SEARCH · Search PubMed

Results for “Paracetamol”

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.

4 recordsLinked to original sources

PubMed2026

Comparison of analgesic treatments used for ankle sprains in the emergency department.

BACKGROUND: Ankle sprains (ASs) account for approximately 5% of emergency department visits and 40% of all sports-related injuries, causing significant pain and restriction in the range of motion (ROM). This study aims to observe the clinical outcomes of early administration of intravenously administered paracetamol, ibuprofen, and dexketoprofen, which are frequently used in emergency department practice for ASs. For this purpose, pain monitoring and ROM measurements were performed to demonstrate the effectiveness of early functional analgesia. METHODS: This prospective, randomized, double-blind study was conducted between December 2023 and May 2024 on patients diagnosed with grade 1-2 ASs in the emergency department. Patients were divided into three groups and received intravenous dexketoprofen (Group D, n=52), paracetamol (Group P, n=52), and ibuprofen (Group I, n=51). Pain assessment was performed using the numeric rating scale (NRS) and the Wong-Baker FACES Pain Scale (WBS). ROM was evaluated by measuring dorsiflexion ROM (d-ROM) and plantar flexion ROM (p-ROM) angles using a semicircular goniometer. Pre-treatment and 1-h post-treatment measure-ments were compared. RESULTS: In the post-treatment pain assessment, no significant difference was observed between the groups in terms of NRS scores (p=0.352); however, Group I had the lowest WBS scores (p<0.001). Nevertheless, in all three groups, post-treatment pain scores (NRS and WBS) were significantly lower compared to pre-treatment values (p<0.001). Regarding ROM, pre-treatment d-ROM and p-ROM values were similar among the groups (p=0.196) and p=0.287, respectively). Post-treatment measurements revealed that d-ROM was lower in Group I (p=0.034), whereas p-ROM was higher (p=0.011). However, in all groups, ROM values significantly improved after treatment compared to baseline (p<0.001). When pre- and post-treatment changes (Δ) in pain scores and ROM values were compared, no statistically significant differences were found between the groups (ΔNRS p=0.264, ΔWBS p=0.965, Δd-ROM p=0.099, Δp-ROM p=0.073). CONCLUSION: Paracetamol, ibuprofen, and dexketoprofen demonstrated similar efficacy in reducing pain and improving ankle joint ROM during the acute phase of ASs. These findings suggest that the early initiation of analgesic treatment in ASs contributes to clinical recovery.

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

Early Analgesia for the Management of Acute Pancreatitis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.

BACKGROUND: We aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of early analgesic interventions, particularly NSAIDs versus opioids, in reducing pain and improving clinical outcomes among adults with AP. METHODS: A systematic literature search was conducted across PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), Web of Science, Scopus, and ClinicalTrials.gov from database/registry inception to December 2025 to obtain relevant data. Randomized controlled trials involving adults aged 18 years or older diagnosed with AP, irrespective of the etiology and severity, who were administered analgesics (opioids, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, cyclooxygenase-2 inhibitors, epidural anesthesia, local anesthesia, and paracetamol) and compared with placebo, conventional treatment, or another analgesic modality were included in this review. The primary outcome assessed was pain reduction. The secondary outcomes assessed were the need for rescue analgesia, length of hospital stay, complications (local and/or systemic), mortality, and adverse drug effects. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool 2.0. Effect estimates were pooled using a random-effects meta-analysis (DerSimonian-Laird approach), while nonpooled outcomes were summarized narratively. RESULTS: A total of 13 studies were included in the analysis. NSAIDs provided pain relief comparable to opioids, with a lower incidence of local complications (RR: 0.59, 95% CI: 0.37-0.94). No significant differences in the need for rescue analgesia (OR: 0.88, 95% CI: 0.33-2.35), length of hospital stay (MD: -2.68 d, 95% CI: -6.27 to 0.91), mortality (RR: 0.76, 95% CI: 0.19-3.05), and adverse drug effects (RR: 0.55, 95% CI: 0.17-1.76) were observed. However, the findings are limited by study bias and heterogeneity. CONCLUSION: Early analgesia with NSAIDs has efficacy and safety comparable to opioids in adults with AP, with the advantage of reducing local complications.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Clinical effectiveness of transversus abdominis plane block versus local anaesthesia wound infiltration for postoperative pain relief after laparoscopic appendicectomy in children: A multicentre, double-blind, randomised, controlled phase III trial.

BACKGROUND: Postoperative pain relief after laparoscopic appendicectomy in children provided by transversus abdominis plane (TAP) block and local anaesthesia wound infiltration (LAWI) of trocar insertion sites has never been compared. OBJECTIVE: To investigate whether TAP block could decrease postoperative opioid requirements after laparoscopic appendicectomy in children compared with LAWI. DESIGN: Multicentre, double-blind, phase III randomised trial. SETTING: Two tertiary paediatric surgery centres. PATIENTS: Children aged 3 to 15 years admitted for laparoscopic appendicectomy. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome was the total dose of nalbuphine delivered within 24 h after surgery. Secondary outcomes were the Face Legs Activity Cry Consolability (FLACC) scale values at 1, 2, 6, 12 and 24 h, the time from levobupivacaine injection to the first dose of nalbuphine, and the time from the end of surgery to the first mobilisation. Patients received either ultrasound-guided TAP block (TAP group) or LAWI of trocar insertion sites (infiltration group) with 0.6 ml kg -1 of levobupivacaine 2.5 mg ml -1 , combined with standardised systemic multimodal analgesia including paracetamol, ketoprofen, phloroglucinol and nalbuphine. RESULTS: Forty-six and 50 patients were analysed in the TAP and infiltration groups, respectively [age: 10 [7 to 12] versus 10 [8 to 12] years; females: 16 (35%) versus 25 (50%); duration of surgery: 71 [64 to 90] versus 69 [56 to 89] min]. The primary outcome (total nalbuphine dose) was 0.2 [0.0 to 0.2] and 0.2 [0.0 to 0.2] mg kg -1 in the TAP and infiltration groups, respectively ( P  = 0.95). FLACC scale values did not significantly differ between the two groups ( P  = 0.78). Time to the first dose of nalbuphine or to first mobilisation was not significantly different between groups ( P value for log-rank test = 0.095 and 0.18, respectively). CONCLUSION: TAP block does not appear to provide a greater opioid-sparing effect than LAWI of trocar insertion sites after laparoscopic appendicectomy in children, when combined with systemic multimodal analgesia including nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04969133.

Humans↗