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

Influence of transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation on pain intensity and functional activities following lower segment cesarean section

BACKGROUND

Postoperative incisional pain following lower segment cesarean section (LSCS) is one of the commonly reported complaints which may affect mother-infant bonding, and restrict mobility and functional activities.

PURPOSE

To study the influence of transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) on pain intensity and functional activities using the Numerical Pain Rating Scale (NPRS) and the Patient Specific Functional Scale (PSFS) following LSCS from the postoperative day (POD) 1 to POD 4.

METHODS

This quasi-experimental study consisted of 50 postpartum women who underwent LSCS and were assigned to an intervention group (IG) that received TENS and a control group (CG) that received routine hospital care.

RESULTS

NPRS scores between CG and IG (pre-TENS application) showed a statistically significant difference (ηp2 = 0.542, p < .001) from POD 1 to POD 4. Study participants showed an improvement in PSFS scores (ηp2 = 0.412, 0.488, 0.661, 0.304, 0.262, and 0.395, p < .001) in IG compared to CG for bed transitions, bed transfers, sitting, sit to stand, walking, and toileting activities respectively from POD 1 to POD 4 which was statistically significant.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study results suggest that administration of TENS following LSCS shows an improvement in pain intensity and functional activities as reported on NPRS and PSFS respectively.

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.

A Mixed-Methods Study of the Effect of Abdominal Binders on Opioid Use and Postoperative Pain After Cesarean Birth

OBJECTIVE

To compare levels of postoperative oxycodone use and incisional pain between two randomized groups-an intervention and a control.

DESIGN

Mixed-methods design; quantitative data achieved via a randomized controlled trial, with qualitative data collected on binder use. The primary variable was oxycodone (in milligrams) required during the first 48 hours after birth, and the secondary variable was incisional pain levels measured on Postoperative Days 1 and 2.

SETTING

Acute-care community hospital in Wheat Ridge, Colorado, and an acute care urban hospital in Denver, Colorado.

PARTICIPANTS

A total of 220 individuals in the postpartum period after having cesarean birth.

INTERVENTIONS/MEASUREMENTS

Participants were randomized to the intervention group (binder) or the control group (no binder). Data were collected on opioid usage for the first 48 hours. Participants in both groups were asked to rate their incisional pain on Postoperative Day 1 (24 hours after birth) and Postoperative Day 2 (48 hours after birth). Participants in the binder group were also asked to provide feedback on their experience wearing the binder.

RESULTS

A total of 196 participants completed the study. The overall amount of oxycodone taken by individuals in the binder group was lower than that in the control group, but the difference was not statistically significant (p = .10). Pain scores in the binder group were significantly lower on Day 2 compared with the control group (p = .002). The majority of individuals in the binder group provided positive feedback about their experience wearing the binder.

CONCLUSION

Individuals routinely receive medications to assist with pain management postoperatively. Because of growing concerns related to the nation's opioid addiction crisis, there is interest in using multimodal treatments to achieve adequate pain control for individuals postoperatively. Abdominal binders are a low-cost intervention to assist with pain management and, given the results of this study, seem like a reasonable option to consider.

A systematic review of patient-reported outcome measures to assess postpartum pain using Consensus Based Standards for the Selection of Health Measurement Instruments (COSMIN) guidelines

BACKGROUND

We performed a systematic review using Consensus Based Standards for the Selection of Health Measurement Instruments (COSMIN) guidelines to identify the best available patient-reported outcome measure (PROM) of postpartum pain.

METHODS

This review follows COSMIN guidelines. We searched four databases with no date limiters, for previously identified validated PROMs used to assess postpartum pain. PROMs evaluating more than one author-defined domain of postpartum pain were assessed. We sought studies evaluating psychometric properties. An overall rating was then assigned based upon COSMIN analysis, and the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach was used to assess the level of evidence for psychometric properties of included PROMs. These assessments were used to make recommendations and identify the best PROM to assess postpartum pain.

RESULTS

We identified 19 studies using seven PROMs (involving 3511 women), which evaluated postpartum pain. All included studies evaluated ≥1 psychometric property of the included PROMs. An adequate number of pain domains was assessed by the Brief Pain Inventory (BPI), Short Form-BPI (SF-BPI), and McGill Pain Questionnaire (MPQ). The SF-BPI was the only PROM to demonstrate adequate content validity and at least a low-level of evidence for sufficient internal consistency, resulting in a Class A recommendation (the best performing instrument, recommended for use).

CONCLUSION

SF-BPI is the best currently available PROM to assess postpartum pain. However, it fails to assess several important domains and only just met the criteria for a Class A recommendation. Future studies are warranted to develop, evaluate, and implement a new PROM designed to specifically assess postpartum pain.

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.

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.