Cited by 80Cannabis and Cannabinoid ResearchAnesthesia and Pain ManagementPain Management and Opioid Use

A systematic review of the analgesic efficacy of cannabinoid medications in the management of acute pain

Stevens, A. J., Higgins, M. D.·2017·Acta Anaesthesiologica Scandinavica

Abstract

Background: Cannabinergic medications have been postulated to demonstrate efficacy in the management of pain. The aim of this systematic review was to assess the analgesic efficacy and adverse effects of cannabinoids when used for the management of acute pain. Methods: A systematic review was performed by searching the MEDLINE, EMBASE and CENTRAL databases, and the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform for human randomized controlled trials that assessed the analgesic efficacy of cannabinoids compared to placebo or active comparators. The reported outcomes for analgesic efficacy and adverse effects in included studies were qualitatively analysed. Results: Seven studies, including 611 patients were included in the systematic review. In five studies, cannabinoids were found to provide equivalent analgesia to placebo, in one study the analgesia provided by cannabinoids was superior to placebo, and in one study cannabinoids provided analgesia that was inferior to that provided by placebo. No synergistic or additive analgesic effect was observed when cannabinoids were used in combination with opioids. In five of the seven studies, certain adverse effects were more frequent with cannabinoid treatment than with placebo or active comparator. Conclusion: On the basis of the available randomized controlled trial evidence, cannabinoids have no role in the management of acute pain.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/aas.12851

Cites

32 of 32 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Stevens, A. J., & Higgins, M. D.
Affiliations
  • St Vincent's Hospital Melbourne (AU)
  • Flinders Medical Centre (AU)
Corresponding author
Stevens, A. J.
Venue
Acta Anaesthesiologica Scandinavica
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2017-01-16
Volume
61
Issue
3
Pages
268-280
ISSN
  • 0001-5172 (ISSN-L)
  • 1399-6576
OpenAlex
W2577694949
Cited by
80
References
32
Citations by year
2026: 7 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 16 · 2020: 13 · 2019: 10 · 2018: 11 · 2017: 5
FWCI
1.35
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Acta Anaesthesiologica Scandinavica (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pharmacology › Cannabis and Cannabinoid Research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Anesthesia and Pain Management
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine › Pain Management and Opioid Use
Keywords
cannabinoids, acute pain, analgesic efficacy, adverse effects, opioid combination, placebo comparison, pain management
MeSH terms
Analgesics, Analgesics, Opioid, Cannabinoids, Humans, Bias, Acute Pain

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