ArticleCureus2026
Ultra-Restrictive Opioid Prescription Protocol After Inflatable Penile Prosthesis.
Article 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background Addressing the opioid epidemic in the United States requires minimizing the overprescription of opioid pain medications, which poses a challenge for urologic surgeons, as postoperative pain is common after procedures such as inflatable penile prosthesis (IPP) placement. This research aimed to evaluate the impact of an ultra-restrictive opioid prescription protocol (UROPP) on pain management and opioid usage following IPP implant surgery. Methodology Patients undergoing IPP surgery were treated perioperatively using a UROPP with 500 mg acetaminophen and 15 mg intravenous ketorolac every six hours and opioids as needed for breakthrough pain. At discharge, some patients were given a three-day prescription of 5 mg oxycodone/325 mg acetaminophen, and all patients were given prescriptions for seven-day supplies of acetaminophen (500 mg) and ibuprofen (600 mg). When IPP surgery was performed as a same-day procedure due to COVID-19 precautions, all patients were given a three-day prescription of 5 mg oxycodone/325 mg acetaminophen at discharge. The patients on the UROPP were compared with a retrospective cohort of IPP patients treated before the institution of the UROPP. Outcomes assessed were opioid use, including total morphine milligram equivalents (MMEs), the number of opioid pills prescribed, and the need for refills or postoperative emergency visits. Results In total, 96 patients were analyzed (46 pre-UROPP, 50 post-UROPP) with no significant differences in baseline demographics. UROPP implementation significantly reduced opioid prescribing at discharge (100% vs. 36%, p < 0.001), median opioid pills (19.0 vs. 0.0, p < 0.001), and total MME. There was no increase in 30-day emergency department visits. Inpatient UROPP patients had the greatest reduction, with 96% discharged without opioids and low refill rates, while outpatient UROPP patients had higher refill rates but remained significantly lower than pre-UROPP levels. Conclusions The UROPP seems feasible and effective in reducing potentially unnecessary opioid prescribing and the risk of abuse following IPP placement.
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.