Adam Khan, Tiffany Nguyen, Bryan Dunford, Taimoor Khan, Mahnoor Khalid, Cody Hillman, Samuel Shepard, Micah Kee, Will Roberts, Ashlyn Terrell, Landon Stallings, Ryan Ottwell, Micah Hartwell, Matt Vassar
{"title":"在以周围神经阻滞为重点的随机对照试验中,患者报告的结果遵循conber - pro扩展指南:一项荟萃流行病学研究。","authors":"Adam Khan, Tiffany Nguyen, Bryan Dunford, Taimoor Khan, Mahnoor Khalid, Cody Hillman, Samuel Shepard, Micah Kee, Will Roberts, Ashlyn Terrell, Landon Stallings, Ryan Ottwell, Micah Hartwell, Matt Vassar","doi":"10.1007/s40122-025-00766-y","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Patient-reported outcomes (PROs), such as peri- and postoperative pain scores, capture patient perspectives in regional anesthesia trials. However, whether these outcomes are reported according to established guidelines remains unclear. The CONSORT statement and its PRO extension (CONSORT-PRO) aim to enhance transparency in reporting PROs, yet no study has investigated adherence in peripheral nerve block (PNB) trials. Our meta-epidemiological investigation evaluated how well PNB randomized controlled trials (RCTs) adhere with CONSORT-PRO and explored whether trial characteristics affect reporting quality.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We performed a cross-sectional, meta-epidemiological study to determine adherence to CONSORT-PRO reporting guidelines in RCTs. We searched Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), Embase, and MEDLINE for RCT publications investigating PNBs between 2006 and 2020. RCTs investigating PNBs that incorporated PROs as a primary or secondary outcome were included. All other studies, reviews, or publications without a PRO were excluded.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In total, 65 RCTs met the inclusion criteria. Mean CONSORT-PRO adherence was 46.80 ± 17.36%, and trials that designated a PRO as the primary endpoint were more adherent than those in which the PRO was secondary (49.27 ± 16.58% versus 38.57 ± 17.92%; P = 0.035). Trials with ≥ 6-month follow-up were 16.24% more adherent than those with ≤ 3-month follow-up (P = 0.006). Studies that used a visual analog scale (VAS) or numeric rating scale (NRS) in combination with other PRO instruments were significantly more adherent than trials using VAS alone (P = 0.028).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Our meta-epidemiological review reveals substantial nonadherence to CONSORT-PRO guidelines in PNB trials. Although PROs are crucial for capturing patient-centered outcomes, they remain under-reported, especially when treated as secondary endpoints. Using diverse, validated measures beyond VAS/NRS and consistently applying CONSORT-PRO can enhance the quality, transparency, and clinical relevance of future trials. Targeted education for authors, editors, and clinicians-and expanded research on neuraxial techniques-will further strengthen reporting standards and the interpretability of anesthesia evidence.</p>","PeriodicalId":19908,"journal":{"name":"Pain and Therapy","volume":" ","pages":"1531-1546"},"PeriodicalIF":3.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12484481/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Adherence to CONSORT-PRO Extension Guidelines for Patient-Reported Outcomes in Randomized Controlled Trials Focused on Peripheral Nerve Blocks: A Meta-epidemiological Study.\",\"authors\":\"Adam Khan, Tiffany Nguyen, Bryan Dunford, Taimoor Khan, Mahnoor Khalid, Cody Hillman, Samuel Shepard, Micah Kee, Will Roberts, Ashlyn Terrell, Landon Stallings, Ryan Ottwell, Micah Hartwell, Matt Vassar\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s40122-025-00766-y\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Patient-reported outcomes (PROs), such as peri- and postoperative pain scores, capture patient perspectives in regional anesthesia trials. However, whether these outcomes are reported according to established guidelines remains unclear. The CONSORT statement and its PRO extension (CONSORT-PRO) aim to enhance transparency in reporting PROs, yet no study has investigated adherence in peripheral nerve block (PNB) trials. Our meta-epidemiological investigation evaluated how well PNB randomized controlled trials (RCTs) adhere with CONSORT-PRO and explored whether trial characteristics affect reporting quality.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We performed a cross-sectional, meta-epidemiological study to determine adherence to CONSORT-PRO reporting guidelines in RCTs. We searched Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), Embase, and MEDLINE for RCT publications investigating PNBs between 2006 and 2020. RCTs investigating PNBs that incorporated PROs as a primary or secondary outcome were included. All other studies, reviews, or publications without a PRO were excluded.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In total, 65 RCTs met the inclusion criteria. Mean CONSORT-PRO adherence was 46.80 ± 17.36%, and trials that designated a PRO as the primary endpoint were more adherent than those in which the PRO was secondary (49.27 ± 16.58% versus 38.57 ± 17.92%; P = 0.035). Trials with ≥ 6-month follow-up were 16.24% more adherent than those with ≤ 3-month follow-up (P = 0.006). Studies that used a visual analog scale (VAS) or numeric rating scale (NRS) in combination with other PRO instruments were significantly more adherent than trials using VAS alone (P = 0.028).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Our meta-epidemiological review reveals substantial nonadherence to CONSORT-PRO guidelines in PNB trials. Although PROs are crucial for capturing patient-centered outcomes, they remain under-reported, especially when treated as secondary endpoints. Using diverse, validated measures beyond VAS/NRS and consistently applying CONSORT-PRO can enhance the quality, transparency, and clinical relevance of future trials. Targeted education for authors, editors, and clinicians-and expanded research on neuraxial techniques-will further strengthen reporting standards and the interpretability of anesthesia evidence.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":19908,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Pain and Therapy\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"1531-1546\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-10-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12484481/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Pain and Therapy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s40122-025-00766-y\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/8/6 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Pain and Therapy","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s40122-025-00766-y","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/8/6 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Adherence to CONSORT-PRO Extension Guidelines for Patient-Reported Outcomes in Randomized Controlled Trials Focused on Peripheral Nerve Blocks: A Meta-epidemiological Study.
Introduction: Patient-reported outcomes (PROs), such as peri- and postoperative pain scores, capture patient perspectives in regional anesthesia trials. However, whether these outcomes are reported according to established guidelines remains unclear. The CONSORT statement and its PRO extension (CONSORT-PRO) aim to enhance transparency in reporting PROs, yet no study has investigated adherence in peripheral nerve block (PNB) trials. Our meta-epidemiological investigation evaluated how well PNB randomized controlled trials (RCTs) adhere with CONSORT-PRO and explored whether trial characteristics affect reporting quality.
Methods: We performed a cross-sectional, meta-epidemiological study to determine adherence to CONSORT-PRO reporting guidelines in RCTs. We searched Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), Embase, and MEDLINE for RCT publications investigating PNBs between 2006 and 2020. RCTs investigating PNBs that incorporated PROs as a primary or secondary outcome were included. All other studies, reviews, or publications without a PRO were excluded.
Results: In total, 65 RCTs met the inclusion criteria. Mean CONSORT-PRO adherence was 46.80 ± 17.36%, and trials that designated a PRO as the primary endpoint were more adherent than those in which the PRO was secondary (49.27 ± 16.58% versus 38.57 ± 17.92%; P = 0.035). Trials with ≥ 6-month follow-up were 16.24% more adherent than those with ≤ 3-month follow-up (P = 0.006). Studies that used a visual analog scale (VAS) or numeric rating scale (NRS) in combination with other PRO instruments were significantly more adherent than trials using VAS alone (P = 0.028).
Conclusions: Our meta-epidemiological review reveals substantial nonadherence to CONSORT-PRO guidelines in PNB trials. Although PROs are crucial for capturing patient-centered outcomes, they remain under-reported, especially when treated as secondary endpoints. Using diverse, validated measures beyond VAS/NRS and consistently applying CONSORT-PRO can enhance the quality, transparency, and clinical relevance of future trials. Targeted education for authors, editors, and clinicians-and expanded research on neuraxial techniques-will further strengthen reporting standards and the interpretability of anesthesia evidence.
期刊介绍:
Pain and Therapy is an international, open access, peer-reviewed, rapid publication journal dedicated to the publication of high-quality clinical (all phases), observational, real-world, and health outcomes research around the discovery, development, and use of pain therapies and pain-related devices. Studies relating to diagnosis, pharmacoeconomics, public health, quality of life, and patient care, management, and education are also encouraged.
Areas of focus include, but are not limited to, acute pain, cancer pain, chronic pain, headache and migraine, neuropathic pain, opioids, palliative care and pain ethics, peri- and post-operative pain as well as rheumatic pain and fibromyalgia.
The journal is of interest to a broad audience of pharmaceutical and healthcare professionals and publishes original research, reviews, case reports, trial protocols, short communications such as commentaries and editorials, and letters. The journal is read by a global audience and receives submissions from around the world. Pain and Therapy will consider all scientifically sound research be it positive, confirmatory or negative data. Submissions are welcomed whether they relate to an international and/or a country-specific audience, something that is crucially important when researchers are trying to target more specific patient populations. This inclusive approach allows the journal to assist in the dissemination of all scientifically and ethically sound research.