Key Points
-
This paper reviews the available high quality information on analgesics commonly prescribed by dentists, including COX-2 selective inhibitors.
-
Problems related to chance effects are avoided by combining multiple trials in a meta-analysis.
-
There is good evidence of efficacy for most commonly-prescribed analgesics.
-
Standard doses of NSAIDs and COX-2 inhibitors provide the best analgesia and lowest rate of adverse events.
Abstract
Objectives To compare the relative efficacy of analgesics after third molar extraction from systematic reviews of randomised, double blind studies.
Data sources Dental trials from systematic reviews of randomised, double-blind studies of analgesics in acute pain.
Data selection Number of patients with moderate or severe pain achieving at least half pain relief over 4 to 6 hours after a single oral dose of analgesic.
Data extraction Independently by two reviewers.
Data synthesis Use of dichotomous information from active and placebo treatments, first to calculate the statistical significance using relative risk, and then to evaluate the clinical relevance using number needed to treat (NNT). Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) and cyclo-oxygenase-2 (COX-2) inhibitors had the lowest (best) NNTs for the outcome of at least half pain relief over 4-6 hours compared with placebo. With the best performing analgesics, 50-70 patients out of 100 had good pain relief compared with about 10 out of 100 with placebo. Only paracetamol 600/650 mg plus codeine 60 mg was associated with any significant increase in any patient experiencing an adverse event.
Conclusions NSAIDs and COX-2 inhibitors have the lowest (best) NNTs. They may also have fewer adverse effects after third molar surgery, though conclusive evidence is lacking. At least 80% of analgesic prescribing by UK dentists is in line with the best available evidence on efficacy and safety.
Similar content being viewed by others
Log in or create a free account to read this content
Gain free access to this article, as well as selected content from this journal and more on nature.com
or
References
Beecher HK, Keats AS, Mosteller F . The effectiveness of oral analgesics (morphine, codeine, acetylsalicylic acid) and the problem of placebo 'reactors' and 'nonreactors'. J Pharmacol 1953; 109: 93–400.
Beecher HK . The measurement of pain. Pharmacol Rev 1957; 9: 59–210.
Houde RW, Wallenstein SL, Beaver WT . Clinical measurement of pain. In: G. De Stevens (ed). Analgetics pp75–122. New York and London: Academic Press, 1965.
Moore RA, Gavaghan D, Tramèr MR, Collins SL, McQuay HJ . Size is everything — large amounts of information are needed to overcome random effects in estimating direction and magnitude of treatment effects. Pain 98; 78: 209–216.
Ioannidis JPA, Lau J . Evolution of treatment effects over time: Empirical insight from recursive cumulative metaanalyses. PNAS 2001; 98: 831–836.
McQuay HJ, Moore RA . An evidence-based resource for pain relief. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1998.
McQuay HJ, Carroll D, Moore RA . Variation in the placebo effect in randomised controlled trials of analgesics: all is as blind as it seems. Pain 1996; 64: 331–335.
Edwards JE, Oldman A, Smith L, Wiffen PJ, Carroll D, McQuay HJ, Moore RA . Oral aspirin in postoperative pain: a quantitative systematic review. Pain 1999; 81: 289–297.
Moher D, Cook DJ, Eastwood S, Olkin I, Rennie D, Stroup DF . Improving the quality of reports of meta-analyses of randomised controlled: the QUOROM statement. Lancet 1999; 354: 1896–1900.
Jadad AR, Carroll D, Moore A, McQuay H . Developing a database of published reports of randomised clinical trials in pain research. Pain 1996; 66: 239–46.
Collins SL, Moore RA, McQuay HJ, Wiffen PJ, Edward JS . Single dose oral ibuprofen and diclofenac for postoperative pain. In: The Cochrane Library, Issue 4, 2000. Oxford: Update Software.
Edwards JE, McQuay HJ, Moore RA . Single-dose dihydrocodeine for acute postoperative pain. In: The Cochrane Library, Issue 4, 2000. Oxford: Update Software.
Moore RA, Collins SL, Carroll D, McQuay HJ, Edwards J . Single dose paracetamol (acetaminophen), with and without codeine, for postoperative pain. In: The Cochrane Library, Issue 4, 2000. Oxford: Update Software.
Barden J, Edwards JE, McQuay HJ, Moore RA . Rofecoxib in acute postoperative pain: quantitative systematic review. BMC Anesthesiol 2002; 2: 4. http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2253/2/4
Edwards JE, McQuay HJ, Moore RA, Collins SL . Reporting of adverse effects in clinical trials should be improved. Lessons from acute postoperative pain. J Pain Sympt Manage 1999; 18: 427–437.
Jadad AR, Moore RA, Carroll D, et al. Assessing the quality of reports of randomized clinical trials: is blinding necessary? Control Clin Trials 1996; 17: 1–12.
Khan KS, Daya S, Jadad AR . The importance of quality of primary studies in producing unbiased systematic reviews. Arch Intern Med 1996; 156: 661–666.
Moher D, Pham B, Jones A, et al. Does quality of reports of randomised trials affect estimates of intervention efficacy reported in meta-analyses? Lancet 1998; 352: 609–613.
Cooper S A : Single-dose analgesic studies: the upside and downside of assay sensitivity. In: Max M B, Portenoy R K, and Laska E M (eds). The design of analgesic clinical trials (Advances in Pain Research and Therapy Vol. 18), pp117–124. New York: Raven Press, 1991.
Moore A, McQuay H, Gavaghan D . Deriving dichotomous outcome measures from continuous data in randomised controlled trials of analgesics. Pain 1996; 66: 229–237.
Moore A, McQuay H, Gavaghan D . Deriving dichotomous outcome measures from continuous data in randomised controlled trials of analgesics: Verification from independent data. Pain 1997; 69: 127–130.
Moore A, Moore O, McQuay H, Gavaghan D . Deriving dichotomous outcome measures from continuous data in randomised controlled trials of analgesics: Use of pain intensity and visual analogue scales. Pain 1997; 69: 311–315.
Morris JA, Gardner MJ . Calculating confidence intervals for relative risk, odds ratios and standardised ratios and rates. In: Gardner M J and Altman D G (eds). Statistics with confidence — confidence intervals and statistical guidelines. pp50–63. London: British Medical Journal, 1995.
Gavaghan DJ, Moore RA, McQuay HJ . An evaluation of homogeneity tests in meta-analyses in pain using simulations of individual patient data. Pain 2000; 85: 415–424.
Higgins J, Thompson S, Deeks J, Altman D . Statistical heterogeneity in systematic reviews of clinical trials: a critical appraisal of guidelines and practice. J Health Surv Res Policy 2002; 7: 51–61.
L'Abbé KA, Detsky AS, O'Rourke K . Meta-analysis in clinical research. Ann Intern Med 1987; 107: 224–233.
Sterne JA, Gavaghan D, Egger M . Publication and related bias in meta-analysis: power of statistical tests and prevalence in the literature. J Clin Epidemiol 2000; 53: 1119–1129.
Tang J-L, Liu JLY . Misleading funnel plot for detection of bias in meta-analysis. J Clin Epidemiol 2000; 53: 477–484.
Cook RJ, Sackett DL . The number needed to treat: a clinically useful measure of treatment effect. Br Med J 1995; 310: 452–454.
Carroll D, Tramèr M, McQuay H, Nye B, Moore A . Randomization is important in studies with pain outcomes: systematic review of transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation in acute postoperative pain. Br J Anaesth 1996; 77: 798–803.
Schulz KF, Chalmers I, Hayes RJ, Altman DG . Empirical evidence of bias: dimensions of methodological quality associated with estimates of treatment effects in controlled trials. J Am Med Assoc 1995; 273: 408–412.
McQuay HJ, Moore RA . Using numerical results from systematic reviews in clinical practice. Ann Intern Med 1997; 126: 712–720.
M Hyllested, Jones S, Pedersen JL, Kehlet H . Comparative effect of paracetamol, NSAIDs or their combination in postoperative pain management: a qualitative review. Br J Anaesth 2002; 88: 199–214.
F Song, Altman DG, Glenny AM, Deeks JJ . Validity of indirect comparison for estimating efficacy of competing interventions: empirical evidence from published meta-analyses. Br Med J 2003; 326: 472–476.
Acknowledgements
The work was supported by Pain Research Funds and the Oxford Pain Relief Trust. The authors would like to thank Frances Fairman, of the Cochrane Pain, Palliative and Supportive Care systematic review group for bringing this issue to our attention. The Department of Health Statistics Division provided data on prescribing by dentists.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Refereed Paper
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Barden, J., Edwards, J., McQuay, H. et al. Relative efficacy of oral analgesics after third molar extraction. Br Dent J 197, 407–411 (2004). https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.bdj.4811721
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.bdj.4811721
This article is cited by
-
Dexketoprofen/tramadol: randomised double-blind trial and confirmation of empirical theory of combination analgesics in acute pain
The Journal of Headache and Pain (2015)
-
Orale postoperative Schmerztherapie bei Erwachsenen
Der MKG-Chirurg (2013)
-
Relative efficacy of oral analgesics after third molar extraction – a 2011 update
British Dental Journal (2011)
-
Konzepte zur perioperativen Schmerztherapie
Der Anaesthesist (2009)
-
Systematic review of dexketoprofen in acute and chronic pain
BMC Clinical Pharmacology (2008)
