Table 2.
GRADE evidence profile summary table for pain.
| Outcome Time Frame | Number of Studies (Number of Patients) | Risk of Bias | Inconsistency | Indirectness | Imprecision | Other Considerations | Magnitude of Effect (95% CI) | Overall Quality |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Pain (1 day to 6 months) | Data from 2345 patients in 29 studies, 34 comparisons | Seriousa | No serious inconsistency | No serious indirectness | No serious imprecision | Serious (publication bias) | Mean difference 0.63 less (0.85 less to 0.42 less) | Low |
| Pain (1 day to 2 weeks) | Data from 1252 patients in 13 studies, 18 comparisons | Seriousb | No serious inconsistency | No serious indirectness | No serious imprecision | None | Mean difference 0.54 less (0.76 less to 0.31 less) | Moderate |
| Pain (2-8 weeks) | Data from 1362 patients in 16 studies, 16 comparisons | Seriousc | No serious inconsistency | No serious indirectness | No serious imprecision | Serious (publication bias) | Mean difference 0.68 less (0.96 less to 0.40 less) | Low |
| Pain (2-6 months) | Data from 1399 patients in 9 studies, 9 comparisons | Seriousd | Seriouse | No serious indirectness | No serious imprecision | None | Mean difference 0.43 less (0.75 less to 0.10 less) | Low |
Abbreviations: CI, confidence interval; GRADE, Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation.
Of the 29 trials, 8 had moderate risk of bias for randomization sequence generation, 16 had moderate risk of bias for allocation concealment, 10 had moderate risk of bias for blinding of outcome assessment, 5 had high risk of bias for incomplete outcome data, 6 had high risk of bias for selective reporting, and 12 had moderate risk of bias for selective reporting.
Of the 13 trials, 2 had moderate risk of bias for randomization sequence generation, 4 had moderate risk of bias for allocation concealment, 2 had moderate risk of bias for blinding of outcome assessment, 2 had high risk of bias for incomplete outcome data, 2 had high risk of bias for selective reporting, and 4 had moderate risk of bias for selective reporting.
Of the 16 trials, 2 had moderate risk of bias for randomization sequence generation, 8 had moderate risk of bias for allocation concealment, 2 had moderate risk of bias for blinding of outcome assessment, 2 had high risk of bias for incomplete outcome data, 2 had high risk of bias for selective reporting, and 5 had moderate risk of bias for selective reporting.
Of the 9 trials, 5 had moderate risk of bias for randomization sequence generation, 5 had moderate risk of bias for allocation concealment, 4 had moderate risk of bias for blinding of outcome assessment, 4 had high risk of bias for incomplete outcome data, 3 had high risk of bias for selective reporting and 2 had moderate risk of bias for selective reporting.
Heterogeneity I2 = 30%.