• BMJ open · Nov 2016

    Meta Analysis

    Gabapentinoids for chronic low back pain: a protocol for systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials.

    • Harsha Shanthanna, Ian Gilron, Lehana Thabane, Philip J Devereaux, Mohit Bhandari, Rizq AlAmri, Manikandan Rajarathinam, and Sriganesh Kamath.
    • Department of Anesthesiology, McMaster University, Michael DeGroote School of Medicine, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada.
    • BMJ Open. 2016 Nov 10; 6 (11): e013200.

    IntroductionChronic low back pain (CLBP) is a common condition and causes significant pain, distress and disability across the world. It is multifactorial in aetiology and is challenging to manage. Although the underlying mechanism of pain is predominantly non-specific, many argue that there is a substantial neuropathic pain element. Neuropathic pain is more severe, with significant disability. Gabapentinoids, including gabapentin and pregabalin, have proven efficacy in some neuropathic pain conditions. Despite no clear evidence, a substantial population of patients with CLBP are treated with gabapentinoids.ObjectivesWe aim to assess whether the use of gabapentinoids is effective and safe in the treatment of predominant CLBP, by conducting a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised control trials (RCTs).MethodologyWe will search the databases of MEDLINE, EMBASE and Cochrane for RCTs published in English language and have used gabapentinoids for the treatment of CLBP. Study selection and data extraction will be performed independently by paired reviewers using structured electronic forms, piloted between pairs of reviewers. The review outcomes will be guided by Initiative on Methods, Measurement and Pain Assessment in Clinical Trials guidelines, with pain relief as the primary outcome. We propose to carry out meta-analysis if there are three or more studies in a particular outcome domain, using a random effects model. Pooled outcomes will be reported as weighted mean differences or standardised mean differences and risk ratios with their corresponding 95% CIs, for continuous outcomes and dichotomous outcomes, respectively. Rating of quality of evidence will be reported using GRADE summary of findings table.DiscussionThe proposed systematic review will be able to provide valuable evidence to help decision-making in the use of gabapentinoids for the treatment of CLBP. This will help advance patient care and potentially highlight limitations in existing evidence to direct future research.Ethics And DisseminationBeing a systematic review, this study would not necessitate ethical review and approval. We plan to report and publish our study findings in a high impact medical journal, with online access.Trial Registration NumberCRD42016034040.Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://www.bmj.com/company/products-services/rights-and-licensing/.

      Pubmed     Free full text   Copy Citation     Plaintext  

      Add institutional full text...

    Notes

     
    Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?
    300 characters remaining
    help        
    You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
    • Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as *italics*, _underline_ or **bold**.
    • Superscript can be denoted by <sup>text</sup> and subscript <sub>text</sub>.
    • Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines 1. 2. 3., hyphens - or asterisks *.
    • Links can be included with: [my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
    • Images can be included with: ![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
    • For footnotes use [^1](This is a footnote.) inline.
    • Or use an inline reference [^1] to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document [^1]: This is a long footnote..

    hide…