RESUMO
Purpose: To describe the details of a systematic review to assess the current evidence about the efficacy of communication strategies on the prevention of chronic postsurgical pain (CPSP). Methods: The protocol for this systematic review was based on the Cochrane Handbook methodology and the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Protocols (PRISMA-P) recommendations. A systematic search of the literature on electronic databases Medline, Embase, Cochrane Library, CINAHL, PsycINFO, and Web of Science (from the inception to 19 June 2022) was carried out using predefined search terms to identify relevant studies. This review will include randomized clinical trials or observational studies. The search strategy consisted of keywords and index terms related to "clinician", "communication" or "post-surgical pain". Inclusion criteria are as follows: randomized clinical trials or observational studies using a parallel group design that assess the efficacy of communication interventions in patients undergoing surgery and that assess pain and pain-related disability. We considered interventions that included any type of written, verbal, and non-verbal communication in combination with other interventions or without. Control groups may include no communication intervention or another intervention distinctly different. We excluded studies with follow-up duration of less than 3 months, patients aged <18 years, and studies for which no reviewer had language proficiency (eg, Chinese, Korean). Descriptive statistics will be used to summarize quantitative findings. Meta-analysis will only be considered if at least three studies used the same outcome with comparable interventions, as we expect a wide heterogeneity of study population and settings. Conclusion: This systematic review and meta-analysis will be an important source for clinicians and researchers to understand the influence of communication to prevent CPSP. Study Registration: This protocol is registered with the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO). Registration number: CRD42021241596.
RESUMO
INTRODUCTION: Low back pain (LBP) is among the top three most common diseases worldwide, resulting in a life with pain-related disability. To date, no study has assessed the efficacy of metamizole (dipyrone), a non-opioid analgesic and antipyretic prodrug compared with the conventional non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug ibuprofen, in patients with an acute LBP episode. Further, it is unclear, whether a short educational intervention is superior to usual care alone. OBJECTIVES: The objective of this study is to assess first, whether metamizole is non-inferior to ibuprofen in a new episode of acute or subacute LBP. Second, we aim to assess whether a short educational intervention including evidence-based patient information on the nature of LBP is superior to usual care alone. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: An investigator-initiated multicentre, randomised, double blind trial using a factorial design will be performed. A total of 120 participants with a new episode of LBP will be recruited from GP practices, outpatient clinics and from emergency departments, and randomised into four different treatment groups: ibuprofen alone, ibuprofen and short intervention, metamizole alone, metamizole and short intervention. The primary endpoint for the medical treatment will be change in pain assessed on an 11-point Numeric Rating Scale after 14 days. The primary outcome for the short intervention will be change in the Core Outcome Measures Index assessed after 42 days. ETHICS, DISSEMINATION AND FUNDING: This study has been approved by the responsible Ethics Board (Ethikkommission Bern/2018-01986) and the Swiss Agency for Therapeutic Products (Swissmedic/2019DR4002). Results will be published in open access policy peer-reviewed journals. The study is funded by the Swiss National Science Foundation (grant number 32 003B-179346). TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT04111315.
