ArticleInternational journal of clinical pharmacy2023
The cost-effectiveness analysis of analgesic treatment options for postoperative pain following laparotomy surgeries.
Article in International journal of clinical pharmacy, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Opioid-free strategies for patient-controlled intravenous postoperative analgesia: a review of recent studies.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2024Review
- Cost-effectiveness of toripalimab plus chemotherapy for advanced esophageal squamous cell carcinoma.International journal of clinical pharmacy · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundPostoperative pain control remains unsatisfactory. Patients who underwent laparotomy may have moderate to severe acute postoperative pain. Comparative cost-effectiveness of the following postoperative pain treatment options remains to be investigated: patient-controlled intravenous analgesia (PCIA) with flurbiprofen therapy, flurbiprofen monotherapy, parecoxib monotherapy, or dezocine monotherapy.
aimTo provide a cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) of four analgesic regimens for patients with postoperative pain following laparotomy surgeries.
methodPatients with postoperative pain following laparotomy were retrospectively reviewed from a postoperative pain management database created by pharmacists, and divided into four groups according to analgesic regimens. The clinical outcomes were visual analogue scale (VAS) scores and the incidence of adverse drug events. The CEA was conducted by developing a decision tree model based on retrospective data. The maximum incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of the four regimens was used as the willingness-to-pay (WTP) value. Meanwhile, the uncertainty of the base-case results was examined by one-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses.
resultsA total of 677 patients were included in the retrospective study. PCIA with flurbiprofen therapy had the lowest VAS scores at 6, 24, 48 h postoperatively. Based on the base-case results, PCIA plus flurbiprofen was the optimal regimen with the highest effectiveness, while flurbiprofen monotherapy had the lowest cost. PCIA plus flurbiprofen was the optimal regimen even with a WTP value of 0 dollars.
conclusionPCIA plus flurbiprofen therapy was the optimal regimen. Parecoxib monotherapy was more cost-effective than flurbiprofen monotherapy. The findings may guide the selection of postoperative pain management.
Indexed as
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.