HPB : the official journal of the International Hepato Pancreato Biliary Association · 2026
Systematic review of randomised controlled trials on pain domains and assessment methods in post pancreatectomy patients.
Систематический обзорСтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Peddakota Vivek, Owen Ruth, Joseph Nejo, Chouhan Mudavath Litesh, Siggaard Knoph Cecilie, Kuhlmann Louise, Pogatzki-Zahn Esther, Windsor John, Drewes Asbjorn M, Pandanaboyana Sanjay
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: This systematic review aims to identify the core outcome domains and assessment methods currently used in randomised controlled trials (RCTs) for acute postoperative pain following pancreatic surgery.
METHODS: PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library were searched without restrictions. Eligible studies were screened and data extracted for pain assessment tools, analgesic outcomes, adverse effects, pain interference and quality-of-life measures.
RESULTS: Fifteen RCTs involving 1034 patients were included. All trials assessed pain intensity using a visual analogue scale (n = 11) or a numerical rating scale (n = 4). Analgesic consumption was reported in 13 trials, with significant variability in the reporting, rescue analgesia and adverse effects. Pain interference or physical function was described in 10 trials, including pain on coughing (n = 4), mobilisation (n = 3), % gait speed and % peak cough flow (n = 2). Multidimensional tools were rarely used, with a single RCT employing three different scales. Psychological function was assessed in one trial using anxiety and depression scales.
CONCLUSION: There was notable heterogeneity in pain domains assessed and the tools used across pain management RCTs post-pancreatectomy. This highlights the need for standardized core outcome domains and multidimensional tools specific to pancreatic surgery to enable comparability of data and robust analysis.
METHODS: PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library were searched without restrictions. Eligible studies were screened and data extracted for pain assessment tools, analgesic outcomes, adverse effects, pain interference and quality-of-life measures.
RESULTS: Fifteen RCTs involving 1034 patients were included. All trials assessed pain intensity using a visual analogue scale (n = 11) or a numerical rating scale (n = 4). Analgesic consumption was reported in 13 trials, with significant variability in the reporting, rescue analgesia and adverse effects. Pain interference or physical function was described in 10 trials, including pain on coughing (n = 4), mobilisation (n = 3), % gait speed and % peak cough flow (n = 2). Multidimensional tools were rarely used, with a single RCT employing three different scales. Psychological function was assessed in one trial using anxiety and depression scales.
CONCLUSION: There was notable heterogeneity in pain domains assessed and the tools used across pain management RCTs post-pancreatectomy. This highlights the need for standardized core outcome domains and multidimensional tools specific to pancreatic surgery to enable comparability of data and robust analysis.