ReviewJournal of pain research2025
Navigating Pregnancy Testing in Chronic Pain Management for Women of Reproductive Age.
Review in Journal of pain research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Women of childbearing age often require a nuanced and individualized approach to chronic pain management, especially when pregnancy is a possibility. Interventional procedures involving ionizing radiation, such as fluoroscopy-guided injections, raise specific concerns for fetal safety, including risks of embryo death, congenital anomalies, intellectual disability, and microcephaly. Despite national recommendations from organizations like the American College of Radiology (ACR), implementation of pregnancy screening in the pain management context remains limited. Methods: This review synthesizes current literature and practice guidelines to assess the gaps in pregnancy screening protocols within chronic pain management settings. It highlights challenges in evaluating pregnancy status before initiating pharmacologic or fluoroscopic procedures, and it examines both biological testing limitations and procedural risks. Results: Fluoroscopically guided procedures may exceed the teratogenic radiation threshold of 50 mGy, underscoring the critical need for reliable pregnancy screening. While urine and serum hCG tests are widely used, both are susceptible to false negatives and positives due to timing, hormone variants, and analytical interferences. Integrating clinical evaluation with menstrual history, point-of-care testing, and serum confirmation may improve diagnostic accuracy and ensure greater protection for the fetus. Conclusion and Recommendations: To address safety concerns, this review proposes a structured pregnancy screening algorithm tailored for chronic pain practices. Key recommendations include: routine screening of all reproductive-age women prior to procedures involving radiation or teratogenic medications, use of serum hCG testing when uncertainty exists, optimizing radiation exposure strategies, and clear, informed consent processes outlining fetal risks. Adoption of these best practices may improve clinical consistency and enhance patient safety.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.