Pain Management, Perioperative Analgesia, War-Related Injuries
Conditions
Keywords
acute pain, pain managment, analgesia, war related trauma
Brief summary
To compare the effectiveness of continuous regional anaesthesia with standard pain management strategies for the treatment of acute pain in patients with war-related lower limb trauma.
Detailed description
War-related lower limb trauma represents one of the most frequent and severe injury patterns in modern armed conflicts. Blast injuries, gunshot wounds, and complex soft-tissue damage often result in severe acute pain requiring repeated surgical procedures, prolonged hospitalization, and intensive rehabilitation. Adequate pain management in this population is critical not only for immediate patient comfort but also for facilitating wound care, early mobilization, rehabilitation participation, and potentially reducing the risk of long-term pain syndromes. Continuous regional anaesthesia (CRA), delivered through ultrasound-guided peripheral nerve catheters, allows prolonged targeted analgesia by continuous infusion of local anesthetics. Compared with systemic analgesia or single-shot regional blocks, CRA may provide superior and sustained pain control, reduce opioid exposure, and improve rehabilitation tolerance. However, evidence regarding the effectiveness of continuous regional anaesthesia in war-related lower limb trauma remains limited, particularly in real-world trauma settings involving blast injuries and multi-stage reconstructive surgery. This study aims to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of continuous regional anaesthesia compared with standard analgesic strategies in patients with war-related lower limb trauma.
Interventions
None listed
Sponsors
Charitable Organisation Charitable Fund Superhumans (Co Cf Superhumans)
Study design
Observational model
COHORT
Time perspective
PROSPECTIVE
Eligibility
Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
18 Years to 50 Years
Healthy volunteers
No
Inclusion criteria
* age ≥18 years * war-related lower limb trauma * hospital admission requiring surgical treatment or wound management * documented pain assessment during hospitalization * availability of analgesic treatment data * informed consent where required
Exclusion criteria
* age \<18 years * isolated upper limb trauma * missing key pain outcome data * contraindication to regional anaesthesia prior to treatment * refusal to participate (for prospective component)
Design outcomes
Primary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Pain intensity measured by Numeric Rating Scale (NRS 0-10) during the first 72 hours after initiation of analgesic treatment. | Pain intensity will be assessed at 6, 12, 24, 48, and 72 hours after initiation of analgesia. | Pain scores will be recorded: at rest during movement during wound care or dressing changes. |
Secondary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Total opioid consumption during first 72 hours, expressed as morphine milligram equivalents (MME). | Cumulative opioid consumption during the first 72 hours after initiation of analgesic therapy. | Total opioid consumption will be recorded during the first 72 hours after initiation of analgesic treatment. All administered opioids will be converted to morphine milligram equivalents (MME) using standard opioid conversion factors to allow comparison between treatment groups. The cumulative opioid dose will be calculated for each patient and analyzed as a measure of opioid requirement during the acute post-traumatic period. |
Countries
Ukraine
Contacts
CONTACTDmytro Dmitriy Dmytriiev, PhD.Professor
Outcome results
None listed