Management of chronic neuropathic pain

A protocol for a multiple treatment comparison meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials

Sohail M. Mulla, D. Norman Buckley, Dwight E. Moulin, Rachel Couban, Zain Izhar, Arnav Agarwal, Akbar Panju, Li Wang, Sun Makosso Kallyth, Alparslan Turan, Victor Manuel Montori, Daniel I. Sessler, Lehana Thabane, Gordon H. Guyatt, Jason W. Busse

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

8 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Introduction: Chronic neuropathic pain is associated with reduced health-related quality of life and substantial socioeconomic costs. Current research addressing management of chronic neuropathic pain is limited. No review has evaluated all interventional studies for chronic neuropathic pain, which limits attempts to make inferences regarding the relative effectiveness of treatments.

Methods and analysis: We will conduct a systematic review of all randomised controlled trials evaluating therapies for chronic neuropathic pain. We will identify eligible trials, in any language, by a systematic search of CINAHL, EMBASE, MEDLINE, AMED, HealthSTAR, DARE, PsychINFO and the Cochrane Central Registry of Controlled Trials. Eligible trials will be: (1) enrol patients presenting with chronic neuropathic pain, and (2) randomise patients to alternative interventions (pharmacological or non-pharmacological) or an intervention and a control arm. Pairs of reviewers will, independently and in duplicate, screen titles and abstracts of identified citations, review the full texts of potentially eligible trials and extract information from eligible trials. We will use a modified Cochrane instrument to evaluate risk of bias of eligible studies, recommendations from the Initiative on Methods, Measurement, and Pain Assessment in Clinical Trials (IMMPACT) to inform the outcomes we will collect, and the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) system to evaluate our confidence in treatment effects. When possible, we will conduct: (1) in direct comparisons, a random-effects meta-analysis to establish the effect of reported therapies on patient-important outcomes; and (2) a multiple treatment comparison meta-analysis within a Bayesian framework to assess the relative effects of treatments. We will define a priori hypotheses to explain heterogeneity between studies, and conduct meta-regression and subgroup analyses consistent with the current best practices.

Ethics and Dissemination: We do not require ethics approval for our proposed review. We will disseminate our findings through peer-reviewed publications and conference presentations.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Article number006112
JournalBMJ Open
Volume4
Issue number11
DOIs
StatePublished - 2014

Fingerprint

Neuralgia
Chronic Pain
Randomized Controlled Trials
Ethics
Pain Measurement
Therapeutics
Practice Guidelines
MEDLINE
Registries
Publications
Meta-Analysis
Language
Regression Analysis
Quality of Life
Network Meta-Analysis
Clinical Trials
Pharmacology
Costs and Cost Analysis
Research

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Medicine(all)

Cite this

Mulla, S. M., Buckley, D. N., Moulin, D. E., Couban, R., Izhar, Z., Agarwal, A., ... Busse, J. W. (2014). Management of chronic neuropathic pain: A protocol for a multiple treatment comparison meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials. BMJ Open, 4(11), [006112]. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2014-006112

Management of chronic neuropathic pain : A protocol for a multiple treatment comparison meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials. / Mulla, Sohail M.; Buckley, D. Norman; Moulin, Dwight E.; Couban, Rachel; Izhar, Zain; Agarwal, Arnav; Panju, Akbar; Wang, Li; Kallyth, Sun Makosso; Turan, Alparslan; Montori, Victor Manuel; Sessler, Daniel I.; Thabane, Lehana; Guyatt, Gordon H.; Busse, Jason W.

In: BMJ Open, Vol. 4, No. 11, 006112, 2014.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Mulla, SM, Buckley, DN, Moulin, DE, Couban, R, Izhar, Z, Agarwal, A, Panju, A, Wang, L, Kallyth, SM, Turan, A, Montori, VM, Sessler, DI, Thabane, L, Guyatt, GH & Busse, JW 2014, 'Management of chronic neuropathic pain: A protocol for a multiple treatment comparison meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials', BMJ Open, vol. 4, no. 11, 006112. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2014-006112
Mulla, Sohail M. ; Buckley, D. Norman ; Moulin, Dwight E. ; Couban, Rachel ; Izhar, Zain ; Agarwal, Arnav ; Panju, Akbar ; Wang, Li ; Kallyth, Sun Makosso ; Turan, Alparslan ; Montori, Victor Manuel ; Sessler, Daniel I. ; Thabane, Lehana ; Guyatt, Gordon H. ; Busse, Jason W. / Management of chronic neuropathic pain : A protocol for a multiple treatment comparison meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials. In: BMJ Open. 2014 ; Vol. 4, No. 11.
@article{c11196a678ce4da99886a28a587d752f,
title = "Management of chronic neuropathic pain: A protocol for a multiple treatment comparison meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials",
abstract = "Introduction: Chronic neuropathic pain is associated with reduced health-related quality of life and substantial socioeconomic costs. Current research addressing management of chronic neuropathic pain is limited. No review has evaluated all interventional studies for chronic neuropathic pain, which limits attempts to make inferences regarding the relative effectiveness of treatments.Methods and analysis: We will conduct a systematic review of all randomised controlled trials evaluating therapies for chronic neuropathic pain. We will identify eligible trials, in any language, by a systematic search of CINAHL, EMBASE, MEDLINE, AMED, HealthSTAR, DARE, PsychINFO and the Cochrane Central Registry of Controlled Trials. Eligible trials will be: (1) enrol patients presenting with chronic neuropathic pain, and (2) randomise patients to alternative interventions (pharmacological or non-pharmacological) or an intervention and a control arm. Pairs of reviewers will, independently and in duplicate, screen titles and abstracts of identified citations, review the full texts of potentially eligible trials and extract information from eligible trials. We will use a modified Cochrane instrument to evaluate risk of bias of eligible studies, recommendations from the Initiative on Methods, Measurement, and Pain Assessment in Clinical Trials (IMMPACT) to inform the outcomes we will collect, and the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) system to evaluate our confidence in treatment effects. When possible, we will conduct: (1) in direct comparisons, a random-effects meta-analysis to establish the effect of reported therapies on patient-important outcomes; and (2) a multiple treatment comparison meta-analysis within a Bayesian framework to assess the relative effects of treatments. We will define a priori hypotheses to explain heterogeneity between studies, and conduct meta-regression and subgroup analyses consistent with the current best practices.Ethics and Dissemination: We do not require ethics approval for our proposed review. We will disseminate our findings through peer-reviewed publications and conference presentations.",
author = "Mulla, {Sohail M.} and Buckley, {D. Norman} and Moulin, {Dwight E.} and Rachel Couban and Zain Izhar and Arnav Agarwal and Akbar Panju and Li Wang and Kallyth, {Sun Makosso} and Alparslan Turan and Montori, {Victor Manuel} and Sessler, {Daniel I.} and Lehana Thabane and Guyatt, {Gordon H.} and Busse, {Jason W.}",
year = "2014",
doi = "10.1136/bmjopen-2014-006112",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "4",
journal = "BMJ Open",
issn = "2044-6055",
publisher = "BMJ Publishing Group",
number = "11",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Management of chronic neuropathic pain

T2 - A protocol for a multiple treatment comparison meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials

AU - Mulla, Sohail M.

AU - Buckley, D. Norman

AU - Moulin, Dwight E.

AU - Couban, Rachel

AU - Izhar, Zain

AU - Agarwal, Arnav

AU - Panju, Akbar

AU - Wang, Li

AU - Kallyth, Sun Makosso

AU - Turan, Alparslan

AU - Montori, Victor Manuel

AU - Sessler, Daniel I.

AU - Thabane, Lehana

AU - Guyatt, Gordon H.

AU - Busse, Jason W.

PY - 2014

Y1 - 2014

N2 - Introduction: Chronic neuropathic pain is associated with reduced health-related quality of life and substantial socioeconomic costs. Current research addressing management of chronic neuropathic pain is limited. No review has evaluated all interventional studies for chronic neuropathic pain, which limits attempts to make inferences regarding the relative effectiveness of treatments.Methods and analysis: We will conduct a systematic review of all randomised controlled trials evaluating therapies for chronic neuropathic pain. We will identify eligible trials, in any language, by a systematic search of CINAHL, EMBASE, MEDLINE, AMED, HealthSTAR, DARE, PsychINFO and the Cochrane Central Registry of Controlled Trials. Eligible trials will be: (1) enrol patients presenting with chronic neuropathic pain, and (2) randomise patients to alternative interventions (pharmacological or non-pharmacological) or an intervention and a control arm. Pairs of reviewers will, independently and in duplicate, screen titles and abstracts of identified citations, review the full texts of potentially eligible trials and extract information from eligible trials. We will use a modified Cochrane instrument to evaluate risk of bias of eligible studies, recommendations from the Initiative on Methods, Measurement, and Pain Assessment in Clinical Trials (IMMPACT) to inform the outcomes we will collect, and the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) system to evaluate our confidence in treatment effects. When possible, we will conduct: (1) in direct comparisons, a random-effects meta-analysis to establish the effect of reported therapies on patient-important outcomes; and (2) a multiple treatment comparison meta-analysis within a Bayesian framework to assess the relative effects of treatments. We will define a priori hypotheses to explain heterogeneity between studies, and conduct meta-regression and subgroup analyses consistent with the current best practices.Ethics and Dissemination: We do not require ethics approval for our proposed review. We will disseminate our findings through peer-reviewed publications and conference presentations.

AB - Introduction: Chronic neuropathic pain is associated with reduced health-related quality of life and substantial socioeconomic costs. Current research addressing management of chronic neuropathic pain is limited. No review has evaluated all interventional studies for chronic neuropathic pain, which limits attempts to make inferences regarding the relative effectiveness of treatments.Methods and analysis: We will conduct a systematic review of all randomised controlled trials evaluating therapies for chronic neuropathic pain. We will identify eligible trials, in any language, by a systematic search of CINAHL, EMBASE, MEDLINE, AMED, HealthSTAR, DARE, PsychINFO and the Cochrane Central Registry of Controlled Trials. Eligible trials will be: (1) enrol patients presenting with chronic neuropathic pain, and (2) randomise patients to alternative interventions (pharmacological or non-pharmacological) or an intervention and a control arm. Pairs of reviewers will, independently and in duplicate, screen titles and abstracts of identified citations, review the full texts of potentially eligible trials and extract information from eligible trials. We will use a modified Cochrane instrument to evaluate risk of bias of eligible studies, recommendations from the Initiative on Methods, Measurement, and Pain Assessment in Clinical Trials (IMMPACT) to inform the outcomes we will collect, and the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) system to evaluate our confidence in treatment effects. When possible, we will conduct: (1) in direct comparisons, a random-effects meta-analysis to establish the effect of reported therapies on patient-important outcomes; and (2) a multiple treatment comparison meta-analysis within a Bayesian framework to assess the relative effects of treatments. We will define a priori hypotheses to explain heterogeneity between studies, and conduct meta-regression and subgroup analyses consistent with the current best practices.Ethics and Dissemination: We do not require ethics approval for our proposed review. We will disseminate our findings through peer-reviewed publications and conference presentations.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84912026385&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84912026385&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1136/bmjopen-2014-006112

DO - 10.1136/bmjopen-2014-006112

M3 - Article

VL - 4

JO - BMJ Open

JF - BMJ Open

SN - 2044-6055

IS - 11

M1 - 006112

ER -