↓ Skip to main content

Combatting pain after orthopedic/trauma surgery- perioperative oral extended-release tapentadol vs. extended-release oxycodone/naloxone

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Anesthesiology, July 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (65th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (82nd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
5 X users
googleplus
1 Google+ user

Citations

dimensions_citation
15 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
108 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Combatting pain after orthopedic/trauma surgery- perioperative oral extended-release tapentadol vs. extended-release oxycodone/naloxone
Published in
BMC Anesthesiology, July 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12871-017-0383-6
Pubmed ID
Authors

Gertrud Haeseler, Dirk Schaefers, Natalie Prison, Jörg Ahrens, Xiaofei Liu, Annika Karch

Abstract

High post-operative pain scores after "minor" orthopedic/trauma surgery are in part attributed to inadequate prescription of opioid analgesics. Novel concepts aiming to achieve sufficient analgesia while minimizing opioid-related side effects by avoiding fluctuating plasma levels are based on perioperative oral administration of extended-release opioids beginning with the first dose pre-operatively. This is the first study to evaluate analgesic efficacy and side effect rates of extended-release tapentadol compared to oxycodone/naloxone following orthopedic/trauma surgery. This randomized, observer-blinded, active-controlled prospective clinical trial had 2 co-primary endpoints: (1) Analgesic efficacy: Mean pain level on a numeric rating scale (NRS) from 0 to 10 during exercise over 5 days. (2) Safety: Side effect sum score of the following events: Nausea, vomiting, constipation, sedation, vertigo, somnolence. The study was powered to detect superiority of tapentadol for at least one endpoint pending statistical proof of non-inferiority for both endpoints in a first step. Two hundred sixty-six trauma patients were randomized to receive either tapentadol (n = 133) or oxycodone/naloxone (n = 133). Analgesic efficacy: Mean (±SD) daily pain levels in the first five post-operative days were 2.8 ± 1.3 in both groups. Mean maximum pain intensity during exercise in the first 24 h after surgery was 3.8 ± 1.9 (tapentadol) and 3.8 ± 2.1 (oxycodone/naloxone). Statistically tapentadol was non-inferior but not superior to oxycodone/naloxone. Vomiting on day 1 occurred in 11%, constipation in 35% of the tapentadol patients and in 16% and 30% of the oxycodone/naloxone patients (p = 0.60 and 0.33), respectively. The incidence of sedation/ vertigo was <10%, that of somnolence <2% in both groups (p > 0.3, respectively). The sum score of side effect events was 51% in the tapentadol vs. 49% in the oxycodone/naloxone group; risk difference 3% [95% CI, -8 to 14%]; p = 0.6). Non-inferiority of tapentadol could not be concluded as the pre-defined non-inferiority margin was exceeded. With both concepts, mean maximum pain intensity during exercise within the first 24 h after orthopedic/trauma surgery was reduced to a score of <4. This analgesic efficacy came at the cost of mainly gastro-intestinal side effects. Thus, we now use a prophylaxis against nausea and vomiting and pre-emptive laxatives as part of these concepts. https://eudract.ema.europa.eu (EudraCT- Nr. 2011-003238-15 ); October 24th, 2012.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 108 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 108 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 13 12%
Researcher 12 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 7%
Student > Bachelor 8 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 5%
Other 19 18%
Unknown 43 40%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 29 27%
Nursing and Health Professions 9 8%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 5 5%
Unspecified 4 4%
Sports and Recreations 4 4%
Other 11 10%
Unknown 46 43%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 19 August 2017.
All research outputs
#6,782,242
of 23,881,329 outputs
Outputs from BMC Anesthesiology
#268
of 1,574 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#104,165
of 314,357 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Anesthesiology
#8
of 40 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,881,329 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 70th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,574 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.2. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 314,357 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 65% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 40 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% of its contemporaries.