Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34459995›Full record

ReviewSchmerz (Berlin, Germany)2022

[Treatment expectations for postoperative pain].

Julia Stuhlreyer, Regine Klinger

Erratum issuedAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Schmerz (Berlin, Germany), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

  • Erratum issued
    2022
5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Julia StuhlreyerUniversitätsklinikum Hamburg-Eppendorf, Martinistraße 52, 20246, Hamburg, Deutschland. j.stuhlreyer@uke.de.
Regine KlingerUniversitätsklinikum Hamburg-Eppendorf, Martinistraße 52, 20246, Hamburg, Deutschland.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPreoperative treatment expectations have a significant influence on postoperative pain and treatment outcomes. Positive expectations are an important mechanism of the placebo effect and negative expectations are an important mechanism of the nocebo effect.

objectivesWhat is the influence of treatment expectations, how are they assessed in the clinical setting, and how can the findings be implemented in clinical practice?

methodsA literature search was performed using the keywords "expectation" AND ("postoperative" OR "surgery"). All English and German articles were selected. In addition, the bibliographies of the articles found were examined and incorporated.

resultsA total of 158 articles were found, 49 of which investigate expectations and include postoperative treatment outcomes. Most articles investigate expectations only at baseline to ensure that groups do not differ preoperatively. The studies that prospectively examine the influence of expectations apply very different measurement methods to investigate expectancy constructs. Thus, comparison across studies is difficult. There are few studies examining whether and how expectations can be influenced perioperatively, and who developed practice-relevant interventions to change them.

conclusionValid and reliable measurement tools should be applied in clinical trials for a more robust investigation of treatment expectations. Further studies should address possible intervention options so that treatment expectations can also be incorporated into standard clinical care.

Indexed as

MotivationPostoperative PainHumansPlacebo EffectTreatment OutcomeAcute painMeasurement of treatment expectationsNocebo effectPerioperative settingPlacebo effect

Identifiers

PMID34459995
PMCPMC9156456

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.