Analgesic benefits and clinical role of the posterior suprascapular nerve block in shoulder surgery: a systematic review, meta‐analysis and trial sequential analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The posterior suprascapular nerve block has been proposed as an analgesic alternative for shoulder surgery based on the publication of several comparisons with interscalene block that failed to detect differences in analgesic outcomes. However, quantification of the absolute treatment effect of suprascapular nerve block on its own, in comparison with no block (control), to corroborate the aforementioned conclusions has been lacking. This study examines the absolute analgesic efficacy of suprascapular nerve block compared with control for shoulder surgery. We systematically sought electronic databases for studies comparing suprascapular nerve block with control. The primary outcomes included postoperative 24-h cumulative oral morphine consumption and the difference in area under the curve for 24-h pooled pain scores. Secondary outcomes included the incidence of opioid-related side-effects (postoperative nausea and vomiting) and patient satisfaction. Data were pooled using random-effects modelling. Ten studies (700 patients) were analysed; all studies examined landmark-guided posterior suprascapular nerve block performed in the suprascapular fossa. Suprascapular nerve block was statistically but not clinically superior to control for postoperative 24-h cumulative oral morphine consumption, with a weighted mean difference (99%CI) of 11.41 mg (-21.28 to -1.54; p = 0.003). Suprascapular nerve block was also statistically but not clinically superior to control for area under the curve of pain scores, with a mean difference of 1.01 cm.h. Nonetheless, suprascapular nerve block reduced the odds of postoperative nausea and vomiting and improved patient satisfaction. This review suggests that the landmark-guided posterior suprascapular nerve block does not provide clinically important analgesic benefits for shoulder surgery. Investigation of other interscalene block alternatives is warranted.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.012 | 0.026 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.017 | 0.029 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".