Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31061588›Full record

ArticleJournal of clinical orthopaedics and trauma

How effective is periarticular drug infiltration in providing pain relief and early functional outcome following total hip arthroplasty?

George Mathew Srampickal, Korula Mani Jacob, Jacob Joe Kandoth, Bijesh Kumar Yadev, Tyagraj Palraj, Anil Thomas Oommen, Sajan Philip George, Pradeep Mathew Poonnoose

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of clinical orthopaedics and trauma. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
0.5field-weighted citation impact, top 33% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 6 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

George Mathew SrampickalDepartment of Orthopedics Unit II, Christian Medical College, Vellore, TN, 632004, India.
Korula Mani JacobDepartment of Orthopedics Unit II, Christian Medical College, Vellore, TN, 632004, India.
Jacob Joe KandothDepartment of Orthopedics Unit II, Christian Medical College, Vellore, TN, 632004, India.
Bijesh Kumar YadevDepartment of Biostatistics, Christian Medical College, Vellore, 632004, India.
Tyagraj PalrajDepartment of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Christian Medical College, Vellore, 632004, India.
Anil Thomas OommenDepartment of Orthopedics Unit II, Christian Medical College, Vellore, TN, 632004, India.
Sajan Philip GeorgeDepartment of Anaesthesia, Christian Medical College, Vellore, TN, 632004, India.
Pradeep Mathew PoonnooseDepartment of Orthopedics Unit II, Christian Medical College, Vellore, TN, 632004, India.
Christian Medical College, Vellore · IN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The aim of the study was to compare the efficacy of periarticular injection of a cocktail of analgesic drugs (PIC) with epidural infiltration (EA), in providing postoperative pain relief and early functional improvement following Total Hip Arthroplasty (THA).

methods50 patients undergoing unilateral THA were randomized to receive either EA or PIC for postoperative pain control. Postoperative pain relief, as determined by the visual analogue scale (VAS), functional recovery and side effects related to EA and PIC were assessed.

resultsPIC resulted in significantly lower VAS scores [0.48(0.71) vs 3.04(2.07)] in the first 24 h after surgery [mean (SD)], when compared to EA. The pain relief continued to be significantly lower even on the 10th postoperative day. Functional recovery was significantly better in the PIC group, with patients being able to walk longer distances and climb steps more quickly following THA. EA, unlike PIC was associated with side effects like nausea, vomiting, motor weakness, back pain and urinary retention. The overall satisfaction rate with treatment was significantly better in PIC group (9.04/10) than those who received EA (7.76/10).

conclusionPIC provides significantly better pain control and functional recovery in the early postoperative period, with less side effects when compared with EA. PIC should be the choice for pain control following THA.

Indexed as

CocktailEpidural infiltrationPainPeriarticular injectionTHR

Identifiers

PMID31061588
PMCPMC6492212
OpenAlexW2809120894

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.