Single dose oral paracetamol (acetaminophen) for postoperative pain in adults

From painkiller to empathy killer: acetaminophen (paracetamol) reduces empathy for pain

Simulation theories of empathy hypothesize that empathizing with others' pain shares some common psychological computations with the processing of one's own pain. Support for this perspective has largely relied on functional neuroimaging evidence of an overlap between activations during the experience of physical pain and empathy for other people's pain. Here, we extend the functional overlap perspective to the neurochemical level and test whether a common physical painkiller, acetaminophen (paracetamol), can reduce empathy for another's pain. In two double-blind placebo-controlled experiments, participants rated perceived pain, personal distress and empathic concern in response to reading scenarios about another's physical or social pain, witnessing ostracism in the lab, or visualizing another study participant receiving painful noise blasts. As hypothesized, acetaminophen reduced empathy in response to others' pain. Acetaminophen also reduced the unpleasantness of noise blasts delivered to the participant, which mediated acetaminophen's effects on empathy. Together, these findings suggest that the physical painkiller acetaminophen reduces empathy for pain and provide a new perspective on the neurochemical bases of empathy. Because empathy regulates prosocial and antisocial behavior, these drug-induced reductions in empathy raise concerns about the broader social side effects of acetaminophen, which is taken by almost a quarter of adults in the United States each week.

Ibuprofen and/or paracetamol (acetaminophen) for pain relief after surgical removal of lower wisdom teeth, a Cochrane systematic review

This paper compares the beneficial and harmful effects of paracetamol, ibuprofen and the novel combination of both in a single tablet for pain relief following the surgical removal of lower wisdom teeth. In this systematic review only randomised controlled double-blinded clinical trials were included. We calculated the proportion of patients with at least 50% pain relief at 2 and 6 hours post dosing, along with the proportion of participants using rescue medication at 6 and 8 hours. Adverse events were also analysed. Data was meta-analysed where possible. Seven studies were included with a total of 2,241 participants enrolled. Ibuprofen 400 mg is superior to 1,000 mg paracetamol with a risk ratio for at least 50% pain relief at 6 hours of 1.47 (95% confidence interval [CI] 1.28 to 1.69). For the combined drug, the risk ratio for at least 50% maximum pain relief over 6 hours is 1.77 (95% CI 1.32 to 2.39) based on total pain relief (TOTPAR) data. There is high quality evidence that ibuprofen is superior to paracetamol. The novel combination drug shows encouraging results when compared to the single drugs (based on two trials).

Perioperative Pain Management in Total Hip Arthroplasty: Korean Hip Society Guidelines

Effective perioperative pain management techniques and accelerated rehabilitation programs can improve health-related quality of life and functional status of patients after total hip arthroplasty. Traditionally, postoperative analgesia following arthroplasty was provided by intravenous patient-controlled analgesia or epidural analgesia. Recently, peripheral nerve blockade has emerged alternative analgesic approach. Multimodal analgesia strategy combines analgesics with different mechanisms of action to improve pain management. Intraoperative periarticular injection of multimodal drugs is one of the most important procedures in perioperative pain control for total hip arthroplasty. The goal of this review article is to provide a concise overview of the principles of multimodal pain management regimens as a practical guide for the perioperative pain management for total hip arthroplasty.

Non-prescription (OTC) oral analgesics for acute pain - an overview of Cochrane reviews

BACKGROUND

Non-prescription (over-the-counter, or OTC) analgesics (painkillers) are used frequently. They are available in various brands, package sizes, formulations, and dose. They can be used for a range of different types of pain, but this overview reports on how well they work for acute pain (pain of short duration, usually with rapid onset). Thirty-nine Cochrane reviews of randomised trials have examined the analgesic efficacy of individual drug interventions in acute postoperative pain.

OBJECTIVES

To examine published Cochrane reviews for information about the efficacy of pain medicines available without prescription using data from acute postoperative pain.

METHODS

We identified OTC analgesics available in the UK, Australia, Canada, and the USA by examining online pharmacy websites. We also included some analgesics (diclofenac potassium, dexketoprofen, dipyrone) of importance in parts of the world, but not currently available in these jurisdictions.We identified systematic reviews by searching the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (CDSR) on The Cochrane Library through a simple search strategy. All reviews were overseen by a single review group, had a standard title, and had as their primary outcome numbers of participants with at least 50% pain relief over four to six hours compared with placebo. From individual reviews we extracted the number needed to treat for an additional beneficial outcome (NNT) for this outcome for each drug/dose combination, and also calculated the success rate to achieve at least 50% of maximum pain relief. We also examined the number of participants experiencing any adverse event, and whether the incidence was different from placebo.

MAIN RESULTS

We found information on 21 different OTC analgesic drugs, doses, and formulations, using information from 10 Cochrane reviews, supplemented by information from one non-Cochrane review with additional information on ibuprofen formulations (high quality evidence). The lowest (best) NNT values were for combinations of ibuprofen plus paracetamol, with NNT values below 2. Analgesics with values close to 2 included fast acting formulations of ibuprofen 200 mg and 400 mg, ibuprofen 200 mg plus caffeine 100 mg, and diclofenac potassium 50 mg. Combinations of ibuprofen plus paracetamol had success rates of almost 70%, with dipyrone 500 mg, fast acting ibuprofen formulations 200 mg and 400 mg, ibuprofen 200 mg plus caffeine 100 mg, and diclofenac potassium 50 mg having success rates above 50%. Paracetamol and aspirin at various doses had NNT values of 3 or above, and success rates of 11% to 43%. We found no information on many of the commonly available low dose codeine combinations.The proportion of participants experiencing an adverse event were generally not different from placebo, except for aspirin 1000 mg and (barely) ibuprofen 200 mg plus caffeine 100 mg. For ibuprofen plus paracetamol, adverse event rates were lower than with placebo.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is a body of reliable evidence about the efficacy of some of the most commonly available drugs and doses widely available without prescription. The postoperative pain model is predominantly pain after third molar extraction, which is used as the industry model for everyday pain. The proportion of people with acute pain who get good pain relief with any of them ranges from around 70% at best to less than 20% at worst; low doses of some drugs in fast acting formulations were among the best. Adverse events were generally no different from placebo. Consumers can make an informed choice based on this knowledge, together with availability and price. Headache and migraine were not included in this overview.

Perioperative local infiltration anesthesia with ropivacaine has no effect on postoperative pain after total hip arthroplasty

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

The local infiltration analgesia (LIA) technique has been widely used to reduce opioid requirements and to improve postoperative mobilization following total hip arthroplasty (THA). However, the evidence for the efficacy of LIA in THA is not yet clear. We determined whether single-shot LIA in addition to a multimodal analgesic regimen would reduce acute postoperative pain and opioid requirements after THA.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

116 patients undergoing primary THA under spinal anesthesia were included in this randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. All patients received oral opioid-sparing multimodal analgesia: etoricoxib, acetaminophen, and glucocorticoid. The patients were randomized to receive either 150 mL ropivacaine (2 mg/mL) and 0.5 mL epinephrine (1 mg/mL) or 150 mL 0.9% saline. Rescue analgesic consisted of morphine and oxycodone as needed. The primary endpoint was pain during mobilization in the recovery unit. Secondary endpoints were pain during mobilization on the day after surgery and total postoperative opioid requirements on the first postoperative day.

RESULTS

The levels of pain during mobilization-both in the recovery unit and on the day after surgery-and consumption of opioids on the first postoperative day were similar in the 2 groups.

INTERPRETATION

LIA did not provide any extra analgesic effect after THA over and above that from the multimodal analgesic regimen used in this study.

Adverse events associated with single dose oral analgesics for acute postoperative pain in adults - an overview of Cochrane reviews

BACKGROUND

This is an update of a Cochrane overview published in Issue 9, 2011; that overview considered both efficacy and adverse events. This overview considers adverse events, with efficacy dealt with in a separate overview.Thirty-nine Cochrane reviews of randomised trials have examined the adverse events associated with individual drug interventions in acute postoperative pain. This overview brings together the results of those individual reviews.

OBJECTIVES

To provide an overview of adverse event rates associated with single-dose oral analgesics, compared with placebo, for acute postoperative pain in adults.

METHODS

We identified systematic reviews in The Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews on The Cochrane Library through a simple search strategy. All reviews were overseen by a single review group. We extracted information related to participants experiencing any adverse event, and reports of serious adverse events, and deaths from the individual reviews.

MAIN RESULTS

Information was available from 39 Cochrane reviews for 41 different analgesics or analgesic combinations (51 drug/dose/formulations) tested in single oral doses in participants with moderate or severe postoperative pain. This involved around 350 unique studies involving about 35,000 participants. Most studies involved younger participants with pain following removal of molar teeth.For most nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), paracetamol, and combinations not containing opioids, there were few examples where participants experienced significantly more or fewer adverse events than with placebo. For aspirin 1000 mg and diflunisal 1000 mg, opioids, or fixed-dose combination drugs containing opioids, participants typically experienced significantly more adverse events than with placebo. Studies of combinations of ibuprofen and paracetamol reported significantly fewer adverse events.Serious adverse events were rare, occurring a rate of about 1 in 3200 participants.Most reviews did not report specific adverse events.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Despite ongoing problems with the measurement, recording, and reporting of adverse events in clinical trials and in systematic reviews, the large amount of information available for single oral doses of analgesics provides evidence that adverse events rates are generally similar with active drug and placebo in these circumstances, except at higher doses of some drugs, and in combinations including opioids.

Single dose oral analgesics for acute postoperative pain in adults - an overview of Cochrane reviews

BACKGROUND

This is an updated version of the original Cochrane overview published in Issue 9, 2011. That overview considered both efficacy and adverse events, but adverse events are now dealt with in a separate overview.Thirty-nine Cochrane reviews of randomised trials have examined the analgesic efficacy of individual drug interventions in acute postoperative pain. This overview brings together the results of those individual reviews and assesses the reliability of available data.

OBJECTIVES

To summarise the efficacy of pharmaceutical interventions for acute pain in adults with at least moderate pain following surgery who have been given a single dose of oral analgesic.

METHODS

We identified systematic reviews in the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews in The Cochrane Library through a simple search strategy. All reviews were overseen by a single review group, had a standard title, and had as their primary outcome the number of participants with at least 50% pain relief over four to six hours compared with placebo. For individual reviews, we extracted the number needed to treat for an additional beneficial outcome (NNT) for this outcome for each drug/dose combination, and also the percentage of participants achieving at least 50% maximum pain relief, the mean of mean or median time to remedication, and the percentage of participants remedicating by six, eight, 12, or 24 hours. Where there was adequate information for pairs of drug and dose (at least 200 participants, in at least two studies), we defined the addition of four comparisons of typical size (400 participants in total) with zero effect as making the result potentially subject to publication bias and therefore unreliable.

MAIN RESULTS

The overview included 39 separate Cochrane Reviews with 41 analyses of single dose oral analgesics tested in acute postoperative pain models, with results from about 50,000 participants in approximately 460 individual studies. The individual reviews included only high-quality trials of standardised design, methods, and efficacy outcome reporting. No statistical comparison was undertaken.Reliable results (high quality information) were obtained for 53 pairs of drug and dose in painful postsurgical conditions; these included various fixed dose combinations, and fast acting formulations of some analgesics. NNTs varied from about 1.5 to 20 for at least 50% maximum pain relief over four to six hours compared with placebo. The proportion of participants achieving this level of benefit varied from about 30% to over 70%, and the time to remedication varied from two hours (placebo) to over 20 hours. Good (low) NNTs were obtained with ibuprofen 200 mg plus paracetamol (acetaminophen) 500 mg (NNT compared with placebo 1.6; 95% confidence interval 1.5 to 1.8), ibuprofen fast acting 200 mg (2.1; 1.9 to 2.3); ibuprofen 200 mg plus caffeine 100 mg (2.1; 1.9 to 3.1), diclofenac potassium 50 mg (2.1; 1.9 to 2.5), and etoricoxib 120 mg (1.8; 1.7 to 2.0). For comparison, ibuprofen acid 400 mg had an NNT of 2.5 (2.4 to 2.6). Not all participants had good pain relief and, for many pairs of drug and dose, 50% or more did not achieve at least 50% maximum pain relief over four to six hours.Long duration of action (eight hours or greater) was found for etoricoxib 120 mg, diflunisal 500 mg, paracetamol 650 mg plus oxycodone 10 mg, naproxen 500/550 mg, celecoxib 400 mg, and ibuprofen 400 mg plus paracetamol 1000 mg.There was no evidence of analgesic effect for aceclofenac 150 mg, aspirin 500 mg, and oxycodone 5 mg (low quality evidence). No trial data were available in reviews of acemetacin, meloxicam, nabumetone, nefopam, sulindac, tenoxicam, and tiaprofenic acid. Inadequate amounts of data were available for nine drugs and doses, and data potentially susceptible to publication bias for 13 drugs and doses (very low quality evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is a wealth of reliable evidence on the analgesic efficacy of single dose oral analgesics. Fast acting formulations and fixed dose combinations of analgesics can produce good and often long-lasting analgesia at relatively low doses. There is also important information on drugs for which there are no data, inadequate data, or where results are unreliable due to susceptibility to publication bias. This should inform choices by professionals and consumers.

Impact of a Mandatory Prescription Drug Monitoring Program on Prescription of Opioid Analgesics by Dentists

Prescription Drug Monitoring Programs (PDMP) are statewide databases that collect data on prescription of controlled substances. New York State mandates prescribers to consult the PDMP registry before prescribing a controlled substance such as opioid analgesics. The effect of mandatory PDMP on opioid drug prescriptions by dentists is not known. This study investigates the impact of mandatory PDMP on frequency and quantity of opioid prescriptions by dentists in a dental urgent care center. Based on the sample size estimate, we collected patient records of a 3-month period before and two consecutive 3-month periods after the mandatory PDMP implementation and analyzed the data on number of visits, treatment types and drug prescriptions using Chi-square tests. For patients who were prescribed pain medications, 452 (30.6%), 190 (14.1%), and 140 (9.6%) received opioid analgesics in the three study periods respectively, signifying a statistically significant reduction in the number of opioid prescriptions after implementation of the mandatory PDMP (p<0.05). Total numbers of prescribed opioid pills in a 3-month period decreased from 5096 to 1120, signifying a 78% reduction in absolute quantity. Prescriptions for non-opioid analgesics acetaminophen increased during the same periods (p<0.05). We conclude that the mandatory PDMP significantly affected the prescription pattern for pain medications by dentists. Such change in prescription pattern represents a shift towards the evidence-based prescription practices for acute postoperative pain.

Evaluation of a Single Dose Intravenous Paracetamol for Pain Relief After Maxillofacial Surgery: A Randomized Clinical Trial Study

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to evaluate, using a single dose of intravenous paracetamol, pain relief after maxillofacial surgery.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This is a controlled, randomized, uni- blind, clinical trial study to evaluate using a single dose of IV paracetamol for pain relief after maxillofacial surgery. The subjects were randomly divided into two groups with 40 subjects in each: group I received paracetamol (Apotel)* as a single dose and group II received placebo. Subjects were randomly allocated according to randomization lists. Paracetamol was used as a single dose (20 mg/kg in 100 cc of normal saline which was infused for 10 min after surgery in recovery room just before discharging). We used a visual analogue scale to investigate pain relief at various times.

RESULTS

Analysis of the data, did not show any significant difference for age, sex and weight between the treatment group and the control group. Pain decreased 6 h after paracetamol infusion; then it increased mildly. In the control group, pain severity increased after operation, then it decreased mildly. Results showed a correlation between duration of surgery and pain severity in both the groups.

CONCLUSION

Paracetamol is effective on pain relief after maxillofacial surgeries. Operation time may be an important factor for induction of pain after the surgeries.

Single dose oral ibuprofen plus caffeine for acute postoperative pain in adults

BACKGROUND

There is good evidence that combining two different analgesics in fixed doses in a single tablet can provide better pain relief in acute pain and headache than either drug alone, and that the drug-specific benefits are essentially additive. This appears to be broadly true in postoperative pain and migraine headache across a range of different drug combinations, and when tested in the same and different trials. Adding caffeine to analgesics also increases the number of people obtaining good pain relief. Combinations of ibuprofen and caffeine are available without prescription in some parts of the world.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the analgesic efficacy and adverse effects of a single oral dose of ibuprofen plus caffeine for moderate to severe postoperative pain, using methods that permit comparison with other analgesics evaluated in standardised trials using almost identical methods and outcomes.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Oxford Pain Relief Database, two clinical trial registries, and the reference lists of articles. The date of the most recent search was 1 February 2015.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised, double-blind, placebo- or active-controlled clinical trials of single dose oral ibuprofen plus caffeine for acute postoperative pain in adults.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently considered trials for inclusion in the review, assessed risk of bias, and extracted data. We used the area under the pain relief versus time curve to derive the proportion of participants with at least 50% pain relief over six hours prescribed either ibuprofen plus caffeine or placebo. We calculated the risk ratio (RR) and number needed to treat to benefit (NNT). We used information on the use of rescue medication to calculate the proportion of participants requiring rescue medication and the weighted mean of the median time to use. We also collected information on adverse effects.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified five randomised, double-blind studies with 1501 participants, but only four had been published and had relevant outcome data. These four studies were of high quality, although two of the studies were small.Both ibuprofen 200 mg + caffeine 100 mg and ibuprofen 100 mg + caffeine 100 mg produced significantly more participants than placebo who achieved at least 50% of maximum pain relief over six hours, and both doses significantly reduced remedication rates (moderate quality evidence). For at least 50% of maximum pain relief, the NNT was 2.1 (95% confidence interval 1.8 to 2.5) for ibuprofen 200 mg + caffeine 100 mg (four studies, 334 participants) and 2.4 (1.9 to 3.1) for ibuprofen 100 mg + caffeine 100 mg (two studies, 200 participants) (moderate quality evidence). These values were close to those predicted by published models for combination analgesics in acute pain, and were supported by low (good) NNT values for prevention of remedication.Adverse event rates were low, and no sensible analysis was possible.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

For ibuprofen 200 mg + caffeine 100 mg particularly, the low NNT value is among the lowest (best) values for analgesics in this pain model. The combination is not commonly available, but can be probably be achieved by taking a single 200 mg ibuprofen tablet with a cup of modestly strong coffee or caffeine tablets. In principle, this can deliver good analgesia at lower doses of ibuprofen.

Single dose oral diclofenac for acute postoperative pain in adults

BACKGROUND

Diclofenac is a nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug, available as a potassium salt (immediate release) or sodium salt (enteric coated to suppress dissolution in the stomach). This review updates an earlier review published in the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (Issue 2, 2009) entitled 'Single dose oral diclofenac for acute postoperative pain in adults'.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the analgesic efficacy and adverse effects of a single oral dose of diclofenac for moderate to severe postoperative pain, using methods that permit comparison with other analgesics evaluated in standardised trials using almost identical methods and outcomes.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Oxford Pain Relief Database, two clinical trial registries, and the reference lists of articles. The date of the most recent search was 9 March 2015.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trials of single dose, oral diclofenac (sodium or potassium) for acute postoperative pain in adults.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently considered studies for inclusion in the review, assessed risk of bias, and extracted data. We used the area under the pain relief versus time curve to derive the proportion of participants with at least 50% pain relief over six hours prescribed either diclofenac or placebo. We calculated the risk ratio (RR) and number needed to treat to benefit (NNT). We used information on the use of rescue medication to calculate the proportion of participants requiring rescue medication and the weighted mean of the median time to use. We also collected information on adverse effects.

MAIN RESULTS

This update included three new studies, providing a 26% increase in participants in comparisons between diclofenac and placebo. We included 18 studies involving 3714 participants, 1902 treated with diclofenac and 1007 with placebo. This update has also changed the focus of the review, examining the effects of formulation in more detail than previously. This is a result of increased understanding of the importance of speed of onset in determining analgesic efficacy in acute pain.The largest body of information, for diclofenac potassium 50 mg, in seven studies, produced an NNT for at least 50% of maximum pain relief compared with placebo of 2.1 (95% confidence interval (CI) 1.9 to 2.5) (high quality evidence). There was a graded improvement in efficacy as doses rose from 25 mg to 100 mg, both for participants achieving at least 50% maximum pain relief, and for remedication within 6 to 8 hours. Fast-acting formulations (dispersible products, solutions, and softgel formulations) had a similar efficacy for a 50 mg dose, with an NNT of 2.4 (2.0 to 3.0). Diclofenac sodium in a small number of studies produced a lesser effect, with an NNT of 6.6 (4.1 to 17) for the 50 mg dose.Adverse event rates were low in these single dose studies, with no difference between diclofenac and placebo (moderate quality evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Diclofenac potassium provides good pain relief at 25 mg, 50 mg, and 100 mg doses. Diclofenac sodium has limited efficacy and should probably not be used in acute pain.

Pain Management Issues for the Geriatric Surgical Patient

Adequate treatment of pain is of utmost importance in making uncomplicated the perioperative course for geriatric surgical patients. Effective analgesia reduces morbidity, improves patient and family satisfaction, and is a natural expectation of high-quality care. Pain treatment in older adults is more complicated than in younger counterparts, and great consideration must be given to age-related changes in physiology and pharmacokinetics. Pain treatment must be individualized based on each patient's profile. Side effects must be minimized and organ toxicity avoided. When complications occur they may be more severe, and treatment must be prompt. Alternative plans for analgesia must be readily enacted.

Paracetamol (acetaminophen) for prevention or treatment of pain in newborns

BACKGROUND

Newborn infants have the ability to experience pain. Newborns treated in neonatal intensive care units are exposed to numerous painful procedures. Healthy newborns are exposed to pain if the birth process consists of assisted vaginal birth by vacuum extraction or by forceps and during blood sampling for newborn screening tests.

OBJECTIVES

Primary objectiveTo determine the efficacy and safety of paracetamol for the prevention or treatment of procedural/postoperative pain or pain associated with clinical conditions in neonates. Secondary objectiveTo review the effects of various doses and routes of administration (enteral, intravenous or rectal) of paracetamol for the prevention or treatment of pain in neonates. We designed the main comparisons according to intention of use, that is, paracetamol for prevention or treatment of pain. We included separate comparisons based on the painful intervention/procedure/condition (heel lance, insertion of nasogastric tube, insertion of intravenous catheter, lumbar puncture, assisted vaginal birth, postoperative pain, birth trauma, congenital anomalies such as myelomeningocoele and open cutaneous lesions) and the mode of administration of paracetamol. Within these comparisons, we planned to assess in subgroups (when possible) effects based on postmenstrual age (PMA) at the birth of randomly assigned infants (< 28 weeks, 28 weeks to 31 + 6 weeks, 32 weeks to 36 + 6 weeks and ≥ 37 weeks) or based on birth weight (or current weight) categories (≤ 1000 grams, 1001 to 1500 grams, 1501 to 2500 grams and ≥ 2501 grams)

SEARCH METHODS

We used the standard search strategy of the Cochrane Neonatal Review Group including electronic searches of the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (October 2014), MEDLINE (1966 to October 2014), EMBASE (1980 to October 2014) and the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL) (1982 to October 2014). We applied no language restrictions.We conducted electronic searches of abstracts from meetings of the Pediatric Academic Societies (2000 to 2014) and the Perinatal Society of Australia and New Zealand (2010 to 2014).We searched clinical trial registries for ongoing trials and the Web of Science for articles quoting identified randomised controlled trials. We searched the first 200 hits on Google Scholar(TM) to identify grey literature.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised and quasi-randomised controlled trials of paracetamol for the prevention or treatment of pain in neonates (≤ 30 days of age).

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently extracted data from the full-text articles using a specifically designed form. We used this form to decide trial inclusion/exclusion, to extract data from eligible trials and to request additional published information from authors of the original reports. We entered and cross-checked data using RevMan 5.3.3 software. When noted, we resolved differences by mutual discussion and consensus.

MAIN RESULTS

We included eight trials with low risk of bias, which assessed paracetamol use for the treatment of pain in 614 infants. Painful interventions studied included heel lance, assisted vaginal birth, eye examination for ascertainment of retinopathy of prematurity (ROP) and postoperative care following major surgery. Results of individual studies could not be combined in meta-analyses as the painful conditions, the use of paracetamol and comparison interventions and the outcome measures differed. Paracetamol compared with water, cherry elixir or EMLA cream did not significantly reduce pain following heel lance. The Premature Infant Pain Profile score (PIPP) within three minutes following lancing was higher in the paracetamol group than in the oral glucose group (mean difference (MD) 2.21, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.72 to 3.70; one study, 38 infants). Paracetamol did not reduce "modified facies scores" after assisted vaginal birth (one study, 119 infants). In another study (n = 123), the Échelle de Douleur et d'Inconfort du Nouveau-Né score at two hours of age was significantly higher in the group that received paracetamol suppositories than in the placebo suppositories group (MD 1.00, 95% CI 0.60 to 1.40). In that study, when infants were subjected to a heel lance at two to three days of age, Bernese Pain Scale for Neonates scores were higher in the paracetamol group than in the placebo group, and infants spent a longer time crying (MD 19 seconds, 95% CI 14 to 24). For eye examinations, no significant reduction in PIPP scores in the first or last 45 seconds of eye examination was reported, nor at five minutes after the eye examination. In one study (n = 81), the PIPP score was significantly higher in the paracetamol group than in the 24% sucrose group (MD 3.90, 95% CI 2.92 to 4.88). For postoperative care following major thoracic or abdominal surgery, the total amount of morphine (µg/kg) administered over 48 hours was significantly less among infants randomly assigned to the paracetamol group than in those randomly assigned to the morphine group (MD -157 µg/kg, 95% CI -27 to -288). No adverse events were noted in any study.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Paracetamol does not significantly reduce pain associated with heel lance or eye examinations. Paracetamol given after assisted vaginal birth may increase the response to later painful exposures. Paracetamol should not be used for painful procedures given its lack of efficacy and its potential for adverse effects. Paracetamol may reduce the total need for morphine following major surgery, and for this aspect of paracetamol use, further research is needed.

Patient controlled analgesia with remifentanil versus epidural analgesia in labour: randomised multicentre equivalence trial

OBJECTIVE

To determine women's satisfaction with pain relief using patient controlled analgesia with remifentanil compared with epidural analgesia during labour.

DESIGN

Multicentre randomised controlled equivalence trial.

SETTING

15 hospitals in the Netherlands.

PARTICIPANTS

Women with an intermediate to high obstetric risk with an intention to deliver vaginally. To exclude a clinically relevant difference in satisfaction with pain relief of more than 10%, we needed to include 1136 women. Because of missing values for satisfaction this number was increased to 1400 before any analysis. We used multiple imputation to correct for missing data.

INTERVENTION

Before the onset of active labour consenting women were randomised to a pain relief strategy with patient controlled remifentanil or epidural analgesia if they requested pain relief during labour.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Primary outcome was satisfaction with pain relief, measured hourly on a visual analogue scale and expressed as area under the curve (AUC), thus providing a time weighted measure of total satisfaction with pain relief. A higher AUC represents higher satisfaction with pain relief. Secondary outcomes were pain intensity scores, mode of delivery, and maternal and neonatal outcomes. Analysis was done by intention to treat. The study was defined as an equivalence study for the primary outcome.

RESULTS

1414 women were randomised, of whom 709 were allocated to patient controlled remifentanil and 705 to epidural analgesia. Baseline characteristics were comparable. Pain relief was ultimately used in 65% (447/687) in the remifentanil group and 52% (347/671) in the epidural analgesia group (relative risk 1.32, 95% confidence interval 1.18 to 1.48). Cross over occurred in 7% (45/687) and 8% (51/671) of women, respectively. Of women primarily treated with remifentanil, 13% (53/402) converted to epidural analgesia, while in women primarily treated with epidural analgesia 1% (3/296) converted to remifentanil. The area under the curve for total satisfaction with pain relief was 30.9 in the remifentanil group versus 33.7 in the epidural analgesia group (mean difference -2.8, 95% confidence interval -6.9 to 1.3). For who actually received pain relief the area under the curve for satisfaction with pain relief after the start of pain relief was 25.6 in the remifentanil group versus 36.1 in the epidural analgesia group (mean difference -10.4, -13.9 to -7.0). The rate of caesarean section was 15% in both groups. Oxygen saturation was significantly lower (SpO2 <92%) in women who used remifentanil (relative risk 1.5, 1.4 to 1.7). Maternal and neonatal outcomes were comparable between both groups.

CONCLUSION

In women in labour, patient controlled analgesia with remifentanil is not equivalent to epidural analgesia with respect to scores on satisfaction with pain relief. Satisfaction with pain relief was significantly higher in women who were allocated to and received epidural analgesia.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Netherlands Trial Register NTR2551.

Single dose oral ibuprofen plus codeine for acute postoperative pain in adults

BACKGROUND

This is an update of the original Cochrane review published in Issue 3, 2013. There is good evidence that combining two different analgesics in fixed doses in a single tablet can provide better pain relief in acute pain and headache than either drug alone, and that the drug-specific effects are essentially additive. This appears to be broadly true in postoperative pain and migraine headache across a range of different drug combinations and when tested in the same and different trials. Some combinations of ibuprofen and codeine are available without prescription (but usually only from a pharmacy) where the dose of codeine is lower, and with a prescription when the dose of codeine is higher.Use of combination analgesics that contain codeine has been a source of some concern because of misuse from over-the-counter preparations.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the analgesic efficacy and adverse effects of a single oral dose of ibuprofen plus codeine for acute moderate-to-severe postoperative pain using methods that permit comparison with other analgesics evaluated in standardised trials using almost identical methods and outcomes.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Oxford Pain Relief Database, ClinicalTrials.gov, and the reference lists of articles. The date of the most recent search was 1 December 2014.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised, double-blind, placebo- or active-controlled clinical trials of single dose oral ibuprofen plus codeine for acute postoperative pain in adults.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently considered trials for inclusion in the review, assessed risk of bias, and extracted data. We used the area under the pain relief versus time curve to derive the proportion of participants prescribed ibuprofen plus codeine, placebo, or the same dose of ibuprofen alone with at least 50% pain relief over six hours, using validated equations. We calculated the risk ratio (RR) and number needed to treat to benefit (NNT). We used information on the use of rescue medication to calculate the proportion of participants requiring rescue medication and the weighted mean of the median time to use. We also collected information on adverse effects. Analyses were planned for different doses of ibuprofen and codeine, but especially for codeine where we set criteria for low (< 10 mg), medium (10 to 20 mg), and high (> 20 mg) doses.

MAIN RESULTS

Since the last version of this review no new studies were found. Information was available from six studies with 1342 participants, using a variety of doses of ibuprofen and codeine. In four studies (443 participants) using ibuprofen 400 mg plus codeine 25.6 mg to 60 mg (high dose codeine) 64% of participants had at least 50% maximum pain relief with the combination compared to 18% with placebo. The NNT was 2.2 (95% confidence interval 1.8 to 2.6) (high quality evidence). In three studies (204 participants) ibuprofen plus codeine (any dose) was better than the same dose of ibuprofen (69% versus 55%) but the result was barely significant with a relative benefit of 1.3 (1.01 to 1.6) (moderate quality evidence). In two studies (159 participants) ibuprofen plus codeine appeared to be better than the same dose of codeine alone (69% versus 33%), but no analysis was done. There was no difference between the combination and placebo in the reporting of adverse events in these acute studies (moderate quality evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The combination of ibuprofen 400 mg plus codeine 25.6 mg to 60 mg demonstrates good analgesic efficacy. Very limited data suggest that the combination is better than the same dose of either drug alone, and that similar numbers of people experience adverse events with the combination as with placebo.

Perioperative management of elderly patients

The older population only represents 13.7% of the US population but has grown by 21% since 2002. The centenarian population is growing at a faster rate than the total US population. This unprecedented growth has significantly increased surgical demand. The establishment of quality and performance improvement data has allowed researchers to focus attention on the older patient population, resulting in an exponential increase in studies. Although there is still much work to be done in this field, overlying themes regarding the perioperative management of elderly patients are presented in this article based on a thorough literature review.

Analgesic efficacy of acetaminophen for controlling postextraction dental pain

Background:

Considering the clinical safety of acetaminophen over other nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, this clinical trial was formulated to assess the analgesic efficacy of acetaminophen for controlling postextraction dental pain when compared to commonly prescribed ibuprofen.

Aim:

The aim was to assess the analgesic efficacy of paracetamol/acetaminophen in postextraction dental pain.

Settings and Design:

Double-blind, randomized prospective clinical trial.

Materials and Methods:

A total of 30 patients requiring bilateral maxillary and mandibular premolar extraction for their orthodontic treatment were included in the study to evaluate the efficacy of acetaminophen in controlling postextraction dental pain.

Statistical Analysis Used:

Unpaired t-test.

Results and Conclusions:

Clinically, both the postoperative analgesics exerted similar pain control with minor variations of recorded visual analog scale scores by the patients in both the groups. It may be concluded from the findings of this study that paracetamol at a dosage of 500 mg thrice a day (1.5 g) is sufficient to achieve reliable pain control following exodontia provided the surgical trauma caused to the investing tissues is minimal.

Benefits of a Multimodal Regimen for Postsurgical Pain Management in Colorectal Surgery

BACKGROUND

Postoperative pain management is a major concern and a significant component of postoperative care pathways for surgery patients.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective medical record review of 233 consecutive patients undergoing major colorectal surgery from October 2011 to January 2013 at an academic medical center. All patients were managed with similar enhanced recovery pathways; 66 patients received multimodal postsurgical pain management that included liposomal bupivacaine intraoperatively, and 167 patients received conventional pain management with intravenous opioids. Comparisons were made using t test and chi-square analysis with StatView (SAS Institute Inc.).

RESULTS

Patients receiving multimodal pain management with liposomal bupivacaine injected in the surgical site at the end of major colorectal procedures had lower postoperative pain scores and used significantly less opioids at 12, 24, 36, 48, 60, and 72 hours (P=0.03). Patients in the multimodal group also had a significantly decreased risk of opioid-related adverse events, with decreased use of antipruritic medications and antiemetic medications postoperatively. A significant decrease in length of postoperative hospital stay was seen in the multimodal group (7.2 vs 9.0 days, P=0.04).

CONCLUSION

The use of multimodal pain management including liposomal bupivacaine during major colorectal surgeries improved postoperative outcomes, decreased lengths of stay, and increased bed availability.

Postoperative pain management in patients with chronic kidney disease

Chronic kidney disease (CKD) is a health care problem with increasing prevalence worldwide. Pain management represents one of the challenges in providing perioperative care for this group of patients. Physicians from different specialties may be involved in pain management of CKD patients, especially in advanced stages. It is important to understand the clinical staging of kidney function in CKD patients as the pharmacotherapeutic pain management strategies change as kidney function becomes progressively impaired. Special emphasis should be placed on dose adjustment of certain analgesics as well as prevention of further deterioration of renal function that could be induced by certain classes of analgesics. Chronic pain is a common finding in CKD patients which may be caused by the primary disease that led to kidney damage or can be a direct result of CKD and hemodialysis. The presence of chronic pain in some of the CKD patients makes postoperative pain management in these patients more challenging. This review focuses on the plans and challenges of postoperative pain management for patient at different stages of CKD undergoing surgical intervention to provide optimum pain control for this patient population. Further clinical studies are required to address the optimal medication regimen for postoperative pain management in the different stages of CKD.

Adverse effects of perioperative paracetamol, NSAIDs, glucocorticoids, gabapentinoids and their combinations: a topical review

Post-operative pain affects millions of patients worldwide and the post-operative period has high rates of morbidity and mortality. Some of this morbidity may be related to analgesics. The aim of this review was to provide an update of current knowledge of adverse events (AE) associated with the most common perioperative non-opioid analgesics: paracetamol, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), glucocorticoids (GCCs), gabapentinoids and their combinations. The review is based on data from systematic reviews with meta-analyses of analgesic efficacy and/or adverse effects of perioperative non-opioid analgesics, and randomised trials and cohort/retrospective studies. Generally, data on AE are sparse and related to the immediate post-operative period. For paracetamol, the incidence of AEs appears trivial. Data are inconclusive regarding an association of NSAIDs with mortality, cardiovascular events, surgical bleeding and renal impairment. Anastomotic leakage may be associated with NSAID usage. No firm evidence exists for an association of NSAIDs with impaired bone healing. Single-dose GCCs were not significantly related to increased infection rates or delayed wound healing. Gabapentinoid treatment was associated with increased sedation, dizziness and visual disturbances, but the clinical relevance needs clarification. Importantly, data on AEs of combinations of the above analgesics are sparse and inconclusive. Despite the potential adverse events associated with the most commonly applied non-opioid analgesics, including their combinations, reporting of such events is sparse and confined to the immediate perioperative period. Knowledge of benefit and harm related to multimodal pain treatment is deficient and needs clarification in large trials with prolonged observation.

Efficacy of paracetamol for acute low-back pain: a double-blind, randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Regular paracetamol is the recommended first-line analgesic for acute low-back pain; however, no high-quality evidence supports this recommendation. We aimed to assess the efficacy of paracetamol taken regularly or as-needed to improve time to recovery from pain, compared with placebo, in patients with low-back pain.

METHODS

We did a multicentre, double-dummy, randomised, placebo controlled trial across 235 primary care centres in Sydney, Australia, from Nov 11, 2009, to March 5, 2013. We randomly allocated patients with acute low-back pain in a 1:1:1 ratio to receive up to 4 weeks of regular doses of paracetamol (three times per day; equivalent to 3990 mg paracetamol per day), as-needed doses of paracetamol (taken when needed for pain relief; maximum 4000 mg paracetamol per day), or placebo. Randomisation was done according to a centralised randomisation schedule prepared by a researcher who was not involved in patient recruitment or data collection. Patients and staff at all sites were masked to treatment allocation. All participants received best-evidence advice and were followed up for 3 months. The primary outcome was time until recovery from low-back pain, with recovery defined as a pain score of 0 or 1 (on a 0-10 pain scale) sustained for 7 consecutive days. All data were analysed by intention to treat. This study is registered with the Australian and New Zealand Clinical Trial Registry, number ACTN 12609000966291.

FINDINGS

550 participants were assigned to the regular group (550 analysed), 549 were assigned to the as-needed group (546 analysed), and 553 were assigned to the placebo group (547 analysed). Median time to recovery was 17 days (95% CI 14-19) in the regular group, 17 days (15-20) in the as-needed group, and 16 days (14-20) in the placebo group (regular vs placebo hazard ratio 0·99, 95% CI 0·87-1·14; as-needed vs placebo 1·05, 0·92-1·19; regular vs as-needed 1·05, 0·92-1·20). We recorded no difference between treatment groups for time to recovery (adjusted p=0·79). Adherence to regular tablets (median tablets consumed per participant per day of maximum 6; 4·0 [IQR 1·6-5·7] in the regular group, 3·9 [1·5-5·6] in the as-needed group, and 4·0 [1·5-5·7] in the placebo group), and number of participants reporting adverse events (99 [18·5%] in the regular group, 99 [18·7%] in the as-needed group, and 98 [18·5%] in the placebo group) were similar between groups.

INTERPRETATION

Our findings suggest that regular or as-needed dosing with paracetamol does not affect recovery time compared with placebo in low-back pain, and question the universal endorsement of paracetamol in this patient group.

FUNDING

National Health and Medical Research Council of Australia and GlaxoSmithKline Australia.

Post-operative analgesic effects of paracetamol, NSAIDs, glucocorticoids, gabapentinoids and their combinations: a topical review

In contemporary post-operative pain management, patients are most often treated with combinations of non-opioid analgesics, to enhance pain relief and to reduce opioid requirements and opioid-related adverse effects. A diversity of combinations is currently employed in clinical practice, and no well-documented 'gold standards' exist. The aim of the present topical, narrative review is to provide an update of the evidence for post-operative analgesic efficacy with the most commonly used, systemic non-opioid drugs, paracetamol, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs)/COX-2 antagonists, glucocorticoids, gabapentinoids, and combinations of these. The review is based on data from previous systematic reviews with meta-analyses, investigating effects of non-opioid analgesics on pain, opioid-requirements, and opioid-related adverse effects. Paracetamol, NSAIDs, COX-2 antagonists, and gabapentin reduced 24 h post-operative morphine requirements with 6.3 (95% confidence interval: 3.7 to 9.0) mg, 10.2 (8.7, 11.7) mg, 10.9 (9.1, 12.8) mg, and ≥ 13 mg, respectively, when administered as monotherapy. The opioid-sparing effect of glucocorticoids was less convincing, 2.33 (0.26, 4.39) mg morphine/24 h. Trials of pregabalin > 300 mg/day indicated a morphine-sparing effect of 13.4 (4, 22.8) mg morphine/24 h. Notably, though, the available evidence for additive or synergistic effects of most combination regimens was sparse or lacking. Paracetamol, NSAIDs, selective COX-2 antagonists, and gabapentin all seem to have well-documented, clinically relevant analgesic properties. The analgesic effects of glucocorticoids and pregabalin await further clarification. Combination regimens are sparsely documented and should be further investigated in future studies.

Postoperative pain control

The effective relief of pain is of the utmost importance to anyone treating patients undergoing surgery. Pain relief has significant physiological benefits; hence, monitoring of pain relief is increasingly becoming an important postoperative quality measure. The goal for postoperative pain management is to reduce or eliminate pain and discomfort with a minimum of side effects. Various agents (opioid vs. nonopioid), routes (oral, intravenous, neuraxial, regional) and modes (patient controlled vs. "as needed") for the treatment of postoperative pain exist. Although traditionally the mainstay of postoperative analgesia is opioid based, increasingly more evidence exists to support a multimodal approach with the intent to reduce opioid side effects (such as nausea and ileus) and improve pain scores. Enhanced recovery protocols to reduce length of stay in colorectal surgery are becoming more prevalent and include multimodal opioid sparing regimens as a critical component. Familiarity with the efficacy of available agents and routes of administration is important to tailor the postoperative regimen to the needs of the individual patient.

Single dose oral etoricoxib for acute postoperative pain in adults

BACKGROUND

This is an updated version of the original Cochrane review first published in Issue 2, 2009, and updated in Issue 4, 2012.Etoricoxib is a selective cyclo-oxygenase-2 (COX-2) inhibitor licensed for the relief of chronic pain in osteoarthritis and rheumatoid arthritis, and acute pain in some jurisdictions. This class of drugs is believed to be associated with fewer upper gastrointestinal adverse effects than conventional non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs).

OBJECTIVES

To assess the efficacy and adverse effects of single dose etoricoxib for acute postoperative pain using methods that permit accurate comparison with other analgesics evaluated in the same way, using criteria of efficacy recommended by in-depth studies at the individual patient level.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Oxford Pain Database, www.clinicaltrials.gov, and reference lists of articles. The date of the most recent search was 31 January 2014.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trials of single dose, oral etoricoxib for acute postoperative pain in adults.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently considered studies for inclusion in the review, assessed quality, and extracted data. We used the area under the pain relief versus time curve to derive the proportion of participants prescribed etoricoxib or placebo with at least 50% pain relief over six hours, using validated equations. We calculated relative risk (RR) and number needed to treat to benefit (NNT). We used information on use of rescue medication to calculate the proportion of participants requiring rescue medication and the weighted mean of the median time to use. We also collected information on adverse events.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified no new studies for this updated review, which includes six studies with 1214 participants in comparisons of etoricoxib with placebo. All six studies reported on the 120 mg dose (798 participants in a comparison with placebo). Sixty-six per cent of participants with etoricoxib 120 mg and 12% with placebo reported at least 50% pain relief (NNT 1.8 (1.7 to 2.0); high-quality evidence). For dental studies only, the NNT was 1.6 (1.5 to 1.8). A single dose of 90 mg produced similar results in one large trial. Other doses (60, 180, and 240 mg) were each studied in only one treatment arm.Significantly fewer participants used rescue medication over 24 hours when taking etoricoxib 120 mg than placebo (NNT to prevent remedication 2.2 (1.9 to 2.8)), and the median time to use of rescue medication was 20 hours for etoricoxib and two hours for placebo. Adverse events were reported at a similar rate to placebo (moderate-quality evidence), with no serious events.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Single-dose oral etoricoxib produces high levels of good quality pain relief after surgery, and adverse events did not differ from placebo in these studies. The 120 mg dose is as effective as, or better than, other commonly used analgesics.

[Paracetamol. Efficacious and safe for all ages]

Paracetamol has become a focus of attention as being unsafe due to hepatic toxicity and market withdrawal or prescription status is presently under discussion in Germany. This drug is, however, effective and safe if notes of caution are applied. In Germany 38 fatal cases of analgesic poisoning were observed in 2010, only 4 of which were due to paracetamol and 16 were caused by diclofenac and ibuprofen. Alternative pain medications are obviously much less safe, in particular given the additional risk of sometimes fatal gastrointestinal bleeding and cardiovascular side effects. This review extensively analyzes the safety record of paracetamol and applies these findings to the treatment of elderly people. Even very elderly patients may be safely treated with this compound, although a dose limit of 3 g/day should be instituted. This renewed discussion was triggered by the uncontrolled availability of paracetamol in the USA but observations from this country should not be generalized and applied to the German situation and objective reasoning should be re-installed.

Ibuprofen and/or paracetamol (acetaminophen) for pain relief after surgical removal of lower wisdom teeth

BACKGROUND

Both paracetamol and ibuprofen are commonly used analgesics for the relief of pain following the surgical removal of lower wisdom teeth (third molars). In 2010, a novel analgesic (marketed as Nuromol) containing both paracetamol and ibuprofen in the same tablet was launched in the United Kingdom, this drug has shown promising results to date and we have chosen to also compare the combined drug with the single drugs using this model. In this review we investigated the optimal doses of both paracetamol and ibuprofen via comparison of both and via comparison with the novel combined drug. We have taken into account the side effect profile of the study drugs. This review will help oral surgeons to decide on which analgesic to prescribe following wisdom tooth removal.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the beneficial and harmful effects of paracetamol, ibuprofen and the novel combination of both in a single tablet for pain relief following the surgical removal of lower wisdom teeth, at different doses and administered postoperatively.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Oral Health Group'sTrials Register (to 20 May 2013); the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library 2013, Issue 4); MEDLINE via OVID (1946 to 20 May 2013); EMBASE via OVID (1980 to 20 May 2013) and the metaRegister of Controlled Trials (to 20 May 2013). We checked the bibliographies of relevant clinical trials and review articles for further studies. We wrote to authors of the identified randomised controlled trials (RCTs), and searched personal references in an attempt to identify unpublished or ongoing RCTs. No language restriction was applied to the searches of the electronic databases.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Only randomised controlled double-blinded clinical trials were included. Cross-over studies were included provided there was a wash out period of at least 14 days. There had to be a direct comparison in the trial of two or more of the trial drugs at any dosage. All trials used the third molar pain model.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

All trials identified were scanned independently and in duplicate by two review authors, any disagreements were resolved by discussion, or if necessary a third review author was consulted. The proportion of patients with at least 50% pain relief (based on total pain relief (TOTPAR) and summed pain intensity difference (SPID) data) was calculated for all three drugs at both two and six hours postdosing and meta-analysed for comparison. The proportion of participants using rescue medication over both six and eight hours was also collated and compared. The number of patients experiencing adverse events or the total number of adverse events reported or both were analysed for comparison.

MAIN RESULTS

Seven studies were included, they were all parallel-group studies, two studies were assessed as at low risk of bias and three at high risk of bias; two were considered to have unclear bias in their methodology. A total of 2241 participants were enrolled in these trials.Ibuprofen was found to be a superior analgesic to paracetamol at several doses with high quality evidence suggesting that ibuprofen 400 mg is superior to 1000 mg paracetamol based on pain relief (estimated from TOTPAR data) and the use of rescue medication meta-analyses. The risk ratio for at least 50% pain relief (based on TOTPAR) at six hours was 1.47 (95% confidence interval (CI) 1.28 to 1.69; five trials) favouring 400 mg ibuprofen over 1000 mg paracetamol, and the risk ratio for not using rescue medication (also favouring ibuprofen) was 1.50 (95% CI 1.25 to 1.79; four trials).The combined drug showed promising results, with a risk ratio for at least 50% of the maximum pain relief over six hours of 1.77 (95% CI 1.32 to 2.39) (paracetamol 1000 mg and ibuprofen 400 mg) (one trial; moderate quality evidence), and risk ratio not using rescue medication 1.60 (95% CI 1.36 to 1.88) (two trials; moderate quality evidence).The information available regarding adverse events from the studies (including nausea, vomiting, headaches and dizziness) indicated that they were comparable between the treatment groups. However, we could not formally analyse the data as it was not possible to work out how many adverse events there were in total.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is high quality evidence that ibuprofen is superior to paracetamol at doses of 200 mg to 512 mg and 600 mg to 1000 mg respectively based on pain relief and use of rescue medication data collected at six hours postoperatively. The majority of this evidence (five out of six trials) compared ibuprofen 400 mg with paracetamol 1000 mg, these are the most frequently prescribed doses in clinical practice. The novel combination drug is showing encouraging results based on the outcomes from two trials when compared to the single drugs.

WITHDRAWN: Single dose dipyrone for acute postoperative pain

BACKGROUND

Dipyrone (metamizole) is a non‐steroidal anti‐inflammatory drug used in some countries to treat pain (postoperative, colic, cancer, and migraine); it is banned in others because of an association with life‐threatening blood agranulocytosis. This review updates a 2001 Cochrane review, and no relevant new studies were identified, but additional outcomes were sought.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the efficacy and adverse events of single dose dipyrone in acute postoperative pain.

SEARCH METHODS

The earlier review searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE, LILACS and the Oxford Pain Relief Database to December 1999. For the update we searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE,EMBASE and LILACS to February 2010.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Single dose, randomised, double‐blind, placebo or active controlled trials of dipyrone for relief of established moderate to severe postoperative pain in adults. We included oral, rectal, intramuscular or intravenous administration of study drugs.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Studies were assessed for methodological quality and data extracted by two review authors independently. Summed total pain relief over six hours (TOTPAR) was used to calculate the number of participants achieving at least 50% pain relief. Derived results were used to calculate, with 95% confidence intervals, relative benefit compared to placebo, and the number needed to treat (NNT) for one participant to experience at least 50% pain relief over six hours. Use and time to use of rescue medication were additional measures of efficacy. Information on adverse events and withdrawals was collected.

MAIN RESULTS

Fifteen studies tested mainly 500 mg oral dipyrone (173 participants), 2.5 g intravenous dipyrone (101), 2.5 g intramuscular dipyrone (99); fewer than 60 participants received any other dose. All studies used active controls (ibuprofen, paracetamol, aspirin, flurbiprofen, ketoprofen, dexketoprofen, ketorolac, pethidine, tramadol, suprofen); eight used placebo controls. Over 70% of participants experienced at least 50% pain relief over 4 to 6 hours with oral dipyrone 500 mg compared to 30% with placebo in five studies (288 participants; NNT 2.4 (1.9 to 3.2)). Fewer participants needed rescue medication with dipyrone (7%) than with placebo (34%; four studies, 248 participants). There was no difference in participants experiencing at least 50% pain relief with 2.5 g intravenous dipyrone and 100 mg intravenous tramadol (70% vs 65%; two studies, 200 participants). No serious adverse events were reported.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Based on very limited information, single dose dipyrone 500 mg provides good pain relief to 70% of patients. For every five individuals given dipyrone 500 mg, two would experience this level of pain relief who would not have done with placebo, and fewer would need rescue medication, over 4 to 6 hours.

Single dose oral dexibuprofen [S(+)-ibuprofen] for acute postoperative pain in adults

BACKGROUND

This review is an update of a previously published review in The Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews Issue 3, 2009 on single dose oral dexibuprofen (S(+)-ibuprofen) for acute postoperative pain in adults.Dexibuprofen is a non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID) licensed for use in rheumatic disease and other musculoskeletal disorders in the UK, and widely available in other countries worldwide. It is an active isomer of ibuprofen. This review sought to evaluate the efficacy and safety of oral dexibuprofen in acute postoperative pain, using clinical studies in patients with established pain, and with outcomes measured primarily over four to six hours, using standard methods. This type of study has been used for many decades to establish that drugs have analgesic properties.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the efficacy and adverse effects of single dose oral dexibuprofen for acute postoperative pain using methods that permit comparison with other analgesics evaluated in standardised studies using almost identical methods and outcomes.

SEARCH METHODS

Searches were run for the original review in 2009 and subsequent searches have been run in August 2013. We did not find any new published studies as a result of the updated search.We searched for randomised studies of dexibuprofen in acute postoperative pain in MEDLINE, EMBASE, and CENTRAL (The Cochrane LIbrary), and for clinical trial reports and synopses of published and unpublished studies from Internet sources.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised, double blind, placebo-controlled clinical studies of oral dexibuprofen for relief of acute postoperative pain in adults.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed study quality and extracted data. We extracted pain relief or pain intensity data and converted it into the dichotomous outcome of number of participants with at least 50% pain relief over four to six hours, from which relative risk and number needed to treat to benefit (NNT) were calculated. Numbers of participants using rescue medication over specified time periods, and time to use of rescue medication, were sought as additional measures of efficacy. We collected information on adverse events and withdrawals.

MAIN RESULTS

New data were identified for this update in one unpublished trial synopsis (BR1160 1995) in addition to the single study (Dionne 1998) that was included in the original review. In both studies dexibuprofen gave high levels of response, with 51/96 (53%) participants experiencing at least 50% pain relief with dexibuprofen 200 mg and 35/50 (70%) with dexibuprofen 400 mg, compared with 75/147 (51%) with racemic ibuprofen 400 mg, and 12/62 (13%) with placebo. The numbers of participants was too small to calculate NNTs with any meaning. The median time to additional analgesic use was greater than four hours for all active therapies, but about two hours for placebo.Adverse events were generally of mild or moderate intensity and consistent with events normally associated with anaesthesia and surgery. There were no serious adverse events or deaths.Additional data did not alter the conclusions from the earlier review.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The information from these two studies in acute postoperative pain suggested that dexibuprofen may be a useful analgesic, but at doses not very different from racemic ibuprofen, for which considerably more evidence exists.

Single dose oral celecoxib for acute postoperative pain in adults

BACKGROUND

This is an update of a review first published in The Cochrane Library in Issue 4, 2008, and updated in Issue 3, 2012. Celecoxib is a selective cyclo-oxygenase-2 (COX-2) inhibitor usually prescribed for the relief of chronic pain in osteoarthritis and rheumatoid arthritis. Celecoxib is believed to be associated with fewer upper gastrointestinal adverse effects than conventional non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs). Its effectiveness in acute pain was demonstrated in the earlier reviews.

OBJECTIVES

To assess analgesic efficacy and adverse effects of a single oral dose of celecoxib for moderate to severe postoperative pain in adults.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Oxford Pain Database, and ClinicalTrials.gov. The most recent search was to 31 May 2013.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials (RCTs) of adults prescribed any dose of oral celecoxib or placebo for acute postoperative pain.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors assessed studies for quality and extracted data. We converted summed pain relief (TOTPAR) or pain intensity difference (SPID) into dichotomous information, yielding the number of participants with at least 50% pain relief over four to six hours. We used this to calculate the relative benefit (RB) and number needed to treat to benefit (NNT), for one patient to achieve at least 50% of maximum pain relief with celecoxib who would not have done so with placebo. We used information on use of rescue medication to calculate the proportion of participants requiring rescue medication and the weighted mean of the median time to use.

MAIN RESULTS

Ten studies (1785 participants) met the inclusion criteria. The two new studies in this update had been identified in the earlier update, but data were not available. There remain three potentially relevant unpublished studies for which data are not available at this time.The NNT for celecoxib 200 mg and 400 mg compared with placebo for at least 50% of maximum pain relief over four to six hours was 4.2 (95% confidence interval (CI) 3.4 to 5.6) and 2.6 (95% CI 2.3 to 3.0) respectively. The median time to use of rescue medication was 6.6 hours with celecoxib 200 mg, 8.4 hours with celecoxib 400 mg, and 2.3 hours with placebo. The proportion of participants requiring rescue medication over 24 hours was 74% with celecoxib 200 mg, 63% for celecoxib 400 mg, and 91% for placebo. The NNT to prevent one patient using rescue medication was 4.8 (95% CI 3.5 to 7.7) and 3.5 (95% CI 2.9 to 4.6) for celecoxib 200 mg and 400 mg respectively. Adverse events were generally mild to moderate in severity, and were experienced by a similar proportion of participants in the celecoxib and placebo groups. One serious adverse event that was probably related to celecoxib was reported.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Single-dose oral celecoxib is an effective analgesic for postoperative pain relief. Indirect comparison suggests that the 400 mg dose has similar efficacy to ibuprofen 400 mg.

A multicentre programme of clinical and public health research in support of the National Suicide Prevention Strategy for England

Objectives

To carry out a programme of linked research studies aimed at improving the management of self-harm, reducing the incidence of suicide and providing reliable data to evaluate the impact of theNational Suicide Prevention Strategy for England(2002).

Methods

There were four research streams: (1) we studied inquest records from 12 coroners and Ministry of Justice data to assess the accuracy of official suicide statistics; (2) we used Office for National Statistics mortality statistics, data from the Multicentre Study of Self-harm in England, national liver unit data, prescription data and patient interviews to assess (a) the impact of paracetamol (acetaminophen) pack size restrictions (1998), (b) the impact of withdrawal of co-proxamol in 2007 and (c) the relative toxicity in overdose of commonly used antidepressants; (3) we carried out 3-month audits of self-harm management in 32 hospitals to investigate variations between hospitals and the impact of management on repeat self-harm; and (4) we developed and piloted letter-based contact interventions aimed at reducing self-harm.

Key findings

(1) Between 1990 and 2005, the proportion of researcher-defined suicides given a verdict of suicide by the 12 coroners studied decreased by almost 7%, largely because of the increased use of misadventure/accident verdicts for deaths thought, on clinical review, to be suicides. Use of narrative verdicts increased markedly. Coroners who gave more narrative verdicts also gave fewer suicide verdicts, and geographical variations in the use of narrative verdicts appeared to distort reliable assessment of small-area differences in suicide rates. 2(a) UK legislation to reduce pack sizes of paracetamol was followed by a 43% reduction in number of deaths and a 61% reduction in registrations for liver transplantation over the next 11 years. Paracetamol overdoses were often impulsive and some were influenced by media (including the internet); sales outlets appeared mostly to be adhering to sales guidance. Smaller pack sizes of paracetamol for sale in Ireland compared with England did not result in a smaller number of tablets being taken in overdose. There was no clear evidence of an effect of the legislation on prescribing of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, nor on resulting gastrointestinal bleeds. 2(b) Withdrawal of co-proxamol from use in the UK resulted in approximately 600 fewer deaths than predicted between 2005 and 2010 based on previous trends, with no evidence of substitution by poisoning with other analgesics. 2(c) Of the tricyclic antidepressants, dosulepin and doxepin had the greatest toxicity. Citalopram was more toxic than other selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors. (3) There was marked variation between hospitals in the management of self-harm; effects of this variation on patient outcomes were unclear, although psychosocial assessment may have been associated with reduced repetition. Levels of specialist assessment remained static between 2001–2 and 2010–11, but service quality appeared to improve. (4) Findings of two pilot randomised controlled trials suggested that, although it would be feasible to scale up these interventions to full trials, these interventions might have low generalisability and be of limited benefit to patients.

Conclusion

Within the context of the strengths and limitations of the individual studies, this research programme has made significant additions to the evidence base related to suicide and self-harm prevention in the UK.

Study registration

A pilot study of a contact and information based intervention to reduce repeat self-harm; ISRCTN65171515.

Funding

The National Institute for Health Research Programme Grants for Applied Research programme.

Fatty acid amide hydrolase-dependent generation of antinociceptive drug metabolites acting on TRPV1 in the brain

The discovery that paracetamol is metabolized to the potent TRPV1 activator N-(4-hydroxyphenyl)-5Z,8Z,11Z,14Z-eicosatetraenamide (AM404) and that this metabolite contributes to paracetamol’s antinociceptive effect in rodents via activation of TRPV1 in the central nervous system (CNS) has provided a potential strategy for developing novel analgesics. Here we validated this strategy by examining the metabolism and antinociceptive activity of the de-acetylated paracetamol metabolite 4-aminophenol and 4-hydroxy-3-methoxybenzylamine (HMBA), both of which may undergo a fatty acid amide hydrolase (FAAH)-dependent biotransformation to potent TRPV1 activators in the brain. Systemic administration of 4-aminophenol and HMBA led to a dose-dependent formation of AM404 plus N-(4-hydroxyphenyl)-9Z-octadecenamide (HPODA) and arvanil plus olvanil in the mouse brain, respectively. The order of potency of these lipid metabolites as TRPV1 activators was arvanil = olvanil>>AM404> HPODA. Both 4-aminophenol and HMBA displayed antinociceptive activity in various rodent pain tests. The formation of AM404, arvanil and olvanil, but not HPODA, and the antinociceptive effects of 4-aminophenol and HMBA were substantially reduced or disappeared in FAAH null mice. The activity of 4-aminophenol in the mouse formalin, von Frey and tail immersion tests was also lost in TRPV1 null mice. Intracerebroventricular injection of the TRPV1 blocker capsazepine eliminated the antinociceptive effects of 4-aminophenol and HMBA in the mouse formalin test. In the rat, pharmacological inhibition of FAAH, TRPV1, cannabinoid CB1 receptors and spinal 5-HT₃ or 5-HT_1A receptors, and chemical deletion of bulbospinal serotonergic pathways prevented the antinociceptive action of 4-aminophenol. Thus, the pharmacological profile of 4-aminophenol was identical to that previously reported for paracetamol, supporting our suggestion that this drug metabolite contributes to paracetamol’s analgesic activity via activation of bulbospinal pathways. Our findings demonstrate that it is possible to construct novel antinociceptive drugs based on fatty acid conjugation as a metabolic pathway for the generation of TRPV1 modulators in the CNS.

Clinical pharmacology of analgesics assessed with human experimental pain models: bridging basic and clinical research

The medical impact of pain is such that much effort is being applied to develop novel analgesic drugs directed towards new targets and to investigate the analgesic efficacy of known drugs. Ongoing research requires cost-saving tools to translate basic science knowledge into clinically effective analgesic compounds. In this review we have re-examined the prediction of clinical analgesia by human experimental pain models as a basis for model selection in phase I studies. The overall prediction of analgesic efficacy or failure of a drug correlated well between experimental and clinical settings. However, correct model selection requires more detailed information about which model predicts a particular clinical pain condition. We hypothesized that if an analgesic drug was effective in an experimental pain model and also a specific clinical pain condition, then that model might be predictive for that particular condition and should be selected for development as an analgesic for that condition. The validity of the prediction increases with an increase in the numbers of analgesic drug classes for which this agreement was shown. From available evidence, only five clinical pain conditions were correctly predicted by seven different pain models for at least three different drugs. Most of these models combine a sensitization method. The analysis also identified several models with low impact with respect to their clinical translation. Thus, the presently identified agreements and non-agreements between analgesic effects on experimental and on clinical pain may serve as a solid basis to identify complex sets of human pain models that bridge basic science with clinical pain research.

Single dose oral ibuprofen plus oxycodone for acute postoperative pain in adults

BACKGROUND

Combining two different analgesics in fixed doses in a single tablet can provide better pain relief than either drug alone in acute pain. This appears to be broadly true across a range of different drug combinations, in postoperative pain and migraine headache. Fixed-dose combinations of ibuprofen and oxycodone are available, and the drugs may be separately used in combination in some acute pain situations.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the analgesic efficacy and adverse effects of a single oral dose of ibuprofen plus oxycodone for moderate to severe postoperative pain.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, (CENTRAL), on The Cochrane Library, (Issue 4 of 12, 2013), MEDLINE (1950 to 21st May 2013), EMBASE (1974 to 21st May 2013), the Oxford Pain Database, ClinicalTrials.gov, and reference lists of articles.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised, double-blind clinical trials of single dose, oral ibuprofen plus oxycodone compared with placebo or the same dose of ibuprofen alone for acute postoperative pain in adults.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently considered trials for inclusion in the review, assessed quality, and extracted data. We used the area under the pain relief versus time curve to derive the proportion of participants prescribed ibuprofen plus oxycodone, ibuprofen alone, oxycodone alone, or placebo with at least 50% pain relief over six hours, using validated equations. We calculated relative risk (RR) and number needed to treat to benefit (NNT). We used information on use of rescue medication to calculate the proportion of participants requiring rescue medication and the weighted mean of the median time to use. We also collected information on adverse events.

MAIN RESULTS

Searches identified three studies involving 1202 participants. All examined the same dose combination. Included studies provided data from 603 participants for the comparison of ibuprofen 400 mg + oxycodone 5 mg with placebo, 717 participants for the comparison of ibuprofen 400 mg + oxycodone 5 mg with ibuprofen 400 mg alone, and 471 participants for the comparison of ibuprofen 400 mg + oxycodone 5 mg with oxycodone 5 mg alone.The proportion of participants achieving at least 50% pain relief over 6 hours was 60% with ibuprofen 400 mg + oxycodone 5 mg and 17% with placebo, giving an NNT of 2.3 (2.0 to 2.8). For ibuprofen 400 mg alone the proportion was 50%, producing no significant difference between ibuprofen 400 mg + oxycodone 5 mg and ibuprofen 400 mg alone. For oxycodone 5 mg alone the proportion was 23%, giving an NNT for ibuprofen 400 mg + oxycodone 5 mg compared with oxycodone alone of 2.9 (2.3 to 4.0).Ibuprofen + oxycodone resulted in longer times to remedication than with placebo. The median time to use of rescue medication was more than 5 hours for ibuprofen 400 mg + oxycodone 5 mg, and 2.3 hours or less with placebo. Fewer participants needed rescue medication with ibuprofen + oxycodone combination than with placebo or ibuprofen alone. The proportion was 40% with ibuprofen 400 mg + oxycodone 5 mg, 83% with placebo, 53% with ibuprofen alone, and 83% with oxycodone alone, giving NNT to prevent one patient needing rescue medication of 2.4 (2.0 to 2.9), 11 (6.1 to 56), and 2.6 (2.1 to 3.4) for comparisons of ibuprofen 400 mg + oxycodone 5 mg with placebo, ibuprofen alone, and oxycodone alone, respectively.The proportion of participants experiencing one or more adverse events was 25% with ibuprofen 400 mg + oxycodone 5 mg, 25% with placebo, 26% with ibuprofen alone, and 35% with oxycodone alone; they were not significantly different. Serious adverse events were reported only after abdominal surgery 6/169 with the combination, 1/175 with ibuprofen alone, 3/52 with oxycodone alone, and 1/60 with placebo. Withdrawals for reasons other than lack of efficacy were fewer than 5% and balanced across treatment arms.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The combination of ibuprofen 400mg + oxycodone 5mg provided analgesia for longer than oxycodone alone, but not ibuprofen alone (at the same dose). There was also a smaller chance of needing additional analgesia over about eight hours, and with no greater chance of experiencing an adverse event.

Single dose oral ibuprofen plus paracetamol (acetaminophen) for acute postoperative pain

BACKGROUND

Combining two different analgesics in fixed doses in a single tablet can provide better pain relief than either drug alone in acute pain. This appears to be broadly true across a range of different drug combinations, in postoperative pain and migraine headache. Some combinations of ibuprofen and paracetamol are available for use without prescription in some acute pain situations.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the efficacy and adverse effects of single dose oral ibuprofen plus paracetamol for acute postoperative pain using methods that permit comparison with other analgesics evaluated in standardised trials using almost identical methods and outcomes.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) on The Cochrane Library (Issue 4 of 12, 2013), MEDLINE (1950 to May 21st 2013), EMBASE (1974 to May 21st 2013), the Oxford Pain Database, ClinicalTrials.gov, and reference lists of articles.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised, double-blind clinical trials of single dose, oral ibuprofen plus paracetamol compared with placebo or the same dose of ibuprofen alone for acute postoperative pain in adults.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently considered trials for inclusion in the review, assessed quality, and extracted data. We used validated equations to calculate the area under the pain relief versus time curve and derive the proportion of participants with at least 50% of maximum pain relief over six hours. We calculated relative risk (RR) and number needed to treat to benefit (NNT) for ibuprofen plus paracetamol, ibuprofen alone, or placebo. We used information on use of rescue medication to calculate the proportion of participants requiring rescue medication and the weighted mean of the median time to use. We also collected information on adverse events.

MAIN RESULTS

Searches identified three studies involving 1647 participants. Each of them examined several dose combinations. Included studies provided data from 508 participants for the comparison of ibuprofen 200 mg + paracetamol 500 mg with placebo, 543 participants for the comparison of ibuprofen 400 mg + paracetamol 1000 mg with placebo, and 359 participants for the comparison of ibuprofen 400 mg + paracetamol 1000 mg with ibuprofen 400 mg alone.The proportion of participants achieving at least 50% maximum pain relief over 6 hours was 69% with ibuprofen 200 mg + paracetamol 500 mg, 73% with ibuprofen 400 mg + paracetamol 1000 mg, and 7% with placebo, giving NNTs of 1.6 (1.5 to 1.8) and 1.5 (1.4 to 1.7) for the lower and higher doses respectively compared with placebo. For ibuprofen 400 mg alone the proportion was 52%, giving an NNT for ibuprofen 400 mg + paracetamol 1000 mg compared with ibuprofen alone of 5.4 (3.5 to 12).Ibuprofen + paracetamol at the 200/500 mg and 400/1000 mg doses resulted in longer times to remedication than placebo. The median time to use of rescue medication was 7.6 hours for ibuprofen 200 mg + paracetamol 500 mg, 8.3 hours with ibuprofen 400 mg + paracetamol 1000 mg, and 1.7 hours with placebo. Fewer participants needed rescue medication with ibuprofen + paracetamol combination than with placebo or ibuprofen alone. The proportion was 34% with ibuprofen 200 mg + paracetamol 500 mg, 25% with ibuprofen 400 mg + paracetamol 1000 mg, and 79% with placebo, giving NNTs to prevent use of rescue medication of 2.2 (1.8 to 2.9) and 1.8 (1.6 to 2.2) respectively compared with placebo. The proportion of participants using rescue medication with ibuprofen 400 mg was 48%, giving an NNT to prevent use for ibuprofen 400 mg + paracetamol 1000 mg compared with ibuprofen alone of 4.3 (3.0 to 7.7).The proportion of participants experiencing one or more adverse events was 30% with ibuprofen 200 mg + paracetamol 500 mg, 29% with ibuprofen 400 mg + paracetamol 1000 mg, and 48% with placebo, giving NNT values in favour of the combination treatment of 5.4 (3.6 to 10.5) and 5.1 (3.5 to 9.5) for the lower and higher doses respectively. No serious adverse events were reported in any of the included studies. Withdrawals for reasons other than lack of efficacy were fewer than 5% and balanced across treatment arms.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Ibuprofen plus paracetamol combinations provided better analgesia than either drug alone (at the same dose), with a smaller chance of needing additional analgesia over about eight hours, and with a smaller chance of experiencing an adverse event.

The modern pharmacology of paracetamol: therapeutic actions, mechanism of action, metabolism, toxicity and recent pharmacological findings

Paracetamol is used worldwide for its analgesic and antipyretic actions. It has a spectrum of action similar to that of NSAIDs and resembles particularly the COX-2 selective inhibitors. Paracetamol is, on average, a weaker analgesic than NSAIDs or COX-2 selective inhibitors but is often preferred because of its better tolerance. Despite the similarities to NSAIDs, the mode of action of paracetamol has been uncertain, but it is now generally accepted that it inhibits COX-1 and COX-2 through metabolism by the peroxidase function of these isoenzymes. This results in inhibition of phenoxyl radical formation from a critical tyrosine residue essential for the cyclooxygenase activity of COX-1 and COX-2 and prostaglandin (PG) synthesis. Paracetamol shows selectivity for inhibition of the synthesis of PGs and related factors when low levels of arachidonic acid and peroxides are available but conversely, it has little activity at substantial levels of arachidonic acid and peroxides. The result is that paracetamol does not suppress the severe inflammation of rheumatoid arthritis and acute gout but does inhibit the lesser inflammation resulting from extraction of teeth and is also active in a variety of inflammatory tests in experimental animals. Paracetamol often appears to have COX-2 selectivity. The apparent COX-2 selectivity of action of paracetamol is shown by its poor anti-platelet activity and good gastrointestinal tolerance. Unlike both non-selective NSAIDs and selective COX-2 inhibitors, paracetamol inhibits other peroxidase enzymes including myeloperoxidase. Inhibition of myeloperoxidase involves paracetamol oxidation and concomitant decreased formation of halogenating oxidants (e.g. hypochlorous acid, hypobromous acid) that may be associated with multiple inflammatory pathologies including atherosclerosis and rheumatic diseases. Paracetamol may, therefore, slow the development of these diseases. Paracetamol, NSAIDs and selective COX-2 inhibitors all have central and peripheral effects. As is the case with the NSAIDs, including the selective COX-2 inhibitors, the analgesic effects of paracetamol are reduced by inhibitors of many endogenous neurotransmitter systems including serotonergic, opioid and cannabinoid systems. There is considerable debate about the hepatotoxicity of therapeutic doses of paracetamol. Much of the toxicity may result from overuse of combinations of paracetamol with opioids which are widely used, particularly in USA.

Single dose oral ibuprofen plus codeine for acute postoperative pain in adults

BACKGROUND

There is good evidence that combining two different analgesics in fixed doses in a single tablet can provide better pain relief in acute pain and headache than either drug alone, and that the drug-specific effects are essentially additive. This appears to be broadly true in postoperative pain and migraine headache across a range of different drug combinations and when tested in the same and different trials. Some combinations of ibuprofen and codeine are available without prescription (but usually only from a pharmacy) where the dose of codeine is lower, and with a prescription when the dose of codeine is higher.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the analgesic efficacy and adverse effects of a single oral dose of ibuprofen plus codeine for moderate to severe postoperative pain. We compared ibuprofen plus codeine with placebo and with the same dose of ibuprofen alone.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Oxford Pain Database, ClinicalTrials.gov, and reference lists of articles. The date of the most recent search was 30 September 2012.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised, double-blind, placebo- or active-controlled clinical trials of single dose oral ibuprofen plus codeine for acute postoperative pain in adults.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently considered trials for inclusion in the review, assessed quality, and extracted data. We used the area under the pain relief versus time curve to derive the proportion of participants prescribed ibuprofen plus codeine, placebo, or the same dose of ibuprofen alone with at least 50% pain relief over six hours, using validated equations. We calculated the relative risk (RR) and number needed to treat to benefit (NNT). We used information on the use of rescue medication to calculate the proportion of participants requiring rescue medication and the weighted mean of the median time to use. We also collected information on adverse effects. Analyses were planned for different doses of ibuprofen and codeine, but especially for codeine where we set criteria for low (< 10 mg), medium (10 to 20 mg), and high (> 20 mg) doses.

MAIN RESULTS

Information was available from six studies with 1342 participants, with a variety of doses of ibuprofen and codeine. In four studies (443 participants) using ibuprofen 400 mg plus codeine 25.6 to 60 mg (high dose codeine) 64% of participants had at least 50% maximum pain relief with the combination compared to 18% with placebo. The NNT was 2.2 (95% CI 1.8 to 2.6). In three studies (204 participants) ibuprofen plus codeine (any dose) was better than the same dose of ibuprofen (69% versus 55%) but the result was barely significant with a relative benefit of 1.3 (95% CI 1.01 to 1.6). In two studies (159 participants) ibuprofen plus codeine appeared to be better than the same dose of codeine alone (69% versus 33%), but no analysis was done. There was no difference between the combination and placebo in the reporting of adverse events in these acute studies.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The combination of ibuprofen 400 mg plus codeine 25.6 to 60 mg demonstrates good analgesic efficacy. Very limited data suggest that the combination is better than the same dose of either drug alone. Use of combination analgesics that contain codeine has been a source of some concern because of misuse from over-the-counter preparations.

Pre emptive analgesia for reducing pain after cholecystectomy: Oral tramadol vs. acetaminophen codeine

Background:

Considering that protocols of postoperative pain management would be planned regarding the facilities of each center or region and the importance of its proper management to reduce its related complication and improve patient's satisfaction, in this study we compared the effect of orally administrated tramadol and acetaminophen-codeine in this regard.

Materials and Methods:

In this prospective randomized double-blind clinical trial, 136 (68 in tramadol and 68 in acetaminophen codeine groups) ASA I and II patients scheduled for open cholecystectomy under general anaesthesia were enrolled. They randomly allocated to receive oral tramadol (50 mg capsule) or acetaminophen-codeine (325/10 mg) 1 hour before surgery. After surgery they evaluated for postoperative pain using VAS score, analgesic consumption and vomiting.

Results:

Mean of postoperative pain score during 24 hours after surgery was 2.1 ± 1.0 and 3.8 ± 2.0 in tramadol and acetaminophen-codeine groups, respectively (P < 0.05). Mean of analgesic consumption (morphine) during 24 hours after surgery was 6.2 ± 4.4 mg and 12.9 ± 5.7 mg in tramadol and acetaminophen-codeine groups, respectively (P < 0.05). Mean of vomiting during 24 hours after surgery was 1.2 ±0.9 and 0.4 ± 0.5 in tramadol and acetaminophen-codeine groups, respectively (P < 0.05).

Conclusion:

The findings of current study indicated that in lower dose of tramadol (50 mg) and acetaminophen/codeine (325 mg/10 mg) the analgesic effect of tramadol is better and its side effects are higher than acetaminophen/codeine, which limit its use for mentioned purpose. It seems that administration of each of studied agents it depends on patients’ tolerance and decision of the physician.

Perioperative interventions to reduce chronic postsurgical pain

Approximately 10% of patients following a variety of surgeries develop chronic postsurgical pain. Reducing chronic postoperative pain is especially important to reconstructive surgeons because common operations such as breast and limb reconstruction have even higher risk for developing chronic postsurgical pain. Animal studies of posttraumatic nerve injury pain demonstrate that there is a critical time frame before and immediately after nerve injury in which specific interventions can reduce the incidence and intensity of chronic neuropathic pain behaviors-so called "preventative analgesia." In animal models, perineural local anesthetic, systemic intravenous local anesthetic, perineural clonidine, systemic gabapentin, systemic tricyclic antidepressants, and minocycline have each been shown to reduce pain behaviors days to weeks after treatment. The translation of this work to humans also suggests that brief perioperative interventions may protect patients from developing new chronic postsurgical pain. Recent clinical trial data show that there is an opportunity during the perioperative period to dramatically reduce the incidence and severity of chronic postsurgical pain. The surgeon, working with the anesthesiologist, has the ability to modify both early and chronic postoperative pain by implementing an evidence-based preventative analgesia plan.

Paracetamol/acetaminophen (single administration) for perineal pain in the early postpartum period

BACKGROUND

Perineal pain is a common but poorly studied adverse outcome following childbirth. Pain may result from perineal trauma due to bruising, spontaneous tears, surgical incisions (episiotomies), or in association with operative births (ventouse or forceps assisted births).

OBJECTIVES

To determine the efficacy of a single administration of paracetamol (acetaminophen) systemic drugs used in the relief of acute postpartum perineal pain

SEARCH METHODS

We updated the search of the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register on 6 November 2012.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) assessing paracetamol (acetaminophen) in a single dose compared with placebo for women with early postpartum perineal pain. We excluded quasi-RCTs and cross-over studies.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors assessed each paper for inclusion and extracted data. One review author reviewed the decisions and confirmed calculations for pain relief scores.

MAIN RESULTS

We did not identify any new trials from the updated search so the results remain unchanged as follows.We have included 10 studies describing two dosages of paracetamol. Of these, five studies (526 women) assessed 500 mg to 650 mg and six studies (841 women) assessed 1000 mg of paracetamol. We chose to use random-effects meta-analyses because of the heterogeneity in dosage used. Studies were from the 1970s to the early 1990s, and there was insufficient information to assess the risk of bias adequately, hence the findings need to be interpreted within this context.More women experienced pain relief with paracetamol compared with placebo (average risk ratio (RR) 2.14, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.59 to 2.89, 10 studies, 1279 women). In addition, there were significantly fewer women having additional pain relief with paracetamol compared with placebo (RR 0.34, 95% CI 0.21 to 0.55, eight studies, 1132 women). Both the 500 mg to 650 mg and 1000 mg doses were effective in providing more pain relief than placebo.Maternal and neonatal potential adverse drug effects were not assessed in any of the included studies. Indeed few secondary outcomes were assessed.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

More women experienced pain relief, and fewer had additional pain relief, with paracetamol compared with placebo, although potential adverse effects were not assessed and generally the quality of studies was unclear.

The effect of paracetamol and tropisetron on pain: experimental studies and a review of published data

Experimental studies suggest that paracetamol-induced analgesia is mediated via central serotonergic pathways and attenuated by 5-HT3-antagonists. However, clinical studies do not support this, and 5-HT3-antagonists are expected to reduce pain by blocking the descending pronociceptive pathway. The current project tested whether tropisetron attenuates analgesia by paracetamol. Two randomized, double-blind, crossover studies with 18 healthy male volunteers in each were performed. Pain stimuli were cold water immersion (cold pressor test), contact heat pain (study 1) and electrical stimulation (study 2). In both studies, tropisetron 5 mg i.v. or saline was administered, followed by paracetamol 2 g i.v. 30 min. later. Individual changes in heat and cold pain intensity, cold pain tolerance and unpleasantness were recorded. The same thresholds were also expressed as scores (% of the individual score at baseline). Additionally, previously published findings on the effects of paracetamol and its interaction with 5HT3-antagonists in human experimental pain models were reviewed. After calculation of the sensory and pain scores (%), tropisetron seemed to amplify the analgesic action of paracetamol. Paracetamol 2 g i.v. did not show any statistically significant analgesia in thermal tests (study 1), or differences in sensory, pain detection or moderate pain thresholds of the electrical stimulus (study 2). As paracetamol did not have a measurable analgesic effect in these tests, no conclusions can be drawn about the interaction between paracetamol and tropisetron. However, tropisetron may have an analgesic effect of its own. Clinicians should not avoid using these drugs together, unless larger clinical studies indicate otherwise.

Acute pain management in the postanesthesia care unit

Pain management in the postanesthesia care unit (PACU) is continually evolving, with several new nonopioids expanding the list of available agents. Pain in the PACU is not an inevitable outcome of surgery. With careful planning, multimodal analgesic techniques instituted preoperatively will reduce pain in the PACU. Accurate assessment of the characteristics of pain will direct rational drug choices while minimizing side effects. Better management of pain in the PACU setting will likely improve patient satisfaction and facilitate shorter PACU stays.

Effects of preemptive analgesia with celecoxib or acetaminophen on postoperative pain relief following lower extremity orthopedic surgery

Background:

Efficacy of preemptive analgesia with nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) in comparison with acetaminophen is controversial. The present study evaluates the preemptive analgesia efficacy of celecoxib and acetaminophen in comparison with placebo for postoperative pain relief in patients who underwent orthopedic surgery under general anesthesia.

Materials and Methods:

Ninetypatients eligible for elective distal extremity surgery were categorized in three groups: group C includedpatients who received oral celecoxib 200 mg 2 h before surgery; group A included those who received oral acetaminophen 320 mg 2 h before surgery; and group P included those who received oral placebo 2 h before surgery. Pain scores were recorded at 4, 12, and 24 h after operation.

Results:

The pain scores 4 h after operation was significantly less in group C than in groups A and P (4.7±1.7 vs. 5±1.5 vs. 6.8±1.7, respectively, P = 0.015). No significant difference was noted in pain scores at 12 h (4.6±2, 4.9±1.9, 4.3±1.4 in group A, group C, group P, respectively P > 0.05) and 24 h (3.1±1.7, 3.0±1.4, 3.3±1.7 in group A, group C, group P, respectively, P > 0.05) after operation among the three groups.

Conclusion:

Using oral celecoxib 200 mg 2 h before operation is better thanusing oral acetaminophen 320 mg 2 h before the beginning of surgery for control of postoperative pain in patients who underwent lower extremity orthopedic surgery under general anesthesia.

Single dose oral etoricoxib for acute postoperative pain in adults

BACKGROUND

Etoricoxib is a selective cyclo-oxygenase-2 (COX-2) inhibitor licensed for the relief of chronic pain in osteoarthritis and rheumatoid arthritis, and acute pain in some jurisdictions. This class of drugs is believed to be associated with fewer upper gastrointestinal adverse effects than conventional non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs). One additional study in acute postoperative pain has been published since the original review was completed in Issue 2, 2009.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the analgesic efficacy and adverse effects of a single oral dose of etoricoxib for moderate to severe postoperative pain.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Oxford Pain Database, ClinicalTrials.gov, and reference lists of articles. The date of the most recent search was 3 January 2012.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trials of single dose, oral etoricoxib for acute postoperative pain in adults.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently considered trials for inclusion in the review, assessed quality, and extracted data. We used the area under the pain relief versus time curve to derive the proportion of participants prescribed etoricoxib or placebo with at least 50% pain relief over six hours, using validated equations. We calculated relative risk (RR) and number needed to treat to benefit (NNT). We used information on use of rescue medication to calculate the proportion of participants requiring rescue medication and the weighted mean of the median time to use. We also collected information on adverse effects.

MAIN RESULTS

One additional study has been added to this updated review, making a total of six included studies with 1214 participants in comparisons of etoricoxib with placebo. All six studies reported on the 120 mg dose (798 participants in a comparison with placebo). At least 50% pain relief was reported by 66% with etoricoxib 120 mg and 12% with placebo (NNT 1.8 (1.7 to 2.0)). For dental studies only the NNT was 1.6 (1.5 to 1.8). Although the new study almost doubled the number of participants in included studies it added only about 25% more data for the 120 mg dose and the result was unchanged. Other doses (60, 90, 180, and 240 mg) were each studied in only one treatment arm and we did not undertake pooled analysis.Significantly fewer participants used rescue medication over 24 hours when taking etoricoxib 120 mg than placebo (NNT to prevent remedication 2.2 (1.9 to 2.8)), and the median time to use of rescue medication was 20 hours for etoricoxib and two hours for placebo. Adverse events were reported at a similar rate to placebo, with no serious events.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The additional study did not change the results from the first review published in 2009, but does make the result more robust. Single dose oral etoricoxib produces high levels of good quality pain relief after surgery and adverse events did not differ from placebo. The 120 mg dose is as effective as, or better than, other commonly used analgesics.

Single dose oral aspirin for acute postoperative pain in adults

BACKGROUND

This review is an update of a previously published review in the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews on 'Single dose oral aspirin for acute pain'. Aspirin has been known for many years to be an effective analgesic for many different pain conditions. Although its use as an analgesic is now limited in developed countries, it is widely available, inexpensive, and remains commonly used throughout the world.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the analgesic efficacy and associated adverse events of single dose oral aspirin in acute postoperative pain.

SEARCH METHODS

For the earlier review, we identified randomised trials by searching CENTRAL (The Cochrane Library) (1998, Issue 1), MEDLINE (1966 to March 1998), EMBASE (1980 to January 1998), and the Oxford Pain Relief Database (1950 to 1994). We updated searches of CENTRAL, MEDLINE, and EMBASE to January 2012.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Single oral dose, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials of aspirin for relief of established moderate to severe postoperative pain in adults.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We assessed studies for methodological quality and two review authors extracted the data independently. We used summed total pain relief (TOTPAR) over four to six hours to calculate the number of participants achieving at least 50% pain relief. We used these derived results to calculate, with 95% confidence intervals, the relative benefit compared to placebo, and the number needed to treat (NNT) for one participant to experience at least 50% pain relief over four to six hours. We sought numbers of participants using rescue medication over specified time periods, and time to use of rescue medication, as additional measures of efficacy. We collected information on adverse events and withdrawals.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 68 studies in which aspirin was used at doses from 300 mg to 1200 mg, but the vast majority of participants received either 600/650 mg (2409 participants, 64 studies) or 990/1000 mg (380 participants, eight studies). There was only one new study.Studies were overwhelmingly of adequate or good methodological quality. NNTs for at least 50% pain relief over four to six hours were 4.2 (3.9 to 4.8), 3.8 (3.0 to 5.1), and 2.7 (2.0 to 3.8) for 600/650 mg, 900/1000 mg, and 1200 mg respectively, compared with placebo. Type of pain model had no significant impact on the results. Lower doses were not significantly different from placebo. These results do not differ from those of the earlier review.Fewer participants required rescue medication with aspirin than with placebo over four to eight hours postdose, but by 12 hours there was no difference. The number of participants experiencing adverse events was not significantly different from placebo for 600/650 mg aspirin, but for 900/1000 mg the number needed to treat to harm was 7.5 (4.8 to 17). The most commonly reported events were dizziness, drowsiness, gastric irritation, nausea, and vomiting, nearly all of which were of mild to moderate severity.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Aspirin is an effective analgesic for acute pain of moderate to severe intensity. High doses are more effective, but are associated with increased adverse events, including drowsiness and gastric irritation. The pain relief achieved with aspirin was very similar milligram for milligram to that seen with paracetamol. There was no change to the conclusions in this update.

Single dose oral celecoxib for acute postoperative pain in adults

BACKGROUND

This is an update of a review published in The Cochrane Library 2008, Issue 4. Celecoxib is a selective cyclo-oxygenase-2 (COX-2) inhibitor usually prescribed for the relief of chronic pain in osteoarthritis and rheumatoid arthritis. Celecoxib is believed to be associated with fewer upper gastrointestinal adverse effects than conventional non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs). Its effectiveness in acute pain was demonstrated in the earlier reviews.

OBJECTIVES

To assess analgesic efficacy and adverse effects of a single oral dose of celecoxib for moderate to severe postoperative pain.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Oxford Pain Database, and ClinicalTrials.gov. The most recent search was to 3 January 2012.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials (RCTs) of adults prescribed any dose of oral celecoxib or placebo for acute postoperative pain.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors assessed studies for quality and extracted data. We converted summed pain relief (TOTPAR) or pain intensity difference (SPID) into dichotomous information, yielding the number of participants with at least 50% pain relief over four to six hours, and used this to calculate the relative benefit (RB) and number needed to treat to benefit (NNT) for one patient to achieve at least 50% of maximum pain relief with celecoxib who would not have done so with placebo. We used information on use of rescue medication to calculate the proportion of participants requiring rescue medication and the weighted mean of the median time to use.

MAIN RESULTS

Eight studies (1380 participants) met the inclusion criteria. We identified five potentially relevant unpublished studies in the most recent searches, but data were not available at this time. The number of included studies therefore remains unchanged.The NNT for celecoxib 200 mg and 400 mg compared with placebo for at least 50% of maximum pain relief over four to six hours was 4.2 (95% confidence interval (CI) 3.4 to 5.6) and 2.5 (2.2 to 2.9) respectively. The median time to use of rescue medication was 6.6 hours with celecoxib 200 mg, 8.4 with celecoxib 400 mg, and 2.3 hours with placebo. The proportion of participants requiring rescue medication over 24 hours was 74% with celecoxib 200 mg, 63% for celecoxib 400 mg, and 91% for placebo. The NNT to prevent one patient using rescue medication was 4.8 (3.5 to 7.7) and 3.5 (2.9 to 4.6) for celecoxib 200 mg and 400 mg respectively. Adverse events were generally mild to moderate in severity, and were experienced by a similar proportion of participants in celecoxib and placebo groups. One serious adverse event probably related to celecoxib was reported.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Single-dose oral celecoxib is an effective analgesic for postoperative pain relief. Indirect comparison suggests that the 400 mg dose has similar efficacy to ibuprofen 400 mg.