Dataset Information

Gabapentin for the Management of Chronic Pelvic Pain in Women (GaPP1): A Pilot Randomised Controlled Trial.

ABSTRACT: Chronic pelvic pain (CPP) affects 2.1-24% of women. Frequently, no underlying pathology is identified, and the pain is difficult to manage. Gabapentin is prescribed for CPP despite no robust evidence of efficacy. We performed a pilot trial in two UK centres to inform the planning of a future multicentre RCT to evaluate gabapentin in CPP management. Our primary objective was to determine levels of participant recruitment and retention. Secondary objectives included estimating potential effectiveness, acceptability to participants of trial methodology, and cost-effectiveness of gabapentin. Women with CPP and no obvious pelvic pathology were assigned to an increasing regimen of gabapentin (300-2700 mg daily) or placebo. We calculated the proportion of eligible women randomised, and of randomised participants who were followed up to six months. The analyses by treatment group were by intention-to-treat. Interviews were conducted to evaluate women's experiences of the trial. A probabilistic decision analytical model was used to estimate cost-effectiveness. Between September 2012-2013, 47 women (34% of those eligible) were randomised (22 to gabapentin, 25 to placebo), and 25 (53%) completed six-month follow-up. Participants on gabapentin had less pain (BPI difference 1.72 points, 95% CI:0.07-3.36), and an improvement in mood (HADS difference 4.35 points, 95% CI:1.97-6.73) at six months than those allocated placebo. The majority of participants described their trial experience favorably. At the UK threshold for willingness-to-pay, the probabilities of gabapentin or no treatment being cost-effective are similar. A pilot trial assessing gabapentin for CPP was feasible, but uncertainty remains, highlighting the need for a large definitive trial.

SUBMITTER: Lewis SC

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4829183 | biostudies-literature | 2016

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Gabapentin for the Management of Chronic Pelvic Pain in Women (GaPP1): A Pilot Randomised Controlled Trial.

Lewis Steff C SC Bhattacharya Siladitya S Wu Olivia O Vincent Katy K Jack Stuart A SA Critchley Hilary O D HO Porter Maureen A MA Cranley Denise D Wilson John A JA Horne Andrew W AW

PloS one 20160412 4

Chronic pelvic pain (CPP) affects 2.1-24% of women. Frequently, no underlying pathology is identified, and the pain is difficult to manage. Gabapentin is prescribed for CPP despite no robust evidence of efficacy. We performed a pilot trial in two UK centres to inform the planning of a future multicentre RCT to evaluate gabapentin in CPP management. Our primary objective was to determine levels of participant recruitment and retention. Secondary objectives included estimating potential effectiven ...[more]

PMID: 27070434

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundChronic pelvic pain affects 2-24% of women worldwide and evidence for medical treatments is scarce. Gabapentin is effective in treating some chronic pain conditions. We aimed to measure the efficacy and safety of gabapentin in women with chronic pelvic pain and no obvious pelvic pathology.MethodsWe performed a multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled randomised trial in 39 UK hospital centres. Eligible participants were women with chronic pelvic pain (with or without dysmenorrhoea or dyspareunia) of at least 3 months duration. Inclusion criteria were 18-50 years of age, use or willingness to use contraception to avoid pregnancy, and no obvious pelvic pathology at laparoscopy, which must have taken place at least 2 weeks before consent but less than 36 months previously. Participants were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive gabapentin (titrated to a maximum dose of 2700 mg daily) or matching placebo for 16 weeks. The online randomisation system minimised allocations by presence or absence of dysmenorrhoea, psychological distress, current use of hormonal contraceptives, and hospital centre. The appearance, route, and administration of the assigned intervention were identical in both groups. Patients, clinicians, and research staff were unaware of the trial group assignments throughout the trial. Participants were unmasked once they had provided all outcome data at week 16-17, or sooner if a serious adverse event requiring knowledge of the study drug occurred. The dual primary outcome measures were worst and average pain scores assessed separately on a numerical rating scale in weeks 13-16 after randomisation, in the intention-to-treat population. Self-reported adverse events were assessed according to intention-to-treat principles. This trial is registered with the ISRCTN registry, ISCRTN77451762.FindingsParticipants were screened between Nov 30, 2015, and March 6, 2019, and 306 were randomly assigned (153 to gabapentin and 153 to placebo). There were no significant between-group differences in both worst and average numerical rating scale (NRS) pain scores at 13-16 weeks after randomisation. The mean worst NRS pain score was 7·1 (standard deviation [SD] 2·6) in the gabapentin group and 7·4 (SD 2·2) in the placebo group. Mean change from baseline was -1·4 (SD 2·3) in the gabapentin group and -1·2 (SD 2·1) in the placebo group (adjusted mean difference -0·20 [97·5% CI -0·81 to 0·42]; p=0·47). The mean average NRS pain score was 4·3 (SD 2·3) in the gabapentin group and 4·5 (SD 2·2) in the placebo group. Mean change from baseline was -1·1 (SD 2·0) in the gabapentin group and -0·9 (SD 1·8) in the placebo group (adjusted mean difference -0·18 [97·5% CI -0·71 to 0·35]; p=0·45). More women had a serious adverse event in the gabapentin group than in the placebo group (10 [7%] of 153 in the gabapentin group compared with 3 [2%] of 153 in the placebo group; p=0·04). Dizziness, drowsiness, and visual disturbances were more common in the gabapentin group.InterpretationThis study was adequately powered, but treatment with gabapentin did not result in significantly lower pain scores in women with chronic pelvic pain, and was associated with higher rates of side-effects than placebo. Given the increasing reports of abuse and evidence of potential harms associated with gabapentin use, it is important that clinicians consider alternative treatment options to off-label gabapentin for the management of chronic pelvic pain and no obvious pelvic pathology.FundingNational Institute for Health Research.

Project description:BACKGROUND: Acupuncture is increasingly being used for many conditions including chronic neck pain. However the evidence remains inconclusive, indicating the need for further well-designed research. The aim of this study was to conduct a pilot randomised controlled parallel arm trial, to establish key features required for the design and implementation of a large-scale trial on acupuncture for chronic neck pain. METHODS: Patients whose GPs had diagnosed neck pain were recruited from one general practice, and randomised to receive usual GP care only, or acupuncture (up to 10 treatments over 3 months) as an adjunctive treatment to usual GP care. The primary outcome measure was the Northwick Park Neck Pain Questionnaire (NPQ) at 3 months. The primary analysis was to determine the sample size for the full scale study. RESULTS: Of the 227 patients with neck pain identified from the GP database, 28 (12.3%) consenting patients were eligible to participate in the pilot and 24 (10.5%) were recruited to the trial. Ten patients were randomised to acupuncture, receiving an average of eight treatments from one of four acupuncturists, and 14 were randomised to usual GP care alone. The sample size for the full scale trial was calculated from a clinically meaningful difference of 5% on the NPQ and, from this pilot, an adjusted standard deviation of 15.3%. Assuming 90% power at the 5% significance level, a sample size of 229 would be required in each arm in a large-scale trial when allowing for a loss to follow-up rate of 14%. In order to achieve this sample, one would need to identify patients from databases of GP practices with a total population of 230,000 patients, or approximately 15 GP practices roughly equal in size to the one involved in this study (i.e. 15,694 patients). CONCLUSION: This pilot study has allowed a number of recommendations to be made to facilitate the design of a large-scale trial, which in turn will help to clarify the existing evidence base on acupuncture for neck pain.

Project description:IntroductionGabapentin has potential analgesic benefits in patients with neuropathic pain, such as post-herpetic neuralgia and diabetic peripheral neuropathy neuropathic pain. However, its efficacy in women with chronic pelvic pain (CPP) remains contradictory. In the present study, we performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to ascertain the efficacy of this treatment.MethodsWe systematically reviewed RCTs published in PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and Google Scholar databases, up to July 2021. These articles compared gabapentin with placebo or any other active treatment for CPP in women, with 'the change in pain scores from the baseline during the first 3 and 6 months of treatment' taken as the primary outcome. We considered reductions equivalent to 1.0 cm for primary outcomes to be clinically important.ResultsFour studies, comprising 469 participants, were included in our meta-analysis. Results revealed that the gabapentin group had significantly higher change in pain intensity scores from baseline to 3 months [weighted mean difference (WMD) - 0.61 cm; 95% confidence interval (CI) - 0.97 to - 0.25; I2 = 0%; p = 0.0009] and 6 months (WMD - 1.38 cm; 95% CI - 1.89 to - 0.88; I2 = 0%; p < 0.00001), relative to the control group. The difference of 6-month pooled result was more clinically important. Results from analysis of secondary outcomes showed that gabapentin had no beneficial efficacy during the first 3 months of treatment. Although gabapentin treatment was associated with a higher risk of dizziness and somnolence, no statistically significant differences were observed with regards to the total incidence of adverse events.ConclusionsOverall, gabapentin could be a potential treatment option for CPP in women. However, as a pilot study, further studies are needed to explore the longer-term benefits and definite safety of this therapy in the future.Registration numberPROSPERO registration number CRD42021249421.

Project description:OBJECTIVE:To evaluate the effect of oral gabapentin in conjunction with usual oral pain management regimens of lorazepam, ibuprofen, oxycodone, and acetaminophen for surgical abortion on pain 5 minutes postprocedure. METHODS:This was a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of patients from 6 0/7-14 6/7 weeks of gestation scheduled to undergo surgical abortion at the Duke Family Planning Clinic. Participants were administered 600 mg of oral gabapentin compared with placebo with usual oral pain management. Pain score was assessed using a 100-mm visual analog scale, with the primary outcome being pain score 5 minutes after the procedure. The effect of gabapentin was assessed using a linear regression model controlling for baseline pain. We also measured pain perception 24 hours after the procedure. Secondary outcome measures included anxiety, side effects, and usage of opiate pain medication in the 24-hour postoperative period. RESULTS:Out of 113 women screened for this study; 96 women were recruited, enrolled, and randomized to study treatment arm from August 2016 to June 2018. Pain at 5 minutes after the procedure was similar between the gabapentin and placebo groups ((Equation is included in full-text article.)=3.40; 95% CI -8.20 to 15.0; P=.56). Gabapentin and placebo were well tolerated, with no statistically significant difference in side effects or anxiety levels. Although prescription of opioids after the procedure was not standardized among patients, 73% of women received a short-term prescription for oxycodone. A lower percentage of women in the gabapentin group self-reported taking opioids in the 24 hours postprocedure (18% vs 47%; odds ratio 0.26; 95% CI 0.09-0.75). CONCLUSION:The addition of gabapentin to usual oral pain management regimens with paracervical block did not reduce postoperative pain for patients undergoing outpatient surgical abortion. Although the addition of gabapentin was well tolerated and reduced oral opiate use 24 hours postprocedure, it did not affect the experience of pain during and immediately after the procedure. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION:ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02725710.

Project description:BackgroundEndometriosis (where endometrial-like tissue is found outside the uterus) affects ~ 176 million women worldwide and can lead to debilitating pelvic pain. Three subtypes of endometriosis exist, with ~ 80% of women having superficial peritoneal endometriosis (SPE). Endometriosis is diagnosed by laparoscopy and, if SPE is found, gynaecologists usually remove it surgically. However, many women get limited pain relief from surgical removal of SPE. We plan to undertake a future large trial where women who have only SPE found at initial laparoscopy are randomly allocated to have surgical removal (excision or ablation) of SPE, or not. Ultimately, we want to determine whether surgical removal improves overall symptoms and quality of life, or whether surgery is of no benefit, exacerbates symptoms, or even causes harm. The primary objective of this feasibility study is to determine what proportion of women with suspected SPE undergoing diagnostic laparoscopy will agree to randomisation. The secondary objectives are to determine if there are differences in key prognostic parameters between eligible women that agree to be randomised and those that decline; how many women having laparoscopy for investigation of chronic pelvic pain are eligible for the trial; the range of treatment effects and variability in outcomes and the most acceptable methods of recruitment, randomisation and assessment tools.MethodsWe will recruit up to 90 women with suspected SPE undergoing diagnostic laparoscopy over a 9-month recruitment period in four Scottish hospitals and randomise them 1:1 to either diagnostic laparoscopy alone (with a sham port to achieve blinding of the allocation) or surgical removal of endometriosis. Baseline characteristics, e.g. age, index of social deprivation, ethnicity, and intensity/duration of pain will be collected. Participants will be followed up by online questionnaires assessing pain, physical and emotional function at baseline, 3 months, 6 months and 12 months.DiscussionRecruitment to a randomised controlled trial to assess the effectiveness of surgery for endometriosis may be challenging because of preconceived ideas about treatment success amongst patients and clinicians. We have designed this study to assess feasibility of recruitment and to inform the design of our future definitive trial.Trial registrationClincicalTrials.gov, NCT04081532 STATUS: Recruiting.

Project description:BackgroundChronic pain can disrupt the cortical representation of a painful body part. This disruption may play a role in maintaining the individual's pain. Tactile acuity training has been used to normalise cortical representation and reduce pain in certain pain conditions. However, there is little evidence for the effectiveness of this intervention for chronic low back pain (CLBP). The primary aim of this study was to inform the development of a fully powered randomised controlled trial (RCT) by providing preliminary data on the effect of tactile acuity training on pain and function in individuals with CLBP. The secondary aim was to obtain qualitative feedback about the intervention.MethodsIn this mixed-methods pilot RCT 15 individuals were randomised to either an intervention (tactile acuity training) or a placebo group (sham tactile acuity training). All participants received 3 sessions of acuity training (intervention or sham) from a physiotherapist and were requested to undertake daily acuity home training facilitated by an informal carer (friend/relative). All participants also received usual care physiotherapy. The primary outcome measures were pain (0-100visual analogue scale (VAS)) and function (Roland Morris Disability Questionnaire (RMDQ)). Participants and their informal carers were invited to a focus group to provide feedback on the intervention.ResultsThe placebo group improved by the greatest magnitude for both outcome measures, but there was no statistically significant difference (Mean difference (95%CI), p-value) between groups for change in pain (25.6 (-0.7 to 51.9), p = 0.056) or function (2.2 (-1.6 to 6.0), p = 0.237). Comparing the number of individuals achieving a minimally clinically significant improvement, the placebo group had better outcomes for pain with all participants achieving ?30% improvement compared to only a third of the intervention group (6/6 vs. 3/9, p = 0.036). Qualitatively, participants reported that needing an informal carer was a considerable barrier to the home training component of the study.ConclusionsThis pilot RCT found tactile acuity training to be no more effective than sham tactile acuity training for function and less effective for pain in individuals with CLBP. That the intervention could not be self-applied was a considerable barrier to its use.Trial registration isrctnISRCTN98118082.

Dataset Information

Gabapentin for the Management of Chronic Pelvic Pain in Women (GaPP1): A Pilot Randomised Controlled Trial.

Publications

Gabapentin for the Management of Chronic Pelvic Pain in Women (GaPP1): A Pilot Randomised Controlled Trial.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets