Search Results
Abstract
Background: Given that excess opioid prescriptions contribute to the United States opioid epidemic and there are few national opioid prescribing guidelines for the management of acute pain, it is pertinent to determine if prescribers can sufficiently assess their own prescribing practice. The purpose of this study was to investigate podiatric surgeons’ ability to evaluate if their own opioid prescribing practice is less than, near, or above that of an “average” prescriber.
Methods: We administered a scenario-based, voluntary, anonymous, online questionnaire via Qualtrics which consisted of five surgery-based scenarios commonly performed by podiatric surgeons. Respondents were asked the quantity of opioids they would prescribe at the time of surgery. Respondents were also asked to rate their prescribing practice compared to the average (median) podiatric surgeons. We compared self-reported behavior to self-reported perception (“I prescribe less than average,” “I prescribed about average,” and “I prescribe more than average”). ANOVA was used for univariate analysis between the three groups. We used linear regression to adjust for confounders. Data restriction was used to account for restrictive state laws.
Results: One hundred fifteen podiatric surgeons completed the survey from in April 2020. Less than half of the time, respondents accurately identified their own category. Consequently, there were no statistically significant differences between podiatric surgeons who reported that they “prescribe less,” “prescribe about average,” and “prescribe more.” Paradoxically, there was a flip in scenario #5, whereas respondents who reported they “prescribe more” actually prescribed the least and respondents who believed that they “prescribe less” actually prescribed the most.
Conclusions: Cognitive bias, in the form of a novel effect, occurs in postoperative opioid prescribing practice; in the absence of procedure-specific guidelines or an objective standard, podiatric surgeons, more often than not, were unaware of how their own opioid prescribing practice measured up to other podiatric surgeons.
Background: Clinicians, governmental agencies, patients, and pharmaceutical companies all contribute to the United States' opioid epidemic. These same stakeholders can make meaningful contributions to resolve the epidemic by identifying ineffective habits and encouraging change. The purpose of this study was to determine if postoperative opioid prescribing practice variation exists in foot and ankle surgery. We also aimed to identify if demographic characteristics of podiatric foot and ankle surgeons were associated with their postoperative opioid prescribing practices. Methods: We administered an open, voluntary, anonymous, online questionnaire distributed on the internet via Qualtrics, an online survey platform. The questionnaire consisted of six foot and ankle surgery scenarios followed by a demographics section. We invited Podiatric foot and ankle surgeons practicing in the United States to complete the questionnaire via email from the American Podiatric Medical Association's membership list. Respondents selected the postoperative opioid(s) that they would prescribe at the time of surgery, as well as the dose, frequency, and number of "pills" (dosage units). We developed multiple linear regression models to identify associations between prescriber characteristics and two measures of opioid quantity: dosage units and MME. Results: Eight hundred and sixty podiatric foot and ankle surgeons completed the survey. The median number of dosage units never exceeded 30 regardless of the foot and ankle surgery. Years in practice correlated with reduction in opioid dosage units prescribed at the time of surgery. Conclusions: Postoperative opioid prescribing practice variation exists in foot and ankle surgery. In comparison to the orthopedic community, podiatric foot and ankle surgeons prescribe approximately 25% fewer opioids at the time of surgery than orthopedic foot and ankle surgeons. Further research is warranted to determine if additional education is needed for young surgeons.
Geriatric Pharmacology
Safer Prescribing for the Elderly Patient
Adverse drug effects are common in elderly patients but can often be avoided. Judicious prescribing practices require the clinician to be aware of age-related changes in drug absorption, distribution, metabolism, and elimination. Clinicians may need to adjust drug dose, frequency, or the choice of drug altogether as they consider the physiologic changes of aging. This article reviews prescribing situations with elderly patients commonly encountered by the podiatric physician. Strategies for medication management are provided to minimize the risk of adverse drug events in the older patient. (J Am Podiatr Med Assoc 94(2): 90-97, 2004)
Pseudomonas aeruginosa
An Uncommon Cause of Diabetic Foot Infection
Background
Pseudomonas aeruginosa has traditionally been considered a common pathogen in diabetic foot infection (DFI), yet the 2012 Infectious Diseases Society of America guideline for DFI states that “empiric therapy directed at P aeruginosa is usually unnecessary.” The objective of this study was to evaluate the frequency of P aeruginosa isolated from bone or tissue cultures from patients with DFI.
Methods
This study is a cross-sectional survey of diabetic patients presenting with a foot infection to an urban county hospital between July 1, 2012, and December 31, 2013. All of the patients had at least one debridement procedure during which tissue or bone cultures from operative or bedside debridements were obtained. The χ2 test and the t test of means were used to determine relationships between variables and the frequency of P aeruginosa in culture.
Results
The median number of bacteria isolated from DFI was two. Streptococcus spp and Staphylococcus aureus were the most commonly isolated organisms; P aeruginosa was isolated in only five of 112 patients (4.5%). The presence of P aeruginosa was not associated with the patient's age, glycosylated hemoglobin level, tobacco abuse, the presence of osteomyelitis, a prescription for antibiotic drugs in the preceding 3 months, or the type of operative procedure.
Conclusions
Pseudomonas aeruginosa was an infrequent isolate from DFI in this urban, underserved diabetic population. The presence of P aeruginosa was not associated with any measured risk factors. By introducing a clinical practice guideline, we hope to discourage frontline providers from using routine antipseudomonal antibiotic drugs for DFI.
Pitted Keratolysis
A Clinical Review
Background
Pitted keratolysis is a bacterial infection that affects the plantar epidermis. Despite the condition being reported in many countries affecting both shod and unshod populations, there is little guidance for clinicians providing evidence or best practice guidelines on the management of this often stubborn infection.
Methods
Using a structured search of a range of databases, papers were identified that reported treatments tested on patients with the condition.
Results
Most of the literature uncovered was generally of a low level, such as case-based reporting or small case series. Studies were focused mainly on the use of topical antibiotic agents, such as clindamycin, erythromycin, fusidic acid, and mupirocin, often in combination with other measures, such as hygiene advice and the use of antiperspirants. From the limited evidence available, the use of topical antibiotic agents shows some efficacy in the treatment of pitted keratolysis. However, there is currently no suggestion that oral antibiotic drug therapy alone is effective in managing the condition.
Conclusions
Currently, there is no consensus on the most effective approach to managing pitted keratolysis, but a combination of antimicrobial agents and adjunctive measures, such as antiperspirants, seems to demonstrate the most effective approach from the current literature available.
The topic of pain management remains a minor component of the formal education and training of residents and physicians in the United States. Misguided attitudes concerning acute and chronic pain management, in addition to reservations about the legal aspects of pain management, often translate into a “fear of the unknown” when it comes to narcotic prescription. The intentionally limited scope of this review is to promote an understanding of the laws regulating pain management practices in the United States and to provide recommendations for appropriate pain management assessment and documentation based on the Model Policy for the Use of Controlled Substances for the Treatment of Pain established by the Federation of State Medical Boards of the United States. (J Am Podiatr Med Assoc 100(6): 511–517, 2010)
Evidence-Based Podiatric Medicine
Importance of Systematic Reviews in Clinical Practice
Due to the exponential increase in the quantity and quality of podiatric medicine–related research during the past decade, podiatric physicians are inundated with an insurmountable volume of research relevant to clinical practice. Systematic reviews can refine this literature by using explicit, rigorous, and reproducible methods to identify, critically appraise, and synthesize the best evidence from all clinical trials to answer clearly defined clinical questions. The Cochrane Collaboration is an international not-for-profit organization created to improve the user-friendliness and accessibility of medical literature mainly through preparing and maintaining systematic reviews of health-care interventions. The Cochrane Library currently contains more than 50 podiatric medicine–relevant systematic reviews summarizing and synthesizing evidence from many hundreds of randomized controlled trials evaluating interventions for foot problems. Although more than 60 countries worldwide have open online access to The Cochrane Library, in the United States, only the state of Wyoming has free access to full-text reviews. In an era demanding an evidence-based approach for every clinical intervention, high-quality systematic reviews streamline podiatric medical literature by reducing the time, cost, and training necessary to establish a solid evidence base for practice. (J Am Podiatr Med Assoc 99(3): 260–266, 2009)
The unpleasant and subjective sensation resulting from a noxious sensory stimulus defines the phenomenon of pain. The podiatric physician is no stranger to the difficulties in achieving optimal pain therapy. Podiatric physicians must develop analgesic regimens to treat patients with acute, chronic, and postoperative pain. Because opioid therapy is the cornerstone of the pharmacologic management of acute and chronic pain, this review focuses on the prescribing of opioid analgesics to treat lower-extremity pain. The pharmacology of frequently prescribed opioids is introduced. Then, criteria for selecting appropriate opioid analgesics as found in the current medical literature are reported. Finally, a review of the literature describing legal and ethical considerations regarding the prescribing of opioid analgesics is presented. (J Am Podiatr Med Assoc 96(4): 367–373, 2006)
With the growing prevalence worldwide of diabetes mellitus and hyperglycemia, hospital-based health-care professionals will encounter patients with these conditions with increasing frequency. It is well known that long-term control of blood glucose reduces the rate and severity of complications in patients with diabetes, but there is also mounting evidence that even short-term glycemic control in hospitalized diabetic patients can significantly lower morbidity and mortality in many areas, from nosocomial infection to postoperative course. The results of traditional approaches to controlling blood glucose in hospitalized patients have been disappointing owing to a variety of factors, including the use of oral agents that are difficult or dangerous to use in inpatients, older insulin preparations with unphysiologic modes of action, and even provider reluctance to accept glycemic control as an essential element of the care of the diabetic hospitalized patient. This article provides guidelines for the effective management of hyperglycemia in these patients throughout the hospital stay, with specific recommendations for the perioperative, operative, and postoperative periods. (J Am Podiatr Med Assoc 94(2): 135-148, 2004)
