...
首页> 外文期刊>Pain Physician >Efficacy of Cannabis-Based Medicines for Pain Management: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials
【24h】

Efficacy of Cannabis-Based Medicines for Pain Management: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

机译:基于大麻药物治疗疼痛管理的疗效:随机对照试验的系统审查和荟萃分析

获取原文
           

摘要

BACKGROUND: The management of chronic pain is a complex challenge worldwide. Cannabis-based medicines (CBMs) have proven to be efficient in reducing chronic pain, although the topic remains highly controversial in this field.OBJECTIVES: This study’s aim is to conduct a conclusive review and meta-analysis, which incorporates all randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in order to update clinicians’ and researchers’ knowledge regarding the efficacy and adverse events (AEs) of CBMs for chronic and postoperative pain treatment.STUDY DESIGN: A systematic review and meta-analysis.METHODS: An electronic search was conducted using Medline/Pubmed and Google Scholar with the use of Medical Subject Heading (MeSH) terms on all literature published up to July 2015. A follow-up manual search was conducted and included a complete cross-check of the relevant studies. The included studies were RCTs which compared the analgesic effects of CBMs to placebo. Hedges’s g scores were calculated for each of the studies. A study quality assessment was performed utilizing the Jadad scale. A meta-analysis was performed utilizing random-effects models and heterogeneity between studies was statistically computed using I2 statistic and tau2 test.RESULTS: The results of 43 RCTs (a total of 2,437 patients) were included in this review, of which 24 RCTs (a total of 1,334 patients) were eligible for meta-analysis. This analysis showed limited evidence showing more pain reduction in chronic pain -0.61 (-0.78 to -0.43, P < 0.0001), especially by inhalation -0.93 (-1.51 to -0.35, P = 0.001) compared to placebo. Moreover, even though this review consisted of some RCTs that showed a clinically significant improvement with a decrease of pain scores of 2 points or more, 30% or 50% or more, the majority of the studies did not show an effect. Consequently, although the primary analysis showed that the results were favorable to CBMs over placebo, the clinical significance of these findings is uncertain. The most prominent AEs were related to the central nervous and the gastrointestinal (GI) systems. LIMITATIONS: Publication limitation could have been present due to the inclusion of English-only published studies. Additionally, the included studies were extremely heterogeneous. Only 7 studies reported on the patients’ history of prior consumption of CBMs. Furthermore, since cannabinoids are surrounded by considerable controversy in the media and society, cannabinoids have marked effects, so that inadequate blinding of the placebo could constitute an important source of limitation in these types of studies. CONCLUSIONS: The current systematic review suggests that CBMs might be effective for chronic pain treatment, based on limited evidence, primarily for neuropathic pain (NP) patients. Additionally, GI AEs occurred more frequently when CBMs were administered via oral/oromucosal routes than by inhalation.Key words: Cannabis, CBMs, chronic pain, postoperative pain, review, meta-analysis
机译:背景:慢性疼痛的管理是全世界复杂的挑战。基于大麻的药物(CBMS)已被证明在降低慢性疼痛方面是有效的,尽管该话题在这一领域仍然具有争议性高度争议。目的:本研究的目的是进行决定性的审查和荟萃分析,其中包括所有随机对照试验( RCTS)为了更新临床医生和研究人员对CBMS的疗效和不良事件(AES)的知识,用于慢性和术后疼痛治疗。Study设计:系统评价和META分析。方法:使用MEDLINE进行电子搜索/ PubMed和Google Scholar在2015年7月出版的所有文献中使用医疗主题标题(网格)条款。进行了后续手动搜索并列入了相关研究的完整交叉检查。所附的研究是RCT,将CBMS对安慰剂的镇痛作用进行了比较。对每个研究计算了对冲G分数。采用JADAD规模进行研究质量评估。利用随机效应模型进行META分析,使用I2统计和TAU2 TEST进行统计计算研究之间的异质性。结果:43个RCT(共2,437名患者)的结果包括在本综述中,其中24个RCT(共有1,334名患者)有资格进行Meta分析。该分析显示有限的证据表明,与安慰剂相比,慢性疼痛慢性疼痛的慢性疼痛的疼痛更低-0.61(-0.78至-0.43,p <0.51至-0.35,p = 0.001)。此外,虽然本综述包括一些RCT,但在疼痛评分的降低2点或更高,30%或50%或以上,大多数研究没有显示出效果的临床显着改善。因此,尽管初步分析表明,结果对安慰剂的CBMS有利,但这些发现的临床意义是不确定的。最突出的AES与中枢神经和胃肠道(GI)系统有关。限制:由于包含英语仅发布的研究,出版限制可能存在。此外,所附的研究非常异质。只有7项研究报告了CBMS的患者患者的历史。此外,由于大麻素在媒体和社会中得到了相当大的争议,因此大麻素具有显着的影响,因此安慰剂的令人不安的是可能构成这些类型研究中的重要限制来源。结论:目前的系统评价表明,基于有限的证据,CBMS可能对慢性疼痛治疗有效,主要是针对神经性疼痛(NP)患者。另外,当通过口腔/ oromucosal途径给予CBMS而不是吸入时,GI AE更频繁地发生。单词:大麻,CBM,慢性疼痛,术后疼痛,评论,荟萃分析

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号