ArticleThe Australian & New Zealand journal of obstetrics & gynaecology2026
Management of Gynaecological Chronic Pelvic Pain in the Emergency Setting- A Scoping Review.
Article in The Australian & New Zealand journal of obstetrics & gynaecology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Management of Gynaecological Chronic Pelvic Pain in the Emergency Setting- A Scoping Review.The Australian & New Zealand journal of obstetrics & gynaecology · 2026Article
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
backgroundGynaecological chronic pelvic pain (CPP) has a high prevalence among adult women. This pain can be debilitating and life-impacting, affecting quality of life across all dimensions of health. Many barriers to specialised care exist, leading women to rely on unscheduled general care like emergency departments or in the out-of-hospital.
objectiveThe review aimed to investigate evidence regarding pain management for women presenting to acute, non-specialist settings for gynaecological CPP. Secondary aims were to identify areas of suboptimal care and potential for improvement of patient outcomes.
methodsA scoping review was conducted using the Joanna Briggs Institute scoping review framework with the PRISMA extension. Academic and grey literature were searched.
resultsInitially, 1563 records were identified, with 50 from grey literature and 801 from citation screening. Nineteen were included for descriptive analysis. Key themes were pharmacological agents, holistic care and ongoing care. Appraisal of the literature showed varying quality.
conclusionThis scoping review highlights the need to define clinicians' roles in managing gynaecological CPP exacerbations in acute, non-specialist settings. It identifies gaps in best-practice pain assessment, management and clinician education, with guidelines and recommendations often of poor quality. Effective CPP management requires a multidisciplinary and biopsychosocial approach and, despite limitations, clinicians can enhance knowledge and practice scope to improve patient outcomes.
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.