Acute Pain

This pilot study will test an innovative way to establish how pain medicines provide analgesia in healthy adults. The study uses a group of short, controlled pain tests to look at different types of pain responses in the body. The main goal is to find out if this testing approach can show the pain-relieving effects of 2 medicines, pregabalin and naproxen versus placebo, and show how they provide relief of different types of pain. The study hypothesis is that this pain testing approach administered as a battery would be able to tell the difference between a medicine that works mainly in the brain and spinal cord (pregabalin) and a medicine that works mainly on inflammation in body tissues (naproxen). Up to 25 healthy adults will take part. Each participant will receive all 3 study treatments, pregabalin, naproxen, and placebo, administered in random order during separate study periods. The order will be assigned by chance. Neither the participant nor the study team will know which treatment is given at each visit. The study includes several experimental pain tests. These include: a heat and capsaicin skin test that causes short-term skin sensitivity, a UVB light test that causes a temporary sunburn-like sensitivity, and a cold pressor test, in which a hand is placed in very cold water for a short time. Participants will also have sensory testing to measure how they feel touch, pressure, pinprick, warmth, heat, and cold. Blood samples will be collected to measure study drug levels. Urine samples, vital signs, and other safety checks will also be done. Each treatment visit includes testing before and for several hours after taking the study drug. There will be a washout period of at least 48 hours between treatments. Total participation may last up to about 10 weeks. This study is not expected to provide direct medical benefit to participants. The information learned may help researchers improve early testing of future pain treatments....

What is this study about, in short? This study looks at simple, no-cost ways to reduce the pain and fear that children aged 6-12 feel when they have blood drawn at the hospital. Two methods are being tested: * A nurse lightly and rhythmically tapping with their fingertips just above the spot where the needle will go ("rhythmic skin tapping"). * The child making an "mmmm" humming sound while the blood is being drawn ("internal vibration" or "humming"). These methods need no medicine and no device, so they can be used easily in any hospital. The study aims to find out whether these two methods really reduce pain and fear, by comparing them with a group that receives no extra method. Why is this study being done? Drawing blood is one of the most common painful procedures in children. Fear of needles is very common and can even lead a person to avoid health care later in life. So it matters to make the blood-draw experience easier for children. Some methods used to reduce pain have practical limits: * Numbing creams must be applied 30-60 minutes before the procedure; they are not practical in urgent situations and add cost. * Special devices that give cold and vibration can work, but they can be expensive, are not always available, and need care for hygiene. For these reasons, there is a need for simple methods that cost nothing, need no device, and can be applied easily in any setting. This study tests exactly that. How do the methods work? (Simple science) Both methods rest on an idea called the "Gate Control Theory": in our body, the sense of touch and vibration competes with the sense of pain on the way to the brain. Gentle touch or mild vibration can act like a "gate" that partly blocks the pain signal from reaching the brain. * Rhythmic skin tapping: Gentle, rhythmic tapping with the fingers may help "close the gate," so the pain is felt less. * Internal vibration (humming): The "mmmm" sound creates a mild vibration in the body. It can also stimulate the calming part of the nervous system, which may lower the heart rate and stress. Taking an active part in the procedure also gives the child a sense of control. Who can take part in the study? Can take part: * Children aged 6-12 years * Children who will have a blood draw * Children whose parent has given written permission and who themselves agree verbally * Children who can understand and speak Turkish * Children whose cognitive development is appropriate for their age * Children who do not have an ongoing (chronic) pain condition Cannot take part, or will be withdrawn: * Children who do not want to take part, or wish to withdraw at any stage * Children who develop a complication (an unexpected medical problem) during the procedure * Children who have used a painkiller within the last 24 hours * Children who have already taken part in this study before * Children whose skin is broken at the site where the needle will go * Children who have a neurological or psychiatric diagnosis What will happen if my child takes part? The blood draw will happen anyway because it is medically needed. The study only adds the method used during the draw and a short measurement afterward. Step by step: * Your child is placed by computer, at random (like drawing lots), into one of three groups. No one can choose the group in advance; this is called "randomization" and it keeps the comparison fair. * The blood draw is done as usual. The only difference is the method used, depending on your child's group. * Right after the procedure, the child is shown two short picture scales: one for pain, with faces ranging from smiling to crying (0-10), and one for fear, also made of faces (0-4). * A short form collects details such as age, sex, and any previous blood-draw experience. * No extra needle, medicine, or laboratory test is done beyond the routine blood draw. The three groups are: Group What is done in this group? 1. Rhythmic skin tapping Gentle, rhythmic tapping with the fingertips just above the needle site. 2. Internal vibration (humming) The child is asked to make an "mmmm" humming sound during the blood draw. 3. Control group The blood draw is done as usual, with no extra method. This group is the comparison point used to measure the effect of the other two methods. Where and when will the study take place? * Place: Kepez State Hospital Blood Collection Outpatient Clinic (Antalya, Türkiye). * Data collection period: June 2026 - June 2027. The total study duration is about 12 months. * Planned number of participants: 126 children in total (42 in each group). This number was set in advance by a statistical calculation so the results would be reliable. Taking part is completely voluntary * Your child does not have to take part. Even if you agree, you may withdraw at any time without giving a reason. * Not taking part, or withdrawing, will not affect the health care your child receives in any way. * Your child may also say they do not want the method; the child's decision is

The aim of this prospective, randomized controlled trial is to compare the analgesic efficacy of transverse versus longitudinal ultrasound probe orientations during Serratus Anterior Plane (SAP) block in patients undergoing breast surgery. The study hypothesizes that the longitudinal approach (probe parallel to the ribs) may provide better craniocaudal spread of the local anesthetic, thereby resulting in lower postoperative Visual Analog Scale (VAS) scores and reduced opioid consumption compared to the standard transverse approach.

Postoperative pain management is crucial for patients undergoing mastectomy for breast cancer. Regional analgesia techniques, such as the Thoracic Paravertebral Block (TPVB), are commonly used to reduce pain and opioid consumption; however, TPVB carries potential risks, including pneumothorax. Interfascial plane blocks, specifically the Pectoral Nerve II (PECS II) block combined with the Superficial Parasternal Intercostal Plane (PIP) block, have emerged as alternative techniques to provide comprehensive analgesia to both the lateral and anterior chest wall. The purpose of this randomized controlled trial is to evaluate and compare the analgesic efficacy and quality of postoperative recovery between a combination of ultrasound-guided PECS II and PIP blocks versus the standard Thoracic Paravertebral Block (TPVB) in patients undergoing mastectomy with or without axillary lymph node dissection (ALND). Participants will be randomly assigned to receive either the combined PECS II and PIP block or the TPVB following general anesthesia induction. Pain scores, total opioid consumption, time to first analgesic request, quality of recovery using the QoR-15 questionnaire, and potential block-related complications will be monitored and compared over the 24-hour postoperative period.

The goal of this observational registry is to systematically collect and analyse real-world clinical and patient-reported data in individuals receiving treatment for acute and chronic pain. The main questions it aims to answer are: How do pain intensity, functional status, and quality of life evolve over time in patients with acute and chronic pain? How are different routine clinical treatment approaches associated with patient-reported outcomes in real-world clinical practice? Participants already receiving standard care for pain management will have routine clinical data recorded as part of their treatment and will be asked to complete standardized questionnaires on pain intensity, functional status, and quality of life at multiple time points during treatment and follow-up. Data are collected using a secure electronic system and are pseudonymised prior to analysis in accordance with Swiss data protection regulations.

This project is a single-site, three-arm, randomized controlled trial investigating whether different length audio-recorded mindfulness practices differentially decrease pain among patients in a waiting room awaiting orthopedic care.

This prospective cohort study will evaluate the association between the overall burden of regional anesthesia and early clinical outcomes in adult patients with polytrauma. Patients with severe trauma often experience pain from multiple injury sites and may require more than one peripheral nerve block or continuous regional anesthesia catheter. While regional anesthesia can improve pain control and reduce opioid use, multiple blocks and catheters may also increase treatment complexity, local anesthetic exposure, motor weakness, and monitoring challenges. The study will prospectively collect data on the number and type of regional anesthesia procedures, local anesthetic exposure, catheter use, pain intensity, opioid consumption, mobility, complications, and early recovery outcomes. The goal is to determine whether increasing regional anesthesia burden is associated with improved analgesia, functional recovery, or increased risk in polytrauma patients.

To address the current limitations related to infant pain assessment in the NICU, our international team of knowledge users and health/natural science/engineering/social science researchers have come together to build a machine learning algorithm that will learn how to discriminate invasive and non-invasive distress. Furthermore, to improve the use of current pain management practices, our team seeks to better understand the developmental mechanisms underlying skin-to-skin contact over time and factors that may influence its efficacy in mitigating pain responses in preterm infants. This is an ongoing naturalistic observational study.

Supratentorial brain tumor surgeries are associated with significant nociceptive stimulation and postoperative pain, which may adversely affect patient outcomes. Scalp block has emerged as an effective regional anesthetic technique to improve analgesia and reduce opioid consumption. Objective: To compare efficacy of ketamine versus dexmedetomidine as adjuvants to bupivacaine in scalp blocks for supratentorial brain tumor surgeries, focusing on analgesia, opioid consumption, and hemodynamic stability. Methods: This randomized double-blinded controlled trial included 80 patients undergoing supratentorial tumor excision, allocated equally into two groups: Group K received bupivacaine with ketamine (2 mg/kg), and Group D received bupivacaine with dexmedetomidine (1 µg/kg). Intraoperative hemodynamics, fentanyl consumption, postoperative pain scores (NRS), analgesic requirements, and complications were assessed.

A total of 14-18 healthy volunteers will be included. There will be three different procedure days, separated by at least one week. On each visit, the subjects will receive a QL block, according to the randomization process. Each volunteer will undergo pre-procedure screening on the first visit. The blocks will be performed on the same side, by the same anesthesiologist, with at least one week between each block. An anterior QL block will be administered on one day, a posterior QL block on another, and a lateral QL block on the third. The order will be randomized, and both the subject and the research team member assessing the block will be blinded. To compare the dermatomal sensory block distribution, the investigators will use detailed mapping with pinprick, cold, and heat stimuli. A handheld dynamometric assessment of lower extremity strength. The testing will be performed 60 to 90 minutes after performance of the blocks.

The feeling of pain is not just a sensory experience, but is also influenced by emotions, beliefs and expectations, making pain a highly subjective experience. This is evident in clinical practice, where the behavior of the physician and the treatment context can strongly influence the pain experience of patients. Research has shown that patients' expectation that a treatment will reduce pain influences individual perception of pain, even if the treatment has no active ingredient. The expectancy-induced analgesia emerges due to a modulation of the individual pain experience of patients by an engagement of endogenous inhibitory systems in the central nervous system. The development of expectancy-induced analgesia can be generated in several ways. The investigators have previously demonstrated that social information and observational learning (e.g. the patient observes analgesia in another person receiving a treatment) can lead to expectancy-induced analgesia and pain reduction. However, the neural mechanisms (mechanisms in the brain) of how these expectancies are acquired and the neural mechanisms of analgesia induced by observational learning are unknown. The investigators recently established a procedure to investigate neural mechanisms of observational learning in placebo analgesia. Here the investigators propose to investigate the influence of vasopressin, a neurotransmitter that is important for social interaction, on observational learning. The investigators will use functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI), a non-invasive method, to investigate neural activity in humans. Participants will either receive vasopressin or saline with a nasal spray. During fMRI scanning, participants will then undergo an observational learning phase, where the study participants will learn the experience of analgesia in another person through a video, and a testing phase, where participants will perceive painful stimulations with the same cues as the observational phase. The comparison of the vasopressin group and the saline group will allow us to investigate how vasopressin influences behavioral effects of observational learning on pain perception as well as its effect on the neural processing of observational learning. A better understanding of how the human brain processes observationally-induced analgesia would allow us to improve the therapeutic context of pain treatments by increasing the contextual factors which help patients cope with pain.

The aim of this study is to evaluate the postoperative analgesic efficacy of the Serratus Posterior Superior Intercostal Plane Block (SPSIP block) in patients undergoing Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion (ACDF) surgery and to compare the outcomes with those of patients who do not receive regional anesthesia.

This randomized, blinded, controlled clinical trial aims to evaluate the effectiveness of ultrasound-guided retrolaminar block in reducing postoperative opioid consumption in patients undergoing lumbar spine fusion surgery under multimodal analgesia. The participants will: * Be randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive either a retrolaminar block with 0.25% bupivacaine plus epinephrine or a sham block (normal saline) prior to surgical incision. * Receive standardized multimodal analgesia. * Have follow-up by the Acute Pain Unit during the first 3 days, to assess opioid consumption (morphine) in 24 hours, pain intensity measured by Numeric Rating Scale, quality of recovery assessed by the QoR-15 questionnaire, intraoperative blood loss, and postoperative complications.

Combogesic® IV is an intravenous medicine (given by vein) containing a combination of two pain relief (analgesic) medicines called ibuprofen and acetaminophen. The goal of this clinical trial is to study the way that the body processes and clears the intravenous infusion of Combogesic® IV and that it is safe to be used in children and adolescents between the ages of 2 and \<17 years. What will the study involve for participants? * Combogesic® IV will be administered every 6 hours as necessary with a maximum of 4 doses within a 24-hour period as an intravenous infusion for about 15 minutes. * Participants will receive Combogesic® IV for a minimum of 12 hours (2 doses) up to a maximum of 5 days (20 doses). Dosing will be dependent on body weight. * If pain is not sufficiently controlled by Combogesic® IV, opioids may be used as supplementary pain relief at the discretion of the study doctor. * Have their blood samples collected before dosing and at specific times after dosing. The amount of study drug in the blood will be measured, and safety assessments (including blood and urine samples) will be done. * Rate the study drug at the end of the treatment. It is expected that Combogesic® IV will be well tolerated in children and adolescents and that the pharmacokinetics findings will be similar as compared with adults.

Total hip arthroplasty (THA) causes moderate-to-severe postoperative pain. The PROSPECT guideline recommends the supra-inguinal fascia iliaca compartment block (SI-FICB) for THA, whereas evidence for newer quadratus-lumborum-family blocks is limited. The quadro-iliac plane block (QIPB) is a recently described fascial plane block, and no study has compared QIPB with SI-FICB head-to-head in any surgical context. In this prospective, double-blind, patients undergoing elective THA who receive one of the two routinely used preoperative blocks (SI-FICB or QIPB, chosen by the attending anesthesiologist as part of routine care) are systematically observed and compared. The primary objective is to assess whether the postoperative analgesic efficacy of QIPB is non-inferior to SI-FICB, using the resting NRS pain score at 6 hours postoperatively as the primary endpoint (non-inferiority margin Δ = 1.3).

Each year, over 3.5 million, mostly, healthy young adults, have their third molar teeth ('wisdom teeth') removed under sedation and are often given opioid prescriptions for managing their pain. Wisdom molar removal is one of the most common reasons for opioid prescriptions to be given to adolescents. There is a national thrust to reduce both the dose and the duration of such opioid prescriptions because even short-term opioid exposures increase risk for narcotic addiction and misuse. Non-opioid options to manage pain will still allow for sufficient pain control without risking addiction, and hence, a fundamental component of our response to combat the current national opioid crisis. The investigators are going to study a promising option- the Twin Block dental anesthetic injection. The Twin block involves injecting the standard dental numbing medication in a way that 'numbs' the 'jaw-clencher' muscles on the side of the face. The investigators found that the Twin block relieved jaw pain stemming from these muscles, in a quick and sustained manner, even in patients whose pain following wisdom tooth removal primarily came from 'taut' and tender jaw-clencher muscles. However, what is not known is- how often do patients who have their wisdom teeth removed under sedation, end up in significant pain from taut and tender jaw-clencher muscles? Will using the twin block effectively reduce pain in such patients? In this pilot study, the investigators will examine wisdom molar extraction patients one day after their procedure. Those with significant pain (pain rated ≥ 5 on a 0-10 scale) in their jaw-clencher muscles, will get either the Twin block injection or a placebo. The investigators will track both 1) pain before and after the injection, and 2) pain medication usage over a 7-day period to see if both pain and opioid dosage come down with the Twin block. This study can support a simple, safe and inexpensive means to reduce pain after a common procedure.

Regional anesthesia techniques (or nerve blocks) are used to provide sensory blockade over the abdominal wall. The most established technique is thoracic epidural. This provides bilateral spread but is also associated with neuraxial complications, which has led to a decrease in clinical usage. The rectus sheath block (RSB) is an established regional anesthesia technique used to provide somatic analgesia to the midline anterior abdominal wall by depositing local anesthetic in the posterior rectus sheath, thereby targeting the terminal anterior branches of the lower thoracic intercostal nerves. The conventional approach involves placing the ultrasound (US) probe transversely across the rectus abdominis muscle and advancing the needle in-plane either lateral-to-medial or medial-to-lateral. While this technique achieves spread within the sheath, the cephalocaudal distribution of local anesthetic may be suboptimal, potentially limiting the extent of dermatomal coverage. A longitudinal probe orientation, with needle insertion from cephalad to caudad, may theoretically facilitate a more extensive cranio-caudal spread by aligning the injection axis with the anatomical fascial plane of the posterior rectus sheath. However, the relative efficacy of these two approaches has not been investigated in a controlled, comparative setting. Thus, this randomized, single-blinded trial aims to evaluate the dermatomal sensory distribution and ultrasound-assessed local anesthetic spread achieved by the transverse versus longitudinal in-plane approaches to ultrasound-guided RSB in healthy adult volunteers. To compare the dermatomal sensory block distribution, investigators will use dermatomal mapping with pinprick, and cold.

This study will prospectively compare the preventive effect of liposomal bupivacaine combined with plain bupivacaine versus plain bupivacaine alone on rebound pain after nerve block in patients undergoing orthopedic extremity surgery. The primary aim is to assess whether the combination reduces the incidence or severity of rebound pain (i.e., more effectively covers the postoperative inflammatory peak on days 2-3 and provides a smoother regression curve of sensory blockade). Secondary aims include evaluation of upper limb functional scores, occurrence of chronic pain, and health-related quality of life. All aims will be assessed over 72 hours or the duration of hospitalization if shorter.

The purpose of this study is to compare the effectiveness of three different intravenous (IV) patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) regimens-Fentanyl, Tramadol, and Ibuprofen-in managing postoperative pain and respiratory performance in patients undergoing Video-Assisted Thoracoscopic Surgery (VATS). While regional blocks like Erector Spinae Plane (ESP) block provide effective early analgesia, their effect typically diminishes after 8-12 hours, leading to potential 'rebound pain.' This study specifically investigates the period following the duration of the regional block's action. The primary goal is to evaluate which IV PCA protocol better controls pain (Visual Analog Scale scores) and supports better respiratory performance (measured by incentive spirometry) during the first 72 hours post-surgery

The main goal of the project is to assess pain levels and patient comfort during the administration of a 50:50 Nitrous Oxide/Oxygen gas mixture, in comparison to the same parameters under the standard method used at our institution, which includes injecting a local anaesthetic at the site of planned puncture for central venous catheterisation.

The goal of this observational study is to learn about how regional anesthesia (numbing medication) affects pain in patients with different psychosocial phenotypes such as different levels of concern about pain, sleep issues, and anxiety, who are having surgery. The main questions are: 1. Do psychosocial factors such as concerns about pain, sleep, anxiety affect the effectiveness of regional anesthesia? 2. Do psychosocial factors and regional anesthesia affect the amount of opioids used after surgery? 3. Do psychosocial factors and regional anesthesia affect development of chronic postsurgical pain?

Preservatives such as m-Cresol are essential components in many subcutaneously injected medications, including insulin or human growth hormone, to prevent bacterial growth. However, clinical reports have suggested that these preservatives may cause local discomfort or pain at the injection site, which can negatively impact treatment adherence. While m-Cresol is widely used, its direct contribution to injection-site pain has not yet been investigated in a prospective clinical trial. This study aims to investigate whether subcutaneous injection of m-Cresol at concentrations commonly used in clinical practice (0.1% and 0.25%) cause significantly more pain than a preservative-free control solution. In a randomized, double-blind crossover design, healthy volunteers will receive three separate injections in a belly fold. Participants will rate their pain every 5 seconds until it subsides. The findings will help determine if m-Cresol is a primary source of injection-site pain and could lead to the development of more comfortable drug formulations.

This is a prospective, single-arm, open-label, pilot clinical study to evaluate the efficacy and safety of topical 10% high-concentration 35 kDa hyaluronan (HA35) gel in subjects with herpes zoster-associated pain (ZAP). Eligible participants will receive a single topical application of the study gel. The primary objective is to assess rapid pain reduction within 2 minutes and 24hours after application. Secondary objectives include evaluation of analgesic duration, local tolerability, erythema improvement, and overall safety throughout the observation period. This is a minimal-risk, non-pharmacological supportive care intervention.

The purpose of this study is to evaluate the safety and efficacy of LY4515100 and see how a single oral dose compares with placebo in acute postsurgical pain after removing impacted third molars. For each participant, the study may last approximately 6 weeks and will include a stay in a Clinical Research Unit (CRU) after third molar removal.

This randomized controlled trial aims to evaluate the effect of the ShotBlocker device on pain, anxiety, and patient satisfaction during peripheral intravenous catheterization (PIVC). Peripheral intravenous catheterization is a commonly performed procedure in clinical settings and is often associated with pain and anxiety, which may negatively affect patient experience. The ShotBlocker is a simple, non-pharmacological device designed to reduce pain by applying pressure and sensory stimulation at the injection site. Participants will be randomly assigned to either the intervention group, where the ShotBlocker will be used during the procedure, or the control group, where routine care will be provided.Pain will be assessed using the Visual Analog Scale (VAS). Anxiety and patient satisfaction will be evaluated using a visual analog-based scale supported , combining features of the Visual Analog Scale and the Wong-Baker Faces Scale, with scores ranging from 0 to 10. The findings of this study are expected to contribute to evidence-based nursing practices by providing an effective, low-cost, and non-invasive method for reducing procedural discomfort and improving patient experience during PIVC.