Procedure-Specific Pain Management (PROSPECT) – An update

Uložené v:
Podrobná bibliografia
Názov: Procedure-Specific Pain Management (PROSPECT) – An update
Autori: Brian Lee, Stephan A. Schug, Girish P. Joshi, Henrik Kehlet, Helene Beloeil, Francis Bonnet, Patricia Lavand’Homme, Philipp Lirk, Esther Pogatzki-Zahn, Johan Raeder, Narinder Rawal, Marc van der Velde
Prispievatelia: UCL - SSS/IONS - Institute of NeuroScience, UCL - SSS/IONS/CEMO - Pôle Cellulaire et moléculaire
Zdroj: Best practice & research. Clinical anaesthesiology, Vol. 32, no.2, p. 101-111 (2018)
Informácie o vydavateľovi: Elsevier BV, 2018.
Rok vydania: 2018
Predmety: procedure specific, Pain, Postoperative, Evidence-Based Medicine, Clinical Decision-Making/methods, Clinical Decision-Making, Evidence-Based Medicine/methods, Pain, Anesthesiologists/trends, Anesthesiologists, 3. Good health, 03 medical and health sciences, 0302 clinical medicine, evidence-based, Postoperative/prevention & control, treatment recommendations, outcome, Humans, Pain Management, guidelines, post-operative analgesia, Pain Management/methods
Popis: Post-operative pain management protocols may be optimised by examining procedure-specific evidence and outcomes. This recognition led to the formation of the PROcedure-SPECific Pain ManagemenT (PROSPECT) collaboration of anaesthesiologists and surgeons. The aim of PROSPECT is to provide practical and evidence-based recommendations to prevent and treat post-operative pain after specific surgical procedures, thereby overcoming the limitations of generic, non-specific guidelines. Updates in the methodology of PROSPECT in 2017 have placed an increased emphasis on the clinical relevance of studies, including a focus on interventions in the context of multimodal analgesia strategies and consideration of risks and benefits of interventions in specific surgical settings. Evidence-based reviews of analgesic measures, including advice on surgical techniques and adjuvants after diverse surgical procedures, have been completed by the PROSPECT collaboration and are accessible on the website (www.postoppain.org) and published in the peer-reviewed literature. These reviews continue to identify significant gaps in clinically relevant research on post-operative analgesia and are possibly leading to a closing of some of these gaps.
Druh dokumentu: Article
Jazyk: English
ISSN: 1521-6896
DOI: 10.1016/j.bpa.2018.06.012
Prístupová URL adresa: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30322452
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30322452
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1521689618300594
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30322452/
https://dial.uclouvain.be/pr/boreal/object/boreal:222445
https://hdl.handle.net/2078.1/222445
Rights: Elsevier TDM
Prístupové číslo: edsair.doi.dedup.....a4f1b54616f77cfa2983b8b42c365de3
Databáza: OpenAIRE
Popis
Abstrakt:Post-operative pain management protocols may be optimised by examining procedure-specific evidence and outcomes. This recognition led to the formation of the PROcedure-SPECific Pain ManagemenT (PROSPECT) collaboration of anaesthesiologists and surgeons. The aim of PROSPECT is to provide practical and evidence-based recommendations to prevent and treat post-operative pain after specific surgical procedures, thereby overcoming the limitations of generic, non-specific guidelines. Updates in the methodology of PROSPECT in 2017 have placed an increased emphasis on the clinical relevance of studies, including a focus on interventions in the context of multimodal analgesia strategies and consideration of risks and benefits of interventions in specific surgical settings. Evidence-based reviews of analgesic measures, including advice on surgical techniques and adjuvants after diverse surgical procedures, have been completed by the PROSPECT collaboration and are accessible on the website (www.postoppain.org) and published in the peer-reviewed literature. These reviews continue to identify significant gaps in clinically relevant research on post-operative analgesia and are possibly leading to a closing of some of these gaps.
ISSN:15216896
DOI:10.1016/j.bpa.2018.06.012