Hello
We are conducting a systematic review currently, but we have some difficulties in interpreting the finding of the included studies.
3 studies included in the review. All of them have high methodological quality, according to the JBI critical appraisal checklist.Due to methodological heterogeneity, we did not conduct a MA.
All the three included studies reported conflicted outcomes.
The A study reported that no significant difference Intervention A and Intervention B in terms of postoperative pain.
The B study reported that Intervention A has significantly more postop pain than Intervention B in first 24 h, however no significant difference after 24 h.
The C study reported that Intrvention A has significantly more postop pain than Inervention B in first 4 days.
So, how should we interpret these findings in our Systematic review?
Thank you
|