Article Text

Download PDFPDF

Multi-modal Analgesic Strategies for Trauma (MAST): protocol for a pragmatic randomized trial
  1. John A Harvin1,2,3,
  2. Charles E Green3,
  3. Laura E Vincent2,
  4. Kandice L Motley2,
  5. Jeanette Podbielski2,
  6. Charles C Miller3,
  7. Jon E Tyson3,
  8. John B Holcomb1,2,
  9. Charles E Wade2,
  10. Lillian S Kao1,2,3
  1. 1 Department of Surgery, McGovern Medical School, The University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston, Houston, Texas, USA
  2. 2 Center for Translational Injury Research, McGovern Medical School, The University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston, Houston, Texas, USA
  3. 3 Center for Evidence Based Medicine, McGovern Medical School, The University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston, Houston, Texas, USA
  1. Correspondence to Dr John A Harvin, Department of Surgery, McGovern Medical School, The University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston, Houston, Texas 77030, USA; John.Harvin{at}uth.tmc.edu

Abstract

Background Pain management after injury is critically important for functional recovery. Although opioids have been a mainstay for treatment of pain, they are associated with adverse events and may contribute to long-term use or abuse. Opioid-minimizing multimodal pain regimens have the potential to reduce exposure to opioids without compromising pain control. This article details an ongoing clinical trial comparing two pill-based, opioid-minimizing, multimodal pain strategies.

Methods This is a single-center, parallel-group, randomized, controlled comparative effectiveness trial comparing two multimodal pain regimens in adult trauma patients. All patients 16 years and older admitted to the Red Duke Trauma Institute are eligible unless they are pregnant, a prisoner, under observation status, or a non-acute trauma patient. At admission to the trauma service, patients are enrolled and randomized to one of two multimodal pain regimens. The primary outcome is opioid use, measured by morphine milligram equivalents per patient per day. The secondary outcomes include pain scores, ventilator days, hospital and intensive care unit lengths of stay, occurrence of opioid-related complications, hospital and pharmacy costs, and incidence of hospital discharge with opioid prescription. Outcomes will be compared using Bayesian methods.

Discussion This trial will determine the effectiveness of two multimodal pain treatment strategies on reducing in-hospital opioid exposure in adult trauma patients. Furthermore, it will compare the two strategies on pain control and patient safety. Knowledge gained in this study can improve quality of care at this hospital and other trauma centers regardless of which medication regimen proves superior.

  • trauma/ critical care
  • injury
  • acute pain
  • Opioid

This is an Open Access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0

Statistics from Altmetric.com

Request Permissions

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

Footnotes

  • Contributors Conception and design: JAH, CG, LEV, KLM, JP, CCM, JET, JBH, CEW, and LSK. Drafting of the article: JAH, CG, and LEV. Critical review of the article: LEV, KLM, JP, CCM, JET, JBH, CEW, and LSK.

  • Funding JAH is supported by the Center for Clinical and Translational Sciences, which is funded by the National Institutes of Health Clinical and Translational Award UL1 TR000371 and KL2 TR000370 from the National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences. The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences or the National Institutes of Health.

  • Competing interests None declared.

  • Patient consent Not required.

  • Ethics approval UT Health Committee for the Protection of Human Subjects.

  • Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.