Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://swslhd.intersearch.com.au/swslhdjspui/handle/1/9590
Full metadata record
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorLiu, S.-
dc.contributor.authorAthar, A.-
dc.contributor.authorQuach, D.-
dc.contributor.authorPatanwala, A. E.-
dc.contributor.authorNaylor, J. M.-
dc.contributor.authorStevens, J. A.-
dc.contributor.authorLevy, N.-
dc.contributor.authorKnaggs, R. D.-
dc.contributor.authorLobo, D. N.-
dc.contributor.authorPenm, J.-
dc.date.accessioned2023-08-18T05:08:20Z-
dc.date.available2023-08-18T05:08:20Z-
dc.date.issued2023-
dc.identifier.issn00032409 (ISSN)-
dc.identifier.urihttps://swslhd.intersearch.com.au/swslhdjspui/handle/1/9590-
dc.description.abstractPrescription of modified-release opioids for acute postoperative pain is widespread despite evidence to show their use may be associated with an increased risk of adverse effects. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to examine the available evidence on the safety and efficacy of modified-release, compared with immediate-release, oral opioids for postoperative pain in adults. We searched five electronic databases from 1 January 2003 to 1 January 2023. Published randomised clinical trials and observational studies on adults who underwent surgery which compared those who received oral modified-release opioids postoperatively with those receiving oral immediate-release opioids were included. Two reviewers independently extracted data on the primary outcomes of safety (incidence of adverse events) and efficacy (pain intensity, analgesic and opioid use, and physical function) and secondary outcomes (length of hospital stay, hospital readmission, psychological function, costs, and quality of life) up to 12 months postoperatively. Of the eight articles included, five were randomised clinical trials and three were observational studies. The overall quality of evidence was low. Modified-release opioid use was associated with a higher incidence of adverse events (n = 645, odds ratio (95%CI) 2.76 (1.52-5.04)) and worse pain (n = 550, standardised mean difference (95%CI) 0.2 (0.04-0.37)) compared with immediate-release opioid use following surgery. Our narrative synthesis concluded that modified-release opioids showed no superiority over immediate-release opioids for analgesic consumption, length of hospital stay, hospital readmissions or physical function after surgery. One study showed that modified-release opioid use is associated with higher rates of persistent postoperative opioid use compared with immediate-release opioid use. None of the included studies reported on psychological function, costs or quality of life.-
dc.publisherJohn Wiley and Sons Inc-
dc.subjectacute pain modified-release opioid surgery-
dc.titleRisks and benefits of oral modified-release compared with oral immediate-release opioid use after surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis-
dc.typeJournal Article-
dc.contributor.swslhdauthorNaylor, Justine M.-
dc.description.affiliatesFaculty of Medicine and Health, School of Pharmacy, University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia Department of Pharmacy, Prince of Wales Hospital, Randwick, Sydney, NSW, Australia Faculty of Medicine and Health, School of Medicine, University of Notre Dame, Sydney, NSW, Australia Faculty of Medical and Health Sciences, School of Pharmacy, University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand Department of Pharmacy, Royal Prince Alfred Hospital, Camperdown, NSW, Australia Whitlam Orthopaedic Research Centre, Orthopaedic Department, Liverpool Hospital, Liverpool, NSW, Australia South Western Sydney Clinical School, University of New South Wales, Sydney, NSW, Australia School of Clinical Medicine, St VincentTable s Clinical Campus, University of New South Wales, Sydney, NSW, Australia University of Notre Dame, Sydney, NSW, Australia Department of Anaesthesia and Perioperative Medicine, West Suffolk Hospital, Bury St. Edmunds, United Kingdom School of Pharmacy, University of Nottingham, and Primary Integrated Community Services, Nottingham, United Kingdom Nottingham Digestive Diseases Centre and National Institute for Health Research Nottingham Biomedical Research Centre, Nottingham University Hospitals and University of Nottingham, Queen's Medical Centre, Nottingham, United Kingdom David Greenfield Metabolic Physiology Unit, MRC Versus Arthritis Centre for Musculoskeletal Ageing Research, School of Life Sciences, University of Nottingham, Queen's Medical Centre, Nottingham, United Kingdom-
dc.identifier.doi10.1111/anae.16085-
dc.identifier.departmentLiverpool Hospital, Orthopaedic Department-
dc.identifier.departmentFairfield Hospital-
dc.type.studyortrialArticle-
dc.identifier.journaltitleAnaesthesia-
Appears in Collections:Fairfield Hospital
Liverpool Hospital

Files in This Item:
There are no files associated with this item.


Items in Prosentient are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.

Google Media

Google ScholarTM

Who's citing