Comparison of multimodal, sliding scale acute pain protocols with traditional prescribing in non-surgical patients

Objective: Our institution implemented six multimodal, sliding scale protocols for managing pain in non-surgical inpatients. The purpose of this study was to compare the use of these acute pain protocols with traditional prescribing in regard to pain management efficacy and safety measures.Methods: This retrospective cohort study evaluated hospital in-patients who were prescribed one of the protocols during the first 6 months following implementation, admitted to the hospitalist service, and had received at least two doses of PRN analgesic medication within a 24-hour period. Data collected included baseline demographics, verbal pain rating scores to determine time to achieve analgesia, total opioid use in oral morphine equivalent doses (MEDs), and safety measures. A sample of patients admitted during the same time frame, meeting inclusion/exclusion criteria, but who received traditional analgesic prescribing served as controls.Results: Forty-six adult, non-surgical patients were included in the analysis, and 46 served as controls. The average baseline pain scores were similar between groups (7.26 in protocol, 7.43 in control, p = 0.684). Protocol patients required significantly less time to achieve meaningful analgesia (average 507.52 min) compared to the control group (894.33 min, p = 0.045). Patients in the protocol group used an average of 35.81 MEDs per day compared to 65.77 MEDs in controls (p = 0.019). Patients in the protocol group used significantly fewer PRN analgesic doses (12.70 vs. 24.02, p < 0.0001).Conclusion: Analysis of the implementation of acute pain management protocols indicates that using standardized pain management protocols of opioids, non-opioids, and medications to prevent opioid-related adverse events is more effective than traditional analgesic prescribing for our patient population.