ReviewCureus2026
Analgesic Strategies in Adult Intensive Care Units: A Systematic Review of Opioid and Non-opioid Approaches.
Review in Cureus, 2026. 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.
- ComparativeFrontiers in pediatrics · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Effective analgesia and sedation are critical components of care in adult intensive care units, with strategies ranging from opioid and non-opioid regimens to multimodal and protocol-guided approaches. This systematic review was conducted in accordance with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Evidence was synthesized from randomized controlled trials and observational studies across PubMed, Cochrane Library, Scopus, and Web of Science through October 2025, evaluating sedative and analgesic interventions - including opioid, non-opioid, alpha-2 agonist, and protocolized approaches - in adult intensive care unit (ICU) populations. The methodological quality of the chosen studies was assessed using the Modified Downs and Black checklist. A total of 11 eligible studies demonstrated that dexmedetomidine provided comparable or superior sedation quality relative to benzodiazepines and propofol, reduced delirium incidence, and shortened time to extubation; remimazolam yielded equivalent sedation to propofol with fewer hypotensive events; and protocolized or nurse-driven sedation strategies improved ventilator-free days and reduced ICU length of stay compared with daily interruption alone. Multimodal and non-opioid adjuvant therapies reduced opioid requirements and nausea while maintaining hemodynamic stability, and across studies, light, cooperative sedation paired with validated pain and sedation assessment tools was associated with better recovery profiles and fewer cognitive complications. Overall, the evidence supports adopting multimodal, analgesia-first, and non-gamma-aminobutyric-acid (non-GABA) sedation approaches in critical care, with dexmedetomidine and remimazolam offering superior safety and delirium prevention compared with benzodiazepines.
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.