ArticlePain research & management2017
Clinical Evaluation of a Novel Technology for Oral Patient-Controlled Analgesia, the
Article in Pain research & management, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- The Impact of Patient Interactive Systems on the Management of Pain in an Inpatient Hospital Setting: A Systematic Review.Applied clinical informatics · 2019Pooled it
- Optimizing CFTR modulator therapy management for cystic fibrosis through the ReX platform.Frontiers in pediatrics · 2023Article
- Patient-Controlled Analgesia (PCA): Intravenous Administration (IV-PCA) versus Oral Administration (Oral-PCA) by Using a Novel Device (PCoA® Acute) for Hospitalized Patients with Acute Postoperative Pain-A Comparative Retrospective Study.Pain research & management · 2021Review
- Use of a Digital Medication Management System for Effective Assessment and Enhancement of Patient Adherence to Therapy (ReX): Feasibility Study.JMIR human factors · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Acute postoperative pain delays recovery and increases morbidity and mortality. Traditional administration of postoperative analgesics by nurses is often inefficient. The present study evaluated the safety, efficacy, and usability of a novel, patient-controlled analgesic dispenser, the PCoA Acute. Methods: A controlled pilot study was conducted at three medical centers. Patients scheduled for elective surgery were enrolled into two groups, both taking oral analgesics: a control group ( Results: No severe adverse events were recorded. Average pill intake time was reduced from 8 : 58 minutes in the control group to 1 : 17 minutes in the test group ( Conclusions: The study confirmed that PCoA Acute is safe and effective. It is well accepted by patients and medical staff. Its use can optimize pain medication administration.
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.