Relief of pain due to uterine cramping/involution after birth

Investigation of the Relationship Between Religious Attitude and Postpartum Physical and Perineal Pain in Iran

Postpartum pain is one of the most important and common problems of postpartum mothers who resort to non-pharmacological strategies to relieve it due to the side effects of painkillers. This study was conducted to investigate the relationship between religiosity and postpartum physical and perineal pain. The sample size in this cross-sectional study was 101 women giving birth in educational and medical centers of Shiraz, Iran, that was selected by purposive-convenience sampling. Then, a questionnaire was completed for each of them including demographic characteristics, religious attitude, and visual scale of postpartum pain. Data were analyzed by SPSS software. The frequency of the majority of the research population was found at moderate religious attitudes 65.4% (72 individuals). There is a positive and Statistical inverse correlation between religious attitude and perineal pain. According to Fisher's test, in mothers with a high religious attitude, 9.7% had severe perineal pain, 41.9% had moderate pain, and 48.4% had mild pain (p = 0.001). Besides, in the case of physical pain, 3.2%, 35.5%, and 61.3% had severe, moderate, and mild pain, respectively. Regarding physical pains, with the increase in the level of mothers' religious attitude, physical pains also decreased, but the statistical relationship was not significant (p = 0.32). The results showed that the religiosity and spirituality of pregnant women have relieving effects on postpartum pain. Therefore, more attention to the spiritual dimension of human existence and planning to improve it using prayer therapy, dhikr, and meditation is suggested as a strategy to deal with the fear of pain and childbirth and reduce psychological and physical changes before and after childbirth. These findings apply to women with ectopic pregnancies in Iran.

Moxibustion for uterine contraction pain: A protocol for systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Uterine contraction pain is a common postpartum condition that often plagues mothers and can interfere with feeding and normal life for young children. Many investigations have demonstrated that moxibustion has certain advantages in the treatment of uterine contraction pain, but the effectiveness, safety, and advantages of various methods have not been confirmed by high-quality meta-analyses. This study will conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the safety and effectiveness in moxibustion, in order to provide a reference for further clinical treatment for uterine contraction pain.

METHODS

Nine electronic databases, including PubMed, Medline, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, Chinese Biomedical Literature Database, Chinese Scientific Journal Database, Wan-Fang Database and 1 clinical trial register platforms: ClinicalTrials.gov (www.ClinicalTrials.gov/) will be searched using English and Chinese search strategies. All eligible studies are randomized controlled trials of moxibustion treatment for uterine contraction pain, published on or before December 31, 2021. The screening process will be developed by 2 independent authors, and network meta-analysis will be performed with RevMan (V5.3) software.

RESULTS

This study will provide a high-quality review that will be used to evaluate the safety and effectiveness of moxibustion for the treatment of uterine contraction pain.

CONCLUSION

The results of this study will provide evidence to support whether moxibustion can effectively intervene in uterine contraction pain.

Does TENS Reduce the Intensity of Acute and Chronic Pain? A Comprehensive Appraisal of the Characteristics and Outcomes of 169 Reviews and 49 Meta-Analyses

Background and Objectives: Uncertainty about the clinical efficacy of transcutaneous electric nerve stimulation (TENS) to alleviate pain spans half a century. There has been no attempt to synthesise the entire body of systematic review evidence. The aim of this comprehensive review was to critically appraise the characteristics and outcomes of systematic reviews evaluating the clinical efficacy of TENS for any type of acute and chronic pain in adults. Materials and Methods: We searched electronic databases for full reports of systematic reviews of studies, overviews of systematic reviews, and hybrid reviews that evaluated the efficacy of TENS for any type of clinical pain in adults. We screened reports against eligibility criteria and extracted data related to the characteristics and outcomes of the review, including effect size estimates. We conducted a descriptive analysis of extracted data. Results: We included 169 reviews consisting of eight overviews, seven hybrid reviews and 154 systematic reviews with 49 meta-analyses. A tally of authors' conclusions found a tendency toward benefits from TENS in 69/169 reviews, no benefits in 13/169 reviews, and inconclusive evidence in 87/169 reviews. Only three meta-analyses pooled sufficient data to have confidence in the effect size estimate (i.e., pooled analysis of >500 events). Lower pain intensity was found during TENS compared with control for chronic musculoskeletal pain and labour pain, and lower analgesic consumption was found post-surgery during TENS. The appraisal revealed repeated shortcomings in RCTs that have hindered confident judgements about efficacy, resulting in stagnation of evidence. Conclusions: Our appraisal reveals examples of meta-analyses with 'sufficient data' demonstrating benefit. There were no examples of meta-analyses with 'sufficient data' demonstrating no benefit. Therefore, we recommend that TENS should be considered as a treatment option. The considerable quantity of reviews with 'insufficient data' and meaningless findings have clouded the issue of efficacy. We offer solutions to these issues going forward.

The effectiveness and safety of complementary health approaches to managing postpartum pain: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

Women experience pain from a number of causes during the postpartum period. Although pharmacological pain relief has shown to be effective, the efficacy of non-pharmacological methods of pain relief will be of interest to breastfeeding women. The aim of this systematic review was to examine the efficacy and safety of complementary approaches to manage postpartum pain.

Methods

A search of English language databases from their inception to 2020 was undertaken for randomised controlled trials and included primiparous and multiparous women who experienced postpartum pain up to two weeks post birth. The primary outcome was pain. The risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane risk of bias tool.

Results

Thirty trials were included in the review, 25 trials (2,413 women) were included in the meta-analysis. Two trials of massage found a reduction in pain following caesarean birth within the first 24 h post birth (MD -2.64, 95–2.82 to -2.46, 184 women, I² 0%), and at seven days postpartum (MD -1.91, 95%CI -2.42 to -1.40, 2 trials, 120 women I² 37%). Two trials conducted with women receiving an episiotomy found reduction in perineal pain from herbal ointments within 24 h (MD -1.33, 95% CI -.96 to -0.70, 221 women) and at 14 days postpartum (MD -0.74, 95% CI -1.02 to -0.47, 4 trials). Few trials reported on safety, few trials were at an overall low risk of bias, and overall the quality of evidence was very low.

Conclusion

Further high quality trials are needed to determine the safety and effectiveness of herbal ointment and massage during the early postpartum period.

Oral non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (single dose) for perineal pain in the early postpartum period

BACKGROUND

Many women experience perineal pain after childbirth, especially after having sustained perineal trauma. Perineal pain-management strategies are an important part of postnatal care. Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are a commonly-used type of medication in the management of postpartum pain, and their effectiveness and safety should be assessed. This is an update of a review first published in 2016.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the effectiveness of a single dose of an oral NSAID for relief of acute perineal pain in the early postpartum period.

SEARCH METHODS

For this update, we searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register, ClinicalTrials.gov, the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) (9 December 2019), OpenSIGLE and ProQuest Dissertations and Theses (28 February 2020), and reference lists of retrieved studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) assessing a single dose of a NSAID versus a single dose of placebo, paracetamol or another NSAID for women with perineal pain in the early postpartum period. We excluded quasi-RCTs and cross-over trials. We included papers in abstract format only if they had sufficient information to determine that they met the review's prespecified inclusion criteria.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors (FW and VS) independently assessed all identified papers for inclusion and risks of bias, resolving any discrepancies through discussion. Two review authors independently conducted data extraction, including calculations of pain relief scores, and checked it for accuracy. We assessed the certainty of the evidence using the GRADE approach.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 35 studies examining 16 different NSAIDs and involving 5136 women (none were breastfeeding). Studies were published between 1967 and 2013. Risk of bias due to random sequence generation, allocation concealment and blinding of outcome assessors was generally unclearly to poorly reported, but participants and caregivers were blinded, and outcome data were generally complete. We downgraded the certainty of evidence due to risk of bias, suspected publication bias, and imprecision for small numbers of participants. NSAID versus placebo Compared to women who receive a placebo, more women who receive a single-dose NSAID may achieve adequate pain relief at four hours (risk ratio (RR) 1.91, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.64 to 2.23; 10 studies, 1573 women; low-certainty evidence) and at six hours (RR 1.92, 95% CI 1.69 to 2.17; 17 studies, 2079 women; very low-certainty evidence), although we are less certain about the effects at six hours. At four hours after administration, women who receive a NSAID are probably less likely to need additional analgesia compared to women who receive placebo (RR 0.39, 95% CI 0.26 to 0.58; 4 studies, 486 women; moderate-certainty evidence) and may be less likely to need additional analgesia at six hours after initial administration, although the evidence was less certain at six hours (RR 0.32, 95% CI 0.26 to 0.40; 10 studies, 1012 women; very low-certainty evidence). One study reported that no adverse events were observed at four hours post-administration (90 women). There may be little or no difference in maternal adverse effects between NSAIDs and placebo at six hours post-administration (RR 1.38, 95% CI 0.71 to 2.70; 13 studies, 1388 women; low-certainty evidence). Fourteen maternal adverse effects were reported in the NSAID group (drowsiness (5), abdominal discomfort (2), weakness (1), dizziness (2), headache (2), moderate epigastralgia (1), not specified (1)) and eight in the placebo group (drowsiness (2), light-headedness (1), nausea (1), backache (1), dizziness (1), epigastric pain (1), not specified (1)), although not all studies assessed adverse effects. Neonatal adverse effects were not assessed in any of the studies. NSAID versus paracetamol NSAIDs may lead to more women achieving adequate pain relief at four hours, compared with paracetamol (RR 1.54, 95% CI 1.07 to 2.22; 3 studies, 342 women; low-certainty evidence). We are uncertain if there is any difference in adequate pain relief between NSAIDs and paracetamol at six hours post-administration (RR 1.82, 95% CI 0.61 to 5.47; 2 studies, 99 women; very low-certainty evidence) or in the need for additional analgesia at four hours (RR 0.55, 95% CI 0.27 to 1.13; 1 study, 73 women; very low-certainty evidence). NSAIDs may reduce the risk of requiring additional analgesia at six hours compared with paracetamol (RR 0.28, 95% CI 0.12 to 0.67; 1 study, 59 women; low-certainty evidence). One study reported that no maternal adverse effects were observed at four hours post-administration (210 women). Six hours post-administration, we are uncertain if there is any difference between groups in the number of maternal adverse effects (RR 0.74, 95% CI 0.27 to 2.08; 3 studies, 300 women; very low-certainty evidence), with one case of pruritis in the NSAID group and one case of sleepiness in the paracetamol group. Neonatal adverse effects were not assessed in any of the included studies. Comparisons of different NSAIDs or doses did not demonstrate any differences in effectiveness for any primary outcome measures; however, few data were available on some NSAIDs. None of the included studies reported on any of this review's secondary outcomes.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

In women who are not breastfeeding and who sustained perineal trauma, NSAIDs (compared to placebo or paracetamol) may provide greater pain relief for acute postpartum perineal pain and fewer women need additional analgesia, but uncertainty remains, as the evidence is rated as low- or very low-certainty. The risk of bias was unclear for many studies, adverse effects were often not assessed and breastfeeding women were not included. While this review provides some indication of the likely effect, there is uncertainty in our conclusions. The main reasons for downgrading were the inclusion of studies at high risk of bias and inconsistency in the findings of individual studies. Future studies could examine NSAIDs' adverse effects, including neonatal effects and the compatibility of NSAIDs with breastfeeding, and could assess other secondary outcomes. Future research could consider women with and without perineal trauma, including perineal tears. High-quality studies could be conducted to further assess the efficacy of NSAIDs versus paracetamol and the efficacy of multimodal treatments.