Use of Abdominal Binders for Postoperative Pain After Gastrointestinal Surgery: An Integrative Review

The effect of mobilization protocol on mobilization start time and patient care outcomes in patients undergoing abdominal surgery

AIM

To evaluate the effect of mobilization protocol on mobilization start time, maintenance of mobilization and patient care outcomes in patients who underwent major abdominal open surgery.

BACKGROUND

Early mobilization in the first 24 hours postoperatively is recommended. Early mobilization is one of the evidence-based, effective nursing interventions that improve patient care outcomes.

DESIGN

A quasi-experimental non-randomised design was used in the study.

METHODS

In the study, the groups were followed sequentially and the data of the control group (n = 21) were collected before the intervention group (n = 21). The patients in the control group were mobilised postoperatively by the nurses according to the decision of the nurse and physician in the intensive care unit (ICU) on the day of the operation. There was no standard protocol for mobilization in the ICU. Mobilization training was given to the patients in the intervention group by the researcher nurse the evening before the operation, and a mobilization protocol was applied on the 0th postoperative day. Data on patient care outcomes were collected until the day when the patient was discharged from the hospital. The TREND checklist was followed.

RESULTS

According to the postoperative comparison of the patients in the intervention group to those in the control group, patients in the intervention group started mobilization earlier after admission in intensive care unit (6.22 ± 1.95 hours versus 12.21 ± 3.76 hours), had higher postoperative 0^th -day total mobilization time (128 minutes versus 34 minutes), had a shorter passage of flatus time and length of intensive care unit and hospital stay and had higher sleep quality and satisfaction scores.

CONCLUSIONS

The structured mobilization protocol is effective in the management of early mobilization and improvement of patient care outcomes.

RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE

mobilization protocols ensure that the mobilization process is maintained effectively.

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.

Outcome of abdominal binder in midline abdominal wound Dehiscence in terms of pain, psychological satisfaction and need for reclosure

Objective

To assess the role of abdominal binder in patients with midline wound dehiscence after elective or emergency laparotomy in terms of pain, psychological satisfaction and need for reclosure.

Methods

It was a comparative study done at EAST Surgical Ward of Mayo Hospital, Lahore from 1^st January 2018 to 31^st December 2019. One hundred and sixty-two (162) patients were included in this study with post-operative midline abdominal wound dehiscence and after informed consent by consecutive non probability sampling technique. Patients were divided into two groups by lottery method into eighty-one patients each. Group-A included patients where abdominal binder was applied and Group-B included patients without abdominal binder. In both groups pain score, psychological satisfaction and need for reclosure was assessed and compared.

Results

Patients with abdominal binder shows significantly less pain (P value =0.000) and more psychological satisfaction (P value = 0.000) as compared to the patients where abdominal binder was not used. However, there was no difference in reducing the need for reclosure in patients who use abdominal binder (P value = 0.063).

Conclusion

Although abdominal binder helps in reducing the pain and improving the psychological satisfaction in patients with midline abdominal wound dehiscence yet it doesn't help in healing of wound and reclosure of the dehisced abdominal wound is needed.

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.

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.

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.