Quantitive systematic review of topically applied non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs
- 31 January 1998
- Vol. 316 (7128) , 333-338
- https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.316.7128.333
Abstract
Objective: To review the effectiveness and safety of topical non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs in acute and chronic pain conditions. Design: Quantitive systematic review of randomised controlled trials. Data sources: 86 trials involving 10 160 patients. Main outcome measures: Measures of treatment success approximating at least 50% reduction in pain, local and systemic adverse effects. Analysis at 1 week for acute and 2 weeks for chronic conditions with relative benefit and number needed to treat. Results: In acute pain conditions (soft tissue trauma, strains, and sprains) placebo controlled trials had a relative benefit of 1.7 (1.5 to 1.9), the number needed to treat was 3.9 (3.4 to 4.4). With analysis by drug (at least three trials), ketoprofen (number needed to treat 2.6), felbinac (3.0), ibuprofen (3.5), and piroxicam (4.2) had significant efficacy. Benzydamine and indomethacin were no different from placebo. In chronic pain conditions (osteoarthritis, tendinitis) placebo controlled trials had a relative benefit of 2.0 (1.5 to 2.7); the number needed to treat was 3.1 (2.7 to 3.8). Small trials (Conclusion: Topical non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs are effective in relieving pain in acute and chronic conditions. Topical non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs are widely thought to be ineffective, despite licensed status To evaluate their effectiveness and safety we conducted a quantitive systematic review of all relevant randomised trials In acute conditions like strains and sprains topical non-steroidals were significantly better than placebo over 1 week with a number needed to treat of 3.9 (3.4 to 4.4). For drugs with at least three placebo controlled trials ketoprofen (number needed to treat 2.6), felbinac (3.0), ibuprofen (3.5), and piroxicam (4.2) had significant efficacy In chronic conditions like arthritis and rheumatism topical non-steroidals were significantly better than placebo over 2 weeks with a number needed to treat of 3.1 (2.7 to 3.8) In both acute and chronic pain local and systemic adverse events and withdrawal related to tested drug had a low incidence and were no different from placeboKeywords
This publication has 13 references indexed in Scilit:
- Fortnightly review: Treating acute pain in hospitalBMJ, 1997
- Using Numerical Results from Systematic Reviews in Clinical PracticeAnnals of Internal Medicine, 1997
- Developing a database of published reports of randomised clinical trials in pain research 1Pain, 1996
- Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and elderly patientsBMJ, 1995
- The number needed to treat: a clinically useful measure of treatment effectBMJ, 1995
- Pharmacoeconomics of Nonsteroidal Anti-Inflammatory Drugs (NSAIDs)PharmacoEconomics, 1993
- Feasibility of Measuring the Bioavailability of Topical Ibuprofen in Commercial Formulations Using Drug Content in Epidermis and a Methyl Nicotinate Skin Inflammation AssaySkin Pharmacology and Physiology, 1993
- Topical Indomethacin in Overuse Injuries in Athletes. A Randomized Double-Blind Study Comparing Elmetacin®with Oral Indomethacin and PlaceboInternational Journal of Sports Medicine, 1990
- An Assessment of Clinically Useful Measures of the Consequences of TreatmentNew England Journal of Medicine, 1988
- Beta blockade during and after myocardial infarction: An overview of the randomized trialsProgress in Cardiovascular Diseases, 1985