ArticleSaudi journal of anaesthesia
Evaluating oral ketamine's adverse side effects in chronic pain patients.
Article in Saudi journal of anaesthesia. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Ketamine has been shown to be an effective treatment at sub-anesthetic doses for various chronic pain conditions. This study assesses the relationship between oral ketamine and the incidence of adverse side effects in patients receiving long-term, moderate to high-dose tablets for chronic pain. Materials and Methods: All adult patients given prescriptions for oral ketamine from November 2019 to October 2023 were identified for our initial cohort. Patients were excluded if they failed to reach at least 80 mg per day during their treatment period or if their treatment periods lasted less than 90 days. Demographic variables, comorbidities, prescription information, and patient-reported side effects were recorded. Results: This study identified 193 patients who received oral ketamine prescriptions at our institution. One hundred forty-nine patients received 80 mg-159 mg per day, 24 patients received 160 mg-199 mg per day, and 20 patients received 200 mg-240 mg per day. In Group 1, 9 of the 149 patients (6.0%) reported 12 instances of side effects; in Group 2, 2 of the 24 patients (8.3%) reported 6 instances of side effects; in Group 3, 2 of the 20 patients (10%) reported 2 instances of side effects. The maximum average daily dosage was not associated with the number of reported side effects ( Conclusion: Our results suggest that at daily doses above 80 mg and up to 240 mg, oral ketamine does not show a dose-dependent relationship in predicting the number of patient-reported side effects.
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.