The Impact of Music and Noise-Cancellation on Sedation Requirements During Total Knee Replacement: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Bryant W Tran, Maliha Y Nowrouz, Sabrina K Dhillon, Katherine K Xie, Kathryn M Breslin, Gregory J Golladay, Bryant W Tran, Maliha Y Nowrouz, Sabrina K Dhillon, Katherine K Xie, Kathryn M Breslin, Gregory J Golladay

Abstract

Background: Music has emerged as a well-received medical intervention. Patients may be uncomfortable during total joint replacement, which can result in high sedation requirements. These requirements place elderly patients at risk for delirium. This study compares the effect of noise-cancellation versus music medicine on sedation requirements, pain, and opioid consumption during elective total knee replacement.

Methods: This prospective, double-blinded, randomized clinical trial was conducted at Virginia Commonwealth University Medical Center between July 2018 and July 2019. All participants underwent primary total knee arthroplasty with a combined spinal-epidural as their primary anesthetic and received noise-cancelling, wireless headphones. Patients in the control group received the noise-cancellation feature only, while patients in the experimental group were permitted to listen to music of their choice. Patients signaled a request for sedation by squeezing a noise-making rubber hippopotamus toy. The primary outcomes included whether sedation was requested by the participant, the number of sedation demand doses requested, and the amount of propofol sedation administered during the procedure. Secondary outcomes included postoperative pain scores, total opioid consumption, and time to first opioid request.

Results: Seventy-one percent (n = 36) of patients agreed to participate in the study. Forty-four percent of participants in the noise-cancellation group and 19% of participants in the music group requested sedation (P = .25). The median propofol consumption was not different between groups (0 [0-6.7] µg/kg/min vs 0 [0-0] µg/kg/min, P = .101 for noise cancellation vs music, respectively). Pain scores and opioid consumption were not different between groups.

Discussion: To date, this is the first study to use Bluetooth communication, noise-cancellation, and an Internet-based music streaming service to determine whether this technology has an impact on outcomes during major orthopedic surgery.

Conclusion: As an isolated intervention, the benefits of music in a complex operating room environment may be overstated. However, music integration with noise-reduction technology and patient-controlled sedation may lead to a safer and more satisfying anesthetic. More research is needed to determine the nonpharmacologic interventions that will produce positive outcomes for the geriatric population.

Keywords: acute pain medicine; adult reconstructive surgery; anesthesia; geriatric medicine; music therapy; regional anesthesia.

Conflict of interest statement

Declaration of Conflicting Interests: The author(s) declared the following potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article. Bryant W. Tran is member of the editorial board for the Geriatric Orthopaedic Surgery and Rehabilitation journal. Gregory J. Golladay is a paid consultant for OrthoSensor, Inc. He receives royalties, represents the company in paid presentations, owns stock options, and receives research support from OrthoSensor, Inc. He also receives research support from KCI Company and Cerus Corporation. He is a member of the editorial board for the Journal of Arthroplasty and Deputy Editor for Arthroplasty Today. He is the Publications Committee Chair for the American Association of Hip and Knee Surgeons and is a member of the Virginia Orthopaedic Society Board.

© The Author(s) 2020.

Figures

Figure 1.
Figure 1.
A noise-making rubber hippo toy served as a signaling device, allowing for patient-controlled sedation. Noise-cancelling headphones are also displayed.
Figure 2.
Figure 2.
Consolidated Standard of Reporting Trials 2010 flow diagram for study recruitment.
Figure 3.
Figure 3.
Kaplan-Meier survival curve reflecting time to first opioid request. Hazard ratio 1.1 [0.52-2.3], P = .633.

References

    1. Bhananker SM, Posner KL, Cheney FW, Caplan RA, Lee LA, Domino KB. Injury and liability associated with monitored anesthesia care: a closed claims analysis. Anesthesiology. 2006;104(2):228–234.
    1. Crosby G, Culley DJ. Delirium: a cognitive cost of the comfort of procedural sedation in elderly patients? Mayo Clin Proc. 2010;85(1):12–14.
    1. Sieber FE, Zakriya KJ, Gottschalk A, et al. Sedation depth during spinal anesthesia and the development of postoperative delirium in elderly patients undergoing hip fracture repair. Mayo Clin Proc. 2010;85(1):18–26.
    1. Hoffmann TC, Del Mar C. Clinicians’ expectations of the benefits and harms of treatments, screening, and tests: a systematic review. JAMA Intern Med. 2017;177(3):407–419.
    1. Koelsch S, Fuermetz J, Sack U, et al. Effects of music listening on cortisol levels and propofol consumption during spinal anesthesia. Front Psychol. 2011;2:58.
    1. Simpson JP, Hamer AJ. How noisy are total knee and hip replacements? J Perioper Pract. 2017;27(12):292–295.
    1. Wu PY, Huang ML, Lee WP, Wang C, Shih WM. Effects of music listening on anxiety and physiological responses in patients undergoing awake craniotomy. Complement TherMed. 2017;32:56–60.
    1. Kahloul M, Mhamdi S, Nakhli MS, et al. Effects of music therapy under general anesthesia in patients undergoing abdominal surgery. Libyan J Med. 2017;12(1):1260886.
    1. Graff V, Cai L, Badiola I, Elkassabany N. Music versus midazolam during preoperative nerve block placements: a prospective randomized controlled study. Reg Anesth Pain Med. 2019. [Epub ahead of print].
    1. Gold C, Erkkila J, Bonde LO, Trondalen G, Maratos A, Crawford MJ. Music therapy or music medicine? Psychother Psychosom. 2011;80(5):304.
    1. Bradt J, Potvin N, Kesslick A, et al. The impact of music therapy versus music medicine on psychological outcomes and pain in cancer patients: a mixed methods study. Support Care Center. 2015;23(5):1261–1271.
    1. Rosner B. Fundamentals of Biostatistics. 7th ed Boston, MA: Brooks/Cole; 2011.
    1. Miller RD, Pardo MC. Basics of Anesthesia, 7th ed Philadelphia, PA: Elsevier; 2018.
    1. Moher D, Hopewell S, Schulz KF, et al. Consort 2010 explanation and elaboration: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials. BMJ. 2010;340:c869.
    1. Katz JD. Noise in the operating room. Anesthesiology. 2014;121(4):894–898.
    1. Carter JE, Pyati S, Kanach FA, et al. Implementation of perioperative music using the consolidated framework for implementation research. Anesth Analg. 2018;127(3):623–631.
    1. Palmer P, Ji X, Stephens J. Cost of opioid intravenous patient-controlled analgesia: results from a hospital database analysis and literature assessment. Clinicoecon Outcomes Res. 2014;6:311–318.

Source: PubMed

Sponsors and Collaborators

Medical Conditions

Drug Interventions

3
Subscribe