Skip to main content

Table 2 Summary of findings and quality of evidence (GRADE)

From: Postoperative pain after different doses of remifentanil infusion during anaesthesia: a meta-analysis

Variable

No of Participants (studies)

Effect Size (95% CI)

Heterogeneity (I2)

Quality of Comments the Evidence (GRADE)

Pain score at 1-2 h

 remifentanil vs placebo

426(8 studies)

WMD 0.71(0.17, 1.24)

68%

⊕⊕2,3

 high dose vs low dose

909(13 studies)

WMD 0.60(0.05, 1.15)

94%

⊕⊕⊕3

Pain score at 3-8 h

 remifentanil vs placebo

326(6 studies)

WMD 0.73(0.39, 1.08)

42%

⊕⊕⊕2

 high dose vs low dose

1122(16 studies)

WMD 0.38(0.00, 0.75)

85%

⊕⊕⊕3

Pain score at 24 h

 remifentanil vs placebo

516(9 studies)

WMD 0.10(-0.10, 0.30)

29%

⊕⊕⊕2

 high dose vs low dose

1269(18 studies)

WMD 0.26(0.04, 0.48)

82%

⊕⊕⊕3

Pain score at 48 h

 remifentanil vs placebo

247(4 studies)

WMD 0.15(-0.22, 0.52)

0%

⊕⊕⊕1

 high dose vs low dose

467(8 studies)

WMD 0.32(0.09, 0.55)

34%

⊕⊕⊕⊕

periincisional wound allodynia

 high dose vs low dose

441(7 studies)

SMD -1.14(-1.47, -0.80)

61%

⊕⊕⊕3

forearm allodynia

 high dose vs low dose

174(3 studies)

SMD -0.46(-0.82, -0.10)

28%

⊕⊕⊕1

Analgesic consumption at 0-8 h

 remifentanil vs placebo

306(6 studies)

SMD 0.42(0.09, 0.75)

51%

⊕⊕2,3

 high dose vs low dose

675(9 studies)

SMD 1.28(0.41, 2.16)

96%

⊕⊕⊕3

Analgesic consumption at 12 h

 high dose vs low dose

557(6 studies)

SMD 2.50(1.17, 3.83)

98%

⊕⊕⊕3

Analgesic consumption at 24-48 h

 remifentanil vs placebo

446(8 studies)

SMD 0.08(-0.31, 0.47)

75%

⊕⊕2,3

 high dose vs low dose

1041(16 studies)

SMD 0.94(0.40, 1.49)

94%

⊕⊕⊕3

Time to first postoperative analgesic requirement

 remifentanil vs placebo

200(3 studies)

WMD-25.27(-32.09, -18.46)

72%

⊕1,2,3

 high dose vs low dose

521(9 studies)

WMD -7.53(-10.31, -4.75)

31%

⊕⊕⊕⊕

PONV

 remifentanil vs placebo

414(6 studies)

OR 1.46(0.92, 2.32)

0%

⊕⊕⊕⊕

 high dose vs low dose

1231(17 studies)

OR 1.13(0.87, 1.45)

9%

⊕⊕⊕⊕

Shivering

 high dose vs low dose

572(6 studies)

OR 3.98(2.59, 6.13)

0%

⊕⊕⊕⊕

  1. CI Confidence interval, GRADE Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation, OR Odds ratio, PONV Postoperative nausea and vomiting, SM, Standardized mean differences, WMD Weighted mean differences
  2. The level of evidence was assessed by the GRADE method. ⊕⊕⊕⊕(High quality): Further research is very unlikely to change our confidence in the estimate of effect. ⊕⊕⊕(Moderate quality): Further research is likely to have an important impact on our confidence in the estimate of effect and may change the estimate. ⊕⊕(Low quality): Further research is very likely to have an important impact on our confidence in the estimate of effect and is likely to change the estimate. ⊕(Very low quality): We are very uncertain about the estimate.1 Downgraded for imprecision: optimal information size not reached. 2 Downgraded for insufficient data quality. 3 Downgraded for inconsistency (I2> 50%).