Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36675605›Full record

ArticleJournal of clinical medicine2023

Following Evidence-Based Recommendations for Perioperative Pain Management after Cesarean Section Is Associated with Better Pain-Related Outcomes: Analysis of Registry Data.

Ruth Zaslansky, Philipp Baumbach, Ruth Edry, Sean Chetty, Lim Siu Min, Isabelle Schaub, Jorge Jimenez Cruz, Winfried Meissner, Ulrike M Stamer

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of clinical medicine, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
4.4field-weighted citation impact, top 5% 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

9 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. 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

9 authors at 7 institutions in 6 countries.

Ruth ZaslanskyDepartment of Anesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine, University Hospital Jena, 07747 Jena, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-8792-6820
Philipp BaumbachDepartment of Anesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine, University Hospital Jena, 07747 Jena, Germany.
Ruth EdryAcute Pain Service, Department of Anesthesiology, Rambam Health Care Campus, Haifa 3109601, Israel.
Sean ChettyDepartment of Anaesthesiology& Critical Care, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Stellenbosch University, Cape Town 7500, South Africa.ORCID 0000-0002-9878-5488
Lim Siu MinDepartment of Anesthesiology, Faculty of Medicine, University of Malaya, Kuala Lumpur 50603, Malaysia.ORCID 0000-0002-3608-6956
Isabelle SchaubDepartment of Anesthesiology and Pain Clinic, Clinique St Jean, 1000 Brussels, Belgium.ORCID 0000-0002-4232-5220
Jorge Jimenez CruzDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Bonn University Hospital, 53127 Bonn, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-1892-790X
Winfried MeissnerDepartment of Anesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine, University Hospital Jena, 07747 Jena, Germany.ORCID 0000-0003-2982-7696
Ulrike M StamerDepartment of Anaesthesiology and Pain Medicine, Inselspital, Bern University Hospital, University of Bern, 3010 Bern, Switzerland.ORCID 0000-0001-8385-2249
Jena University Hospital · DEClinique Saint Jean · BERambam Health Care Campus · ILStellenbosch University · ZAUniversity Hospital Bonn · DEUniversity of Bern · CHUniversity of Malaya · MY

Funding

European Community's Seventh Framework Program FP7/2007-2013 223590
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Women who have had a Cesarean Section (CS) frequently report severe pain and pain-related interference. One reason for insufficient pain treatment might be inconsistent implementation of evidence-based guidelines. We assessed the association between implementing three elements of care recommended by guidelines for postoperative pain management and pain-related patient-reported outcomes (PROs) in women after CS. The analysis relied on an anonymized dataset of women undergoing CS, retrieved from PAIN OUT. PAIN OUT, an international perioperative pain registry, provides clinicians with treatment assessment methodology and tools for patients to assess multi-dimensional pain-related PROs on the first postoperative day. We examined whether the care included [i] regional anesthesia with a neuraxial opioid OR general anesthesia with wound infiltration or a Transvesus Abdominis Plane block; [ii] at least one non-opioid analgesic at the full daily dose; and [iii] pain assessment and recording. Credit for care was given only if all three elements were administered (= “full”); otherwise, it was “incomplete”. A “Pain Composite Score-total” (PCStotal), evaluating outcomes of pain intensity, pain-related interference with function, and side-effects, was the primary endpoint in the total cohort (women receiving GA and/or RA) or a sub-group of women with RA only. Data from 5182 women was analyzed. “Full” care was administered to 20% of women in the total cohort and to 21% in the RA sub-group. In both groups, the PCStotal was significantly lower compared to “incomplete” care (p < 0.001); this was a small-to-moderate effect size. Administering all three elements of care was associated with better pain-related outcomes after CS. These should be straightforward and inexpensive for integration into routine care after CS. However, even in this group, a high proportion of women reported poor outcomes, indicating that additional work needs to be carried out to close the evidence-practice gap so that women who have undergone CS can be comfortable when caring for themselves and their newborn.

Indexed as

anti-inflammatory agents non-steroidalcaesarean sectionpainpatient reported outcomesregistry

Identifiers

PMID36675605
PMCPMC9864952
OpenAlexW4316664293

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.