Literature DB >> 25821010

Oral analgesia for relieving post-caesarean pain.

Nondumiso Mkontwana1, Natalia Novikova.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Oral analgesia is a convenient and widely used form of pain relief following caesarean section. It includes various medications used at different doses alone or in adjunction to other form of analgesia.
OBJECTIVES: To determine the effectiveness, safety and cost-effectiveness of oral analgesia for post-caesarean pain relief. SEARCH
METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (31 July 2014) and reference lists of retrieved studies. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs). Cluster-randomised trials were eligible for inclusion but none were identified. Quasi-randomised and cross-over trials were not eligible for inclusion.Interventions included oral medication given to women for post-caesarean pain relief compared with oral medication, or placebo/no treatment. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently assessed for inclusion all the potential studies and independently assessed trial quality, extracted the data using the agreed data extraction form, and checked them for accuracy. MAIN
RESULTS: Eight small trials involving 962 women (out of 13 included trials) contributed data to the analysis, of which only four trials had low risk of bias.None of the included studies reported on 'adequate pain relief', which is one of this review's primary outcomes. 1. Opiod analgesics versus placeboBased on one trial involving 120 women, the effect of opioids versus placebo was not significant in relation to the need for additional pain relief (primary outcome) (risk ratio (RR) 0.33, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.06 to 1.92), and the effect in terms of adverse drug effects outcomes was also uncertain (RR 6.58, 95% CI 0.38 to 113.96).Low (75 mg) and high (150 mg) doses of tramadol had a similar effect on the need for additional pain relief (RR 0.67, 95% CI 0.12 to 3.78 and RR 0.14, 95% CI 0.01 to 2.68, respectively, one study, 80 women). 2. Non-opioid analgesia versus placeboThe confidence interval for the lower requirement for additional analgesia (primary outcome) with the non-opioid analgesia group was wide and includes little or no effect (average RR 0.70, 95% CI 0.48 to 1.01, six studies, 584 women). However, we observed substantial heterogeneity due to the variety of non-opioid drugs used (I(2) = 85%). In a subgroup analysis of different drugs, only gabapentin use resulted in less need for additional pain relief (RR 0.34, 95% CI 0.23 to 0.51, one trial, 126 women). There was no difference in need for additional pain relief with the use of celexocib, ibuprofen, ketoprofen, naproxen, paracetamol. Maternal drug effects were more common with the use of non-opioid analgesics (RR 11.12, 95% CI 2.13 to 58.22, two trials, 267 women).Gabapentin 300 mg (RR 0.25, 95% CI 0.13 to 0.49, one study, 63 women) and 600 mg (RR 0.44, 95% CI 0.27 to 0.71, one study, 63 women) as well as ketoprofen 100 mg (RR 0.55, 95% CI 0.39 to 0.79, one study 72 women) were both more effective than placebo with respect to the need for additional pain relief. However, the 50 mg ketoprofen group and the placebo group did not differ in terms of the number of women requiring additional pain relief (RR 0.82, 95% CI 0.64 to 1.07, one study, 72 women). 3. Combination analgesics versus placeboOur pooled analysis for the effect of combination analgesics on the need for additional pain relief was RR 0.70 (95% CI 0.35 to 1.40, three trials, 242 women, I(2) = 69%). When comparing different drugs within the combination oral analgesics versus placebo comparison we observed subgroup differences (P = 0.05; I² = 65.8%). One trial comparing paracetamol plus codeine versus placebo resulted in fewer women requiring additional pain relief (RR 0.44, 95% CI 0.23 to 0.82, one trial, 65 women). However, there were no differences in the the number of women requiring additional pain relief when comparing paracetamol plus oxycodone versus placebo, or paracetamol plus propoxyphene (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.78 to 1.28, one trial, 96 women and RR 0.65, 95% CI 0.11 to 3.69, one trial, 81 women, respectively).Maternal drug effects were more common in combination analgesics group versus placebo (RR 13.18, 95% CI 2.86 to 60.68, three trials, 252 women). 4. Opioid analgesics versus non-opioid analgesicsThe confidence interval for the effect on additional pain relief between opioid and non-opioid drugs was very wide (RR 0.51, 95% CI 0.07 to 3.51, one trial, 121 women). Side effects were more common with the use opioids versus non-opioids analgesics (RR 2.32, 95% CI 1.15 to 4.69, two trials 241 women). 5. Opioid analgesics versus combination analgesicsThere was no difference in need for additional pain relief in opioid analgesics versus combination analgesics based on one study involving 121 women comparing tramadol and paracetamol plus propoxyphene (RR 0.51, 95% CI 0.07 to 3.51). Maternal adverse effects also did not differ between the two groups (RR 6.74, 95% CI 0.39 to 116.79). 6. Non-opioid versus combination analgesicsThe need for additional pain relief was greater in the group of women who received non-opoid analgesics (RR 0.87, 95% CI 0.81 to 0.93, one trial, 192 women) compared with the group of women who received combination analgesics. Secondary outcomes not reported in the included studiesNo data were found on the following secondary outcomes: number of days in hospital post-operatively, re-hospitalisation due to incisional pain, fully breastfeeding on discharge, mixed feeding at discharge, incisional pain at six weeks after caesarean section, maternal post partum depression, effect (negative) on mother and baby interaction and cost of treatment. AUTHORS'
CONCLUSIONS: Eight trials with 962 women were included in the analysis, but only four trials were of high quality. All the trials were small. We carried out subgroup analysis for different drugs within the same group and for high versus low doses of the same drug. However, the relatively few studies (one to two trials) and numbers of women (40 to 136) limits the reliability of these subgroup analyses.Due to limited data available no conclusions can be made regarding the safest and the most effective form of oral analgesia for post-caesarean pain. Further studies are necessary.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2015        PMID: 25821010      PMCID: PMC8923051          DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD010450.pub2

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev        ISSN: 1361-6137


  56 in total

1.  Rates of caesarean section: analysis of global, regional and national estimates.

Authors:  Ana P Betrán; Mario Merialdi; Jeremy A Lauer; Wang Bing-Shun; Jane Thomas; Paul Van Look; Marsden Wagner
Journal:  Paediatr Perinat Epidemiol       Date:  2007-03       Impact factor: 3.980

Review 2.  Cesarean birth in the United States: epidemiology, trends, and outcomes.

Authors:  Marian F MacDorman; Fay Menacker; Eugene Declercq
Journal:  Clin Perinatol       Date:  2008-06       Impact factor: 3.430

Review 3.  Optimising postoperative pain management in the ambulatory patient.

Authors:  Allan B Shang; Tong J Gan
Journal:  Drugs       Date:  2003       Impact factor: 9.546

4.  Deriving dichotomous outcome measures from continuous data in randomised controlled trials of analgesics: verification from independent data.

Authors:  A Moore; H McQuay; D Gavaghan
Journal:  Pain       Date:  1997-01       Impact factor: 6.961

5.  Single-dose, extended-release epidural morphine (DepoDur) compared to conventional epidural morphine for post-cesarean pain.

Authors:  Brendan Carvalho; Laura M Roland; Larry F Chu; Vincent A Campitelli; Edward T Riley
Journal:  Anesth Analg       Date:  2007-07       Impact factor: 5.108

6.  A double-blind randomised controlled trial of paracetamol, diclofenac or the combination for pain relief after caesarean section.

Authors:  B Munishankar; P Fettes; C Moore; G A McLeod
Journal:  Int J Obstet Anesth       Date:  2007-11-05       Impact factor: 2.603

7.  A randomised comparison of regular oral oxycodone and intrathecal morphine for post-caesarean analgesia.

Authors:  N J McDonnell; M J Paech; R M Browning; E A Nathan
Journal:  Int J Obstet Anesth       Date:  2009-08-22       Impact factor: 2.603

8.  [Effects of low spinal morphine doses associated to intravenous and oral ketoprofen in patients submitted to cesarean sections].

Authors:  Eliana Marisa Ganem; Norma Sueli Pinheiro Módolo; Fábio Ferrari; Francisco Carlos Obata Cordon; Edgar Shiguero Koguti; Yara Marcondes Machado Castiglia
Journal:  Rev Bras Anestesiol       Date:  2003-08       Impact factor: 0.964

9.  A randomized controlled trial examining the effect of naproxen on analgesia during the second day after cesarean delivery.

Authors:  Pamela J Angle; Stephen H Halpern; Barbara L Leighton; J P Szalai; K Gnanendran; Jean E Kronberg
Journal:  Anesth Analg       Date:  2002-09       Impact factor: 5.108

10.  Limiting the caesarean section rate in low risk pregnancies is key to lowering the trend of increased abdominal deliveries: an observational study.

Authors:  Ilse Delbaere; Hendrik Cammu; Evelyne Martens; Inge Tency; Guy Martens; Marleen Temmerman
Journal:  BMC Pregnancy Childbirth       Date:  2012-01-09       Impact factor: 3.007

View more
  8 in total

Review 1.  Stroke in Pregnancy: A Focused Update.

Authors:  Eliza C Miller; Lisa Leffert
Journal:  Anesth Analg       Date:  2020-04       Impact factor: 5.108

Review 2.  Does Caesarean Section Affect Breastfeeding Practices in China? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Authors:  Jian Zhao; Yun Zhao; Mengran Du; Colin W Binns; Andy H Lee
Journal:  Matern Child Health J       Date:  2017-11

3.  A cost-effectiveness analysis of maternal CYP2D6 genetic testing to guide treatment for postpartum pain and avert infant adverse events.

Authors:  M E Moretti; D F Lato; H Berger; G Koren; S Ito; W J Ungar
Journal:  Pharmacogenomics J       Date:  2017-07-11       Impact factor: 3.550

4.  Predicting Opioid Use Following Discharge After Cesarean Delivery.

Authors:  Jacqueline A Carrico; Katharine Mahoney; Kristen M Raymond; Shannon K McWilliams; Lena M Mayes; Susan K Mikulich-Gilbertson; Karsten Bartels
Journal:  Ann Fam Med       Date:  2020-03       Impact factor: 5.166

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

Authors:  E Roofthooft; G P Joshi; N Rawal; M Van de Velde
Journal:  Anaesthesia       Date:  2020-12-28       Impact factor: 12.893

6.  Is ABO Blood Group a Predictive Factor for the Amount of Opioid Consumption in the First 24 Hours After Cesarean Section?

Authors:  Sasikaan Nimmaanrat; Withaporn Thongkumdee; Alan F Geater; Maliwan Oofuvong; Pannawit Benjhawaleemas
Journal:  J Pain Res       Date:  2021-11-23       Impact factor: 3.133

7.  Effectiveness of Acupuncture for Pain Control After Cesarean Delivery: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Authors:  Taras I Usichenko; Berthold Johannes Henkel; Catharina Klausenitz; Thomas Hesse; Guillermo Pierdant; Mike Cummings; Klaus Hahnenkamp
Journal:  JAMA Netw Open       Date:  2022-02-01

8.  Characterization of the intergenerational impact of in utero and postnatal oxycodone exposure.

Authors:  Katherine E Odegaard; Victoria L Schaal; Alexander R Clark; Sneh Koul; Austin Gowen; Jagadesan Sankarasubramani; Peng Xiao; Chittibabu Guda; Steven J Lisco; Sowmya V Yelamanchili; Gurudutt Pendyala
Journal:  Transl Psychiatry       Date:  2020-09-23       Impact factor: 6.222

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.