Intravenous infusion tests have limited utility for selecting long-term drug therapy in patients with chronic pain: A systematic review

26Citations
Citations of this article
77Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

Since the first description in the early 1990s, the scope of intravenous infusions tests has expanded to encompass multiple drug classes and indications. Purported advantages of these tests include elucidating mechanisms of pain, providing temporary relief of symptoms, and usefulness as prognostic tools in guiding drug therapy. In an attempt to discern the value of these tests, the authors conducted a systematic review to explore the rationale and evidence behind the following intravenous infusion tests: lidocaine, ketamine, opioid, and phentolamine. The studies evaluating all intravenous infusion tests were characterized by lack of standardization, wide variations in outcome measures, and methodological flaws. The strongest evidence found was for the intravenous lidocaine test, with the phentolamine test characterized by the least convincing data. Whereas intravenous opioid infusions are the most conceptually appealing test, their greatest utility may be in predicting poor responders to sustained-release formulations. © 2009 American Society of Anesthesiologists, Inc.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Cohen, S. P., Kapoor, S. G., & Rathmell, J. P. (2009). Intravenous infusion tests have limited utility for selecting long-term drug therapy in patients with chronic pain: A systematic review. Anesthesiology. Lippincott Williams and Wilkins. https://doi.org/10.1097/ALN.0b013e3181ac1c47

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free