ArticlePLoS neglected tropical diseases2015
Assessment and Treatment of Pain during Treatment of Buruli Ulcer.
Article in PLoS neglected tropical diseases, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Microbiology of secondary infections in Buruli ulcer lesions; implications for therapeutic interventions.BMC microbiology · 2021Article
- Pharmacologic management ofExpert review of clinical pharmacology · 2020Review
- Assessing and managing wounds of Buruli ulcer patients at the primary and secondary health care levels in Ghana.PLoS neglected tropical diseases · 2017Observational
- Former Buruli Ulcer Patients' Experiences and Wishes May Serve as a Guide to Further Improve Buruli Ulcer Management.PLoS neglected tropical diseases · 2016Article
- Experiences of Pain and Expectations for Its Treatment Among Former Buruli Ulcer Patients.The American journal of tropical medicine and hygiene · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors at 4 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundBuruli ulcer (BU) is described as a relatively painless condition; however clinical observations reveal that patients do experience pain during their treatment. Knowledge on current pain assessment and treatment in BU is necessary to develop and implement a future guideline on pain management in BU. METHODOLOGY: A mixed methods approach was used, consisting of information retrieved from medical records on prescribed pain medication from Ghana and Benin, and semi-structured interviews with health care personnel (HCP) from Ghana on pain perceptions, assessment and treatment. Medical records (n = 149) of patients treated between 2008 and 2012 were collected between November 2012 and August 2013. Interviews (n = 11) were audio-taped, transcribed verbatim and qualitatively analyzed. PRINCIPAL
findingsIn 113 (84%) of the 135 included records, pain medication, mostly simple analgesics, was prescribed. In 48% of the prescriptions, an indication was not documented. HCP reported that advanced BU could be painful, especially after wound care and after a skin graft. They reported not be trained in the assessment of mild pain. Pain recognition was perceived as difficult, as patients were said to suppress or to exaggerate pain, and to have different expectations regarding acceptable pain levels. HCP reported a fear of side effects of pain medication, shortage and irregularities in the supply of pain medication, and time constraints among medical doctors for pain management.
conclusionsProfessionals perceived BU disease as potentially painful, and predominantly focused on severe pain. Our study suggests that pain in BU deserves attention and should be integrated in current treatment.
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.