Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34368943›Full record

Trial reportClinical drug investigation2021

Efficacy and Tolerability of Oral Compared with Sublingual Ketamine Lozenges as Rescue Analgesics in Adults for Acute Pain: The OSKet Trial.

Chui C Chong, Stephan A Schug

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in Clinical drug investigation, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
0.3field-weighted citation impact, top 38% 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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
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

2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Chui C ChongDepartment of Anaesthesia and Pain, Royal Perth Hospital, GPO Box X2213, Perth, WA, 6847, Australia. chui.chong@health.wa.gov.au.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7465-538X
Stephan A SchugEmeritus Professor and Honorary Senior Research Fellow, Anaesthesiology and Pain Medicine, Medical School, University of Western Australia, Royal Perth Hospital, Level 4 MRF Building, GPO Box X2213, Perth, WA, 6847, Australia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0302-2315
Royal Perth Hospital · AUThe University of Western Australia · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND

objectiveKetamine is an N-methyl-D-aspartate receptor (NMDA) antagonist used widely as an intravenous analgesic for treatment of acute pain. Its use as oral and sublingual analgesics is not well studied. This study aims to compare the clinical efficacy and tolerability of oral (PO) versus sublingual (SL) ketamine lozenges in adult patients with moderate-to-severe breakthrough pain.

methodsThe study had a randomized, double-blind crossover design in 23 inpatients requiring ketamine as rescue analgesics when pain scores exceeded 4/10 on the Numerical Rating Scales. Each participant received either SL 50 mg ketamine lozenge and PO placebo lozenge or SL placebo lozenge and PO 50 mg ketamine lozenge in two treatment periods with a minimum 24-h washout. Pain scores and adverse effects were documented half hourly for the first 2 h, then one hourly for the next 2 h after treatment. The time to first effect and time to meaningful pain relief were recorded. Patients reported their satisfaction and a global impression of change (GIC) at the end of each treatment period. Data were analysed using random effects regression models.

resultsSixteen subjects completed both days, 7 completed 1 day. Time to first effect was 13.1 min PO versus 6.6 min SL (p = 0.069), time to meaningful pain relief was 29.4 min PO versus 10.8 min SL (p = 0.02). Pain scores were not significantly different at all time points post-treatment. Satisfaction and GIC scores were similar for both groups. Overall, adverse events occurred more often with SL administration (p = 0.02).

conclusionsSublingual administration of ketamine led to a faster onset of pain relief (but also a higher adverse event rate), but in all other aspects treatment with ketamine given sublingually and orally produced similar analgesic effects. ACTRN: ACTRN12621000240842, 08/03/2021, retrospectively registered.

Indexed as

Acute PainKetamineAdministration, SublingualAdultAnalgesicsAnalgesics, OpioidDouble-Blind MethodHumansPain ManagementTreatment OutcomeAnalgesicsAnalgesics, OpioidKetamine

Identifiers

PMID34368943
OpenAlexW3191950781

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.