ArticleAnesthesiology research and practice2018
Disparity between High Satisfaction and Severe Pain in Patients after Caesarean Section: A Prospective Observational-Controlled Investigation.
Article in Anesthesiology research and practice, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Effectiveness of Acupuncture for Pain Control After Cesarean Delivery: A Randomized Clinical Trial.JAMA network open · 2022Trial
- Factors conditioning pain control and reduction in post-cesarean section parturients: a cross-sectional study.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2024Observational
- Effect of ondansetron for preventing postoperative nausea and vomiting after breast cancer surgery.American journal of translational research · 2022Article
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 at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesRecent advances in the treatment of postoperative pain (POP) have increased the quality of life in surgical patients. The aim of this study was to examine the quality of POP management in patients after CS in comparison with patients after comparable surgical procedures.
methodsThis was a prospective observational analysis in patients after CS in comparison with the patients of the same age, who underwent comparable abdominal gynaecological surgeries (GS group) at the university hospital. A standardised questionnaire including pain intensity on the Verbal Rating Scale (VRS-11), incidence of analgesia-related side effects, and incidence of pain interference with the items of quality of life and patients' satisfaction with the treatment of POP was used.
resultsSixty-four patients after CS reported more pain on movement than the patients after GS (
conclusionThe disparity between the high level of pain and excellent satisfaction with POP treatment raises the ethical and biomedical considerations of restrictive pharmacological therapy of post-CS pain.
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.