SEARCH · Search PubMed

Results for “Shoulder Pain”

Search indexed PubMed citations on genomics, clinical trials, systematic reviews and public health. Explore titles, authors and supplied subject terms, then open the PubMed record.

SourceResearch connectionFrom yearThrough year

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

217 records · Page 4Linked to original sources

PubMed2026

Comparative effectiveness and safety of pharmacological interventions for sleep outcomes in chronic non-cancer pain: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.

Sleep disturbances are highly prevalent among individuals with chronic non-cancer pain and are associated with worse pain severity and poorer prognosis. The comparative trade-offs between the effectiveness and safety of available pharmacotherapies for sleep outcomes in this population remain poorly defined. Ninety-eight RCTs involving 28,920 participants (mean age 53.2 years, 71.2% female) were included. Moderate-certainty evidence demonstrated that melatonin significantly improved sleep quality compared with placebo (standardized mean difference [SMD] = -0.60, 95%CI: -0.98, -0.22). Ten agents (e.g., amitriptyline, oxycodone, gabapentin, pregabalin, duloxetine) also showed statistically significant improvements in subjective sleep quality (SMD = -0.24 to -1.07), but most effects were supported by low-certainty evidence and were accompanied by an increased risk of adverse events (odds ratio [OR] = 1.90 to 37.00). Conversely, melatonin was not associated with an increased risk (OR = 0.88, 95%CI: 0.19, 3.94). Our findings indicate that melatonin shows promise as a safe, adjunctive option for improving sleep quality in this population, but larger, condition-specific trials are warranted to confirm these effects. Other pharmacological agents are limited by lower-certainty and unfavorable safety profiles. These results should be interpreted cautiously given limited direct comparisons, heterogeneous chronic pain populations, the high proportion of trials at high risk of bias, and the predominance of subjective sleep outcomes.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Efficacy and Safety of Elagolix Versus Dienogest for Treatment of Moderate-to-Severe Endometriosis Pain: A Phase III, Multicentric, Double-Blind, Active-Controlled, Non-Inferiority Study.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the efficacy, safety and tolerability of elagolix with dienogest in women with moderate-to-severe endometriosis-associated pain. DESIGN: A multicentre, double-blind, double-dummy, randomised, parallel-group, active-controlled, non-inferiority phase III study. SETTING: Nineteen clinical centres across India. STUDY POPULATION: Women (18-49 years) diagnosed with endometriosis and experiencing moderate-to-severe pain. METHODS: Participants were randomised (1:1) to receive oral elagolix (150 mg once daily) or dienogest (2 mg once daily) for 24 weeks. OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome was change in endometriosis-related pain (Numeric Rating Scale [NRS]) from baseline to Day 85. Secondary outcomes included changes in NRS (Day 169), dysmenorrhoea, non-menstrual pelvic pain (NMPP) scores (Days 85 and 169), rescue medication use, patient global impression of change (PGIC), adverse events and bone mineral density. RESULTS: Of 340 patients screened, 230 were randomised (115 per group). At Day 85, both arms showed similar reductions in NRS pain scores with a treatment difference of 0.04 (95% CI: -0.3, 0.37) [p = 0.9747] demonstrating non-inferiority as upper 95% CI was below pre-specified margin of 1.5. At Day 169, both arms showed comparable improvements in overall pain, dysmenorrhoea and NMPP from baseline (p = 0.9372, p = 0.8884, and p = 0.9616, respectively). Rescue medication use and PGIC were comparable between treatment arms. Adverse event incidence was similar (elagolix: 14.8%; dienogest: 19.1%), with no serious TEAEs or discontinuations. No significant bone mineral density changes were observed. CONCLUSIONS: Elagolix demonstrated non-inferiority to dienogest with an acceptable safety and tolerability profile, supporting its use in managing endometriosis-associated pain. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: CTRI/2023/01/049292.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

[Clinical efficacy and safety of electroacupuncture at the motor area for Parkinson's disease with musculoskeletal pain: a randomized controlled trial].

OBJECTIVE: To observe the clinical efficacy and safety of electroacupuncture (EA) at the motor area for Parkinson's disease (PD) with musculoskeletal pain. METHODS: Fifty-eight patients with PD accompanied by musculoskeletal pain were randomly assigned to an EA group (29 cases, 1 case dropped out) and a sham EA group (29 cases, 1 case dropped out). The EA group was treated with EA at the motor area contralateral to the painful side (for bilateral pain, the left motor area was selected), using disperse-dense wave (2 Hz/20 Hz), with a current intensity of 1-2 mA, and needles were retained for 30 min. The sham EA group was treated with sham EA at non-acupoint area located 5-20 mm posterior to the motor area contralateral to the painful side. The connection mode was the same as that in the EA group, but no electrical current was delivered, and the needles were retained for 30 min. Both groups were treated once daily for 5 consecutive days. Visual analogue scale (VAS) for pain, unified Parkinson's disease rating scale part Ⅲ (UPDRS-Ⅲ), 24-item Hamilton depression rating scale (HAMD-24), Hamilton anxiety rating scale (HAMA), and 39-item Parkinson's disease questionnaire (PDQ-39) scores were evaluated before treatment, immediately after treatment, and at 2 and 4 weeks after treatment completion in the two groups. Safety was also assessed in the two groups. RESULTS: In both groups, VAS scores for pain after treatment and at 2 and 4 weeks after treatment completion were lower than those before treatment (P<0.01, P<0.05). VAS scores for pain in the EA group were lower than those in the sham EA group after treatment and at 2 and 4 weeks after treatment completion (P<0.05). In the EA group, UPDRS-Ⅲ, HAMD-24, HAMA, and PDQ-39 scores after treatment and at 2 and 4 weeks after treatment completion were lower than those before treatment (P<0.05, P<0.01). In the sham EA group, there were no statistically significant differences in UPDRS-Ⅲ, HAMD-24, HAMA, and PDQ-39 scores at any post-treatment time point compared with those before treatment (P>0.05). There were no statistically significant differences in UPDRS-Ⅲ, HAMD-24, HAMA, and PDQ-39 scores between the two groups at any post-treatment time point (P>0.05). No serious adverse events occurred during the trial. CONCLUSION: EA at the motor area could reduce pain intensity in patients with PD accompanied by musculoskeletal pain, and improve pain-related motor symptoms, emotional status, and quality of life, with a favorable safety profile.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Application of SPI-guided analgesia in laparoscopic gynecologic surgery: a randomized controlled trial evaluating the remifentanil-sparing effect and predictive value of time-weighted SPI.

This study aimed to achieve two primary objectives: (1) to evaluate the opioid-sparing effect of Surgical Pleth Index (SPI)-directed analgesia during surgery via a randomized controlled trial (RCT), and (2) to propose and preliminarily assess a novel dynamic metric, Threshold-based Time-Weighted SPI (Tb-TW-SPI), which integrates stimulus intensity and duration, for its predictive efficacy regarding postoperative moderate-to-severe pain. Employing an RCT combined with exploratory analysis, 61 patients undergoing elective laparoscopic gynecologic surgery were randomized into an SPI-directed analgesia group or a conventional analgesia group. The primary outcome was total intraoperative remifentanil consumption. Postoperatively, an exploratory analysis of the control group data evaluated the correlation between Tb-TW-SPI and Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) pain scores in the post-anesthesia care unit (PACU), calculating its predictive value for moderate-to-severe pain (NRS ≥ 4). Results: The SPI-directed group required significantly less intraoperative remifentanil than the conventional group [median (IQR): 5.84(5.02,6.62)vs. 6.96(5.81,8.19)µg/kg/h; P = 0.016]. Postoperative pain scores did not differ significantly between groups (P > 0.05). Exploratory analysis of the conventional analgesia group revealed that Tb-TW-SPI values were significantly higher in patients with moderate-to-severe postoperative pain (NRS ≥ 4) compared to those without (P = 0.0417).The area under the ROC curve for Tb-TW-SPI predicting this pain was 0.74 (95% CI: 0.52-0.96), with 67% sensitivity and 76% specificity at an optimal cutoff of 1210. This RCT suggests that SPI-directed analgesia can safely and moderately reduce intraoperative remifentanil consumption. Furthermore, the proposed Tb-TW-SPI metric, in this exploratory analysis, suggests potential for predicting postoperative pain, though this finding requires validation in larger cohorts with higher-frequency SPI sampling, offering a new direction for SPI interpretation. Large-scale, multicenter trials are warranted to validate the predictive utility of Tb-TW-SPI. Clinical Trial Registration, China Clinical Trial Registry: ChiCTR2400088444.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

A flipped classroom approach compared with low-interactive online learning for pediatric pain management knowledge and instructional motivation in nursing students: A randomized controlled study.

AIM: This study aimed to compare a flipped classroom approach with low-interactive online learning in terms of nursing students' questionnaire-assessed pediatric pain management knowledge and instructional motivation. BACKGROUND: Pain management in children is a critical and multidimensional nursing responsibility. However, limited curricular time and opportunities for applied learning may restrict nursing students' preparedness in this area. Structured and interactive instructional formats, such as the flipped classroom, may support knowledge acquisition and motivation in pediatric nursing education. METHODS: This study employed a parallel-group randomized controlled trial design with a 1:1 allocation ratio. Eighty-eight third-year prelicensure nursing students were randomized to either the flipped classroom group (n = 44) or the low-interactive online learning group (n = 44). Due to attrition (2 intervention, 2 control), analyses included 42 participants per group (n = 84 in total). Data were collected between February and July 2022 using the Pediatric Pain Management Knowledge Scale for Nursing Students and the Instructional Materials Motivation Survey. This study was prospectively registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (Identifier: NCT07129044). RESULTS: At baseline, the groups were comparable in terms of knowledge and learning motivation. Following the intervention, the flipped classroom group demonstrated greater improvements in questionnaire-assessed pediatric pain management knowledge and instructional motivation than the low-interactive online learning group. Although scores declined from post-test to the three-month follow-up, they remained above baseline in the flipped classroom group. CONCLUSIONS: Within the context of this course, the flipped classroom approach was associated with greater improvement in questionnaire-assessed pediatric pain management knowledge and instructional motivation than low-interactive online learning. The findings should be interpreted as proximal educational outcomes rather than evidence of improved clinical competence or durable long-term effectiveness. Further studies using objective performance-based outcomes and longer follow-up periods are needed.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Comparative Efficacy of Non-opioid Analgesic Drugs for Chronic Cancer Pain: A Bayesian Network Meta-analysis.

PURPOSE: While opioids remain the primary pharmacological intervention for cancer pain management, their clinical utility is frequently compromised by dose-limiting toxicities. This study aimed to determine the comparative efficacy, opioid-sparing potential, and clinical hierarchy of non-opioid adjuvant drug classes. The study was structured around the PICO framework to evaluate the pharmacological strategies currently utilized in multimodal clinical oncology. METHODS: A systematic search of electronic databases (PubMed, Embase, Cochrane) was conducted for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published between 2000 and 2025. The primary outcome was global analgesic efficacy (standardized mean difference [SMD]), while secondary outcomes included the opioid-sparing effect, defined as the percentage reduction in morphine equivalent daily dose (MEDD) and the incidence of treatment-emergent adverse events (Harms). A Bayesian network meta-analysis (NMA) was performed to rank treatments using SUCRA values. The methodological quality was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias (RoB 2.0) tool. RESULTS: Twenty-three RCTs (n = 1845) met the inclusion criteria. Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) (-1.10) and anticonvulsants (-1.06) demonstrated the most robust analgesic effects. The SUCRA ranking confirmed a clear hierarchy, with the combination of anticonvulsants and antidepressants showing the highest probability of efficacy. A significant opioid-sparing effect was observed for gabapentinoids and ketamine, facilitating MEDD reduction. While serious adverse events were rare, minor harms (somnolence, dizziness) were more frequent in the most effective classes. CONCLUSION: Our NMA provides a robust evidence base for a "Clinical Tier" system, ranking adjuvants by their balance of efficacy and safety. These findings support the early integration of Tier I agents (anticonvulsants and NSAIDs) to optimize pain control and reduce opioid-related toxicities in chronic cancer pain management.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Nociception-guided opioid administration within multimodal analgesia for laparoscopic endometriosis surgery: a randomized controlled trial.

Women with endometriosis are at increased risk of severe postoperative pain due to nociceptive sensitization. While multimodal analgesia reduces opioid use, the added value of objective nociception monitoring remains unclear. This study evaluated whether NOL®-guided opioid titration improves perioperative outcomes within a standardized multimodal regimen. In this prospective, randomized, single-blinded trial, premenopausal women undergoing laparoscopic surgery for suspected endometriosis or adenomyosis were assigned to NOL®-guided analgesia or standard care based on clinical assessment. All patients received a standardized multimodal protocol. The primary outcome was total perioperative opioid consumption. Secondary outcomes included postoperative pain scores (NRS) and PACU length of stay. Exploratory analyses assessed the association between preoperative pain (Mankoski Pain Scale, MPS) and postoperative outcomes. A total of 111 patients were analyzed (NOL®: n = 54; control: n = 57). Total perioperative opioid consumption did not differ significantly between groups (adjusted mean difference = 14 μg for Fentanyl and 52 μg for Remifentanil; p = 0.8). Surgery duration was an independent predictor of opioid use (p < 0.001) and PACU length of stay (p = 0.01), whereas treatment group had no significant effect. Postoperative pain scores were comparable between groups at all time points. NOL®-derived metrics were not associated with opioid consumption or pain. Higher preoperative MPS scores independently predicted higher pain scores in the late PACU phase. NOL®-guided opioid titration did not reduce perioperative opioid consumption or improve early postoperative outcomes compared with standard multimodal analgesia in women undergoing laparoscopic surgery for endometriosis.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Comparative Evaluation of Virtual Reality versus Standard Nursing Care in Managing Pain and Fear during Lumbar Puncture Procedures: A Randomised Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: Meningitis is a serious infectious disease that can cause significant morbidity and long-term neurological problems. Although a lumbar puncture is a necessary diagnostic procedure, it is often accompanied by discomfort, anxiety, and fear, which can severely impact the patient's experience. Although there is few data on its application prior to lumbar puncture in adult patients with meningitis, immersive virtual reality (VR) has become a promising non-pharmacological technique for lowering procedural distress. Thus, among individuals undergoing lumbar punctures, this randomized controlled research assessed how well pre-procedural VR reduced pain, anxiety, and fear while enhancing patient satisfaction. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to evaluate the effectiveness of virtual reality (VR) in reducing pain and fear among adults undergoing lumbar puncture (LP) compared with standard care protocol. METHODS: A randomised clinical trial was conducted from May to October 2025, using a single-blind, true experimental design. A total of 85 patients were randomly assigned to either the VR intervention group ( n = 41) or the control group receiving standard care ( n = 44). Pain levels were assessed using a visual analogue scale. Fear was assessed using the Multidimensional Fear-of-Injection Scale. Data were analysed using SPSS version 26. RESULTS: According to the study, the findings revealed a significant reduction in pain levels among the study group following the VR intervention, with mean pain scores dropping from 7.54 ± 1.925 to 2.49 ± 0.675. In contrast, the control group showed increased pain intensity, with mean scores rising from 6.84 ± 1.842 to 8.36 ± 1.348. The VR group showed a significant reduction in fear scores across all domains, whereas no significant changes were observed in the control group. Direct fear decreased from 20.12 ± 1.71 to 9.44 ± 2.00, indirect fear from 17.24 ± 1.46 to 8.66 ± 2.24, physiological response improved from 0.34 ± 0.66 to 3.00 ± 1.00 and avoidance behaviour decreased from 16.71 ± 1.49 to 7.80 ± 1.85. CONCLUSIONS: The research shows that the use of VR prior to LP significantly reduces level of pain and fear compared to standard care. These results support VR as a non-pharmacological intervention for fear and pain to improve patient experience during invasive procedures. In contrast, the control group experienced no improvement.Trial Registration: The IRCT code for the trial was IRCT ID 20250803066743N1.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Do adherence-focused interventions in low back pain have an impact on rehabilitation outcomes? A systematic review with meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Low back pain (LBP) is the leading cause of disability worldwide. Exercise-based interventions are effective, but adherence remains suboptimal. This systematic review and meta-analysis evaluated the effectiveness of strategies designed to enhance adherence to exercise-based interventions in individuals with LBP in terms of adherence as well as pain and functionality. METHODS: Randomized controlled trials including adults with non-specific LBP were eligible if they compared exercise-based interventions incorporating adherence-enhancing strategies versus exercise alone or usual care. Primary outcome was adherence; secondary outcomes were pain and functionality. Searches were conducted in PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, CINAHL, Scopus, and PEDro up to May 2026. Two reviewers independently screened studies, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias using the Cochrane RoB 2 tool. Random-effects meta-analyses were performed using standardized mean differences. Certainty of evidence was evaluated using the GRADE approach. RESULTS: Fourteen randomized controlled trials including 1233 participants were included. Risk of bias was low in six studies, with the remainder showing some concerns or high risk. For adherence outcomes, evidence showed no clear effect of adherence-enhancing strategies on either device-measured physical activity (SMD = 0.21, 95% CI -0.01 to 0.43; 3 trials, 320 participants; moderate-certainty evidence) or questionnaire-based adherence (SMD = 0.33, 95% CI -0.23 to 0.89; 4 trials, 377 participants; very low-certainty evidence). For pain and functionality, moderate certainty of evidence indicated small improvements favoring intervention groups in the medium term. CONCLUSIONS: Strategies to enhance adherence to exercise in LBP show uncertain effects on adherence but may provide small improvements in clinical outcomes in the medium term. Higher-quality trials are needed to strengthen the evidence base.

Adult↗

PubMed2026

Analgesic effect of premixed nitrous oxide in postoperative rehabilitation for ankle fractures: a randomized controlled trial.

INTRODUCTION: The global incidence of ankle fractures is on the rise, effective postoperative rehabilitation is a crucial aspect of surgical management. However, the occurrence of severe pain during the rehabilitation continues to pose a substantial clinical challenge. METHODS: The study utilizes a dual-arm, single-center, double-blind, randomized controlled trial design. A total of 100 participants were enrolled. Participants included patients experiencing acute pain (self-reported pain score ≥4) who underwent postoperative rehabilitation for ankle fractures. Participants undergoing rehabilitation training were randomized to receive either 65% nitrous oxide or 100% oxygen. The primary outcome measured was the pain score, while secondary outcomes encompassed anxiety scores, physiological indices, side effects, patient and therapist satisfaction, acceptance, and residual pain. RESULTS: Pain scores were found to be significantly lower in the nitrous oxide group than in the oxygen group (T1: median difference -3.0, [95% CI -3.4 to -2.6]; p < 0.001; T2: median difference -2.0, [95% CI -2.8 to -1.2]; p < 0.001). Compared with the oxygen group, both therapists (p < 0.001) and participants (p < 0.001) in the nitrous oxide group reported significantly higher satisfaction levels. Acceptance rate showed significant intergroup differences (p < 0.001). No severe adverse effects were observed in either group. Anxiety scores between the two groups did not show a significant difference (p = 0.31, η2 = 0.027). CONCLUSION: The safety and analgesic profile of nitrous oxide renders it a suitable option for pain management in postoperative ankle fractures rehabilitation, thus providing a safe and easily manageable alternative to the current available strategies. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: We have registered at https://www.chictr.org.cn and the registration number is: ChiCTR2400089379.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Clinical outcomes of fusion vs excision in the treatment of painful type II accessory naviculars: A matched cohort study.

BACKGROUND: For painful Type II accessory naviculars, whether to remove or fuse them remains unclear based on the current literature. This study aimed to investigate the clinical outcomes of fusion versus excision in treating painful type II accessory naviculars. METHODS: This retrospective comparative study included and followed 54 eligible patients (from May 2017 to March 2023). After 1:1 propensity score matching (PSM), 34 patients (17 fusion versus 17 excision) were analyzed. Outcomes included Visual Analog Scale (VAS), American Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Society (AOFAS) midfoot score, Tegner score, complication rates, and radiographic measurements. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis was performed to identify the appropriate accessory navicular size cutoff for predicting nonunion following fusion. RESULTS: The mean follow-up was 35.0 ± 9.9 months. The fusion and excision groups showed significant and comparable VAS and AOFAS score improvements (p < .001). The fusion group had a higher complication rate (41.2% vs. 5.9%, p = .039), primarily nonunion and persistent pain. ROC curve analysis identified 50.3 mm² as the cutoff for nonunion risk; sizes < 50.3 mm² predicted high nonunion likelihood. CONCLUSIONS: Both fusion and excision are effective treatments for painful type II accessory naviculars, demonstrating acceptable pain and functional improvement during midterm follow-up. However, the lower complication rate along with relatively superior functional recovery favors the excision technique. For accessory naviculars smaller than 50.3 mm2, excision may be a better choice. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, retrospective comparative study.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Comparison of Ketamine and Pregabalin on Postoperative Opioid Usage and Pain Management in Spinal Fusion: Systematic Review and Network Meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND CONTEXT: Spinal fusion is associated with substantial early postoperative pain and opioid exposure. Both ketamine and pregabalin are widely incorporated into Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) protocols as opioid-sparing adjuncts. However, their comparative efficacy and safety in this specific setting remain uncertain. Our objective was to compare ketamine and pregabalin indirectly for early postoperative opioid consumption, pain, and adverse events in adults undergoing spinal fusion. METHODS: Pubmed, Embase, and Cochrane Trials were searched from inception through October 2025. Eligible studies were randomized trials enrolling adults undergoing instrumented spinal fusion, randomized to perioperative ketamine, pregabalin, or control, and reported extractable 24-hour opioid consumption or pain outcomes. Continuous outcomes were pooled as mean differences in MME or VAS units, and adverse events were reported descriptively. A connected treatment network was analyzed using random-effects models. Risk of bias (RoB) was assessed with the Cochrane RoB 2 tool. RESULTS: Thirteen trials (n=879) were included: ketamine (n=210), pregabalin (n=271), and control (n=398). Six trials contributed opioid data (3 ketamine, 3 pregabalin). Using pregabalin 150 mg as reference, ketamine was associated with lower 0-24-hour opioid use (MD -56.99 mg MME; 95% CI -99.56 to -14.43). Control (MD +21.31; 95% CI -1.05 to +43.66) and pregabalin 300 mg (MD -13.22; 95% CI -40.41 to +13.96) did not significantly differ from pregabalin 150 mg. Seven trials contributed 24-hour VAS data, with control being associated with higher pain versus pregabalin 150 mg (MD +0.84; 95% CI +0.01 to +1.66), while ketamine and pregabalin 300 mg were not k significantly different. Adverse events were generally infrequent and similar to control. CONCLUSIONS: Both ketamine and pregabalin provide early opioid sparing with comparable 24-hour analgesia. Ketamine showed a larger opioid-sparing point estimate, but indirect comparisons are imprecise. Adequately powered head-to-head trials with standardized protocols and adverse event reporting are needed.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Nonoperative Management is Associated With Similar Long-Term Patient-Reported Outcomes Compared With Surgery for Cervical Radiculopathy: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

STUDY DESIGN: Systematic review and meta-analysis. OBJECTIVE: To compare long-term patient-reported outcomes between surgical and nonoperative management for cervical radiculopathy. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Cervical radiculopathy is a common condition associated with substantial morbidity. While both surgical and nonoperative approaches are effective, it remains unclear which patients benefit most from each strategy and whether earlier operative intervention confers meaningful long-term advantage. MATERIALS AND METHODS: PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library were searched from inception to January 2026 for randomized and observational studies comparing surgical and nonoperative management for cervical radiculopathy. Primary outcomes included visual analog scale (VAS) scores for neck and arm pain, neck disability index (NDI), and overall clinical success. Secondary outcomes included analgesia use and sick leave. Random-effects meta-analyses were performed using restricted maximum likelihood estimation. Risk of bias was assessed using RoB 2 and ROBINS-I, and certainty of evidence using GRADE. RESULTS: Eleven studies comprising 1154 patients (surgical: 522; nonoperative: 632) were included. Surgery was not associated with superior outcomes in VAS for arm pain (MD: -0.67, 95% CI: -1.59 to 0.26, P =0.12), VAS for neck pain (MD: -0.50, 95% CI: -1.38 to 0.38; P =0.19), or NDI (MD: -3.69, 95% CI: -9.63 to 2.25, P =0.16) after 12 months of treatment, nor in overall success (RR: 1.11, 95% CI: 0.93-1.34, P =0.21). No significant differences were observed in analgesia use ( P =0.54) or sick leave ( P =0.48) at last follow-up. Most studies were rated serious risk of bias and overall certainty of evidence was moderate. CONCLUSION: Evidence from this pooled analysis suggests that long-term pain, disability, and functional outcomes are comparable between patients selected for nonoperative management and those selected for surgery. These findings reflect outcomes within selected cohorts and should not be interpreted as evidence of therapeutic equivalence. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level II.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Ibuprofen versus acetaminophen for acute mild-to-moderate pain management in pediatric populations: a systematic review and meta-analysis of their efficacy.

UNLABELLED: Ibuprofen and acetaminophen are the most widely used analgesics in pediatric practice for the management of acute mild-to-moderate pain. Despite their widespread use, the comparative analgesic efficacy of these two agents in children remains a subject of ongoing debate, with existing evidence largely derived from heterogeneous clinical settings and small individual trials. Therefore, this study aimed to systematically review and meta-analyze randomized controlled trials comparing the analgesic efficacy of ibuprofen versus acetaminophen in pediatric populations with acute mild-to-moderate pain. A systematic literature search was conducted up to May 2026 in PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science. The review was conducted and reported in accordance with the PRISMA-Children and Adolescents (PRISMA-C) 2026 reporting guideline. Eligible studies were randomized controlled trials comparing ibuprofen with acetaminophen in children and adolescents (defined as individuals aged 0 to < 18 years) with acute pain, reporting at least one extractable efficacy outcome. Continuous outcomes were synthesized as standardized mean differences (Hedges' g) using random-effects models; dichotomous outcomes were pooled as risk ratios (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane RoB 2 tool and certainty of evidence was evaluated using the GRADE framework. Eight randomized controlled trials enrolling 1325 participants were included. Three pediatric trials contributed to the primary continuous pain outcome meta-analysis (n = 196 analyzable participants), yielding a pooled SMD of - 0.28 (95% CI - 0.57 to 0.00; p = 0.052; I2 = 0%), indicating a small effect favoring ibuprofen that did not reach conventional statistical significance. Given the small number of contributing studies (k = 3), the I2 statistic should be interpreted with caution as it has limited power to detect heterogeneity in this context. For the dichotomous pain freedom outcome (2 trials, n = 114), no significant difference was observed (pooled RR 1.03, 95% CI 0.53-1.99; p = 0.93; I2 = 0%). A prespecified sensitivity analysis including an adult soft-tissue injury trial attenuated the pooled effect toward the null (SMD - 0.15, 95% CI - 0.38 to 0.09; p = 0.23; I2 = 36.6%). Narrative synthesis of additional studies generally demonstrated comparable analgesic efficacy between the two agents across postoperative and outpatient pediatric settings. The overall certainty of evidence was rated as low for both primary outcomes, primarily due to imprecision and indirectness. CONCLUSION: Current evidence from randomized controlled trials does not demonstrate a superiority of ibuprofen over acetaminophen for acute mild-to-moderate pain management in children. Both agents appear to provide clinically meaningful analgesia across heterogeneous pediatric pain settings. The clinical choice between agents should be guided by individual patient factors, including contraindications to NSAIDs, the inflammatory nature of the pain etiology, and patient-specific characteristics. The low certainty of evidence underscores the need for adequately powered, methodologically rigorous trials to definitively establish the comparative efficacy of these two analgesics in the pediatric population. WHAT IS KNOWN: • Ibuprofen and acetaminophen are the two most widely used non-opioid analgesics for acute mild-to-moderate pain in children, and both are recommended as first-line agents by major international guidelines. • Prior meta-analyses in mixed pediatric-adult populations have suggested a modest analgesic advantage of ibuprofen over acetaminophen, but pediatric-specific evidence has remained limited and methodologically heterogeneous. WHAT IS NEW: • This systematic review and meta-analysis, restricted to randomized controlled trials in pediatric populations, found that ibuprofen showed a small effect favoring pain reduction compared with acetaminophen (SMD - 0.28, p = 0.052), although this did not reach conventional statistical significance. • The analgesic advantage of ibuprofen may be more pronounced in pain etiologies with a significant inflammatory component (e.g., fractures). At the same time, both agents appear broadly equivalent in most other acute pediatric pain settings, supporting individualized analgesic selection based on clinical context and patient-specific factors.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

The Efficacy of Erector Spinae Plane Block Versus Subcostal Transversus Abdominis Plane Block in Laparoscopic Nephrectomy: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

OBJECTIVES: This study compared the efficacy and safety of erector spinae plane block (ESPB) versus subcostal transversus abdominis plane (TAP) block in reducing postoperative pain among patients undergoing laparoscopic nephrectomy. METHODS: This randomized clinical trial enrolled 70 adult patients, ASA physical status I or II, who underwent total (radical) laparoscopic nephrectomy under general anesthesia. Patients were randomly assigned to 2 groups. Group ESPB received an ultrasound-guided ESPB at the T7 transverse process level, while group TAP received an ultrasound-guided subcostal TAP block. The primary outcome was the total amount of morphine consumed at 6 and 24 hours postoperatively. Secondary outcomes included the incidence of patients requiring opioid analgesia, time to rescue analgesia, visual analog scale of pain intensity, time to postoperative ambulation, intraoperative and postoperative hemodynamics, arterial partial pressure of oxygen to fraction of inspired oxygen (PaO 2 /FiO 2 or P /F) ratio, and incidence of complications. RESULTS: Compared with the TAP group, the ESPB group exhibited significantly lower median morphine consumption at 24 hours ( P =0.032), prolonged time to first analgesic rescue ( P =0.049), and lower incidence of rescue morphine requirement (OR=0.23; 95% CI=0.06-0.94; P =0.031), with lower visual analog scale pain scores at 12, 18, and 24 hours postoperatively ( P <0.001). The mean arterial blood pressure and heart rates were comparable between groups. No significant adverse effects from either approach. DISCUSSION: In laparoscopic nephrectomy, ultrasound-guided ESPB may safely and effectively be used to improve pain management and reduce pain intensity, with stable hemodynamics and a comparable risk of postoperative complications to the ultrasound-guided subcostal TAP block.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Hand Pain and Sensory Deficits: Carpal Tunnel Syndrome: 2026 Revision. Using the Evidence to Guide Musculoskeletal Rehabilitation Practice.

SYNOPSIS: Carpal tunnel syndrome is common in women, manual laborers, and during pregnancy; it is often associated with medical conditions such as obesity and diabetes. The musculoskeletal rehabilitation clinician's approach to managing hand pain and sensory deficits associated with carpal tunnel syndrome should include prescribing a neutral-positioned wrist orthosis plus instructing the patient on how to modify activities, adjust ergonomics, and reduce exposure to risk factors. Here, we present for clinicians the most up-to-date information to guide their work in managing hand pain and sensory deficits associated with carpal tunnel syndrome. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2026;56(9):622-623. doi:10.2519/jospt.2026.0502.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Dexamethasone as an adjuvant to continuous erector spinae plane block for postoperative analgesia after video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery for pulmonary nodule surgery: a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: While dexamethasone is proven to enhance single-shot erector spinae plane block (ESPB), its role as an adjuvant in continuous ESPB catheters is unclear. This randomised controlled trial evaluated whether adding dexamethasone to ropivacaine improves analgesia after video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS). METHODS: 85 patients undergoing VATS with continuous ESPB were randomised to receive postoperative infusion of either 0.2% ropivacaine(C-ESPB group) or ropivacaine with 10 mg dexamethasone(D + C-ESPB group). The primary outcome was resting pain visual analog scale (VAS)at 12 h postoperatively, while secondary outcomes included QoR-15 scores, tramadol consumption, time to first analgesic requirement, postoperative adverse events, 3-month incidence of chronic pain, catheter-related complications, pain intensity at other times, and hospital stay. RESULTS: The D + C-ESPB group had significantly lower resting pain at 12 h [2.56 (1.03) vs 3.24 (1.21), mean difference -0.680, p = 0.006]; and lower coughing pain at 12 h [4.60 (1.48) vs 5.69 (1.35), mean difference 1.086, p < 0.001], with analgesic superiority sustained through 72 h. Quality of Recovery-15 scores were higher at 12 h [124.70 (12.48) vs 117.26 (12.24); mean difference -7.436, p = 0.007] and 48 h [141.60 (5.51) vs 138.98 (6.64); mean difference -2.628, p = 0.050]; Total tramadol consumption over 72 h was markedly reduce [0 (0,100) vs 100 (75,100), z = -3.807, p < 0.001], and hospital stay was shorter [Mean (SD) 6.09 (1.34) d vs 6.93 (1.55)d, p < 0.001]. The intervention did not, however, alter the 3-month incidence of chronic postsurgical pain (31% vs 34%, p = 0.756). CONCLUSION: Dexamethasone significantly enhances the analgesic efficacy of continuous ESPB, improving early pain control, recovery quality, and opioid-sparing after VATS, but does not reduce the incidence of chronic persistent surgical pain.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Liposomal bupivacaine versus ropivacaine for surgical site infiltration in lumbar fusion: a prospective randomized controlled trial.

INTRODUCTION: Effective postoperative pain control after lumbar spine surgery remains challenging, and excessive opioid use is associated with adverse outcomes. Evidence comparing liposomal bupivacaine (LB) with conventional long-acting local anesthetics in spine surgery is limited. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In this single-center, prospective, randomized, patient- and outcome assessor-blinded trial, adult undergoing one- or two-level posterior lumbar decompression and fusion were assigned (1:1) to surgical site infiltration with either LB (266 mg) plus 25 mg plain bupivacaine (LB group) or ropivacaine (R group). The primary outcome was 72 h cumulative opioid consumption (morphine milligram equivalents, MME). Secondary outcomes included time-profile opioid consumption, pain scores, rescue analgesia, safety, and functional recovery. RESULTS: A total of 202 patients were included in the modified intention-to-treat analysis. Cumulative MME within 72 h was significantly lower in the LB group compared with the R group [43.0 (37.0, 58.0) mg vs. 58.0 (46.0, 73.0) mg], corresponding to a 22% relative reduction (GMR 0.78, 95% CI 0.71-0.85; p < 0.001). The reduction was most pronounced during 8-24 h and 24-48 h postoperatively. Overall pain scores at rest and with movement, as well as 72-h pain AUC, were lower in the LB group. No significant between-group differences were observed in rescue analgesia, adverse events and functional recovery. CONCLUSION: In patients undergoing one- or two-level posterior lumbar decompression and fusion, surgical site infiltration with an LB-based combined regimen, compared with ropivacaine monotherapy, reduced 72-h opioid consumption and cumulative postoperative pain burden without an observed increase in adverse events or impairment of early functional recovery.

Humans↗