Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40107773›Full record

ArticleThe Korean journal of pain2025

Comparison of ultrasound-guided superior trunk block

Mohamed Gaber Mohamed, Ahmed Mohammad Fahmy, Marwa Mohamed Medhat

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The Korean journal of pain, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing 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

7 citing papers in PubMed.

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

3 authors.

Mohamed Gaber MohamedDepartment of Anesthesia and Surgical Intensive Care, Faculty of Medicine, Zagazig University, Zagazig, Egypt.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2186-2852
Ahmed Mohammad FahmyDepartment of Anesthesia and Surgical Intensive Care, Faculty of Medicine, Zagazig University, Zagazig, Egypt.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0002-6148-067X
Marwa Mohamed MedhatDepartment of Anesthesia and Surgical Intensive Care, Faculty of Medicine, Zagazig University, Zagazig, Egypt.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0949-8872

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: This study compared the quality and duration of analgesia between the superior trunk (ST) and the clavipectoral fascial plane (CFP) blocks in conjunction with a selective supraclavicular nerve (SCN) block for clavicular surgeries. Methods: Fifty patients undergoing mid-third clavicular procedures were randomly assigned to the ST group (received an SCN block followed by blockage of the ST of the brachial plexus) and the CFP group (received an SCN block followed by the CFP block). The primary outcome was the time until the first rescue analgesia. Secondary outcomes included total nalbuphine dosage and numerical rating scale (NRS) scores within the first 24 hours, the onset of sensory block, as well as deltoid and biceps muscle function using the modified Bromage score (MBS), diaphragmatic excursion, along with satisfaction levels. Results: The ST group exhibited a more prolonged duration until the first request for rescue analgesia compared to the CFP group (18.76 ± 0.89 hours vs. 15.34 ± 1.38 hours), with a mean difference of 3.42 hours (95% confidence interval: 2.76 to 4.08, Conclusions: The ST group demonstrated superior outcomes in pain control with less favorable outcomes concerning diaphragmatic excursion and upper limb motor function.

Indexed as

AnalgesiaBrachial PlexusClavicleInterventionalNerve BlockPainPostoperativeUltrasonography

Identifiers

PMID40107773
PMCPMC11965990

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.