional, sleep, and psychological and mood outcomes compared with nonsmokers. Smoking also has prognostic importance for poor recovery and improvement over time. Further research is needed on tailored therapies to assist people with chronic pain who smoke and to determine an optimal strategy to facilitate smoking cessation.

BACKGROUND: Inadvertent perioperative hypothermia is a common complication of surgery, and active body surface warming (ABSW) systems are used to prevent adverse clinical outcomes. Prior data on certain outcomes are equivocal (ie, blood loss) or limited (ie, pain and opioid consumption). The objective of this study was to provide an updated review on the effect of ABSW on clinical outcomes and temperature maintenance. METHODS: We conducted a systematic review of randomized controlled trials evaluating ABSW systems compared to nonactive warming controls in noncardiac surgeries. Outcomes studied included postoperative pain scores and opioid consumption (primary outcomes) and other perioperative clinical variables such as temperature changes, blood loss, and wound infection (secondary outcomes). We searched Ovid MEDLINE daily, Ovid MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINHAL, Cochrane CENTRAL, and Web of Science from inception to June 2019. Quality of evidence (QoE) was rated according to the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations (GRADE) approach. Subgroup analysis sought to determine the effect of preoperative + intraoperative warming versus intraoperative warming alone. Metaregression evaluated the effect of year of publication, use of neuromuscular blockers, anesthesia, and surgery type on outcomes. RESULTS: Fifty-four articles (3976 patients) were included. Pooled results demonstrated that ABSW maintained normothermia compared to controls, during surgery (30 minutes postinduction [mean difference {MD}: 0.3°C, 95% confidence interval {CI}, 0.2–0.4, moderate QoE]), end of surgery (MD: 1.1°C, 95% CI, 0.9–1.3, high QoE), and up to 4 hours postoperatively (MD: 0.3°C, 95% CI, 0.2–0.5, high QoE). ABSW was not associated with difference in pain scores (<24 hours postoperatively, moderate to low QoE) or perioperative opioid consumption (very low QoE). ABSW increased patient satisfaction (MD: 2.2 points, 95% CI, 0.9–3.6, moderate QoE), reduced blood transfusions (odds ratio [OR] = 0.6, 95% CI, 0.4–1.0, moderate QoE), shivering (OR = 0.2, 95% CI, 0.1–0.4, high QoE), and wound infections (OR = 0.3, 95% CI, 0.2–0.7, high QoE). No significant differences were found for fluid administration (low QoE), blood loss (very low QoE), major adverse cardiovascular events (very low QoE), or mortality (very low QoE). Subgroup analysis and metaregression suggested increased temperature benefit with pre + intraoperative warming, use of neuromuscular blockers, and recent publication year. ABSW seemed to confer less temperature benefit in cesarean deliveries and neurosurgical/spinal cases compared to abdominal surgeries. CONCLUSIONS: ABSW is effective in maintaining physiological normothermia, decreasing wound infections, shivering, blood transfusions, and increasing patient satisfaction but does not appear to affect postoperative pain and opioid use.

Background: Chronic postsurgical pain is a common complication of surgery. The role of psychologic risk factors like depression and anxiety is substantially understudied in cardiac surgery. This study sought to identify perioperative factors associated with chronic pain at 3, 6, and 12 months after cardiac surgery. The authors hypothesize that baseline psychologic vulnerabilities have a negative influence on chronic postsurgical pain. Methods: The authors prospectively collected demographic, psychologic, and perioperative factors in a cohort of 1,059 patients undergoing cardiac surgery at the Toronto General Hospital between 2012 and 2020. Patients were followed and completed chronic pain questionnaires at 3, 6, and 12 months after surgery. Results: The study included 767 patients who completed at least one follow-up questionnaire. The incidence of postsurgical pain (more than 0 out of 10) at 3, 6, and 12 months after surgery was 191 of 663 (29%), 118 of 625 (19%), and 89 of 605 (15%), respectively. Notably, among patients reporting any pain, the incidence of pain compatible with a neuropathic phenotype increased from 56 of 166 (34%) at 3 months to 38 of 97 (39%) at 6 months and 43 of 67 (64%) at 12 months. Factors associated with postsurgical pain scores at 3 months include female sex, pre-existing chronic pain, previous cardiac surgery, preoperative depression, baseline pain catastrophizing scores, and moderate-to-severe acute pain (4 or more out of 10) within 5 postoperative days. Conclusions: Nearly one in three patients undergoing cardiac surgery reported pain at 3 months of follow-up, with approximately 15% reporting persistent pain at 1 yr. Female sex, pre-existing chronic pain, and baseline depression were associated with postsurgical pain scores across all three time periods. Editor’s Perspective: What We Already Know about This Topic: What This Article Tells Us That Is New:

Background: The purpose of this study was to determine the incidence, characteristics, impact, and risk factors associated with persistent incisional pain. The hypothesis was that patient demographics and perioperative interventions are associated with persistent pain. Methods: This was a secondary analysis of an international prospective cohort study from 2012 to 2014. This study included patients who were 45 yr of age or older who underwent major inpatient noncardiac surgery. Data were collected perioperatively and at 1 yr after surgery to assess for the development of persistent incisional pain (pain present around incision at 1 yr after surgery). Results: Among 14,831 patients, 495 (3.3%; 95% CI, 3.1 to 3.6) reported persistent incisional pain at 1 yr, with an average pain intensity of 3.6 ± 2.5 (0 to 10 numeric rating scale), with 35% and 14% reporting moderate and severe pain intensities, respectively. More than half of patients with persistent pain reported needing analgesic medications, and 85% reported interference with daily activities (denominator = 495 in the above proportions). Risk factors for persistent pain included female sex (P = 0.007), Asian ethnicity (P < 0.001), surgery for fracture (P < 0.001), history of chronic pain (P < 0.001), coronary artery disease (P < 0.001), history of tobacco use (P = 0.048), postoperative patient-controlled analgesia (P < 0.001), postoperative continuous nerve block (P = 0.010), insulin initiation within 24 h of surgery (P < 0.001), and withholding nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory medication or cyclooxygenase-2 inhibitors on the day of surgery (P = 0.029 and P < 0.001, respectively). Older age (P < 0.001), endoscopic surgery (P = 0.005), and South Asian (P < 0.001), Native American/Australian (P = 0.004), and Latin/Hispanic ethnicities (P < 0.001) were associated with a lower risk of persistent pain. Conclusions: Persistent incisional pain is a common complication of inpatient noncardiac surgery, occurring in approximately 1 in 30 adults. It results in significant morbidity, interferes with daily living, and is associated with persistent analgesic consumption. Certain demographics, ethnicities, and perioperative practices are associated with increased risk of persistent pain. Editor’s Perspective: What We Already Know about This Topic: What This Article Tells Us That Is New:

Background: The most commonly used means to assess pain is by patient self-reported questionnaires. These questionnaires have traditionally been completed using paper-and-pencil, telephone, or in-person methods, which may limit the validity of the collected data. Electronic data capture methods represent a potential way to validly, reliably, and feasibly collect pain-related data from patients in both clinical and research settings. Objective: The aim of this study was to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis to compare electronic and conventional pain-related data collection methods with respect to pain score equivalence, data completeness, ease of use, efficiency, and acceptability between methods. Methods: We searched the Medical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System Online (MEDLINE), Excerpta Medica Database (EMBASE), and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) from database inception until November 2019. We included all peer-reviewed studies that compared electronic (any modality) and conventional (paper-, telephone-, or in-person–based) data capture methods for patient-reported pain data on one of the following outcomes: pain score equivalence, data completeness, ease of use, efficiency, and acceptability. We used random effects models to combine score equivalence data across studies that reported correlations or measures of agreement between electronic and conventional pain assessment methods. Results: A total of 53 unique studies were included in this systematic review, of which 21 were included in the meta-analysis. Overall, the pain scores reported electronically were congruent with those reported using conventional modalities, with the majority of studies (36/44, 82%) that reported on pain scores demonstrating this relationship. The weighted summary correlation coefficient of pain score equivalence from our meta-analysis was 0.92 (95% CI 0.88-0.95). Studies on data completeness, patient- or provider-reported ease of use, and efficiency generally indicated that electronic data capture methods were equivalent or superior to conventional methods. Most (19/23, 83%) studies that directly surveyed patients reported that the electronic format was the preferred data collection method. Conclusions: Electronic pain-related data capture methods are comparable with conventional methods in terms of score equivalence, data completeness, ease, efficiency, and acceptability and, if the appropriate psychometric evaluations are in place, are a feasible means to collect pain data in clinical and research settings.