ArticleThe Clinical journal of pain2026
Quantitative Sensory Testing Following Orthopedic Trauma: A Longitudinal Multisite Feasibility Study.
Article in The Clinical journal of pain, 2026. 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
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesOrthopedic trauma is a major cause of disability worldwide; around half of the people who sustain orthopedic trauma develop chronic pain. Quantitative Sensory Testing (QST) is a standardized method of assessing pain sensitivity, which may be useful in characterizing pain after injury and predicting chronic pain. This primary aim of this project was to test the feasibility of a portable QST battery, administered to adults 6-weeks post major orthopedic trauma and surgery.
methodsTwenty-nine participants (62% male; 52% black) who sustained major orthopedic trauma and surgery completed QST testing (including static measures, conditioned pain modulation, and mechanical temporal summation) at their 6-week postoperative visit and were invited to complete a 6-month follow-up survey. We examined feasibility and acceptability indices and explored associations between QST and clinical pain ratings.
resultsOf all eligible patients, 77% were recruited. QST procedures were feasible and tolerable. No participant declined participation, withdrew for reasons related to study procedures, or discontinued QST due to discomfort. No patient experienced increased clinical pain after QST. Exploratory analyses identified a positive association between static QST and pain interference at T1. Feasibility challenges included poor 6-month retention (57%) and difficulty administering QST to patients with upper extremity injuries. High rates of analgesic use before testing (38%) poses an additional barrier for future QST studies in this population. DISCUSSION: QST was acceptable and partially feasible; challenges included poor retention, high rates of analgesic use, and logistical barriers to accessing injury sites for testing. We pose several potential solutions for future research.
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.