Evidence-based review of the literature on intrathecal delivery of pain medication

Gary Bennett, Mario Serafini, Kim Burchiel, Eric Buchser, Ashley Classen, Tim Deer, Stuart Du Pen, F. Michael Ferrante, Samuel J. Hassenbusch, Leland Lou, Jan Maeyaert, Richard Penn, Russell K. Portenoy, Richard Rauck, K. Dean Willis, Tony Yaksh

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

135 Scopus citations


Evidence-based medicine depends on the existence of controlled clinical trials that establish the safety and efficacy of specific therapeutic techniques. Many interventions in clinical practice have achieved widespread acceptance despite little evidence to support them in the scientific literature; the critical appraisal of these interventions based on accumulating experience is a goal of medicine. To clarify the current state of knowledge concerning the use of various drugs for intraspinal infusion in pain management, an expert panel conducted a thorough review of the published literature. The exhaustive review included 5 different groups of compounds, with morphine and bupivacaine yielding the most citations in the literature. The need for additional large published controlled studies was highlighted by this review, especially for promising agents that have been shown to be safe and efficacious in recent clinical studies. (C) U.S. Cancer Pain Relief Committee, 2000.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)S12-S36
JournalJournal of Pain and Symptom Management
Issue number2
StatePublished - Aug 2000


  • Evidence-based medicine
  • Intraspinal infusion
  • Intrathecal
  • Pain management

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Nursing(all)
  • Clinical Neurology
  • Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine


Dive into the research topics of 'Evidence-based review of the literature on intrathecal delivery of pain medication'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this