A Systematic Review of Multimodal Analgesic Effectiveness on Acute Postoperative Pain After Adult Cardiac Surgery
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
AIM: To synthesise the best available empirical evidence about the effectiveness of multimodal analgesics on pain after adult cardiac surgery. DESIGN: A systematic review with meta-analysis. METHODS: Indexed full-text papers or abstracts, in any language, of randomised controlled trials of adult patients undergoing cardiac surgery investigating multimodal postoperative analgesic regimen effect on mean level of patient-reported pain intensity at rest. DATA SOURCES: Eight databases, via two platforms and three trial registries were searched from 1 January 1995 to 1 June 2024 returning 3823 citations. RESULTS: Of the 123 full-text papers assessed, 29 were eligible for inclusion. Data were independently extracted by a minimum of two reviewers in Covidence. There were 2195 participants, aged 60.4 ± 6.6 (range 40-79) years, who were primarily male (n = 1522, 76.1%), randomised in the included studies. Risk of bias was high and reporting quality was poor. Patient-reported pain was measured at rest in 28 (96.6%) trials. Data were suitable for pooled analysis from 10 (34.5%) of these trials with an average rest pain intensity of 3.3 (SD 1.5) in the control and 2.7 (SD 1.9) in the intervention groups, respectively. No trials compared combinations of nonopioid, opioid-agonist-antagonist, partial opioid agonists or full opioid agonists. Most trials (n = 11, 37.9%) compared two different full opioid options for less than 72 h (n = 24, 82.7%). CONCLUSIONS: Robust trials are needed to determine which multimodal analgesic combination will optimise patient recovery after adult cardiac surgery. There is an urgent need to test and refine high-quality end-point measures. IMPLICATIONS FOR PATIENT CARE: Adequate assessment precedes ideal pain treatment. The findings from this review reveal neither are sufficient, and the impact of suboptimal pain management on postoperative recovery is grossly underinvestigated. IMPACT: The optimal combination of multimodal analgesics is unknown despite being recommended in best practice guidelines for enhanced recovery after cardiac surgery. Almost 30% of adults continue to experience ongoing pain up to a year after cardiac surgery, and findings from this review reveal a dearth of robust empirical evidence for optimal pain management, and heterogeneity in the way pain is assessed, measured and managed. This review provides a premise for robust trials focused on acute postoperative recovery in cardiac surgery and beyond. REPORTING METHOD: This review was conducted in accordance with the PRISMA-P statement. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: There was no patient or public contribution. PROTOCOL REGISTRATION: PROSPERO: CRD42022355834.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,004 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,007 | 0,003 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».