ArticleCureus2017
Comparison of Different Analgesia Drug Regimens for Pain Control During Extracorporeal Shock Wave Lithotripsy for Renal Stones: A Randomized Control Study.
Article in Cureus, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT07512297 (Comparative Evaluation of Non-Opioid Analgesics for Pain Control During Extracorporeal Shock Wave Lithotripsy), which is not on this map. Cited by 2 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.
Comparative Evaluation of Non-Opioid Analgesics for Pain Control During Extracorporeal Shock Wave Lithotripsy: A Prospective Randomized Controlled Trial
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Intracutaneous sterile water injection for pain relief during extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy: comparison with diclofenac sodium.Urolithiasis · 2020Trial
- Comparison of three analgesic drug regimens with twelfth subcostal nerve block for pain control during extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy.International urology and nephrology · 2018Trial
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionWith the increased use of extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL), the management of urolithiasis has become much convenient for the patients and the health care professionals alike. However, associated with the procedure is the common complaint of pain. No agreed upon pain management strategy has yet been developed for the procedure. We compared the effect of different analgesia drug regiments for pain control. METHODOLOGY: A randomised controlled trial was carried out in Shifa International Hospital from between July 2015 to January 2016. A total of 135 patients were divided into three groups; group A received 30 g lidocaine 2% gel applied locally on corresponding lumber area 30 minutes before the procedure, group B received oral naproxen sodium 550 mg 45 minutes before the procedure, and group C received both oral naproxen and lidocaine gel. Patients were supplemented with intravenous nalbuphine during the procedure. The pain was assessed with 0-10 visual analogue scale. Both pre-procedure and post-procedure pain score was measured.
resultsAmong 135 patients, 105 (77.8%) were male and 29 (21.5%) were female with mean age of 38.7 ± 1.31 years. There was no difference of mean pain score or need for supplemental intravenous nalbuphine between groups B and C but there was significantly decreased mean pain score and need for supplemental intravenous nalbuphine in groups B and C in comparison with group A.
conclusionThe use of oral naproxen sodium with or without the addition of lidocaine gel during ESWL is a promising option for pain management during the procedure with significant improvement in comparison with lidocaine gel alone.
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.