Effect of P-6 acupressure on prevention of nausea and vomiting after epidural morphine for post-cesarean section pain relief

The Application of Acupuncture Therapy for Postoperative Pain Over the Past 20 Years: A Bibliometric Analysis

Purpose

The purpose of this study is to analyze and visualize the research trends on acupuncture therapy for postoperative pain over the past 20 years to identify hotspots and frontiers, and provide new research ideas.

Methods

A search of the Web of Science database, with a time frame of 2001–01-01 to 2022–02-28, was conducted to collect literatures related to acupuncture therapy for postoperative pain. A bibliometric analysis and visualization of results was performed using CiteSpace software for the volume of annual publications, journals, countries, institutions, authors, keywords, and references.

Results

A total of 840 literatures were eventually included in the analysis. The number of publications has fluctuated upwards each year over the past 20 years and reached a peak in the latest three years. Evidence-Based Complementary and Alternative Medicine was the journal with the most relevant publications and Pain was the most frequently cited journal. The country with the highest volume of publications was China, and the USA contributed most to the international collaboration. The most prolific and influential authors were Inhyunk Ha and Han JS respectively. The most frequent keyword was “acupuncture”. References with highest frequency or centrality were both systematic evaluations focusing on different acupuncture therapies for postoperative pain relief.

Conclusion

The field of acupuncture therapy for postoperative pain is currently in a period of high growth. China and the USA have made the largest contribution to the volume of publications. The most influential institutions and authors are mainly from China and South Korea. The overall collaborative network needs to be strengthened. Electroacupuncture and auricular acupuncture (therapeutic techniques), low back surgery (types of surgery), and “postoperative pain, nausea and vomiting” are research hotspots in this field. Improvement of postoperative life quality, proof of clinical efficacy and evidence-based evaluation are the current research trends and frontiers.

Acupressure and Acupuncture Use in the Peripartum Period

Acupuncture is the procedure of inserting fine needles into specific points on the body for therapeutic purposes. Acupuncture and its derivatives (acupressure, moxibustion, electroacupuncture, and transcutaneous electric nerve stimulation on acupoints) are a popular treatment choice in the peripartum period (32 wk' gestation to 14 d postdelivery). There is substantial research evidence supporting acupuncture and its derivatives in the peripartum period. Benefits in the use of acupressure to reduce labor pain intensity and a reduction in the duration of labor with acupressure have been found. There is mixed evidence for the use of both moxibustion and moxibustion with acupuncture for noncephalic presentations and for acupressure for reducing intraoperative nausea. There is limited evidence available on acupuncture use in women with high-risk pregnancies or multifetal gestations.

Interventions for preventing nausea and vomiting in women undergoing regional anaesthesia for caesarean section

BACKGROUND

Nausea and vomiting are distressing symptoms which are experienced commonly during caesarean section under regional anaesthesia and in the postoperative period.  OBJECTIVES: To assess the efficacy of pharmacological and non-pharmacological interventions versus placebo or no intervention given prophylactically to prevent nausea and vomiting in women undergoing regional anaesthesia for caesarean section.

SEARCH METHODS

For this update, we searched Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth's Trials Register, ClinicalTrials.gov and the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) (16 April 2020), and reference lists of retrieved studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of studies and conference abstracts, and excluded quasi-RCTs and cross-over studies.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Review authors independently assessed the studies for inclusion, assessed risk of bias and carried out data extraction. Our primary outcomes are intraoperative and postoperative nausea and vomiting. Data entry was checked. Two review authors independently assessed the certainty of the evidence using the GRADE approach.

MAIN RESULTS

Eighty-four studies (involving 10,990 women) met our inclusion criteria. Sixty-nine studies, involving 8928 women, contributed data. Most studies involved women undergoing elective caesarean section. Many studies were small with unclear risk of bias and sometimes few events. The overall certainty of the evidence assessed using GRADE was moderate to very low. 5-HT3 antagonists: We found intraoperative nausea may be reduced by 5-HT3 antagonists (average risk ratio (aRR) 0.55, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.42 to 0.71, 12 studies, 1419 women, low-certainty evidence). There may be a reduction in intraoperative vomiting but the evidence is very uncertain (aRR 0.46, 95% CI 0.29 to 0.73, 11 studies, 1414 women, very low-certainty evidence). There is probably a reduction in postoperative nausea (aRR 0.40, 95% CI 0.30 to 0.54, 10 studies, 1340 women, moderate-certainty evidence), and these drugs may show a reduction in postoperative vomiting (aRR 0.47, 95% CI 0.31 to 0.69, 10 studies, 1450 women, low-certainty evidence). Dopamine antagonists: We found dopamine antagonists may reduce intraoperative nausea but the evidence is very uncertain (aRR 0.38, 95% CI 0.27 to 0.52, 15 studies, 1180 women, very low-certainty evidence). Dopamine antagonists may reduce intraoperative vomiting (aRR 0.41, 95% CI 0.28 to 0.60, 12 studies, 942 women, low-certainty evidence) and postoperative nausea (aRR 0.61, 95% CI 0.48 to 0.79, 7 studies, 601 women, low-certainty evidence). We are uncertain if dopamine antagonists reduce postoperative vomiting (aRR 0.63, 95% CI 0.44 to 0.92, 9 studies, 860 women, very low-certainty evidence). Corticosteroids (steroids): We are uncertain if intraoperative nausea is reduced by corticosteroids (aRR 0.56, 95% CI 0.37 to 0.83, 6 studies, 609 women, very low-certainty evidence) similarly for intraoperative vomiting (aRR 0.52, 95% CI 0.31 to 0.87, 6 studies, 609 women, very low-certainty evidence). Corticosteroids probably reduce postoperative nausea (aRR 0.59, 95% CI 0.49 to 0.73, 6 studies, 733 women, moderate-certainty evidence), and may reduce postoperative vomiting (aRR 0.68, 95% CI 0.49 to 0.95, 7 studies, 793 women, low-certainty evidence). Antihistamines: Antihistamines may have little to no effect on intraoperative nausea (RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.47 to 2.11, 1 study, 149 women, very low-certainty evidence) or intraoperative vomiting (no events in the one study of 149 women). Antihistamines may reduce postoperative nausea (aRR 0.44, 95% CI 0.30 to 0.64, 4 studies, 514 women, low-certainty evidence), however, we are uncertain whether antihistamines reduce postoperative vomiting (average RR 0.48, 95% CI 0.29 to 0.81, 3 studies, 333 women, very low-certainty evidence). Anticholinergics: Anticholinergics may reduce intraoperative nausea (aRR 0.67, 95% CI 0.51 to 0.87, 4 studies, 453 women, low-certainty evidence) but may have little to no effect on intraoperative vomiting (aRR 0.79, 95% CI 0.40 to 1.54, 4 studies; 453 women, very low-certainty evidence). No studies looked at anticholinergics in postoperative nausea, but they may reduce postoperative vomiting (aRR 0.55, 95% CI 0.41 to 0.74, 1 study, 161 women, low-certainty evidence). Sedatives: We found that sedatives probably reduce intraoperative nausea (aRR 0.65, 95% CI 0.51 to 0.82, 8 studies, 593 women, moderate-certainty evidence) and intraoperative vomiting (aRR 0.35, 95% CI 0.24 to 0.52, 8 studies, 593 women, moderate-certainty evidence). However, we are uncertain whether sedatives reduce postoperative nausea (aRR 0.25, 95% CI 0.09 to 0.71, 2 studies, 145 women, very low-certainty evidence) and they may reduce postoperative vomiting (aRR 0.09, 95% CI 0.03 to 0.28, 2 studies, 145 women, low-certainty evidence). Opioid antagonists: There were no studies assessing intraoperative nausea or vomiting. Opioid antagonists may result in little or no difference to the number of women having postoperative nausea (aRR 0.75, 95% CI 0.39 to 1.45, 1 study, 120 women, low-certainty evidence) or postoperative vomiting (aRR 1.25, 95% CI 0.35 to 4.43, 1 study, 120 women, low-certainty evidence). Acupressure: It is uncertain whether acupressure/acupuncture reduces intraoperative nausea (aRR 0.55, 95% CI 0.41 to 0.74, 9 studies, 1221 women, very low-certainty evidence). Acupressure may reduce intraoperative vomiting (aRR 0.52, 95% CI 0.33 to 0.80, 9 studies, 1221 women, low-certainty evidence) but it is uncertain whether it reduces postoperative nausea (aRR 0.46, 95% CI 0.27 to 0.75, 7 studies, 1069 women, very low-certainty evidence) or postoperative vomiting (aRR 0.52, 95% CI 0.34 to 0.79, 7 studies, 1069 women, very low-certainty evidence). Ginger: It is uncertain whether ginger makes any difference to the number of women having intraoperative nausea (aRR 0.66, 95% CI 0.36 to 1.21, 2 studies, 331 women, very low-certainty evidence), intraoperative vomiting (aRR 0.62, 95% CI 0.38 to 1.00, 2 studies, 331 women, very low-certainty evidence), postoperative nausea (aRR 0.63, 95% CI 0.22 to 1.77, 1 study, 92 women, very low-certainty evidence) and postoperative vomiting (aRR 0.20, 95% CI 0.02 to 1.65, 1 study, 92 women, very low-certainty evidence). Few studies assessed our secondary outcomes including adverse effects or women's views.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

This review indicates that 5-HT3 antagonists, dopamine antagonists, corticosteroids, sedatives and acupressure probably or possibly have efficacy in reducing nausea and vomiting in women undergoing regional anaesthesia for caesarean section. However the certainty of evidence varied widely and was generally low. Future research is needed to assess side effects of treatment, women's views and to compare the efficacy of combinations of different medications.

Knowledge Mapping of Acupuncture for Cancer Pain: A Scientometric Analysis (2000-2019)

Objective

This study aimed to demonstrate the state of the present situation and trends concerning the global use of acupuncture for cancer pain in the past 20 years.

Methods

Searched the Web of Science database from 2000 to 2019 related to acupuncture for cancer pain, and then used CiteSpace to conduct scientometric analysis to acquire the knowledge mapping.

Results

Yearly output has increased year by year, and the growth rate has become faster after 2012. According to the cluster analysis of institutions, authors, cited references, and keywords, 4, 4, 15, and 14 categories were obtained, respectively. The most productive countries, institutions, and authors are the USA, Mem Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, and Mao JJ, whose frequencies are 196, 24, and 17, respectively. However, the most important of them are Australia, Univ. Maryland, and Bao T, owing to their highest centrality, they are 0.90, 0.21, and 0.09 separately. Moreover, cited references that contributed to the most co-citations are Crew KD (2010), however, the most key cited reference is Roscoe JA (2003). Keywords such as acupuncture, pain, breast cancer, palliative care, and quality of life are the most frequently used. But auricular acupuncture is the crucial keyword. In the cluster analysis of institutions, authors, cited references, and keywords, the more convincing research categories are multiple myeloma, placebo effect, neck malignancies, and early breast cancer, with S values of 0.990, 0.991, 0.990, and 0.923, respectively. Therefore, they can be regarded as research hotspots in this field.

Conclusion

Based on the scientometric analysis in the past 20 years, the knowledge mapping of the country, institution, author, cited reference, and the keyword is gained, which has an important guiding significance for quickly and accurately positioning the trend in this field.

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.

Evaluation of Percutaneous Electrical Nerve Stimulation of the Auricle for Relief of Postoperative Pain Following Cesarean Section

Objective: Percutaneous electrical nerve stimulation is a nonpharmacologic modality of analgesia. This study was conducted to evaluate such a technology (ANSiStim™, DyAnsys Inc., San Mateo, CA) prospectively, in conjunction with standard analgesia per patient demand, for managing postoperative pain following lower-segment cesarean section. Materials and Methods: One hundred parturients were randomized into 2 equal groups (controls and study cases). The latter cohort consisted of parturients for whom nerve stimulation was exerted on the pinna. Pain scores were compared across subjects at corresponding time points with 17 intervals in 48 hours, and, in totality, using estimated area under the curves of numerical scores. Conditional inference analysis was also performed. Results: Ninety-six parturients were finally included. The device was well-tolerated by a majority of parturients. Pain scores were significantly lower in the study group, both at corresponding time intervals and in totality. (H - 15)*(0.74 - H)*(H² - 17H + 110)/440, where H was the corresponding hour, fit the pain scores in the control group. Controls could be detected at the 11 hour with greater pain scores (≥ 4), whereas smaller scores (≤ 2) at the 42nd hour mostly revealed that electrical stimulation was performed (p < 0.001). Requirements for supplementary analgesics were lower for subjects who were given the electroanalgesia. Conclusions: Neurostimulation via the ANSiStim™ is a safe and reasonably effective ambulatory analgesic adjuvant following abdominal delivery. There are no serious adverse effects.

Effectiveness of P6 Stimulation for Reduction of Nausea and Vomiting During Caesarean Section Under Combined Spinal-Epidural Anaesthesia: A Randomised Controlled Trial

Objective

Obstetric patients who receive combined spinal-epidural (CSE) anaesthesia for elective caesarean section (CS) frequently experience intraoperative nausea and vomiting (N&V). Prophylactic therapy with antiemetic agents can have multiple adverse effects to the mother and baby. We designed a randomised clinical trial to evaluate the efficacy of electrical P6 stimulation for prophylactic N&V treatment for scheduled elective CS performed under CSE anaesthesia.

Methods

Following the Institutional Review Board approval and informed consent, a total of 180 patients were randomly allocated into three groups: (1) P6 stimulation (via a peripheral nerve stimulator), (2) intravenous (IV) antiemetics (metoclopramide and ondansetron), and (3) control (no IV antiemetic medications and no P6 stimulation), with 60 parturients in each group.

Results

Significantly fewer patients experienced intraoperative N&V in the P6 group (nausea 36.7% and vomiting 13.3%) and IV antiemetic group (nausea 23.3% and vomiting 16.7%) than those in the control group (nausea 73.3% and vomiting 45%; p<0.001). In addition, significantly fewer patients required rescue antiemetic medications in the P6 group (35%) and the IV antiemetic group (31.7%) than those in the control group (73.3%; p<0.001). There was no significant difference in the overall anaesthetic care satisfaction reported between the three study groups.

Conclusion

Our data suggest that P6 stimulation is as simple and as effective as our routine prophylactic IV antiemetic treatment for prevention of N&V during CS performed under CSE anaesthesia that could be of great interest to patients and obstetric anaesthesiologists who prefer treatments with fewer potential side effects.

The Use of Short-Term Acupressure to Prevent Long-Term PONV: Was This a Case of Too Little, Too Late?

PURPOSE

Postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) is a common surgical complication that contributes to poor patient outcomes. The purpose of this study was to determine if acupressure to the P6 pressure point during the immediate postoperative period decreased PONV for the first 24 postoperative hours.

DESIGN

This was a double-blind, randomized study.

METHODS

Experimental group participants wore a wristband, which administered acupressure to the P6 pressure point of one wrist. Control group wristbands were malpositioned. Bands remained on until patients were discharged from the postanesthesia care unit or up to a maximum of 2 hours. Data on nausea, vomiting, and antiemetic use were tracked for the first 24 postoperative hours.

FINDING

There were no statistically significant between-group differences in PONV or antiemetic use.

CONCLUSIONS

Short-term postoperative acupressure to one wrist did not lead to a 24-hour decrease in nausea, vomiting, or antiemetic use.

Use of Transcutaneous Nerve Stimulation Wristband to Treat Methotrexate-Induced Nausea

Background:

Although methotrexate is a highly effective treatment for psoriasis, nausea and vomiting may be dose-limiting side effects. Various approaches have been used to improve the tolerability of methotrexate therapy, including changing the dose or form of administration of the methotrexate or concomitant administration of folic acid or an antiemetic.

Objective:

The objective of this case report is to present the use of a novel, nonpharmacologic approach for controlling the nausea associated with methotrexate therapy.

Results:

A 47-year-old patient with long-standing psoriasis was treated with methotrexate. She developed nausea refractory to standard antiemetic measures. She noted almost immediate relief of her nausea when using a transcutaneous nerve stimulation wristband.

Conclusions:

Nerve stimulation may be a valid alternative to other first-line antiemetic therapies.

Stimulation of the wrist acupuncture point PC6 for preventing postoperative nausea and vomiting

BACKGROUND

Postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) are common complications following surgery and anaesthesia. Antiemetic drugs are only partially effective in preventing PONV. An alternative approach is to stimulate the PC6 acupoint on the wrist. This is an update of a Cochrane review first published in 2004, updated in 2009 and now in 2015.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the effectiveness and safety of PC6 acupoint stimulation with or without antiemetic drug versus sham or antiemetic drug for the prevention of PONV in people undergoing surgery.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (Cochrane Library, Issue 12, 2014), MEDLINE (January 2008 to December 2014), EMBASE (January 2008 to December 2014), ISI Web of Science (January 2008 to December 2014), World Health Organization Clinical Trials Registry, ClinicalTrials.gov, and reference lists of articles to identify additional studies. We applied no language restrictions.

SELECTION CRITERIA

All randomized trials of techniques that stimulated the PC6 acupoint compared with sham treatment or drug therapy, or combined PC6 acupoint and drug therapy compared to drug therapy, for the prevention of PONV. Interventions used in these trials included acupuncture, electro-acupuncture, transcutaneous electrical acupoint stimulation, transcutaneous nerve stimulation, laser stimulation, capsicum plaster, acu-stimulation device, and acupressure in people undergoing surgery. Primary outcomes were the incidences of nausea and vomiting after surgery. Secondary outcomes were the need for rescue antiemetic therapy and adverse effects.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently extracted the data and assessed the risk of bias domains for each trial. We used a random-effects model and reported risk ratio (RR) with associated 95% confidence interval (95% CI). We used trial sequential analyses to help provide information on when we had reached firm evidence in cumulative meta-analyses of the primary outcomes, based on a 30% risk ratio reduction in PONV.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 59 trials involving 7667 participants. We rated two trials at low risk of bias in all domains (selection, attrition, reporting, blinding and other). We rated 25 trials at high risk in one or more risk-of-bias domains. Compared with sham treatment, PC6 acupoint stimulation significantly reduced the incidence of nausea (RR 0.68, 95% CI 0.60 to 0.77; 40 trials, 4742 participants), vomiting (RR 0.60, 95% CI 0.51 to 0.71; 45 trials, 5147 participants) and the need for rescue antiemetics (RR 0.64, 95% CI 0.55 to 0.73; 39 trials, 4622 participants). As heterogeneity among trials was substantial and there were study limitations, we rated the quality of evidence as low. Using trial sequential analysis, the required information size and boundary for benefit were reached for both primary outcomes.PC6 acupoint stimulation was compared with six different types of antiemetic drugs (metoclopramide, cyclizine, prochlorperazine, droperidol. ondansetron and dexamethasone). There was no difference between PC6 acupoint stimulation and antiemetic drugs in the incidence of nausea (RR 0.91, 95% CI 0.75 to 1.10; 14 trials, 1332 participants), vomiting (RR 0.93, 95% CI 0.74 to 1.17; 19 trials, 1708 participants), or the need for rescue antiemetics (RR 0.87, 95% CI 0.65 to 1.16; 9 trials, 895 participants). We rated the quality of evidence as moderate, due to the study limitations. Using trial sequential analyses, the futility boundary was crossed before the required information size was surpassed for both primary outcomes.Compared to antiemetic drugs, the combination of PC6 acupoint stimulation and antiemetic therapy reduced the incidence of vomiting (RR 0.56, 95% CI 0.35 to 0.91; 9 trials, 687 participants) but not nausea (RR 0.79, 95% CI 0.55 to 1.13; 8 trials, 642 participants). We rated the quality of evidence as very low, due to substantial heterogeneity among trials, study limitations and imprecision. Using trial sequential analysis, none of the boundaries for benefit, harm or futility were crossed for PONV. The need for rescue antiemetic was lower in the combination PC6 acupoint stimulation and antiemetic group than the antiemetic group (RR 0.61, 95% CI 0.44 to 0.86; 5 trials, 419 participants).The side effects associated with PC6 acupoint stimulation were minor, transient and self-limiting (e.g. skin irritation, blistering, redness and pain) in 14 trials. Publication bias was not apparent in the contour-enhanced funnel plots.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is low-quality evidence supporting the use of PC6 acupoint stimulation over sham. Compared to the last update in 2009, no further sham comparison trials are needed. We found that there is moderate-quality evidence showing no difference between PC6 acupoint stimulation and antiemetic drugs to prevent PONV. Further PC6 acupoint stimulation versus antiemetic trials are futile in showing a significant difference, which is a new finding in this update. There is inconclusive evidence supporting the use of a combined strategy of PC6 acupoint stimulation and antiemetic drug over drug prophylaxis, and further high-quality trials are needed.

Interventions at caesarean section for reducing the risk of aspiration pneumonitis

BACKGROUND

Aspiration pneumonitis is a syndrome resulting from the inhalation of gastric contents. The incidence in obstetric anaesthesia has fallen, largely due to improved anaesthetic techniques and the increased use of regional anaesthesia at caesarean section. However, aspiration pneumonitis is still a cause of maternal morbidity and mortality, and it is important to use effective prophylaxis.

OBJECTIVES

To determine whether interventions given prior to caesarean section reduce the risk of aspiration pneumonitis in women with an uncomplicated pregnancy.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (30 April 2013).

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials were included. Quasi-randomised trials were excluded.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Review authors independently assessed the studies for inclusion, assessed risk of bias and carried out data extraction. Data entry was checked. Fixed-effect meta-analysis was used to combine data where it was reasonable to assume that studies were estimating the same underlying treatment effect. If substantial clinical or statistical heterogeneity was detected, we used random-effects analysis to produce an overall summary.

MAIN RESULTS

Thirty-two studies were included in this review. However, only 22 studies, involving 2658 women, provided data for analysis. All the women in the included studies had a caesarean section under general anaesthesia. The studies covered a number of comparisons, but were mostly small and of unclear or poor quality.When compared with no treatment or placebo, there was a significant reduction in the risk of intragastric pH < 2.5 with antacids (risk ratio (RR) 0.17, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.09 to 0.32, two studies, 108 women), H2 antagonists (RR 0.09, 95% CI 0.05 to 0.18, two studies, 170 women) and proton pump antagonists (RR 0.26, 95% CI 0.14 to 0.46, one study 80 women). H2 antagonists were associated with a reduced the risk of intragastric pH < 2.5 at intubation when compared with proton pump antagonists (RR 0.39, 95% CI 0.16 to 0.97, one study, 120 women), but compared with antacids the findings were unclear. The combined use of 'antacids plus H2 antagonists' was associated with a significant reduction in the risk of intragastric pH < 2.5 at intubation when compared with placebo (RR 0.02, 95% CI 0.00 to 0.15, one study, 89 women) or compared with antacids alone (RR 0.12, 95% CI 0.02 to 0.92, one study, 119 women).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The quality of the evidence was poor, but the findings suggest that the combination of antacids plus H2 antagonists was more effective than no intervention, and superior to antacids alone in preventing low gastric pH. However, none of the studies assessed potential adverse effects or substantive clinical outcomes. These findings are relevant for all women undergoing caesarean section under general anaesthesia.

A physiological perspective for utility or futility of alcohol-based hand rub gel against nausea-vomiting: is it P-6 acupoint or transnasal aroma?

Nausea-vomiting is a common and unpleasant phenomenon with numerous underlying mechanisms and pathways that are not always well elucidated. In clinical practice, refractory nausea-vomiting is encountered in several settings. Antiemetic medications may reduce these symptoms but are not always effective in all patients. In the absence of a well-defined optimal strategy for management of nausea-vomiting, the search for better approaches to treat this distressing symptom continues. One of the alternative treatment approaches is a compounded formulation called ABHR gel that is comprised of multiple antiemetic medications and has been shown to be useful for symptomatic relief in some patients with refractory nausea-vomiting. It has been suggested that alternative mechanisms should be explored to explain the perceived efficacy of ABHR gel, because transdermal absorption leading to nil-to-minimal or subtherapeutic blood concentrations of active ingredients does not explain the role of ABHR gel in the treatment of nausea-vomiting. In the current paper, we discuss possible mechanisms that may explain ABHR transdermal gel's efficacy. Compounded ABHR transdermal gel formulation's efficacy in antagonizing nausea-vomiting that has been recently questioned may be explained by alternative mechanisms mediated through the P-6 acupoint stimulation and facial-nasal, cooling-related counterstimulation.

Acupuncture in preventing postoperative nausea and vomiting: efficacy of two acupuncture points versus a single one

Despite recent advances in anesthesiology and postoperative care, postoperative nausea and vomiting are common complaints. Although acupuncture techniques have received attention in anesthesiology, the ideal technique and selection of the most appropriate acupuncture points are still under debate. This study compared the efficacy of two simultaneous acupuncture points with that of a single point in the prevention and treatment of postoperative nausea and vomiting following general anesthesia through a double-blind, randomized, controlled trial involving 227 surgical patients undergoing general anesthesia who were randomly assigned into two groups. The first group received acupuncture by stimulation only on the PC6 point (single group), and the second group underwent concomitant stimulation of the PC6 and the L14 acupuncture points (combined group) during surgery under general anesthesia. The prevalences of postoperative nausea and vomiting were compared between the two groups. No significant differences were observed between the two groups (p>0.05). Of 115 patients in the combined group, 80 (69.6%) complained about nausea and vomiting compared with 96 (85.7%) in the single group, a significantly lower proportion (p<0.05). Our findings favor a combination of PC6 and LI4 stimulation for the treatment of postoperative nausea and vomiting.

Interventions for preventing nausea and vomiting in women undergoing regional anaesthesia for caesarean section

BACKGROUND

Nausea and vomiting are distressing symptoms which are experienced commonly during caesarean section under regional anaesthesia and can also occur in the period following the procedure. 

OBJECTIVES

To assess the efficacy of pharmacological and non-pharmacological interventions given prophylactically to prevent nausea and vomiting in women undergoing regional anaesthesia for caesarean section.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (27 February 2012) and reference lists of identified studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and excluded quasi-RCTs and cross-over studies.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Review authors independently assessed the studies for inclusion, assessed risk of bias and carried out data extraction. Data entry was checked.  

MAIN RESULTS

Fifty-two studies met the inclusion criteria but only 41 studies, involving 5046 women, provided useable data for the review involving women having caesareans under regional anaesthesia. The majority of the studies involved women undergoing elective caesarean section. Only two studies included emergency surgery, however, they did not stratify data according to type of surgery. The studies covered numerous comparisons, but the majority of studies involved 5-HT(3) receptor antagonists, dopamine receptor antagonists, corticosteroids or acupressure. Studies were mainly small and of unclear quality.Three classes of intervention were found to be effective in at least three out of four of our primary outcomes (intraoperative nausea, intraoperative vomiting, postoperative nausea and postoperative vomiting). These interventions were 5-HT(3) antagonists, dopamine antagonists and sedatives. Other classes of intervention were effective for fewer than three of our primary outcomes.With 5-HT antagonists, we found a reduction in intraoperative nausea (average risk ratio (RR) 0.64, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.46 to 0.88, eight studies, 720 women). There were also reductions in postoperative nausea (average RR 0.40, 95% CI 0.25 to 0.64, four studies, 405 women) and vomiting (average RR 0.50, 95% CI 0.32 to 0.77, five studies, 565 women). We did not detect a significant reduction in intraoperative vomiting (average RR 0.56, 95% CI 0.31 to 1.00, seven studies, 668 women).Dopamine antagonists demonstrated a reduction in intraoperative nausea (average RR 0.38, 95% CI 0.25 to 0.57, nine studies, 636 women) and intraoperative vomiting (average 0.39, 95% CI 0.24 to 0.64, eight studies, 536 women), with similar reductions in postoperative nausea (average RR 0.60, 95% CI 0.40 to 0.91, five studies, 412 women) and vomiting (average RR 0.57, 95% CI 0.36 to 0.91, six studies, 472 women). These differences were observed with both metoclopramide and droperidol.Sedatives (most commonly propofol) demonstrated a reduction in intraoperative nausea (average RR 0.71, 95% CI 0.52 to 0.96, four studies, 285 women) and intraoperative vomiting (average RR 0.42, 95% CI 0.26 to 0.68, four studies, 285 women), also with a reduction in postoperative nausea (average RR 0.25, 95% CI 0.09 to 0.71, two studies 145 women) and vomiting (average RR 0.09, 95% CI 0.03 to 0.28, two studies, 145 women).Acupressure was found to be effective for intraoperative nausea (average RR 0.59, 95% CI 0.38 to 0.90, six studies, 649 women) but not postoperative nausea (average RR 0.83, 95% CI 0.68 to 1.00, three studies, 429 women). Acupressure was not effective at reducing vomiting either intraoperatively (average RR 0.74, 95% CI 0.46 to 1.18, six studies, 649 women) or postoperatively (average RR 0.69, 95% CI 0.45 to 1.06, three studies, 429 women).Other effective intervention classes included corticosteroids, antihistamines, and anticholinergics.There were insufficient data to demonstrate any class of intervention was superior to another. There were no significant differences observed in the comparison of combined versus single interventions.Few studies assessed our secondary outcomes or the incidence of adverse effects. However, one study showed an increase in respiratory depression with sedation (midazolam) compared with dopamine antagonists.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

This review indicates that many different interventions have efficacy in preventing nausea and vomiting in women undergoing regional anaesthesia for caesarean section. There is little evidence that combinations of treatment are better than single agents.

Interventions at caesarean section for reducing the risk of aspiration pneumonitis

BACKGROUND

Aspiration pneumonitis is a syndrome resulting from the inhalation of gastric contents. The incidence in obstetric anaesthesia has fallen, largely due to improved anaesthetic techniques and the increased use of regional anaesthesia at caesarean section. However, aspiration pneumonitis is still a cause of maternal morbidity and mortality, and it is important to use effective prophylaxis.

OBJECTIVES

To determine whether interventions given prior to caesarean section reduce the risk of aspiration pneumonitis in women with an uncomplicated pregnancy.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (April 2009).

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials were included. Quasi-randomised trials were excluded.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Authors independently assessed the studies for inclusion, assessed risk of bias and carried out data extraction. Data entry was checked.

MAIN RESULTS

Twenty-two studies, involving 2658 women, are included, all having a caesarean section under general anaesthesia. The studies covered a number of comparisons, but were mostly small and of unclear or poor quality.When compared to no treatment or placebo, there was a significant reduction in the risk of intragastric pH < 2.5 with antacids (risk ratio (RR) 0.17, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.09 to 0.32, two studies, 108 women), H(2) antagonists (RR 0.09, 95% CI 0.05 to 0.18, two studies, 170 women) and proton pump antagonists (RR 0.26, 95% CI 0.14 to 0.46, one study 80 women). H(2) antagonists were associated with a reduced the risk of intragastric pH < 2.5 at intubation when compared with proton pump antagonists (RR 0.39, 95% CI 0.16 to 0.97, one study, 120 women), but compared with antacids the findings were unclear. The combined use of 'antacids plus H(2) antagonists' was associated with a significant reduction in the risk of intragastric pH < 2.5 at intubation when compared with placebo (RR 0.02, 95% CI 0.00 to 0.15, one study, 89 women) or compared with antacids alone (RR 0.12, 95% CI 0.02 to 0.92, one study, 119 women).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The quality of the evidence was poor, but the findings suggest that the combination of antacids plus H(2) antagonists was more effective than no intervention, and superior to antacids alone in preventing low gastric pH. However, none of the studies assessed potential adverse effects or substantive clinical outcomes. These findings are relevant for all women undergoing caesarean section under general anaesthesia.

Stimulation of the wrist acupuncture point P6 for preventing postoperative nausea and vomiting

BACKGROUND

Postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) are common complications following surgery and anaesthesia. Drugs to prevent PONV are only partially effective. An alternative approach is to stimulate the P6 acupoint on the wrist. This is an update of a Cochrane review first published in 2004.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the efficacy and safety of P6 acupoint stimulation in preventing PONV.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched CENTRAL (The Cochrane Library, Issue 3, 2008), MEDLINE (January 1966 to September 2008), EMBASE (January 1988 to September 2008), ISI Web of Science (January 1965 to September 2008), the National Library of Medicine publication list of acupuncture studies, and reference lists of articles.

SELECTION CRITERIA

All randomized trials of techniques that stimulated the P6 acupoint compared with sham treatment or drug therapy for the prevention of PONV. Interventions used in these trials included acupuncture, electro-acupuncture, transcutaneous nerve stimulation, laser stimulation, capsicum plaster, an acu-stimulation device, and acupressure in patients undergoing surgery. Primary outcomes were the risks of nausea and vomiting. Secondary outcomes were the need for rescue antiemetic therapy and adverse effects.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed trial quality and extracted the data. We collected adverse effect information from the trials. We used a random-effects model and reported relative risk (RR) with associated 95% confidence intervals (95% CI).

MAIN RESULTS

We included 40 trials involving 4858 participants; four trials reported adequate allocation concealment. Twelve trials did not report all outcomes. Compared with sham treatment P6 acupoint stimulation significantly reduced: nausea (RR 0.71, 95% CI 0.61 to 0.83); vomiting (RR 0.70, 95% CI 0.59 to 0.83), and the need for rescue antiemetics (RR 0.69, 95% CI 0.57 to 0.83). Heterogeneity among trials was moderate. There was no clear difference in the effectiveness of P6 acupoint stimulation for adults and children; or for invasive and noninvasive acupoint stimulation. There was no evidence of difference between P6 acupoint stimulation and antiemetic drugs in the risk of nausea (RR 0.82, 95% CI 0.60 to 1.13), vomiting (RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.77 to 1.31), or the need for rescue antiemetics (RR 0.82, 95% CI 0.59 to 1.13). The side effects associated with P6 acupoint stimulation were minor. There was no evidence of publication bias from contour-enhanced funnel plots.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

P6 acupoint stimulation prevented PONV. There was no reliable evidence for differences in risks of postoperative nausea or vomiting after P6 acupoint stimulation compared to antiemetic drugs.

Perioperative pain management

The under-treatment of postoperative pain has been recognised to delay patient recovery and discharge from hospital. Despite recognition of the importance of effective pain control, up to 70% of patients still complain of moderate to severe pain postoperatively. The mechanistic approach to pain management, based on current understanding of the peripheral and central mechanisms involved in nociceptive transmission, provides newer options for clinicians to manage pain effectively. In this article we review the rationale for a multimodal approach with combinations of analgesics from different classes and different sites of analgesic administration. The pharmacological options of commonly used analgesics, such as opioids, NSAIDs, paracetamol, tramadol and other non-opioid analgesics, and their combinations is discussed. These analgesics have been shown to provide effective pain relief and their combinations demonstrate a reduction in opioid consumption. The basis for using non-opioid analgesic adjuvants is to reduce opioid consumption and consequently alleviate opioid-related adverse effects. We review the evidence on the opioid-sparing effect of ketamine, clonidine, gabapentin and other novel analgesics in perioperative pain management. Most available data support the addition of these adjuvants to routine analgesic techniques to reduce the need for opioids and improve quality of analgesia by their synergistic effect. Local anaesthetic infiltration, epidural and other regional techniques are also used successfully to enhance perioperative analgesia after a variety of surgical procedures. The use of continuous perineural techniques that offer prolonged analgesia with local anaesthetic infusion has been extended to the care of patients beyond hospital discharge. The use of nonpharmacological options such as acupuncture, relaxation, music therapy, hypnosis and transcutaneous nerve stimulation as adjuvants to conventional analgesia should be considered and incorporated to achieve an effective and successful perioperative pain management regimen.

Metaanalyses of Acustimulations: Effects on Nausea and Vomiting in Postoperative Adult Patients

OBJECTIVE

Using metaanalysis to examine the effects of acustimulations on nausea and vomiting symptoms (NVS) in postoperative adult populations.

METHODS

Metaanalyses of effects of various acupoints stimulations (AS) (including acupuncture, acupressure, and electrical stimulation) on NVS in postoperative adult populations were performed. Thirty-three quality randomized controlled trials (RCT) published over the past three decades were identified by evaluating the quality of randomization and treatment methods, and results were pooled using a fixed effects model.

RESULTS

Twenty-four trials were pooled for nausea, 29 trials for vomiting, and 19 trials for rescue antiemetics, with AS compared with placebo or controls. Two additional trials did not have control groups but compared AS to medication groups. Compared with the controls, AS (all modalities) reduced nausea (relative risk [RR] = 0.60, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.54-0.67, P < .0001), vomiting (RR = 0.51, 95% CI: 0.45-0.57, P < .0001), and use of rescue antiemetics (RR = 0.63, 95% CI: 0.54-0.74, P < 0001). All AS modalities were effective in reducing NVS. Korean hand acupressure stimulations (two trials) had the best impact on reducing vomiting. There were no significant differences on pooled RRs for nausea (five trials) and vomiting (eight trials) between medication and AS groups, but medication groups had increased use of rescue antiemetics (two trials, RR = 2.27, 95% CI: 1.48-3.49, P = .0002). There was a placebo effect when compared with controls in reducing nausea (four trials, RR = 0.67, 95% CI: 0.50-0.90, P = .0069) and vomiting (three trials, RR = 0.39, 95% CI: 0.19-0.80, P = .0106).

CONCLUSIONS

This metaanalysis demonstrated that AS is just as effective as medications in reducing NVS and that acupressure is just as effective as acupuncture or electrical stimulation in reducing NVS for postoperative adult populations.

P6 acupressure does not prevent emesis during spinal anesthesia for cesarean delivery

Nausea and vomiting are major adverse effects during spinal anesthesia for cesarean delivery. Stimulation of the P6 (Neiguan) acupoint is a traditional Chinese acupuncture technique used for effective antiemetic purposes. In this study, we evaluated the antiemetic effect of P6 acupressure in parturients during spinal anesthesia for cesarean delivery. In a randomized, double-blind, controlled trial, 110 parturients scheduled for elective cesarean delivery were enrolled in the study. Thirty minutes before initiation of spinal anesthesia, parturients were randomized to acupressure bands or placebo bands bilaterally on the P6 acupoint and nausea and vomiting were observed over the study period. There were no statistically significant differences in maternal characteristics. Incidence rates for intraoperative nausea were 64% (acupressure group) and 71% (control group) (P = 0.416), with an incidence of intraoperative vomiting of 22% (acupressure group) and 27% (control group) (P = 0.506). The results suggest that prophylactic use of acupressure bands bilaterally on the P6 acupoint failed to prevent nausea and vomiting during spinal anesthesia for cesarean delivery.

Transcutaneous acupoint electrical stimulation with the ReliefBand for the prevention of nausea and vomiting during and after cesarean delivery under spinal anesthesia

We randomized 94 patients undergoing cesarean delivery with spinal anesthesia to receive transcutaneous acupoint electrical stimulation using the ReliefBand at the P6 point (active group) or an active ReliefBand applied to the dorsum of the wrist (sham control group). The ReliefBand was applied 30-60 min preoperatively and left in place for 24 h. There was no statistically significant difference between the active and sham control groups in the incidence of intraoperative/postoperative nausea (30% versus 43%/23% versus 41%), vomiting (13% versus 9%/26 versus 37%), need for rescue antiemetics (23% versus 18%/34% versus 39%), or complete response (55% versus 57%/51% versus 34%). There was also no difference between the two groups in nausea scores, number of vomiting episodes, or patient satisfaction with postoperative nausea and vomiting management.

Complementary and alternative medicine in obstetrics

OBJECTIVE

To identify, survey and review randomized controlled studies of the use of complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) for obstetric treatment or health promotion.

METHODS

The MEDLINE database was searched to identify randomized controlled trials of CAM treatment and therapies in obstetrics. Studies examining modalities for treatment or improvement of health status were reviewed.

RESULTS

Fifty-four articles assessing a variety of health modalities met the criteria for inclusion. Acupressure and ginger for prenatal nausea and vomiting, moxibustion for version of breech presentation, sterile water injections for back pain relief in labor, and perineal massage to prevent perineal trauma have three or more studies demonstrating beneficial effect. Other interventions have been studied less, and evidence for them is limited.

CONCLUSIONS

Some CAM interventions have evidence of effectiveness for use in obstetric patients, while others require further investigation before they can be considered for use in practice.

Acustimulation wrist bands are not effective for the control of chemotherapy-induced nausea in women with breast cancer

This experiment examined the efficacy of an acustimulation wrist band for the relief of chemotherapy-induced nausea using a randomized three-arm clinical trial (active acustimulation, sham acustimulation, and no acustimulation) in 96 women with breast cancer who experienced nausea at their first chemotherapy treatment. Five outcomes related to wrist band efficacy (acute nausea, delayed nausea, vomiting, QOL, and total amount of antiemetic medication used) were examined. The five outcomes were examined separately using analysis of covariance controlling for age and severity of past nausea. There were no significant differences in any of these study measures among the three treatment conditions (P>0.1 for all). Study results do not support the hypothesis that acustimulation bands are efficacious as an adjunct to pharmacological antiemetics for control of chemotherapy-related nausea in female breast cancer patients.

Effect of acupressure on nausea and vomiting during chemotherapy cycle for Korean postoperative stomach cancer patients

Despite the development of effective antiemetic drugs, nausea and vomiting remain the main side effects associated with cancer chemotherapy. The purpose of this study was to examine the effect of acupressure on emesis control in postoperative gastric cancer patients undergoing chemotherapy. Forty postoperative gastric cancer patients receiving the first cycle of chemotherapy with cisplatin and 5-Fluorouracil were divided into control and intervention groups (n = 20 each). Both groups received regular antiemesis medication; however, the intervention group received acupressure training and was instructed to perform the finger acupressure maneuver for 5 minutes on P6 (Nei-Guan) point located at 3-finger widths up from the first palmar crease, between palmaris longus and flexor carpi radialis tendons point, at least 3 times a day before chemotherapy and mealtimes or based on their needs. Both groups received equally frequent nursing visits and consultations, and reported nausea and vomiting using Rhode's Index of Nausea, Vomiting and Retching. We found significant differences between intervention and control groups in the severity of nausea and vomiting, the duration of nausea, and frequency of vomiting. This study suggests that acupressure on P6 point appears to be an effective adjunct maneuver in the course of emesis control.

Use of acupressure to improve gastrointestinal motility in women after trans-abdominal hysterectomy

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of acupressure on gastrointestinal (GI) motility in women after trans-abdominal hysterectomy (TAH). Patients were randomly assigned into two groups of 21 and 20 patients each. The experimental group received acupressure for 3 minutes at each of three meridian points: Neiguan (PC-6), Zusanli (ST-36) and Sanyinjiao (SP-6). The control group received 3 minutes of acupressure on sham points. Acupressure was performed twice a day. A questionnaire was used to determine patients' satisfaction prior to and after afternoon acupressure. GI contractions were measured with a multifunctional stethoscope before and after acupressure. Acupressure of these three meridian points significantly (p < 0.05) increased GI motility in the experimental group, but there was little change in the control group (p > 0.05). Our conclusions are that non-invasive acupressure of these meridian points can significantly improve GI motility and can be incorporated into the technical curriculum and clinical education program of nursing schools. Patients and their family members can be taught to continue this procedure at home to enhance GI motility in patients who have undergone TAH.

Stimulation of the wrist acupuncture point P6 for preventing postoperative nausea and vomiting

BACKGROUND

Postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) are common complications following surgery and anaesthesia. Drug therapy to prevent PONV is only partially effective. An alternative approach is to stimulate a P6 acupoint on the wrist. Although there are many trials examining this technique, the results are conflicting.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the efficacy and safety of P6 acupoint stimulation in preventing PONV.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched CENTRAL (The Cochrane Library, Issue 1, 2003), MEDLINE (January 1966 to January 2003), EMBASE (January 1988 to January 2003) and the National Library of Medicine publication list of acupuncture studies up to and including January 2003. Reference lists of retrieved papers and reviews were consulted for additional references.

SELECTION CRITERIA

All randomized trials of techniques that stimulated the P6 acupoint compared with: sham treatment or drug therapy for the prevention of PONV. Interventions used in these trials included acupuncture, electro-acupuncture, transcutaneous nerve stimulation, laser stimulation, acustimulation device and acupressure.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two reviewers independently assessed methodological quality and extracted the data. Primary outcomes were incidences of nausea and vomiting. Secondary outcomes were the need for rescue antiemetic therapy and adverse effects. A random effects model was used and relative risk (RR) with associated 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) are reported. Egger's test was used to measure the asymmetry of the funnel plot.

MAIN RESULTS

Twenty-six trials (n = 3347) were included, none of which reported adequate allocation concealment. There were significant reductions in the risks of nausea (RR 0.72, 95% CI 0.59 to 0.89), vomiting (RR 0.71, 95% CI 0.56 to 0.91) and the need for rescue antiemetics (RR 0.76, 95% CI 0.58 to 1.00) in the P6 acupoint stimulation group compared with the sham treatment, although many of the trials were heterogeneous. There was no evidence of difference in the risk of nausea and vomiting in the P6 acupoint stimulation group versus individual antiemetic groups. However, when different antiemetics were pooled, there was significant reduction in the risk of nausea but not vomiting in the P6 acupoint stimulation group compared with the antiemetic group (RR 0.70, 95% CI 0.50 to 0.98; RR 0.92, 95% CI 0.65 to 1.29 respectively). The side effects associated with P6 acupoint stimulation were minor. There was some evidence of asymmetry of the funnel plot.

REVIEWERS' CONCLUSIONS

This systematic review supports the use of P6 acupoint stimulation in patients without antiemetic prophylaxis. Compared with antiemetic prophylaxis, P6 acupoint stimulation seems to reduce the risk of nausea but not vomiting.

The efficacy of acupressure and acustimulation wrist bands for the relief of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting. A University of Rochester Cancer Center Community Clinical Oncology Program multicenter study

As an adjunct to standard antiemetics for the relief of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (NV), 739 patients were randomly assigned to either: 1) acupressure bands, 2) an acustimulation band, or 3) a no band control condition. Patients in the acupressure condition experienced less nausea on the day of treatment compared to controls (P<0.05). There were no significant differences in delayed nausea or vomiting among the three treatment conditions. Additional analyses revealed pronounced gender differences. Men in the acustimulation condition, but not the acupressure condition, had less NV compared to controls (P<0.05). No significant differences among the three treatment conditions were observed in women, although the reduction in nausea on the day of treatment in the acupressure, compared to the no band condition, closely approached statistical significance (P=0.052). Expected efficacy of the bands was related to outcomes for the acupressure but not the acustimulation conditions.

Opioids: a review

Recent discoveries in opioid pharmacology help explain the enormous variability in clinical responses to these powerful analgesics. Although there is only one m opioid receptor gene, splice variants of that gene's expression result in a panoply of different functioning receptors. Other sources of variable response include polymorphisms in the m opioid receptor regulatory region, and pharmacokinetic differences because of cytochrome P-450 mono-oxygenase heterogeneity. Analgesic tolerance is likely the key phenomenon limiting the benefit of opioids. A plethora of intracellular pathways affects this. Among them are the N-methyl-D-aspartate receptor, protein kinase C gamma activity, nitric oxide synthase, and GM1 ganglioside content of the neuronal membrane. Clinical studies undercut the routine use of meperidine in most settings. Other studies have shown better ways to diminish opioid side effects.

The effect of electroacupuncture as an adjunct on cyclophosphamide-induced emesis in ferrets

The effect of electroacupuncture (EA) on cyclophosphamide-induced emesis in ferrets was studied at acupuncture point Neiguan (P6) with various electrical stimulation parameters (5-100 Hz, 1.5-3 V, 5-20 min, n=6/group). The combination therapy of EA (100 Hz, 1.5 V and 10 min) with the lower doses of ondansetron (0.04 mg/kg), droperidol (0.25 mg/kg) and metoclopramide (2.24 mg/kg) significantly reduced the total number of emetic episodes by 52%, 36% and 73%, respectively, as well as the number of emetic episodes in the first phase as compared to the sham acupuncture control (P<.01). These EA/drug combinations also showed a significant effect in preventing emesis as compared to either EA or drug alone (P<.05). The present study suggests that acupuncture may be useful as an adjunctive therapy in the treatment of chemotherapy-induced emesis.

P6 acupressure may relieve nausea and vomiting after gynecological surgery: an effectiveness study in 410 women

PURPOSE

To investigate the effect of sensory stimulation of the P6 point on postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) after gynecological surgery in the everyday clinical setting (effectiveness study).

METHODS

Four hundred and ten women undergoing general anesthesia for elective gynecological surgery were included in a prospective, consecutive, randomized, multicentre, placebo-controlled, double-blind clinical trial with a reference group. One group was given bilateral P6 acupressure (n = 135), a second group similar pressure on bilateral non-acupressure points (n = 139), and a third group (n = 136) served as reference group. Nausea (scale 0-6), vomiting, pain, and satisfaction with the treatment were recorded. Primary outcome was complete response, i.e., no nausea, vomiting or rescue medication for 24 hr. Results were analyzed by applying logistic regression with indicators of treatments, type of operation and risk score for PONV as explanatory variables.

RESULTS

Complete response was more frequent in the P6 acupressure group than in the reference group (P = 0.0194) Conversely, the incidence of PONV was 46% in the reference group, 38% after pressure on a non-acupoint and 33% after P6 acupressure. The decrease from 46% to 33% was statistically significant. When considering vaginal cases separately, the decrease in PONV was from 36% to 20% (P = 0.0168). The corresponding decrease from 59% to 55% in the laparoscopic surgery group was not statistically significant.

CONCLUSION

P6 acupressure is a non-invasive method that may have a place as prophylactic antiemetic therapy during gynecological surgery.

Nausea and vomiting in pregnancy: safety and efficacy of self-administered complementary therapies

Nausea and vomiting affects a large proportion of women in early pregnancy, yet because it is a physiological symptom it is often dismissed by health professionals, leaving women to find their own coping mechanisms. This leads many to try a range of complementary and alternative therapies and natural remedies, although the evidence of efficacy is variable. Furthermore, while women realise the possible risks of taking medication during pregnancy they do not see complementary medicine in the same way. This paper explores a few of the common alternatives which expectant mothers self-administer to relieve nausea and vomiting and addresses issues of efficacy and safety.

Acupressure and ondansetron for postoperative nausea and vomiting after laparoscopic cholecystectomy

PURPOSE

To compare the efficacy of acupressure wrist bands and ondansetron for the prevention of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV).

METHODS

One hundred and fifty ASA I-II, patients undergoing elective laparoscopic cholecystectomy were included in a randomized, prospective, double-blind and placebo-controlled study. Patients were divided into three groups of 50. Group I was the control; Group II received ondansetron 4 mg iv just prior to induction of anesthesia; in Group III acupressure wristbands were applied at the P6 points. Acupressure wrist bands were placed inappropriately in Groups I and II. The acupressure wrist bands were applied 30 min prior to induction of anesthesia and removed six hours following surgery. Anesthesia was standardized. PONV were evaluated separately as none, mild, moderate or severe within six hours of patients' arrival in the postanesthesia care unit and then at 24 hr after surgery by a blinded observer. If patients vomited more than once, they were given 4 mg ondansetron iv as the rescue antiemetic. Results were analyzed by Z test. A P value of < 0.05 was taken as significant.

RESULTS

The incidence of PONV and the requirement of rescue medication were significantly lower in both the acupressure and ondansetron groups during the first six hours.

CONCLUSION

Acupressure at P6 causes a significant reduction in the incidence of PONV and the requirement for rescue medication in the first six hours following laparoscopic cholecystectomy, similar to that of ondansetron 4 mg iv.

Acupressure and acustimulation bands for control of nausea: a brief review

We review the published literature examining the efficacy of acupressure and acustimulation wrist bands for the relief of nausea, with special emphasis on the alleviation of nausea associated with pregnancy. We also present preliminary data from an open-label study on the efficacy of acustimulation bands for control of chemotherapy nausea. The literature supports the conclusion that Neiguan-point stimulation by acupressure and acustimulation wrist bands for nausea relief is efficacious for many patients.

Integrity and research: introducing the concept of dual blindness. how blind are double-blind clinical trials in alternative medicine?

Double-blind methodology is used in clinical studies to control for potential external or nonspecific influences such as belief and expectation, as well as to maintain as much objectivity as possible on the part of the researchers. Despite not being feasible in all medical disciplines, as in the case of some modalities of complementary and alternative medicine, there are numerous studies that spuriously claim its use. Distinctions and standards therefore need to be set to avoid misleading information. We propose a new term in research methodology, dual-blind, to describe a methodological alternative in which the caregiver is not blind but the patient and an external evaluator/investigator are. The term double-blind should be used strictly to describe a methodology in which both the patient and the caregiver are blind. Making the distinction between these two terms will result in more reliable reports of clinical trials and will support integrity in research.

Manual acupuncture reduces hyperemesis gravidarum: a placebo-controlled, randomized, single-blind, crossover study

Hyperemesis gravidarum, severe vomiting, develops in about 1-2% of all pregnancies. Acupuncture on the point PC6 above the wrist on the palmar side has been found to prevent some types of nausea and vomiting. The purpose of the present study was to see if acupuncture, in addition to standard treatment, could hasten the improvement of hyperemesis gravidarum. Thirty-three women with hyperemesis were evaluated in a randomized, single-blind, crossover comparison of two methods of acupuncture, active (deep) PC6 acupuncture or placebo (superficial) acupuncture. The women estimated their degree of nausea on a visual analogue scale (VAS). The daily number of emesis episodes were documented. Crossover analyses showed that there was a significantly faster reduction of nausea VAS and more women who stopped vomiting after active acupuncture than after placebo acupuncture. This study suggests that active PC6 acupuncture, in combination with standard treatment, could make women with hyperemesis gravidarum better faster than placebo acupuncture.

Acupressure wristbands do not prevent postoperative nausea and vomiting after urological endoscopic surgery

PURPOSE

To evaluate the efficacy of acupressure wristbands in the prevention of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV).

METHODS

Two hundred ASA I-II patients undergoing elective endoscopic urological procedures were included in a randomized, prospective, double blind, placebo-controlled study. Spherical beads of acupressure wristbands were placed at the P6 points in the anterior surface of both forearms in Group I patients (acupressure group, n = 100) whereas, in Group 2 (control group, n = 100) they were placed inappropriately on the posterior surface. The acupressure wristbands were applied 30 min before induction of anesthesia and were removed six hours postoperatively. Anesthesia was induced with thiopental and maintained with nitrous oxide and oxygen, fentanyl, isoflurane and vecuronium. The tracheas were extubated on the operation table after patients received neostigmine and atropine. Post operative nausea and vomiting were evaluated separately as none, mild, moderate or severe at the time of patient's arrival in PACU, then at six hours and twenty-four hours after surgery by a blinded observer.

RESULTS

In the acupressure group, 25 patients had PONV compared with 29 patients in the control group (P = NS).

CONCLUSION

Application of acupressure wristbands at the P6 of both forearms 30 min before induction of anesthesia did not decrease the incidence of PONV in patients undergoing endoscopic urological procedures.

The use of nonpharmacologic techniques to prevent postoperative nausea and vomiting: a meta-analysis

We assessed the efficacy of nonpharmacologic techniques to prevent postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) by systematic review. These studies included acupuncture, electroacupuncture, transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation, acupoint stimulation, and acupressure. Of the 24 randomized trials retrieved by a search of articles indexed on the MEDLINE and EMBASE databases (1980-1997), 19 were eligible for meta-analysis. The primary outcomes were the incidence of nausea, vomiting, or both 0-6 h (early efficacy) or 0-48 h (late efficacy) after surgery. The pooled relative risk (RR) and numbers needed to treat (NNT) were calculated. In children, no benefit was found. Some results in adults were significant. Nonpharmacologic techniques were similar to antiemetics in preventing early vomiting (RR = 0.89 [95% confidence interval 0.47-1.67]; NNT = 63 [10-infinity]) and late vomiting (RR = 0.80 [0.35-1.81]; NNT = 25 [5-infinity]) in adults. Nonpharmacologic techniques were better than placebo at preventing early nausea (RR = 0.34 [0.20-0.58]; NNT = 4 [3-6]) and early vomiting in adults (RR = 0.47 [0.34-0.64]; NNT = 5 [4-8]). Nonpharmacologic techniques were similar to placebo in preventing late vomiting in adults (RR = 0.81 [0.46-1.42]; NNT = 14 [6-infinity]). Using nonpharmacologic techniques, 20%-25% of adults will not have early PONV compared with placebo. It may be an alternative to receiving no treatment or first-line antiemetics.

IMPLICATIONS

This systematic review showed that nonpharmacologic techniques were equivalent to commonly used antiemetic drugs in preventing vomiting after surgery. Nonpharmacologic techniques were more effective than placebo in preventing nausea and vomiting within 6 h of surgery in adults, but there was no benefit in children.

Traditional alternatives as complementary sciences: the case of Indo-Tibetan medicine

Traditional medical systems, like those preserved in Asia, pose a challenge because they involve theories and practices that strike many conventionally trained physicians and researchers as incomprehensible, even nonsensical. Should modern medicine continue to dismiss these systems as unscientific, therefore worthy of debunking rather than serious study; view them as sources of alternatives, possibly effective but hidden in a matrix of prescientific custom and belief; or do they represent something like a complementary science of medicine? We make the latter argument using the example of Indo-Tibetan medicine. Indo-Tibetan medicine is based on analytic models and methods that are rationally defined, internally coherent, and make testable predictions, therefore meeting current definitions of "science." The possibility of multiple, complementary sciences is a consequence of certain findings in physics that have led to a view of science as a set of tools-instruments of social activity that depend on learned agreement in aims and methods-rather than as a monolith of absolute objective truth. Implications of this pluralistic view of science for medical research and practice are discussed.

Acupressure versus intravenous metoclopramide to prevent nausea and vomiting during spinal anesthesia for cesarean section

Nausea and vomiting occur frequently during cesarean section under spinal anesthesia. Metoclopramide reduces intraoperative nausea and vomiting, but not without potential side effects. Acupressure, a noninvasive variation of acupuncture that involves constant pressure on the wrist, has been suggested as an alternative method to prevent nausea and vomiting. The aim of this study was to compare acupressure and intravenous (IV) metoclopramide for the prevention of nausea and vomiting during elective cesarean section under spinal anesthesia. Seventy-five patients were studied in a randomized, prospective, double-blind comparative trial. Group I patients received acupressure bands + 2 mLIV saline, Group II patients received placebo wrist bands + 10 mg IV metoclopramide, and Group III patients received placebo wrist bands + 2 mL IV saline. Patients who received either acupressure or metoclopramide prior to initiation of spinal anesthesia for cesarean section had much less nausea than patients in the placebo group. Acupressure is an effective, non-pharmacologic method to reduce intraoperative nausea during elective cesarean section in the awake patient.