Trial reportNature medicine2026
Eliminating opioid prescriptions from outpatient minimally invasive gynecologic surgery: a randomized trial.
Trial report in Nature medicine, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT04837014 (Eliminating Narcotic Prescriptions from Outpatient Minimally Invasive Gynecologic Surgery), which is not on this 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.
Eliminating Narcotic Prescriptions from Outpatient Minimally Invasive Gynecologic Surgery: a Randomized Controlled Trial
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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Despite low pain scores after minimally invasive gynecologic surgery (MIGS), opioids remain overprescribed in patients undergoing these procedures. In a single-blind randomized trial conducted at a tertiary-care academic center, we assessed whether a multimodal opioid-free exit prescription (OFP) for analgesia would result in noninferior postoperative pain control compared to an opioid-containing prescription in patients undergoing MIGS. Female patients without prior pain conditions undergoing outpatient laparoscopic MIGS were randomized to receive either an OFP or a restrictive opioid prescription (ROP; five tablets hydromorphone 1 mg) alongside multimodal analgesia. The primary outcome was patient-reported pain on postoperative day (POD) 1. Secondary outcomes included patient-reported pain and measures of recovery such as total opioid consumption, participant mobility, opioid-related side effects, return to emergency room or clinic, need for rescue analgesia prescription, overall satisfaction with pain control and overall satisfaction with postoperative care, which were assessed on POD1 and POD7 by a blinded outcome assessor. Of n = 110 patients randomized, n = 103 completed the study (OFP = 49, ROP = 54). No significant difference in mean pain scores on POD1 (3.1 versus 3.5, P = 0.31) or POD7 (1.0 versus 1.5, P = 0.14) were found. Mobility and satisfaction were comparable. ROP patients experienced more nausea and vomiting (14.3% versus 35.2%, P = 0.01). No OFP patients required rescue opioids. Only 27.8% and 11.1% of ROP patients consumed opioids by POD1 and POD7 respectively. Thus, in patients undergoing outpatient MIGS, an OFP resulted in noninferior postoperative pain compared to an ROP, suggesting that opioids may be safely omitted in this clinical context. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT04837014 .
Indexed as
Identifiers
41491106What 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.