Trial reportDrug design, development and therapy2025
A Prospective, Randomized Trial Comparing Hydromorphone and Nalbuphine for Postcesarean Patient-Controlled Analgesia and Developing a Risk Prediction Model for Inadequate Analgesia.
Trial report in Drug design, development and therapy, 2025. 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.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: Effective postoperative analgesia is essential for maternal recovery following cesarean delivery. Hydromorphone and nalbuphine are commonly used opioids with differing pharmacologic properties, but direct comparisons in postcesarean patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) are limited. This study aimed to compare the analgesic efficacy and safety of hydromorphone versus nalbuphine and to develop a predictive model for inadequate analgesia. Patients and Methods: In this prospective, randomized, double-blind clinical trial conducted from December 2024 to March 2025, 212 women undergoing elective cesarean section under spinal anesthesia were randomized (1:1) to receive hydromorphone (0.1 mg/mL) or nalbuphine (1 mg/mL) via standardized intravenous PCA. The primary outcome was the incidence of inadequate analgesia within 24 hours, defined as a numerical rating scale (NRS) score ≥ 4 at rest or during movement. Secondary outcomes included adverse events, PCA consumption, and recovery indicators. Multivariable logistic regression was used to identify predictors of inadequate analgesia, and a nomogram was constructed and internally validated. Results: Nalbuphine was associated with a significantly lower incidence of inadequate analgesia than hydromorphone (14.2% vs 26.4%; Conclusion: Nalbuphine demonstrated superior analgesia and fewer adverse effects compared with hydromorphone for postcesarean PCA. The developed predictive model may support individualized pain management by identifying patients at risk for inadequate analgesia.
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.