Randomized controlled trial of abdominal binders for postoperative pain, distress, and blood loss after cesarean delivery

Is There a Clinical Benefit of Abdominal Binders After Abdominal Surgery: A Systematic Literature Review

Background

The incidence of incisional hernia following laparotomy varies between 2% and 30%. It is well-established that the need to control several risk factors prior to surgery exists (weight loss before surgery, diabetes control). Postoperative abdominal binder (AB) is often recommended by surgeons, yet evidence on this topic is lacking. The aim of this review was to present current evidence on the use of abdominal binders after abdominal surgery.

Material and Methods

A comprehensive literature review between January and May 2024 was conducted using a range of search engines, including PubMed, Science Direct, EMBASE, Google Scholar, and Google. The following keywords were used: "abdominal binder," "abdominal support," "hernia," "girdle and hernia," "compression belt and hernia," and "abdominal support and hernia."

Results

Sixteen articles were selected for further analysis (7 RCTs, 6 non-RCTs and 3 meta-analyses). None of the studies reported a reduction in the incidence of abdominal dehiscence or incisional hernia. Postoperative use of the AB has been shown to reduce postoperative discomfort and pain for a limited period of up to 48-72 h. There was no discernible difference in the incidence of surgical site complications.

Conclusion

The current evidence indicates that the use of AB following abdominal surgery is safe, although no benefit has been established (except 48 h after surgery). AB may enhance comfort in select patients; however, further studies are necessary to justify their routine use, with a particular focus on the medical and economic implications.

Effect of Using Silver Nylon Dressings on Postoperative Pain after Cesarean Delivery

OBJECTIVE

Silver dressings have been associated with a decrease in postoperative pain in selected populations, but it is unknown if the benefit can be observed after cesarean deliveries. We sought to evaluate the impact of silver nylon dressings in reducing postoperative pain after cesarean delivery.

STUDY DESIGN

A secondary analysis of data from a blinded randomized clinical trial of women undergoing cesarean delivery scheduled and unscheduled at a single site was conducted. Women were recruited for participation from a single site and randomized to a silver nylon dressing or an identical-appearing gauze wound dressing. Wounds were evaluated in the outpatient clinic at 1 and 6 weeks after delivery and patient responded to the modified patient scar assessment scale. The primary outcome of this analysis was inpatient opioid and nonopioid analgesic dispensed. The secondary outcome was patient-reported pain at the 1- and 6-week postpartum visits. Data were analyzed using chi-square test, Student's t-test, Fisher's exact test, Wilcoxon-Mann-Whitney's test, and logistic regression where appropriate. A p-value of < 0.05 was considered significant.

RESULTS

Among the 649 participants, women allocated to the silver nylon dressing group, when compared with the gauze group, were similar in the amount of dispensed opioid and nonopioid analgesic medications (morphine equivalent milligrams of opioids dispensed [82.5 vs. 90 mg, p = 0.74], intravenous nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) [120 vs. 120 mg, p = 0.55], and oral NSAIDs [4,800 vs. 5,600 mg in the gauze group, p = 0.65]). After adjusting for confounding variables, postoperative wound infection (adjusted odds ratio [aOR]: 11.70; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 4.51-30.31) at 1-week postoperative and again at 6-week postoperative (aOR: 5.59; 95% CI: 1.03-30.31) but not gauze dressing was associated with patient-reported postoperative pain.

CONCLUSION

Among women undergoing cesarean delivery, silver nylon dressing was not associated with a reduction in postoperative pain.

KEY POINTS

· Silver dressings showed no decrease in pain medications.. · Wound infection is associated with pain postoperatively.. · Silver dressings did not reduce postoperative pain..

Post-cesarean section analgesia

Worldwide, the most performed surgical intervention is cesarean section. Hence, post-cesarean pain is a common problem with significant health and economic impact on the individual patient and society. Adequate treatment of post-cesarean pain is necessary to facilitate enhanced recovery, improve neonatal outcome by improving breastfeeding success and bonding between mother and child, and reduce pain-induced side effects. Therefore, optimal pain relief is important, but in the obstetric population, this is often complex due to the interplay of mother and neonate. To facilitate recovery and temper the side effects of potent analgesic drugs such as opioids, multimodal analgesia is currently advocated, and clear international guidelines and recommendations have recently been described. In the present overview, we will discuss the most recent guidelines and evaluate various analgesic interventions.

Prevalence of Planned Abdominal Binder Use after Vaginal Delivery

OBJECTIVES

Pregnancy and vaginal delivery are risk factors for pelvic floor dysfunction. Abdominal binder use may increase intraabdominal pressure, affecting pelvic floor healing or function in recently traumatized postpartum pelvic floor muscle. This study assesses the prevalence of postpartum abdominal binder use, timing, and reasons for use.

METHODS

In this cross-sectional observational survey study, women who underwent a vaginal delivery at our institution were enrolled. Participants were excluded if they did not speak Spanish or English. Participants were recruited on the postpartum unit. Data were deidentified and analyzed as appropriate for each variable.

RESULTS

In total, 673 surveys were completed. Seven were excluded because they had cesarean deliveries. The average age was 26 years. Median gravidity and parity were 2 and 2. In total, 549 women (82%) planned to wear an abdominal binder postpartum. In all, 335 women provided a specific time when they would start use: 240 women (71%) would start at ≤2 days postpartum, 60 women (18%) would start at 3 to 7 days postpartum, and 35 women (11%) would start after 1 week postpartum. Common reasons reported for use included appearance, support, pain, swelling, weight loss, and recommendation.

CONCLUSIONS

Among women delivering at our institution, planned abdominal binder use postvaginal delivery is common. The reasons cited include health and desire to return to prior body shape. The effects of using an abdominal binder in the postpartum period are unknown. More research is needed to better elucidate how increased postpartum intraabdominal pressure affects healing in traumatized pelvic floor muscles.

Pharmacologic Stepwise Multimodal Approach for Postpartum Pain Management: ACOG Clinical Consensus No. 1

SUMMARY

Pain in the postpartum period is common and considered by many individuals to be both problematic and persistent (1). Pain can interfere with individuals' ability to care for themselves and their infants, and untreated pain is associated with risk of greater opioid use, postpartum depression, and development of persistent pain (2). Clinicians should therefore be skilled in individualized management of postpartum pain. Though no formal time-based definition of postpartum pain exists, the recommendations presented here provide a framework for management of acute perineal, uterine, and incisional pain. This Clinical Consensus document was developed using an a priori protocol in conjunction with the authors listed. This document has been revised to incorporate more recent evidence regarding postpartum pain.

Effect of abdominal binder after laparoscopic cholecystectomy on enhanced recovery: a randomized controlled trialcontrolled trial

Purpose

The purpose of this randomized controlled trial was to compare the effects of abdominal binder after laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

Methods

From August to December 2020, 66 patients who were set to undergo cholecystectomy were selected for a prospective trial at Kangbuk Samsung Hospital, Seoul, Republic of Korea, and their clinical characteristics and postoperative surgical outcomes were evaluated. Among 66 patients, 33 patients belong to the abdominal binder group and the other 33 patients belong to the control group.

Results

The average hospital stay was 2.46 ± 1.29 days, and was not significantly different between the two groups. The average postoperative pain score (visual analogue scale, 0–10) 12, 24, and 48 hours after surgery were not significantly different. However, the degree of comfort score was significantly higher for the control group patients (2.56 vs. 3.33, p < 0.001). Time to the first ambulation, walking ability, return of bowel function, time to full diet resumption, and the numbers of analgesics and antiemetics administered were not significantly different between the two groups.

Conclusion

No postoperative recovery benefit and no reduction in hospital stay was found in patients who used an abdominal binder while undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Statistically, between the group that used the binder and the one that did not, no significant differences in surgical outcome nor postoperative outcome were observed. The only exception was that the degree of comfort score was significantly higher in the control group. Therefore, in terms of patient benefit and convenience, wearing an abdominal binder after laparoscopic cholecystectomy is not recommended.

Effect of Elastic Abdominal Binder on Pain and Functional Recovery Following Gynecologic Cancer Surgery: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Background and Objectives: Clinicians have been using elastic abdominal binder for stabilizing incision site after major abdominal surgery. However, the benefits of that practice have never been formally assessed. The aim of this study was to examine the effects of the use of elastic abdominal binder on postoperative pain and recovery of gynecologic cancer patients. Materials and Methods: One-hundred and nine women diagnosed with cervical, endometrial, or ovarian cancer, who underwent open abdominal surgery were assigned randomly into two groups: intervention (56 patients) and control (53 patients). The women in the intervention group applied abdominal binder from postoperative day 1. For the control group, the women did not wear the binder or similar devices. The primary outcomes were pain and functional recovery. Subgroup analysis on participants age ≥ 50 was also performed. Results: For the entire study cohort, the baseline, postoperative day 1, and postoperative day 2 pain scores in the intervention group were significantly lower than the control group. However, there was no significant difference between the groups for postoperative day 3 pain score and for the change in pain scores from the baseline value. Of note, the age ≥ 50 subgroup represented a more balanced cohort with comparable baseline pain scores between the study groups. For this population, the pain scores for postoperative day 1–3 were significantly lower in the intervention group. The intervention group had a longer six-minute walking distance on postoperative day 3 with a trend toward a smaller difference in the day 3 distance from the baseline. Conclusions: The potential benefits of abdominal binder use in reducing postoperative pain and improving functional recovery after open gynecologic cancer surgery could be demonstrated only in those age ≥ 50.

The efficacy of abdominal binders in reducing postoperative pain and distress after cesarean delivery: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the efficacy of abdominal binders in reducing postoperative pain, patient distress and surgical postoperative sequelae after cesarean delivery (CD).

METHODS

A comprehensive search in electronic databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane Central) was performed up to February 2021. Selection criteria included randomized clinical trials investigating the application or not of abdominal binder after CD. The primary outcome was postoperative pain, measured using the visual analog scale (VAS) pain score. Secondary outcomes were divided into short- and long-term postoperative outcomes, including patient distress, need for additional pain medications, time to mobilization, return to normal daily activities, surgical site infection, fascial dehiscence or incisional hernia, and rectus abdominis diastasis. The summary measures were reported as mean difference with 95 % confidence intervals (CI) using the random effects model of DerSimonian and Laird. An I² (Higgins I²) value of greater than 0% was used to identify heterogeneity.

RESULTS

Four RCTs involving 601 women were included for meta-analysis: 310 (51.6 %) were randomized to the abdominal binder and 291 (48.4 %) to no abdominal binder group. There was no statistically significant difference between the two groups for VAS score either at 24 h (MD -0.97, 95 % CI -2.23 to 0.30; p = 0.13) and at 48 h (MD -0.30, 95 % CI -0.71 to 0.11; p = 0.15). Conversely, there was a significant reduction in postoperative distress (SDS) both at 24 h (MD -2.23, 95 % CI -3.77 to -0.70; p = 0.004) and 48 h (MD -2.37, 95 % CI -3.86 to -0.87; p = 0.002).

CONCLUSION

The present meta-analysis shows that the use of abdominal binders after CD significantly reduces patient distress.

Effects of abdominal binders on postoperative pain and functional recovery: a systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to assess the effectiveness of abdominal binders (ABs) on postoperative pain and functional recovery in patients receiving abdominal surgery.

METHODS

The Pubmed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and PEDro databases were searched for clinical trials published up to November 30, 2019. Randomized controlled trials that compared the effects of wearing an AB to not wearing an AB in participants after abdominal surgery were included. The primary outcomes were pain, pulmonary function, and physical function, as assessed by the visual analog scale (VAS) score, a spirometry device, and the 6-min walk test (6MWT), respectively. The registration number of this review in PROSPERO is CRD42020165303.

RESULTS

Fourteen trials involving 1317 participants were included. Pooled estimates for the VAS score and the 6MWT showed significant differences between the AB group and the control group, especially on the fourth day following surgery (Mean Difference (MD) = -2.82, 95% Confidence Interval (CI) -3.41 to -2.22, P < 0.00001; MD = 50.97 m, 95% CI 39.99 to 61.95 m, P < 0.00001). However, no significant differences were found in pulmonary function (forced vital capacity (FVC): MD = 0.01, 95% CI -0.29 to -0.32, P = 0.94; forced expiratory volume during 1 s (FEV1): MD = -0.05; 95% CI -0.24 to 0.14; p = 0.63; FEV1/FVC: MD = 3.14, 95% CI -2.78 to 9.06, P = 0.30).

CONCLUSION

ABs probably improve postoperative pain and physical function, especially on the fourth day or more following abdominal surgery, but they have no effects on pulmonary function.

The effectiveness of the abdominal binder in relieving pain after cesarean delivery: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

Abdominal binder is a non-pharmacological method of relieving pain after surgical procedures.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the effectiveness of the abdominal binder in relieving pain and distress scores after cesarean delivery (CD).

SEARCH STRATEGY

The following terms were searched: cesarean section, cesarean, caesarean, abdominal deliveries, C-section, abdominal delivery, abdominal binding, binder, and abdominal binder.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) with patients undergoing CD receiving an abdominal binder compared with non-users of the abdominal binder.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Five electronic databases were searched until November 2019. Records were screened for eligibility. Data were extracted independently and analyzed. The main outcomes were pain and distress scores.

RESULTS

The final analysis included six RCTs. Overall effect estimate favored the abdominal binder group over the control group in the following outcomes: VAS pain scores after 24 h (mean difference [MD] -1.76; 95% confidence interval [CI] -3.14 to -0.39; P = 0.01), VAS scores after 48 h (MD -1.21; 95% CI -1.51 to -0.90; P < 0.001), distress score after 24 h (MD -1.87; 95% CI -3.01 to -0.73; P = 0.001), and distress score after 48 h (MD -1.87; 95% CI -3.07 to -0.67; P = 0.002).

CONCLUSION

The abdominal binder could be an effective, simple, non-pharmacological option of relieving pain and distress after CD.

PROSPECT guideline for elective caesarean section: updated systematic review and procedure-specific postoperative pain management recommendations

Caesarean section is associated with moderate‐to‐severe postoperative pain, which can influence postoperative recovery and patient satisfaction as well as breastfeeding success and mother‐child bonding. The aim of this systematic review was to update the available literature and develop recommendations for optimal pain management after elective caesarean section under neuraxial anaesthesia. A systematic review utilising procedure‐specific postoperative pain management (PROSPECT) methodology was undertaken. Randomised controlled trials published in the English language between 1 May 2014 and 22 October 2020 evaluating the effects of analgesic, anaesthetic and surgical interventions were retrieved from MEDLINE, Embase and Cochrane databases. Studies evaluating pain management for emergency or unplanned operative deliveries or caesarean section performed under general anaesthesia were excluded. A total of 145 studies met the inclusion criteria. For patients undergoing elective caesarean section performed under neuraxial anaesthesia, recommendations include intrathecal morphine 50–100 µg or diamorphine 300 µg administered pre‐operatively; paracetamol; non‐steroidal anti‐inflammatory drugs; and intravenous dexamethasone administered after delivery. If intrathecal opioid was not administered, single‐injection local anaesthetic wound infiltration; continuous wound local anaesthetic infusion; and/or fascial plane blocks such as transversus abdominis plane or quadratus lumborum blocks are recommended. The postoperative regimen should include regular paracetamol and non‐steroidal anti‐inflammatory drugs with opioids used for rescue. The surgical technique should include a Joel‐Cohen incision; non‐closure of the peritoneum; and abdominal binders. Transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation could be used as analgesic adjunct. Some of the interventions, although effective, carry risks, and consequentially were omitted from the recommendations. Some interventions were not recommended due to insufficient, inconsistent or lack of evidence. Of note, these recommendations may not be applicable to unplanned deliveries or caesarean section performed under general anaesthesia.

The Clinical Effects of Abdominal Binder on Abdominal Surgery: A Meta-analysis

Objective. We conducted a meta-analysis to quantitatively evaluate the effects of abdominal binder in abdominal surgeries. Methods. Through literature retrieval in globally recognized databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane Central), trials investigating the application of abdominal binder in abdominal surgeries were systematically reviewed. The main outcomes, namely, 6-minute walk test (6MWT), visual analog scale (VAS) pain score, and symptom distress scale (SDS) score, were pooled to make an overall estimation. I² index was calculated to identify heterogeneity, and sensitivity analysis was performed to validate the stability of main results and explore the source of heterogeneity. A funnel plot and Egger's test were applied to assess publication bias. Results. Ten randomized controlled trials consisting of 968 subjects were ultimately included for the pooled estimation. Abdominal binder significantly increased the distance of 6MWT with standard mean difference (SMD) of .555 (P < .001) and decreased the scores of VAS and SDS with SMD of -.979 (P < .001) and -.716 (P < .001), respectively. Despite of the significant heterogeneity indicated by I² index statistic, the results of sensitivity analysis revealed the reliability of the main conclusions. While we identified no obvious publication bias regarding 6MWT (Egger's test P = .321), it seemed that significant publication biases existed with respect to the estimation of VAS (P < .001) and SDS (P = .006). Conclusion. The current meta-analysis verified that abdominal binder efficiently promoted recovery after abdominal surgeries in terms of facilitating mobilization, alleviating pain, and reducing postoperative distress. More rigorously designed clinical trials with large sample size are expected to further elaborate its clinical value.

Complementary and alternative therapies for post-caesarean pain

BACKGROUND

Pain after caesarean sections (CS) can affect the well-being of the mother and her ability with her newborn. Conventional pain-relieving strategies are often underused because of concerns about the adverse maternal and neonatal effects. Complementary alternative therapies (CAM) may offer an alternative for post-CS pain.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of CAM for post-caesarean pain.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth's Trials Register, LILACS, PEDro, CAMbase, ClinicalTrials.gov and the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) (6 September 2019), and checked the reference lists of retrieved articles.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs), including quasi-RCTs and cluster-RCTs, comparing CAM, alone or associated with other forms of pain relief, versus other treatments or placebo or no treatment, for the treatment of post-CS pain.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently performed study selection, extracted data, assessed risk of bias and assessed the certainty of evidence using GRADE.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 37 studies (3076 women) which investigated eight different CAM therapies for post-CS pain relief. There is substantial heterogeneity among the trials. We downgraded the certainty of evidence due to small numbers of women participating in the trials and to risk of bias related to lack of blinding and inadequate reporting of randomisation processes. None of the trials reported pain at six weeks after discharge. Primary outcomes were pain and adverse effects, reported per intervention below. Secondary outcomes included vital signs, rescue analgesic requirement at six weeks after discharge; all of which were poorly reported, not reported, or we are uncertain as to the effect Acupuncture or acupressure We are very uncertain if acupuncture or acupressure (versus no treatment) or acupuncture or acupressure plus analgesia (versus placebo plus analgesia) has any effect on pain because the quality of evidence is very low. Acupuncture or acupressure plus analgesia (versus analgesia) may reduce pain at 12 hours (standardised mean difference (SMD) -0.28, 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.64 to 0.07; 130 women; 2 studies; low-certainty evidence) and 24 hours (SMD -0.63, 95% CI -0.99 to -0.26; 2 studies; 130 women; low-certainty evidence). It is uncertain whether acupuncture or acupressure (versus no treatment) or acupuncture or acupressure plus analgesia (versus analgesia) has any effect on the risk of adverse effects because the quality of evidence is very low. Aromatherapy Aromatherapy plus analgesia may reduce pain when compared with placebo plus analgesia at 12 hours (mean difference (MD) -2.63 visual analogue scale (VAS), 95% CI -3.48 to -1.77; 3 studies; 360 women; low-certainty evidence) and 24 hours (MD -3.38 VAS, 95% CI -3.85 to -2.91; 1 study; 200 women; low-certainty evidence). We are uncertain if aromatherapy plus analgesia has any effect on adverse effects (anxiety) compared with placebo plus analgesia. Electromagnetic therapy Electromagnetic therapy may reduce pain compared with placebo plus analgesia at 12 hours (MD -8.00, 95% CI -11.65 to -4.35; 1 study; 72 women; low-certainty evidence) and 24 hours (MD -13.00 VAS, 95% CI -17.13 to -8.87; 1 study; 72 women; low-certainty evidence). Massage We identified six studies (651 women), five of which were quasi-RCTs, comparing massage (foot and hand) plus analgesia versus analgesia. All the evidence relating to pain, adverse effects (anxiety), vital signs and rescue analgesic requirement was very low-certainty. Music Music plus analgesia may reduce pain when compared with placebo plus analgesia at one hour (SMD -0.84, 95% CI -1.23 to -0.46; participants = 115; studies = 2; I2 = 0%; low-certainty evidence), 24 hours (MD -1.79, 95% CI -2.67 to -0.91; 1 study; 38 women; low-certainty evidence), and also when compared with analgesia at one hour (MD -2.11, 95% CI -3.11 to -1.10; 1 study; 38 women; low-certainty evidence) and at 24 hours (MD -2.69, 95% CI -3.67 to -1.70; 1 study; 38 women; low-certainty evidence). It is uncertain whether music plus analgesia has any effect on adverse effects (anxiety), when compared with placebo plus analgesia because the quality of evidence is very low. Reiki We are uncertain if Reiki plus analgesia compared with analgesia alone has any effect on pain, adverse effects, vital signs or rescue analgesic requirement because the quality of evidence is very low (one study, 90 women). Relaxation Relaxation may reduce pain compared with standard care at 24 hours (MD -0.53 VAS, 95% CI -1.05 to -0.01; 1 study; 60 women; low-certainty evidence). Transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation TENS (versus no treatment) may reduce pain at one hour (MD -2.26, 95% CI -3.35 to -1.17; 1 study; 40 women; low-certainty evidence). TENS plus analgesia (versus placebo plus analgesia) may reduce pain compared with placebo plus analgesia at one hour (SMD -1.10 VAS, 95% CI -1.37 to -0.82; 3 studies; 238 women; low-certainty evidence) and at 24 hours (MD -0.70 VAS, 95% CI -0.87 to -0.53; 108 women; 1 study; low-certainty evidence). TENS plus analgesia (versus placebo plus analgesia) may reduce heart rate (MD -7.00 bpm, 95% CI -7.63 to -6.37; 108 women; 1 study; low-certainty evidence) and respiratory rate (MD -1.10 brpm, 95% CI -1.26 to -0.94; 108 women; 1 study; low-certainty evidence). We are uncertain if TENS plus analgesia (versus analgesia) has any effect on pain at six hours or 24 hours, or vital signs because the quality of evidence is very low (two studies, 92 women).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Some CAM therapies may help reduce post-CS pain for up to 24 hours. The evidence on adverse events is too uncertain to make any judgements on safety and we have no evidence about the longer-term effects on pain. Since pain control is the most relevant outcome for post-CS women and their clinicians, it is important that future studies of CAM for post-CS pain measure pain as a primary outcome, preferably as the proportion of participants with at least moderate (30%) or substantial (50%) pain relief. Measuring pain as a dichotomous variable would improve the certainty of evidence and it is easy to understand for non-specialists. Future trials also need to be large enough to detect effects on clinical outcomes; measure other important outcomes as listed lin this review, and use validated scales.

A prospective quasi-experimental controlled study evaluating the use of dynamic elastomeric fabric orthoses to manage common postpartum ailments during postnatal care

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the effectiveness of a postnatal dynamic elastomeric fabric orthoses to manage postpartum pain, improve functional capacity and enhance the quality of life arising from postnatal ailments immediately to an 8-week postpartum, compared with patients who did not wear dynamic elastomeric fabric orthoses.

METHOD

A total of 51 postpartum women were recruited (day 0 to 10 days post-delivery) from hospitals and community-based health clinics to participate in a prospective quasi-experimental controlled study using parallel groups without random allocation. The subgroup of the compression shorts group wore SRC recovery shorts and received standard postnatal care. The comparison group received standard postnatal care alone. Wear compliance was monitored throughout the study. Primary outcome measure, Numeric Pain Rating Scale, and secondary outcome measures, Roland Morris Disability Questionnaire, Pelvic Floor Impact Questionnaire-7, and Short Form (SF-36) were assessed fortnightly over 8 weeks for both groups.

RESULTS

The compression shorts group reported a larger reduction in mean (SD) Numeric Pain Rating Scale score (-3.09 (2.20)) from baseline to 8 weeks, compared to the comparison group (-2.00 (1.41)). However, there was insufficient evidence of a statistical difference in Numeric Pain Rating Scale score at 8 weeks when comparing the compression shorts group and comparison group (-1.17; 95%CI: (-2.35, -0.01), R2 = .19, p = .050). The compression shorts group met the wear compliance of the dynamic elastomeric fabric orthoses and reported an average wear of the dynamic elastomeric fabric orthoses as 9 out of 14 days for 11 h per day (SD 4.8 h) between the fortnightly timepoints.

CONCLUSION

The use of dynamic elastomeric fabric orthoses may be considered during postnatal care as a non-pharmacological therapeutic intervention to manage pain resulting from common postpartum ailments. While the dynamic elastomeric fabric orthoses was clinically well accepted by participants with high wearing compliance, future research with larger population samples are needed to enable statistical conclusions on the effectiveness of a dynamic elastomeric fabric orthoses in postnatal care to be made.

REGISTRATION

Trial registration was not required as per the Australian Government Department of Health, Therapeutic Goods Administration.

SLK Triple Therapy Improves Maternal and Fetal Status and Promotes Postpartum Pelvic Floor Function in Chinese Primiparous Women

Background

During pregnancy, appropriate physical activity plays critical roles in maternal and fetal health. This study investigated the effects of Sophrology childbirth-Kegel-Lamaze respiratory training (SLK triple therapy) on maternal and newborn health, pelvic floor function, and quality of life.

Material/Methods

Single-pregnant primiparous women involved in this study were divided into the control group (n=120) and the SLK triple therapy group (n=120). SLK triple therapy was taught to and practiced by the women in the SLK triple therapy group. Data on delivery mode (natural delivery or cesarean section), postpartum complications (postpartum urinary incontinence, postpartum hemorrhage), and birth process were recorded. Apgar scores and body weight of newborns were evaluated. Pelvic floor function, postpartum emotion, and sexual functions were assessed.

Results

Women in the SLK triple therapy group had significantly better natural delivery rate compared to the control group (p<0.05). SLK triple therapy significantly decreased the postpartum urinary incontinence rate and reduced the postpartum hemorrhage rate compared to the control group (p<0.05). Birth process and postpartum hemorrhage volume in the SLK triple therapy group were also significantly lower compared to the control group (p<0.05). Apgar scores were significantly lower and body weights were significantly higher in the SLK triple therapy group compared to the control group (p<0.05). SLK triple therapy significantly improved pelvic floor function compared to the control group (p<0.05). SLK triple therapy significantly decreased SDS scores and enhanced FSFI scores compared to the control group (p<0.05).

Conclusions

SLK triple therapy improved maternal and fetal health by improving pregnancy outcomes, promoting postpartum pelvic floor function, reducing the incidence of depression, and enhancing sexual function. Therefore, SLK triple therapy has great utility in treating primiparous women.

Influence of Abdominal Binder Usage after Cesarean Delivery on Postoperative Mobilization, Pain and Distress: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Objective

The purpose of the present study was to determine the effect of abdominal binder usage on mobilization, postoperative pain, and distress after cesarean delivery.

Materials and Methods

This prospective randomized controlled study was conducted between September 1, 2017 and January 31, 2018 at Bakirkoy Dr. Sadi Konuk Education and Research Hospital, Istanbul, Turkey. A total of 89 women undergoing elective cesarean were randomized to the study (binder, n=45) or control (no binder, n=44) groups. Patients in the study group were fitted with a binder before leaving the operating room. Mobilization (6-minute walk test), postoperative pain (measured by Short-Form McGill Pain Questionnaire and Visual Analog Scale), and perceived distress status of both groups were evaluated within 8^th (first mobilization time), 24^th, and 48^th h of surgery.

Results

We found that the binder group (BG) walked longer than the control group during the 6-minute walking distance test. At the first mobilization time (postoperative 8^th h), the BG (99.4±27.3 m) covered significantly more distance than the control group (81.0±22.2 m) (p=0.001) in the walking distance test. At postoperative 24^th h, the McGill pain score in the BG was significantly lower than that in the control group (p=0.004). For all three test times, the Symptom Distress Scale of the BG was lower than that of the control group (postoperative 8^th h p=0.024, 24^th h p<0.001, and 48^th h p<0.001).

Conclusion

The evidence is consistent with abdominal binder usage after cesarean section decreasing the feeling of distress and increasing mobility.

Use of Abdominal Binders after a Major Abdominal Surgery: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Objective

To compare the effect of abdominal binder versus no binder after major abdominal surgery and cesarean section on various post-operative recovery parameters.

Materials and methods

This is a randomized controlled trial conducted at the Department of General Surgery and Obstetrics, Civil Hospital, Karachi, Pakistan. All those patients aged ≥18 years having abdominal surgery including elective and emergency abdominal surgery and cesarean sections with American Society of Anesthesiologists Class I-III were included in the study. Randomization was done using the sealed envelope method by the principal investigator. The intervention group wore an abdominal binder postoperatively while the control group did not use it. Mobilization and the pain status of both groups were evaluated on the first, fourth, and seventh days after surgery.

Results

Primary outcome variables were mobility, assessed via 6-minute walk test (6MWT) and postoperative pain, evaluated via visual analogue scale. There was no statistically significant difference in the 6MWT distance before (p = 0.278) and on postoperative day one of the surgery (p = 0.0762). However, the difference was significant on fourth (p < 0.001) and seventh day (p value < 0.001). With regards to the pain status, patients in the binder group reported significantly less postoperative pain on first, fourth, and seventh (p value < 0.001) day compared to the non-binder group.

Conclusion

The use of abdominal binder postoperatively significantly reduced pain and improved mobility in both obstetric and surgery patients.

Effect of elastic abdominal binder on pain and functional recovery after caesarean delivery: a randomised controlled trial

The Elastic abdominal binder has been widely employed by clinicians for pain relief, wound complications prevention, improved pulmonary function, and stabilisation. However, these proposed benefits have not been properly examined in women following caesarean delivery. We aimed to examine the effects of post-caesarean elastic abdominal binder use on recovery by comparing post-operative pain, mobility and quality of life. Pregnant women undergoing caesarean delivery were randomly assigned into two groups: abdominal binder (90 patients) and control (90 patients). The primary outcomes included the daily visual analogue scale pain scores and the distance from the six-minute walk test. Baseline characteristics were similar between the groups. There was no significant difference in pain scores and six-minute walking distance between the study groups. There was no significant between-group difference in quality-of-life dimensions, overall health status, and post-operative complication. The positive effects of elastic abdominal binder use following caesarean delivery could not be demonstrated in this study.Impact statementWhat is already known on this subject? Elastic abdominal binder is commonly used after laparotomy to support incision. There was evidence to support the benefit of abdominal binder in reducing psychological distress during the first five days following laparotomy for other indications. From limited number of studies addressing caesarean section, the evidence for the benefits of the binder on pain, symptom distress, and change in haemoglobin level is conflicting.What do the results of this study add? In contrast to the results of the previous study, the beneficial effects of abdominal binder on pain reduction, functional recovery, and quality of life following caesarean delivery could not be demonstrated in this study.What are the implications of these findings for clinical practice and/or further research? The use of elastic abdominal binder after caesarean delivery is not associated with reduction of postoperative pain, faster functional recovery, and improved quality of life in our population. Further studies in other population with different characteristics may be worthwhile.

Effectiveness, Feasibility, and Acceptability of Dynamic Elastomeric Fabric Orthoses (DEFO) for Managing Pain, Functional Capacity, and Quality of Life during Prenatal and Postnatal Care: A Systematic Review

Conservative interventions for addressing prenatal and postnatal ailments have been described in the research literature. Research results indicated that maternity support belts assist with reducing pain and other symptoms in these phases; however, compliance in wearing maternity support belts is poor. To combat poor compliance, commercial manufacturers designed dynamic elastomeric fabric orthoses (DEFO)/compression garments that target prenatal and postnatal ailments. This systematic review aimed to identify, critically appraise, and synthesize key findings on the effectiveness, the feasibility, and the acceptability of using DEFO to manage ailments during pre-natal and postnatal phases of care. Electronic databases were systematically searched to identify relevant studies, resulting in 17 studies that met the eligibility criteria. There were variations in DEFO descriptors, including hosiery, support belts, abdominal binders and more, making it difficult to compare findings from the research articles regarding value of DEFO during prenatal and/or postnatal phases. A meta-synthesis of empirical research findings suggests wearing DEFOs during pregnancy has a significant desirable effect for managing pain and improving functional capacity. Further research is required to investigate the use of DEFOs for managing pain in the postnatal period and improving quality life during prenatal and postnatal care.

A Randomized Controlled Trial for Abdominal Binder Use after Laparoendoscopic Single-Site Surgery

STUDY OBJECTIVE

To compare postoperative pain in patients using an abdominal binder with a control group after laparoendoscopic single-site (LESS) surgery.

DESIGN

A randomized controlled trial (Canadian Task Force classification level 1).

SETTING

An academic gynecologic surgeon's practice.

PATIENTS

Private patients undergoing surgery performed by a fellowship-trained minimally invasive gynecologic surgeon between April 2016 and April 2017.

INTERVENTIONS

Ninety total patients were selected for this study, with 60 randomized to receive an abdominal binder after surgery and 30 patients randomized to the control group without a binder.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

Using a 10-point verbal analog scale, patients recorded pain levels for 3 weeks postoperatively on a variety of measures, including overall and incisional pain. They recorded results on postoperative days 0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 7, 14, and 21. On average, the association between time and the overall pain score did not differ with binder use (p = .37). The overall pain decreases significantly over time (p < .001). After adjusting for time, the overall pain score differed significantly by binder status (p = .04). Those without a binder reported an average pain score that was 1.13 (standard deviation = 0.55) points higher than those with a binder across the first week.

CONCLUSION

The results suggest that abdominal binder use after LESS surgery may be beneficial in reducing postoperative pain in the first week. Results from this study can provide feasibility data for future studies.