Assessment of Postoperative Analgesic Drug Efficacy: Method of Data Analysis Is Critical

Lars Peter Kloster Andersen; Ismail Gögenur; Henrik Torup; Jacob Rosenberg; Mads Utke Werner

doi:10.1213/ANE.0000000000002007

Assessment of Postoperative Analgesic Drug Efficacy: Method of Data Analysis Is Critical

Lars Peter Kloster Andersen, Ismail Gögenur, Henrik Torup, Jacob Rosenberg, Mads Utke Werner

Institut for Klinisk Medicin

5 Citationer (Scopus)

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Pain intensity ratings and opioid consumption (OC) are ubiquitous indicators of pain in postoperative trials of the efficacy of interventional procedures. Unfortunately, consensus on the appropriate statistical handling of these outcomes has not been reached. The aim of this article was, therefore, to reexamine original data obtained from a postoperative analgesic drug trial, applying a collection of standard statistical methods in analgesic outcome assessments. Furthermore, a modified integrated assessment method of these outcomes was evaluated.

METHODS: Data from a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study investigating the analgesic efficacy of a regional anesthetic block following a major elective surgical procedure were analyzed. The original data included measurements of pain intensity (visual analog scale [VAS]) at rest and during coughing (VAS0/2/4/6/12/18/24 h) and OC0-6/0-24 h administered by patient-controlled analgesia. The statistical analyses included comparisons of discrete pain intensity scores (VAS0/2/4/6/12/18/24 h), summary measures of pain intensity ratings (area under the curve [AUC]-VAS0-6/0-24 h; mean VAS0-6/0-24 h), and OC0-6/0-24 h. Finally, the analyses also included an integrated assessment of longitudinally measured pain intensity and opioid consumption (PIOC0-6/0-24 h). Also, estimation of effect size, generalized odds ratio of the individual analgesic outcome variables was performed.

RESULTS: Sixty-one patients were included in the final data analysis. Discrete pain intensity ratings differed significantly between the treatment groups at specific postoperative time points, but appropriate correction for multiple comparisons eliminated some of these differences. AUC-VAS0-6 h differed significantly at rest and during coughing, while no difference was found for AUC-VAS0-24 h. In contrast, mean VAS0-6 h and VAS0-24 h differed significantly between treatment groups at rest and during coughing. OC0-6/0-24 h differed significantly between the treatment groups. Finally, also PIOC0-6/0-24 h differed significantly at rest and during coughing.

CONCLUSIONS: Our analyses demonstrate that the applied statistical method may alter the statistical significance and estimates of effect size of analgesic outcome variables in postoperative pain trials. Our findings underline the importance of defining valid statistical methods for future analgesic drug trials. We propose an integrated assessment of longitudinally measured pain intensity and opioid consumption (PIOC). The method combines two interdependent analgesic outcomes, lowers the risk of mass significance, and provides more accurate representation of the dynamic nature of postoperative pain and analgesic drug efficacy.

Originalsprog	Engelsk
Tidsskrift	Anesthesia and Analgesia
Vol/bind	125
Udgave nummer	3
Sider (fra-til)	1008-1013
Antal sider	6
ISSN	0003-2999
DOI	https://doi.org/10.1213/ANE.0000000000002007
Status	Udgivet - 1 sep. 2017

Adgang til dokumentet

10.1213/ANE.0000000000002007

Citationsformater

@article{02f1f996b6914391888a18981a914b1a,

title = "Assessment of Postoperative Analgesic Drug Efficacy: Method of Data Analysis Is Critical",

abstract = "BACKGROUND: Pain intensity ratings and opioid consumption (OC) are ubiquitous indicators of pain in postoperative trials of the efficacy of interventional procedures. Unfortunately, consensus on the appropriate statistical handling of these outcomes has not been reached. The aim of this article was, therefore, to reexamine original data obtained from a postoperative analgesic drug trial, applying a collection of standard statistical methods in analgesic outcome assessments. Furthermore, a modified integrated assessment method of these outcomes was evaluated.METHODS: Data from a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study investigating the analgesic efficacy of a regional anesthetic block following a major elective surgical procedure were analyzed. The original data included measurements of pain intensity (visual analog scale [VAS]) at rest and during coughing (VAS0/2/4/6/12/18/24 h) and OC0-6/0-24 h administered by patient-controlled analgesia. The statistical analyses included comparisons of discrete pain intensity scores (VAS0/2/4/6/12/18/24 h), summary measures of pain intensity ratings (area under the curve [AUC]-VAS0-6/0-24 h; mean VAS0-6/0-24 h), and OC0-6/0-24 h. Finally, the analyses also included an integrated assessment of longitudinally measured pain intensity and opioid consumption (PIOC0-6/0-24 h). Also, estimation of effect size, generalized odds ratio of the individual analgesic outcome variables was performed.RESULTS: Sixty-one patients were included in the final data analysis. Discrete pain intensity ratings differed significantly between the treatment groups at specific postoperative time points, but appropriate correction for multiple comparisons eliminated some of these differences. AUC-VAS0-6 h differed significantly at rest and during coughing, while no difference was found for AUC-VAS0-24 h. In contrast, mean VAS0-6 h and VAS0-24 h differed significantly between treatment groups at rest and during coughing. OC0-6/0-24 h differed significantly between the treatment groups. Finally, also PIOC0-6/0-24 h differed significantly at rest and during coughing.CONCLUSIONS: Our analyses demonstrate that the applied statistical method may alter the statistical significance and estimates of effect size of analgesic outcome variables in postoperative pain trials. Our findings underline the importance of defining valid statistical methods for future analgesic drug trials. We propose an integrated assessment of longitudinally measured pain intensity and opioid consumption (PIOC). The method combines two interdependent analgesic outcomes, lowers the risk of mass significance, and provides more accurate representation of the dynamic nature of postoperative pain and analgesic drug efficacy.",

keywords = "Analgesics/administration & dosage, Anesthesia, Conduction/methods, Double-Blind Method, Humans, Nerve Block/methods, Pain Measurement/methods, Pain, Postoperative/diagnosis, Statistics as Topic/methods, Treatment Outcome",

author = "Andersen, {Lars Peter Kloster} and Ismail G{\"o}genur and Henrik Torup and Jacob Rosenberg and Werner, {Mads Utke}",

year = "2017",

month = sep,

day = "1",

doi = "10.1213/ANE.0000000000002007",

language = "English",

volume = "125",

pages = "1008--1013",

journal = "Anesthesia and Analgesia",

issn = "0003-2999",

publisher = "Lippincott Williams & Wilkins",

number = "3",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Assessment of Postoperative Analgesic Drug Efficacy

T2 - Method of Data Analysis Is Critical

AU - Andersen, Lars Peter Kloster

AU - Gögenur, Ismail

AU - Torup, Henrik

AU - Rosenberg, Jacob

AU - Werner, Mads Utke

PY - 2017/9/1

Y1 - 2017/9/1

N2 - BACKGROUND: Pain intensity ratings and opioid consumption (OC) are ubiquitous indicators of pain in postoperative trials of the efficacy of interventional procedures. Unfortunately, consensus on the appropriate statistical handling of these outcomes has not been reached. The aim of this article was, therefore, to reexamine original data obtained from a postoperative analgesic drug trial, applying a collection of standard statistical methods in analgesic outcome assessments. Furthermore, a modified integrated assessment method of these outcomes was evaluated.METHODS: Data from a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study investigating the analgesic efficacy of a regional anesthetic block following a major elective surgical procedure were analyzed. The original data included measurements of pain intensity (visual analog scale [VAS]) at rest and during coughing (VAS0/2/4/6/12/18/24 h) and OC0-6/0-24 h administered by patient-controlled analgesia. The statistical analyses included comparisons of discrete pain intensity scores (VAS0/2/4/6/12/18/24 h), summary measures of pain intensity ratings (area under the curve [AUC]-VAS0-6/0-24 h; mean VAS0-6/0-24 h), and OC0-6/0-24 h. Finally, the analyses also included an integrated assessment of longitudinally measured pain intensity and opioid consumption (PIOC0-6/0-24 h). Also, estimation of effect size, generalized odds ratio of the individual analgesic outcome variables was performed.RESULTS: Sixty-one patients were included in the final data analysis. Discrete pain intensity ratings differed significantly between the treatment groups at specific postoperative time points, but appropriate correction for multiple comparisons eliminated some of these differences. AUC-VAS0-6 h differed significantly at rest and during coughing, while no difference was found for AUC-VAS0-24 h. In contrast, mean VAS0-6 h and VAS0-24 h differed significantly between treatment groups at rest and during coughing. OC0-6/0-24 h differed significantly between the treatment groups. Finally, also PIOC0-6/0-24 h differed significantly at rest and during coughing.CONCLUSIONS: Our analyses demonstrate that the applied statistical method may alter the statistical significance and estimates of effect size of analgesic outcome variables in postoperative pain trials. Our findings underline the importance of defining valid statistical methods for future analgesic drug trials. We propose an integrated assessment of longitudinally measured pain intensity and opioid consumption (PIOC). The method combines two interdependent analgesic outcomes, lowers the risk of mass significance, and provides more accurate representation of the dynamic nature of postoperative pain and analgesic drug efficacy.

AB - BACKGROUND: Pain intensity ratings and opioid consumption (OC) are ubiquitous indicators of pain in postoperative trials of the efficacy of interventional procedures. Unfortunately, consensus on the appropriate statistical handling of these outcomes has not been reached. The aim of this article was, therefore, to reexamine original data obtained from a postoperative analgesic drug trial, applying a collection of standard statistical methods in analgesic outcome assessments. Furthermore, a modified integrated assessment method of these outcomes was evaluated.METHODS: Data from a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study investigating the analgesic efficacy of a regional anesthetic block following a major elective surgical procedure were analyzed. The original data included measurements of pain intensity (visual analog scale [VAS]) at rest and during coughing (VAS0/2/4/6/12/18/24 h) and OC0-6/0-24 h administered by patient-controlled analgesia. The statistical analyses included comparisons of discrete pain intensity scores (VAS0/2/4/6/12/18/24 h), summary measures of pain intensity ratings (area under the curve [AUC]-VAS0-6/0-24 h; mean VAS0-6/0-24 h), and OC0-6/0-24 h. Finally, the analyses also included an integrated assessment of longitudinally measured pain intensity and opioid consumption (PIOC0-6/0-24 h). Also, estimation of effect size, generalized odds ratio of the individual analgesic outcome variables was performed.RESULTS: Sixty-one patients were included in the final data analysis. Discrete pain intensity ratings differed significantly between the treatment groups at specific postoperative time points, but appropriate correction for multiple comparisons eliminated some of these differences. AUC-VAS0-6 h differed significantly at rest and during coughing, while no difference was found for AUC-VAS0-24 h. In contrast, mean VAS0-6 h and VAS0-24 h differed significantly between treatment groups at rest and during coughing. OC0-6/0-24 h differed significantly between the treatment groups. Finally, also PIOC0-6/0-24 h differed significantly at rest and during coughing.CONCLUSIONS: Our analyses demonstrate that the applied statistical method may alter the statistical significance and estimates of effect size of analgesic outcome variables in postoperative pain trials. Our findings underline the importance of defining valid statistical methods for future analgesic drug trials. We propose an integrated assessment of longitudinally measured pain intensity and opioid consumption (PIOC). The method combines two interdependent analgesic outcomes, lowers the risk of mass significance, and provides more accurate representation of the dynamic nature of postoperative pain and analgesic drug efficacy.

KW - Analgesics/administration & dosage

KW - Anesthesia, Conduction/methods

KW - Double-Blind Method

KW - Humans

KW - Nerve Block/methods

KW - Pain Measurement/methods

KW - Pain, Postoperative/diagnosis

KW - Statistics as Topic/methods

KW - Treatment Outcome

U2 - 10.1213/ANE.0000000000002007

DO - 10.1213/ANE.0000000000002007

M3 - Journal article

C2 - 28632527

SN - 0003-2999

VL - 125

SP - 1008

EP - 1013

JO - Anesthesia and Analgesia

JF - Anesthesia and Analgesia

IS - 3

ER -

Assessment of Postoperative Analgesic Drug Efficacy: Method of Data Analysis Is Critical

Abstract

Adgang til dokumentet

Fingeraftryk

Citationsformater