Elke Wuyts, Lisa Goudman, Cleo L Crunelle, Maria Merlano Gomez, Koen Putman, Frenn Bultinck, Julie G Pilitsis, Maarten Moens
{"title":"Effectiveness of pain medication tapering in chronic pain patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis.","authors":"Elke Wuyts, Lisa Goudman, Cleo L Crunelle, Maria Merlano Gomez, Koen Putman, Frenn Bultinck, Julie G Pilitsis, Maarten Moens","doi":"10.1016/j.bja.2024.07.025","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to inventory all outcome measures that are affected by tapering in chronic noncancer pain and to investigate the effectiveness of tapering.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A literature search was conducted from inception to April 2024 in MEDLINE via PubMed, Web of Science, SCOPUS, EMBASE, and PsycINFO.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The initial database search identified 3969 articles, which were screened by two independent reviewers. Studies evaluating pain medication tapering in adults with chronic noncancer pain were eligible for inclusion. In total, 57 and 34 articles were included in the systematic review and meta-analysis, respectively. Risk of bias assessment demonstrated poor, fair, and good quality in 30, 24, and three studies, respectively. Pain intensity was the most reported outcome measure, as reported in 28 studies. Furthermore, a random-effect three-level meta-analysis was performed. An overall effect size of 0.917 (95% confidence interval 0.61-1.22; P<0.001) was found, indicating a beneficial effect of tapering. In addition, a statistically significant improvement was demonstrated after tapering for pain intensity, headache disability, the number of headache days per month, anxiety, depression, the number of pills consumed per month, the number of days with medication intake per month, pain catastrophising, and pain interference. No statistically significant effect was observed for physical functioning, mental health-related quality of life, opioid use, pain self-efficacy, and physical health-related quality of life.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>This systematic review revealed a broad range of outcome measures affected by tapering. Owing to the high risk of bias of the included articles, the results of this meta-analysis must be interpreted with caution.</p><p><strong>Systematic review protocol: </strong>CRD42023416343 (PROSPERO).</p>","PeriodicalId":9250,"journal":{"name":"British journal of anaesthesia","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":9.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"British journal of anaesthesia","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bja.2024.07.025","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ANESTHESIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background: This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to inventory all outcome measures that are affected by tapering in chronic noncancer pain and to investigate the effectiveness of tapering.
Methods: A literature search was conducted from inception to April 2024 in MEDLINE via PubMed, Web of Science, SCOPUS, EMBASE, and PsycINFO.
Results: The initial database search identified 3969 articles, which were screened by two independent reviewers. Studies evaluating pain medication tapering in adults with chronic noncancer pain were eligible for inclusion. In total, 57 and 34 articles were included in the systematic review and meta-analysis, respectively. Risk of bias assessment demonstrated poor, fair, and good quality in 30, 24, and three studies, respectively. Pain intensity was the most reported outcome measure, as reported in 28 studies. Furthermore, a random-effect three-level meta-analysis was performed. An overall effect size of 0.917 (95% confidence interval 0.61-1.22; P<0.001) was found, indicating a beneficial effect of tapering. In addition, a statistically significant improvement was demonstrated after tapering for pain intensity, headache disability, the number of headache days per month, anxiety, depression, the number of pills consumed per month, the number of days with medication intake per month, pain catastrophising, and pain interference. No statistically significant effect was observed for physical functioning, mental health-related quality of life, opioid use, pain self-efficacy, and physical health-related quality of life.
Conclusions: This systematic review revealed a broad range of outcome measures affected by tapering. Owing to the high risk of bias of the included articles, the results of this meta-analysis must be interpreted with caution.
期刊介绍：
The British Journal of Anaesthesia (BJA) is a prestigious publication that covers a wide range of topics in anaesthesia, critical care medicine, pain medicine, and perioperative medicine. It aims to disseminate high-impact original research, spanning fundamental, translational, and clinical sciences, as well as clinical practice, technology, education, and training. Additionally, the journal features review articles, notable case reports, correspondence, and special articles that appeal to a broader audience.
The BJA is proudly associated with The Royal College of Anaesthetists, The College of Anaesthesiologists of Ireland, and The Hong Kong College of Anaesthesiologists. This partnership provides members of these esteemed institutions with access to not only the BJA but also its sister publication, BJA Education. It is essential to note that both journals maintain their editorial independence.
Overall, the BJA offers a diverse and comprehensive platform for anaesthetists, critical care physicians, pain specialists, and perioperative medicine practitioners to contribute and stay updated with the latest advancements in their respective fields.
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
分享
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
扫码关注我们
