You are here

Article Text

Article menu
Systematic review
Neuropathic agents in the management of pruritus in burn injuries: a systematic review and meta-analysis
  1. Christopher McGovern1,2,
  2. Tara Quasim1,2,
  3. Kathryn Puxty1,2,
  4. Martin Shaw1,3,
  5. Wijnand Ng4,
  6. Charlotte Gilhooly1,2,
  7. Nikolaos Arkoulis5,6,
  8. Michael Basler7,
  9. Alan Macfarlane1,7,
  10. Lia Paton2
  1. 1Anaesthesia, Critical Care and Peri-operative Medicine, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK
  2. 2Anaesthesia & Critical Care, Glasgow Royal Infirmary, Glasgow, UK
  3. 3Department of Clinical Physics and Bioengineering, NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde, Glasgow, UK
  4. 4Medical Student, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK
  5. 5Plastic and Burn Surgery, Glasgow Royal Infirmary, Glasgow, UK
  6. 6Honorary Clinical Senior Lecturer (Medicine), University of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK
  7. 7Anaesthesia and Pain Medicine, Glasgow Royal Infirmary, Glasgow, UK
  1. Correspondence to Dr Christopher McGovern, Anaesthesia, Critical Care and Peri-operative Medicine, University of Glasgow, Glasgow G12 8QQ, UK; christopher.mcgovern2{at}ggc.scot.nhs.uk

Abstract

Objectives Pruritus is a common and often distressing complication after a burn injury. The purpose of this review is to explore the efficacy of drugs classically used to treat neuropathic pain in the management of pruritus after burn injury.

Methods A systematic literature search of medical databases was conducted to find studies investigating drugs listed in the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) guideline (CG173, “neuropathic pain in adults”) for the management of pruritus after burn injury in patients of any age. Controlled studies were stratified by the drug class studied and their risk of bias before conducting meta-analysis. A narrative review of case series or observational studies was presented. Severity of pruritus at any time point, with all quantitative and qualitative measures, was included.

Results Fifteen studies were included in the final analysis, 10 investigated the use of gabapentinoids, 4 studied doxepin, and 1 local anesthetic agents. Meta-analysis of three randomized controlled trials (RCTs) demonstrated that the use of gabapentinoids was associated with an improvement in mean VAS (Visual Analog Scale) 0–10 scores of 2.96 (95% confidence interval (95% CI) 1.20 to 4.73, p<0.001) when compared with placebo or antihistamine. A meta-analysis of four RCTs investigating topical doxepin showed an improvement in mean VAS scores of 1.82 (95% CI 0.55 to 3.09, p<0.001). However, when excluding two studies found to be at high risk of bias, no such improvement was found (−0.32, 95% CI −1.64 to –0.99, p=0.83).

Conclusion This study suggests that gabapentinoids are beneficial in the management of burn-related pruritus. There is a lack of evidence to suggest that doxepin is an effective treatment. Topical local anesthetic agents may be safe and beneficial, but studies are scarce.

Level of evidence Systematic review, level II.

  • burn
  • patient outcome assessment
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/

This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited, appropriate credit is given, any changes made indicated, and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/.

https://doi.org/10.1136/tsaco-2021-000810

Statistics from Altmetric.com

    Request Permissions

    If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

    Introduction

    Burn injuries are acute traumatic insults. However, even with successful treatment, it is increasingly recognized that such injuries have far reaching and long lasting consequences.1 After even relatively minor burns, patients experience a persisting inflammatory response and immune dysfunction,2 leading to an increased risk of cardiovascular disease,3 cancer,4 infections,5 and early death.6 Although seemingly minor in comparison, pruritus is an additional long-term consequence that is common and significantly affects the quality of life of patients surviving burns.

    There is a high prevalence of sensory disorders such as chronic pain, paresthesia, and pruritus in burns patients.7 The incidence of pruritus has been reported to be 93% at hospital discharge,8 67% to 73% at 2 years,8 9 and 44% at 4 years to 10 years.8 9 Factors such as deep dermal injury, greater total body surface area (TBSA) burned, an increased number of surgical interventions, female gender, and symptoms of post-traumatic stress disorder increase the risk.9

    Achieving meaningful control of pruritus symptoms can be difficult and only a paucity of clinical trials have evaluated interventions.10–12 Histamine produced both from mast cell degranulation and as a by-product of collagen formation is thought to be a major contributor to the development of pruritus. A survey performed in the UK showed that over 90% of burns units used antihistamines as the first-line treatment.13 However, the involvement of various other peripherally acting pruritogens and the pathophysiological changes that occur more centrally mean that antihistamine monotherapy is often inadequate, especially in chronic pruritus.14

    Although the neuronal pathways involved in the perception of pain have been extensively explored, the equivalent neuroanatomical basis for pruritus remains incompletely understood. A subset of afferent slow conducting C-fibers are activated by pruritogens including histamine, acetylcholine, calcitonin gene-related peptide, bradykinin, leukotrienes, prostaglandins, and various cytokines.15 Pain and pruritus share a similar neurophysiological basis, thought to be a consequence of evolutionary changes15 and after activation, these C-fibers conduct impulses in a similar manner to the pain pathway via the dorsal root ganglion, spinothalamic tract, thalamus, and then to various higher centers including the somatosensory cortex.14 15

    Similarities have been drawn between chronic pruritus and neuropathic pain. Clinical features such as hyperknesis and alloknesis mirror the hyperalgesia and allodynia seen in neuropathic pain secondary to peripheral and central sensitization.14 16 17 Such pathological processes are reflected in one classification of pruritus, as pruritogenic, neuropathic, neurogenic, and psychogenic.16

    The objective of this narrative, systematic review is to evaluate the effectiveness of agents used in neuropathic pain, as detailed by the National Institute of Clinical Excellence (NICE),18 in the management of pruritus after a burn injury.

    Methods

    Registration

    This review was registered on the PROSPERO Register of Systematic Reviews, ID number CRD42020164777. The PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses) guidelines for the conduct of systematic reviews were followed throughout.19

    Eligibility criteria

    Articles were included that investigated the management of pruritus in patients of any age that had sustained a burn injury with the use of neuropathic agents that are listed in the NICE guideline (CG173) “neuropathic pain in adults: pharmacological management in non-specialist settings”.18 Given the likelihood of several studies being observational in nature, no restrictions were made regarding the use of a control group. Animal studies, human volunteer studies, literature reviews, and conference abstracts were excluded, otherwise no restrictions on the type of study were made.

    Search strategy

    Three databases, MEDLINE, EMBASE and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), were searched with no time period or language restrictions (last accessed January 7, 2021). The search strategies for each database can be found in the online supplemental material.

    Supplemental material

    Study selection

    After amalgamation of search results from the three sources and removal of duplicates, two authors (CM, WN) independently conducted a title review, abstract review, and then full article review to select articles for inclusion. Any disagreement between the two reviewers was resolved by a third reviewer (LP). The references of all titles included in the data analysis were screened for further articles to be included.

    Data extraction

    Data were extracted by CM using a predefined spreadsheet which included study design, patient demographics, interventions, and outcomes. In the event of missing data, study investigators were contacted.

    Outcomes measured

    The outcome of interest was the severity of pruritus at any time point. No specific restrictions were used, with all quantitative severity scales, qualitative measures, and questionnaire methods of assessment included. For inclusion in meta-analysis, any quantitative scales were converted to an 11-point continuous scale and the mean difference between groups reported.

    Risk of bias assessment

    Each included study was assessed independently by CM and WN using a specific risk of bias tool. The RoB2 (the updated Cochrane risk of bias tool) was used for randomized controlled trials (RCTs), and ROBINS-I tool for non-randomized studies. The quality of evidence for the outcomes of interest were assessed using the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations) system.20

    Data synthesis

    Studies were categorized based on the intervention studied, specifically the neuropathic agent of interest, and are presented in tables for each class of agent. In controlled studies using the same drug or class of drug (eg, gabapentinoids) and comparable outcome measures (eg, a continuous variable such as visual analogue scale), results were collated using a random-effects meta-analysis, and two-sided p values and 95% confidence intervals were calculated. Heterogeneity was expressed as an I2 statistic for studies included in meta-analyses. No specific sensitivity analyses were performed; however, studies were stratified by their risk of bias and meta-analyses were conducted separately for those at high and low/moderate risk and then combined.

    For agents where only case series or observational studies were available, a narrative review of the study findings was undertaken.

    Numeric data were extracted from graphs if the required data were not included elsewhere in an article using Graphgrabber (V.2.0.2, Quintessa Ltd, Oxfordshire, United Kingdom). Meta-analysis was conducted using the software package Revman (V.5.4.1, Copenhagen: The Nordic Cochrane Centre, The Cochrane Collaboration).

    Results

    Study inclusion

    The literature search returned 5469 articles after removal of duplicates. The PRISMA flowchart (see online supplemental figure S1) details the selection process. One article required translation from Chinese.

    Figure 1
    Figure 1

    Forest plot showing the reduction in mean VAS (Visual Analog Scale) in each treatment arm, comparing gabapentinoids with controls. 95% CI, 95% confidence interval.

    Three main classes of neuropathic agents were investigated in the articles included in the final analysis:

    • Gabapentinoids (gabapentin and pregabalin).

    • Topical doxepin.

    • Topical local anesthetic agents.

    Gabapentinoids

    Ten articles21–30 investigated gabapentinoids in the management of pruritus after burn injury. Four studies were RCTs (table 1) and six were observational studies with varying methodology (table 2).

    View this table:
    Table 1

    Randomized controlled trials of gabapentinoids

    View this table:
    Table 2

    Observational studies of gabapentinoids

    Randomized controlled trials

    Three RCTs provided sufficient data to perform meta-analyses. Two studies21 30 included groups comparing gabapentin to a control arm given an antihistamine, cetirizine. Both studies demonstrated a mean reduction in pruritus severity, measured on 0 to 10 VAS (Visual Analog Scale) of around 6 points in the gabapentin group over the 28-day trial period. Those treated with cetirizine had a reduction of 3.9 and 3.5. The meta-analysis demonstrated a greater reduction in VAS score of 2.19 (95% CI 1.74 to 2.63) with gabapentin compared with cetirizine (figure 1).

    Studies by Gray et al24 and Zheng et al30 included cohorts treated with a placebo. Gabapentinoids differed between studies, with Gray et al using pregabalin 150 o 600 mg daily and Zheng et al using gabapentin 600 mg daily. Meta-analysis demonstrated an improvement in 0 to 10 itch severity score of 3.63 (95% CI −1.20 to –8.46) when a gabapentinoid was used in comparison to placebo (figure 1).

    Combination of the above subgroup meta-analyses demonstrated an improvement in VAS of 2.96 (95% CI 1.20 to 4.73) when gabapentinoids are compared with control.

    Although pruritus was not reported as a primary outcome in the study by Gray et al, it did report elements of the NPS (Neuropathic Pain Scale) including a 0 to 10 scale of pruritus severity. The effect of pregabalin on pruritus appeared much smaller than that demonstrated by the other studies included in the meta-analysis, with an improvement in mean scores of 1.17 (95% CI 0.10 to 2.24).

    A further RCT was not included in the meta-analysis.22 Although the percentage changes in mean VAS scores were reported, the analysis did not include sufficient information regarding the distribution of the sample data, such as SD, to allow inclusion.22 This trial did, however, demonstrate a 78.9% fall in mean pruritus VAS scores in the group given pregabalin in comparison to 33.3% in the placebo group when focusing on patients with the most severe initial VAS scores (9 to 10). The placebo and antihistamine groups in this study suffered high dropout rates, however, potentially reflecting inadequate symptom relief.

    Both RCTs conducted by Ahuja et al21 22 also included groups given a gabapentinoid and antihistamine in combination but found no additional benefit when compared with gabapentinoid alone.

    Observational studies

    Of the six observational studies (table 2), three were considered to be at serious risk of bias, two at moderate risk, and one to be of low risk (see online supplemental table S2). Sources of possible bias were primarily outcome measurements, which were often generated by research staff rather than patient reported.

    Mendham et al27 reported improvements in itch intensity when gabapentin was used in children with persisting itch despite treatment with antihistamines. Unfortunately, this outcome was measured solely on subjective reporting by nursing staff, parents, and children.

    Goutos et al23 investigated the use of two antipruritic protocols, with early or late introduction of gabapentin as part of incremental pharmacotherapy. In 41.5% of patients given gabapentin as the first-line agent, satisfactory itch control was achieved, in comparison to just 10% when cetirizine was used first line.

    Zachariah et al29 reported improved mean itch severity scores when gabapentin was given to pediatric and adult patients complaining of pruritus with inadequate relief on antihistamines and emollients. On a scale ranging from 7 to 21, mean itch severity scores fell from 13.35 to 8.36 within 1 month of treatment and this effect was sustained for the 6-month follow-up period.

    Kaul et al25 conducted a retrospective review of drug prescribing data of 136 mainly pediatric patients given gabapentin, pregabalin, or a combination of both for pruritus or neuropathic pain. Although 91.4% of patients had an adequate response to treatment with gabapentin alone for pruritus, the measure of this outcome relied on adequate documentation in the patient medical notes and there was no comparator or control group.

    Nieuwendijk et al28 investigated the incidence, severity, and risk factors associated with pruritus in pediatric burn injury, then went on to describe pharmacotherapies used with 17.9% having received gabapentin. Unfortunately, as the study was principally designed to explore factors associated with pruritus, no conclusions could be drawn on the effectiveness of the pharmacological therapy.

    Kneib et al26 conducted a retrospective cohort study investigating the use of a neuropathic pain and pruritus protocol. Patients were started on incremental doses of gabapentin if itch scores remained greater than 4 (on 0 to 10 NRS) despite initial treatment with cetirizine. Comparison was made between various groups including pre-protocol and post-protocol introduction as well as patients that received gabapentin early (<72 hours), late (>72 hours), or not at all. There was no difference in itch severity odds ratios between any group at discharge through to 24 months.

    Topical doxepin

    Doxepin is a tricyclic antidepressant agent, but due to its potent antihistaminergic activity, is used topically to treat pruritus in eczema. Four studies31–34 investigated the use of topical doxepin on pruritic burn scars in adult patients (table 3). Given significant differences in both the results of these studies and the risk of bias assessments, meta-analyses are presented on studies at high risk and low/moderate risk of bias separately and then combined (figure 2).

    View this table:
    Table 3

    Studies of topical doxepin

    Figure 2
    Figure 2

    Forest plot showing the reduction in mean VAS (Visual Analog Scale) in each treatment arm, comparing topical doxepin with controls. 95% CI, 95% confidence interval.

    Demling et al performed two single center RCTs comparing topical doxepin to standard care.31 34 The results of both trials showed a marked improvement in itch VAS scores at all time points compared with standard care. The results of a meta-analysis including these studies demonstrated an improvement in mean VAS score of 3.10 (95% CI 2.73 to 3.47). Both of these studies were found to be at high risk of bias from a lack of blinding and unclear randomization methods (see online supplemental table S1). Additionally, the control arm of “standard care” involved titration of oral antihistamines that all participants were already taking prior to enrollment rather than introduction of another therapy or placebo.

    Kwa et al conducted two multicenter, blinded RCTs investigating the use of doxepin cream. The first study32 showed no difference in itch intensity at any time point between doxepin cream and the control group. Due to difficulty recruiting to the trial and a high dropout rate, this study was underpowered. A second study33 addressed these recruitment issues using a cross-over study design comparing doxepin against placebo without the inclusion of an antihistamine. Again, this demonstrated no difference in itch intensity between groups. A meta-analysis of both articles by Kwa et al (figure 2) using outcome data at 14 days showed no difference in changes in VAS scores in comparison to placebo or antihistamines, with a mean VAS change of −0.32 (95% CI −1.64 to 0.99).

    All four studies investigating doxepin have been included in the final meta-analysis (figure 2) with no adjustment made for the risk of bias assessment. This demonstrated a reduction in mean VAS of 1.82 (95% CI 0.55 to 3.09). This result should be interpreted with caution as, when assessed using the GRADE tool, was found to be of very low quality, principally due to the high risk of bias (see online supplemental table S3).

    Topical local anesthetics

    One study35 investigated the use of a topical local anesthetic agent in the management of pruritus after burn injury in children 1 to 5 years old. EMLA cream, a mixture of prilocaine and lidocaine, was applied to healed partial thickness burns with persisting pruritus in five patients. The main purpose of this study was to assess the safety and pharmacokinetics of this therapy.

    This study was performed over 3 days, with the first 2 days acting as a control for the treatment being implemented on day 3. There was an improvement in itch intensity as measured by a VAS and number of pruritic episodes. Owing to the young age of the children, outcome measures were made by parents, nursing staff, and the study investigators, potentially introducing an element of bias. This study suggested that the use of such topical local anesthetic agents was safe and may have potential benefit.

    Discussion

    This systematic review identified 15 studies investigating the use of various drugs often used to manage neuropathic pain to treat pruritus after burn injury. The analysis has demonstrated that gabapentin is effective in treating pruritus after a burn injury, resulting in an improvement of around 2 points on a VAS when compared with antihistamines.

    When compared with placebo, gabapentinoids were also beneficial, although the confidence intervals in the meta-analysis were wide. The drugs used in each of the two included studies also differed, as did the indication for their initiation. Zheng et al30 investigated gabapentin in the management of pruritus, whereas Gray et al24 investigated the use of pregabalin in patients with neuropathic pain, demonstrating a much smaller improvement in pruritic symptoms. This perhaps reflects the patient selection in this study whereby pain was the cardinal symptom, rather than pruritus. Given these limitations, it is therefore not possible to conclude whether this improvement is reproducible among the class of gabapentinoids or only evident with gabapentin.

    Gabapentinoids are now used for a wide variety of indications. Although structurally similar to the inhibitory neurotransmitter GABA (gamma aminobutyric acid) found throughout the central nervous system they do not act on GABA receptors and their benefit in the management of pain and pruritus is likely to be due to action at voltage-gated calcium channels and NMDA (N-methyl D-aspartate) receptors within the spinal cord and brain, inhibiting the release of excitatory neurotransmitters.36

    Previous studies have demonstrated the benefit of gabapentinoids in reducing central sensitization and wind-up phenomenon to an acute painful stimulus in an effort to treat neuropathic pain.37 38 Such pathophysiological changes are characterized by alterations in the function of nociceptive neuronal pathways in response to persistent activation, inflammation, or injury. These changes lower the thresholds by which nociceptive neurons are activated, resulting in chronic pain syndromes and additional features such as hyperalgesia and allodynia.39 Given similar theories have been outlined to explain the pathological changes that result in chronic pruritus after burn injury, it is therefore logical that gabapentinoids may improve itch.14

    The anti-neuropathic effects of gabapentinoids are increasingly used in a spectrum of pruritic and painful conditions, many of which these drugs are not licensed for.40–49 Such expanding uses of these drugs have seen an increase in gabapentinoid prescriptions across the UK, Europe, and North America.50–53 However, the potential harm from such agents, particularly gabapentinoids, is becoming clear. A systematic review of 59 studies highlighted the increasing use of gabapentinoids for recreational use and abuse.54 In Scotland, gabapentinoids are increasingly implicated in drug-related deaths, with toxicology reports from 2017 implicating gabapentin in 14% of such deaths and pregabalin in 12%.50 Given the risks of dependence and harm with the use of these drugs,50 55–57 gabapentin and pregabalin were categorized as Class C controlled substances in the UK in April 2019.58 In the USA, pregabalin has been a Schedule 5 controlled substance since its release in 2005 and some states have recently reclassified gabapentin in the same category. Patients with a previous history of psychiatric comorbidity, alcohol, or drug misuse are at even higher risk of harm when prescribed gabapentinoids.54 55 In the context of individuals suffering a burn injury, such comorbidities are not uncommon, prompting vigilance when prescribing these drugs.59–61

    Furthermore, more work is required to establish the clinical significance of a reduction in VAS of around 2 points when compared with antihistamines alone, particularly given the potential for harm. The threshold whereby a treatment effect measured on such a scale is considered beneficial remains a topic of debate.62

    Although observational data suggest topical EMLA may be a safe and potentially effective therapeutic option when used on healed burn wounds in children, such therapy will be limited by the size of pruritic area. Systemic absorption and the risk of local anesthetic toxicity must always be considered, particularly with larger areas of application. Topical lidocaine is increasingly being used in multiple conditions63–67 but the evidence for benefit in neuropathic pain is lacking, with NICE concluding that the evidence is insufficient to issue any recommendation on its use.18 Topical lidocaine, however, has been effective in managing pruritus in animal models,68 pruritus ani,69 and notalgia paresthetica.70

    Although topical doxepin showed promise in healed burn wounds in early studies, such results have not been replicated in more recent trials described in this review. Although our meta-analysis of all studies investigating doxepin suggests an improvement in pruritic symptoms, this should be interpreted with caution due to the high risk of bias of two of the included studies.

    This systematic review has several limitations. The paucity of RCTs included in our final analysis reflects the quality of evidence investigating these drugs in patients with burns. This resulted in only small numbers being included in the meta-analyses and a narrative review being conducted for the remaining studies.

    Although the drugs we investigated are classically used to manage neuropathic pain, we elected not to focus on this specific pain condition, but rather pruritus given the increasing use of such drugs in other pruritic disorders and the recognized clinical and pathophysiological similarities between neuropathic pain and pruritus. Although some studies have demonstrated a reduction in morphine consumption and improved acute pain scores with the use of gabapentin,71–73 there is a lack of evidence studying their specific use in neuropathic pain in patients with burns.74

    The VAS or other numerical scoring systems were commonly used to report pruritus outcomes. However, other methods included itch episodes, breakthrough doses of antihistamines, and the itch severity scale. Difficulties were encountered due to these multiple reporting methods. Similar issues have been highlighted in other systematic reviews, often from pain management literature, highlighting the difficulties in standardizing and validating such outcome measures.75

    This systematic review also limited the interventions being investigated to those drugs listed by NICE for the management of neuropathic pain. Despite this wide inclusion criteria including multiple drugs and drugs classes, the literature search did not return any information on therapies such as other tricyclic antidepressants, including amitriptyline, or selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors that have been used to manage pruritus in other conditions.76 77 Other therapies beyond pharmacological management may be of benefit in pruritus, namely, psychotherapy such as cognitive behavioral therapy, transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation, and acupuncture. These were not addressed in this review.9

    Conclusions

    Gabapentin appears effective in the management of pruritus associated with burn injury. Topical lidocaine may be a safe and effective option for managing pruritus in small surface area healed burns. Topical doxepin, although used to manage pruritus in eczema, does not appear to be effective in burn injuries.

    Ethics statements

    Patient consent for publication

    Acknowledgments

    The authors would like to thank the burn team at Glasgow Royal Infirmary for their advice on guidance, especially Mr Stuart Watson, Ms Eleanor Roberston, Katrina Dalgarno, Gillian Calder, and Ellen Meland.

    References

    1. ↵
      1. Barrett LW,
      2. Fear VS,
      3. Waithman JC,
      4. Wood FM,
      5. Fear MW
      . Understanding acute burn injury as a chronic disease. Burns Trauma 2019;7:23.doi:10.1186/s41038-019-0163-2
      OpenUrl
    2. ↵
      1. Jeschke MG,
      2. Gauglitz GG,
      3. Kulp GA,
      4. Finnerty CC,
      5. Williams FN,
      6. Kraft R,
      7. Suman OE,
      8. Mlcak RP,
      9. Herndon DN
      . Long-Term persistance of the pathophysiologic response to severe burn injury. PLoS One 2011;6:e21245. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0021245
    3. ↵
      1. O’Halloran E,
      2. Shah A,
      3. Dembo L,
      4. Hool L,
      5. Viola H,
      6. Grey C,
      7. Boyd J,
      8. O’Neill T,
      9. Wood F,
      10. Duke J, et al
      . The impact of non-severe burn injury on cardiac function and long-term cardiovascular pathology. Sci Rep 2016;6:34650. doi:10.1038/srep34650
    4. ↵
      1. Duke JM,
      2. Bauer J,
      3. Fear MW,
      4. Rea S,
      5. Wood FM,
      6. Boyd J
      . Burn injury, gender and cancer risk: population-based cohort study using data from Scotland and Western Australia. BMJ Open 2014;4:e003845. doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2013-003845
    5. ↵
      1. Duke JM,
      2. Randall SM,
      3. Wood FM,
      4. Boyd JH,
      5. Fear MW
      . Burns and long-term infectious disease morbidity: a population-based study. Burns 2017;43:S0305-4179(16)30449-1:273–81. doi:10.1016/j.burns.2016.10.020
      OpenUrl
    6. ↵
      1. Duke JM,
      2. Rea S,
      3. Boyd JH,
      4. Randall SM,
      5. Wood FM
      . Mortality after burn injury in children: a 33-year population-based study. Pediatrics 2015;135:e903–10.doi:10.1542/peds.2014-3140
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    7. ↵
      1. Malenfant A,
      2. Forget R,
      3. Papillon J,
      4. Amsel R,
      5. Frigon JY,
      6. Choinière M
      . Prevalence and characteristics of chronic sensory problems in burn patients. Pain 1996;67:493–500.doi:10.1016/0304-3959(96)03154-5
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    8. ↵
      1. Carrougher GJ,
      2. Martinez EM,
      3. McMullen KS,
      4. Fauerbach JA,
      5. Holavanahalli RK,
      6. Herndon DN,
      7. Wiechman SA,
      8. Engrav LH,
      9. Gibran NS
      . Pruritus in adult burn survivors: postburn prevalence and risk factors associated with increased intensity. J Burn Care Res 2013;34:94–101.doi:10.1097/BCR.0b013e3182644c25
      OpenUrl
    9. ↵
      1. Van Loey NEE,
      2. Bremer M,
      3. Faber AW,
      4. Middelkoop E,
      5. Nieuwenhuis MK
      . Itching following burns: epidemiology and predictors. Br J Dermatol 2008;158:95–100.
      OpenUrlPubMed
    10. ↵
      1. Bell PL,
      2. Gabriel V
      . Evidence based review for the treatment of post-burn pruritus. J Burn Care Res 2009;30:55–61.doi:10.1097/BCR.0b013e318191fd95
      OpenUrlPubMed
    11. ↵
      1. Zachariah JR,
      2. Rao AL,
      3. Prabha R,
      4. Gupta AK,
      5. Paul MK,
      6. Lamba S
      . Post burn pruritus--a review of current treatment options. Burns 2012;38:621–9.doi:10.1016/j.burns.2011.12.003
      OpenUrlPubMed
    12. ↵
      1. Morgan M,
      2. Deuis JR,
      3. Frøsig-Jørgensen M,
      4. Lewis RJ,
      5. Cabot PJ,
      6. Gray PD,
      7. Vetter I
      . Burn pain: a systematic and critical review of epidemiology, pathophysiology, and treatment. Pain Med 2018;19:708–34.doi:10.1093/pm/pnx228
      OpenUrl
    13. ↵
      1. Bell L,
      2. McAdams T,
      3. Morgan R
      . Pruritus in burns: a descriptive study. J Burn Care Rehabil 1988;9:305–8.
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    14. ↵
      1. Goutos I
      . Neuropathic mechanisms in the pathophysiology of burns pruritus: Redefining directions for therapy and research. J Burn Care Res 2013;34:82–93.doi:10.1097/BCR.0b013e3182644c44.doi:10.1097/BCR.0b013e3182644c44
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    15. ↵
      1. Paus R,
      2. Schmelz M,
      3. Bíró T,
      4. Steinhoff M
      . Frontiers in pruritus research: scratching the brain for more effective itch therapy. Journal of Clinical Investigation 2006;116:1174–85.doi:10.1172/JCI28553
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    16. ↵
      1. G. Atanassoff P,
      2. Brull SJ,
      3. Zhang J,
      4. Greenquist K,
      5. Silverman DG,
      6. Lamotte RH
      . Enhancement of experimental pruritus and mechanically evoked dysesthesiae with local anesthesia. Somatosens Mot Res 1999;16:291–8.doi:10.1080/08990229970357
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    17. ↵
      1. Simone DA,
      2. Alreja M,
      3. LaMotte RH
      . Psychophysical studies of the itch sensation and itchy skin ("alloknesis") produced by intracutaneous injection of histamine. Somatosens Mot Res 1991;8:271–9.doi:10.3109/08990229109144750
      OpenUrlPubMedWeb of Science
    18. ↵
      Neuropathic pain in adults: pharmacological management in non-specialist settings. NICE Guidel 2013:1–36.
    19. ↵
      1. Moher D,
      2. Liberati A,
      3. Tetzlaff J,
      4. Altman DG, . The PRISMA Group
      . Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. PLoS Med 2009;6:e1000097. doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.1000097
    20. ↵
      1. Guyatt GH,
      2. Oxman AD,
      3. Vist GE,
      4. Kunz R,
      5. Falck-Ytter Y,
      6. Alonso-Coello P,
      7. Schünemann HJ, . GRADE Working Group
      . Grade: an emerging consensus on rating quality of evidence and strength of recommendations. BMJ 2008;336:924–6.doi:10.1136/bmj.39489.470347.AD
      OpenUrlFREE Full Text
    21. ↵
      1. Ahuja RB,
      2. Gupta R,
      3. Gupta G,
      4. Shrivastava P
      . A comparative analysis of cetirizine, gabapentin and their combination in the relief of post-burn pruritus. Burns 2011;37:203–7.doi:10.1016/j.burns.2010.06.004
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    22. ↵
      1. Ahuja RB,
      2. Gupta GK
      . A four arm, double blind, randomized and placebo controlled study of pregabalin in the management of post-burn pruritus. Burns 2013;39:S0305-4179(12)00305-1:24–9. doi:10.1016/j.burns.2012.09.016
      OpenUrl
    23. ↵
      1. Goutos I,
      2. Eldardiri M,
      3. Khan AA,
      4. Dziewulski P,
      5. Richardson PM
      . Comparative evaluation of antipruritic protocols in acute burns. The emerging value of gabapentin in the treatment of burns pruritus. J Burn Care Res 2010;31:57–63.doi:10.1097/BCR.0b013e3181cb8ecf
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    24. ↵
      1. Gray P,
      2. Kirby J,
      3. Smith MT,
      4. Cabot PJ,
      5. Williams B,
      6. Doecke J,
      7. Cramond T
      . Pregabalin in severe burn injury pain: a double-blind, randomised placebo-controlled trial. Pain 2011;152:1279–88.doi:10.1016/j.pain.2011.01.055
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    25. ↵
      1. Kaul I,
      2. Amin A,
      3. Rosenberg M,
      4. Rosenberg L,
      5. Meyer WJ
      . Use of gabapentin and pregabalin for pruritus and neuropathic pain associated with major burn injury: a retrospective chart review. Burns 2018;44:S0305-4179(17)30406-0:414–22. doi:10.1016/j.burns.2017.07.018
      OpenUrl
    26. ↵
      1. Kneib CJ,
      2. Sibbett SH,
      3. Carrougher GJ,
      4. Muffley LA,
      5. Gibran NS,
      6. Mandell SP
      . The effects of early neuropathic pain control with gabapentin on long-term chronic pain and itch in burn patients. J Burn Care Res 2019;40:457–63.doi:10.1093/jbcr/irz036
      OpenUrl
    27. ↵
      1. Mendham JE
      . Gabapentin for the treatment of Itching produced by burns and wound healing in children: a pilot study. Burns 2004;30:851–3.doi:10.1016/j.burns.2004.05.009
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    28. ↵
      1. Nieuwendijk SMP,
      2. de Korte IJ,
      3. Pursad MM,
      4. van Dijk M,
      5. Rode H
      . Post burn pruritus in pediatric burn patients. Burns 2018;44:S0305-4179(18)30129-3:1151–8. doi:10.1016/j.burns.2018.02.022
      OpenUrl
    29. ↵
      1. Zachariah JR,
      2. Lakshmanarao A,
      3. Prabha R,
      4. Gupta AK,
      5. Paul KM,
      6. Lamba S
      . A prospective study on the role of gabapentin in post-burn pruritus. Eur J Plast Surg 2012;35:425–31.doi:10.1007/s00238-011-0644-4
      OpenUrl
    30. ↵
      1. Zheng L,
      2. Bing Z,
      3. Wei L,
      4. Qiang W
      . [Clinical effects of gabapentin on the treatment of pruritus of scar resulting from deep partial-thickness burn]. Zhonghua Shao Shang Za Zhi 2015;31:177–80.
      OpenUrl
    31. ↵
      1. Demling RH,
      2. DeSanti L
      . Topical doxepin significantly decreases Itching and erythema in the healed burn wound. Wounds 2002;14:334–9.
      OpenUrl
    32. ↵
      1. Kwa KAA,
      2. Pijpe A,
      3. Middelkoop E,
      4. van Baar ME,
      5. Niemeijer AS,
      6. Breederveld RS,
      7. Nieuwenhuis MK,
      8. Kuipers HC,
      9. Meij-de Vries A,
      10. Rashaan ZM, et al
      . Comparing doxepin cream to oral antihistamines for the treatment of itch in burn patients: a multi-center triple-blind randomized controlled trial. Burns Open 2019;3:135–40.doi:10.1016/j.burnso.2019.07.003
      OpenUrl
    33. ↵
      1. Kwa KAA,
      2. Legemate CM,
      3. Pijpe A,
      4. Meij-de Vries A,
      5. Middelkoop E,
      6. van Baar ME,
      7. Breederveld RS,
      8. Nieuwenhuis MK
      . Doxepin cream is not effective in reducing itch in burn scar patients: a multicenter triple-blind randomized clinical crossover trial. Burns 2020;46:S0305-4179(19)30541-8:340–6. doi:10.1016/j.burns.2019.11.006
      OpenUrl
    34. ↵
      1. Demling RH,
      2. DeSanti L
      . Topical doxepin significantly decreases itching and erythema in the chronically pruritic burn scar. Wounds 2003;15:195–200.
      OpenUrl
    35. ↵
      1. Kopecky EA,
      2. Jacobson S,
      3. Bch MB,
      4. Hubley P,
      5. Palozzi L,
      6. Clarke HM,
      7. Koren G
      . Safety and pharmacokinetics of EMLA in the treatment of postburn pruritus in pediatric patients: a pilot study. J Burn Care Rehabil 2001;22:235–42.doi:10.1097/00004630-200105000-00010
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    36. ↵
      1. Rose MA,
      2. Kam PCA
      . Gabapentin: pharmacology and its use in pain management. Anaesthesia 2002;57:451–62.doi:10.1046/j.0003-2409.2001.02399.x
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    37. ↵
      1. Gottrup H,
      2. Juhl G,
      3. Kristensen AD,
      4. Lai R,
      5. Chizh BA,
      6. Brown J,
      7. Bach FW,
      8. Jensen TS
      . Chronic oral gabapentin reduces elements of central sensitization in human experimental hyperalgesia. Anesthesiology 2004;101:1400–8.doi:10.1097/00000542-200412000-00021
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    38. ↵
      1. Chincholkar M
      . Analgesic mechanisms of gabapentinoids and effects in experimental pain models: a narrative review. Br J Anaesth 2018;120:1315–34.doi:10.1016/j.bja.2018.02.066
      OpenUrl
    39. ↵
      1. Latremoliere A,
      2. Woolf CJ
      . Central sensitization: a generator of pain hypersensitivity by central neural plasticity. J Pain 2009;10:895–926.doi:10.1016/j.jpain.2009.06.012
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    40. ↵
      1. Aperis G,
      2. Paliouras C,
      3. Zervos A,
      4. Arvanitis A,
      5. Alivanis P
      . The use of pregabalin in the treatment of uraemic pruritus in haemodialysis patients. J Ren Care 2010;36:180–5.doi:10.1111/j.1755-6686.2010.00190.x
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    41. ↵
      1. Bueller HA,
      2. Bernhard JD,
      3. Dubroff LM
      . Gabapentin treatment for brachioradial pruritus. J Eur Acad Dermatol Venerol 1999;13:227–8.doi:10.1111/j.1468-3083.1999.tb00890.x
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    42. ↵
      1. Yesudian PD,
      2. Wilson NJE
      . Efficacy of gabapentin in the management of pruritus of unknown origin. Arch Dermatol 2005;141:1507–9.doi:10.1001/archderm.141.12.1507
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    43. ↵
      1. Clarke H,
      2. Bonin RP,
      3. Orser BA,
      4. Englesakis M,
      5. Wijeysundera DN,
      6. Katz J
      . The prevention of chronic postsurgical pain using gabapentin and pregabalin: a combined systematic review and meta-analysis. Anesth Analg 2012;115:428–42.
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    44. ↵
      1. Singh D,
      2. Kennedy DH
      . The use of gabapentin for the treatment of postherpetic neuralgia. Clin Ther 2003;25:852–89.doi:10.1016/S0149-2918(03)80111-X
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    45. ↵
      1. Cooper TE,
      2. Derry S,
      3. Wiffen PJ,
      4. Moore RA
      . Gabapentin for fibromyalgia pain in adults. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2017;2017:CD012188.
    46. ↵
      1. Verret M,
      2. Lauzier F,
      3. Zarychanski R,
      4. Perron C,
      5. Savard X,
      6. Pinard A-M,
      7. Leblanc G,
      8. Cossi M-J,
      9. Neveu X,
      10. Turgeon AF, et al
      . Perioperative use of gabapentinoids for the management of postoperative acute pain: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Anesthesiology 2020;133:265–79.doi:10.1097/ALN.0000000000003428
      OpenUrlPubMed
    47. ↵
      1. KY H,
      2. Gan TJ,
      3. Habib AS
      . Gabapentin and postoperative pain - a systematic review of randomized controlled trials. Pain 2006;126:91–101.
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    48. ↵
      1. Han C,
      2. Li X-D,
      3. Jiang H-Q,
      4. Ma J-X,
      5. Ma X-L
      . The use of gabapentin in the management of postoperative pain after total knee arthroplasty: a PRISMA-compliant meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Medicine 2016;95:e3883. doi:10.1097/MD.0000000000003883
    49. ↵
      1. Zhai L,
      2. Song Z,
      3. Liu K
      . The effect of gabapentin on acute postoperative pain in patients undergoing total knee arthroplasty: a meta-analysis. Medicine 2016;95:e3673. doi:10.1097/MD.0000000000003673
    50. ↵
      1. Torrance N,
      2. Veluchamy A,
      3. Zhou Y,
      4. Fletcher EH,
      5. Moir E,
      6. Hebert HL,
      7. Donnan PT,
      8. Watson J,
      9. Colvin LA,
      10. Smith BH
      . Trends in gabapentinoid prescribing, co-prescribing of opioids and benzodiazepines, and associated deaths in Scotland. Br J Anaesth 2020;125:S0007-0912(20)30373-1:159–67. doi:10.1016/j.bja.2020.05.017
      OpenUrl
    51. ↵
      1. Montastruc F,
      2. Loo SY,
      3. Renoux C
      . Trends in first gabapentin and pregabalin prescriptions in primary care in the United Kingdom, 1993-2017. JAMA 2018;320:2149–51.doi:10.1001/jama.2018.12358
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    52. ↵
      1. Chiappini S,
      2. Schifano F
      . A decade of gabapentinoid misuse: an analysis of the European medicines agency's 'suspected adverse drug reactions' database. CNS Drugs 2016;30:647–54.doi:10.1007/s40263-016-0359-y
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    53. ↵
      1. Johansen ME
      . Gabapentinoid use in the United States 2002 through 2015. JAMA Intern Med 2018;178:292–4.doi:10.1001/jamainternmed.2017.7856
      OpenUrl
    54. ↵
      1. Evoy KE,
      2. Morrison MD,
      3. Saklad SR
      . Abuse and misuse of pregabalin and gabapentin. Drugs 2017;77:403–26.doi:10.1007/s40265-017-0700-x
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    55. ↵
      1. Molero Y,
      2. Larsson H,
      3. D’Onofrio BM,
      4. Sharp DJ,
      5. Fazel S
      . Associations between gabapentinoids and suicidal behaviour, unintentional overdoses, injuries, road traffic incidents, and violent crime: population based cohort study in Sweden. BMJ 2019;19:l2147. doi:10.1136/bmj.l2147
    56. ↵
      1. Smith RV,
      2. Havens JR,
      3. Walsh SL
      . Gabapentin misuse, abuse and diversion: a systematic review. Addiction 2016;111:1160–74.doi:10.1111/add.13324
      OpenUrl
    57. ↵
      1. Bonnet U,
      2. Scherbaum N
      . How addictive are gabapentin and pregabalin? A systematic review. Eur Neuropsychopharmacol 2017;27:S0924-977X(17)30897-0:1185–215. doi:10.1016/j.euroneuro.2017.08.430
      OpenUrl
    58. ↵
      1. Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency
      . Pregabalin (Lyrica), gabapentin (Neurontin) and risk of abuse and dependence: new scheduling requirements from 1 April. 2019. https://www.gov.uk/drug-safety-update/pregabalin-lyrica-gabapentin-neurontin-and-risk-of-abuse-and-dependence-new-scheduling-requirements-from-1-april#risk-of-abuse-and-dependence.
    59. ↵
      1. Vetrichevvel TP,
      2. Randall SM,
      3. Wood FM,
      4. Rea S,
      5. Boyd JH,
      6. Duke JM
      . A population-based comparison study of the mental health of patients with intentional and unintentional burns. Burns Trauma 2018;6:31.doi:10.1186/s41038-018-0133-0
      OpenUrl
    60. ↵
      1. Davis CS,
      2. Esposito TJ,
      3. Palladino-Davis AG,
      4. Rychlik K,
      5. Schermer CR,
      6. Gamelli RL,
      7. Kovacs EJ
      . Implications of alcohol intoxication at the time of burn and smoke inhalation injury: an epidemiologic and clinical analysis. J Burn Care Res 2013;34:120–6.doi:10.1097/BCR.0b013e3182644c58
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    61. ↵
      1. Klifto KM,
      2. Quiroga L,
      3. Hultman CS
      . Substance use and inhalation injury in adult burn patients: retrospective study of the impact on outcomes. Burns Trauma 2019;7:15.doi:10.1186/s41038-019-0152-5
      OpenUrl
    62. ↵
      1. Farrar JT,
      2. Berlin JA,
      3. Strom BL
      . Clinically important changes in acute pain outcome measures. J Pain Symptom Manage 2003;25:406–11.doi:10.1016/S0885-3924(03)00162-3
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    63. ↵
      1. Demant DT,
      2. Lund K,
      3. Finnerup NB,
      4. Vollert J,
      5. Maier C,
      6. Segerdahl MS,
      7. Jensen TS,
      8. Sindrup SH
      . Pain relief with lidocaine 5% patch in localized peripheral neuropathic pain in relation to pain phenotype: a randomised, double-blind, and placebo-controlled, phenotype panel study. Pain 2015;156:2234–44.doi:10.1097/j.pain.0000000000000266
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    64. ↵
      1. Derry S,
      2. Wiffen PJ,
      3. Moore RA,
      4. Quinlan J
      . Topical lidocaine for neuropathic pain in adults. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2014;2017:10.
      OpenUrl
    65. ↵
      1. Fiorelli A,
      2. Pace C,
      3. Cascone R,
      4. Carlucci A,
      5. De Ruberto E,
      6. Izzo AC,
      7. Passavanti B,
      8. Chiodini P,
      9. Pota V,
      10. Aurilio C, et al
      . Preventive skin analgesia with lidocaine patch for management of post-thoracotomy pain: results of a randomized, double blind, placebo controlled study. Thorac Cancer 2019;10:631–41.doi:10.1111/1759-7714.12975
      OpenUrl
    66. ↵
      1. Saber AA,
      2. Elgamal MH,
      3. Rao AJ,
      4. Itawi EA,
      5. Martinez RL
      . Early experience with lidocaine patch for postoperative pain control after laparoscopic ventral hernia repair. Int J Surg 2009;7:36–8.doi:10.1016/j.ijsu.2008.09.003
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    67. ↵
      1. Khanna M,
      2. Peters C,
      3. Singh JR
      . Treating pain with the lidocaine patch 5% after total knee arthroplasty. PM&R 2012;4:S1934-1482(12)00285-7:642–6. doi:10.1016/j.pmrj.2012.06.003
      OpenUrl
    68. ↵
      1. Inan S,
      2. Dun NJ,
      3. Cowan A
      . Inhibitory effect of lidocaine on pain and itch using formalin-induced nociception and 5′-guanidinonaltrindole-induced scratching models in mice: behavioral and neuroanatomical evidence. Eur J Pharmacol 2009;616:141–6.doi:10.1016/j.ejphar.2009.06.026
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    69. ↵
      1. Allenby CF,
      2. Johnstone RS,
      3. Chatfield S,
      4. Pike LC,
      5. Tidy G
      . PERINAL--a new no-touch spray to relieve the symptoms of pruritus ani. Int J Colorectal Dis 1993;8:184–7.doi:10.1007/BF00290302
      OpenUrlPubMed
    70. ↵
      1. Layton AM,
      2. Cotterill JA
      . Notalgia paraesthetica--report of three cases and their treatment. Clin Exp Dermatol 1991;16:197–8.doi:10.1111/j.1365-2230.1991.tb00345.x
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    71. ↵
      1. Rimaz S,
      2. Alavi C,
      3. Sedighinejad A,
      4. Tolouie M,
      5. Kavoosi S,
      6. Kouchakinejad L
      . Effect of gabapentin on morphine consumption and pain after surgical debridement of burn wounds: a double-blind randomized clinical trial study. Arch Trauma Res 2012;1:38–43.doi:10.5812/atr.5397
      OpenUrl
    72. ↵
      1. Cuignet O,
      2. Pirson J,
      3. Soudon O,
      4. Zizi M
      . Effects of gabapentin on morphine consumption and pain in severely burned patients. Burns 2007;33:81–6.doi:10.1016/j.burns.2006.04.020
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    73. ↵
      1. Gray P,
      2. Williams B,
      3. Cramond T
      . Successful use of gabapentin in acute pain management following burn injury: a case series. Pain Med 2008;9:371–6.doi:10.1111/j.1526-4637.2006.00149.x
      OpenUrl
    74. ↵
      1. McClenaghan F
      . The concurrent use of gabapentin and opioid analgesia in burns patients. Arch Trauma Res 2012;1:81–2.doi:10.5812/atr.6636
      OpenUrl
    75. ↵
      1. Malhotra A,
      2. Mackey S
      . Outcomes in pain medicine: a brief review. Pain Ther 2012;1:5.doi:10.1007/s40122-012-0005-4
      OpenUrl
    76. ↵
      1. Kouwenhoven TA,
      2. van de Kerkhof PCM,
      3. Kamsteeg M
      . Use of oral antidepressants in patients with chronic pruritus: a systematic review. J Am Acad Dermatol 2017;77:1068–73.doi:10.1016/j.jaad.2017.08.025
      OpenUrl
    77. ↵
      1. Magazin M,
      2. Daze RP,
      3. Okeson N
      . Treatment refractory brachioradial pruritus treated with topical amitriptyline and ketamine. Cureus 2019;11:e5117. doi:10.7759/cureus.5117

    Supplementary materials

    • Supplementary Data

      This web only file has been produced by the BMJ Publishing Group from an electronic file supplied by the author(s) and has not been edited for content.

    Footnotes

    • Contributors CM preformed literature searches, study review and selection, conducted data collection and analysis, and drafted and revised the article. CM is the guarantor. WN performed study reviews and data collection. LP supervised literature review and study selection. TQ and KP revised the manuscript and supervised all aspects of the study. MS supervised statistical analysis and revised the manuscript. AM, NA, CG, and MB contributed to the planning of the study and revised manuscript drafts.

    • Funding Open access funding costs were provided by a grant from the Association of Anaesthetists, grant number NIAA19R213.

    • Competing interests None declared.

    • Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.