Pain relief that matters to patients: systematic review of empirical studies assessing the minimum clinically important difference in acute pain

Reduction of pre-procedural anxiety for repeat sessions in extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy (ESWL) reduces pain intensity: A prospective observational study

Pain control is a major determinant for successful stone clearance in extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy (ESWL) for urolithiasis. Pain perception during ESWL may be influenced by patient factors like gender, age, body habitus and anxiety level, and stone related factors like size, laterality and location of stone. We investigated in general, the confounding patient and stone factors influencing pain perception during ESWL with importance given to procedural anxiety in first and the subsequent session of ESWL. This was a prospective observational study of all new consecutive patients who underwent ESWL for a period of 1 year at a tertiary Urological Centre. Demographic and stone anthropometry were analyzed. Pre-procedural anxiety was assessed prior to procedure using hospital anxiety and depression score (HADS) and pain was scored using numerical rating scale-11 at baseline, 30-minutes (i.e., during) and 24 hours after ESWL. Univariate and multivariate analysis for confounding factors included HADs were performed for pain perception. A P value < .05 was considered to be statistically significant. For the study duration, 119 patients were recruited and 72 of them returned for a second session. Procedural anxiety was the only independent factor affecting pain score in ESWL for the first session in multivariate analysis. A statistically significant reduction of mean procedural anxiety score from 6.7 ± 4.5 to 3.2 ± 2.7 (P < .05) for the second ESWL session was observed (n = 72). This was in conjunction with statistical reduction of mean pain score 30 minutes after ESWL from 5.2 ± 2.1 to 4.2 ± 2.1 (P < .05). Patients with HADS ≥ 8 had statistically significant higher mean pain score at all 3 intervals in the first ESWL session. This study has shown that pre-procedural anxiety mainly anticipatory, reduces and shows reduction in pain intensity among patients undergoing repeat ESWL. Hence, anxiety reducing methods should be explored in patients undergoing ESWL to avoid unnecessary analgesic use.

Transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation effects on pain-intensity and endogenous opioids levels among chronic low-back pain patients: A randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) is a promising non-pharmacological modality for the management of chronic low back pain (CLBP), but its efficacy and mode of action have not been clearly established.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the responses of plasma beta-endorphin (βE), met-enkephalin (ME), and pain intensity (PI) among patients with CLBP exposed to TENS or sham-TENS.

METHODS

This double-blind trial involved 62 participants (aged 53.29 ± 5.07 years) randomised into TENS group (frequency 100 Hz, burst-rate 2 Hz, burst-width 150 μs, intensity 40 mA, duration 30 min), and sham-TENS group. The PI and plasma concentrations of βE and ME were measured at baseline, immediately (0 hr), 1 hr, 24 hrs, and 48 hrs post-intervention. Data were analysed using general linear model repeated measures, ordinal regression, one-way analysis of variance, Kruskal-Wallis test, independent and paired samples t-tests, Mann-Whitney U test, Wilcoxon signed-rank test, and Kendall's tau coefficient.

RESULTS

There was a significant temporal difference in PI between groups, F (1, 58) = 18.83, p< 0.001; the TENS group had better pain relief. The relative analgesic effect of TENS started immediately after the intervention (median difference [M⁢D] =-3, p< 0.001), peaked at 1 hr (M⁢D=-4, p< 0.001), and worn out by 24 hrs (M⁢D=-1, p= 0.029). However, there was no significant difference in βE and ME between the groups from 0 hr to 24 hrs post interventions, and no significant correlation between the PI, and βE, or ME.

CONCLUSION

TENS significantly reduced PI up to 24 hrs after treatment.

Effect of Music in Reducing Pain during Hemodialysis Access Cannulation: A Crossover Randomized Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Pain during cannulation for vascular access is a considerable problem for patients with kidney disease who are undergoing hemodialysis. We examined whether listening to music can reduce cannulation pain in these patients.

DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS, & MEASUREMENTS

We conducted a multicenter, single-blind, crossover, randomized trial of 121 patients who reported pain during cannulation for hemodialysis. We compared participants listening to "Sonata for Two Pianos in D Major, K.448" or white noise as control while undergoing the cannulation procedure. The cannulation operator was blinded to the intervention, and the hypothesized superiority of music over white noise was concealed during explanations to the participants. The primary end point was the visual analog scale score for cannulation pain independently evaluated by participants.

RESULTS

The primary analysis was on the basis of the modified intention-to-treat principle. The median baseline visual analog scale pain score was 24.7 mm (interquartile range, 16.5-42.3). Median change of the visual analog scale pain score from the "no sound" to the music period was -2.7 mm (interquartile range, -9.2 to 3.6), whereas it was -0.3 mm (interquartile range, -5.8 to 4.5) from "no sound" to white noise. The visual analog scale pain score decreased when listening to music compared with white noise. (Adjusted difference of visual analog scale pain score: -12%; 95% confidence interval, -21 to -2; P=0.02.) There were no significant differences in the secondary outcomes of anxiety, BP, or stress assessed by salivary amylase (adjusted difference of visual analog scale anxiety score -8%, 95% confidence interval, -18 to 4; P=0.17). No intervention-related adverse events were reported.

CONCLUSIONS

Listening to music reduced cannulation pain in patients on hemodialysis, although there was no significant effect on anxiety, BP, or stress markers.

Paracetamol, ibuprofen and dexamethasone for pain treatment after total hip arthroplasty: protocol for the randomised, placebo-controlled, parallel 4-group, blinded, multicentre RECIPE trial

INTRODUCTION

Multimodal analgesia with paracetamol, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug and glucocorticoid is recommended for hip arthroplasty, but with uncertain effects of the different combinations. We aim to investigate benefit and harm of different combinations of paracetamol, ibuprofen and dexamethasone following total hip arthroplasty.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

RECIPE is a randomised, placebo-controlled, parallel 4-group, blinded trial with 90-day and 1-year follow-up performed at nine Danish hospitals. Interventions are initiated preoperatively and continued for 24 hours postoperatively. Eligible participants undergoing total hip arthroplasty are randomised to:group A: oral paracetamol 1000 mg × 4+oral ibuprofen 400 mg × 4+intravenous placebo; group B: oral paracetamol 1000 mg × 4+intravenous dexamethasone 24 mg+oral placebo; group C: oral ibuprofen 400 mg × 4+intravenous dexamethasone 24 mg+oral placebo; group D: oral paracetamol 1000 mg × 4+oral ibuprofen 400 mg × 4+intravenous dexamethasone 24 mg.Primary outcome is cumulative opioid consumption at 0-24 hours. Secondary outcomes are pain at rest, during mobilisation and during a 5 m walk and adverse events. Follow-up includes serious adverse events and patient reported outcome measures at 90 days and 1 year. A total of 1060 participants are needed to demonstrate a difference of 8 mg in 24-hour morphine consumption assuming an SD of 24.5 mg, a risk of type I errors of 0.0083 and a risk of type 2 errors of 0.2. Primary analysis will be a modified intention-to-treat analysis.With this trial we aim to verify recommendations for pain treatment after total hip arthroplasty, and investigate the role of dexamethasone as an analgesic adjuvant to paracetamol and ibuprofen.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

This trial is approved by the Region Zealand Committee on Health Research Ethics (SJ-799). Plans for dissemination include publication in peer-reviewed journals and presentation at scientific meetings.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT04123873.

Application of Honey to Reduce Perineal Laceration Pain during the Postpartum Period: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Perineal lacerations affect between 35 and 85% of women during childbirth and may be responsible for postpartum pain. Honey has been demonstrated to have interesting properties that can promote wound healing. The aim was to evaluate the effectiveness of the application of honey to the perineum to reduce perineal pain during the early postpartum period. A randomized controlled trial including 68 women was conducted. In the intervention group, honey was applied to perineal lacerations for four days, in addition to standard care. The control group received only standard care. The primary outcome was pain intensity using the Visual Analog Scale and pain perception using the McGill Pain Questionnaire (QDSA). The secondary outcomes were a burning sensation, the use of a pain killer, and the women's satisfaction with the honey application. The intensity of pain was not significantly different between the groups on Day 1 (VAS 3.38 in the control group versus 3.34 in the intervention group, p = 0.65) or on Day 4 (VAS 2.28 versus 1.41, respectively, p = 0.09). There was no significant difference regarding the perception of pain with the QDSA. Despite this, most of the women in the intervention group (93%) were satisfied or very satisfied with the use of honey on their perineum.

Intraoperative Respiratory and Hemodynamic Strategies for Reducing Nausea, Vomiting, and Pain after Surgery: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

Despite improved medical treatment strategies, post-operative pain, nausea, and vomiting remain major challenges. This systematic review investigated the relationship between perioperative respiratory and hemodynamic interventions and postoperative pain, nausea, and vomiting.

METHODS

PubMed and Embase were searched on March 8, 2021 for randomized clinical trials investigating the effect of perioperative respiratory or hemodynamic interventions in adults undergoing non-cardiac surgery. Investigators reviewed trials for relevance, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias. Meta-analyses were performed when feasible. GRADE was used to assess the certainty in the evidence.

RESULTS

This review included 65 original trials; of these 48% had pain, nausea and/or vomiting as the primary focus. No reduction of postoperative pain was found in meta-analyses when comparing recruitment maneuvers with no recruitment, high (80%) to low (30%) fraction of oxygen, low (5-7 ml/kg) to high (9-12 ml/kg) tidal volume, or goal-directed hemodynamic therapy to standard care. In the meta-analysis comparing recruitment maneuvers with no recruitment maneuvers, patients undergoing laparoscopic gynecological surgery had less shoulder pain 24 hours postoperatively (mean difference in the numeric rating scale from 0 to 10: -1.1, 95% CI: -1.7, -0.5). In meta-analyses, comparing high to low fraction of inspired oxygen and goal-directed hemodynamic therapy to standard care in patients undergoing abdominal surgery, the risk of postoperative nausea and vomiting was reduced (odds ratio: 0.45, 95% CI: 0.24, 0.87 and 0.48, 95% CI: 0.27, 0.85). The certainty in the evidence was mostly very low to low. The results should be considered exploratory given the lack of pre-specified hypotheses and corresponding risk of Type 1 errors.

CONCLUSION

There is limited evidence regarding the impact of intraoperative respiratory and hemodynamic interventions on postoperative pain or nausea and vomiting. More definitive trials are needed to guide clinical care within this area. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

Lower effectiveness of facet joint infiltration in patients with concurrent facet joint degeneration and active endplate changes

BACKGROUND CONTEXT

Facet joint degeneration (FJD) and disc degeneration (DD) with associated endplate (EP) changes, specifically Modic 1 changes, might occur concurrently and therefore pose a challenge in the treatment of lower back pain (LBP).

PURPOSE

The aim of the present study was to investigate if the presence of active EP changes (Modic 1) would alter the effect of facet joint infiltrations (FJI) for the treatment of concurrent FJD.

STUDY DESIGN

Prospective cohort study, Level III.

PATIENT SAMPLE

42 patients (Male:20, Female:22) with an average of 58±14 years with FJD on conventional magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) receiving a FJI for treatment of lower back pain were included.

OUTCOME MEASURES

The pain score at baseline, 15 min, 1 day, 1 week and 1 month following FJI as well as the reduction of pain were analyzed. Furthermore, active EP changes on conventional MRI and increased EP metabolic activity on PET/MRI were evaluated and compared.

METHODS

All the patients underwent a (18F)-NaF PET/MRI, conventional MRI and FJI for symptomatic FJD. Active EP changes on conventional MRI and increased EP metabolic activity on PET/MR were analyzed for conformity. The pain score as well as the pain reduction at the above-mentioned time points were compared between patients with and without increased EP metabolic activity in PET/MRI.

RESULTS

The LBP reduction was significantly different between patients with (n=20) and without (n=22) active EP changes at 15 minutes (1.3±2.4 vs. 2.9±2.4, p=.03) and 1 month (0.9±2.3 vs. 2.8±2.9, p<.001) following FJI. The minimal clinically important difference for LBP reduction was reached significantly more often in the absence of active EP changes (73%) compared with patients with active EP changes (35%) 1 month following FJI (p=.03).

CONCLUSIONS

FJI is less effective in LBP reduction of patients with FJD and concurrent active EP changes (eg Modic 1).

Protocol for mindfulness-oriented recovery enhancement (MORE) in the management of lumbosacral radiculopathy/radiculitis symptoms: A randomized controlled trial

Introduction

Lumbosacral radiculopathy/radiculitis (LR) or "sciatica" is a commonly intractable sequelae of chronic low back pain (LBP), and challenges in the treatment of LR indicate that persistent pain may have both mechanical and neuropathic origins. Mindfulness-based interventions have been demonstrated to be effective tools in mitigating self-reported pain in LBP patients. This paper describes the protocol for a randomized controlled trial (RCT) evaluating the effects of the specific mindfulness-based intervention Mindfulness-Oriented Recovery Enhancement (MORE) on LR symptoms and sequelae, including mental health and physical function.

Methods

Participants recruited from the Portland, OR area are screened before completing a baseline visit that includes a series of self-report questionnaires and surface electromyography (sEMG) of the lower extremity. Upon enrollment, participants are randomly assigned to the MORE (experimental) group or treatment as usual (control) group for 8 weeks. Self-reported assessments and sEMG studies are repeated after the intervention is complete for pre/post-intervention comparisons. The outcome measures evaluate self-reported pain, physical function, quality of life, depression symptoms, trait mindfulness, and reinterpretation of pain, with surface electromyography (sEMG) findings evaluating objective physical function in patients with LR. To our knowledge, this is the first trial to date using an objective measure, sEMG, to evaluate the effects of a mindfulness-based intervention on LR symptoms.

Hypotheses

We hypothesize that MORE will be effective in improving self-reported pain, physical function, quality of life, depression symptoms, mindfulness, and reinterpretation of pain scores after 8 weeks of mindfulness training as compared to treatment as usual. Additionally, we hypothesize that individuals in the MORE group with abnormal sEMG findings at baseline will have improved sEMG findings at their 8-week follow-up visit.

Establishing the Minimal Clinically Important Difference and Substantial Clinical Benefit for the Pain Visual Analog Scale in a Postoperative Hand Surgery Population

PURPOSE

Although the pain visual analog scale (VAS-pain) is a ubiquitous patient-reported outcome instrument, it remains unclear how to interpret changes or differences in scores. Therefore, our purpose was to calculate the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) and substantial clinical benefit (SCB) for the VAS-pain instrument in a nonshoulder hand and upper extremity postoperative population.

METHODS

Adult postoperative patients treated by 1 of 5 fellowship-trained orthopedic hand surgeons at a single tertiary academic medical center were identified. Inclusion required VAS-pain scores at baseline (up to 3 months before surgery) and follow-up (up to 4 months after surgery), in addition to a response to a pain-specific anchor question at follow-up. The MCID estimates were calculated with (1) the 1/2 standard deviation method; and (2) an anchor-based approach. The SCB estimates were calculated with (1) an anchor-based approach; and (2) a receiver operator curve method that maximized the sensitivity and specificity for detecting a "much improved" pain status.

RESULTS

There were 667 and 148 total patients included in the MCID and SCB analyses, respectively. The 1/2 standard deviation MCID estimate was 1.6, and the anchor-based estimate was 1.9. The anchor-based SCB estimate was 2.2. The receiver operator curve analysis yielded an SCB estimate of 2.6, with an area under the curve of 0.72, consistent with acceptable discrimination.

CONCLUSIONS

We propose MCID values in the range of 1.6 to 1.9 and SCB values in the range of 2.2 to 2.6 for the VAS-pain instrument in a nonshoulder hand and upper extremity postoperative population.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

These MCID and SCB estimates may be useful for powering clinical studies and when interpreting VAS-pain score changes or differences reported in the hand surgery literature. These values are to be applied at a population level, and should not be applied to assess the improvement, or lack thereof, for individual patients.

Does motor control training improve pain and function in adults with symptomatic lumbar disc herniation? A systematic review and meta-analysis of 861 subjects in 16 trials

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the effectiveness of motor control training (MCT) compared with other physical therapist-led interventions, minimal/no intervention or surgery in patients with symptomatic lumbar disc herniation (LDH).

DESIGN

Systematic review and meta-analysis.

DATA SOURCES

Eight databases and the ClinicalTrials.gov were searched from inception to April 2021.

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA

We included clinical trial studies with concurrent comparison groups which examined the effectiveness of MCT in patients with symptomatic LDH. Primary outcomes were pain intensity and functional status which were expressed as mean difference (MD) and standardised mean difference (SMD), respectively.

RESULTS

We screened 6695 articles, of which 16 clinical trials (861 participants) were eligible. Fourteen studies were judged to have high risk of bias and two studies had some risk of bias. In patients who did not undergo surgery, MCT resulted in clinically meaningful pain reduction compared with other physical therapist-led interventions (ie, transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS)) at short-term (MD -28.85, -40.04 to -17.66, n=69, studies=2). However, the robustness of the finding was poor. For functional status, a large and statistically significant treatment effect was found in favour of MCT compared with traditional/classic general exercises at long-term (SMD -0.83 to -1.35 to -0.31, n=63, studies=1) and other physical therapist-led interventions (ie, TENS) at short-term (SMD -1.43 to -2.41 to -0.46, n=69, studies=2). No studies compared MCT with surgery. In patients who had undergone surgery, large SMDs were seen. In favour of MCT compared with traditional/classic general exercises (SMD -0.95 to -1.32 to -0.58, n=124, studies=3), other physical therapist-led interventions (ie, conventional treatments; SMD -2.30 to -2.96 to -1.64, n=60, studies=1), and minimal intervention (SMD -1.34 to -1.87 to -0.81, n=68, studies=2) for functional improvement at short-term. The overall certainty of evidence was very low to low.

CONCLUSION

At short-term, MCT improved pain and function compared with TENS in patients with symptomatic LDH who did not have surgery. MCT improved function compared with traditional/classic general exercises at long-term in patients who had undergone surgery. However, the results should be interpreted with caution because of the high risk of bias in the majority of studies.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42016038166.

NSAIDs in sciatica (NIS): study protocol for an investigator-initiated multicentre, randomized placebo-controlled trial of naproxen in patients with sciatica

BACKGROUND

Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are widely used to treat sciatica, despite insufficient evidence from placebo-controlled trials. NSAIDs may cause serious side effects; hence, there is a strong need to clarify their potential beneficial effects in patients with sciatica.

METHODS

This is a multicentre, randomized, placebo-controlled, parallel-group superiority trial. Participants will be recruited among sciatica patients referred to outpatient clinics at hospitals in Norway who have radiating pain below the knee with a severity score of ≥ 4 on a 0-10 numeric rating scale and clinical signs of nerve root or spinal nerve involvement. The intervention consists of oral naproxen 500 mg or placebo twice daily for 10 days. Participants will report the outcomes and adverse events daily using an electronic case report form. The primary endpoint is change in leg pain intensity from baseline to day 10 based on daily observations. The secondary outcomes are back pain intensity, disability, sciatica symptom severity, rescue medication (paracetamol) consumption, opioid use, ability to work or study, 30% and 50% improvement in leg pain, and global perceived change of sciatica/back problem. The outcomes will be analysed using mixed effects models for repeated measurements. The total duration of follow-up is 12 (± 2) days.

DISCUSSION

This trial aims to evaluate the benefits of naproxen, a non-selective NSAID, in patients with sciatica. No important differences in efficacy have been demonstrated between different NSAIDs in the management of musculoskeletal disorders; hence, the results of this trial will likely be applicable to other NSAIDs.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03347929 . Registered on November 20, 2017.

Trans-auricular vagus nerve stimulation to reduce perioperative pain and morbidity: protocol for a single-blind analyser-masked randomised controlled trial

Background

Established or acquired loss of parasympathetic vagal tone is associated with complications, including pain, after noncardiac surgery. We describe a study protocol designed to test the hypothesis that transcutaneous auricular nerve stimulation may preserve efferent parasympathetic activity to reduce pain and morbidity after noncardiac surgery.

Methods

Participants aged >18 yr scheduled for urgent/elective orthopaedic surgery (n=86) will be randomly allocated to bilateral transcutaneous auricular nerve stimulation or sham protocol for 50 min at the same time of day, before and 24 h after surgery. Holter monitoring, the analysis of which is masked to allocation, will quantify autonomic modulation of HR. The primary outcome will be pain, quantified by absolute changes in VAS 24 h after surgery following sham or stimulation. Secondary outcomes include presence or absence of >10 mm change in the 100 mm VAS (which defines a minimum clinically important change) and postoperative morbidity (Postoperative Morbidity Survey) before and 24 h after surgery. The relationship between the explanatory variable (HR variability), VAS, and morbidity will be examined using a multilevel (mixed-error component) regression model. Safety and complications of the intervention will also be recorded. The study was approved by the NHS Research Ethics Committee (21/LO/0272). As of 25 December 2021, 34/86 participants (mean [standard deviation] age: 48 [19] yr; 14 females [41.2%]) have been recruited, with complete collection of Holter data.

Conclusions

This phase 2b study will explore whether noninvasive autonomic neuromodulation may reduce pain or morbidity using trans-auricular vagus nerve stimulation, providing proof-of-concept data for a non-pharmacological, generalisable approach to improve perioperative outcomes.

Clinical trial registration

Researchregistry7566.

Oral phenazopyridine vs intravesical lidocaine for bladder onabotulinumtoxinA analgesia: a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

The efficacy of intradetrusor onabotulinumtoxinA injections for the management of idiopathic overactive bladder has been well-established. The injections are typically performed in the office setting using local analgesia, most commonly a 20 to 30-minute intravesical instillation of lidocaine. There are limited data evaluating alternative bladder analgesics.

OBJECTIVE

To compare pain scores with preprocedure oral phenazopyridine vs intravesical lidocaine in women undergoing intradetrusor onabotulinumtoxinA injections for idiopathic overactive bladder.

STUDY DESIGN

Nonpregnant adult females with idiopathic overactive bladder, scheduled for office injection of 100 units of intradetrusor onabotulinumtoxinA were randomized to either 200 mg of oral phenazopyridine taken 1 to 2 hours preprocedure or a 20-minute preprocedure intravesical instillation of 50 mL of 2% lidocaine. We excluded participants with neurogenic bladders, and those who had received intradetrusor onabotulinumtoxinA injections in the previous 12 months. The primary outcome was pain measured by a 100-mm visual analog scale. Demographic characteristics and overall satisfaction with the procedure were also recorded. Providers answered questions about cystoscopic visualization, ease of procedure, and perception of participant comfort. Prespecified noninferiority margin was set to equal the anticipated minimum clinically important difference of 14 mm. A planned sample of 100 participants, 50 in each treatment arm, provided 80% power to detect noninferiority at a significance level of.05. We performed a modified intention-to-treat analysis and compared variables with the t test or the Fisher exact test.

RESULTS

A total of 111 participants were enrolled, and complete data were obtained for 100 participants; 47 participants were randomized to phenazopyridine and 53 to lidocaine. Baseline characteristics did not differ between groups. There were 19.6% and 20.8% of participants in the phenazopyridine and lidocaine groups, respectively, who previously underwent intradetrusor onabotulinumtoxinA injections. The mean postprocedure pain was 2.7 mm lower in the phenazopyridine group than in the lidocaine group (95% confidence interval, -11.3 to 10.7), demonstrating noninferiority. More than 90% of participants in both groups stated that the pain was tolerable. Slightly more participants reported being "very satisfied" in the lidocaine group, although this was not statistically significant (50.0% vs 40.4%; P=.34). Providers reported clear visualization in 89.4% of participants in the phenazopyridine group and in 100% of participants in the lidocaine group (P=.02). Provider perception of participant comfort and overall ease of procedure were not different between groups. Length of time in the exam room was significantly shorter in the phenazopyridine than in the lidocaine group (44.4 vs 57.5 minutes; P=.0003).

CONCLUSION

In women receiving intradetrusor onabotulinumtoxinA injections for idiopathic overactive bladder, oral phenazopyridine was noninferior to intravesical lidocaine for procedural pain control. Phenazopyridine is well-tolerated by participants, allows for the procedure to be performed with similar ease, and is associated with shorter appointment times.

Ultrasound-Guided Femoral Nerve Block in Geriatric Patients with Hip Fracture in the Emergency Department

Background and Objectives: Systemic analgesics, including opioids, are commonly used for acute pain control in traumatic hip fracture patients in the emergency department (ED). However, their use is associated with high rates of adverse reactions in the geriatric population. As such, the aim of this study was to investigate the impact of lidocaine-based single-shot ultrasound-guided femoral nerve block (USFNB) on the standard care for acute pain management in geriatric patients with traumatic hip fracture in the ED. Methods: This retrospective, single-center, observational study included adult patients aged ≥60 years presenting with acute traumatic hip fracture in the ED between 1 January 2017 and 31 December 2020. The primary outcome measure was the difference in the amount of opioid use, in terms of morphine milligram equivalents (MME), between lidocaine-based single-shot USFNB and standard care groups. The obtained data were evaluated through a time-to-event analysis (time to meaningful pain relief), a time course analysis, and a multivariable analysis. Results: Overall, 607 adult patients (USFNB group, 66; standard care group, 541) were included in the study. The patients in the USFNB group required 80% less MME than those in the standard care group (0.52 ± 1.47 vs. 2.57 ± 2.53, p < 0.001). The multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression models showed that patients who received USFNB achieved meaningful pain relief 2.37-fold faster (hazard ratio (HR) = 2.37, 95% confidence intervals (CI) = 1.73−3.24, p < 0.001). Conclusions: In geriatric patients with hip fractures, a lidocaine-based single-shot USFNB can significantly reduce opioid consumption and provide more rapid and effective pain reduction.

Pain management for medical abortion before 14 weeks' gestation

BACKGROUND

Abortion is common worldwide and increasingly abortions are performed at less than 14 weeks' gestation using medical methods, specifically using a combination of mifepristone and misoprostol. Medical abortion is known to be a painful process, but the optimal method of pain management is unclear. We sought to identify and compare pain management regimens for medical abortion before 14 weeks' gestation.  OBJECTIVES: Primary objective To determine if there is evidence of superiority of any particular pain relief regimen in the management of combination medical abortion (mifepristone + misoprostol) under 14 weeks' gestation (i.e. up to 13 + 6 weeks or 97 days). Secondary objectives To compare the rate of gastrointestinal side effects resulting from different methods of analgesia To compare the rate of complete abortion resulting from different methods of analgesia during medical abortion To determine if the induction-to-abortion interval is associated with different methods of analgesia To determine if any method of analgesia is associated with unscheduled contact with the care provider in relation to pain.

SEARCH METHODS

On 21 August 2019 we searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, LILACs, PsycINFO, the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry and ClinicalTrials.gov together with reference checking and handsearching of conference abstracts of relevant learned societies and professional organisations to identify further studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies (non-randomised studies of interventions (NRSIs)) of any pain relief intervention (pharmacological and non-pharmacological) for mifepristone-misoprostol combination medical abortion of pregnancies less than 14 weeks' gestation.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors (JRW and MA) independently assessed all identified papers for inclusion and risks of bias, resolving any discrepancies through discussion with a third and fourth author as required (CM and SC). Two review authors independently conducted data extraction, including calculations of pain relief scores, and checked for accuracy. We assessed the certainty of the evidence using the GRADE approach.

MAIN RESULTS

We included four RCTs and one NRSI. Due to the heterogeneity of study designs, interventions and outcome reporting, we were unable to perform meta-analysis for any of the primary or secondary outcomes in this review. Only one study found evidence of an effect between interventions on pain score: a prophylactic dose of ibuprofen 1600 mg likely reduces the pain score when compared to a dose of paracetamol 2000 mg (mean difference (MD) 2.26 out of 10 lower, 95% confidence interval (CI) 3.00 to 1.52 lower; 1 RCT 108 women; moderate-certainty evidence). There may be little to no difference in pain score when comparing pregabalin 300 mg with placebo (MD 0.5 out of 10 lower, 95% CI 1.41 lower to 0.41 higher; 1 RCT, 107 women; low-certainty evidence).  There may be little to no difference in pain score when comparing ibuprofen 800 mg with placebo (MD 1.4 out of 10 lower, 95% CI 3.33 lower to 0.53 higher; 1 RCT, 61 women; low-certainty evidence). Ambulation or non-ambulation during medical abortion treatment may have little to no effect on pain score, but the evidence is very uncertain (MD 0.1 out of 5 higher, 95% CI 0.26 lower to 0.46 higher; 1 NRSI, 130 women; very low-certainty evidence). There may be little to no difference in pain score when comparing therapeutic versus prophylactic administration of ibuprofen 800 mg (MD 0.2 out of 10 higher, 95% CI 0.41 lower to 0.81 higher; 1 RCT, 228 women; low-certainty evidence).   Other outcomes of interest were reported inconsistently across studies. Where these outcomes were reported, there was no evidence of difference in incidence of gastrointestinal side effects, complete abortion rate, interval between misoprostol administration to pregnancy expulsion, unscheduled contact with a care provider, patient satisfaction with analgesia regimen nor patient satisfaction with abortion experience overall. However, the certainty of evidence was very low to low.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The findings of this review provide some support for the use of ibuprofen as a single dose given with misoprostol prophylactically, or in response to pain as needed. The optimal dosing of ibuprofen is unclear, but a single dose of ibuprofen 1600 mg was shown to be effective, and it was less certain whether 800 mg was effective. Paracetamol 2000 mg does not improve pain scores as much as ibuprofen 1600 mg, however its use does not appear to cause greater frequency of side effects or reduce the success of the abortion. A single dose of pregabalin 300 mg does not affect pain scores during medical abortion, but like paracetamol, does not appear to cause harm. Ambulation or non-ambulation during the medical abortion procedure does not appear to affect pain scores, outcomes, or duration of treatment and so women can be advised to mobilise or not, as they wish. The majority of outcomes in this review had low- to very low-certainty evidence, primarily due to small sample sizes and two studies at high risk of bias. High-quality, large-scale RCT research is needed for pain management during medical abortion at gestations less than 14 weeks. Consistent recording of pain with a validated measure would be of value to the field going forward.

Beliefs about back pain and associations with clinical outcomes: a primary care cohort study

OBJECTIVE

To investigate associations between beliefs about low back pain (LBP) at baseline and pain intensity and disability at 2-week, 13-week and 52-week follow-up.

DESIGN

Observational cohort study.

SETTING

Primary care private chiropractic clinics in Denmark.

PARTICIPANTS

A total of 2734 adults consulting a chiropractor for a new episode of LBP, with follow-up data available from 71%, 61% and 52% of the participants at 2, 13 and 52 weeks, respectively.

OUTCOME MEASURES

Beliefs about LBP were measured by the Back Belief Questionnaire (BBQ) before consulting the chiropractor. Pain (Numerical Rating Scale 0-10) and disability (the Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire) were measured at baseline and after 2, 13 and 52 weeks. Associations were explored using longitudinal linear mixed models estimating interactions between BBQ and time, and by estimating associations between single items of BBQ and 13-week outcomes.

RESULTS

More positive beliefs about LBP were weakly associated with a reduction in pain at 2 weeks (β interaction BBQ#Time=-0.02 (95% CI -0.04 to -0.001)), at 13 weeks (-0.03 (95% CI -0.05 to -0.01)) and at 52 weeks of follow-up (-0.03 (95% CI -0.05 to -0.01); p=0.003). For disability, the association was uncertain (p=0.7). The item 'Back trouble means periods of pain for the rest of one's life' had the strongest association with both reduction in pain (-0.29, 95% CI -0.4 to -0.19, p<0.001) and disability (-2.42, 95% CI -3.52 to -1.33, p<0.001) at 13-week follow-up.

CONCLUSION

Positive beliefs regarding LBP, measured by the BBQ, were associated with a reduction in pain intensity at both short-term and long-term follow-up. However, the association was weak, and the clinical relevance is therefore questionable. No clear association was demonstrated between beliefs and disability. This study did not show promise that back beliefs as measured by the BBQ were helpful for predicting or explaining the course of LBP in this setting.

Plating vs Closed Reduction for Fractures in the Distal Radius in Older Patients: A Secondary Analysis of a Randomized Clinical Trial

Importance

Distal radius fractures are common and are managed with or without surgery. Current evidence indicates surgical treatment is not superior to nonsurgical treatment at 12 months.

Objective

Does surgical treatment for displaced distal radius fractures in patients 60 years or older provide better patient-reported wrist pain and function outcomes than nonsurgical treatment at 24 months?

Design, Setting, and Participants

In this secondary analysis of a combined multicenter randomized clinical trial (RCT) and a parallel observational study, 300 patients were screened from 19 centers in Australia and New Zealand. Of these, 166 participants were randomized to surgical or nonsurgical treatment. Participants who declined randomization (n = 134) were included in the parallel observational group with the same treatment options and follow-up. Participants were followed up at 3, 12, and 24 months by a blinded assessor. The 24-month outcomes are reported herein. Data were collected from December 1, 2016, to December 31, 2020, and analyzed from February 4 to October 21, 2021.

Interventions

Surgical treatment consisting of open reduction and internal fixation using a volar-locking plate (VLP group) and nonsurgical treatment consisting of closed reduction and cast immobilization (CR group).

Main Outcomes and Measures

The primary outcome was patient-reported function using the Patient-Rated Wrist Evaluation (PRWE) questionnaire. Secondary outcomes included health-related quality of life, wrist pain, patient-reported treatment success, patient-rated bother with appearance, and posttreatment complications.

Results

Among the 166 randomized and 134 observational participants (300 participants; mean [SD] age, 71.2 [7.5] years; 269 women [89.7%]), 151 (91.0%) randomized and 118 (88.1%) observational participants were followed up at 24 months. In the RCT, no clinically important difference occurred in mean PRWE scores at 24 months (13.6 [95% CI, 9.1-18.1] points for VLP fixation vs 15.8 [95% CI, 11.3-20.2] points for CR; mean difference, 2.1 [95% CI, -4.2 to 8.5]; P = .50). There were no between-group differences in all other outcomes except for patient-reported treatment success, which favored VLP fixation (33 of 74 [44.6%] in the CR group vs 54 of 72 [75.0%] in the VLP fixation group reported very successful treatment; P = .002). Rates of posttreatment complications were generally low and similar between treatment groups, including deep infection (1 of 76 [1.3%] in the CR group vs 0 of 75 in the VLP fixation group) and complex regional pain syndrome (2 of 76 [2.6%] in the CR group vs 1 of 75 [1.3%] in the VLP fixation group). The 24-month trial outcomes were consistent with 12-month outcomes and with outcomes from the observational group.

Conclusions and Relevance

Consistent with previous reports, these findings suggest that VLP fixation may not be superior to CR for displaced distal radius fractures for patient-rated wrist function in persons 60 years or older during a 2-year period. Significantly higher patient-reported treatment success at 2 years in the VLP group may be attributable to other treatment outcomes not captured in this study.

Trial Registration

ANZCTR.org Identifier: ACTRN12616000969460.

Monitoring calf circumference: changes during prolonged constrained sitting

Prolonged sitting has been associated with negative health effects; however, short-term time-varying exposure and response data is lacking. Twenty-two young and healthy participants were seated for 2 hours with the instruction to avoid the confounding effects of large leg movements while calf circumference, perceived discomfort, and lower limb muscle activity were collected. Calf circumference increased significantly (0.90 ± 0.32 cm) during sitting with no statistical differences between sexes. Perceived discomfort increased significantly over time in the low back and gluteal regions (p = 0.001-0.072, η_p²=0.080-0.360). On average, it took 20.31 ± 10.87 minutes of walking for calf measures to return to pre-sitting baseline. These results suggest that sitting for 2 hours without activity breaks may not be advisable and that recovery may take longer than expected. The exposure/response data from this study may be helpful in the design of future studies, with a larger and more general population, aiming to better define recommended duration/activity ratios for sitting-focused occupations. Practitioner summary: Leg swelling is a concern in prolonged sitting. In this study of young, healthy participants, we found a 2 hour constrained sitting exposure (controlling for large leg movements) induced significant increases in calf circumference that took an average of 20.31 ± 10.87 min of walking to return to baseline.Abbreviations: FMD: flow-mediated dilation, GSC: gastrocnemius; TA: tibialis anterior; EMG: electromyography; VAS: visual analog scale; MVC: maximum voluntary contractions.

Current practice for primary headache disorders and perspectives on peripheral nerve blocks among emergency physicians in Canada: A national survey

OBJECTIVE

This national postal survey aimed to examine Canadian emergency physicians' practice patterns with respect to drug treatment and perspectives on peripheral nerve blocks.

BACKGROUND

The treatment of primary headache disorders in the emergency department is variable.

METHODS

We surveyed 500 emergency physicians listed in the Canadian Medical Directory according to a modified Dillman's method: an initial invitation was followed by up to four reminders to nonresponders. Physicians were asked questions regarding their frequency of medication administration and perspectives toward peripheral nerve blocks.

RESULTS

Of 500 mailed surveys, 468 were delivered and 179 physicians responded (response rate = 38.2%). The majority of physicians were men (92/144, 63.9%); 80.6% (116/144) had been in practice for greater than or equal to 10 years with 50.7% (75/148) in a community or district general teaching hospital. Commonly used pharmacotherapies for primary headaches were intravenous dopamine receptor antagonists (69%), co-administration of ketorolac and a dopamine receptor antagonist (54.2%), intravenous fluid boluses (54%), nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) alone (53.5%), and acetaminophen (51.4%). Only 80 of 144 physicians (55.6%) reported previous experience with peripheral nerve blocks (95% confidence interval [CI] = 48%-65%). The majority (68/80, 85.0%) agreed peripheral nerve blocks are safe and 55.1% (43/78) agreed they are effective. The vast majority (118/140, 84.3%) would consider peripheral nerve blocks as a first-line treatment option given sufficient evidence from a future trial (95% CI = 78%-90%).

CONCLUSION

NSAIDs alone, as well as dopamine receptor antagonists with or without ketorolac are commonly used for primary headache in Canadian emergency departments. A large proportion of physicians have never used a peripheral nerve block in their practice; among those who have experience with peripheral nerve blocks, the majority find them safe and effective. The majority of respondents would consider peripheral nerve blocks as a first-line treatment option given sufficient evidence from a future trial.

Perioperative Multimodal Analgesia for Adults undergoing surgery of the Spine- Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Three or More Modalities

BACKGROUND

Multimodal analgesia is a strategy which may be employed to improve pain management in the perioperative period in patients undergoing surgery of the spine. However, there is no review evidence available on quantitative models of multimodal analgesia within this clinical setting. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to examine the impact of maximal (three or more analgesic agents) multimodal analgesic medication in patients undergoing surgery of the spine.

METHODS

We included randomized controlled trials (RCT's) evaluating the use of three or more multimodal analgesia components (maximal multi modal analgesia) in patients undergoing spinal surgery. We excluded patients receiving neuraxial or regional analgesia. The control group consisted of placebo, standard care (any therapeutic modality including two or less analgesic components). Primary outcomes were post-operative pain scores at rest, at twenty-four, and forty eight hours. We searched the MEDLINE via Ovid SP; EMBASE via Ovid SP; and Cochrane Library (Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews and CENTRAL). We used Cochrane's standard methods.

RESULTS

We identified consistently improved analgesic endpoints across all pre-determined primary and secondary outcomes. A total of eleven eligible studies evaluated the primary outcome of pain at rest at twenty four hours. Patients receiving maximal multimodal analgesia were identified to have lower pain scores with an average of MD [-1.03], p<0.00001. Length of hospital stay was decreased in patients receiving multimodal analgesia MD [-0.55], p<0.00001.

CONCLUSION

Perioperative maximal multimodal analgesia consistently improves visual analogue scale outcomes in adult population in the immediate post-operative period, with a moderate quality of evidence. There is significant decrease in hospital length of stay in patients receiving maximal multimodal analgesia with a high level of evidence and no statistical heterogeneity.

Physiotherapy interventions may relieve pain in individuals with central neuropathic pain: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials

Objectives:

To evaluate the effectiveness of any form of physiotherapy intervention for the management of central neuropathic pain (cNeP) due to any underlying cause.

Methods:

Multiple databases were searched from inception until August 2021. Randomised controlled trials evaluating physiotherapy interventions compared to a control condition on pain among people with cNeP were included. Methodological quality and the quality of evidence were assessed using the Physiotherapy Evidence Database Scale and the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation tool, respectively.

Results:

The searches yielded 2661 studies, of which 23 randomised controlled trials met the inclusion criteria and were included in the meta-analyses. Meta-analyses of trials examining non-invasive neurostimulation revealed significant reductions in pain severity due to spinal cord injury (SCI; standardised mean difference (SMD): −0.59 (95% confidence interval [CI]: −1.07, −0.11), p = 0.02) and phantom limb pain (weighted mean difference (WMD): −1.57 (95% CI: −2.85, −0.29), p = 0.02). The pooled analyses of trials utilising acupuncture, transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS), and mirror therapy showed significant reductions in pain severity among individuals with stroke (WMD: −1.46 (95% CI: −1.97, −0.94), p < 0.001), multiple sclerosis (SMD: −0.32 (95% CI: −0.57, −0.06), p = 0.01), and phantom limb pain (SMD: −0.74 (95% CI: −1.36, −0.11), p = 0.02), respectively. Exercise was also found to significantly reduce pain among people with multiple sclerosis (SMD: −1.58 (95% CI: −2.85, −0.30), p = 0.02).

Conclusion:

Evidence supports the use of non-invasive neurostimulation for the treatment of pain secondary to SCI and phantom limb pain. Beneficial pain management outcomes were also identified for acupuncture in stroke, TENS in multiple sclerosis, and mirror therapy in phantom limb pain.

Outcomes of transcutaneous nerve stimulation for migraine headaches: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Implanted and transcutaneous nerve stimulators have shown promise as novel non-pharmacologic treatment for episodic and chronic migraines. The purpose of this study was to summarize the reported efficacy of transcutaneous single nerve stimulators in management of migraine frequency and severity.

METHODS

A systematic review of five databases identified studies treating migraines with transcutaneous stimulation of a single nerve. Random effects model meta-analyses were conducted to establish the effect of preventive transcutaneous nerve stimulation on headache days per month and 0-10 numeric rating scale pain severity of headaches for both individuals with episodic and chronic migraines.

RESULTS

Fourteen studies, which treated 995 patients, met inclusion criteria, including 7 randomized controlled trials and 7 uncontrolled clinical trials. Transcutaneous nerve stimulators reduced headache frequency in episodic migraines (2.81 fewer headache days per month, 95% CI 2.18-3.43, I² = 21%) and chronic migraines (2.97 fewer headache days per month, 95% CI 1.66-4.28, I² = 0%). Transcutaneous nerve stimulators reduced headache severity in episodic headaches (2.23 fewer pain scale points, 95% CI 1.64-2.81, I² = 88%).

CONCLUSIONS

Preventive use of transcutaneous nerve stimulators provided clinically significant reductions in headache frequency in individuals with chronic or episodic migraines. Individuals with episodic migraines also experienced a reduction in headache pain severity following preventive transcutaneous nerve stimulation.

Effectiveness of pulsed electromagnetic field therapy in the management of complex regional pain syndrome type 1: A randomized-controlled trial

Objectives: This study aims to investigate whether pulsed electromagnetic field (PEMF) therapy in addition to a conventional rehabilitation program is effective on pain and functioning in patients with type 1 complex regional pain syndrome (CRPS-1) of the hand.

Patients and methods: Between March 2013 and January 2015, a total of 32 patients (16 males, 16 females; mean age: 50.1±13.1 years; range, 25 to 75 years) were included. The patients were randomly allocated into two groups. The control group (n=16) received a conventional rehabilitation program consisting of physical modalities, exercises, and occupational therapy, whereas the PEMF group (n=16) received additional PEMF (8 Hz, 3.2 mT) to the affected hand. The primary outcome measure was pain intensity using the Numeric Rating Scale (NRS). Secondary outcome measures were grip and pinch strength, hand edema, hand dexterity, and hand activities. All patients received 20 therapy sessions (five sessions/week, four weeks in total) and were evaluated before and after the therapy and at the first-month follow-up.

Results: Both groups showed significant improvements in primary and secondary outcomes (p<0.05) after the therapy and at follow-up. When the groups were compared in terms of improvements in assessment parameters, no statistically significant difference was found between the two groups in any of the outcomes (p>0.05).

Conclusion: The PEMF in addition to conventional rehabilitation program did not provide additional benefit for pain and hand functions in CRPS-1. Future studies using different application parameters such as frequency, intensity, duration, and route may provide a better understanding of the role of PEMF in CRPS-1 treatment.

Arthroscopic Synovectomy of the Wrist in Patients With Rheumatoid Arthritis: A Systematic Review of the Current Literature

BACKGROUND

Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) of the wrist can lead to loss of wrist function and progressive joint destruction if inadequately treated. Arthroscopic synovectomy of the wrist may prove a valuable treatment for local inflammation.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to perform a systematic review evaluating functional outcomes and pain following arthroscopic synovectomy of the wrist in RA patients.

METHODS

A systematic review was performed according to the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis) guidelines. MEDLINE, EMBASE, The Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and Google Scholar were searched for studies describing pain or functional outcomes following arthroscopic synovectomy of the wrist in RA patients (CRD42021270846). Risk of bias was assessed using the Methodological Index for Non-Randomized Studies. Data collection included patient characteristics, pain scores, wrist function questionnaires, secondary surgery, and complications.

RESULTS

Six noncomparative cohort studies were included, with a total of 153 arthroscopic synovectomies. Disease duration of RA ranged from 32 to 89 months, and radiographic progression was mild to moderate. The Methodological Index for Non-Randomized Studies scores ranged from 8 to 10 out of 16. Mean follow-up ranged from 21 to 95 months. Improvements were seen in pooled mean visual analog scale pain score (from 7.7 to 2.2, p < 0.05), pooled mean Modified Mayo Wrist Score (from 43.3 to 70.4, p < 0.05), and the Disability of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand (from 67.5 to 36.5, p < 0.05). Two complications occurred, and 5 patients required secondary surgery.

CONCLUSIONS

There is limited evidence suggesting that arthroscopic synovectomy of the wrist improves wrist function and pain in patients with RA, with few complications. In centers with arthroscopic expertise, it can be considered as a treatment option.

The efficacy and safety of extracorporeal shock wave therapy on plantar fasciitis in patients with axial spondyloarthritis: a double-blind, randomized controlled trial

The efficacy and safety of extracorporeal shock wave therapy (ESWT) on chronic plantar fasciitis (PF) in patients with axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA) remain unclear. To investigate the efficacy and tolerability of ESWT in patients with PF in axSpA. In this double-blind, randomized controlled trial, 22 axSpA patients with PF who had heel pain above 5 according to visual analog scale (VAS) over 3 months were randomly divided into 2 groups: ESWT and sham-ESWT. Both groups received a total of three treatments at 1-week intervals. All patients were assessed by the VAS, heel pressure algometry, Foot Function Index (FFI), and plantar fascia ultrasonography (thickness and morphology) at baseline, 1 week after each session, 4th and 8th week after the last therapy. The mean ± SD ages of the ESWT and sham-ESWT groups were 43.8 ± 8.2 and 48.5 ± 7.6 years, respectively. Significant time effects between the time points were observed in both groups in terms of VAS, pressure algometry, and FFI. There was a statistically significant decrease in pain, an increase in perceived pressure algometry values, and an improvement in activity restriction in the ESWT group compared to the sham-ESWT group. There was not a change in the plantar fascia thickness before and after the intervention in both groups. No side effects were observed during the treatment and follow-up. ESWT appears to be a safe and well-tolerated physical therapy modality for improving chronic refractory heel pain due to PF in patients with axSPA. This trial was registered to The Australian New Zealand clinical trial with the registration number ACTRN12618001954213. The enrollment began in 15/12/2018 and data collection stopped in 29/05/2020.

Efficacy of Quadratus Lumborum Block for Pain Control in Patients Undergoing Hip Surgeries: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

Several studies have reported the use of anterior, posterior and lateral quadratus lumborum block (QLB) for pain control in hip surgeries. However, high-quality evidence is lacking. The current review aimed to summarize data on the efficacy of QLB for pain control in patients undergoing hip surgeries.

METHODS

PubMed, Embase, and Google Scholar databases were searched up to August 5, 2021 for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) or non-RCTs assessing the efficacy of QLB for any type of hip surgery.

RESULTS

Thirteen studies were included (nine RCTs and four non-RCTs). On pooled analysis, there was a statistically significant reduction of 24-h total opioid consumption in patients receiving QLB as compared to the control group (MD: -9.92, 95% CI: -16.35, -3.48 I 2 = 99% p = 0.003). We noted a statistically significant reduction of pain scores in the QLB group as compared to control group at 2-4 h (MD: -0.57, 95% CI: -0.98, -0.17 I 2 = 61% p = 0.005), 6-8 h (MD: -1.45, 95% CI: -2.09, -0.81 I 2 = 86% p < 0.00001), 12 h (MD: -1.12, 95% CI: -1.89, -0.34 I 2 = 93% p = 0.005), 24 h (MD: -0.71, 95% CI: -1.27, -0.15 I 2 = 89% p = 0.01) and 48 h (MD: -0.76, 95% CI: -1.37, -0.16 I 2 = 85% p = 0.01) after the procedure. There was a statistically significant reduction in the risk of nausea/vomiting (RR: 0.40, 95% CI: 0.18, 0.88 I 2 = 62% p = 0.02) in patients receiving QLB but no difference in the risk of pruritis (RR: 0.46, 95% CI: 0.17, 1.24 I 2 = 16% p = 0.13) and urinary retention (RR: 0.44, 95% CI: 0.19, 1.02 I 2 = 0% p = 0.06).

CONCLUSION

QLB as a part of a multimodal analgesic regimen reduces opioid consumption and pain scores in patients undergoing hip surgeries. The certainty of evidence based on GRADE was moderate. Despite the statistically significant results, the clinical relevance of the analgesic efficacy of QLB is debatable due to the small effect size.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION

https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/, identifier: CRD42021267861.

Estimates of minimal clinically important improvments vary with the responsiveness of the sample

OBJECTIVE

Minimal clinically important improvements (MCII) are known to vary with the baseline level in the sample. We examined if MCIIs are also larger in samples with higher responsiveness.

STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING

In a prospective longitudinal study of patients with active rheumatoid arthritis, we assessed arthritis activity before and after new treatments. We estimated anchor-based MCIIs for three outcomes (pain severity, physical functioning by the Health Assessment Questionnaire, and Simplified Disease Activity Index, a composite measure) using receiver operating characteristic curves. We compared MCIIs among patients treated with three interventions of different impact (dose escalation, new disease-modifying medication, or prednisone). Separately, we used simulations to estimate MCIIs in five groups of responsiveness.

RESULTS

Among 250 patients, standardized response means (SRMs) increased across the dose escalation, disease-modifying treatment, and prednisone treatment groups (-0.74, -1.00, and -1.53, respectively). MCIIs were also highest in the prednisone group. For example, corresponding MCIIs were -5.5, -8.9, and -13.8 for the composite measure. In the simulations, MCIIs (range -4.6 to -11.9) varied directly with SRMs (range -0.40 to -1.33). Results were similar for pain and the Health Assessment Questionnaire.

CONCLUSION

The MCII is not an intrinsic measurement property but varies directly with sample responsiveness.

Postoperative pain treatment after lumbar discectomy. A protocol for a systematic review with meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis

BACKGROUND

Patients undergoing lumbar discectomy usually suffer from moderate to severe pain during the postoperative period. Multimodal, or balanced analgesia, is the leading treatment principle for managing postoperative pain. The rationale is to achieve optimal pain treatment through additive or synergistic effects of several non-opioid analgesics, and thereby, reducing the need for postoperative opioids, facilitating early mobilization and functional rehabilitation. For discectomy surgery, evidence of both the benefit and harm of different analgesic interventions is unclear.

OBJECTIVES

This systematic review aims to investigate the benefits and harms of analgesic interventions in adult patients after lumbar discectomy.

METHODS

This protocol for a systematic review is written according to The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Protocols guidelines. We will search The Cochrane Library's CENTRAL, PubMed, EMBASE, and ClinicalTrails.gov for published and ongoing trials. All randomized clinical trials assessing the postoperative analgesics effect of an intervention with a control or no-intervention group undergoing lumbar discectomy will be included. Two authors will independently screen trials for inclusion using Covidence, extract data and assess the risk of bias using Cochrane's risk-of-bias 2 tool. We will analyse the data using Review Manager and Trial Sequential Analysis. Meta-analysis will be performed according to the Cochrane guidelines. We will present our primary findings in a 'summary of findings' table and evaluate the overall certainty of evidence using the GRADE approach.

DISCUSSION

This systematic review will assess the benefits and harms of analgesic interventions after lumbar discectomy and have the potential to improve best practices and advance research.

Efficacy of Intravenous Lidocaine for Pain Relief in the Emergency Department: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

OBJECTIVE

To compare the efficacy of intravenous (IV) lidocaine with standard analgesics (NSAIDS, opioids) for pain control due to any cause in the emergency department.

METHODS

The electronic databases of PubMed, Embase, ScienceDirect, CENTRAL, and Google Scholar were explored from 1st January 2000 to 30th March 2021 and randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing IV lidocaine with a control group of standard analgesics were included.

RESULTS

Twelve RCTs including 1,351 patients were included. The cause of pain included abdominal pain, renal or biliary colic, traumatic pain, radicular low back pain, critical limb ischemia, migraine, tension-type headache, and pain of unknown origin. On pooled analysis, we found no statistically significant difference in pain scores between IV lidocaine and control group at 15 min (MD: -0.24 95% CI: -1.08, 0.61 I 2 = 81% p = 0.59), 30 min (MD: -0.24 95% CI: -1.03, 0.55 I 2 = 86% p = 0.55), 45 min (MD: 0.31 95% CI: -0.66, 1.29 I 2 = 66% p = 0.53), and 60 min (MD: 0.59 95% CI: -0.26, 1.44 I 2 = 75% p = 0.18). There was no statistically significant difference in the need for rescue analgesics between the two groups (OR: 1.45 95% CI: 0.82, 2.56 I 2 = 41% p = 0.20), but on subgroup analysis, the need for rescue analgesics was significantly higher with IV lidocaine in studies on abdominal pain but not for musculoskeletal pain. On meta-analysis, there was no statistically significant difference in the incidence of side-effects between the two study groups (OR: 1.09 95% CI: 0.59, 2.02 I 2 = 48% p = 0.78).

CONCLUSION

IV lidocaine can be considered as an alternative analgesic for pain control in the ED. However, its efficacy may not be higher than standard analgesics. Further RCTs with a large sample size are needed to corroborate the current conclusions.

Reproxalap Improves Signs and Symptoms of Allergic Conjunctivitis in an Allergen Chamber: A Real-World Model of Allergen Exposure

Purpose

To assess the prophylactic and treatment activity of reproxalap, a novel reactive aldehyde species inhibitor, in a real-world model of allergen exposure.

Methods

In a randomized, double-masked, vehicle-controlled, crossover Phase 2 trial, 70 adult patients with ≥2 years of moderate to severe allergic conjunctivitis history, a positive skin test to ragweed pollen, and allergen chamber-induced ocular itching and redness scores of ≥2.5 and ≥2 (both scales range from 0 to 4), respectively, were randomized 1:1:1 to one of three sequences: 0.25% reproxalap, 0.5% reproxalap, and placebo; 0.5% reproxalap, placebo, and 0.25% reproxalap; or placebo, 0.25% reproxalap, and 0.5% reproxalap. Symptoms and conjunctival redness were assessed over 3.5 hours in an allergen chamber of aerosolized ragweed pollen (3500 grains/m³). Test article was administered bilaterally just before chamber entry and at 90 minutes after chamber entry.

Results

Reproxalap was safe and well tolerated; 66 of 70 enrolled patients completed all visits. Relative to vehicle, both concentrations of reproxalap demonstrated statistically significant and clinically relevant improvements in ocular itching, tearing, and redness over the duration of exposure in the chamber (P < 0.001 for all assessments). Prophylactic and treatment activity of drug were demonstrated.

Conclusion

In an allergen chamber, reproxalap, a novel reactive aldehyde species inhibitor, was statistically superior to vehicle across the typical symptoms and signs of allergic conjunctivitis. These data are among the first rigorous clinical results demonstrating drug improvement in allergic conjunctivitis in an allergen chamber, a real-world model of allergen exposure.

Effect of dexamethasone as an analgesic adjuvant to multimodal pain treatment after total knee arthroplasty: randomised clinical trial

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the effects of one and two doses of intravenous dexamethasone in patients after total knee arthroplasty.

DESIGN

Randomised, blinded, placebo controlled trial with follow-up at 90 days.

SETTING

Five Danish hospitals, September 2018 to March 2020.

PARTICIPANTS

485 adult participants undergoing total knee arthroplasty.

INTERVENTION

A computer generated randomised sequence stratified for site was used to allocate participants to one of three groups: DX1 (dexamethasone (24 mg)+placebo); DX2 (dexamethasone (24 mg)+dexamethasone (24 mg)); or placebo (placebo+placebo). The intervention was given preoperatively and after 24 hours. Participants, investigators, and outcome assessors were blinded. All participants received paracetamol, ibuprofen, and local infiltration analgesia.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary outcome was total intravenous morphine consumption 0 to 48 hours postoperatively. Multiplicity adjusted threshold for statistical significance was P<0.017 and minimal important difference was 10 mg morphine. Secondary outcomes included postoperative pain.

RESULTS

485 participants were randomised: 161 to DX1, 162 to DX2, and 162 to placebo. Data from 472 participants (97.3%) were included in the primary outcome analysis. The median (interquartile range) morphine consumptions at 0-48 hours were: DX1 37.9 mg (20.7 to 56.7); DX2 35.0 mg (20.6 to 52.0); and placebo 43.0 mg (28.7 to 64.0). Hodges-Lehmann median differences between groups were: -2.7 mg (98.3% confidence interval -9.3 to 3.7), P=0.30 between DX1 and DX2; 7.8 mg (0.7 to 14.7), P=0.008 between DX1 and placebo; and 10.7 mg (4.0 to 17.3), P<0.001 between DX2 and placebo. Postoperative pain was reduced at 24 hours with one dose, and at 48 hours with two doses, of dexamethasone.

CONCLUSION

Two doses of dexamethasone reduced morphine consumption during 48 hours after total knee arthroplasty and reduced postoperative pain.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Clinicaltrials.gov NCT03506789.

Adolescents' pain and distress during peripheral intravenous cannulation in a paediatric emergency setting

The objective of the study is to investigate pain and distress experienced by a group of adolescents and children during peripheral intravenous cannulation in a paediatric emergency department. This cross-sectional study was performed between November 2019 and June 2020 at the paediatric emergency department of the Institute for Maternal and Child Health of Trieste, Italy. Eligible subjects were patients between 4 and 17 years old undergoing intravenous cannulation, split into three groups based on their age: adolescents (13-17 years), older children (8-12 years), and younger children (4-7 years). Procedural distress and pain scores were recorded through validated scales. Data on the use of topical anaesthesia, distraction techniques, and physical or verbal comfort during procedures were also collected. We recruited 136 patients: 63 adolescents, 48 older children, and 25 younger children. There was no statistically significant difference in the median self-reported procedural pain found in adolescents (4; IQR = 2-6) versus older and younger children (5; IQR = 2-8 and 6; IQR = 2-8, respectively). Furthermore, no significant difference was observed in the rate of distress between adolescents (79.4%), older (89.6%), and younger (92.0%) children. Adolescents received significantly fewer pain relief techniques.Conclusion: This study shows that adolescents experience similar pain and pre-procedural distress as younger children during peripheral intravenous cannulation. What is Known: • Topical and local anaesthesia, physical and verbal comfort, and distraction are useful interventions for pain and anxiety management during intravenous cannulation in paediatric settings. • No data is available on pain and distress experienced by adolescents in the specific setting of the emergency department. What is New: • Adolescents experienced high levels of pre-procedural distress in most cases and similar levels of pain and distress when compared to younger patients • The number of pain relief techniques employed during procedures was inversely proportional to patient's age, topical or local anaesthesia were rarely used.

The effect of kinesiophobia in older people with acute low back pain: longitudinal data from Back Complaints in the Elders (BACE)

This study aimed to investigate the course of low back pain (LBP) intensity over a period of 12 months in older people with and without kinesiophobia.This was an international multicenter study. LBP intensity was examined by using the Numerical Pain Scale at baseline and over five follow-up periods. The Fear-Avoidance Beliefs Questionnaire was used to measure patients' beliefs and fears. The study included 532 older adults (non kinesiophobic = 227; kinesiophobic = 305). The individuals had moderate pain at baseline, with a significant difference observed between the groups. Participants showed a rapid improvement in the first 6 weeks, followed by minor improvements in the succeeding months. However, a significant difference between groups remained during the follow-up period. Independently, kinesiophobia is a significant prognostic factor. These findings suggest the importance of screening for psychosocial factors in the management of older patients with LBP. Practice implications: patients need to be warned that pain can be perpetuated by inappropriate avoidance behaviors that may later lead to disability.

Arthroscopic Partial Meniscectomy versus Physical Therapy for Degenerative Meniscal Tear: a Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

Meniscal tears are commonly observed in patients with knee osteoarthritis (OA), however, clinical significance of such lesions detected by magnetic resonance imaging is in many cases unclear. This study aimed to determine the clinical effectiveness of arthroscopic partial meniscectomy (APM) compared with non-operative care in patients with knee OA.

METHOD

We used existing systematic reviews with updates of latest studies. Three randomized controlled studies were selected, where two studies compared the effects of APM plus physical therapy (PT) with PT alone and one compared APM alone and PT alone. While 1 study exclusively included OA patients, 2 studies included 21.1 and 12% of patients with no radiographic OA. Patients with knee locking were unanimously excluded.

RESULTS

Upon comparison of APM plus PT and PT alone, there was no significant difference observed in knee function, physical activity, or adverse events. Knee pain was observed to be significantly lower in the APM plus PT group at 6 months, but there was no difference between the two groups at 12 and 24 months. With respect to the comparison between APM alone and PT alone, PT was non-inferior based on the criteria for knee function during 24 months; however, knee pain was significantly reduced in the APM alone group.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study showed that knee pain was significantly improved in the APM group compared to non-operative care group at 6 months and over 24 months. Our result was based on only 3 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) revealing a significant knowledge gap, hence demanding more high-quality RCTs in OA patients.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

PROSPERO Identifier: CRD42020215965.

Efficacy of intra-articular ketorolac for pain control in arthroscopic surgeries: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The current systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to synthesize evidence on the efficacy of intra-articular ketorolac for patients undergoing arthroscopic surgeries.

METHODS

PubMed, Embase, ScienceDirect, and Google Scholar databases were searched for randomized controlled trials assessing the analgesic effect of intra-articular ketorolac for arthroscopic surgery of hip/knee or shoulder joint.

RESULTS

Six studies were included. Two studies were on shoulder arthroscopy, while others were on knee joint. Meta-analysis revealed that patients receiving intra-articular ketorolac had significantly lower pain scores at 2-4 h (MD: - 0.58 95% CI: - 0.88, - 0.19 I2 = 49% p = 0.002), 6-8 h (MD: - 0.77 95% CI: - 1.11, - 0.44 I2 = 31% p < 0.00001), 12 h (MD: - 0.94 95% CI: - 1.21, - 0.67 I2 = 0% p < 0.00001), and 24 h (MD: - 1.28 95% CI: - 1.85, - 0.71 I2 = 84% p < 0.00001) as compared to the control group (Certainty of evidence: low-moderate). Analysis of three studies revealed a tendency of reduced analgesic consumption in patients receiving intra-articular ketorolac, but the difference did not reach statistical significance (MD: - 0.53 95% CI: - 1.07, 0.02 I2 = 55% p = 0.06).

CONCLUSIONS

Preliminary evidence from a limited number of studies indicates that additional intra-articular ketorolac to multimodal analgesia results in reduced pain scores up to 24 h after arthroscopic surgery. The clinical relevance of small changes in pain scores is debatable. Also, scarce data suggest that consumption of analgesics may not be reduced with intra-articular ketorolac. Since pain scores can be influenced by the primary diagnosis and dose of ketorolac, the results should be interpreted with caution. The certainty of the evidence is low-moderate. There is a need for future RCTs to further strengthen current evidence.

Intraoperative epidural analgesia for pain relief after lumbar decompressive spine surgery: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Introduction

During lumbar decompressive spine surgery, the epidural space is easily accessible. This intraoperative situation allows surgeons to apply an epidural bolus of analgesia at the end of the surgical procedure. In literature, several papers about the methods and effectiveness of delivering local analgesia during lumbar decompressive spine surgery have been published.

Research question

This systematic review and meta-analysis aims to summaries the current literature on the effectiveness and safety of intraoperative epidural analgesia in lumbar decompressive surgery, delivered as a bolus.

Material and method

A systematic search was conducted according to the PRISMA guidelines. Inclusion criteria were randomized controlled trials or comparative cohort studies of patients aged 18 years or older who underwent decompressive lumbar spine surgery. Nonsteroidal epidural analgesia had to be administered as a bolus, intraoperatively, as an adjunct to standard analgesia therapy. Primary outcome measures were reduction in postoperative pain scores, analgesics consumption and length of hospital stay. Secondary outcomes were adverse events.

Results

Eight studies evaluating the effectiveness of intraoperative epidural analgesia were included. Seven studies reported statistically significant reductions in postoperative VAS-pain scores. Six studies reported a statistically significant decrease in postoperative analgesics consumption. Four studies reported on the length of hospital stay, with no statistically significant difference between study groups.

Discussion and conclusion

This systematic review and meta-analysis suggests that additional intraoperative epidural nonsteroidal analgesia, delivered as a bolus, can reduce postoperative pain and postoperative analgesics consumption in patients undergoing decompressive spinal surgery. Further well-powered research is needed to bolster the evidence.

Chambered warm moist air eyelid warming devices - a review

BACKGROUND

Eyelid warming is an important treatment for meibomian gland dysfunction (MGD). Specialized chambered devices, using warm moist air have been developed.

PURPOSE

To critically evaluate the literature on the safety and efficacy of chambered warm moist air devices in MGD treatment and pinpoint areas of future research.

METHODS

PubMed and Embase were searched on 06 June 2021. The search term was '(warm OR heat OR steam OR goggle OR spectacle OR moist air) AND (meibomian OR MGD OR blepharitis OR eyelid OR dry eye OR DED)'. All relevant articles with available English full text were included.

RESULTS

Eighteen articles assessing the application of chambered warm moist air eyelid warming devices were identified. In single-application studies, steam-based eyelid warming increased the eyelid temperature and improved symptoms, lipid layer thickness, and tear film breakup time (TBUT). In treatment studies, the steam-based devices improved TBUT and symptom scores. However, in the only randomized controlled trial (RCT) comparing chambered steam-based heat to hot towel treatment, there was no difference between groups for the primary outcome measure; the proportion of subjects noting symptom improvement after 4 weeks.

CONCLUSION

Currently available chambered warm moist air eyelid warming devices are safe and effective at raising eyelid temperature to therapeutic levels and improving signs and symptoms of dry eye. However, it is not clear if they provide a greater benefit than other eyelid warming therapies. Further well-conducted RCTs comparing moist and dry heat devices should be conducted on patients across the range of DED severities and subtype spectrum.

Effectiveness of Oxycodone Hydrochloride (Strong Opioid) vs Combination Acetaminophen and Codeine (Mild Opioid) for Subacute Pain After Fractures Managed Surgically: A Randomized Clinical Trial

IMPORTANCE

Patients with a surgically managed fracture are commonly discharged from the hospital with a strong opioid prescription, but limited evidence exists to support this practice.

OBJECTIVE

To test the hypothesis that strong opioids provide greater analgesia than mild opioids over the first week postdischarge from hospital after fracture surgical treatment.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

This double-blind, superiority, randomized clinical trial was conducted at a single-center, major trauma hospital in Sydney, Australia. Participants were inpatients who had sustained an acute nonpathological facture of a long bone or the pelvis, patella, calcaneus, or talus who were treated with surgical fixation and enrolled from July 27, 2016, to August 22, 2017. Data were analyzed from June through October 2018.

INTERVENTIONS

Initiation at discharge of oxycodone hydrochloride 5 mg of 10 mg (ie, 1 or 2 tablets) or combination acetaminophen and codeine 500 mg and 8 mg or 1000 mg and 16 mg (ie, 1 or 2 tablets) 4 times daily for a maximum duration of 3 weeks.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

The primary outcome was the mean of daily pain scores collected during week 1 of treatment measured using the Numerical Pain Rating Scale (NRS). Participants were asked to rate their mean pain over the previous 24 hours daily using an NRS score from 0 to 10, with 0 representing no pain and 10 representing the worst pain imaginable. The key secondary outcomes were EuroQol 5-Dimension 5-Level Questionnaire (EQ-5D-5L) responses, worst pain, medication adverse events, global perceived effect, and return to work.

RESULTS

A total of 120 patients with 1 or more acute orthopedic fractures requiring surgical fixation were randomized, including 59 patients in the strong-opioid group (43 [72.9%] men; mean [SD] age, 36.0 [14.1] years; mean oral morphine equivalent for days 1-7 of 32.9 mg) and 61 patients in the mild opioid group (47 [77.1%] men; mean [SD] age, 38.2 [13.5] years; mean oral morphine equivalent for days 1-7 of 5.5 mg). From days 1 to 7 postdischarge, the mean daily NRS mean pain score was 4.04 (95% Cl, 3.67 to 4.41) in the strong opioid group and 4.54 (95% Cl, 4.17 to 4.90) in the mild opioid group. The between-group difference of the primary outcome was not statistically significant (-0.50 [95% Cl, -1.11 to 0.12]; P = .11) despite a 6-fold increased dose of opioids being delivered in the strong opioid group.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

This study found that treatment with strong opioid medication subacutely was not superior to treatment with milder medication for treatment of pain among patients with surgically managed orthopedic fractures. These findings suggest that ongoing first-line strong opioid use after discharge from the hospital should not be supported.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Australia New Zealand Clinical Trial Registry No.: ACTRN12616000941460.

Paracetamol, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and glucocorticoids for postoperative pain: A protocol for a systematic review with meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis

BACKGROUND

Multimodal analgesia is the leading principle for managing postoperative pain. Recent guidelines recommend combinations of paracetamol and a non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID) for most surgeries. Glucocorticoids have been used for decades due to their potent anti-inflammatory and antipyretic properties. Subsequently, glucocorticoids may improve postoperative analgesia. We will perform a systematic review to assess benefits and harms of adding glucocorticoids to paracetamol and NSAIDs. We expect to uncover pros and cons of the addition of glucocorticoid to the basic standard regimen of paracetamol and NSAIDs for postoperative analgesia.

METHOD

This protocol for a systematic review was written according to the The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Protocols guidelines. We will search for trials in the following electronic databases: Medline, CENTRAL, CDSR and Embase. Two authors will independently screen trials for inclusion using Covidence, extract data and assess risk of bias using Cochrane's ROB 2 tool. We will analyse data using Review Manager and Trial Sequential Analysis. Meta-analysis will be performed according to the Cochrane guidelines and results will be validated according to the eight-step procedure suggested by Jakobsen et al We will present our primary findings in a 'summary of findings' table. We will evaluate the overall certainty of evidence using the GRADE approach.

DISCUSSION

This review will aim to explore the combination of glucocorticoids together with paracetamol and NSAIDs for postoperative pain. We will attempt to provide reliable evidence regarding the role of glucocorticoids as part of a multimodal analgesic regimen in combination with paracetamol and NSAID.

Tactile stimulation programs in patients with hand dysesthesia after a peripheral nerve injury: A systematic review

STUDY DESIGN

This is a systematic review performed according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses standards.

INTRODUCTION

Diverse approaches based on tactile stimulation are used in hand rehabilitation settings to treat touch-evoked dysesthesias. However, there is a lack of literature synthesis on the description and the effectiveness of the various approaches based on tactile stimulation that can be used for treating hand dysesthesia after nerve injury.

PURPOSE OF THE STUDY

The purpose of the study was to summarize the current evidence on tactile stimulation programs for managing touch-evoked hand dysesthesia due to nerve injury.

METHODS

The search was carried out on Medline, Embase, CINAHL, and the Cochrane Library databases. The selected studies had to present patients with touch-evoked dysesthesia after nerve injury who were treated with tactile stimulation approaches to reduce pain. The methodological quality of the included studies was assessed using the methodological index for nonrandomized studies scale, as well as the risk of bias.

RESULTS

Eleven studies met the inclusion criteria. These studies present tactile stimulation interventions that are heterogeneous relative to the target populations and the intervention itself (desensitization versus somatosensory rehabilitation method). Painful symptoms appear to diminish in patients with touch-evoked hand dysesthesia, regardless of the tactile stimulation program used. However, the included studies present significant risks of bias that limit the confidence in these results.

DISCUSSION

The evidence does not unequivocally support the beneficial effects of tactile stimulation to treat touch-evoked hand dysesthesia.

CONCLUSION

Future studies with more rigorous methodological designs, such as randomized controlled trials, are required to verify the potential benefits of these approaches.

Effectiveness of Peripheral Nerve Blocks for the Treatment of Primary Headache Disorders: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

STUDY OBJECTIVE

Primary headache disorders are prevalent and account for 2% of all emergency department visits. Current treatment options are effective; however, time to pain relief is suboptimal. Alternatives such as peripheral nerve blocks have shown promising results. The objective of this systematic review is to examine the effectiveness of peripheral nerve blocks for timely pain relief.

METHODS

We searched Ovid MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science Core Collection, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and included randomized controlled trials comparing peripheral nerve blocks to placebo or active therapy. The primary outcome was pain within 120 minutes. Secondary outcomes were pain after 120 minutes, adverse events, need for rescue medications, and relapse of headache. Two reviewers screened and extracted data independently; mean differences (MDs) were calculated, and results were pooled using a random-effects model.

RESULTS

Eleven studies met our eligibility criteria (n=860), of which 9 were included in the meta-analysis. Pain scores were significantly lower in patients treated with peripheral nerve blocks than with placebo at 15 minutes (MD: -1.17; 95% confidence interval: -1.82 to -0.51) and 30 minutes (MD: -0.99; 95% confidence interval: -1.66 to -0.32), and no serious adverse events were reported. Pain scores for peripheral nerve blocks versus active therapy and secondary outcomes were not pooled due to clinical heterogeneity.

CONCLUSION

Our review shows peripheral nerve blocks are effective as a rapid treatment option when compared to placebo; however, we were unable to assess effectiveness against standard treatment. Emergency physicians should consider peripheral nerve blocks as an adjunct therapy for patients with primary headache disorders.

Triangulation of multiple meaningful change thresholds for patient-reported outcome scores

PURPOSE

The notion of what constitutes meaningful differences or changes in patient-reported outcome scores is represented by meaningful change thresholds (MCTs). Applying multiple methods to estimate MCTs inevitably results in a range of estimates; however, a single estimate or small range is sought in practice to enable consistent interpretation of scores. While current recommendations for triangulation are appropriate in principle, the vital step of moving from all estimates to a value or small range lacks clarity and is subjective in nature. This article aims to review current triangulation approaches and provide more robust recommendations than what is currently available.

METHODS

Current approaches to perform triangulation are described and discussed. Anchor-based estimates are focussed upon due to their recognition as the most valid and developed approach. Recommendations for triangulation are provided.

RESULTS

A correlation-weighted average of MCT estimates is recommended to triangulate multiple MCT estimates derived from a single study into a single value, where increased weighting is given to stronger anchor measures. The choice of method to triangulate estimates from several published studies is highly dependent on the availability of information within the publications. MCTs designed for between-group differences, within-group changes, and within-individual changes should be considered separately.

CONCLUSION

The recommendations within this article provide a reliable and transparent approach to triangulation when a single value is sought, based on meta-analytic approaches. This approach is preferable to a simple mean of estimates where all are weighted equally, or through 'eyeballing' plotted estimates which is unreliable. We encourage researchers to adopt these methods, but to remain aware of the limitations within each method and further nuances in study design that result in heterogeneity. Sensitivity analyses with a range of plausible values are encouraged; however, the recommendations provide a suitable starting value for inferences. Unresolved issues in triangulation, requiring further exploration, are highlighted.