“…For motor block duration, 23 studies were judged to be at low risk of bias [32, 35, 38, 39, 42, 45, 53, 54, 56, 59, 65, 76, 81, 82, 92–94, 107, 110, 113, 115, 116], 67 studies were at some risk of bias [33, 34, 36, 37, 40, 43, 48, 50–52, 55, 57, 58, 60–62, 67, 68, 70–75, 77–80, 83–91, 95–106, 108, 109, 111, 114, 117–126, 128–131] and 3 studies were at high risk of bias [41, 63, 127]. The provision of inadequate detail about randomisation and allocation concealment was the most common reason for downgrading the rating, followed by concerns relating to outcome measurement.…”