Movement-evoked Pain versus Pain at Rest in Postsurgical Clinical Trials and in Meta-analyses: An Updated Systematic Review
Authors' conclusion
This updated review demonstrates a persistent limited proportion of trials including movement-evoked pain as a pain outcome, a substantial proportion of trials failing to distinguish between pain at rest and movement-evoked pain, and a lack of consistency in the use of pain-evoking maneuvers for movement-evoked pain assessment.
Study context
- Population
- Postsurgical pain RCTs and meta-analyses (thoracotomy, knee arthroplasty, hysterectomy) published 2014–2023944 trials · 186 meta-analyses
- Outcome
- Assessment of pain at rest vs movement-evoked pain
Methodological detailsupdate of 2011 review, MEDLINE and Embase searched
- Update of 2011 review
- MEDLINE and Embase searched
Pooled result
As reported in the abstract
- Trials not measuring movement-evoked pain (vs. 61% in 2011)
- 504 (53%)
- Trials not distinguishing pain at rest from movement-evoked pain (vs. 52% in 2011)
- 428 (45%)
- Trials measuring movement-evoked pain
- 439
- Of these, pain-evoking maneuver not described (vs. 38% in 2011)
- 139 (32%)
- Meta-analyses not distinguishing pain at rest from movement-evoked pain (vs. 71% in 2011)
- 94 (51%)
Original publication
Movement-evoked Pain versus Pain at Rest in Postsurgical Clinical Trials and in Meta-analyses: An Updated Systematic Review. Anesthesiology. Published 27 November 2023. doi:10.
Composed by AI from the published abstract and checked against it. How Briefs are made →