SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2014
Salicylate-containing rubefacients for acute and chronic musculoskeletal pain in adults.
Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
12 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 30 citations in OpenAlex.
- Topical analgesics for acute and chronic pain in adults - an overview of Cochrane Reviews.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2017Pooled it
- Topical NSAIDs for chronic musculoskeletal pain in adults.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2016Pooled it
- Topical NSAIDs for acute musculoskeletal pain in adults.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2015Pooled it
- Repeated tender point injections of granisetron alleviate chronic myofascial pain--a randomized, controlled, double-blinded trial.The journal of headache and pain · 2015Trial
- Short-term cutaneous vasodilatory and thermosensory effects of topical methyl salicylate.Frontiers in physiology · 2024Article
- Clinical recommendations for chronic musculoskeletal pain in South African primary health care.African journal of primary health care & family medicine · 2023Article
- Pharmacological treatments for low back pain in adults: an overview of Cochrane Reviews.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2023Review
- Safety and efficacy of compound methyl salicylate liniment for topical pain: A multicenter real-world study in China.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2022Article
- Foot osteoarthritis: latest evidence and developments.Therapeutic advances in musculoskeletal disease · 2018Review
- Effective treatment options for musculoskeletal pain in primary care: A systematic overview of current evidence.PloS one · 2017Review
- Relative efficacy of topical non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and topical capsaicin in osteoarthritis: protocol for an individual patient data meta-analysis.Systematic reviews · 2016Article
- Osteoarthritis year in review 2015: clinical.Osteoarthritis and cartilage · 2016Review
Corrections and comments
- Update of
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundRubefacients containing salicylates cause irritation of the skin and are believed to relieve various musculoskeletal pains. They are available on prescription, and are common components in over-the-counter remedies. This is an update of a review of rubefacients for acute and chronic pain, originally published in 2009, which found limited evidence for efficacy.
objectivesTo assess the efficacy and safety of topically applied salicylates in acute and chronic musculoskeletal pain in adults. SEARCH
methodsWe searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, and EMBASE, from inception to 22 August 2014, together with the Oxford Pain Relief Database, two clinical trial registries, and the reference lists of included studies and relevant reviews. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised, double-blind, placebo- or active-controlled clinical trials of topical rubefacients containing salicylates to treat musculoskeletal pain in adults, with at least 10 participants per treatment arm, and reporting outcomes at close to 7 (minimum 3, maximum 10) days for acute conditions and 14 (minimum 7) days or longer for chronic conditions. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently assessed trials for inclusion and risk of bias, and extracted data. We calculated risk ratio (RR) and number needed to treat to benefit or harm (NNT or NNH) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) using a fixed-effect model. We analysed acute and chronic conditions separately. MAIN
resultsNew searches for this update identified one new study that satisfied our inclusion criteria, although it contributed information only for withdrawals. Six placebo- and one active-controlled studies (560 and 137 participants, respectively) in acute pain, and seven placebo- and three active-controlled studies (489 and 182 participants, respectively) in chronic pain were included in the review. All studies were potentially at risk of bias, and there were substantial differences between studies in terms of the participants (for example the level of baseline pain), the treatments (different salicylates combined with various other potentially active ingredients), and the methods (for example the outcomes reported). Not all of the studies contributed usable information for all of the outcomes sought.For the primary outcome of clinical success at seven days in acute conditions (mostly sprains, strains, and acute low back pain), the RR was 1.9 (95% CI 1.5 to 2.5) and the NNT was 3.2 (2.4 to 4.9) for salicylates compared with placebo, but this result was not robust (very low quality evidence). Using a random-effects model for analysis the RR was 2.7 (1.05 to 7.0). For the same outcome in chronic conditions (mostly osteoarthritis, bursitis, and chronic back pain), the RR was 1.6 (1.2 to 2.0) and the NNT was 6.2 (4.0 to 13) (very low quality evidence). This result was not substantially changed using a random-effects model for analysis. In both categories there were a number of factors might have influenced the results but sensitivity analysis was limited because of the small number of studies and participants.For both acute and chronic painful conditions any evidence of efficacy came from the older, smaller studies, while the larger, more recent studies showed no effect.Adverse events were more common with salicylate than with placebo but most of the events occurred in only two studies. There was no difference when these studies were removed from the analysis (very low quality evidence). Local adverse events (at the application site) were again more common with salicylate but were nearly all in one study (in which salicylate was combined with another irritant). There was no difference when this study was removed (very low quality evidence).There were insufficient data to draw conclusions against active controls. AUTHORS'
conclusionsThe evidence does not support the use of topical rubefacients containing salicylates for acute injuries or chronic conditions. They seem to be relatively well tolerated in the short-term, based on limited data. The amount and quality of the available data mean that uncertainty remains about the effects of salicylate-containing rubefacients.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.