Cited by 1,055Anesthesia and Pain ManagementPain Management and Opioid UsePediatric Pain Management Techniques

The DOI matches its Crossref record, with a small difference in title or year; 133 of the 133 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Predictors of Postoperative Pain and Analgesic Consumption: A Qualitative Systematic Review

Open access

Abstract

Pain is a subjective and multidimensional experience that is often inadequately managed in clinical practice. Effective control of postoperative pain is important after anesthesia and surgery. A systematic review was conducted to identify the independent predictive factors for postoperative pain and analgesic consumption. The authors identified 48 eligible studies with 23,037 patients included in the final analysis. Preoperative pain, anxiety, age, and type of surgery were four significant predictors for postoperative pain. Type of surgery, age, and psychological distress were the significant predictors for analgesic consumption. Gender was not found to be a consistent predictor as traditionally believed. Early identification of the predictors in patients at risk of postoperative pain will allow more effective intervention and better management. The coefficient of determination of the predictive models was less than 54%. More vigorous studies with robust statistics and validated designs are needed to investigate this field of interest.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1097/aln.0b013e3181aae87a

Cites

133 of 133 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Show all 133 references

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Items 801–900 of 1,001

Metadata

Authors
Ip, H. Y. V., Abrishami, A., Peng, P. W. H., Wong, J., & Chung, F.
Affiliations
  • University Health Network (CA)
  • Research Fellow.
  • Associate Professor.
  • Assistant Professor.
Venue
Anesthesiology
Published
2009-09-01
Volume
111
Issue
3
Pages
657-677
ISSN
0003-3022 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1978519915
Cited by
1,055
References
133
Citations by year
2026: 46 · 2025: 58 · 2024: 91 · 2023: 65 · 2022: 71 · 2021: 84 · 2020: 91 · 2019: 72 · 2018: 72 · 2017: 70 · 2016: 59 · 2015: 43 · 2014: 74 · 2013: 57 · 2012: 47
FWCI
5.43
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
public-domain
Locations
  • Anesthesiology (publishedVersion, public-domain)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine › Anesthesia and Pain Management
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine › Pain Management and Opioid Use
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pediatrics, Perinatology and Child Health › Pediatric Pain Management Techniques
Keywords
postoperative pain, analgesic use, predictors of postoperative pain, preoperative pain, anxiety, psychological distress, age, type of surgery, gender, pain management
MeSH terms
Adaptation, Psychological, Adult, Age Factors, Aged, Analgesics, Anxiety, Data Interpretation, Statistical, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Postoperative Pain, Predictive Value of Tests, Prognosis, Sex Factors, Stress, Psychological, Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review