ReviewCureus2026
Pain After Brachial Plexus Injury Surgery: Variability in Reporting.
Review in Cureus, 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Pain is a major contributor to morbidity following brachial plexus injury (BPI), yet pain-related outcomes are inconsistently reported. The extent of postoperative pain improvement after surgical reconstruction remains unclear due to variable measurement techniques and nonstandardized reporting intervals. A systematic review was conducted in accordance with the PRISMA guidelines. Studies involving adults undergoing operative treatment for traumatic BPI that reported pain using the Visual Analog Scale (VAS) were included. Data extraction focused on the timing and methods of postoperative pain assessment. Nine studies met the inclusion criteria. Pain reporting demonstrated substantial heterogeneity, with more than 15 different postoperative timepoints reported across studies. Only a small minority of studies reported pain at comparable intervals, precluding pooled analysis. Pain was consistently prevalent after BPI, particularly in cases involving root avulsion, and several surgical techniques were associated with qualitative pain improvement. Overall, pain reporting after BPI surgery lacks standardization, limiting meaningful comparison of outcomes. Standardized measurement intervals and reporting methods are needed to guide clinical expectations and strengthen 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.