Tolerability of different doses of oliceridine versus traditional opioids in acute pain management: a systematic review and meta-analysis

This study aims to deliver a systematic review and meta-analysis to scrutinize the tolerability of different doses of oliceridine in acute pain patients. A comprehensive search was carried out in essential databases (PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science) for relevant studies up to th...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published inScientific reports Vol. 15; no. 1; pp. 11470 - 14
Main Authors Liu, Yulin, Zhu, Ying, Fu, Hong
Format Journal Article
LanguageEnglish
Published London Nature Publishing Group UK 03.04.2025
Nature Publishing Group
Nature Portfolio
Subjects
Online AccessGet full text

Cover

Loading…
Abstract This study aims to deliver a systematic review and meta-analysis to scrutinize the tolerability of different doses of oliceridine in acute pain patients. A comprehensive search was carried out in essential databases (PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science) for relevant studies up to the most recent available date.We included Randomized Controlled Trials (RCTs) that compared oliceridine with other interventions in acute pain management. Patients received an equi-analgesic dose of oliceridine relative to morphine, ensuring comparable Sum of Pain Intensity Differences (SPID-48 or SPID-24) or mean pain score reductions across groups. The initial loading dose was 1.5 mg for oliceridine and 4 mg for morphine, followed by demand doses via patient-controlled analgesia (PCA). For oliceridine, the demand doses were 0.1, 0.35, or 0.5 mg, while for morphine, it was 1 mg.Utilizing the Review Manager 5.4, data on nausea, vomiting, sedation, dizziness, pruritus, and hypoxemia were assembled and evaluated.We conducted sensitivity analyses to confirm the robustness of our findings. The preliminary search discovered 710 potential studies. Having gone through a careful screening process, a total of 7 RCTs met our inclusion benchmarks. Five distinct publications analyzed postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV). According to our meta-analysis findings, patients assigned to the oliceridine group experienced a notably lower rate of postoperative nausea (PON) and postoperative vomiting (POV) compared to the morphine group (PON: RR = 0.55, 95% CI 0.41–0.74, P  < 0.001; POV: RR = 0.36, 95% CI 0.28–0.47, P  < 0.001). Data from 4 documents examined sedation and dizziness. Our findings demonstrate that oliceridine recipients had a significant decline in the incidence of both sedation and dizziness (sedation: RR = 0.64, 95% CI 0.45–0.91, P  = 0.01; dizziness: RR = 0.71, 95% CI 0.57–0.88, P  = 0.002).Moreover, the oliceridine group recorded a lower incident of hypoxemia showcasing a favorable safety profile (RR = 0.52, 95% CI 0.41–0.65, P  < 0.001).Sensitivity analyses confirmed the robustness of these findings. The systematic review and meta-analysis reveal that oliceridine is a well-tolerated and safe intravenous analgesic for acute pain patients, often reducing the incidence of adverse events in comparison to morphine.
AbstractList This study aims to deliver a systematic review and meta-analysis to scrutinize the tolerability of different doses of oliceridine in acute pain patients. A comprehensive search was carried out in essential databases (PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science) for relevant studies up to the most recent available date.We included Randomized Controlled Trials (RCTs) that compared oliceridine with other interventions in acute pain management. Patients received an equi-analgesic dose of oliceridine relative to morphine, ensuring comparable Sum of Pain Intensity Differences (SPID-48 or SPID-24) or mean pain score reductions across groups. The initial loading dose was 1.5 mg for oliceridine and 4 mg for morphine, followed by demand doses via patient-controlled analgesia (PCA). For oliceridine, the demand doses were 0.1, 0.35, or 0.5 mg, while for morphine, it was 1 mg.Utilizing the Review Manager 5.4, data on nausea, vomiting, sedation, dizziness, pruritus, and hypoxemia were assembled and evaluated.We conducted sensitivity analyses to confirm the robustness of our findings. The preliminary search discovered 710 potential studies. Having gone through a careful screening process, a total of 7 RCTs met our inclusion benchmarks. Five distinct publications analyzed postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV). According to our meta-analysis findings, patients assigned to the oliceridine group experienced a notably lower rate of postoperative nausea (PON) and postoperative vomiting (POV) compared to the morphine group (PON: RR = 0.55, 95% CI 0.41–0.74, P  < 0.001; POV: RR = 0.36, 95% CI 0.28–0.47, P  < 0.001). Data from 4 documents examined sedation and dizziness. Our findings demonstrate that oliceridine recipients had a significant decline in the incidence of both sedation and dizziness (sedation: RR = 0.64, 95% CI 0.45–0.91, P  = 0.01; dizziness: RR = 0.71, 95% CI 0.57–0.88, P  = 0.002).Moreover, the oliceridine group recorded a lower incident of hypoxemia showcasing a favorable safety profile (RR = 0.52, 95% CI 0.41–0.65, P  < 0.001).Sensitivity analyses confirmed the robustness of these findings. The systematic review and meta-analysis reveal that oliceridine is a well-tolerated and safe intravenous analgesic for acute pain patients, often reducing the incidence of adverse events in comparison to morphine.
This study aims to deliver a systematic review and meta-analysis to scrutinize the tolerability of different doses of oliceridine in acute pain patients. A comprehensive search was carried out in essential databases (PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science) for relevant studies up to the most recent available date.We included Randomized Controlled Trials (RCTs) that compared oliceridine with other interventions in acute pain management. Patients received an equi-analgesic dose of oliceridine relative to morphine, ensuring comparable Sum of Pain Intensity Differences (SPID-48 or SPID-24) or mean pain score reductions across groups. The initial loading dose was 1.5 mg for oliceridine and 4 mg for morphine, followed by demand doses via patient-controlled analgesia (PCA). For oliceridine, the demand doses were 0.1, 0.35, or 0.5 mg, while for morphine, it was 1 mg.Utilizing the Review Manager 5.4, data on nausea, vomiting, sedation, dizziness, pruritus, and hypoxemia were assembled and evaluated.We conducted sensitivity analyses to confirm the robustness of our findings. The preliminary search discovered 710 potential studies. Having gone through a careful screening process, a total of 7 RCTs met our inclusion benchmarks. Five distinct publications analyzed postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV). According to our meta-analysis findings, patients assigned to the oliceridine group experienced a notably lower rate of postoperative nausea (PON) and postoperative vomiting (POV) compared to the morphine group (PON: RR = 0.55, 95% CI 0.41-0.74, P < 0.001; POV: RR = 0.36, 95% CI 0.28-0.47, P < 0.001). Data from 4 documents examined sedation and dizziness. Our findings demonstrate that oliceridine recipients had a significant decline in the incidence of both sedation and dizziness (sedation: RR = 0.64, 95% CI 0.45-0.91, P = 0.01; dizziness: RR = 0.71, 95% CI 0.57-0.88, P = 0.002).Moreover, the oliceridine group recorded a lower incident of hypoxemia showcasing a favorable safety profile (RR = 0.52, 95% CI 0.41-0.65, P < 0.001).Sensitivity analyses confirmed the robustness of these findings. The systematic review and meta-analysis reveal that oliceridine is a well-tolerated and safe intravenous analgesic for acute pain patients, often reducing the incidence of adverse events in comparison to morphine.
This study aims to deliver a systematic review and meta-analysis to scrutinize the tolerability of different doses of oliceridine in acute pain patients. A comprehensive search was carried out in essential databases (PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science) for relevant studies up to the most recent available date.We included Randomized Controlled Trials (RCTs) that compared oliceridine with other interventions in acute pain management. Patients received an equi-analgesic dose of oliceridine relative to morphine, ensuring comparable Sum of Pain Intensity Differences (SPID-48 or SPID-24) or mean pain score reductions across groups. The initial loading dose was 1.5 mg for oliceridine and 4 mg for morphine, followed by demand doses via patient-controlled analgesia (PCA). For oliceridine, the demand doses were 0.1, 0.35, or 0.5 mg, while for morphine, it was 1 mg.Utilizing the Review Manager 5.4, data on nausea, vomiting, sedation, dizziness, pruritus, and hypoxemia were assembled and evaluated.We conducted sensitivity analyses to confirm the robustness of our findings. The preliminary search discovered 710 potential studies. Having gone through a careful screening process, a total of 7 RCTs met our inclusion benchmarks. Five distinct publications analyzed postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV). According to our meta-analysis findings, patients assigned to the oliceridine group experienced a notably lower rate of postoperative nausea (PON) and postoperative vomiting (POV) compared to the morphine group (PON: RR = 0.55, 95% CI 0.41-0.74, P < 0.001; POV: RR = 0.36, 95% CI 0.28-0.47, P < 0.001). Data from 4 documents examined sedation and dizziness. Our findings demonstrate that oliceridine recipients had a significant decline in the incidence of both sedation and dizziness (sedation: RR = 0.64, 95% CI 0.45-0.91, P = 0.01; dizziness: RR = 0.71, 95% CI 0.57-0.88, P = 0.002).Moreover, the oliceridine group recorded a lower incident of hypoxemia showcasing a favorable safety profile (RR = 0.52, 95% CI 0.41-0.65, P < 0.001).Sensitivity analyses confirmed the robustness of these findings. The systematic review and meta-analysis reveal that oliceridine is a well-tolerated and safe intravenous analgesic for acute pain patients, often reducing the incidence of adverse events in comparison to morphine.This study aims to deliver a systematic review and meta-analysis to scrutinize the tolerability of different doses of oliceridine in acute pain patients. A comprehensive search was carried out in essential databases (PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science) for relevant studies up to the most recent available date.We included Randomized Controlled Trials (RCTs) that compared oliceridine with other interventions in acute pain management. Patients received an equi-analgesic dose of oliceridine relative to morphine, ensuring comparable Sum of Pain Intensity Differences (SPID-48 or SPID-24) or mean pain score reductions across groups. The initial loading dose was 1.5 mg for oliceridine and 4 mg for morphine, followed by demand doses via patient-controlled analgesia (PCA). For oliceridine, the demand doses were 0.1, 0.35, or 0.5 mg, while for morphine, it was 1 mg.Utilizing the Review Manager 5.4, data on nausea, vomiting, sedation, dizziness, pruritus, and hypoxemia were assembled and evaluated.We conducted sensitivity analyses to confirm the robustness of our findings. The preliminary search discovered 710 potential studies. Having gone through a careful screening process, a total of 7 RCTs met our inclusion benchmarks. Five distinct publications analyzed postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV). According to our meta-analysis findings, patients assigned to the oliceridine group experienced a notably lower rate of postoperative nausea (PON) and postoperative vomiting (POV) compared to the morphine group (PON: RR = 0.55, 95% CI 0.41-0.74, P < 0.001; POV: RR = 0.36, 95% CI 0.28-0.47, P < 0.001). Data from 4 documents examined sedation and dizziness. Our findings demonstrate that oliceridine recipients had a significant decline in the incidence of both sedation and dizziness (sedation: RR = 0.64, 95% CI 0.45-0.91, P = 0.01; dizziness: RR = 0.71, 95% CI 0.57-0.88, P = 0.002).Moreover, the oliceridine group recorded a lower incident of hypoxemia showcasing a favorable safety profile (RR = 0.52, 95% CI 0.41-0.65, P < 0.001).Sensitivity analyses confirmed the robustness of these findings. The systematic review and meta-analysis reveal that oliceridine is a well-tolerated and safe intravenous analgesic for acute pain patients, often reducing the incidence of adverse events in comparison to morphine.
Abstract This study aims to deliver a systematic review and meta-analysis to scrutinize the tolerability of different doses of oliceridine in acute pain patients. A comprehensive search was carried out in essential databases (PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science) for relevant studies up to the most recent available date.We included Randomized Controlled Trials (RCTs) that compared oliceridine with other interventions in acute pain management. Patients received an equi-analgesic dose of oliceridine relative to morphine, ensuring comparable Sum of Pain Intensity Differences (SPID-48 or SPID-24) or mean pain score reductions across groups. The initial loading dose was 1.5 mg for oliceridine and 4 mg for morphine, followed by demand doses via patient-controlled analgesia (PCA). For oliceridine, the demand doses were 0.1, 0.35, or 0.5 mg, while for morphine, it was 1 mg.Utilizing the Review Manager 5.4, data on nausea, vomiting, sedation, dizziness, pruritus, and hypoxemia were assembled and evaluated.We conducted sensitivity analyses to confirm the robustness of our findings. The preliminary search discovered 710 potential studies. Having gone through a careful screening process, a total of 7 RCTs met our inclusion benchmarks. Five distinct publications analyzed postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV). According to our meta-analysis findings, patients assigned to the oliceridine group experienced a notably lower rate of postoperative nausea (PON) and postoperative vomiting (POV) compared to the morphine group (PON: RR = 0.55, 95% CI 0.41–0.74, P < 0.001; POV: RR = 0.36, 95% CI 0.28–0.47, P < 0.001). Data from 4 documents examined sedation and dizziness. Our findings demonstrate that oliceridine recipients had a significant decline in the incidence of both sedation and dizziness (sedation: RR = 0.64, 95% CI 0.45–0.91, P = 0.01; dizziness: RR = 0.71, 95% CI 0.57–0.88, P = 0.002).Moreover, the oliceridine group recorded a lower incident of hypoxemia showcasing a favorable safety profile (RR = 0.52, 95% CI 0.41–0.65, P < 0.001).Sensitivity analyses confirmed the robustness of these findings. The systematic review and meta-analysis reveal that oliceridine is a well-tolerated and safe intravenous analgesic for acute pain patients, often reducing the incidence of adverse events in comparison to morphine.
This study aims to deliver a systematic review and meta-analysis to scrutinize the tolerability of different doses of oliceridine in acute pain patients. A comprehensive search was carried out in essential databases (PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science) for relevant studies up to the most recent available date.We included Randomized Controlled Trials (RCTs) that compared oliceridine with other interventions in acute pain management. Patients received an equi-analgesic dose of oliceridine relative to morphine, ensuring comparable Sum of Pain Intensity Differences (SPID-48 or SPID-24) or mean pain score reductions across groups. The initial loading dose was 1.5 mg for oliceridine and 4 mg for morphine, followed by demand doses via patient-controlled analgesia (PCA). For oliceridine, the demand doses were 0.1, 0.35, or 0.5 mg, while for morphine, it was 1 mg.Utilizing the Review Manager 5.4, data on nausea, vomiting, sedation, dizziness, pruritus, and hypoxemia were assembled and evaluated.We conducted sensitivity analyses to confirm the robustness of our findings. The preliminary search discovered 710 potential studies. Having gone through a careful screening process, a total of 7 RCTs met our inclusion benchmarks. Five distinct publications analyzed postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV). According to our meta-analysis findings, patients assigned to the oliceridine group experienced a notably lower rate of postoperative nausea (PON) and postoperative vomiting (POV) compared to the morphine group (PON: RR = 0.55, 95% CI 0.41–0.74, P < 0.001; POV: RR = 0.36, 95% CI 0.28–0.47, P < 0.001). Data from 4 documents examined sedation and dizziness. Our findings demonstrate that oliceridine recipients had a significant decline in the incidence of both sedation and dizziness (sedation: RR = 0.64, 95% CI 0.45–0.91, P = 0.01; dizziness: RR = 0.71, 95% CI 0.57–0.88, P = 0.002).Moreover, the oliceridine group recorded a lower incident of hypoxemia showcasing a favorable safety profile (RR = 0.52, 95% CI 0.41–0.65, P < 0.001).Sensitivity analyses confirmed the robustness of these findings. The systematic review and meta-analysis reveal that oliceridine is a well-tolerated and safe intravenous analgesic for acute pain patients, often reducing the incidence of adverse events in comparison to morphine.
ArticleNumber 11470
Author Zhu, Ying
Fu, Hong
Liu, Yulin
Author_xml – sequence: 1
  givenname: Yulin
  surname: Liu
  fullname: Liu, Yulin
  organization: Chongqing University Central Hospital, Chongqing Emergency Medical Center, Department of Anesthesiology
– sequence: 2
  givenname: Ying
  surname: Zhu
  fullname: Zhu, Ying
  organization: Chongqing University Central Hospital, Chongqing Emergency Medical Center, Department of Anesthesiology
– sequence: 3
  givenname: Hong
  surname: Fu
  fullname: Fu, Hong
  email: fuhong1974@cqu.edu.cn
  organization: Chongqing University Central Hospital, Chongqing Emergency Medical Center, Department of Anesthesiology
BackLink https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/40181183$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed
BookMark eNp9kstu1TAQhiNUREvpC7BAltiwCfiW2GaHKi6VKrEpa2sST45cJfbBdorOI_DW-DSlIBbYkj0affPPWP6fNychBmyal4y-ZVTod1myzuiW8q41nVG6NU-aM05l13LB-clf8WlzkfMtravjRjLzrDmVlGnGtDhrft7EGRMMfvblQOJEnJ8mTBgKcTFjPqbi7EdM3vmA5A5TXjMpCZwvPgaYSdz76F0mPhAY14JkDzVcIMAOlyr0ngDJh1xwgeJHkvDO4w8CwZEFC7SVmw_Z5xfN0wnmjBcP93nz7dPHm8sv7fXXz1eXH67bUQpdWiaY7sFo3fXAYFJGSqHEoBiOnRrRMdUbNEo6KrgcRA-0ZwP2VFApuWEozpurTddFuLX75BdIBxvB2_tETDsLqQ46o1XUqEF0iureSOhlPQDc6BR1htdOVevNprVP8fuKudjF5xHnGQLGNdvjrKKrW1f09T_obVxTfftGcSF7Yyr16oFahwXd43i_P6wCfAPGFHNOOD0ijNqjMexmDFuNYe-NYY-qYivKFQ47TH96_6fqF5SbuiA
Cites_doi 10.1007/s40122-021-00299-0
10.2217/pmt.15.49
10.1016/j.hrthm.2021.08.028
10.2147/JPR.S137952
10.1007/s40265-020-01414-9
10.2147/JPR.S171013
10.2147/DDDT.S372612
10.1007/s40122-020-00216-x
10.3390/jpm14030276
10.1016/j.pharmthera.2022.108312
10.57264/cer-2023-0041
10.1097/ACO.0000000000001220
10.3390/ph17010029
10.1111/papr.12801
10.1016/j.tcm.2023.03.006
10.1177/1060028020987679
10.1007/s40122-021-00313-5
10.1097/j.pain.0000000000000363
10.1080/14740338.2021.1965989
10.1136/emermed-2022-212869
10.1097/ACO.0000000000001063
10.1016/j.pain.2014.06.011
10.1080/14656566.2021.1982893
10.1016/S0140-6736(22)00582-7
ContentType Journal Article
Copyright The Author(s) 2025
2025. The Author(s).
Copyright Nature Publishing Group 2025
Copyright_xml – notice: The Author(s) 2025
– notice: 2025. The Author(s).
– notice: Copyright Nature Publishing Group 2025
DBID C6C
AAYXX
CITATION
CGR
CUY
CVF
ECM
EIF
NPM
3V.
7X7
7XB
88A
88E
88I
8FE
8FH
8FI
8FJ
8FK
ABUWG
AEUYN
AFKRA
AZQEC
BBNVY
BENPR
BHPHI
CCPQU
DWQXO
FYUFA
GHDGH
GNUQQ
HCIFZ
K9.
LK8
M0S
M1P
M2P
M7P
PHGZM
PHGZT
PIMPY
PJZUB
PKEHL
PPXIY
PQEST
PQGLB
PQQKQ
PQUKI
PRINS
Q9U
7X8
DOA
DOI 10.1038/s41598-025-95978-9
DatabaseName Springer Nature OA Free Journals
CrossRef
Medline
MEDLINE
MEDLINE (Ovid)
MEDLINE
MEDLINE
PubMed
ProQuest Central (Corporate)
Health & Medical Collection
ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)
Biology Database (Alumni Edition)
Medical Database (Alumni Edition)
Science Database (Alumni Edition)
ProQuest SciTech Collection
ProQuest Natural Science Collection
Hospital Premium Collection
Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)
ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)
ProQuest Central (Alumni)
ProQuest One Sustainability
ProQuest Central UK/Ireland
ProQuest Central Essentials
Biological Science Collection
ProQuest Central
Natural Science Collection
ProQuest One Community College
ProQuest Central Korea
Health Research Premium Collection
Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)
ProQuest Central Student
SciTech Premium Collection
ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)
ProQuest Biological Science Collection
ProQuest Health & Medical Collection
Medical Database
Science Database
Biological Science Database
ProQuest Central Premium
ProQuest One Academic
Publicly Available Content Database
ProQuest Health & Medical Research Collection
ProQuest One Academic Middle East (New)
ProQuest One Health & Nursing
ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)
ProQuest One Applied & Life Sciences
ProQuest One Academic
ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition
ProQuest Central China
ProQuest Central Basic
MEDLINE - Academic
DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals
DatabaseTitle CrossRef
MEDLINE
Medline Complete
MEDLINE with Full Text
PubMed
MEDLINE (Ovid)
Publicly Available Content Database
ProQuest Central Student
ProQuest One Academic Middle East (New)
ProQuest Central Essentials
ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)
ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)
SciTech Premium Collection
ProQuest One Community College
ProQuest One Health & Nursing
ProQuest Natural Science Collection
ProQuest Central China
ProQuest Biology Journals (Alumni Edition)
ProQuest Central
ProQuest One Applied & Life Sciences
ProQuest One Sustainability
ProQuest Health & Medical Research Collection
Health Research Premium Collection
Health and Medicine Complete (Alumni Edition)
Natural Science Collection
ProQuest Central Korea
Health & Medical Research Collection
Biological Science Collection
ProQuest Central (New)
ProQuest Medical Library (Alumni)
ProQuest Science Journals (Alumni Edition)
ProQuest Biological Science Collection
ProQuest Central Basic
ProQuest Science Journals
ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition
ProQuest Hospital Collection
Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)
Biological Science Database
ProQuest SciTech Collection
ProQuest Hospital Collection (Alumni)
ProQuest Health & Medical Complete
ProQuest Medical Library
ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition
ProQuest One Academic
ProQuest One Academic (New)
ProQuest Central (Alumni)
MEDLINE - Academic
DatabaseTitleList
MEDLINE
MEDLINE - Academic

Publicly Available Content Database
Database_xml – sequence: 1
  dbid: C6C
  name: Springer Nature OA Free Journals
  url: http://www.springeropen.com/
  sourceTypes: Publisher
– sequence: 2
  dbid: DOA
  name: DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals
  url: https://www.doaj.org/
  sourceTypes: Open Website
– sequence: 3
  dbid: NPM
  name: PubMed
  url: https://proxy.k.utb.cz/login?url=http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed
  sourceTypes: Index Database
– sequence: 4
  dbid: EIF
  name: MEDLINE
  url: https://proxy.k.utb.cz/login?url=https://www.webofscience.com/wos/medline/basic-search
  sourceTypes: Index Database
– sequence: 5
  dbid: BENPR
  name: ProQuest Central
  url: https://www.proquest.com/central
  sourceTypes: Aggregation Database
DeliveryMethod fulltext_linktorsrc
Discipline Biology
EISSN 2045-2322
EndPage 14
ExternalDocumentID oai_doaj_org_article_7097b35708694a6494aaadcd70d92d17
40181183
10_1038_s41598_025_95978_9
Genre Meta-Analysis
Systematic Review
Journal Article
GrantInformation_xml – fundername: Chongqing Municipal Health Commission Medical Research Project(2024WSJK010);Norman Bethune Charitable Foundation ,Enze Pain Management Medical Research Project(ezmr2022-024); Chongqing Municipal Studios for Young and Middle-Aged Top Medical Talents ,Chongqing Municipal Health Commission Project [ZQNYXGDRCGZS2019006].
GroupedDBID 0R~
4.4
53G
5VS
7X7
88E
88I
8FE
8FH
8FI
8FJ
AAFWJ
AAJSJ
AAKDD
AASML
ABDBF
ABUWG
ACGFS
ACUHS
ADBBV
ADRAZ
AENEX
AEUYN
AFKRA
AFPKN
AJTQC
ALIPV
ALMA_UNASSIGNED_HOLDINGS
AOIJS
AZQEC
BAWUL
BBNVY
BCNDV
BENPR
BHPHI
BPHCQ
BVXVI
C6C
CCPQU
DIK
DWQXO
EBD
EBLON
EBS
ESX
FYUFA
GNUQQ
GROUPED_DOAJ
GX1
HCIFZ
HH5
HMCUK
HYE
KQ8
LK8
M1P
M2P
M7P
M~E
NAO
OK1
PHGZT
PIMPY
PQQKQ
PROAC
PSQYO
RNT
RNTTT
RPM
SNYQT
UKHRP
AARCD
AAYXX
CITATION
PHGZM
PJZUB
PPXIY
PQGLB
CGR
CUY
CVF
ECM
EIF
NPM
3V.
7XB
88A
8FK
K9.
M48
PKEHL
PQEST
PQUKI
PRINS
Q9U
7X8
PUEGO
ID FETCH-LOGICAL-c438t-13186a98856a1af7944373b71ec57ced1769e974d0324b36a061be603044291e3
IEDL.DBID AAJSJ
ISSN 2045-2322
IngestDate Wed Aug 27 01:32:05 EDT 2025
Fri Jul 11 18:51:09 EDT 2025
Wed Aug 13 09:13:20 EDT 2025
Sat May 17 01:30:16 EDT 2025
Tue Aug 05 12:08:39 EDT 2025
Fri Apr 04 01:15:54 EDT 2025
IsDoiOpenAccess true
IsOpenAccess true
IsPeerReviewed true
IsScholarly true
Issue 1
Keywords Oliceridine
Tolerability
Acute pain
Safety
Meta-analysis
Language English
License 2025. The Author(s).
LinkModel DirectLink
MergedId FETCHMERGED-LOGICAL-c438t-13186a98856a1af7944373b71ec57ced1769e974d0324b36a061be603044291e3
Notes ObjectType-Article-2
SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
content type line 14
ObjectType-Feature-3
ObjectType-Evidence Based Healthcare-1
ObjectType-Article-1
ObjectType-Feature-2
content type line 23
ObjectType-Undefined-3
OpenAccessLink https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-025-95978-9
PMID 40181183
PQID 3186234699
PQPubID 2041939
PageCount 14
ParticipantIDs doaj_primary_oai_doaj_org_article_7097b35708694a6494aaadcd70d92d17
proquest_miscellaneous_3186353538
proquest_journals_3186234699
pubmed_primary_40181183
crossref_primary_10_1038_s41598_025_95978_9
springer_journals_10_1038_s41598_025_95978_9
PublicationCentury 2000
PublicationDate 2025-04-03
PublicationDateYYYYMMDD 2025-04-03
PublicationDate_xml – month: 04
  year: 2025
  text: 2025-04-03
  day: 03
PublicationDecade 2020
PublicationPlace London
PublicationPlace_xml – name: London
– name: England
PublicationTitle Scientific reports
PublicationTitleAbbrev Sci Rep
PublicationTitleAlternate Sci Rep
PublicationYear 2025
Publisher Nature Publishing Group UK
Nature Publishing Group
Nature Portfolio
Publisher_xml – name: Nature Publishing Group UK
– name: Nature Publishing Group
– name: Nature Portfolio
References I Qureshi (95978_CR3) 2023; 40
J Biskupiak (95978_CR15) 2024; 13
ER Viscusi (95978_CR23) 2016; 6
MJ Page (95978_CR28) 2021; 88
TL Beard (95978_CR4) 2021; 10
Y Liu (95978_CR6) 2021; 55
Y Noufal (95978_CR5) 2023; 241
A Wang (95978_CR18) 2023; 17
A Burashnikov (95978_CR26) 2021; 18
AD Kaye (95978_CR16) 2021; 10
A Markham (95978_CR7) 2020; 80
Z Jin (95978_CR17) 2022; 23
Q Song (95978_CR24) 2023; 77
NK Singla (95978_CR13) 2019; 19
HS Tan (95978_CR11) 2021; 20
N Rajan (95978_CR19) 2021; 34
A Wolf (95978_CR10) 2024; 19
T Schlesinger (95978_CR20) 2023; 36
BJ Shea (95978_CR29) 2017; 358
M Lee (95978_CR25) 2024; 14
A El Sherbini (95978_CR27) 2024; 34
N Daksla (95978_CR14) 2023; 17
GB Hammer (95978_CR2) 2021; 10
JF Fiore Jr (95978_CR22) 2022; 399
ER Viscusi (95978_CR8) 2016; 157
ER Viscusi (95978_CR12) 2019; 12
N Singla (95978_CR9) 2017; 10
O Amaechi (95978_CR1) 2021; 104
DG Soergel (95978_CR21) 2014; 155
References_xml – volume: 10
  start-page: 1343
  issue: 2
  year: 2021
  ident: 95978_CR2
  publication-title: Pain Ther.
  doi: 10.1007/s40122-021-00299-0
– volume: 6
  start-page: 19
  issue: 1
  year: 2016
  ident: 95978_CR23
  publication-title: Pain Manag.
  doi: 10.2217/pmt.15.49
– volume: 18
  start-page: 2177
  issue: 12
  year: 2021
  ident: 95978_CR26
  publication-title: Heart Rhythm
  doi: 10.1016/j.hrthm.2021.08.028
– volume: 358
  year: 2017
  ident: 95978_CR29
  publication-title: Br. Med. J.
– volume: 10
  start-page: 2413
  year: 2017
  ident: 95978_CR9
  publication-title: J. Pain Res.
  doi: 10.2147/JPR.S137952
– volume: 80
  start-page: 1739
  issue: 16
  year: 2020
  ident: 95978_CR7
  publication-title: Drugs
  doi: 10.1007/s40265-020-01414-9
– volume: 19
  issue: 2
  year: 2024
  ident: 95978_CR10
  publication-title: PLoS ONE
– volume: 12
  start-page: 927
  year: 2019
  ident: 95978_CR12
  publication-title: J. Pain Res.
  doi: 10.2147/JPR.S171013
– volume: 17
  start-page: 875
  year: 2023
  ident: 95978_CR14
  publication-title: Drug Des. Devel. Ther.
  doi: 10.2147/DDDT.S372612
– volume: 10
  start-page: 401
  issue: 1
  year: 2021
  ident: 95978_CR4
  publication-title: Pain Ther.
  doi: 10.1007/s40122-020-00216-x
– volume: 104
  start-page: 63
  issue: 1
  year: 2021
  ident: 95978_CR1
  publication-title: Am. Fam. Physician.
– volume: 88
  year: 2021
  ident: 95978_CR28
  publication-title: Int. J. Surg.
– volume: 14
  start-page: 276
  issue: 3
  year: 2024
  ident: 95978_CR25
  publication-title: J Pers Med.
  doi: 10.3390/jpm14030276
– volume: 241
  year: 2023
  ident: 95978_CR5
  publication-title: Pharmacol. Ther.
  doi: 10.1016/j.pharmthera.2022.108312
– volume: 13
  start-page: e230041
  issue: 5
  year: 2024
  ident: 95978_CR15
  publication-title: J. Comp. Eff. Res.
  doi: 10.57264/cer-2023-0041
– volume: 36
  start-page: 117
  issue: 1
  year: 2023
  ident: 95978_CR20
  publication-title: Curr. Opin. Anaesthesiol.
  doi: 10.1097/ACO.0000000000001220
– volume: 17
  start-page: 29
  issue: 1
  year: 2023
  ident: 95978_CR18
  publication-title: Pharmaceuticals
  doi: 10.3390/ph17010029
– volume: 19
  start-page: 715
  issue: 7
  year: 2019
  ident: 95978_CR13
  publication-title: Pain Pract.
  doi: 10.1111/papr.12801
– volume: 34
  start-page: 279
  issue: 5
  year: 2024
  ident: 95978_CR27
  publication-title: Trends Cardiovasc. Med.
  doi: 10.1016/j.tcm.2023.03.006
– volume: 55
  start-page: 1283
  issue: 10
  year: 2021
  ident: 95978_CR6
  publication-title: Ann. Pharmacother.
  doi: 10.1177/1060028020987679
– volume: 10
  start-page: 1003
  issue: 2
  year: 2021
  ident: 95978_CR16
  publication-title: Pain Ther.
  doi: 10.1007/s40122-021-00313-5
– volume: 157
  start-page: 264
  issue: 1
  year: 2016
  ident: 95978_CR8
  publication-title: Pain
  doi: 10.1097/j.pain.0000000000000363
– volume: 20
  start-page: 1291
  issue: 11
  year: 2021
  ident: 95978_CR11
  publication-title: Expert Opin. Drug Saf.
  doi: 10.1080/14740338.2021.1965989
– volume: 40
  start-page: 499
  issue: 7
  year: 2023
  ident: 95978_CR3
  publication-title: Emerg. Med. J.
  doi: 10.1136/emermed-2022-212869
– volume: 34
  start-page: 695
  issue: 6
  year: 2021
  ident: 95978_CR19
  publication-title: Curr. Opin. Anaesthesiol.
  doi: 10.1097/ACO.0000000000001063
– volume: 155
  start-page: 1829
  issue: 9
  year: 2014
  ident: 95978_CR21
  publication-title: Pain
  doi: 10.1016/j.pain.2014.06.011
– volume: 23
  start-page: 9
  issue: 1
  year: 2022
  ident: 95978_CR17
  publication-title: Expert Opin. Pharmacother.
  doi: 10.1080/14656566.2021.1982893
– volume: 77
  start-page: 537
  issue: 5
  year: 2023
  ident: 95978_CR24
  publication-title: Acta Med. Okayama.
– volume: 399
  start-page: 2280
  issue: 10343
  year: 2022
  ident: 95978_CR22
  publication-title: Lancet
  doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(22)00582-7
SSID ssj0000529419
Score 2.443852
SecondaryResourceType review_article
Snippet This study aims to deliver a systematic review and meta-analysis to scrutinize the tolerability of different doses of oliceridine in acute pain patients. A...
Abstract This study aims to deliver a systematic review and meta-analysis to scrutinize the tolerability of different doses of oliceridine in acute pain...
SourceID doaj
proquest
pubmed
crossref
springer
SourceType Open Website
Aggregation Database
Index Database
Publisher
StartPage 11470
SubjectTerms 692/1807/1676
692/1807/1876
692/1807/244
692/1807/4018
692/1807/410
692/308
692/308/409
692/699
Acute pain
Acute Pain - drug therapy
Analgesia
Analgesics
Analgesics, Opioid - administration & dosage
Analgesics, Opioid - adverse effects
Analgesics, Opioid - therapeutic use
Anesthesia
Benchmarks
Clinical trials
Dose-Response Relationship, Drug
Drug therapy
Humanities and Social Sciences
Humans
Hypoxemia
Meta-analysis
Morphine
Morphine - administration & dosage
Morphine - adverse effects
Morphine - therapeutic use
multidisciplinary
Nausea
Oliceridine
Pain
Pain management
Pain Management - methods
Pain perception
Pruritus
Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
Safety
Science
Science (multidisciplinary)
Sensitivity analysis
Spiro Compounds - administration & dosage
Spiro Compounds - adverse effects
Spiro Compounds - therapeutic use
Systematic review
Thiophenes
Tolerability
Vomiting
SummonAdditionalLinks – databaseName: DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals
  dbid: DOA
  link: http://utb.summon.serialssolutions.com/2.0.0/link/0/eLvHCXMwrV3Ni9UwEA-yIHgRv-26SgRvWrZpvpq9reKyCHrahb2FaZLCA7d9vPYd9k_wv3am6Xu7ouJFCqWkpU0yvzAzncxvGHuXBFgLIMrOyRYdFAdU5kWVVMBOQhvQpKeI7tdv5vxSfbnSV3dKfdGesEwPnCfu2FbOtlJbNL2dAqPwBBBDtFV0dRRzHjnqvDvOVGb1rp0SbsmSqWRzPKKmomyyWpdOk-vkftFEM2H_n6zM3yKks-I5e8QeLhYjP809fczupf4Ju59rSN48ZT8uhu9pk9m2b_jQ8V3Jk4nHYUwjNRH3LyIN1VTitA1jO_JpA3GV_wPyYb0aVnHkq55D2E6JrwEvr_cbY0448FvGZ56zXTj0kV-nCUpYeE2escuzzxefzsulvkIZlGyoCr1oDLim0QYEdLgyieeotSIFbUPCyTUuob8RK7S6WmkAdX-bDAVTUYuJJJ-zg37o00vGhe5sG0MHIaCNCGg2JpGidqYRSVVKFOz9bq79OtNo-Dn8LRufJeNRMn6WjHcF-0ji2D9JFNhzAwLDL8Dw_wJGwY52wvTLuhw9jbiWyjj8xtv9bVxRFCaBPg3b_IzUeDQFe5FBsO8JQRddMlmwDztU3L787wM6_B8DesUe1ARf2jYkj9jBtNmm12gRTe2bGfw_AeNdBVM
  priority: 102
  providerName: Directory of Open Access Journals
– databaseName: Health & Medical Collection
  dbid: 7X7
  link: http://utb.summon.serialssolutions.com/2.0.0/link/0/eLvHCXMwfV3di9QwEA96Ivgifl_1lAi-ablm0zaNL6LicQj6dAf7FqZJKgtes267D_cn-F8706RdxA8KpaShpJlfMjOZ5DeMvfIClAIQeadliw6KBkrzUuaUwE5Ca9Gkp4jul6_1-WX5eV2t04LbkLZVznPiNFG7YGmN_BSxh5oanTn9bvsjp6xRFF1NKTRusltEXUaoVmu1rLFQFKsUOp2VKWRzOqC-ojNlqyrH6uhA6d_00UTb_zdb84846aR-zu6xu8lu5O-joO-zG75_wG7HTJLXD9nPi_Dd7yLn9jUPHZ8Tn4zchcEPVEQMwIg3VFae02aM_cDHHbhNXA3kYbsJGzfwTc_B7kfPt4CPV8v2mLcc-IH3mcczLxx6x6_8CDkkdpNH7PLs08XH8zxlWchtKRvKRY89C7ppqhoEdDg-ie2oVcLbSlnvhKq1R6_DFWh7tbIGtABaX1NIFXWZ8PIxO-pD748ZF1WnWmc7sBYtRUDj0QvvKl03wpdFKTL2eu5rs41kGmYKgsvGRMkYlIyZJGN0xj6QOJaaRIQ9FYTdN5PGlVGFVq2sFHpmuoS6xBuAs04VTq-w7Rk7mYVp0ugczAFLGXu5vMZxRcES6H3YxzqywqvJ2JMIgqUlBGB0zGTG3syoOHz83z_09P9tecburAiYtC1InrCjcbf3z9HiGdsXE6x_AV7D_XA
  priority: 102
  providerName: ProQuest
Title Tolerability of different doses of oliceridine versus traditional opioids in acute pain management: a systematic review and meta-analysis
URI https://link.springer.com/article/10.1038/s41598-025-95978-9
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/40181183
https://www.proquest.com/docview/3186234699
https://www.proquest.com/docview/3186353538
https://doaj.org/article/7097b35708694a6494aaadcd70d92d17
Volume 15
hasFullText 1
inHoldings 1
isFullTextHit
isPrint
link http://utb.summon.serialssolutions.com/2.0.0/link/0/eLvHCXMwlV1La9wwEBZ5UOil9JG2btNFhd4aU8uyJau3zZIQFhpCmsDexNiSy0JjL2vvIT-h_7ozfoXS9FAMtpFlW_KMPDOa0TeMffICtAYQYWlkjgaKAUrzkoSUwE5CXqBKTx7db5fq4jZZrtLVHovHtTBd0H4Hadn9psfosC8NChpaDBanoUnJ8jH77JCg2pG3D-fz5fflNLNCvqtEmGGFTCSzR27-Qwp1YP2PaZh_eUc7oXP-nD0btEU-79v3gu356iV70uePvH_Fft3UP_22R9q-53XJx3QnLXd14xsqItxf5DIUUZ5TCMau4e0W3LqfA-T1Zl2vXcPXFYdi13q-ATy9m4JivnLgD2jPvF_pwqFy_M63EMKAaXLEbs_PbhYX4ZBbISwSmVEGepEpMFmWKhBQ4qgkjKNcC1-kuvBOaGU82houQo0rlwpQ7udekSMVJZjw8jU7qOrKv2VcpKXOXVFCUaB-CKgyeuFdalQmfBIlImCfx29tNz2Ehu1c3zKzPWUsUsZ2lLEmYKdEjqkmwV93BfX2hx3YwerI6FymGu0xk4BKcAfgCqcjZ2Jse8COR2LaYUw2lnocy0QZfMfH6TKOJnKRQOXrXV9HprhlAXvTM8HUEmJbNMdkwE5Grnh4-L879O7_qr9nT2NiVAoOksfsoN3u_AfUe9p8xvb1Ss8Gdsfj6dnl1TWWLtRi1s0l_AZC-gEd
linkProvider Springer Nature
linkToHtml http://utb.summon.serialssolutions.com/2.0.0/link/0/eLvHCXMwtV1bi9QwFD6sK6Iv4t3qqhH0Scs2k7ZpBBFvy6x7eZqFeYunTUYG3HacdpD5Cf4Zf6Pn9DKDeHlbCqWkJaQ5X3LOyUnOB_DMS9QaUYYzo3JyUAwyzUscMoGdwrwgk54juien6fgs_jRNpjvwczgLw9sqhzmxnahdVfAa-T5hjzQ1OXPmzeJbyKxRHF0dKDQ6WBz59Xdy2erXhx9Ivs9Ho4OPk_fjsGcVCItYZcy9TjWhybIkRYkzwiNn98m19EWiC--kTo0nK9tFZGvkKkXSeLlPOYRIc7f0iuq9BJdJ8Ubs7Omp3qzpcNQslqY_mxOpbL8m_chn2EZJaBJ22Mxv-q-lCfibbftHXLZVdwc34Hpvp4q3HbBuwo4vb8GVjrlyfRt-TKqvftnl-F6LaiYGopVGuKr2NRdxxmHCNylHL3jzx6oWzRLdvFt9FNViXs1dLealwGLVeLFAejzfbMd5JVBs80yL7oyNwNKJc99giH02lTtwdiH9fxd2y6r090HIZKZzV8ywKMgyRTJWvfQuMWkmfRzFMoAXQ1_bRZe8w7ZBd5XZTjKWJGNbyVgTwDsWx-ZLTrzdFlTLL7Yfx1ZHRucq0eQJmhjTmG6IrnA6cmZEbQ9gbxCm7WeD2m6xG8DTzWsaxxycwdJXq-4bldCVBXCvA8GmJTxgyBFUAbwcULGt_N8_9OD_bXkCV8eTk2N7fHh69BCujRikvCVJ7cFus1z5R2RtNfnjFuICPl_0mPoF0ik3jA
linkToPdf http://utb.summon.serialssolutions.com/2.0.0/link/0/eLvHCXMwtV1ti9NAEB7OHopfxHejp66gnzS027xsVhDxvCt3npZD7uC-7U2yGyl4SW1SpD_Bv-SvcyYvLeLLt6MQShKWbeeZnZmd2XkAnjuJSiFKP9dBSgGKRqZ5CX0msAswzcil54zup2l8cBp-OIvOtuBnfxaGyyr7NbFZqG2Z8R75kLBHlpqCOT3Mu7KI473J2_k3nxmkONPa02m0EDlyq-8UvlVvDvdI1i_G48n-yfsDv2MY8LMwSJiHnUZFnSRRjBJzwiZ3-kmVdFmkMmelirUjj9uOyO9IgxjJ-qUu5nQirePSBTTuFdhWHBUNYHt3f3r8eb3Dwzm0UOrupM4oSIYVWUs-0TaOfB1x-KZ_s4YNacDfPN0_srSN8ZvchBud1yretTC7BVuuuA1XWx7L1R34cVJ-dYu24_dKlLnoaVdqYcvKVXyL-w8T2slUOsGlIMtK1Au0s3YvUpTzWTmzlZgVArNl7cQc6evFujjntUCx6Tot2hM3AgsrLlyNPna9Ve7C6aVI4B4MirJwD0DIKFepzXLMMvJTkVxXJ52NdJxIF45C6cHL_r8287aVh2lS8EFiWskYkoxpJGO0B7ssjvWb3Ia7uVEuvphOq40aaZUGkaK4UIcYh3RBtJlVI6vHNHcPdnphmm5tqMwGyR48Wz8mreZUDRauXLbvBBF9Eg_utyBYz4TVh8LCwINXPSo2g__7Bz38_1yewjXSJ_PxcHr0CK6PGaNcnxTswKBeLN1jcr3q9EmHcQHnl61WvwDg0D0n
openUrl ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info%3Aofi%2Fenc%3AUTF-8&rfr_id=info%3Asid%2Fsummon.serialssolutions.com&rft_val_fmt=info%3Aofi%2Ffmt%3Akev%3Amtx%3Ajournal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Tolerability+of+different+doses+of+oliceridine+versus+traditional+opioids+in+acute+pain+management%3A+a+systematic+review+and+meta-analysis&rft.jtitle=Scientific+reports&rft.au=Liu%2C+Yulin&rft.au=Zhu%2C+Ying&rft.au=Fu%2C+Hong&rft.date=2025-04-03&rft.issn=2045-2322&rft.eissn=2045-2322&rft.volume=15&rft.issue=1&rft_id=info:doi/10.1038%2Fs41598-025-95978-9&rft.externalDBID=n%2Fa&rft.externalDocID=10_1038_s41598_025_95978_9
thumbnail_l http://covers-cdn.summon.serialssolutions.com/index.aspx?isbn=/lc.gif&issn=2045-2322&client=summon
thumbnail_m http://covers-cdn.summon.serialssolutions.com/index.aspx?isbn=/mc.gif&issn=2045-2322&client=summon
thumbnail_s http://covers-cdn.summon.serialssolutions.com/index.aspx?isbn=/sc.gif&issn=2045-2322&client=summon