Evidence map›Paper›PMID 18783304›Full record

ArticleClinical drug investigation2008

Prescriptions of NSAIDs to patients undergoing third molar surgery : an observational, prospective, multicentre survey.

Luca Levrini, M Carraro, S Rizzo, S Salgarello, E Bertelli, G A Pelliccioni, V Garau, M Bandettini, S Caputi, A Lörincz and 1 more

Abstract readMulticenter Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Clinical drug investigation, 2008. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed
0.3field-weighted citation impact, top 35% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

11 citing papers in PubMed, 19 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Is it time US dentistry ended its opioid dependence?Journal of the American Dental Association (1939) · 2019
    Review
  11. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

11 authors at 9 institutions in 2 countries.

Luca LevriniClinica Odontoiatrica, Università dell'Insubria, Varese, Italy. luca.levrini@unisubria.it
M Carraro
S Rizzo
S Salgarello
E Bertelli
G A Pelliccioni
V Garau
M Bandettini
S Caputi
A Lörincz
A Szûcs
University of Insubria · ITAzienda Socio Sanitaria Territoriale degli Spedali Civili di Brescia · ITEötvös Loránd University · HUOspedale Santa Maria alle Scotte · ITSemmelweis University · HUUniversity of Bologna · ITUniversity of Cagliari · ITUniversity of Chieti-Pescara · ITUniversity of Pavia · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND

objectivesSurgical extraction of an impacted third molar is generally followed by acute post-operative pain that has been shown to be primarily inflammatory. Thus, use of NSAIDs in this context is appropriate and has been shown to be effective. Several drugs are employed for this purpose, but no information exists on the reasons why preference is given to one rather than another. The principal objective of this study was to evaluate the pattern of administration of NSAIDs in patients undergoing surgery for impacted third molar extraction. The study also aimed to collect information on the efficacy, onset and duration of the analgesic effect of routinely prescribed NSAIDs and to assess the duration of treatment with these drugs and their tolerability.

methodsThis was an observational, multicentre, prospective survey. A total of 616 patients (38% male and 62% female) from the Italian Stomatology Clinics of the Universities of Bologna, Brescia, Cagliari, Chieti, Pavia, Pisa, Siena and Varese and from the Department of Oral and Maxillo-Facial Surgery of Semmelweis University, Budapest, were eligible for the study. Patients were evaluated over the 7 days following surgical extraction. NSAIDs were prescribed according to the normal prescribing habits of the centre and physician involved. The main outcomes of interest in the survey were the efficacy, onset and duration of analgesic effect, duration of therapy, and tolerability of the NSAIDs prescribed.

resultsNimesulide was the most prescribed NSAID (68%), followed by diclofenac, ketoprofen and ibuprofen. Because of the low proportion of patients receiving other NSAIDs, these patients were considered a single treatment group for evaluation purposes. Nimesulide, especially when given before patients started experiencing pain after surgery, was more effective than other NSAIDs in reducing the severity of pain on the day of surgery, in delaying the time to maximum intensity of pain, in providing complete pain relief and in prolonging the duration of analgesic effect on the day of surgery. These results are consistent with the known anti-inflammatory and analgesic actions of nimesulide and with the important role of inflammation in the onset of pain after this type of surgery.

conclusionThese results confirm nimesulide as an effective reference drug for the treatment of post-operative dental pain and show that it has a positive benefit/risk profile in this setting.

Indexed as

AdultAnti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-SteroidalDental Health SurveysDiclofenacDrug PrescriptionsFemaleHumansHungaryIbuprofenItalyKetoprofenMaleMolar, ThirdPain MeasurementPostoperative PainProspective StudiesAnti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-SteroidalDiclofenacIbuprofenKetoprofennimesulideSulfonamides

Identifiers

PMID18783304
OpenAlexW464464

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.