ReviewDer Anaesthesist2015
[Standardized treatment protocols in acute postoperative pain therapy: analysis of contents of standardized medicinal concepts].
Review in Der Anaesthesist, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed, 16 citations in OpenAlex.
- [Principles of acute pain therapy-An overview taking special features in the patient collective of ophthalmology into consideration].Die Ophthalmologie · 2023Review
- [Resolution of the Federal Joint Committee on the mandatory introduction and implementation of acute pain management concepts-Importance and consequences for ophthalmology].Die Ophthalmologie · 2023Article
- [Critical incidents in acute pain management-A risk analysis of CIRS reports].Der Anaesthesist · 2022Article
- [Use of rapid-onset fentanyl preparations beyond indication : A random questionnaire survey among congress participants and pain physicians].Schmerz (Berlin, Germany) · 2021Article
- The effectiveness of an oral opioid rescue medication algorithm for postoperative pain management compared to PCIA : A cohort analysis.Der Anaesthesist · 2020Article
- [Delegation of medical activities in acute pain therapy].Der Anaesthesist · 2018Review
- The Quality of Postoperative Pain Therapy in German Hospitals.Deutsches Arzteblatt international · 2017Article
- [Aus "Fehler und Gefahren" wird "Patientensicherheit" und aus "Trends und Medizinökonomie" wird "Qualitätsmanagement und Medizinökonomie"].Der Anaesthesist · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 4 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundStandardized treatment approaches can improve the quality of the management of acute postoperative pain.
aimThe purpose of this study was to describe the content and structure of currently implemented standards for the management of acute postoperative pain in German hospitals and to better define the concept of a treatment standard for acute pain. MATERIAL AND
methodsWritten standardized treatment protocols from 68 hospitals for the management of acute postoperative pain were analyzed. The evaluation was based on the layout of processes, the baseline and rescue or on-demand analgesic medication and safety mechanisms.
resultsA treatment standard per hospital separated for adults (68 standards) and children (27 standards) was identified and analyzed. A baseline medication was provided in all standards for adults and in 89% for children. Of the 95 standards 68% routinely combined opioids and non-opioids as a basis (78% for adults and 42% for children). A way to adapt the baseline medication was described more often in standards for adults. Of the standards for adults 91% (85% for children) contained provisions for rescue or on-demand analgesia and half of them (both adults and children) included an immediate-release opioid formulation, which was readily available. For adults the availability was regulated by a predefined process in 29% of the standards (8% for children). In cases of persisting pain, repetition of the rescue medication was generally possible in 63% of adult standards (54% for children) but within 1 h after the first dose in only 43% (30% for children). Intervention limitations for application of the rescue medication (e.g., a defined score on the numeric rating scale) were set in 63% of adult standards (54% for children). A follow-up assessment of the pain intensity after a rescue medication was only required in approximately half of the standards and safety information or mechanisms were only rarely included.
conclusionContent, structure and type of the evaluated treatment standards showed a considerable heterogeneity with respect to the availability of rescue and baseline medication. Safety aspects were not addressed in many cases. These findings show that despite the requirements of the German guidelines for treatment of perioperative and posttraumatic pain for treatment standards, there are still no practical recommendations with respect to contents and structure of such standards.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.