Systematic Review of Methods for Individual Prediction of Postoperative Pain.

IF 2.5 3区 医学 Q2 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY
Pain Research & Management Pub Date : 2025-01-25 eCollection Date: 2025-01-01 DOI:10.1155/prm/1331412
Krister Mogianos, Jonas Åkeson, Anna K M Persson
{"title":"Systematic Review of Methods for Individual Prediction of Postoperative Pain.","authors":"Krister Mogianos, Jonas Åkeson, Anna K M Persson","doi":"10.1155/prm/1331412","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b>Background:</b> Acute postoperative pain is a common problem in clinical practice and merits attention considering its potential long-term adverse effects. This systematic review covers current knowledge on methods for individual prediction of postoperative pain. <b>Methods:</b> A systematic literature search was conducted using the PubMed, EMBASE, and CINAHL databases for original studies with adult patients published in English between 2016 and 2022. Inclusion required assessment of risk factors preoperatively and assessment of postoperative pain. No reviews, meta-analyses, or study protocols were included, nor studies with outcomes other than pain or where risk factor analysis was not performed preoperatively. A two peer-reviewed system was utilized using the screening and data collection tool Covidence, with a focus on new tools for preoperative pain prediction. The results were only analyzed qualitatively. <b>Results:</b> The search yielded 1950 abstracts to be screened. In total, 208 articles were subjected to full-text review, and 107 articles were included in the data synthesis of this review. The evaluated scientific methods were grouped and analyzed separately. Psychometric questionnaires and methods for quantitative sensory testing are still being studied. New methods proposed include the evaluation of pain induced by tourniquet inflation, venous cannulation, or pin-prick stimulation, the analgesia/nociception index, electroencephalographic recording, and other new equipment developed for this purpose. <b>Conclusion:</b> Various screening methods have been proposed to identify patients prone to postoperative pain. The focus has shifted from procedure-specific to individualized strategies to improve early management of pain. However, many traditional predictive methods still have a questionable role in clinical practice. <b>Trial Registration:</b> ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: CRD42022298479.</p>","PeriodicalId":19913,"journal":{"name":"Pain Research & Management","volume":"2025 ","pages":"1331412"},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11824487/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Pain Research & Management","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1155/prm/1331412","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Acute postoperative pain is a common problem in clinical practice and merits attention considering its potential long-term adverse effects. This systematic review covers current knowledge on methods for individual prediction of postoperative pain. Methods: A systematic literature search was conducted using the PubMed, EMBASE, and CINAHL databases for original studies with adult patients published in English between 2016 and 2022. Inclusion required assessment of risk factors preoperatively and assessment of postoperative pain. No reviews, meta-analyses, or study protocols were included, nor studies with outcomes other than pain or where risk factor analysis was not performed preoperatively. A two peer-reviewed system was utilized using the screening and data collection tool Covidence, with a focus on new tools for preoperative pain prediction. The results were only analyzed qualitatively. Results: The search yielded 1950 abstracts to be screened. In total, 208 articles were subjected to full-text review, and 107 articles were included in the data synthesis of this review. The evaluated scientific methods were grouped and analyzed separately. Psychometric questionnaires and methods for quantitative sensory testing are still being studied. New methods proposed include the evaluation of pain induced by tourniquet inflation, venous cannulation, or pin-prick stimulation, the analgesia/nociception index, electroencephalographic recording, and other new equipment developed for this purpose. Conclusion: Various screening methods have been proposed to identify patients prone to postoperative pain. The focus has shifted from procedure-specific to individualized strategies to improve early management of pain. However, many traditional predictive methods still have a questionable role in clinical practice. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: CRD42022298479.

求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Pain Research & Management
Pain Research & Management CLINICAL NEUROLOGY-
CiteScore
5.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
109
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Pain Research and Management is a peer-reviewed, Open Access journal that publishes original research articles, review articles, and clinical studies in all areas of pain management. The most recent Impact Factor for Pain Research and Management is 1.685 according to the 2015 Journal Citation Reports released by Thomson Reuters in 2016.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信