ArticleJournal of pain research2024
Efficacy and Safety of Snap Needles in the Treatment of Postoperative Hemorrhoidal Pain: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Article in Journal of pain research, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Comment on Pain Management Strategies After Hepatectomy, a Narrative Review of Therapeutic Options [Letter].Journal of pain research · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: The aim of this study is to evaluate the efficacy and safety of Snap Needles (SN) in the management of Postoperative Hemorrhoidal Pain (POHP). Patients and Methods: A systematic search was conducted in various databases, including EMBASE, Web of Science, PubMed, WanFang database, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), China Biomedical Literature Database (CBM), and China Science and Technology Journal Database (VIP), spanning from their inception to August 2023, to identify relevant randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on SN for POHP. The primary outcome measure was the Visual Analog Scale (VAS), while secondary outcomes encompassed the Total Effective Rate (TER), Wound Healing Time (WHT), Pain Relief Time (PRT), Pain Disappearance Time (PDT), and Adverse Events (AEs). The Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool was employed to assess the quality of individual studies. A meta-analysis was conducted using RevMan 5.4.1 software. Results: The meta-analysis included 11 RCTs involving 1188 POHP patients, with an overall assessment of study quality ranging from very low to moderate. The findings revealed that the SN group exhibited significant improvements in treatment outcomes when compared to the control group (CG). These improvements were reflected in reduced VAS scores (mean difference [MD] = -1.10, 95% confidence interval [CI]: -1.31, -0.89, Conclusion: The use of SN appears to yield favorable outcomes in the treatment of POHP, and is potentially an alternative therapy to western drug therapy.
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.