Perioperative medicine & outcomes
Comfort-Focused Assessment and Patient-Reported Experience After Regional versus General Anaesthesia: Post Hoc Analysis of a Cluster-Randomised Trial
Authors' conclusion
Replacing the NRS with a comfort-focused approach did not improve global patient experience after surgery.
Study context
- Population
- Adults undergoing elective non-cardiac surgery managed in the post-anaesthesia care unit (PACU), divided into regional anaesthesia (RA) and general anaesthesia (GA) subgroups786 with evaluable EVAN data · divided into RA 305 · GA 481
- Participants
- 885 adults
- Comparison
- Comfort-focused scale vs pain NRS in the PACU, by RA vs GA subgroup
- Primary endpoint
- Patient-reported experience (EVAN-G/LR scales, self-completed on the ward/day-care unit)
- Follow-up
- ≥4 h postoperatively
Methodological detailsmulticentre (29 French centres)
- Multicentre (29 French centres)
Primary result
As reported in the abstract
EVAN Pain score, RA subgroup (n = 305)
Comfort
88
median · IQR 75–94
NRS
75
median · IQR 69–88
P = 0.034
Further findings
Nefopam use, RA subgroup
P = 0.005
Median
| Outcome | Comfort | NRS | P value |
|---|---|---|---|
| EVAN Waiting score, RA subgroup | 100 (IQR 75–100) | — not stated in the abstract | P = 0.012 |
| EVAN Global Index, RA subgroup | 81 (IQR 72–91) | 77 (IQR 68–90) | P = 0.044 |
— not stated in the abstract
EVAN scores, GA subgroup (n = 481)
- EVAN scores similar between groups
Antiemetic use, GA subgroup
- Antiemetic use lower with the comfort approach in GA
Original publication
Comfort-Focused Assessment and Patient-Reported Experience After Regional versus General Anaesthesia: Post Hoc Analysis of a Cluster-Randomised Trial. Anaesth Crit Care Pain Med. Published 31 October 2025. doi:10.
Composed by AI from the published abstract and checked against it. How Briefs are made →