Treatment outcomes of peri-articular steroid injection for patients with work-related sacroiliac joint pain and lumbar para-spinal muscle strain.

OBJECTIVES: Evaluating treatment outcomes of local corticosteroid injections for work-related lower back pain (LBP) as the current evidence for the American College of Occupational and Environmental Medicine guidelines is considered insufficient to recommend this practice. MATERIAL AND METHODS: The authors conducted a retrospective study involving the patients who were treated with peri-articular and lower lumbar corticosteroid injections for work-related LBP at their occupational medicine clinic. RESULTS: Sixty-four patients met the inclusion criteria. The average pain level was reduced from M±SD 5.1±2.0 to M±SD 3.1±2.3 after the corticosteroid injection (p < 0.0001). Thirty-five patients (55%) were discharged to regular duty; 23 (36%) were transferred to orthopedics due to persistent pain; and 6 (9%) were lost to follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: Corticosteroid injections for work-related LBP are effective in reducing pain and enhancing discharge to regular duty. Nonetheless, larger prospective trials are needed to validate these findings. Int J Occup Med Environ Health. 2021;34(1):111-20.

Comparison of Regularly Scheduled Ibuprofen Versus "Pro Re Nata" for Ankle Sprains in Children Treated in the Emergency Department: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

OBJECTIVE: We compared pain and degree of disability in patients with acute ankle sprains receiving regular scheduled ibuprofen versus pro re nata (PRN). METHODS: This study is a randomized single-blinded controlled trial of children aged 7 to 17 years presenting with acute ankle sprain to an emergency department. Patients were randomized to receive 10 mg/kg of ibuprofen per dose (maximum 600 mg) every 6 hours regular scheduled versus PRN. Outcome measures included a 100-mm visual analog scale pain and degree of disability at day 4. A sample size of 72 children had a power of 80% to detect a clinically meaningful difference of 20 mm between the regular and PRN group. RESULTS: We randomly assigned 99 patients to receive regular scheduled (n = 50) or PRN (n = 49) ibuprofen. Pain scores and degree of disability at day 4 showed no significant differences between groups. The rate of reported adverse effects was higher in the regular scheduled group (11.4% vs 9.5%) versus the PRN group. CONCLUSIONS: Our study suggests that there is little benefit from routinely using a regular scheduled ibuprofen regimen for acute pediatric ankle sprains.

An Overlooked Cause of Posterior Knee Pain: Ultrasound Imaging and Guided Injection for Proximal Lateral Gastrocnemius Tendon Sprain.

Proximal lateral gastrocnemius tendon injury is an overlooked cause of posterior knee pain. As the proximal gastrocnemius tendon attaches on the distal femur; its pain is more deeply located and can also be aggravated by flexion of the affected knee. In the present report, sonopalpation showed that the painful tendon appeared to have lost its fibrillary pattern and become thickened and hypoechoic as well. Under the diagnosis of proximal gastrocnemius tendon sprain, the ultrasound guided dextrose injection was performed and the pain was totally relieved.

Oral non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs versus other oral analgesic agents for acute soft tissue injury.

BACKGROUND: Acute soft tissue injuries are common and costly. The best drug treatment for such injuries is not certain, although non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are often recommended. There is concern about the use of oral opioids for acute pain leading to dependence. This is an update of a Cochrane Review published in 2015. OBJECTIVES: To assess the benefits or harms of NSAIDs compared with other oral analgesics for treating acute soft tissue injuries. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the CENTRAL, 2020 Issue 1, MEDLINE (from 1946), and Embase (from 1980) to January 2020; other databases were searched to February 2019. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised or quasi-randomised controlled trials involving people with acute soft tissue injury (sprain, strain, or contusion of a joint, ligament, tendon, or muscle occurring within 48 hours of inclusion in the study), and comparing oral NSAIDs versus paracetamol (acetaminophen), opioid, paracetamol plus opioid, or complementary and alternative medicine. The outcomes were pain, swelling, function, adverse effects, and early re-injury. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently assessed studies for eligibility, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias. We assessed the quality of the evidence using GRADE methodology. MAIN RESULTS: We included 20 studies, with 3305 participants. Three studies included children only. The others included predominantly young adults; approximately 60% were male. Seven studies recruited people with ankle sprains only. Most studies were at low or unclear risk of bias; however, two were at high risk of selection bias, three were at high risk of bias from lack of blinding, and five were at high risk of selective outcome reporting bias. Some evidence relating to pain relief was high certainty. Other evidence was either moderate, low or very low certainty, reflecting study limitations, indirectness, imprecision, or combinations of these. Thus, we are certain or moderately certain about some of the estimates, and uncertain or very uncertain of others. Eleven studies, involving 1853 participants compared NSAIDs with paracetamol. There were no differences between the two groups in pain at one to two hours (1178 participants, 6 studies; high-certainty evidence), at days one to three (1232 participants, 6 studies; high-certainty evidence), and at day seven or later (467 participants, 4 studies; low-certainty evidence). There was little difference between the groups in numbers of participants with minimal swelling at day seven or later (77 participants, 1 study; low-certainty evidence). Very low-certainty evidence from three studies (386 participants) means we are uncertain of the finding of little difference between the two groups in return to function at day seven or later. There was low-certainty evidence from 10 studies (1504 participants) that NSAIDs may slightly increase the risk of gastrointestinal adverse events compared with paracetamol. There was low-certainty evidence from nine studies (1679 participants) of little difference in neurological adverse events between the NSAID and paracetamol groups. Six studies, involving 1212 participants compared NSAIDs with opioids. There was moderate-certainty evidence of no difference between the groups in pain at one hour (1058 participants, 4 studies), and low-certainty evidence for no difference in pain at days four or seven (706 participants, 1 study). There was very low-certainty evidence of no important difference between the groups in swelling (84 participants, 1 study). Participants in the NSAIDs group were more likely to return to function in 7 to 10 days (542 participants, 2 studies; low-certainty evidence). There was moderate-certainty evidence (1143 participants, 5 studies) that NSAIDs were less likely to result in gastrointestinal or neurological adverse events compared with opioids. Four studies, involving 240 participants, compared NSAIDs with the combination of paracetamol and an opioid. The applicability of findings from these studies is in question because the dextropropoxyphene combination analgesic agents used are no longer in general use. Very low-certainty evidence means we are uncertain of the findings of no differences between the two interventions in the numbers with little or no pain at day one (51 participants, 1 study), day three (149 participants, 2 studies), or day seven (138 participants, 2 studies); swelling (230 participants, 3 studies); return to function at day seven (89 participants, 1 study); and the risk of gastrointestinal or neurological adverse events (141 participants, 3 studies). No studies reported re-injury rates. No studies compared NSAIDs with oral complementary and alternative medicines, AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Compared with paracetamol, NSAIDs make no difference to pain at one to two hours and at two to three days, and may make no difference at day seven or beyond. NSAIDs may result in a small increase in gastrointestinal adverse events and may make no difference in neurological adverse events compared with paracetamol. Compared with opioids, NSAIDs probably make no difference to pain at one hour, and may make no difference at days four or seven. NSAIDs probably result in fewer gastrointestinal and neurological adverse effects compared with opioids. The very low-certainly evidence for all outcomes for the NSAIDs versus paracetamol with opioid combination analgesics means we are uncertain of the findings of no differences in pain or adverse effects. The current evidence should not be extrapolated to adults older than 65 years, as this group was not well represented in the studies.

Topical Ketoprofen Versus Placebo in Children Presenting With Ankle Sprain to the Emergency Department: A Randomized Controlled Study.

OBJECTIVE: Despite the favorable data concerning topical agents use in outpatient clinics, they are not commonly in emergency departments (EDs). The present study aimed to compare the effect of 2.5% topical ketoprofen (gel form) to placebo in children presenting with ankle sprain to the ED. STUDY DESIGN: Children between 7 and 18 years old presenting with ankle sprain composed the study population. Study patients were randomized into 2 study arms: 2.5% ketoprofen gel and placebo administered in a 5-cm area locally. Pain improvements at 15 and 30 minutes were measured by visual analog scale. RESULTS: Median pain reductions at 15 minutes for ketoprofen and placebo groups were 27.5 (16-39) and 5 (4-10), respectively. Median changes in pain intensity at 30 minutes for ketoprofen and placebo gel groups were 48 (43-52) and 9 (6-16), respectively. When compared 2 arms for the pain improvement at 15 and 30 minutes, the differences between 2 study drugs were 20 (13-28) and 35 (29-41), respectively. There were 7 (12.7%) rescue drug needs in the placebo group and 1 (1.7%) in the ketoprofen group (difference, 10.9%; 95% confidence interval, -6% to 7%; P = 0.83). There were no adverse effects in either group. CONCLUSIONS: Ketoprofen gel is superior to placebo in ceasing pain in children presenting with ankle sprain to the ED with a high safety profile.

Factors Related to the Use of Topical vs. Oral NSAIDs for Sprains, Strains, and Contusions in a Senior Population: A Retrospective Analysis of Administrative Claims Data.

BACKGROUND: Research to date on sprains, strains, and contusions has focused mainly on the analysis of sports-related injuries, occupational injuries, injuries resulting from automobile accidents, and severe injuries that result in inpatient hospital stays. Little is known about real-world acute sprains, strains, and contusions in an aging population. Patients may be treated with over-the-counter, oral, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) for acute sprains, strains, and contusions or may require the use of prescription NSAIDs. For sprains, strains, and contusions treated with prescription NSAIDs, the choice of topical administration or oral administration likely depends on a number of factors such as age and comorbid conditions. OBJECTIVES: The objective of the study was to identify factors associated with the use of a prescription topical NSAID or a prescription oral NSAID for the treatment of sprains, strains, and contusions among patients aged 65-89 years enrolled in the Medicare Advantage with Prescription Drug plan. METHODS: The study sample was selected from the Humana Research Database (Louisville, KY, USA). Study subjects were identified as patients enrolled in Medicare Advantage with Prescription Drug plans, aged 65-89 years, having a medical claim with an International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, Clinical Modification indicative of an acute sprain, strain, and contusion between 1 January, 2010 and 31 March, 2014 (identification period). The date of the first claim was considered the index date, and subjects were required to have 12 months of continuous enrollment before the index date and a minimum of 3 months continuous enrollment after the index date. Prescription NSAID use during the 3 months after the index sprain, strain, and contusion diagnosis was required for study inclusion and was identified based on a pharmacy claim for a topical or an oral NSAID. Patients with prescription NSAID use leading up to the sprains, strains, and contusions were excluded. Potential factors related to the use of a topical vs. oral NSAID were identified using stepwise logistic regression with backward elimination. RESULTS: After applying the inclusion and exclusion criteria, 42,283 patients were prescribed an oral or topical NSAID (39,294 oral; 2989 topical) within 3 months of the index sprain, strain, and contusion diagnosis. After applying stepwise logistic regression, and retaining variables with statistically significant parameter estimates (p < 0.05), use of topical NSAIDs was higher among female individuals [odds ratio and 95% confidence interval = 1.34 (1.24-1.45)], and appeared to increase with age [odds ratio = 1.04 (1.04-1.05)]. Topical NSAID use was lower in the Midwest region [odds ratio = 0.85 (0.77-0.94)] in comparison to the Southern region. Clinical factors associated with topical NSAID use included Elixhauser Comorbidity Index score [odds ratio = 1.06 (1.04-1.09)], medication burden [odds ratio = 1.06 (1.04-1.08), pill burden [odds ratio = 1.02 (1.01-1.03), specific comorbid conditions, including site-specific osteoarthritis of the upper arm [odds ratio = 2.34 (1.19-4.60)], ankle/foot [odds ratio = 1.46 (1.14-1.87)], or lower leg [odds ratio = 1.21 (1.07-1.36)], myofascial pain [odds ratio = 1.31 (1.21-1.42)], gastrointestinal/hepatic disorders [odds ratio = 1.15 (1.05-1.25)], systemic/central pain [odds ratio = 1.12 (1.01-1.23)], and cataracts [odds ratio = 1.10 (1.02-1.20)]. Conversely, a diagnosis of diabetes mellitus was related to use of an oral NSAID rather than a topical NSAID [odds ratio = 0.86 (0.78-0.94)]. Diagnosis of the index sprain, strain, and contusion in an emergency department instead of a physician's office was also associated with oral NSAID use [odds ratio = 0.42 (0.37-0.47)]. CONCLUSIONS: Topical NSAIDs were used less often than oral NSAIDs following a sprain, strain, or contusion. Age, medication burden, pill burden, evidence of gastrointestinal disorder, and evidence of certain pain-related conditions were significant factors associated with topical NSAID as opposed to oral NSAID use. In comparison to oral NSAIDs, topical NSAIDs were more likely to be prescribed in a physician's office than an emergency department, possibly because a patient's physician has a better understanding of the patient's concomitant medications and comorbidities. Although topical NSAIDs were more likely to be used than oral NSAIDs in patients with gastrointestinal disorders, the use of oral NSAIDs among patients with gastrointestinal bleeding was substantial.

Clinical effects of Zingiber cassumunar (Plai): A systematic review.

Zingiber cassumunar Roxb. known locally as "Plai" in Thai, has been used for treating bruise, sprain and musculoskeletal pain. Several pre-clinical studies demonstrated the anti-inflammatory effect of Plai. However, current evidence of clinical effects of Plai is still unclear. This study aimed to determine the clinical efficacy and safety of Plai among all identified indications. Of the 808 articles identified by a systematic review, six studies were included. Four studies were randomized controlled trials, while two studies were quasi-experimental studies involving 178 patients in intervention group and 177 patients in control group. Duration of treatment ranged from 7days to 2 months. Our findings showed that 14% Plai cream had a strong trend of benefits in pain reduction for muscle pain and ankle sprain. However, evidence supporting the effects of Plai on acne vulgaris treatment and anti-histamine effect are still unclear.

Effectiveness of a novel boswellic acids delivery form (Casperome®) in the management of grade II ankle sprains due to sport trauma - a registry study.

OBJECTIVE: In this study, we evaluated a novel delivery form of boswellic acids (Casperome®) in the management of signs and symptoms associated with ankle sprain grade II due to sport trauma. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In this supplement registry study, 72 otherwise healthy subjects with grade II ankle sprain induced by sport activities were advised to either follow a standard management (SM, 37 subjects) for the condition or the SM with the additional daily intake of 1 tablet containing 250 mg Casperome® (35 subjects). Subjects were allowed to use rescue medications (ketoprofen tablets, 25 mg/tablet), and their intake was measured at the end of the management period of 7 days. Each individual was subjected to several non-invasive examinations (self-reported pain at rest and under moderate exercise, range of active and passive movement, presence of local hematomas by ultrasonography) at the following time periods: at inclusion, to evaluate the basal conditions of the subject before the beginning of the study, at day 3 and at the end of the week to evaluate the response differences between the two groups. Additionally, a blood sample from the Casperome® treated subjects (34 out of 35 subjects) was taken at day 7 and analyzed for the systemic concentration of boswellic acids. RESULTS: The 72 individuals recruited in this study spontaneously decided which management to follow, either SM (n=37) or SM+Casperome® (n=35). Supplementation with Casperome® 250 mg/day showed beneficial effects in the reduction of signs and symptoms of ankle sprains evaluated at day 3 and day 7, and was shown to induce measurable plasma level of boswellic acids. Moreover, the supplementary use of Casperome® was well-tolerated and devoid of side effects. CONCLUSIONS: Our pilot registry study showed the effectiveness of Casperome® supplementation in improving recovery after ankle sprain of mild severity (grade II), suggesting a potentially beneficial role in relieving the trauma associated with sport activities and in decreasing the use of rescue drugs.

Topical Ketoprofen Versus Placebo in Treatment of Acute Ankle Sprain in the Emergency Department.

BACKGROUND: Topical agents have been shown to be effective in soft tissue injuries and commonly used in outpatient clinics. However, the data regarding topical agents in the emergency department is insufficient, and they are not used often in the emergency department setting. The present study aimed to compare the effect of 2.5% topical ketoprofen (gel form) to placebo in patients presenting with ankle sprain to the emergency department. METHODS: Patients presenting with ankle sprain composed the study population. Study patients were randomized into 2 study arms: 2.5% ketoprofen gel and placebo administered over a 5-cm area locally. Pain alleviation was measured by visual analog scale at 15 and 30 minutes. A total of 100 patients were included in the final analysis. RESULTS: The median pain reduction in ketoprofen and placebo groups at 15 minutes was 27 (19.8-33.4) and 9 (7.6-17), respectively. The median pain reduction at 30 minutes for both groups was 42 (36-50.8) and 20 (17.6-24.4), respectively. Pain improvement either at 15 minutes (median difference: 16 [9-22]) or 30 minutes (median difference: 21 [15-27]) was better in the ketoprofen group than placebo. There were no adverse effects in either group. CONCLUSION: Ketoprofen gel was superior to placebo at 30 minutes in alleviating pain secondary to ankle sprain in the ED with a high safety profile. Further studies are needed concerning the effect of ketoprofen gel for long-term effects. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level I, high quality prospective randomized study.

Oral non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs versus other oral analgesic agents for acute soft tissue injury.

BACKGROUND: Acute soft tissue injuries are common and costly. The best drug treatment for such injuries is not certain, although non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are often recommended. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects (benefits and harms) of NSAIDs compared with other oral analgesics for treating acute soft tissue injuries. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Bone, Joint and Muscle Trauma Group Specialised Register (12 September 2014), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (The Cochrane Library, 2014 Issue 8), MEDLINE (1966 to September 2014), EMBASE (1980 to September 2014), CINAHL (1937 to November 2012), AMED (1985 to November 2012), International Pharmaceutical Abstracts (1970 to November 2012), PEDro (1929 to November 2012), and SPORTDiscus (1985 to November 2012), plus internet search engines, trial registries and other databases. We also searched reference lists of relevant articles and contacted authors of retrieved studies and pharmaceutical companies to obtain relevant unpublished data. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised or quasi-randomised controlled trials involving people with acute soft tissue injury (sprain, strain or contusion of a joint, ligament, tendon or muscle occurring up to 48 hours prior to inclusion in the study) and comparing oral NSAID versus paracetamol (acetaminophen), opioid, paracetamol plus opioid, or complementary and alternative medicine. The outcomes were pain, swelling, function, adverse effects and early re-injury. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: At least two review authors independently assessed studies for eligibility, extracted data and assessed risk of bias. We assessed the quality of the evidence using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology. MAIN RESULTS: We included 16 trials, with a total of 2144 participants. Two studies included children only. The other 14 studies included predominantly young adults, of whom over 60% were male. Seven studies recruited people with ankle sprains only. Most studies were at low or unclear risk of bias; however, two were at high risk of selection bias, three were at high risk of bias from lack of blinding, one was at high risk of bias due to incomplete outcome data, and four were at high risk of selective outcome reporting bias. The evidence was usually either low quality or very low quality, reflecting study limitations, indirectness such from as suboptimal dosing of single comparators, imprecision, or one or more of these. Thus we are either uncertain or very uncertain of the estimates.Nine studies, involving 991 participants, compared NSAIDs with paracetamol. While tending to favour paracetamol, there was a lack of clinically important differences between the two groups in pain at less than 24 hours (377 participants, 4 studies; moderate-quality evidence), at days 1 to 3 (431 participants, 4 studies; low quality), and at day 7 or over (467 participants, 4 studies; low quality). A similar lack of difference between the two groups applied to swelling at day 3 (86 participants, 1 study; very low quality) and at day 7 or over (77 participants, 1 study; low quality). There was little difference between the two groups in return to function at day 7 or over (316 participants, 3 studies; very low quality): based on an assumed recovery of function of 804 per 1000 participants in the paracetamol group, 8 fewer per 1000 recovered in the NSAID group (95% confidence interval (CI) 80 fewer to 73 more). There was low-quality evidence of a lower risk of gastrointestinal adverse events in the paracetamol group: based on an assumed risk of gastrointestinal adverse events of 16 per 1000 participants in the paracetamol group, 13 more participants per 1000 had a gastrointestinal adverse event in the NSAID group (95% CI 0 to 35 more).Four studies, involving 958 participants, compared NSAIDs with opioids. Since a study of a selective COX-2 inhibitor NSAID (valdecoxib) that was subsequently withdrawn from the market dominates the evidence for this comparison (706 participants included in the analyses for pain, function and gastrointestinal adverse events), the applicability of these results is in doubt and we give only a brief summary. There was low quality evidence for a lack of clinically important differences between the two groups regarding pain at less than 24 hours, at days 4 to 6, and at day 7. Evidence from single studies showed a similar lack of difference between the two groups for swelling at day 3 (68 participants) and day 10 (84 participants). Return to function at day 7 or over favoured the NSAID group (low-quality), and there were fewer gastrointestinal adverse events in the selective COX-2 inhibitor NSAID group (very low quality).Four studies, involving 240 participants, compared NSAIDs with the combination of paracetamol and an opioid. The applicability of findings from these studies is partly in question because the dextropropoxyphene combination analgesic agents used are no longer in general use. While the point estimates favoured NSAID, the very low-quality evidence did not show a difference between the two interventions in the numbers with little or no pain at day 1 (51 participants, 1 study), day 3 (149 participants, 2 studies), or day 7 (138 participants, 2 studies). Very low-quality evidence showed a similar lack of difference between the two groups applied to swelling at day 3 (reported in two studies) and at day 7 (reported in two studies), in return to function at day 7 (89 participants, 1 study), and in gastrointestinal adverse events (141 participants, 3 studies).No studies compared NSAIDs with complementary and alternative medicines, and no study reported re-injury rates. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There is generally low- or very low-quality but consistent evidence of no clinically important difference in analgesic efficacy between NSAIDs and other oral analgesics. There is low-quality evidence of more gastrointestinal adverse effects with non-selective NSAID compared with paracetamol. There is low- or very low-quality evidence of better function and fewer adverse events with NSAIDs compared with opioid-containing analgesics; however, one study dominated this evidence using a now unavailable COX-2 selective NSAID and is of uncertain applicability. Further research is required to determine whether there is any difference in return to function or adverse effects between both non-selective and COX-2 selective NSAIDs versus paracetamol.

Analgesia for people with acute ankle sprain.

Around 302,000 people with soft-tissue ankle injuries present to UK emergency departments every year (Ferran and Maffulli 2006). These patients are generally treated conservatively with analgesia, ice, compression and elevation, and rest. There is some discussion in the literature about whether or not people with these injuries should be treated with non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), with some authors claiming that the inflammatory response following injury is part of the healing process and should not be halted. This article examines the literature on the efficacy of administering NSAIDs as the first-line drug management for ankle sprain. It also considers cost of treatment, prescribing practice and contraindications of NSAIDs.

Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) for treating acute ankle sprains in adults: benefits outweigh adverse events.

PURPOSE: In the recent clinical guideline for acute lateral ankle sprain, the current best evidence for diagnosis, treatment and prevention strategies was evaluated. Key findings for treatment included the use of ice and compression in the initial phase of treatment, in combination with rest and elevation. A short period of taking non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) may facilitate a rapid decrease in pain and swelling can also be helpful in the acute phase. The objective was to assess the effectiveness and safety of oral and topical NSAID in the treatment for acute ankle sprains. METHODS: Randomised controlled trials comparing oral or topic NSAID treatment with placebo or each other were included. Primary outcome measures were pain at rest or at mobilisation and adverse events. Trials were assessed using the Cochrane risk of bias tool. RESULTS: Twenty-eight studies were included, and 22 were available for meta-analysis. Superior results were reported for oral NSAIDs when compared with placebo, concerning pain on weight bearing on short term, pain at rest on the short term, and less swelling on short- and intermediate term. For topical NSAIDs, superior results compared with placebo were found for pain at rest (short term), persistent pain (intermediate term), pain on weight bearing (short- and intermediate term) and for swelling (short and intermediate term). No trials were included comparing oral with topic NSAIDs, so conclusions regarding this comparison are not realistic. CONCLUSIONS: The current evidence is limited due to the low number of studies, lack of methodological quality of the included studies as well as the small sample size of the included studies. Nevertheless, the findings from this review support the use of NSAIDs for the initial treatment for acute ankle sprains. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Meta-analysis of RCTs, Level I.

[Use of NSAIDs in traumatology]. / Du bon usage des AINS en traumatologie.

In traumatology, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are widely used, due to their efficacy in controlling pain and safety profile. Nonetheless, experimental and retrospective studies about the use of NSAIDs in traumatology raise the question about a possible negative influence on bone remodeling through inhibition of prostaglandin synthesis. The results from these studies must be interpreted with caution, as bone repair can be influenced by several parameters. When used in the case of sprains or tendinitis, unwanted side effects of NSAIDs seem to be limited; on the other hand, benefits in terms of antalgic effect are less clear. We have conducted a review of the literature aimed to suggest practical solutions for the use of NSAIDs in traumatology.

A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled multicentre study to evaluate the efficacy and safety of diclofenac 4% spray gel in the treatment of acute uncomplicated ankle sprain.

OBJECTIVE: A prospective, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group multicentre study to evaluate the efficacy and safety of diclofenac 4% spray gel for the treatment of acute, uncomplicated ankle sprain. METHODS: Outpatients with acute, uncomplicated, one-sided ankle sprain were randomly assigned to receive diclofenac 4% spray gel or placebo (vehicle) three times daily for 14 ± 1 days. The main efficacy endpoint was the intra-individual response to treatment (≥ 50% decrease in swelling of the injured ankle after a treatment period of ≤ 10 days). RESULTS: The response rate was significantly higher in the diclofenac group (n = 118) than the placebo group (n = 114) (91.5% vs. 82.5%). After 3-4 days' treatment, diclofenac spray significantly reduced swelling, spontaneous pain, pain on active movement and tenderness compared with placebo. Diclofenac spray was well tolerated, with a low overall rate of adverse events. CONCLUSIONS: Diclofenac 4% spray gel rapidly relieves pain and improves mobility in patients with acute, uncomplicated ankle sprain and is well tolerated. It may be a useful treatment option for other acute soft tissue injuries.

Effects of low-level laser therapy (LLLT) and diclofenac (topical and intramuscular) as single and combined therapy in experimental model of controlled muscle strain in rats.

Muscle injuries represent ca 30% of sports injuries and excessive stretching of muscle causes more than 90% of injuries. Currently the most used treatments are nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), however, in last years, low-level laser therapy (LLLT) is becoming an interesting therapeutic modality. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of single and combined therapies (LLLT, topical application of diclofenac and intramuscular diclofenac) on functional and biochemical aspects in an experimental model of controlled muscle strain in rats. Muscle strain was induced by overloading tibialis anterior muscle of rats. Injured groups received either no treatment, or a single treatment with topical or intramuscular diclofenac (TD and ID), or LLLT (3 J, 810 nm, 100 mW) 1 h after injury. Walking track analysis was the functional outcome and biochemical analyses included mRNA expression of COX-1 and COX-2 and blood levels of prostaglandin E2 (PGE2 ). All treatments significantly decreased COX-1 and COX-2 gene expression compared with injury group (P < 0.05). However, LLLT showed better effects than TD and ID regarding PGE2 levels and walking track analysis (P < 0.05). We can conclude that LLLT has more efficacy than topical and intramuscular diclofenac in treatment of muscle strain injury in acute stage.

Evidence on NSAID use in soft tissue injuries.

This article explores the evidence on the use of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory (NSAID) medications in the management of acute soft tissue injuries such as sprains. NSAIDs have been used for these injuries, on the basis that they reduce pain and lead to a stronger and more effective return to function. However, there is little evidence in support of the latter, and a growing body of evidence is suggesting NSAIDs can delay healing due to their effect on inflammation. The potential side-effects of NSAIDs are another cause for concern. Paracetamol has been proven to be an effective and safe analgesic that does not interfere with the healing process, and should be the first choice of analgesia.