Single dose oral ibuprofen and diclofenac for postoperative pain

NSAIDs for Pain Control During the Peri-Operative Period of Hip Fracture Surgery: A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

Hip fracture (HF) mostly affects older adults and is responsible for increased morbidity and mortality. Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are part of the peri-operative multimodal analgesic management, but their use could be associated with adverse events in older adults. This systematic review aimed to assess outcomes associated with NSAIDs use in the peri-operative period of HF surgery.

METHODS

This systematic review was conducted according to the PRISMA guidelines. Three databases (PubMed/EMBASE/Cochrane Central) were used to search for clinical trials and observational studies assessing efficacy, safety and impact of NSAIDs use on non-specific post-operative outcomes, such as functional status and post-operative complications.

RESULTS

Among the 1320 references initially identified, four provided data on efficacy, four on safety and six on non-specific post-operative outcomes (three randomized controlled clinical trials, three observational studies). Mean study population ages ranged from 68 to 87 years. Two studies found that NSAIDs were effective on pain control, but two studies found conflicting results on opioid sparing. No increased risk of acute kidney injury was observed, while results concerning bleeding risk and delirium were conflicting. No study has found any effect of NSAIDs use on walk recovery. Quality of evidence was high for pain control, but low to very low for all the other studied outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of NSAIDs may be effective for pain control in the peri-operative period of HF surgery. However, safety data were conflicting with low levels of certainty. Further studies are needed to assess their benefit-risk balance in this context. The research protocol was previously registered on PROSPERO (registration number: CRD42021237649).

New Insights Into the Pharmacological Management of Postoperative Pain: A Narrative Review

Postoperative pain is prevalent and often undertreated. There is a risk that untreated or suboptimally treated postoperative pain may transition into chronic postoperative pain, which can be challenging to treat. Clinical guidelines recommend the use of multimodal analgesia, including non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), acetaminophen, and, in some cases, opioids. NSAIDs are a broad class of drugs with different attributes such as cyclo-oxygenase (COX)-1 or COX-2 selectivity, onset of action, and analgesic potency. NSAIDs are associated with gastrointestinal and cardiovascular side effects and should be administered at the lowest effective dose for the shortest effective duration but can be effective in postoperative pain. The role of opioids in postoperative analgesia is long-standing but has recently come under scrutiny. Opioids are often used in multimodal analgesic combinations in such a way as to minimize the total consumption of opioids without sacrificing analgesic benefit. Special clinical considerations are required for surgical patients already on opioid regimens or with opioid use disorder. A particularly useful fixed-dose combination product for postoperative analgesia is dexketoprofen-tramadol, which confers safe and effective postoperative pain control and reduces the risk of persistent postoperative pain.

Flurbiprofen axetil for postoperative analgesia in upper abdominal surgery: a randomized, parallel controlled, double-blind, multicenter clinical study

PURPOSE

To investigate the efficacy and safety of flurbiprofen axetil in postoperative analgesia in upper abdominal surgery.

METHODS

This was a multicenter, randomized, positive drug parallel controlled double-blind clinical study. Patients undergoing upper abdominal surgery were randomly divided to receive flurbiprofen axetil or tramadol. The VAS pain scores at rest and on coughing (pulmonary function training) were assessed immediately before drug usage (T1) to evaluate the efficacy of postoperative analgesia. Repeat assessment of the VAS was performed after T1. The timing of the recovery of the gastrointestinal function and the preoperative and postoperative IL-6, cortisol, and blood glucose levels were recorded as secondary endpoints. Vital signs and the occurrence of adverse reactions were evaluated for the assessment of safety.

RESULTS

A total of 240 patients were enrolled in the current study; 119 used flurbiprofen axetil for postoperative analgesia. The VAS scores at rest and on coughing did not differ between the two groups to a statistically significant extent (P > 0.05). However, the reduction of the VAS score at rest in the flurbiprofen axetil group was greater than that in the tramadol group at 4-24 h after T1. The reduction of the VAS score on coughing at 8 h after T1 was greater in the flurbiprofen axetil group. The incidence of adverse reactions was significantly lower in the flurbiprofen axetil group, with only one adverse reaction recorded. In contrast, 18 adverse reactions were reported in the tramadol group.

CONCLUSION

Flurbiprofen axetil showed superior efficacy to tramadol in early postoperative analgesia after upper abdominal surgery. Flurbiprofen axetil was associated with a significantly lower incidence of adverse reactions in comparison to tramadol.

Diclofenac Potassium in Acute Postoperative Pain and Dysmenorrhoea: Results from Comprehensive Clinical Trial Reports

We compared the efficacy of diclofenac potassium in unpublished clinical study reports (CSRs) and published reports to examine publication bias, industry bias, and comprehensiveness. Novartis provided CSRs of randomised double-blind trials of diclofenac potassium involving postoperative patients following third molar extraction (3 trials, n=519), gynaecological surgery (3 trials, n=679), and dysmenorrhoea (2 trials, n=711) conducted in 1988–1990. Searches identified published reports of 6 trials. Information from 599/1909 patients was not published; trials with 846/1909 patients were published in a defunct journal. Greater methodological information in CSRs contributed to lesser risk of bias than published trials. Numbers needed to treat (NNT) from CSRs for all six postoperative trials for at least 50% of maximum pain relief over 6 h were 2.2 (95% confidence interval, 1.9–2.6) and 2.1 (1.8–2.4) for 50 and 100 mg diclofenac potassium, respectively. A Cochrane review of published trial data reported NNTs of 2.1 and 1.9, and one comprehensive analysis reported NNTs of 2.2 and 2.1, respectively. All analyses had similar results for patients remedicating within 8 h. No data from dysmenorrhoea CSRs appeared in a Cochrane review. CSRs provide useful information and increase confidence. Stable efficacy estimates with standard study designs reduce the need for updating reviews.

Single dose oral ketoprofen or dexketoprofen for acute postoperative pain in adults

BACKGROUND

This review is an update of "Single dose oral ketoprofen and dexketoprofen for acute postoperative pain in adults" last updated in Issue 4, 2009. Ketoprofen is a non-selective nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID) used to treat acute and chronic painful conditions. Dexketoprofen is the (S)-enantiomer, which is believed to confer analgesia. Theoretically dexketoprofen is expected to provide equivalent analgesia to ketoprofen at half the dose, with a consequent reduction in gastrointestinal adverse events. This review is one of a series on oral analgesics for acute postoperative pain. Individual reviews have been brought together in two overviews to provide information about the relative efficacy and harm of the different interventions.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the efficacy and safety of single dose oral ketoprofen and oral dexketoprofen compared with placebo for acute postoperative pain, using methods that permit comparison with other analgesics evaluated in the same way, and criteria of efficacy recommended by an in-depth study at the individual patient level.

SEARCH METHODS

For this update, we searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, and Embase from 2009 to 28 March 2017. We also searched the reference lists of retrieved studies and reviews, and two online clinical trial registries.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials of single dose orally administered ketoprofen or dexketoprofen in adults with moderate to severe acute postoperative pain.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently considered studies for inclusion in the review, examined issues of study quality and potential bias, and extracted data. For dichotomous outcomes, we calculated risk ratio (RR) and number needed to treat for an additional beneficial outcome (NNT) or harmful outcome (NNH) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) for ketoprofen and dexketoprofen, compared with placebo, where there were sufficient data. We collected information on the number of participants with at least 50% of the maximum possible pain relief over six hours, the median time to use of rescue medication, and the proportion of participants requiring rescue medication. We also collected information on adverse events and withdrawals. We assessed the quality of the evidence using GRADE, and created 'Summary of findings' tables.

MAIN RESULTS

This updated review included 24 studies; six additional studies added 1001 participants involved in comparisons of ketoprofen or dexketoprofen and placebo, with a 12% increase in participants taking ketoprofen and a 65% increase for dexketoprofen. Most participants (70%) were women. Dental studies typically involved young participants (mean age 20 to 30 years); other types of surgery involved older participants (mean age 37 to 68 years). Overall, we judged the studies at high risk of bias only for small size, which can lead to an overestimation of benefit.Ketoprofen doses ranged between 6.5 mg and 150 mg. The proportion of participants achieving at least 50% pain relief over six hours with the usual ketoprofen oral dose of 50 mg was 57%, compared to 23% with placebo, giving an NNT of 2.9 (95% CI 2.4 to 3.7) (RR 2.5, 95% CI 2.0 to 3.1; 594 participants; 8 studies; high quality evidence). Efficacy was significantly better in dental studies (NNT 1.8) than other surgery (NNT 4.2). The proportion of participants using rescue medication within six hours was lower with ketoprofen (32%) than with placebo (75%), giving a number needed to treat to prevent use of rescue medication (NNTp) of 2.3 (95% CI 1.8 to 3.1); 263 participants; 4 studies; high quality evidence). Median time to remedication estimates were poorly reported. Reports of any adverse event were similar with ketoprofen (18%) and placebo (11%) (RR 1.6, 95% CI 0.98 to 2.8; 342 participants; 5 studies; high quality evidence). No study reported any serious adverse events (very low quality evidence).Dexketoprofen doses ranged between 5 mg and 100 mg. The proportion of participants achieving at least 50% pain relief over six hours with the usual dexketoprofen oral dose of 20 mg or 25 mg was 52%, compared to 27% with placebo, giving an NNT of 4.1 (95% CI 3.3 to 5.2) (RR 2.0, 95% CI 1.6 to 2.2; 1177 participants; 8 studies; high quality evidence). Efficacy was significantly better in dental studies (NNT 2.7) than other surgery (NNT 5.7). The proportion of participants using rescue medication within six hours was lower with dexketoprofen (47%) than placebo (69%), giving an NNTp of 4.7 (95% CI 3.3 to 8.0); 445 participants; 5 studies; high quality evidence). Median time to remedication estimates were poorly reported. Reports of any adverse event were similar with dexketoprofen (14%) and placebo (10%) (RR 1.4, 95% CI 0.89 to 2.2; 536 participants, 6 studies; high quality evidence). No study reported any serious adverse events (very low quality evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Ketoprofen at doses of 25 mg to 100 mg is an effective analgesic in moderate to severe acute postoperative pain with an NNT for at least 50% pain relief of 2.9 with a 50 mg dose. This is similar to that of commonly used NSAIDs such as ibuprofen (NNT 2.5 for 400 mg dose) and diclofenac (NNT 2.7 for 50 mg dose). Dexketoprofen is also effective with an NNT of 4.1 in the dose range 10 mg to 25 mg. Differential efficacy between dental surgery and other types of surgery seen for both drugs is unusual. Both drugs were well tolerated in single doses.

SWIM (sickle with ibuprofen and morphine) randomised controlled trial fails to recruit: lessons learnt

OBJECTIVES

Sickle With Ibuprofen and Morphine (SWIM) trial was designed to assess whether co-administration of ibuprofen (a non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug) resulted in a reduction of opioid consumption delivered by patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) for acute pain in sickle cell disease.

DESIGN

A randomised, placebo-controlled, double-blind trial.

SETTING

UK multicentre trial in acute hospital setting.

PARTICIPANTS

Adults with sickle cell disease of any gender and phenotype aged 16 years and over.

INTERVENTIONS

Oral ibuprofen at a dose of 800 mg three times daily or placebo in addition to opioids (morphine or diamorphine) administered via PCA pump for up to 4 days.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary outcome measure was opioid consumption over 4 days following randomisation.

RESULTS

The SWIM trial closed early because it failed to randomise to its target of 316 patients within a reasonable time.

CONCLUSIONS

The key issues identified include the unanticipated length of time between informed consent and randomisation, difficulties in randomisation of patients in busy emergency departments, availability of trained staff at weekends and out of hours, fewer centres than expected using PCA routinely for sickle cell pain treatment, lack of research staff and support for participation, and the trial design. There are implications for future UK trials in sickle cell disease.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ISRCTN97241637, NCT00880373; Pre-results.

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.

WITHDRAWN: Diclofenac for acute pain in children

At December 2014, this review has been withdrawn from the Cochrane Library. This review is out of date, although it is correct at the date of publication. The review may be misleading as new studies could alter the original conclusions. All previous versions of the review can be found in the ‘Other versions’ tab. We are seeking additional authors to support the updating of this review. For further information, please contact PaPaS Managing Editor, Anna Hobson [Contact Person].

The editorial group responsible for this previously published document have withdrawn it from publication.

[Pediatric perioperative systemic pain therapy: Austrian interdisciplinary recommendations on pediatric perioperative pain management]

BACKGROUND

Many analgesics used in adult medicine are not licensed for pediatric use. Licensing limitations do not, however, justify that children are deprived of a sufficient pain therapy particularly in perioperative pain therapy. The treatment is principally oriented to the strength of the pain. Due to the degree of pain caused, intramuscular and subcutaneous injections should be avoided generally.

NON-OPIOIDS

The basis of systemic pain therapy for children are non-opioids and primarily non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs). They should be used prophylactically. The NSAIDs are clearly more effective than paracetamol for acute posttraumatic and postoperative pain and additionally allow economization of opioids. Severe side effects are rare in children but administration should be carefully considered especially in cases of hepatic and renal dysfunction or coagulation disorders. Paracetamol should only be taken in pregnancy and by children when there are appropriate indications because a possible causal connection with bronchial asthma exists. To ensure a safe dosing the age, body weight, duration of therapy, maximum daily dose and dosing intervals must be taken into account. Dipyrone is used in children for treatment of visceral pain and cholic. According to the current state of knowledge the rare but severe side effect of agranulocytosis does not justify a general rejection for short-term perioperative administration.

OPIOIDS

In cases of insufficient analgesia with non-opioid analgesics, the complementary use of opioids is also appropriate for children of all age groups. They are the medication of choice for episodes of medium to strong pain and are administered in a titrated form oriented to effectiveness. If severe pain is expected to last for more than 24 h, patient-controlled anesthesia should be implemented but requires a comprehensive surveillance by nursing personnel.

KETAMINE

Ketamine is used as an adjuvant in postoperative pain therapy and is recommended for use in pediatric sedation and analgosedation.

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.

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 lumiracoxib for postoperative pain in adults

BACKGROUND

Lumiracoxib is a selective cyclooxygenase-2 (COX-2) inhibitor. COX-2 inhibitors were developed to avoid COX-1-related gastrointestinal (GI) problems while maintaining the analgesic and anti-inflammatory activity of traditional non-steriodal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs).

OBJECTIVES

To review the analgesic efficacy, duration of analgesia, and adverse effects of a single oral dose of lumiracoxib for moderate to severe postoperative pain in adults.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched Cochrane CENTRAL, MEDLINE, and EMBASE to February 2010.

SELECTION CRITERIA

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

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Studies were assessed for methodological quality and the data extracted by two review authors independently. Summed total pain relief over six hours (TOTPAR 6) was used to calculate the number of participants achieving at least 50% pain relief. These derived results were used 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 six hours. Numbers of participants using rescue medication, and time to use of rescue medication, were sought as additional measures of efficacy. Information on adverse events and withdrawals was collected.

MAIN RESULTS

In this updated review four studies met the inclusion criteria. In total 366 participants were treated with lumiracoxib 400 mg, 51 with lumiracoxib 100 mg, and 212 with placebo. Active comparators were naproxen 500 mg, rofecoxib 50 mg, celecoxib 200 mg, celecoxib 400 mg, and ibuprofen 400 mg. With lumiracoxib 400 mg 50% of participants had at least 50% pain relief over six hours, compared with 8% given placebo; RB 6.9 (95% CI 4.1 to 12), NNT 2.4 (2.1 to 2.8).Median time to onset of analgesia was shorter for lumiracoxib 400 mg (0.6 to 1.5 hours) than placebo (>12 hours). Fewer participants needed rescue medication with lumiracoxib (64%) than with placebo (91%) over 12 to 24 hours; NNT to prevent remedication 3.7 (2.9 to 5.0). The weighted median time to use of rescue medication was 9.4 hours for lumiracoxib 400 mg and 1.7 hours for placebo.Adverse events were generally mild to moderate in severity, with one serious event reported in a placebo patient.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Lumiracoxib 400 mg given as a single oral dose is an effective analgesic for acute postoperative pain, and has a relatively long duration of action. Adverse events with lumiracoxib did not differ from placebo.

Single dose oral gabapentin for established acute postoperative pain in adults

BACKGROUND

Gabapentin is an antiepileptic drug, also used in the treatment of neuropathic pain, which is the subject of a Cochrane review, currently under revision. Its efficacy in treating established acute postoperative pain has not been demonstrated.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the efficacy and safety of single dose oral gabapentin compared with placebo in established acute postoperative pain using methods that permit comparison with other analgesics.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched Cochrane CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Oxford Pain Relief Database. Additional studies were sought from reference lists of retrieved articles and reviews. Clinical trials databases were searched for unpublished studies; clinical trial reports of several unpublished studies have been made public following litigation in the US.

SELECTION CRITERIA

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

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Studies were assessed for methodological quality and data extracted by two review authors independently. Numbers of participants with at least 50% of maximum possible total pain relief (TOTPAR) or summed pain intensity difference (SPID) with gabapentin or placebo were calculated and used to derive relative benefit (RB) or risk (RR), and number-needed-to-treat-to-benefit (NNT). Numbers of participants using rescue medication, and time to its use, were sought as additional measures of efficacy. Information on adverse events and withdrawals was collected.

MAIN RESULTS

Four unpublished studies met inclusion criteria; in three, participants had pain following dental surgery, and one followed major orthopaedic surgery; 177 participants were treated with a single dose of gabapentin 250 mg, 21 with gabapentin 500 mg, and 172 with placebo. At least 50% pain relief over 6 hours was achieved by 15% with gabapentin 250 mg and 5% with placebo; giving a RB of 2.5 (95% CI 1.2 to 5.0) and an NNT of 11 (6.4 to 35). Significantly fewer participants needed rescue medication within 6 hours with gabapentin 250 mg than with placebo; NNT to prevent use 5.8. About one third of participants reported adverse events with both gabapentin 250 mg and placebo. No serious adverse events occurred with gabapentin.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Gabapentin 250 mg is statistically superior to placebo in the treatment of established acute postoperative pain, but the NNT of 11 for at least 50% pain relief over 6 hours with gabapentin 250 mg is of limited clinical value and inferior to commonly used analgesics. Gabapentin 250 mg is not clinically useful as a stand-alone analgesic in established acute postoperative pain, though this is probably the first demonstration of analgesic effect of an antiepileptic in established acute pain.

Single dose oral codeine, as a single agent, for acute postoperative pain in adults

BACKGROUND

Codeine is an opioid metabolised to active analgesic compounds, including morphine. It is widely available by prescription, and combination drugs including low doses of codeine are commonly available without prescription.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the efficacy, the time to onset of analgesia, the time to use of rescue medication and any associated adverse events of single dose oral codeine in acute postoperative pain.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE and PubMed to November 2009.

SELECTION CRITERIA

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

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Studies were assessed for methodological quality and data independently extracted by two review authors. Summed total pain relief (TOTPAR) or pain intensity difference (SPID) over 4 to 6 hours were used to calculate the number of participants achieving at least 50% pain relief, which were used 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 4 to 6 hours. Numbers using rescue medication over specified time periods, and time to use of rescue medication, were sought as additional measures of efficacy. Data on adverse events and withdrawals were collected.

MAIN RESULTS

Thirty-five studies were included (1223 participants received codeine 60 mg, 27 codeine 90 mg, and 1252 placebo). Combining all types of surgery (33 studies, 2411 participants), codeine 60 mg had an NNT of at least 50% pain relief over 4 to 6 hours of 12 (8.4 to 18) compared with placebo. At least 50% pain relief was achieved by 26% on codeine 60 mg and 17% on placebo.Following dental surgery the NNT was 21 (12 to 96) (15 studies, 1146 participants), and following other types of surgery the NNT was 6.8 (4.6 to 13) (18 studies, 1265 participants). The NNT to prevent use of rescue medication within 4 to 6 hours was 11 (6.3 to 50) (11 studies, 765 participants, mostly non-dental); the mean time to its use was 2.7 hours with codeine and 2.0 hours with placebo. More participants experienced adverse events with codeine 60 mg than placebo; the difference was not significant and none were serious. Two adverse event withdrawals occurred with placebo.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Single dose codeine 60 mg provides good analgesia to few individuals, and does not compare favourably with commonly used alternatives such as paracetamol, NSAIDs and their combinations with codeine, especially after dental surgery; the large difference between dental and other surgery was unexpected. Higher doses were not evaluated.

General practitioners' perceptions of the effectiveness of medical interventions: an exploration of underlying constructs

BACKGROUND

Many interventions shown to be effective through clinical trials are not readily implemented in clinical practice. Unfortunately, little is known regarding how clinicians construct their perceptions of the effectiveness of medical interventions. This study aims to explore general practitioners' perceptions of the nature of 'effectiveness'.

METHODS

The design was qualitative in nature using the repertory grid technique to elicit the constructs underlying the perceived effectiveness of a range of medical interventions. Eight medical interventions were used as stimuli (diclophenac to reduce acute pain, cognitive behaviour therapy to treat depression, weight loss surgery to achieve weight loss, diet and exercise to prevent type 2 diabetes, statins to prevent heart disease, stopping smoking to prevent heart disease, nicotine replacement therapy to stop smoking, and stop smoking groups to stop smoking). The setting involved face-to-face interviews followed by questionnaires in London Primary Care Trusts. Participants included a random sample of 13 general practitioners.

RESULTS

Analysis of the ratings showed that the constructs clustered around two dimensions: low patient effort versus high patient effort (dimension one), and small impact versus large impact (dimension two). Dimension one represented constructs such as 'success requires little motivation', 'not a lifestyle intervention', and 'health-care professional led intervention'. Dimension two represented constructs such as 'weak and/or minimal evidence of effectiveness', 'small treatment effect for users', 'a small proportion of users will benefit' and 'not cost-effective'. Constructs within each dimension were closely related.

CONCLUSIONS

General practitioners judged the effectiveness of medical interventions by considering two broad dimensions: the extent to which interventions involve patient effort, and the size of their impact. The latter is informed by trial evidence, but the patient effort required to achieve effectiveness seems to be based on clinical judgement. Some of the failure of evidence-based medicine to be implemented may be more explicable if both dimensions were attended to.

Single dose oral fenbufen for acute postoperative pain in adults

BACKGROUND

Fenbufen is a non-selective non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID), used to treat acute and chronic painful conditions. There is no known systematic review of its use in acute postoperative pain.

OBJECTIVES

To assess efficacy, duration of action, and associated adverse events of single dose oral fenbufen in acute postoperative pain in adults.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched Cochrane CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE and the Oxford Pain Relief database for studies to June 2009.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised, double blind, placebo-controlled trials of single dose orally administered fenbufen in adults with moderate to severe acute postoperative pain.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed trial quality and extracted data. Pain relief or pain intensity data were extracted and converted into the dichotomous outcome of number of participants with at least 50% pain relief over 4 to 6 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. Information on adverse events and withdrawals were collected.

MAIN RESULTS

Searches identified only one study with (90 participants in total, 31 taking fenbufen). The study compared oral fenbufen 800 mg, fenbufen 400 mg, and placebo in participants with established postoperative pain. Fenbufen at both doses had apparent analgesic efficacy, but the numbers of participants was too small to allow sensible analysis. Gastrointestinal adverse events were noted in 4 of 15 participants taking fenbufen 800 mg.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

In the absence of evidence of efficacy for oral fenbufen in acute postoperative pain, its use in this indication is not justified at present. Because trials clearly demonstrating analgesic efficacy in the most basic of acute pain studies is lacking, use in other indications should be evaluated carefully. Given the large number of available drugs of this and similar classes which are effective, there is no urgent research agenda for this particular drug.

Single dose oral rofecoxib for acute postoperative pain in adults

BACKGROUND

Editor's note: The anti-inflammatory drug rofecoxib (Vioxx) was withdrawn from the market at the end of September 2004 after it was shown that long-term use (greater than 18 months) could increase the risk of heart attack and stroke in a study of secondary prevention of adenoma recurrence. Further information is available at www.vioxx.com.Rofecoxib is a selective cyclooxygenase-2 (COX-2) inhibitor previously licensed for treating acute and chronic pain; it was associated with fewer gastrointestinal adverse events than conventional NSAIDs. An earlier Cochrane review (Barden 2005) showed that rofecoxib is at least as effective as conventional non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) for postoperative pain.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the analgesic efficacy and adverse effects of rofecoxib in single oral doses for moderate and severe postoperative pain.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched Cochrane CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE and the Oxford Pain Relief Database for studies to June 2009.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised, double blind, placebo-controlled trials of single dose orally administered rofecoxib in adults with moderate to severe acute postoperative pain.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed trial quality and extracted data. Pain relief or pain intensity data were extracted and converted into the dichotomous outcome of number of participants with at least 50% pain relief over 4 to 6 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. Information on adverse events and withdrawals was collected.

MAIN RESULTS

Twenty new studies and seven from the earlier review met the inclusion criteria. Twenty-four studies were in dental surgery and three in other types of surgery. In total, 2636 participants were treated with rofecoxib 50 mg, 20 with rofecoxib 500 mg, and 1251 with placebo. The NNT for at least 50% pain relief over 4 to 6 hours with rofecoxib 50 mg was 2.2 (2.0 to 2.3) in all studies combined, 1.9 (1.8 to 2.0) in dental studies, and 6.8 (4.6 to 13) in other types of surgery. The median time to use of rescue medication was 14 hours for rofecoxib 50 mg and 2 hours for placebo. Significantly fewer participants used rescue medication following rofecoxib 50 mg than with placebo. Adverse events did not differ from placebo.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Rofecoxib 50 mg (two to four times the standard daily dose for chronic pain) is an effective single dose oral analgesic for acute postoperative pain in adults, with a relatively long duration of action.

Single dose oral ibuprofen for acute postoperative pain in adults

BACKGROUND

This review updates a 1999 Cochrane review showing that ibuprofen at various doses was effective in postoperative pain in single dose studies designed to demonstrate analgesic efficacy. New studies have since been published. Ibuprofen is one of the most widely used non-steroidal anti-inflammatory (NSAID) analgesics both by prescription and as an over-the-counter medicine. Ibuprofen is used for acute and chronic painful conditions.

OBJECTIVES

To assess analgesic efficacy of ibuprofen in single oral doses for moderate and severe postoperative pain in adults.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched Cochrane CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE and the Oxford Pain Relief Database for studies to May 2009.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised, double blind, placebo-controlled trials of single dose orally administered ibuprofen (any formulation) in adults with moderate to severe acute postoperative pain.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed trial quality and extracted data. Pain relief or pain intensity data were extracted and converted into the dichotomous outcome of number of participants with at least 50% pain relief over 4 to 6 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. Information on adverse events and withdrawals were collected.

MAIN RESULTS

Seventy-two studies compared ibuprofen and placebo (9186 participants). Studies were predominantly of high reporting quality, and the bulk of the information concerned ibuprofen 200 mg and 400 mg. For at least 50% pain relief compared with placebo the NNT for ibuprofen 200 mg (2690 participants) was 2.7 (2.5 to 3.0) and for ibuprofen 400 mg (6475 participants) it was 2.5 (2.4 to 2.6). The proportion with at least 50% pain relief was 46% with 200 mg and 54% with 400 mg. Remedication within 6 hours was less frequent with higher doses, with 48% remedicating with 200 mg and 42% with 400 mg. The median time to remedication was 4.7 hours with 200 mg and 5.4 hours with 400 mg. Sensitivity analysis indicated that pain model and ibuprofen formulation may both affect the result, with dental impaction models and soluble ibuprofen salts producing better efficacy estimates. Adverse events were uncommon, and not different from placebo.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The very substantial amount of high quality evidence demonstrates that ibuprofen is an effective analgesic in treating postoperative pain. NNTs for 200 mg and 400 mg ibuprofen did not change significantly from the previous review even when a substantial amount of new information was added. New information is provided on remedication.

Single dose oral aceclofenac for postoperative pain in adults

BACKGROUND

Aceclofenac is the prodrug of the non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID) diclofenac, widely used to treat acute and chronic pain. There are no known systematic reviews of its analgesic efficacy in acute postoperative pain. This review sought to evaluate the efficacy and safety of oral aceclofenac in acute postoperative pain, using clinical studies of patients with established pain, and with outcomes measured primarily over 6 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 of single dose oral aceclofenac in acute postoperative pain, and any associated adverse events.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched The Cochrane Library (Issue 1, 2009), MEDLINE via Ovid (1966 to March 2009); EMBASE via Ovid (1980 to March 2009); the Oxford Pain Relief Database (1950 to 1994); and reference lists of articles.

SELECTION CRITERIA

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

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed trial quality and extracted data. The area under the "pain relief versus time" curve was used to derive the proportion of participants with paracetamol plus codeine and placebo or paracetamol alone experiencing least 50% pain relief over 4 to 6 hours, using validated equations. The number needed to treat to benefit (NNT) was calculated using 95% confidence intervals (CI). The proportion of participants using rescue analgesia over a specified time period, and time to use of rescue analgesia, were sought as additional measures of efficacy. Information on adverse events and withdrawals was also collected.

MAIN RESULTS

Searches identified only one study (217 participants total), which used oral aceclofenac 150 mg in patients with established postoperative pain. Aceclofenac 150 mg could not be distinguished from placebo, though ibuprofen 400 mg was distinguished from placebo.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

In the absence of evidence of efficacy for oral aceclofenac in acute postoperative pain (at least at 150 mg single dose), its use in this indication is not justified. Because trials clearly demonstrating analgesic efficacy in the most basic of acute pain studies are lacking, use in other indications should be evaluated carefully. Given the large number of effective drugs available in this and similar classes of analgesics, there is no urgent research agenda required to demonstrate the effective dose of aceclofenac in acute postoperative pain.

Intravenous or intramuscular parecoxib for acute postoperative pain in adults

BACKGROUND

Parecoxib was the first COX-2 available for parenteral administration, and may, given intravenously or intramuscularly, offer advantages over oral medication when patients have nausea and vomiting or are unable to swallow, such as in the immediate postoperative period.

OBJECTIVES

Assess the efficacy of single dose intravenous or intramuscular parecoxib in acute postoperative pain, the requirement for rescue medication, and any associated adverse events.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched Cochrane CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE in November 2008.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trials of parecoxib compared with placebo for relief of acute postoperative pain in adults.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed trial quality and extracted data. The area under the "pain relief versus time" curve was used to derive the proportion of participants with parecoxib and placebo experiencing at least 50% pain relief over 6 hours, using validated equations. The number-needed-to-treat-to-benefit (NNT) was calculated using 95% confidence intervals (CI). The proportion of participants using rescue analgesia over a specified time period, and time to use of rescue analgesia, were sought as additional measures of efficacy. Information on adverse events and withdrawals were also collected.

MAIN RESULTS

Seven studies (1446 participants) were included. There was no significant difference between doses, or between intravenous and intramuscular administration for 50% pain relief over 6 hours: NNTs compared with placebo were 3.1 (2.4 to 4.5), 2.4 (2.1 to 2.8), and 1.8 (1.5 to 2.3) for 10, 20, and 40 mg parecoxib respectively. Fewer participants required rescue medication over 24 hours with parecoxib than placebo: parecoxib 40 mg was significantly better than parecoxib 20 mg (NNTs to prevent use of rescue medication 7.5 (5.3 to 12.8) and 3.3 (2.6 to 4.5) respectively; P < 0.0007). Median time to use of rescue medication was 3.1 hours, 6.9 hours and 10.6 hours with parecoxib 10 mg, 20 mg and 40 mg respectively, and 1.5 hours with placebo. Adverse events were generally mild to moderate, rarely led to withdrawal, and did not differ in frequency between groups. No serious adverse events were reported with parecoxib or placebo.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

A single dose of parecoxib 20 mg or 40 mg provided effective analgesia for 50 to 60% of those treated compared to about 15% with placebo, and was well tolerated. Duration of analgesia was longer, and significantly fewer participants required rescue medication over 24 hours with the higher dose.

Single dose oral diclofenac for acute postoperative pain in adults

BACKGROUND

Diclofenac is a non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID), available as a potassium salt (immediate-release) or sodium salt (delayed-release). This review updates an earlier review published in The Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (Issue 2, 2004) on 'Single dose oral diclofenac for postoperative pain'.

OBJECTIVES

To assess single dose oral diclofenac for the treatment of acute postoperative pain.

SEARCH STRATEGY

Cochrane CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE, Biological Abstracts, the Oxford Pain Relief Database, and reference lists of articles were searched; last search December 2008.

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 assessed studies for inclusion and quality, and extracted data. The area under the pain relief versus time curve was used to derive the proportion of participants with at least 50% pain relief over 4 to 6 hours, using validated equations. Relative benefit (risk) and number needed to treat to benefit (NNT) were calculated. Information on adverse events, time to remedication, and participants needing additional analgesia was also collected.

MAIN RESULTS

Fifteen studies (eight additional studies) with 1512 participants more than doubled the information available at each dose. Overall 50% to 60% of participants experienced at least 50% pain relief over 4 to 6 hours at any dose with diclofenac, compared to 10 to 20% with placebo, giving NNTs of about 2.5 for doses of 25 mg to 100 mg (similar to earlier review); no dose response was demonstrated. At 50 mg and 100 mg, NNTs for diclofenac potassium (2.1 (1.8 to 2.4) and 1.9 (1.7 to 2.2)) were significantly lower (better) than for diclofenac sodium (6.7 (4.2 to 17) and 4.5 (3.2 to 7.7)). The median time to use of rescue medication was 2 hours for placebo, 4.3 hours for diclofenac 50 mg and 4.9 hours for diclofenac 100 mg. Adverse events were reported at a similar rate to placebo, with no serious events.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Oral diclofenac is an effective single-dose treatment for moderate to severe postoperative pain. Significantly more participants experienced at least 50% pain relief over 4 to 6 hours with diclofenac potassium than with diclofenac sodium. There was no significant difference between diclofenac and placebo in the incidence of adverse events.

Single dose oral etoricoxib for acute postoperative pain in adults

BACKGROUND

Etoricoxib is a selective cyclo-oxygenase-2 (COX-2) inhibitor prescribed for the relief of chronic pain in osteoarthritis and rheumatoid arthritis, and acute pain. The drug is believed to be associated with fewer upper gastrointestinal adverse effects than conventional non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs). A number of studies in acute postoperative pain have now been published.

OBJECTIVES

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

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched Cochrane CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Oxford Pain Database, and reference lists of articles. Date of the most recent search: December 2008.

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

MAIN RESULTS

Five studies (880 participants) were included in the review. All five studies reported on 120 mg, with 655 participants in a comparison with placebo. At least 50% pain relief was reported by 64% with etoricoxib 120 mg and 10% with placebo (NNT 1.9 (1.7 to 2.1)). For dental studies only the NNT was 1.6 (1.5 to 1.8). Two studies also reported on higher doses of 180 and 240 mg, with 249 participants. At least 50% pain relief was reported by 79% with etoricoxib 120 mg and 12% with placebo (NNT 1.5 (1.3 to 1.7)).Significantly fewer participants used rescue medication when taking etoricoxib 120 mg than those taking placebo (NNT to prevent remedication 2.4 (2.1 to 2.9)), and the median time to use of rescue medication was 20 hours. Adverse events were reported at a similar rate to placebo, with no serious events.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Single dose oral etoricoxib produces high levels of good quality pain relief after surgery. The 120 mg dose is as effective as, or better than, other commonly used analgesics.

Single dose oral naproxen and naproxen sodium for acute postoperative pain in adults

BACKGROUND

Naproxen, a non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug, is used to treat various painful conditions including postoperative pain, and is often administered as the sodium salt to improve its solubility. This review updates a 2004 Cochrane review showing that naproxen sodium 550 mg (equivalent to naproxen 500 mg) was effective for treating postoperative pain. New studies have since been published.

OBJECTIVES

To assess efficacy, duration of action, and associated adverse events of single dose oral naproxen or naproxen sodium in acute postoperative pain in adults.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched Cochrane CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE and the Oxford Pain Relief Database for studies to October 2008.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised, double blind, placebo-controlled trials of single dose orally administered naproxen or naproxen sodium in adults with moderate to severe acute postoperative pain.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed trial quality and extracted data. Pain relief or pain intensity data were extracted and converted 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. Information on adverse events and withdrawals were collected.

MAIN RESULTS

The original review included 10 studies with 996 participants. This updated review included 15 studies (1509 participants); 11 assessed naproxen sodium and four naproxen. In nine studies (784 participants) using 500/550 mg naproxen or naproxen sodium the NNT for at least 50% pain relief over four to six hours was 2.7 (95% CI 2.3 to 3.2). No dose response was demonstrated over the range 200/220 mg to 500/550 mg, but limited data was identified. Median time to use of rescue medication was 8.9 hours for naproxen 500/550 mg and 2.0 hours for placebo. Use of rescue medication was significantly less common with naproxen than placebo. Associated adverse events were generally of mild to moderate severity and rarely led to withdrawal.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Doses equivalent to 500 mg and 400 mg naproxen administered orally provided effective analgesia to adults with moderate to severe acute postoperative pain. About half of participants treated with these doses experienced clinically useful levels of pain relief, compared to 15% with placebo, and half required additional medication within nine hours, compared to two hours with placebo. Associated adverse events did not differ from placebo.

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

BACKGROUND

This is an updated version of the Cochrane review published in Issue 4, 1998. Combining drugs from different classes with different modes of action may offer opportunity to optimise efficacy and tolerability, using lower doses of each drug to achieve the same degree of pain relief. Previously we concluded that addition of codeine to paracetamol provided additional pain relief, but at expense of additional adverse events. New studies have been published since. This review sought to evaluate efficacy and safety of paracetamol plus codeine using current data, and compare findings with other analgesics evaluated similarly.

OBJECTIVES

Assess efficacy of single dose oral paracetamol plus codeine in acute postoperative pain, increase in efficacy due to the codeine component, and associated adverse events.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Oxford Pain Relief Database in October 2008 for this update.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials of paracetamol plus codeine, compared with placebo or the same dose of paracetamol alone, for relief of acute postoperative pain in adults.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors assessed trial quality and extracted data. The area under the "pain relief versus time" curve was used to derive proportion of participants with paracetamol plus codeine and placebo or paracetamol alone experiencing least 50% pain relief over four-to-six hours, using validated equations. Number-needed-to-treat-to-benefit (NNT) was calculated using 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Proportion of participants using rescue analgesia over a specified time period, and time to use of rescue analgesia, were sought as additional measures of efficacy. Information on adverse events and withdrawals were collected.

MAIN RESULTS

Twenty-six studies, with 2295 participants, were included comparing paracetamol plus codeine with placebo. Significant dose response was seen for the outcome of at least 50% pain relief over four-to-six hours, with NNTs of 2.2 (95% CI 1.8 to 2.9) for 800 to 1000 mg paracetamol plus 60 mg codeine, 3.9 (2.9 to 4.5) for 600 to 650 mg paracetamol plus 60 mg codeine, and 6.9 (4.8 to 12) for 300 mg paracetamol plus 30 mg codeine. Time to use of rescue medication was over four hours with paracetamol plus codeine and two hours with placebo. The NNT to prevent remedication was 5.6 (4.0 to 9.0) for 600 mg paracetamol plus 60 mg codeine over four to six hours. Adverse events increased of mainly mild to moderate severity with paracetamol plus codeine than placebo.Fourteen studies, with 926 participants, were included in the comparison of paracetamol plus codeine with the same dose of paracetamol alone. Addition of codeine increased proportion of participants achieving at least 50% pain relief over four-to-six hours by 10 to 15%, increased time to use of rescue medication by about one hour, and reduced proportion of participants needing rescue medication by about 15% (NNT to prevent remedication 6.9 (4.2 to 19). Adverse events were mainly mild to moderate in severity and incidence did not differ between groups.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

This update confirms previous findings that combining paracetamol with codeine provided clinically useful levels of pain relief in about 50% of patients with moderate to severe postoperative pain, compared with under 20% with placebo. New information for remedication shows that the combination extended the duration of analgesia by about one hour compared to treatment with the same dose of paracetamol alone. At higher doses, more participants experienced adequate pain relief, but the amount of information available for the 1000 mg paracetamol plus 60 mg codeine dose was small, and based on limited information.

Single dose oral celecoxib for acute postoperative pain in adults

BACKGROUND

This is an update of a review published in The Cochrane Library, Issue 1, 2003. Celecoxib is a selective cyclo-oxygenase-2 (COX-2) inhibitor 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 review. Additional studies have now been published for the 400 mg dose, and this updated review provides more robust estimates of efficacy and harm.

OBJECTIVES

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

SEARCH STRATEGY

Cochrane CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Oxford Pain Database. Most recent search: July 2008.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of adults prescribed any dose of oral celecoxib or placebo for acute postoperative pain were included.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Eight studies (1380 participants) met the inclusion criteria. Studies were assessed for quality and data extracted by two review authors. Summed pain relief (TOTPAR) or pain intensity difference (SPID) was converted into dichotomous information yielding the number of participants with at least 50% pain relief over four to six hours, and used to calculate the relative benefit (RB) and number-needed-to-treat-to-benefit (NNT) for one patient to achieve at least 50% pain relief with celecoxib who would not have done so with placebo. Information on use of rescue medication was used to calculate the proportion of participants requiring rescue medication and the weighted mean (WM) of the median time to use.

MAIN RESULTS

The NNT for celecoxib 200 mg and 400 mg compared with placebo for at least 50% pain relief over four to six hours was 4.2 (CI 3.4 to 5.6) and 2.5 (2.2 to 2.9) respectively. The WM of 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 WM 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. One serious adverse event probably related to celecoxib was reported by the trialists.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Single dose oral celecoxib is an effective means of postoperative pain relief. The 400 mg dose has similar efficacy to ibuprofen 400 mg.

Topical diclofenac and its role in pain and inflammation: an evidence-based review

OBJECTIVE

Topical diclofenac is widely used in the treatment of pain and inflammation. This comprehensive review assesses the safety and efficacy of topical diclofenac in a range of painful and inflammatory disorders.

METHODS

Double-blind, randomized, placebo- or active-controlled trials (RCT) evaluating topical diclofenac in soft-tissue injuries, soft-tissue rheumatic disorders and osteoarthritis were identified through detailed literature searches. In addition, non-RCT evidence from publications evaluating the pharmacologic characteristics of topical diclofenac were also included in this review to obtain a more complete picture of the drug's profile, its efficacy and safety.

RESULTS

Studies demonstrate that the drug preferentially distributes to the target tissues in sufficient concentrations to produce a therapeutic effect. A total of 19 double-blind RCTs in more than 3000 patients, supported by single-blind or open trials, consistently show that topical diclofenac significantly reduces pain and inflammation in acute and chronic conditions compared with placebo and is comparable to other topical non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) and some oral NSAIDs (diclofenac, ibuprofen, naproxen). Improvements have also been observed in patients' functional capacity and mobility. Topical diclofenac is well tolerated, resulting mostly in mild, easily resolved local skin irritation, and is associated with fewer side-effects than other topical NSAIDs and a lower rate of gastrointestinal complications than oral NSAIDs (diclofenac, ibuprofen, naproxen).

CONCLUSION

This evidence-based review shows topical diclofenac to be an effective and well tolerated treatment in painful and inflammatory conditions, at least in the short-term. However, only published RCT studies have been included in this analysis, which may exclude some interesting data from non-RCT studies. Future trials of topical diclofenac need to be of longer duration, be better reported and consider a broader spectrum of acute and chronic pain indications.

Techniques for caesarean section

BACKGROUND

Rates of caesarean section (CS) have been rising globally. It is important to use the most effective and safe technique.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the effects of complete methods of caesarean section; and to summarise the findings of reviews of individual aspects of caesarean section technique.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (August 2007), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (The Cochrane Library 2007, Issue 3) and reference lists of identified papers.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials of intention to perform caesarean section using different techniques.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed studies and extracted data.

MAIN RESULTS

'Joel-Cohen based' compared with Pfannenstiel CS was associated with: less blood loss, (five trials, 481 women; weighted mean difference (WMD) -64.45 ml; 95% confidence interval (CI) -91.34 to -37.56 ml); shorter operating time (five trials, 581 women; WMD -18.65; 95% CI -24.84 to -12.45 minutes); postoperatively, reduced time to oral intake (five trials, 481 women; WMD -3.92; 95% CI -7.13 to -0.71 hours); less fever (eight trials, 1412 women; relative risk (RR) 0.47; 95% CI 0.28 to 0.81); shorter duration of postoperative pain (two comparisons from one trial, 172 women; WMD -14.18 hours; 95% CI -18.31 to -10.04 hours); fewer analgesic injections (two trials, 151 women; WMD -0.92; 95% CI -1.20 to -0.63); and shorter time from skin incision to birth of the baby (five trials, 575 women; WMD -3.84 minutes; 95% CI -5.41 to -2.27 minutes). Serious complications and blood transfusions were too few for analysis.Misgav-Ladach compared with the traditional method (lower midline abdominal incision) was associated with reduced: blood loss (339 women; WMD -93.00; 95% CI -132.72 to -53.28 ml); operating time (339 women; WMD-7.30; 95% CI -8.32 to -6.28 minutes); time to mobilisation (339 women; WMD -16.06; 95% CI -18.22 to -13.90 hours); and length of postoperative stay for the mother (339 women; WMD -0.82; 95% CI -1.08 to -0.56 days). Misgav-Ladach compared with modified Misgav-Ladach methods was associated with a longer time from skin incision to birth of the baby (116 women; WMD 2.10; 95% CI 1.10 to 3.10 minutes).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

'Joel-Cohen based' methods have advantages compared to Pfannenstiel and to traditional (lower midline) CS techniques, which could translate to savings for the health system. However, these trials do not provide information on mortality and serious or long-term morbidity such as morbidly adherent placenta and scar rupture.

Intravenous parecoxib for acute postoperative pain in adults

This is the protocol for a review and there is no abstract. The objectives are as follows: To assess the efficacy and adverse effects of single dose parecoxib in studies of acute postoperative pain using methods that permit comparison with other analgesics evaluated in standardised trials using almost identical methods and outcomes.

Paracetamol for pain relief after surgical removal of lower wisdom teeth

BACKGROUND

Paracetamol has been commonly used for the relief of postoperative pain following oral surgery. In this review we investigated the optimal dose of paracetamol and the optimal time for drug administration to provide pain relief, taking into account the side effects of different doses of the drug. This will inform dentists and their patients of the best strategy for pain relief after the surgical removal of wisdom teeth.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the beneficial and harmful effects of paracetamol for pain relief after surgical removal of lower wisdom teeth, compared to placebo, at different doses and administered postoperatively.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Oral Health Group's Trials Register; the Cochrane Pain, Palliative and Supportive Care Group's Trials Register; CENTRAL; MEDLINE; EMBASE and the Current Controlled Trials Register. Handsearching included several dental journals. We checked the bibliographies of relevant clinical trials and review articles for studies outside the handsearched journals. We wrote to authors of the identified randomised controlled trials (RCTs), to manufacturers of analgesic pharmaceuticals, we searched personal references in an attempt to identify unpublished or ongoing RCTs. No language restriction was applied. The last electronic search was conducted on 24th August 2006.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised, parallel group, placebo controlled, double blind clinical trials of paracetamol for acute pain, following third molar surgery.

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 was calculated for both paracetamol and placebo. The number of patients experiencing adverse events, and/or the total number of adverse events reported were analysed.

MAIN RESULTS

Twenty-one trials met the inclusion criteria. A total of 2048 patients were initially enrolled in the trials (1148 received paracetamol, and 892 the placebo) and of these 1968 (96%) were included in the meta-analysis (1133 received paracetamol, and 835 the placebo). Paracetamol provided a statistically significant benefit when compared with placebo for pain relief and pain intensity at both 4 and 6 hours. Most studies were found to have moderate risk of bias, with poorly reported allocation concealment being the main problem. Risk ratio values for pain relief at 4 hours 2.85 (95% confidence interval (CI) 1.89 to 4.29), and at 6 hours 3.32 (95% CI 1.88 to 5.87). A statistically significant benefit was also found between up to 1000 mg and 1000 mg doses, the higher the dose giving greater benefit for each measure at both time points. There was no statistically significant difference between the number of patients who reported adverse events, overall this being 19% in the paracetamol group and 16% in the placebo group.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Paracetamol is a safe, effective drug for the treatment of postoperative pain following the surgical removal of lower wisdom teeth.

Preoperative analgesia with local lidocaine infiltration for abdominal hysterectomy pain management

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the impact of preemptive local analgesia at the incision site in reducing pain in women undergoing abdominal hysterectomy for a benign myomatous uterus.

STUDY DESIGN

In this prospective, randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled study, 20 mL of 1% lidocaine or 0.9% saline was injected at the abdominal incision site prior to the performance of the hysterectomy. Thirty-two women were enrolled in the study, 16 received preemptive analgesia while 14 were treated by placebo; 2 were excluded. All operations were performed under general anesthesia. The standard postoperative pain treatment consisted of oral analgesia with ibuprofen (400 mg) in liquid-filled capsules. Morphine (10 mg) was used for rescue analgesia. Pain intensity was self-evaluated with the use of a 100 mm visual analog scale.

RESULTS

Compared to the placebo group, women who received preemptive analgesia with lidocaine 1% perceived a significant reduction in postoperative pain in the first hours after surgery (2 h: 50.1+/-27.9 versus 70.6+/-22.6, p=0.043; 5 h: 42.5+/-25.2 versus 64.6+/-28.3, p=0.043; 8 h: 31.2+/-22.4 versus 53.3+/-30.3, p=0.031).

CONCLUSION

Preemptive analgesia with lidocaine 1% is a simple, cheap and efficient mode to reduce pain in the first hours after hysterectomy.

Analgesics for pain after traumatic or orthopaedic surgery: what is the evidence-a systematic review

OBJECTIVE

To assess analgesic drugs in the treatment of postoperative pain after traumatic and orthopaedic surgery (TOS).

DESIGN

A systematic review of randomised clinical trials (RCTs).

DATA SOURCES

Electronic PubMed, EMBASE, The Cochrane Library, and hand searches.

STUDY SELECTION

RCTs of analgesics administered by oral, intramuscular, intravenous, subcutaneous or rectal route, were compared to other analgesics or placebo, in patients under TOS. Study design, characteristics of the study population, analgesic drugs tested, pain intensity and pain relief scores, and adverse effects were assessed.

RESULTS

Ninety-two RCTs (9,596 patients) met our inclusion criteria. Forty-two (46%) were placebo-controlled, and 50 (54%) were direct comparisons between non-opioid, opioid, and/or combinations of both. Patients' mean age (SD) was 49 years (18). In most trials, gastrointestinal ulcer, liver and renal diseases were exclusion criteria. Only 30 trials (33%) were double-blind and reported standardised outcomes of pain intensity and pain relief; 19 of these were single-dose, and follow up of analgesic effects lasted no more than 12 h in 23 (77%). Globally, only nine trials (10%) were double blind, described dropouts or withdrawals, performed analysis by intention to treat, and reported the effects magnitude.

CONCLUSION

Evidence from RCTs on the treatment of postoperative pain after TOS is inadequate for clinical decision making. Assessment of analgesics in pain after TOS should be based on agreed clinically relevant outcomes, in representative patients, and for longer observation periods. In addition, it should include direct comparisons between candidate drugs or their combinations and between various drug administration schedules.

Dose-response in direct comparisons of different doses of aspirin, ibuprofen and paracetamol (acetaminophen) in analgesic studies

AIMS

Establishing the dose-response relationship for clinically useful doses of aspirin, ibuprofen and paracetamol has been difficult. Indirect comparison from meta-analysis is compromised by too little information at some doses.

METHODS

A systematic review of randomized, double-blind trials in acute pain comparing different doses of aspirin, ibuprofen and paracetamol was therefore undertaken.

RESULTS

Fifty trials were found. Numerical superiority of higher over lower dose was found by the original authors in 37/50 trials (74%) and statistical superiority in 11/50 (22%). Twenty-eight trials had design, quality and data reporting characteristics to allow pooling of common doses; in 3/28 (11%) of the individual trials our calculations showed statistical superiority of higher over lower dose. Pooled comparison of 1000/1200 mg aspirin over 500/600 mg was statistically superior, with a number-needed-to-treat (NNT) for higher over lower dose of 16 (8 to > 100). Pooled comparison of 400 mg ibuprofen over 200 mg was statistically superior, with an NNT for higher over lower dose of 10 (6-23). Pooled comparison of 1000 mg paracetamol over 500 mg was statistically superior, with an NNT for higher over lower dose of 9 (6-20).

CONCLUSIONS

Use of trials making direct comparison of two different doses of target drugs revealed the underlying dose-response curve for clinical analgesia.

[Non-opioid analgesics for perioperative pain therapy. Risks and rational basis for use]

Non-opioid analgesics play a central role in the management of postoperative pain. In this review, the pharmacology, the analgesic efficacy and the side-effects of non-opioid analgesics are summarized. First, the pharmacology of diclofenac, acetyl salicylic acid, dipyrone, acetaminophen and the COX-2 inhibitors is described. Second, the analgesic efficacy of non-opioid analgesics is analyzed for moderate pain (e.g. ambulatory surgery) and for moderate to severe pain (e.g. abdominal surgery-in combination with opioids). There is limited evidence for an additive analgesic effect of two non-opioid analgesics. Third, the major side-effects of non-opioid analgesics are discussed in relation to the pathophysiology, the frequency and the clinical relevance of these effects. In particular, side-effects on the gastrointestinal tract (ulcus formation), on coagulation (bleeding and thrombosis), on the renal (renal insufficiency), the pulmonary (bronchospasm) and the hematopoetic systems (agranulocytosis) are described. Recommendations for the clinical use of non-opioid analgesics for perioperative pain therapy are given.

[Postoperative pain therapy in orthopedics]

Postoperative pain management adheres to the principles of a three-step routine according to the WHO recommendations. This routine suggests the combination of a basic non-opioid (step I) with an opioid of low potency (step II) or high potency (step III). Non-opioids are routinely administered prior to an opioid. While i.v. application is the treatment of choice in the immediate postoperative course, a switch to oral pain medication is preferred as early as possible. With oral opioid therapy preference should be given to slow release drugs. Intramuscular application of pain medication has little place in postoperative pain management. In order to lower the need for systemic pain medication, postoperative pain management is supplemented by regional anesthesia administered pre- or intraoperatively. Requirement for pain medication beyond normal or increasing with postoperative time is suggestive of a postsurgical complication. Among the numerous drugs available for postoperative pain management, the physician is advised to confine his selection of pain medication to a limited number in order to gain superior knowledge of effects and side effects of the drugs administered.

Oral valdecoxib and injected parecoxib for acute postoperative pain: a quantitative systematic review

BACKGROUND: Clinical trials suggest that cyclo-oxygenase-2 specific inhibitors (coxibs) are an effective treatment for acute postoperative pain. The aims of this systematic review were to examine the evidence for oral valdecoxib and injected parecoxib, and quantify efficacy and adverse effects. METHODS: Information from randomized, double-blind studies in acute postoperative pain was sought. The area under the pain relief versus time curve over four to six hours was dichotomized using validated equations to derive the proportion of patients with treatment and placebo with at least 50% pain relief over four to six hours and calculate the number-needed-to-treat (NNT). Information on duration of analgesia and adverse events was also collected. RESULTS: The NNT for one patient to experience at least 50% relief over six hours following a single oral dose of valdecoxib 20 mg and 40 mg was 1.7 (1.4 to 2.0) and 1.6 (1.4 to 1.8) respectively. The NNT for one patient to have at least 50% relief over four to six hours with parecoxib 20 mg IV and 40 mg IV was 3.0 (2.3 to 4.1) and 2.3 (2.0 to 2.6) respectively. Mean time to remedication (weighted by trial size) was >24 hours with valdecoxib 40 mg, 8.7 hours with parecoxib 40 mg IV and 1.7 to 1.8 hours with placebo. There were no statistical differences between treatment and placebo for any adverse effect. CONCLUSION: Both oral valdecoxib and injected parecoxib are effective treatments for acute postoperative pain.

Ibuprofen 400 mg is effective in women, and women are well represented in trials

BACKGROUND

A recent article in the New Scientist argued that women were under-represented in clinical trials which, until now, had masked the finding that ibuprofen 400 mg was ineffective in women.

METHODS

Meta-analysis of randomised, double-blind placebo-controlled trials of ibuprofen 400 mg in acute pain, and use of individual patient information were planned to test the hypothesis that ibuprofen is ineffective in women. For each trial the proportion of women participating, the number of patients with at least 50% pain relief and the overall event rate for ibuprofen 400 mg and placebo was calculated. For each patient percentage pain relief was calculated, and the numbers of women and men achieving at least 50% pain relief used to calculate number-needed-to-treat (NNT) for ibuprofen 400 mg compared to placebo.

RESULTS

Thirty-seven included trials had 3,577 patients, 67% of whom were women. The proportion with at least 50% pain relief was unaffected by how many women were included. In an analysis of 678 individual patients the proportion of women and men with at least 50% pain relief was the same, NNT 3.4 (2.6 to 4.6) and 2.5 (2.0 to 3.3) respectively.

CONCLUSION

There is no clinically meaningful difference in the efficacy of ibuprofen 400 mg between men and women experiencing moderate to severe postoperative pain and women were well represented.

Single-dose rofecoxib for acute postoperative pain in adults: a quantitative systematic review

BACKGROUND: Rofecoxib is a cyclo-oxygenase 2 selective inhibitor. This systematic review of rofecoxib in acute pain examined studies in adults of analgesic efficacy over six hours, the amount and quality of the evidence on extended duration of analgesia, and the quality and quantity of evidence on adverse events. METHODS: Cochrane Library (issue 4, 2001), Biological Abstracts (March 2002), MEDLINE (March 2002) and PubMed (March 2002) were searched using rofecoxib as a free text term. The area under the pain relief versus time curve was dichotomized using validated equations to derive the proportion of patients on rofecoxib 50 mg or placebo with at least 50% pain relief over six hours. This was used to calculate the number needed to treat for at least 50% pain relief over six hours for rofecoxib compared with placebo. Information on duration of analgesia and adverse events was also collected. RESULTS: Five included trials investigated 1,118 patients, of whom 211 received placebo and 464 received rofecoxib 50 mg. The NNT for rofecoxib 50 mg was 2.3 (95% confidence interval 2.0 to 2.6). The weighted mean remedication time was 1.9 hours for placebo (126 patients), 7.4 hours for ibuprofen 400 mg (97 patients) and 13.6 hours for rofecoxib 50 mg (322 patients). CONCLUSION: Rofecoxib at 2-4 times the standard daily dose for chronic pain is an effective single dose oral analgesic in acute pain. Limitations in trial reporting constrain conclusions about longer duration of analgesia and adverse event profile.

Incomplete evidence: the inadequacy of databases in tracing published adverse drug reactions in clinical trials

BACKGROUND

We would expect information on adverse drug reactions in randomised clinical trials to be easily retrievable from specific searches of electronic databases. However, complete retrieval of such information may not be straightforward, for two reasons. First, not all clinical drug trials provide data on the frequency of adverse effects. Secondly, not all electronic records of trials include terms in the abstract or indexing fields that enable us to select those with adverse effects data. We have determined how often automated search methods, using indexing terms and/or textwords in the title or abstract, would fail to retrieve trials with adverse effects data.

METHODS

We used a sample set of 107 trials known to report frequencies of adverse drug effects, and measured the proportion that (i) were not assigned the appropriate adverse effects indexing terms in the electronic databases, and (ii) did not contain identifiable adverse effects textwords in the title or abstract.

RESULTS

Of the 81 trials with records on both MEDLINE and EMBASE, 25 were not indexed for adverse effects in either database. Twenty-six trials were indexed in one database but not the other. Only 66 of the 107 trials reporting adverse effects data mentioned this in the abstract or title of the paper. Simultaneous use of textword and indexing terms retrieved only 82/107 (77%) papers.

CONCLUSIONS

Specific search strategies based on adverse effects textwords and indexing terms will fail to identify nearly a quarter of trials that report on the rate of drug adverse effects.

Single dose piroxicam for acute postoperative pain

BACKGROUND

Piroxicam is a non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID) with analgesic properties, and is used mainly for treating rheumatic disorders. Some drugs have been directly compared against each other within a trial setting to determine their relative efficacies, whereas other have not. It is possible, however, to compare analgesics indirectly by examining the effectiveness of each drug against placebo when used in similar clinical situations.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the analgesic efficacy and adverse effects of single-dose piroxicam compared with placebo in moderate to severe postoperative pain. To compare the effects of piroxicam with other analgesics.

SEARCH STRATEGY

Published reports were identified from systematic searching of Medline, Biological Abstracts, Embase, The Cochrane Library and the Oxford Pain Relief Database. Additional studies were identified from the reference lists of retrieved reports.

SELECTION CRITERIA

The following inclusion criteria were used: full journal publication, randomised placebo controlled trial, double-blind design, adult patients, postoperative pain of moderate to severe intensity at the baseline assessment, postoperative administration of oral or intramuscular piroxicam.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Summed pain intensity and pain relief data were extracted and converted into dichotomous information to yield the number of patients obtaining at least 50% pain relief. This was used to calculate estimates of relative benefit and number-needed-to-treat for one patient to obtain at least 50% pain relief. Information was collected on adverse effects and estimates of relative risk and number-needed-to-harm were calculated.

MAIN RESULTS

Three trials (141 patients) compared oral piroxicam 20 mg with placebo and one (15 patients) compared oral piroxicam 40 mg with placebo. For single doses of piroxicam 20 mg and 40 mg the respective numbers-needed-to-treat for at least 50% pain relief were 2.7 (2.1 to 3.8) [95% confidence interval] and 1.9 (1.2 to 4.3) [95% confidence interval] compared with placebo over 4-6 hours in moderate to severe postoperative pain. The reported incidence of adverse effects was no higher with piroxicam (20 mg or 40 mg) than with placebo.

REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS

Piroxicam appears to be of similar efficacy to other non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) and intramuscular morphine 10 mg when used as a single oral dose in the treatment of moderate to severe postoperative pain.