Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41281091›Full record

ReviewCureus2025

Ethical Dilemmas and Approaches to Acute Pain Management in Patients With Substance Use Disorders.

Trevor Virno, Carl Van Rensburg, Marcia Ballantyne

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Cureus, 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. 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.

Trevor VirnoCollege of Medicine, Lake Erie College of Osteopathic Medicine, Bradenton, USA.
Carl Van RensburgCollege of Medicine, Lake Erie College of Osteopathic Medicine, Bradenton, USA.
Marcia BallantynePathology, Lake Erie College of Osteopathic Medicine, Bradenton, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The opioid epidemic has intensified ethical dilemmas in acute pain management, particularly for patients with opioid use disorder (OUD). Clinicians face the dual responsibility of relieving pain while minimizing the risks of relapse and misuse. Historically, this population has been vulnerable to undertreatment due to stigma and fear of addiction, yet inadequate analgesia itself can worsen outcomes and undermine recovery. This review integrates ethical principles with clinical evidence to propose a framework for managing acute pain in patients with OUD. Ethical principles of autonomy, beneficence, nonmaleficence, and justice must guide care while balancing effective analgesia and addiction stability. Regional anesthesia and multimodal approaches are evaluated as ethically compelling alternatives to opioid-centered regimens, offering effective pain relief while reducing potential harms. System-level barriers, including stigma, inconsistent protocols, and limited access to addiction expertise, hinder equitable care. Addressing these requires institutional and policy reforms that prioritize education, interdisciplinary collaboration, and expanded access to MOUD and regional anesthesia. This review concludes that ethically sound acute pain management in OUD demands individualized, multimodal approaches that respect patient autonomy, prevent harm, and advance justice. Clinicians must integrate ethics and evidence to deliver compassionate, equitable care in the midst of the opioid crisis.

Indexed as

acute pain managementbeneficencemedical ethicsmultimodal analgesiamulti-modality pain managementopioid addictionopioid free pain managementopioid pandemicperioperative carerelapse prevention

Identifiers

PMID41281091
PMCPMC12631943

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.