4.5 Review

Opioid Stewardship in Otolaryngology: State of the Art Review

期刊

OTOLARYNGOLOGY-HEAD AND NECK SURGERY
卷 158, 期 5, 页码 817-827

出版社

SAGE PUBLICATIONS LTD
DOI: 10.1177/0194599818757999

关键词

otolaryngology; head and neck surgery; pain; postoperative pain; opioids; narcotics; analgesics

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objective. The United States is facing an epidemic of opioid addiction. Deaths from opioid overdose have quadrupled in the past 15 years and now surpass annual deaths during the height of the human immunodeficiency virus epidemic. There is a link between opioid prescriptions after surgery, opioid misuse, opioid diversion, and use of other drugs of abuse. As surgeons, otolaryngologists contribute to this crisis. Our objective is to outline the risk of abuse from opioids in the management of acute postoperative pain in otolaryngology-head and neck surgery (OHNS) and strategies to avoid misuse. Data Sources. PubMed/MEDLINE. Review Methods. We conducted a review of the literature on the rate of opioid abuse after surgery, methods of safe opioid use, and strategies to minimize the dangers of opioids. Conclusions. Otolaryngologists have a responsibility to treat pain. This begins preoperatively by discussing perioperative pain control and developing a personalized pain control plan. Patients should be aware that opioids carry significant risks of adverse events and abuse. Perioperative use of multimodal nonopioid agents enables pain control and avoidance of opioids in many otolaryngologic cases. When this approach is inadequate, opioids should be used in short duration under close surveillance. Institutional standards for opioid prescribing after common procedures can minimize misuse. Implications for Practice. Otolaryngologists need to acknowledge the potential harm that opioids cause. It is essential that we evaluate our practices to ensure that opioids are used responsibly. Furthermore, opioid stewardship should become a priority in otolaryngology.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据