title: Oral analgesia for relieving post-caesarean pain.
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.
  
  
  OBJECTIVE
  To determine the effectiveness, safety and cost-effectiveness of oral analgesia for post-caesarean pain relief.
  
  
  METHODS
  We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (31 July 2014) and reference lists of retrieved studies.
  
  
  METHODS
  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.
  
  
  METHODS
  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.
  
  
  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.
  
  
  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.
authors.affiliation: Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, East London Hospital Complex, Walter Sisulu University, East London, Eastern Cape, South Africa, 5200.
authors.forename: Nondumiso
authors.initials: N
authors.lastname: Mkontwana
authors.forename: Natalia
authors.initials: N
authors.lastname: Novikova
mesh_terms: D000284:Administration, Oral; D000328:Adult; D000698:Analgesia / Q000379:methods*; D018712:Analgesics, Non-Narcotic / Q000008:administration & dosage; D000701:Analgesics, Opioid / Q000008:administration & dosage*; D002585:Cesarean Section / Q000009:adverse effects*; D004359:Drug Therapy, Combination / Q000379:methods; D005260:Female; D006801:Humans; D010149:Postoperative Pain / Q000188:drug therapy*; D011247:Pregnancy; D016032:Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
chemical_list: D018712:Analgesics, Non-Narcotic; D000701:Analgesics, Opioid
references.citation: BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2012 Jan 09;12:3
references.pmid: 22230339
references.citation: Int J Obstet Anesth. 2008 Jan;17(1):9-14
references.pmid: 17981455
references.citation: Int J Obstet Anesth. 2010 Jan;19(1):16-23
references.pmid: 19700304
references.citation: Drugs. 2003;63(9):855-67
references.pmid: 12678572
references.citation: Anesth Analg. 2002 Sep;95(3):741-5, table of contents
references.pmid: 12198063
references.citation: Anesth Analg. 2007 Jul;105(1):176-83
references.pmid: 17578973
references.citation: Paediatr Perinat Epidemiol. 2007 Mar;21(2):98-113
references.pmid: 17302638
references.citation: Clin Perinatol. 2008 Jun;35(2):293-307, v
references.pmid: 18456070
references.citation: Pain. 1997 Jan;69(1-2):127-30
references.pmid: 9060022
references.citation: Rev Bras Anestesiol. 2003 Aug;53(4):431-9
references.pmid: 19475295
references.citation: Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2011 May;113(2):144-7
references.pmid: 21435642
references.citation: Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2010 Mar 17;(3):CD008407
references.pmid: 20238369
references.citation: Eur Spine J. 2007 Jan;16(1):115-21
references.pmid: 16676151
references.citation: Br J Anaesth. 2003 May;90(5):653-8
references.pmid: 12697594
references.citation: Clin Pharmacol Ther. 1987 Oct;42(4):374-80
references.pmid: 3311548
references.citation: J Clin Pharmacol. 1986 Nov-Dec;26(8):706-11
references.pmid: 3540033
references.citation: Health Psychol. 1996 Jul;15(4):303-14
references.pmid: 8818678
references.citation: Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2012 Oct;286(4):859-65
references.pmid: 22622852
references.citation: Clin Pharmacol Ther. 1993 Apr;53(4):469-78
references.pmid: 8477564
references.citation: Can J Anaesth. 2001 Nov;48(10):1000-10
references.pmid: 11698320
references.citation: Can J Anaesth. 2006 Dec;53(12):1200-6
references.pmid: 17142654
references.citation: Clin Ther. 2000 May;22(5):600-12
references.pmid: 10868557
references.citation: Reg Anesth Pain Med. 2001 Sep-Oct;26(5):461-7
references.pmid: 11561268
references.citation: Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2011 Aug;90(8):925-6
references.pmid: 21615357
references.citation: BMC Anesthesiol. 2007 Jul 07;7:6
references.pmid: 17617920
references.citation: Midwifery. 2006 Sep;22(3):249-61
references.pmid: 16356609
references.citation: Anesth Analg. 2005 Mar;100(3):795-802
references.pmid: 15728070
references.citation: Anesth Analg. 2012 Dec;115(6):1336-42
references.pmid: 23011560
references.citation: Anesth Analg. 1993 Aug;77(2):362-79
references.pmid: 8346839
references.citation: Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2006 Apr;194(4):967-71
references.pmid: 16580284
references.citation: Acta Anaesthesiol Scand. 1989 Jan;33(1):39-47
references.pmid: 2563622
references.citation: J Clin Pharmacol. 1985 Jul-Aug;25(5):374-80
references.pmid: 3897296
references.citation: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2002 Oct 15;99(21):13926-31
references.pmid: 12242329
references.citation: Clin Pharmacol Ther. 1992 Jun;51(6):740-6
references.pmid: 1351804
references.citation: Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2009 Jul 08;(3):CD007076
references.pmid: 19588419
references.citation: Anesth Analg. 2006 Sep;103(3):664-70
references.pmid: 16931678
references.citation: Anesthesiology. 1990 Feb;72(2):233-7
references.pmid: 2105673
references.citation: Anaesth Intensive Care. 2014 Jan;42(1):15-22
references.pmid: 24471659
references.citation: Anesth Analg. 2011 Jan;112(1):167-73
references.pmid: 21081764
references.citation: Int J Obstet Anesth. 1994 Oct;3(4):203-7
references.pmid: 15636951
references.citation: Anaesthesia. 2004 Sep;59(9):876-80
references.pmid: 15310350
references.citation: Br J Anaesth. 2008 Jun;100(6):861-2
references.pmid: 18483117
references.citation: Anesth Analg. 1993 Nov;77(5):925-32
references.pmid: 8214728
references.citation: Int J Obstet Anesth. 2010 Jan;19(1):4-9
references.pmid: 19733050
references.citation: Prim Care Update Ob Gyns. 1998 Jul 1;5(4):195
references.pmid: 10838371
references.citation: Acta Anaesthesiol Sin. 2000 Mar;38(1):23-9
references.pmid: 11000660
references.citation: Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2009 Oct;201(4):422.e1-7
references.pmid: 19788975
references.citation: Pain. 1997 Feb;69(3):311-315
references.pmid: 9085306
references.citation: Zhonghua Yi Xue Za Zhi. 2011 Aug 16;91(30):2132-4
references.pmid: 22093991
references.citation: J Obstet Gynaecol Can. 2007 Dec;29(12):975-981
references.pmid: 18053382
references.citation: Anesth Analg. 1990 Oct;71(4):367-70
references.pmid: 2205128
references.citation: J Clin Pharmacol. 1997 Oct;37(10):908-15
references.pmid: 9505982
references.citation: Clin Pharmacol Ther. 1993 Nov;54(5):546-55
references.pmid: 8222498
references.citation: Am J Med. 1986 Mar 24;80(3A):60-4
references.pmid: 3515926
references.citation: Anesth Analg. 2005 Nov;101(5 Suppl):S62-S69
references.pmid: 16334493
references.citation: Am J Med. 1986 Mar 24;80(3A):55-9
references.pmid: 3515925
references.citation: Acta Anaesthesiol Scand. 1996 Apr;40(4):399-407
references.pmid: 8738682