Skip to main content

Table 3 Summary of the quality of evidence (GRADE) for comparing erector spinae plane block to a control group for the primary and secondary outcomes of the included studies

From: The effect of ultrasound-guided erector spinae plane block on postsurgical pain: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

# studies in design (n) Risk of bias Inconsistency Indirectness Imprecision Publication bias Overall quality of evidencee Importance
Postoperative opioid consumption at 24 h
 12 (573) None seriousa Seriousb None serious None serious Undetected
Moderate
Important
Postoperative pain at rest at 6 h
 9 (486) None seriousa Seriousb None serious None serious Detectedc
Moderate
Important
Postoperative pain at rest at 12 h
 10 (546) None seriousa Seriousb None serious None serious Undetected
Moderate
Important
Postoperative pain at rest at 24 h
 10 (500) None seriousa Seriousd None serious None serious Undetected
Moderate
Important
Postoperative nausea and vomiting
 11 (596) None seriousa None serious None serious None serious Undetected
High
Important
  1. aMajority of studies had allocation concealment and used blinded outcome assessments; lost to follow up was very low; the overall risk of bias was felt to be none serious
  2. bThere is high heterogeneity among the included studies; sensitivity analysis did not significantly reduce heterogeneity
  3. cFunnel plot did reveal asymmetry; Egger’s test, P = < 0.05
  4. dThere is high heterogeneity among the included studies; subgroup analysis of type of block placement did significantly reduce heterogeneity
  5. eGrade Workshop Group grades of evidence: high quality: further research very unlikely to change confidence in estimate of effect; moderate quality; further research likely to have important impact on confidence in estimate of effect and may change estimate; low quality; further research very likely to have important impact on confidence in estimate of effect and likely to change estimate; very low quality: very uncertain about estimate