Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41200478›Full record

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.

Kaiwen Zhang, Jiaoli Sun, Caixia Zhang, Bo Jiao, Wencui Zhang, Shangchen Yu, Xueqin Cao, Zhiqiang Zhou, Guanglei Zhang, Xianwei Zhang

Abstract readRandomized Controlled TrialComparative Study
In one paragraph

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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Trial
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

10 authors.

Kaiwen Zhang *Department of Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine,Hubei Key Laboratory of Geriatric Anesthesia and Perioperative Brain Health, and Wuhan Clinical Research Center for Geriatric Anesthesia, Tongji Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, People's Republic of China.ORCID 0000-0002-5267-3958
Jiaoli Sun *Department of Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine,Hubei Key Laboratory of Geriatric Anesthesia and Perioperative Brain Health, and Wuhan Clinical Research Center for Geriatric Anesthesia, Tongji Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, People's Republic of China.
Caixia ZhangDepartment of Anesthesiology, Wuhan No. 1 Hospital, Wuhan, People's Republic of China.
Bo JiaoDepartment of Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine,Hubei Key Laboratory of Geriatric Anesthesia and Perioperative Brain Health, and Wuhan Clinical Research Center for Geriatric Anesthesia, Tongji Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, People's Republic of China.
Wencui ZhangDepartment of Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine,Hubei Key Laboratory of Geriatric Anesthesia and Perioperative Brain Health, and Wuhan Clinical Research Center for Geriatric Anesthesia, Tongji Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, People's Republic of China.
Shangchen YuDepartment of Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine,Hubei Key Laboratory of Geriatric Anesthesia and Perioperative Brain Health, and Wuhan Clinical Research Center for Geriatric Anesthesia, Tongji Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, People's Republic of China.
Xueqin CaoDepartment of Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine,Hubei Key Laboratory of Geriatric Anesthesia and Perioperative Brain Health, and Wuhan Clinical Research Center for Geriatric Anesthesia, Tongji Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, People's Republic of China.
Zhiqiang ZhouDepartment of Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine,Hubei Key Laboratory of Geriatric Anesthesia and Perioperative Brain Health, and Wuhan Clinical Research Center for Geriatric Anesthesia, Tongji Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, People's Republic of China.
Guanglei ZhangDepartment of Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine,Hubei Key Laboratory of Geriatric Anesthesia and Perioperative Brain Health, and Wuhan Clinical Research Center for Geriatric Anesthesia, Tongji Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, People's Republic of China.
Xianwei ZhangDepartment of Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine,Hubei Key Laboratory of Geriatric Anesthesia and Perioperative Brain Health, and Wuhan Clinical Research Center for Geriatric Anesthesia, Tongji Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, People's Republic of China.ORCID 0000-0001-9361-8202

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

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

Analgesia, Patient-ControlledAnalgesics, OpioidCesarean SectionHydromorphoneNalbuphinePostoperative PainAdultDouble-Blind MethodFemaleHumansPregnancyProspective StudiesAnalgesics, OpioidHydromorphoneNalbuphinehydromorphonenalbuphinepatient-controlled analgesiapostoperative analgesiapredictive model

Identifiers

PMID41200478
PMCPMC12588572

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.