Suscribirse

A sequential, multiple-assignment, randomized trial of analgesic strategies for acute musculoskeletal Pain - 15/07/24

Doi : 10.1016/j.ajem.2024.05.005 
Benjamin W. Friedman, MD a, ⁎ , Yen Ting Chen, MD b, Caron Campbell, MD a, Rebecca Nerenberg, MD a, Freda Afrifa, PharmD c, Kristen Schimmrich, MD a, Victoria Adewunmi, MD a, Jesse Baer, MD a, Eddie Irizarry, MD a
a Department of Emergency Medicine, Montefiore-Einstein, Albert Einstein College of Medicine, Bronx, NY, USA 
b Department of Emergency Medicine, Chi-Mei Medical Center, Tainan, Taiwan 
c Pharmacy Department, Montefiore-Einstein, Bronx, NY, USA 

⁎Corresponding author at: Departments of Emergency Medicine (All except FA and YTC) and Pharmacy (FA), Montefiore-Einstein, Albert Einstein College of Medicine, Bronx, NY, USA.Departments of Emergency Medicine (All except FA and YTC) and Pharmacy (FA), Montefiore-EinsteinAlbert Einstein College of MedicineBronxNYUSA

Abstract

Background

Most methodologically rigorous, ED-based, comparative effectiveness analgesic studies completed in the last two decades failed to find a clinically important difference between the comparators. We believe that many of these comparative effectiveness studies were biased towards the null hypothesis because some ED patients with intense pain will respond to relatively mild interventions. We hypothesized that including a run-in period would alter the results of an acute pain RCT.

Methods

We conducted a sequential, multiple-assignment, randomized study. Adults with acute moderate/severe musculoskeletal pain were randomized (3:1 ratio) to run-in period or no run-in. We administered 650 mg acetaminophen to run-in participants. Those run-in patients who reported insufficient relief one-hour later were randomized (1:1 ratio) to ibuprofen 800mg PO or ketorolac 20mg PO as were all participants randomized to no run-in. The primary outcome was achieving a clinically important improvement, defined as improvement ≥1.3 on a 0–10 scale. We built a logistic regression model including run-in/no run-in, ketorolac/ibuprofen, age and sex.

Results

Of 307 participants who received acetaminophen, 100 (32.6%) reported inadequate relief and were randomized to an NSAID. Of the 100 patients randomized to no run-in, 84/100 (84%) achieved the primary outcome versus 246/287 (86%) run-in participants (95% CI for difference = 2%:−7,10%). Among run-in participants who received an NSAID, 82/99(83%) achieved the primary outcome versus 84/100(84%) no run-in participants (p = 0.82). Among all ibuprofen participants, 44/49(90%) randomized to run-in and 42/50(84%) randomized to no run-in achieved the primary outcome. Among all ketorolac participants, 38/50(76%) randomized to run-in and 42/50 (84%) randomized to no run-in achieved the primary outcome. We observed the following results in a multivariable analysis: OR for ketorolac versus ibuprofen:0.60 (95% CI: 0.28, 1.28); OR for run-in versus no run-in:0.91(95% CI: 0.43, 1.93).

Conclusions

Among patients with acute musculoskeletal pain, using an acetaminophen first strategy did not alter pain outcomes.

El texto completo de este artículo está disponible en PDF.

Keywords : RCT, Pain, Analgesia, Acetaminophen, Ibuprofen, Ketorolac, Methodology, Run-in


Esquema


☆ This publication was supported in part by the Harold and Muriel Block Institute for Clinical and Translational Research at Einstein and Montefiore grant support (UL1TR001073)


© 2024  Elsevier Inc. Reservados todos los derechos.
Añadir a mi biblioteca Eliminar de mi biblioteca Imprimir
Exportación

    Exportación citas

  • Fichero

  • Contenido

Vol 82

P. 15-20 - août 2024 Regresar al número
Artículo precedente Artículo precedente
  • Clinical characteristics and outcome of children with acute cryptorchid testicular torsion: A single-center, retrospective case series study
  • Zlatan Zvizdic, Asmir Jonuzi, Una Glamoclija, Denisa Zvizdic, Semir Vranic
| Artículo siguiente Artículo siguiente
  • ECG manifestations of occlusion of septal perforator of left anterior descending artery
  • Abhinav B. Anand, Pramod T. Gitte, Girish R. Sabnis, Ajay U. Mahajan

Bienvenido a EM-consulte, la referencia de los profesionales de la salud.
El acceso al texto completo de este artículo requiere una suscripción.

¿Ya suscrito a @@106933@@ revista ?

@@150455@@ Voir plus

Mi cuenta


Declaración CNIL

EM-CONSULTE.COM se declara a la CNIL, la declaración N º 1286925.

En virtud de la Ley N º 78-17 del 6 de enero de 1978, relativa a las computadoras, archivos y libertades, usted tiene el derecho de oposición (art.26 de la ley), el acceso (art.34 a 38 Ley), y correcta (artículo 36 de la ley) los datos que le conciernen. Por lo tanto, usted puede pedir que se corrija, complementado, clarificado, actualizado o suprimido información sobre usted que son inexactos, incompletos, engañosos, obsoletos o cuya recogida o de conservación o uso está prohibido.
La información personal sobre los visitantes de nuestro sitio, incluyendo su identidad, son confidenciales.
El jefe del sitio en el honor se compromete a respetar la confidencialidad de los requisitos legales aplicables en Francia y no de revelar dicha información a terceros.


Todo el contenido en este sitio: Copyright © 2026 Elsevier, sus licenciantes y colaboradores. Se reservan todos los derechos, incluidos los de minería de texto y datos, entrenamiento de IA y tecnologías similares. Para todo el contenido de acceso abierto, se aplican los términos de licencia de Creative Commons.