Standl 2004.
Methods |
|
|
Participants | 1. 700 patients enrolled (ASA I/II/III patients were scheduled for lower abdominal or extremity surgery (orthopaedic, trauma, urology, visceral, gynaecology) and underwent the same protocol) Patients randomized to:
23 randomized patients (15 group B, 18 group S) were excluded due to:
2. 0 patients lost to follow‐up 3. Main characteristics of patients:
|
|
Interventions |
|
|
Outcomes | Outcomes were not classified as primary or secondary
|
|
Notes |
|
|
Risk of bias | ||
Bias | Authors' judgement | Support for judgement |
Random sequence generation (selection bias) | Low risk | Quote: "according to a randomization protocol that was created by a computerized program for each study site". (page 513) |
Allocation concealment (selection bias) | Unclear risk | Insufficient information to score this item as low or high risk of bias |
Blinding of participants (performance bias) | Unclear risk | Insufficient information to score this item as low or high risk of bias |
Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias) All outcomes | Low risk | Quote: "During postoperative Day 2 and 4, all patients were visited by an anesthesiologist who was blinded to the type of spinal needle" (page 514) |
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes | Low risk | 23 patients (3.2%) were lost to follow‐up |
Selective reporting (reporting bias) | Low risk | All patient‐important outcomes were reported |
Other bias | Low risk | No other biases were identified |