MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2064412907 · doi:10.1097/ajp.0b013e3181dda1ac

Pregabalin and Transcutaneous Electrical Nerve Stimulation for Postherpetic Neuralgia Treatment

2010· article· en· W2064412907 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Manlio Barbarisi, Maria Caterina Pace, Maria Beatrice Passavanti, Massimo Maisto, Luigi Mazzariello, Vincenzo Pota, Caterina Aurilio

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical Journal of Pain · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPain Mechanisms and Treatments
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPregabalinMedicinePostherpetic neuralgiaNeuropathic painAnesthesiaMcGill Pain QuestionnaireVisual analogue scaleTranscutaneous electrical nerve stimulationPlaceboNeuralgia

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: Postherpetic neuralgia (PHN) is responsible for one of the most common types of neuropathic pain, described as a burning pain that shakes, hits, and tightens and includes allodynia and paresthesia. AIM OF THE STUDY: To evaluate the efficacy of Pregabalin when used during transcutaneous electric nerve stimulation (TENS) in patients with PHN and to analyze any changes in physical activity and sleep quality. METHODS: Patients aged 50 to 80 years were included in this randomized study. We enrolled 15 male (average age 65+/-8.6 y) and 15 female patients (average age 64+/-8.2 y). The male patients had a history of neuropathic pain lasting 15.6+/-8.8 months whereas the female patients had a history of neuropathic pain lasting about 14.9+/-8.6 months. We began with 1 week of patient screening followed by a week of Pregabalin titration. Then, we established the dose of Pregabalin for each patient to obtain visual analog scale (VAS) of less than 60 mm. The eligible patients were randomly divided into 2 groups receiving Pregabalin + TENS or Pregabalin+TENS placebo for the following 4 weeks. Patients underwent 8 outpatient visits during which they completed VAS, SF-McGill Pain Questionnaire, and sleep interference questionnaire. RESULTS: The resulting data showed that Pregabalin administration associated with TENS reduced pain in patients with PHN. At the end of the treatment, all the observed groups presented a reduction of mean VAS. The group treated with Pregabalin 300 (P300)+TENS had a reduction of pain of 30% and the group treated with Pregabalin 600 (P600)+TENS had a reduction of pain of 40%. The comparison between group P300+TENS versus group P300+TENS placebo showed a statistically significant reduction of VAS (P300+TENS 25+/-0.67 vs. P300+TENS placebo 39+/-1.19 P<0.02). Moreover, the comparison between group P600+TENS versus group P600+TENS placebo has shown a statistically significant reduction of VAS (P600+TENS 23+/-0.78 vs. P600+TENS placebo 32+/-0.81 P<0.02). At the end of the study, all groups showed a statistically significant difference in terms of sleep interference, Short-Form McGill Pain Questionnaire total score, and Short-Form McGill Pain Questionnaire Present Pain Intensity. CONCLUSIONS: These data support the conclusion that Pregabalin gives better results when combined with TENS therapy, which is an analgesic nonpharmacologic procedure. Therefore, a multidisciplinary treatment should be considered for this kind of pain.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.826
Threshold uncertainty score0.316

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.037
GPT teacher head0.378
Teacher spread0.341 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designOther design
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations60
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueClinical Journal of PainSame topicPain Mechanisms and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207