Patient-controlled versus staff-controlled analgesia with pethidine after allogeneic bone marrow transplantation

Abstract Patients treated by allogeneic bone marrow transplantation (aBMT) suffer prolonged oropharyngeal mucositis pain. The aim of this study was to prospectively compare patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) with an established regimen of staff-controlled analgesia using pethidine (meperidine). Twenty patients undergoing aBMT for haematologic neoplasias or malignant lymphomas randomly received pethidine intravenously either continuously plus supplemental bolus doses on request through the transplant unit staff or by PCA. Pain intensity was assessed by patient self report using a visual analogue scale (VAS) and daily pethidine intake was documented. In addition, the pethidine consumption of 20 aBMT-patients receiving staff-controlled analgesia prior to initiation of the study, but not reporting pain, was compared retrospectively with that of patients receiving the same analgesia regimen under study conditions. PCA significantly diminished both pethidine consumption and pain intensity compared with staff-controlled analgesia. The maximum pethidine intake was 440.1±111.8 mg/24 h in the patient-controlled and 640.9±128.9 mg/24 h in the staff-controlled analgesia group (mean±95% CI). Mean pain scores remained under 50% but reached 70% in the staff-controlled analgesia group. Pethidine dosage by staff-controlled analgesia increased under study conditions, suggesting that mere pain-assessment and a `competing' analgesic method motivated the BMT-unit staff to administer higher pethidine doses. This observation is discussed as a possible Hawthorne effect. Previous studies using morphine demonstrated that PCA diminishes opioid requirement compared to continuous or staff-controlled application in bone marrow recipients. In contrast to these studies, PCA additionally improved pain relief in the present investigation.