Department of Nursing, Doroud Branch, Islamic Azad University, Doroud, Iran.
Department of Anesthesia, School of Allied Medical Sciences, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
Int Wound J. 2024 Jun;21(6):e14907. doi: 10.1111/iwj.14907.
Recent randomised controlled trials (RCTs) have investigated the analgesic activity of sesame oil among patients with limb trauma; nevertheless, their findings are inconsistent. Hence, this review aimed to clarify the impact of topical administration of sesame oil on acute pain of adult outpatients with minor limb trauma. The online databases (e.g., Scopus, PubMed, Web of Science) were searched up to 31 January 2024. The RCTs were included if they compared the effect of applying standard treatments plus topical sesame oil to administering standard treatments alone or with a placebo/sham treatment. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) and the Cochrane Collaboration's risk of bias tool were applied to address the evidence quality and the study's methodological rigour, respectively. Four RCTs had the inclusion criteria, and their findings were pooled in a meta-analysis employing a random-effects approach. According to the pooled analysis, the reduction in mean change of the pain score from baseline to the second/third intervention day was significantly higher in favour of clients who received standard care plus daily massage of the trauma site with sesame oil compared to those who received a control condition (weighted mean difference: -1.10; 95% confidence interval [-1.62, -0.57]; p < 0.001). However, the evidence quality was moderate, and only two studies had good methodological rigour. Hence, more high-quality studies are needed to make a solid evidence-based conclusion about the favourable consequence of topical sesame oil on alleviating acute traumatic limb pain.
最近的随机对照试验(RCT)研究了芝麻油在肢体创伤患者中的镇痛活性;然而,它们的结果并不一致。因此,本综述旨在阐明局部应用芝麻油对成人门诊小腿创伤患者急性疼痛的影响。在线数据库(如 Scopus、PubMed、Web of Science)进行了检索,检索截至 2024 年 1 月 31 日。如果 RCT 比较了标准治疗加局部芝麻油与单独给予标准治疗或安慰剂/假治疗的效果,则将其纳入。应用推荐评估、制定和评估分级(GRADE)和 Cochrane 协作风险偏倚工具分别用于解决证据质量和研究方法严谨性的问题。四项 RCT 符合纳入标准,并采用随机效应方法对其发现进行了荟萃分析。根据汇总分析,与接受标准护理加创伤部位每日按摩芝麻油的患者相比,接受对照组护理的患者的疼痛评分从基线到第二/第三天的平均变化减少幅度显著更高(加权均数差:-1.10;95%置信区间[-1.62,-0.57];p<0.001)。然而,证据质量为中等,只有两项研究具有良好的方法学严谨性。因此,需要更多高质量的研究来对芝麻油局部应用缓解急性创伤性肢体疼痛的有利后果得出确凿的基于证据的结论。