↓ Skip to main content

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

Oral non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (single dose) for perineal pain in the early postpartum period

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, July 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (96th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (86th percentile)

Mentioned by

1 blog
82 tweeters
3 Facebook pages
1 Google+ user


25 Dimensions

Readers on

193 Mendeley
1 CiteULike
Oral non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (single dose) for perineal pain in the early postpartum period
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, July 2016
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd011352.pub2
Pubmed ID

Francesca Wuytack, Valerie Smith, Brian J Cleary


Many women experience perineal pain after childbirth, especially after having sustained perineal trauma. Perineal pain-management strategies are thus an important part of postnatal care. Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are a commonly used type of medication in the management of postpartum pain and their effectiveness and safety should be assessed. To determine the effectiveness of a single dose of an oral NSAID for relief of acute perineal pain in the early postpartum period. We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (31 March 2016), OpenSIGLE, ProQuest Dissertations and Theses, the ISRCTN Registry and ClinicalTrials.gov (31 March 2016). We also reviewed reference lists of retrieved papers and contacted experts in the field. Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) assessing a single dose of a NSAID versus a single dose of placebo, paracetamol or another NSAID for women with perineal pain in the early postpartum period. Quasi-RCTs and cross-over trials were excluded. Two review authors (FW and VS) independently assessed all identified papers for inclusion and risk of bias. Any discrepancies were resolved through discussion and consensus. Data extraction, including calculations of pain relief scores, was also conducted independently by two review authors and checked for accuracy. We included 28 studies that examined 13 different NSAIDs and involved 4181 women (none of whom were breastfeeding). Studies were published between 1967 and 2013, with the majority published in the 1980s. Of the 4181 women involved in the studies, 2642 received a NSAID and 1539 received placebo or paracetamol. Risk of bias was generally unclear due to poor reporting, but in most studies the participants and personnel were blinded, outcome data were complete and the outcomes that were specified in the methods section were reported.None of the included studies reported on any of this review's secondary outcomes: prolonged hospitalisation or re-hospitalisation due to perineal pain; breastfeeding (fully or mixed) at discharge; breastfeeding (fully or mixed) at six weeks; perineal pain at six weeks; maternal views; postpartum depression; instrumental measures of disability due to perineal pain. NSAID versus placeboCompared to women who received a placebo, more women who received a single dose NSAID achieved adequate pain relief at four hours (risk ratio (RR) 1.91, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.64 to 2.23, 10 studies, 1573 participants (low-quality evidence)) and adequate pain relief at six hours (RR 1.92, 95% CI 1.69 to 2.17, 17 studies, 2079 participants (very low-quality evidence)). Women who received a NSAID were also less likely to need additional analgesia compared to women who received placebo at four hours (RR 0.39, 95% CI 0.26 to 0.58, four studies, 486 participants (low-quality evidence)) and at six hours after initial administration (RR 0.32, 95% CI 0.26 to 0.40, 10 studies, 1012 participants (low-quality evidence)). Fourteen maternal adverse effects were reported in the NSAID group (drowsiness (5), abdominal discomfort (2), weakness (1), dizziness (2), headache (2), moderate epigastralgia (1), not specified (1)) and eight in the placebo group (drowsiness (2), light headed (1), nausea (1), backache (1), dizziness (1), epigastric pain (1), not specified (1)), although not all studies assessed adverse effects. There was no difference in overall maternal adverse effects between NSAIDs and placebo at six hours post-administration (RR 1.38, 95% CI 0.71 to 2.70, 13 studies, 1388 participants (very low-quality evidence)). One small study (with two treatment arms) assessed maternal adverse effects at four hours post-administration, but there were no maternal adverse effects observed (one study, 90 participants (low-quality evidence)). Neonatal adverse effects were not assessed in any of the included studies. NSAID versus paracetamolNSAIDs versus paracetamol were also more effective for adequate pain relief at four hours (RR 1.54, 95% CI 1.07 to 2.22, three studies, 342 participants) but not at six hours post-administration. There was no difference in the need for additional analgesia between the two groups at four hours (RR 0.55, 95% CI 0.27 to 1.13, one study, 73 participants), but women in the NSAID group were less likely to need any additional analgesia at six hours (RR 0.28, 95% CI 0.12 to 0.67, one study, 59 participants). No maternal adverse effects were reported four hours after drug administration (one study). Six hours post-administration, there was no difference between the groups in the number of maternal adverse effects (RR 0.74, 95% CI 0.27 to 2.08, three studies, 300 participants), with one case of pruritis in the NSAID group and one case of sleepiness in the paracetamol group. Neonatal adverse effects were not assessed in any of the included studies.Comparisons of different NSAIDs and different doses of the same NSAID did not demonstrate any differences in their effectiveness on any of the primary outcome measures; however, few data were available on some NSAIDs. In women who are not breastfeeding and who sustained perineal trauma, NSAIDs (compared to placebo) provide greater pain relief for acute postpartum perineal pain and fewer women need additional analgesia when treated with a NSAID. However, the risk of bias was unclear for many of the included studies, adverse effects were often not assessed and breastfeeding women were not included in the studies. The overall quality of the evidence (GRADE) was low with the evidence for all outcomes rated as low or very low. The main reasons for downgrading were inclusion of studies with high risk of bias and inconsistency of findings of individual studies.NSAIDs also appear to be more effective in providing relief for perineal pain than paracetamol, but few studies were included in this analysis.Future studies should examine NSAIDs' adverse effects profile including neonatal adverse effects and the compatibility of NSAIDs with breastfeeding, and assess other important secondary outcomes of this review. Moreover, studies mostly included women who had episiotomies. Future research should consider women with and without perineal trauma, including perineal tears. High-quality studies should be conducted to further assess the efficacy of NSAIDs versus paracetamol and the efficacy of multimodal treatments.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 82 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 193 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Unknown 192 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 41 21%
Student > Bachelor 25 13%
Researcher 17 9%
Student > Ph. D. Student 17 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 13 7%
Other 30 16%
Unknown 50 26%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 52 27%
Nursing and Health Professions 38 20%
Psychology 15 8%
Social Sciences 6 3%
Engineering 4 2%
Other 25 13%
Unknown 53 27%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 62. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 27 September 2017.
All research outputs
of 17,411,817 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
of 11,670 outputs
Outputs of similar age
of 265,389 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
of 136 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 17,411,817 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 97th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,670 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 25.1. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 265,389 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 136 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% of its contemporaries.