Krste Boric1,2, Svjetlana Dosenovic1,3, Antonia Jelicic Kadic1,4, Matija Boric1,5, Milka Jeric6, Livia Puljak1,7. 1. Laboratory for Pain Research, University of Split School of Medicine, Split, Croatia. 2. Department of Traumatology and Orthopaedics. 3. Department of Anesthesiology and Intensive Care. 4. Department of Pediatrics, University Hospital Center Split, Split, Croatia. 5. Department of Abdominal Surgery, University Hospital Split, Croatia. 6. Department of Dermatovenerology, General Hospital Zadar, Zadar, Croatia. 7. Department for Development, Research and Health Technology Assessment, Agency for Quality and Accreditation in Health Care and Social Welfare, Zagreb, Croatia.
Abstract
Objective: To investigate the range of efficacy and safety outcomes used in systematic reviews (SRs) of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of interventions for postoperative pain in children and compare them with outcome domains recommended in the Pediatric Initiative on Methods, Measurement, and Pain Assessment in Clinical Trials (PedIMMPACT). Methods: Five electronic databases were searched: MEDLINE, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, DARE, CINAHL, and PsycINFO. Two review authors extracted outcome data independently. Efficacy and safety outcomes were extracted and categorized. The type and number of outcomes were analyzed and compared against the outcomes recommended by PedIMMPACT. The study protocol was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42015029654). Results: We included 48 systematic reviews with data from 816 trials. The median number of all outcomes was 4, while the median number of the PedIMMPACT core outcomes was three out of six. The most commonly reported outcome of the PedIMMPACT Core Outcome set (COS) was "symptoms and adverse events," followed by pain intensity, which was reported in 75% of the included SRs. Just over half of the SRs that included a pain intensity outcome also indicated the specific pain assessment tool used in the methods section. Conclusions: Systematic reviews in the field of pediatric pain do not use the recommended COS. Nor do they consistently include pain as an outcome. This makes comparisons of efficacy and safety across interventions very difficult. Future studies should explore whether the authors are aware of the COS and whether the recommended COS is appropriate.
Objective: To investigate the range of efficacy and safety outcomes used in systematic reviews (SRs) of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of interventions for postoperative pain in children and compare them with outcome domains recommended in the Pediatric Initiative on Methods, Measurement, and Pain Assessment in Clinical Trials (PedIMMPACT). Methods: Five electronic databases were searched: MEDLINE, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, DARE, CINAHL, and PsycINFO. Two review authors extracted outcome data independently. Efficacy and safety outcomes were extracted and categorized. The type and number of outcomes were analyzed and compared against the outcomes recommended by PedIMMPACT. The study protocol was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42015029654). Results: We included 48 systematic reviews with data from 816 trials. The median number of all outcomes was 4, while the median number of the PedIMMPACT core outcomes was three out of six. The most commonly reported outcome of the PedIMMPACT Core Outcome set (COS) was "symptoms and adverse events," followed by pain intensity, which was reported in 75% of the included SRs. Just over half of the SRs that included a pain intensity outcome also indicated the specific pain assessment tool used in the methods section. Conclusions: Systematic reviews in the field of pediatric pain do not use the recommended COS. Nor do they consistently include pain as an outcome. This makes comparisons of efficacy and safety across interventions very difficult. Future studies should explore whether the authors are aware of the COS and whether the recommended COS is appropriate.
Authors: Alexander Schnabel; Sylvia U Reichl; Stephanie Weibel; Peter K Zahn; Peter Kranke; Esther Pogatzki-Zahn; Christine H Meyer-Frießem Journal: Cochrane Database Syst Rev Date: 2019-10-26