Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34132646›Full record

SynthesisJMIR mHealth and uHealth2021

Efficacy of Short Message Service Text Messaging Interventions for Postoperative Pain Management: Systematic Review.

Christoph Buck, Christian Keweloh, Adam Bouras, Eduardo J Simoes

Open access · goldAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in JMIR mHealth and uHealth, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed
4.1field-weighted citation impact, top 6% 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

15 citing papers in PubMed, 29 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. 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

4 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Christoph Buck *School of Business and Economics, Philipps-Universität Marburg, Marburg, Germany.ORCID 0000-0003-1636-1874
Christian Keweloh *UNITY AG, Büren, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-4166-3703
Adam Bouras *School of Medicine, University of Missouri, Columbia, MO, United States.ORCID 0000-0002-4552-8031
Eduardo J Simoes *School of Medicine, University of Missouri, Columbia, MO, United States.ORCID 0000-0003-4371-4305
University of Missouri · USPhilipps University of Marburg · DE

Funding

Washington University Center for Diabetes Translation Research P30DK092950 · NIDDK · WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY · PI Ross C Brownson, Debra Haire-Joshu · 2011 to 2026
$11.7M
NIDDK NIH HHS P30 DK092950
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAddiction to opiates and synthetic opioids poses a major threat to public health worldwide, with pharmaceutical opioids prescribed to manage pain constituting the main problem. To counteract this threat, suitable pain management strategies should be implemented in health care. Monitoring pain management seems to be feasible using telemedicine with a certain degree of resource intensity and digitization. As a communication channel for this type of monitoring, SMS appears to be a valid alternative.

objectiveThe aim of this systematic literature review was to (1) provide information on the state of research regarding postoperative pain management via SMS, (2) establish a basic understanding of SMS-based pain management, and (3) provide insight into the feasibility of these management strategies. The research question was as follows: Is postoperative pain management feasible and effective utilizing SMS?

methodsA systematic literature review was performed mainly following the PRISMA guidelines and another guide on performing a systematic literature review for information systems-related research. A search string was developed based on the objectives and research question, and eight databases were searched.

resultsThe initial search resulted in 2083 records, which could be narrowed down by applying various exclusion criteria. Thereby, 11 articles were identified as relevant, which were accordingly analyzed and evaluated by full-text screening. In all articles, pain management interventions were performed using SMS communication between health care professionals and patients or their legal guardians. A prospective approach was predominantly chosen as the study design (91%) with the leading research objective of determining the intervention's feasibility (73%). The primary reason for sending SMS messages was to monitor patients (64%). Overall, the use of SMS improved adherence, acceptance, and satisfaction regarding postoperative pain management. With an average response rate of approximately 89.5% (SD 3.8%), the reliability of SMS as a communication and monitoring tool was further emphasized. This response rate is significantly higher than that for email interventions (66.63%, P<.001).

conclusionsThis study provides a comprehensive picture of the current status on postoperative pain management by SMS. Communication via SMS was beneficial in all interventions, even preoperative. Six SMS interventions could be certified by the respective institutional review board and three were Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act-compliant. Therefore, the results of this study could be leveraged to address the opioid epidemic. Overall, the research question could be confirmed. Future research should extend this systematic literature review regarding preoperative pain management. Based on these findings, a pre- and postoperative communication model should be developed to address the opioid epidemic effectively.

Indexed as

TelemedicineText MessagingHumansPostoperative PainReproducibility of ResultsResearch DesignUnited Statesopioidpain managementpostoperativeshort message service (SMS)systematic literature review

Identifiers

PMID34132646
PMCPMC8277313
OpenAlexW3156171798

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.