Single shot blocks vs. continuous peripheral nerve catheters?

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.

Tuohy

Vigilante
15+ Year Member
Joined
Sep 14, 2008
Messages
142
Reaction score
29
Does anyone know the difference in reimbursement between single shot blocks and peripheral nerve continuous catheters? This may pertain to inpt. vs. outpatient; also, medicare vs. private 3rd party insurance? Is it worth the time and effort to place catheters instead of single shot? Our surgeons want to know if there are any studies out there that look at this (single shot vs. catheters)? Thanks for any input...

Members don't see this ad.
 
Does anyone know the difference in reimbursement between single shot blocks and peripheral nerve continuous catheters? This may pertain to inpt. vs. outpatient; also, medicare vs. private 3rd party insurance? Is it worth the time and effort to place catheters instead of single shot? Our surgeons want to know if there are any studies out there that look at this (single shot vs. catheters)? Thanks for any input...

Financially speaking Continuous Catheters don't pay from CMS/Medicare. It isn't worth the increased liability to routinely place catheters in private practice. That said, commercial insurance carriers may reimburse you for your troubles and extra effort. Patients for the most part prefer the catheters for the first 36-48 hours.

There is no difference in outcome or length of stay:


http://www.anesthesia-analgesia.org/content/102/4/1234.full
 
Does anyone know the difference in reimbursement between single shot blocks and peripheral nerve continuous catheters? This may pertain to inpt. vs. outpatient; also, medicare vs. private 3rd party insurance? Is it worth the time and effort to place catheters instead of single shot? Our surgeons want to know if there are any studies out there that look at this (single shot vs. catheters)? Thanks for any input...

Well are you trying to do the best thing for the patient or maximize your revenue? You seem to be asking for the latter, while studies, appropriately,would focus on the former. Or, are you trying to justify the extra 10 minutes for the catheter? Surely they're not that efficient?
:confused:
 
Members don't see this ad :)
These days there is talk of post op Quadriceps weakness which may continue for several months after d/c ing the catheter. I believe there is increased liability doing continuous blocks vs. single shots. This isn't to say that catheters don't play a role in your practice but I recommend limiting the use of catheters to the right patient population.

http://www.whatsnew-esra.org/site/peripheral/fevrier/narchi_1.htm
 
Thanks for the rapid responses-keep them coming!
 
These days there is talk of post op Quadriceps weakness which may continue for several months after d/c ing the catheter. I believe there is increased liability doing continuous blocks vs. single shots. This isn't to say that catheters don't play a role in your practice but I recommend limiting the use of catheters to the right patient population.

http://www.whatsnew-esra.org/site/peripheral/fevrier/narchi_1.htm
I think our practice does way too many catheters myself, but I don't place them, so it's not my liability. The surgeons love them, and the repeat patients ask for them, so there you go.
 
For those who like to place catheters on everybody here is a nice recent study. I do urge you read page 5 of this study and not just the conclusion.


http://www.morthoj.org/2010v4n1/The_Effect_of_Single_Shot.pdf

I fail to see what is 'nice' about this study? i question the skills of the provider given that the average block took 40 minutes and that they miraculously had an even number of patients in both groups even though it was up to provider discretion. I dont necessarily fall on either side of this debate but Im not likely to be swayed by this study.
 
I fail to see what is 'nice' about this study? i question the skills of the provider given that the average block took 40 minutes and that they miraculously had an even number of patients in both groups even though it was up to provider discretion. I dont necessarily fall on either side of this debate but Im not likely to be swayed by this study.







Anesthesiology. 2008 Apr;108(4):703-13.
Ambulatory continuous femoral nerve blocks decrease time to discharge readiness after tricompartment total knee arthroplasty: a randomized, triple-masked, placebo-controlled study.

Ilfeld BM, Le LT, Meyer RS, Mariano ER, Vandenborne K, Duncan PW, Sessler DI, Enneking FK, Shuster JJ, Theriaque DW, Berry LF, Spadoni EH, Gearen PF.
Department of Anesthesiology, University of California San Diego, San Diego, California, USA. [email protected]
Abstract

BACKGROUND: The authors tested the hypotheses that, compared with an overnight continuous femoral nerve block (cFNB), a 4-day ambulatory cFNB increases ambulation distance and decreases the time until three specific readiness-for-discharge criteria are met after tricompartment total knee arthroplasty. METHODS: Preoperatively, all patients received a cFNB (n = 50) and perineural ropivacaine 0.2% from surgery until the following morning, at which time they were randomly assigned to either continue perineural ropivacaine or switch to perineural normal saline. Primary endpoints included (1) time to attain three discharge criteria (adequate analgesia, independence from intravenous analgesics, and ambulation of at least 30 m) and (2) ambulatory distance in 6 min the afternoon after surgery. Patients were discharged with their cFNB and a portable infusion pump, and catheters were removed on postoperative day 4. RESULTS: Patients given 4 days of perineural ropivacaine attained all three discharge criteria in a median (25th-75th percentiles) of 25 (21-47) h, compared with 71 (46-89) h for those of the control group (estimated ratio, 0.47; 95% confidence interval, 0.32-0.67; P <0.001). Patients assigned to receive ropivacaine ambulated a median of 32 (17-47) m the afternoon after surgery, compared with 26 (13-35) m for those receiving normal saline (estimated ratio, 1.21; 95% confidence interval, 0.71-1.85; P = 0.42). CONCLUSIONS: Compared with an overnight cFNB, a 4-day ambulatory cFNB decreases the time to reach three important discharge criteria by an estimated 53% after tricompartment total knee arthroplasty. However, the extended infusion did not increase ambulation distance the afternoon after surgery. (ClinicalTrials.gov No. NCT00135889.).
 
Anesthesiology. 2008 Apr;108(4):703-13.
Ambulatory continuous femoral nerve blocks decrease time to discharge readiness after tricompartment total knee arthroplasty: a randomized, triple-masked, placebo-controlled study.

Ilfeld BM, Le LT, Meyer RS, Mariano ER, Vandenborne K, Duncan PW, Sessler DI, Enneking FK, Shuster JJ, Theriaque DW, Berry LF, Spadoni EH, Gearen PF.
Department of Anesthesiology, University of California San Diego, San Diego, California, USA. [email protected]
Abstract

BACKGROUND: The authors tested the hypotheses that, compared with an overnight continuous femoral nerve block (cFNB), a 4-day ambulatory cFNB increases ambulation distance and decreases the time until three specific readiness-for-discharge criteria are met after tricompartment total knee arthroplasty. METHODS: Preoperatively, all patients received a cFNB (n = 50) and perineural ropivacaine 0.2% from surgery until the following morning, at which time they were randomly assigned to either continue perineural ropivacaine or switch to perineural normal saline. Primary endpoints included (1) time to attain three discharge criteria (adequate analgesia, independence from intravenous analgesics, and ambulation of at least 30 m) and (2) ambulatory distance in 6 min the afternoon after surgery. Patients were discharged with their cFNB and a portable infusion pump, and catheters were removed on postoperative day 4. RESULTS: Patients given 4 days of perineural ropivacaine attained all three discharge criteria in a median (25th-75th percentiles) of 25 (21-47) h, compared with 71 (46-89) h for those of the control group (estimated ratio, 0.47; 95% confidence interval, 0.32-0.67; P <0.001). Patients assigned to receive ropivacaine ambulated a median of 32 (17-47) m the afternoon after surgery, compared with 26 (13-35) m for those receiving normal saline (estimated ratio, 1.21; 95% confidence interval, 0.71-1.85; P = 0.42). CONCLUSIONS: Compared with an overnight cFNB, a 4-day ambulatory cFNB decreases the time to reach three important discharge criteria by an estimated 53% after tricompartment total knee arthroplasty. However, the extended infusion did not increase ambulation distance the afternoon after surgery. (ClinicalTrials.gov No. NCT00135889.).

Thats fine but the study you quoted initially was crap ;)
 
Top