Scolaris Content Display Scolaris Content Display

Dosis única oral de ibuprofeno más codeína para el dolor posoperatorio agudo en adultos

Esta versión no es la más reciente

Contraer todo Desplegar todo

Referencias

References to studies included in this review

Cooper 1982 {published data only}

Cooper SA, Engel J, Ladov M, Precheur H, Rosenheck A, Rauch D. Analgesic efficacy of an ibuprofen‐codeine combination. Pharmacotherapy 1982;2(3):162‐7.

Daniels 2011 {published data only}

Daniels SE, Goulder MA, Aspley S, Reader S. A randomised, five‐parallel‐group, placebo‐controlled trial comparing the efficacy and tolerability of analgesic combinations including a novel single‐tablet combination of ibuprofen/paracetamol for postoperative dental pain. Pain 2011;152(3):632‐42. [DOI: 10.1016/j.pain.2010.12.012]

Frame 1986 {published data only}

Frame JW, Fisher SE, Pickvance NJ, Skene AM. A double‐blind placebo‐controlled comparison of three ibuprofen/codeine combinations and aspirin. British Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery 1986;24(2):122‐9.

McQuay 1989 {published data only}

McQuay HJ, Carroll D, Watts PG, Juniper RP, Moore RA. Codeine 20 mg increases pain relief from ibuprofen 400 mg after third molar surgery. A repeat‐dosing comparison of ibuprofen and an ibuprofen‐codeine combination. Pain 1989;37(1):7‐13.

Petersen 1993 {published data only}

Petersen JK, Hansson F, Strid S. The effect of an ibuprofen‐codeine combination for the treatment of patients with pain after removal of lower third molars. Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery 1993;51(6):637‐40.

Sunshine 1987 {published data only}

Sunshine A, Roure C, Olson N, Laska EM, Zorrilla C, Rivera J. Analgesic efficacy of two ibuprofen‐codeine combinations for the treatment of postepisiotomy and postoperative pain. Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics 1987;42(4):374‐80.

References to studies excluded from this review

Carlos 1989 {published data only}

Carlos R, Sánchez J, González B, Costela JL, Torres A, Galdo JR. Comparative study of two combinations of ibuprofen‐codeine versus its separate components in the treatment of postoperative pain. Revista Española de Anestesiología y Reanimación 1989;36 Suppl 1:48‐9.

Cater 1985 {published data only}

Cater M, Brien PM, Pickvance NJ. A double‐blind comparison of the new ibuprofen‐codeine phosphate combination, zomepirac, and placebo in the relief of postepisiotomy pain. Clinical Therapeutics 1985;7:442–7.

Giles 1985 {published data only}

Giles AD, Pickvance NJ. Combination analgesia following oral surgery ‐ a double‐blind comparison of ibuprofen, codeine phosphate and two combination ratios. Clinical Trials Journal 1985;22:300‐13.

Giles 1986 {published data only}

Giles AD, Hill CM, Shepherd JP, Stewart DJ, Pickvance NJ. A single dose assessment of an ibuprofen/codeine combination in postoperative dental pain. International Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery 1986;15:727–32.

Hellman 1992 {published data only}

Hellman M, Ahlström U, Andersson L, Strid S. Analgesic efficacy of an ibuprofen‐codeine combination in patients with pain after removal of lower third molars. European Journal of Clinical Pharmacology 1992;43(4):347‐50.

McQuay 1992 {published data only}

McQuay HJ, Carroll D, Guest P, Juniper RP, Moore RA. A multiple dose comparison of combinations of ibuprofen and codeine and paracetamol, codeine and caffeine after third molar surgery. Anaesthesia 1992;47(8):672‐7.

Norman 1985 {published data only}

Norman SL, Jeavons BI, O’Brien PM, Johnson IR, Hitchcock A, Noyelle RM, et al. A double‐blind comparison of a new ibuprofen‐codeine phosphate combination, codeine phosphate, and placebo in the relief of postepisiotomy pain. Clinical Therapeutics 1985;7:549–54.

Walton 1990 {published data only}

Walton GM, Rood JP. A comparison of ibuprofen and ibuprofen‐codeine combination in the relief of post‐operative oral surgery pain. British Dental Journal 1990;169(8):245‐7.

Additional references

Barden 2004

Barden J, Edwards JE, McQuay HJ, Moore RA. Pain and analgesic response after third molar extraction and other postsurgical pain. Pain 2004;107(1‐2):86‐90. [DOI: 10.1016/j.pain.2003.09.021]

Cascarbi 2003

Cascarbi I. Pharmacogenetics of cytochrome P4502D6: genetic background and clinical implication. European Journal of Clinical Investigation 2003;33 Suppl 2:17‐22.

Chaparro 2012

Chaparro LE, Wiffen PJ, Moore RA, Gilron I. Combination pharmacotherapy for the treatment of neuropathic pain in adults. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2012, Issue 7. [DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD008943.pub2]

Clarke 2012

Clarke R, Derry S, Moore RA, McQuay HJ. Single dose oral etoricoxib for acute postoperative pain in adults. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2012, Issue 4. [DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD004309.pub3]

Collins 1997

Collins SL, Moore RA, McQuay HJ. The visual analogue pain intensity scale: what is moderate pain in millimetres?. Pain 1997;72:95‐7. [DOI: 10.1016/S0304‐3959(97)00005‐5]

Collins 2001

Collins SL, Edwards J, Moore RA, Smith LA, McQuay HJ. Seeking a simple measure of analgesia for mega‐trials: is a single global assessment good enough?. Pain 2001;91(1‐2):189‐94. [DOI: 10.1016/S0304‐3959(00)00435‐8]

Cook 1995

Cook RJ, Sackett DL. The number needed to treat: a clinically useful measure of treatment effect. BMJ 1995;310:452‐4.

Cooper 1991

Cooper SA. Single‐dose analgesic studies: the upside and downside of assay sensitivity. In: Max MB, Portenoy RK, Laska EM editor(s). The design of analgesic clinical trials. Advances in Pain Research and Therapy. Vol. 18, New York: Raven Press, 1991:117‐24.

Derry 2009

Derry C, Derry S, Moore RA, McQuay HJ. Single dose oral ibuprofen for acute postoperative pain in adults. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2009, Issue 3. [DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD001548.pub2]

Derry 2010

Derry S, Moore RA, McQuay HJ. Single dose oral codeine, as a single agent, for acute postoperative pain in adults. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2010, Issue 4. [DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD008099.pub2]

FitzGerald 2001

FitzGerald GA, Patrono C. The coxibs, selective inhibitors of cyclooxygenase‐2. New England Journal of Medicine 2001;345(6):433‐42. [DOI: 10.1056/NEJM200108093450607]

Forrest 2002

Forrest JB, Camu F, Greer IA, Kehlet H, Abdalla M, Bonnet F. Ketorolac, diclofenac, and ketoprofen are equally safe for pain relief after major surgery. British Journal of Anaesthesia 2002;88(2):227‐33. [DOI: 10.1093/bja/88.2.227]

Frei 2010

Frei MY, Nielsen S, Dobbin MD, Tobin CL. Serious morbidity associated with misuse of over‐the‐counter codeine‐ibuprofen analgesics: a series of 27 cases. Medical Journal of Australia 2010;193(5):294‐6.

Hernandez‐Diaz 2001

Hernández‐Díaz S, García‐Rodríguez LA. Epidemiologic assessment of the safety of conventional nonsteroidal anti‐inflammatory drugs. The American Journal of Medicine 2001;110 Suppl 3A:20S‐7S. [DOI: 10.1016/S0002‐9343(00)00682‐3]

Higgins 2011

Altman DG, Antes G, Gøtzsche P, Higgins JPT, Jüni P, Lewis S, et al. Assessing risk of bias in included studies. In: Higgins JPT, Altman DG, Sterne JAC editor(s). Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. Version 5.1.0 (updated March 2011). Available from www.cochrane‐handbook.org. The Cochrane Collaboration, 2011.

Jadad 1996a

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. [DOI: 10.1016/0304‐3959(96)03033‐3]

Jadad 1996b

Jadad AR, Moore RA, Carroll D, Jenkinson C, Reynolds DJM, Gavaghan DJ, McQuay HJ. Assessing the quality of reports of randomized clinical trials: is blinding necessary?. Controlled Clinical Trials 1996;17:1‐12. [DOI: 10.1016/0197‐2456(95)00134‐4]

L'Abbé 1987

L'Abbé KA, Detsky AS, O'Rourke K. Meta‐analysis in clinical research. Annals of Internal Medicine 1987;107:224‐33.

Li Wan Po 1998

Li Wan Po A, Zhang WY. Analgesic efficacy of ibuprofen alone and in combination with codeine or caffeine in post‐surgical pain: a meta‐analysis. European Journal of Clinical Pharmacology 1998;53(5):303‐11.

McAvoy 2011

McAvoy BR, Dobbin MD, Tobin CL. Over‐the‐counter codeine analgesic misuse and harm: characteristics of cases in Australia and New Zealand. New Zealand Medical Journal 2011;124(1346):29‐33.

McQuay 2005

McQuay HJ, Moore RA. Placebo. Postgraduate Medical Journal 2005;81:155‐60. [DOI: 10.1136/pgmj.2004.024737]

Moher 1999

Moher D, Cook DJ, Eastwood S, Olkin I, Rennie D, Stroup DF. Improving the quality of meta‐analyses of randomised controlled trials: the QUOROM statement. Lancet 1999;354:1896‐900. [DOI: 10.1016/S0140‐6736(99)04149‐5]

Moore 1996

Moore A, McQuay H, Gavaghan D. Deriving dichotomous outcome measures from continuous data in randomised controlled trials of analgesics. Pain 1996;66(2‐3):229‐37. [DOI: 10.1016/0304‐3959(96)03032‐1]

Moore 1997a

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(1‐2):127‐30. [DOI: 10.1016/S0304‐3959(96)03251‐4]

Moore 1997b

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(3):311‐5. [DOI: 10.1016/S0304‐3959(96)03306‐4]

Moore 1998

Moore RA, Gavaghan D, Tramer 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 1998;78(3):209‐16. [DOI: 10.1016/S0304‐3959(98)00140‐7]

Moore 2003

Moore RA, Edwards J, Barden J, McQuay HJ. Bandolier's Little Book of Pain. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2003. [ISBN: 0‐19‐263247‐7]

Moore 2005

Moore RA, Edwards JE, McQuay HJ. Acute pain: individual patient meta‐analysis shows the impact of different ways of analysing and presenting results. Pain 2005;116(3):322‐31. [DOI: 10.1016/j.pain.2005.05.001]

Moore 2006

Moore A, McQuay H. Bandolier's Little Book of Making Sense of the Medical Evidence. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2006. [ISBN: 0‐19‐856604‐2]

Moore 2008

Moore RA, Barden J, Derry S, McQuay HJ. Managing potential publication bias. In: McQuay HJ, Kalso E, Moore RA editor(s). Systematic Reviews in Pain Research: Methodology Refined. Seattle: IASP Press, 2008:15‐23. [ISBN: 978‐0‐931092‐69‐5]

Moore 2011a

Moore RA, Derry S, McQuay HJ, Wiffen PJ. Single dose oral analgesics for acute postoperative pain in adults. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2011, Issue 9. [DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD008659.pub2]

Moore 2011b

Moore RA, Straube S, Paine J, Derry S, McQuay HJ. Minimum efficacy criteria for comparisons between treatments using individual patient meta‐analysis of acute pain trials: examples of etoricoxib, paracetamol, ibuprofen, and ibuprofen/paracetamol combinations after third molar extraction. Pain 2011;152(5):982‐9. [DOI: 10.1016/j.pain.2010.11.030]

Moore 2012

Moore RA, Derry CJ, Derry S, Straube S, McQuay HJ. A conservative method of testing whether combination analgesics produce additive or synergistic effects using evidence from acute pain and migraine. European Journal of Pain 2012;16(4):585‐91. [DOI: 10.1016/j.ejpain.2011.08.009]

Morris 1995

Morris JA, Gardner MJ. Calculating confidence intervals for relative risk, odds ratios and standardised ratios and rates. In: Gardner MJ, Altman DG editor(s). Statistics with confidence ‐ confidence intervals and statistical guidelines. London: British Medical Journal, 1995:50‐63.

Nüesch 2010

Nüesch E, Trelle S, Reichenbach S, Rutjes AW, Tschannen B, Altman DG, et al. Small study effects in meta‐analyses of osteoarthritis trials: meta‐epidemiological study. BMJ 2010;341:c3515. [DOI: 10.1136/bmj.c3515]

Rapoport 1999

Rapoport RJ. The safety of NSAIDs and related drugs for the management of acute pain: Maximizing benefits and minimizing risks. Cancer Control 1999;6(2 Suppl 1):18‐21.

RevMan 2011 [Computer program]

The Nordic Cochrane Centre, The Cochrane Collaboration. Review Manager (RevMan). Version 5.1. Copenhagen: The Nordic Cochrane Centre, The Cochrane Collaboration, 2011.

Robinson 2010

Robinson GM, Robinson S, McCarthy P, Cameron C. Misuse of over‐the‐counter codeine‐containing analgesics: dependence and other adverse effects. New Zealand Medical Journal 2010;123(1317):59‐64.

Toms 2008

Toms L, McQuay HJ, Derry S, Moore RA. Single dose oral paracetamol (acetaminophen) for postoperative pain in adults. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2008, Issue 4. [DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD004602.pub2]

Toms 2009

Toms L, Derry S, Moore RA, McQuay HJ. Single dose oral paracetamol (acetaminophen) with codeine for postoperative pain in adults. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2009, Issue 1. [DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD001547.pub2]

Tramèr 1997

Tramèr MR, Reynolds DJM, Moore RA, McQuay HJ. Impact of covert duplicate results on meta‐analysis: a case study. BMJ 1997;315:635‐9. [DOI: 10.1136/bmj.315.7109.635]

Characteristics of studies

Characteristics of included studies [ordered by study ID]

Cooper 1982

Methods

Randomised, double‐blind, 6 parallel groups. Single oral dose

Medication administered when baseline pain reached a moderate to severe intensity

Pain assessed at 0, 1, 2, 3, 4 hours

Participants

Surgical removal of 1 to 4 impacted third molars

N = 249

M = 83, F = 166

Mean age 23 years

Interventions

Ibuprofen + codeine 400/60 mg, n = 41

Ibuprofen 400 mg, n = 38

Aspirin/codeine 650 mg/60 mg, n = 45

Aspirin 650 mg, n = 38

Codeine 60 mg, n = 41

Placebo, n = 46

Outcomes

PI: standard 4‐point scale

PR: standard 5‐point scale

PGE: standard 5‐point scale

Use of rescue medication

Adverse events

Withdrawals

Notes

Oxford Quality Score: R1, DB2, W1. Total = 4/5

Rescue medication allowed after 1 hour

Risk of bias

Bias

Authors' judgement

Support for judgement

Random sequence generation (selection bias)

Unclear risk

Not described

Allocation concealment (selection bias)

Low risk

Pharmaceutical company held randomisation code and packaged bottles, which were identified by sequential code number only

Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias)
All outcomes

Low risk

Tablets "appeared identical for every patient"

Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias)
All outcomes

Low risk

Tablets "appeared identical for every patient"

Size

High risk

< 50 participants per treatment group

Daniels 2011

Methods

Randomised, double‐blind, 5 parallel groups. Single oral dose

Medication administered when baseline pain reached a moderate to severe intensity, and ≥ 50/100 mm

Pain assessed at baseline then 0.25, 0.5, 0.75, 1, 1.5, 2 hours and hourly to 12 hours

Participants

Surgical removal of ≥ 3 impacted third molars (2 mandibular)

N = 678

M = 271, F = 407

Mean age 20 years

Interventions

Ibuprofen 400 mg + codeine 25.6 mg, n = 169
Paracetamol 1,000 mg + codeine 30 mg, n = 113
Ibuprofen 200 mg + paracetamol 500 mg, n = 173
Ibuprofen 400 mg + paracetamol 1000 mg, n = 168
Placebo, n = 55

Outcomes

PI: standard 4‐point scale

PR: standard 5‐point scale

PGE: standard 5‐point scale

Use of rescue medication

Adverse events

Withdrawals

Notes

Oxford Quality Score: R2, DB2, W1. Total = 5/5

Rescue medication (tramadol if < 4 hours, paracetamol/hydrocodone if 4 hours+) allowed after 1.5 hours

Risk of bias

Bias

Authors' judgement

Support for judgement

Random sequence generation (selection bias)

Low risk

"computer‐generated system"

Allocation concealment (selection bias)

Unclear risk

Not described

Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias)
All outcomes

Low risk

"Each treatment consisted of 2 white tablets of a similar size and was administered as a single dose taken with approximately 300 mL of water"

Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias)
All outcomes

Low risk

"Each treatment consisted of 2 white tablets of a similar size and was administered as a single dose taken with approximately 300 mL of water"

Size

Unclear risk

50 to 199 participants per treatment arm

Frame 1986

Methods

RCT, DB, single oral dose, parallel groups

Medication administered when baseline pain reached a moderate to severe intensity
Assessed at 0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 hours

Participants

Surgical removal of impacted third molar
N = 135

M/F "balanced" but numbers not provided
Mean age 24 years

Interventions

Ibuprofen 200 mg + codeine 15 mg, n = 32

Ibuprofen 400 mg + codeine 30 mg, n = 26

Ibuprofen 800 mg + codeine 60 mg, n = 26

Aspirin 600 mg, n = 25
Placebo n = 26

Outcomes

PI: non‐standard 9‐point scale
PR: standard 5‐point scale
Global assessment (no scale reported)

Use of rescue medication
Adverse events

Withdrawals

Notes

Oxford Quality Score: R = 1, DB = 2, W = 1. Total = 4/5

Rescue medication (paracetamol) allowed after 2 h

Risk of bias

Bias

Authors' judgement

Support for judgement

Random sequence generation (selection bias)

Unclear risk

Not described

Allocation concealment (selection bias)

Low risk

Sealed sachets

Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias)
All outcomes

Low risk

"aspirin specially formulated to match the other drugs"

Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias)
All outcomes

Low risk

"aspirin specially formulated to match the other drugs"

Size

High risk

< 50 participants per treatment arm

McQuay 1989

Methods

RCT, DB, 2‐group cross‐over, multiple dose (data reported for first dose)

Medication administered when baseline pain reached a moderate to severe intensity
Assessed at 0, 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 hours

Participants

Surgical removal of impacted mandibular third molar (one at each phase of cross‐over)

N = 25
M = 6, F = 19
Mean age 24 years

Interventions

Ibuprofen 400 mg + codeine 20 mg, n = 25 (24 analysed)
Ibuprofen 400 mg, n = 25 (23 analysed)

Outcomes

PI: standard 4‐point scale and 100 mm VAS

PR: standard 5‐point scale and 100 mm VAS

PGE: standard 5‐point scale

Adverse events

Withdrawals

Notes

Oxford Quality Score: R = 1, DB = 2, W = 1. Total = 4/5

Second dose available for inadequate pain relief

Risk of bias

Bias

Authors' judgement

Support for judgement

Random sequence generation (selection bias)

Unclear risk

Not described

Allocation concealment (selection bias)

Unclear risk

Not described

Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias)
All outcomes

Low risk

"The white tablets were identifiable only by the patient and treatment numbers"

Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias)
All outcomes

Low risk

"The white tablets were identifiable only by the patient and treatment numbers"

Size

High risk

< 50 participants per treatment arm

Petersen 1993

Methods

RCT, DB, 2‐group cross‐over, 2‐dose (data reported for first dose) (Due to carryover effects data analysed as parallel study using first phase only)

Medication administered when baseline pain reached a moderate to severe intensity
Assessed at 0, 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 hours

Participants

Surgical removal of impacted mandibular third molar (one at each phase of cross‐over)

N = 60
M = 38, F = 22
Mean age 23 years

Interventions

Ibuprofen 400 mg + codeine 60 mg, n = 29
Ibuprofen 400 mg, n = 31

Outcomes

PI: 100 mm VAS

Adverse events for both doses

Withdrawals

Notes

Oxford Quality Score: R = 1, DB = 2, W = 1. Total = 4/5

Second dose available after 2 hours for inadequate pain relief

Risk of bias

Bias

Authors' judgement

Support for judgement

Random sequence generation (selection bias)

Unclear risk

Not described

Allocation concealment (selection bias)

Unclear risk

Not described

Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias)
All outcomes

Low risk

"All tablets were of identical appearance"

Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias)
All outcomes

Low risk

"All tablets were of identical appearance"

Size

High risk

< 50 participants per treatment arm

Sunshine 1987

Methods

Randomised, double‐blind, 5 parallel groups. Single oral dose

Medication administered when baseline pain reached a moderate to severe intensity

Pain assessed at 0, 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 4 hours

Participants

Episiotomy, Caesarian section or gynaecological operations

N = 195

All F

Mean age 26 years

Interventions

Ibuprofen + codeine 200/30 mg, n = 40

Ibuprofen + codeine 400/60 mg, n = 40

Ibuprofen 40 mg, n = 38

Codeine 60 mg, n = 37

Placebo, n = 40

Outcomes

PI: standard 4‐point scale

PR: standard 5‐point scale

Use of rescue medication

Adverse events

Withdrawals

Notes

Oxford Quality Score: R1, DB2, W1. Total = 4/5

Rescue medication allowed after 1 hour

Risk of bias

Bias

Authors' judgement

Support for judgement

Random sequence generation (selection bias)

Unclear risk

Not described

Allocation concealment (selection bias)

Unclear risk

Not described

Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias)
All outcomes

Low risk

"All unit doses were identical in appearance and packaging"

Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias)
All outcomes

Unclear risk

"All unit doses were identical in appearance and packaging"

Size

High risk

< 50 participants per treatment arm

DB ‐ double‐blind, N ‐ number of participants in study, n ‐ number of participants in treatment arm, PGE ‐ patient global evaluation, PI ‐ pain intensity, PR ‐ pain relief, R ‐ randomised, W ‐ withdrawals

Characteristics of excluded studies [ordered by study ID]

Study

Reason for exclusion

Carlos 1989

Short abstract

Cater 1985

Participants remedicating not correctly analysed (diaries continued)

Giles 1985

Did not state which scale was used

Giles 1986

Inappropriate study design ‐ data from patients remedicating were not handled correctly

Hellman 1992

No suitable (placebo or same dose of ibuprofen alone) comparator

McQuay 1992

No suitable (placebo or same dose of ibuprofen alone) comparator

Norman 1985

Participants remedicating not correctly analysed (diaries continued)

Walton 1990

Medication administered preoperatively

Data and analyses

Open in table viewer
Comparison 1. Ibuprofen 400 mg + high dose codeine versus placebo

Outcome or subgroup title

No. of studies

No. of participants

Statistical method

Effect size

1 Participants with ≥ 50% pain relief Show forest plot

4

443

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

4.09 [2.82, 5.93]

Analysis 1.1

Comparison 1 Ibuprofen 400 mg + high dose codeine versus placebo, Outcome 1 Participants with ≥ 50% pain relief.

Comparison 1 Ibuprofen 400 mg + high dose codeine versus placebo, Outcome 1 Participants with ≥ 50% pain relief.

2 Participants with any adverse event Show forest plot

4

443

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

1.18 [0.84, 1.66]

Analysis 1.2

Comparison 1 Ibuprofen 400 mg + high dose codeine versus placebo, Outcome 2 Participants with any adverse event.

Comparison 1 Ibuprofen 400 mg + high dose codeine versus placebo, Outcome 2 Participants with any adverse event.

Open in table viewer
Comparison 2. Ibuprofen + codeine (all doses) versus same dose of ibuprofen alone

Outcome or subgroup title

No. of studies

No. of participants

Statistical method

Effect size

1 Participants with ≥ 50% pain relief Show forest plot

3

204

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

1.26 [1.01, 1.57]

Analysis 2.1

Comparison 2 Ibuprofen + codeine (all doses) versus same dose of ibuprofen alone, Outcome 1 Participants with ≥ 50% pain relief.

Comparison 2 Ibuprofen + codeine (all doses) versus same dose of ibuprofen alone, Outcome 1 Participants with ≥ 50% pain relief.

Risk of bias graph: review authors' judgements about each risk of bias item presented as percentages across all included studies.
Figuras y tablas -
Figure 1

Risk of bias graph: review authors' judgements about each risk of bias item presented as percentages across all included studies.

Risk of bias summary: review authors' judgements about each risk of bias item for each included study.
Figuras y tablas -
Figure 2

Risk of bias summary: review authors' judgements about each risk of bias item for each included study.

Forest plot of comparison: ibuprofen 400 mg + high dose codeine versus placebo, outcome: 2.1 Participants with ≥ 50% pain relief.
Figuras y tablas -
Figure 3

Forest plot of comparison: ibuprofen 400 mg + high dose codeine versus placebo, outcome: 2.1 Participants with ≥ 50% pain relief.

Studies comparing ibuprofen plus codeine with placebo, with the outcome of at least 50% maximum pain relief over 4‐6 hours. Colour code: white ‐ ibuprofen 200 mg + codeine 15 mg; yellow ‐ ibuprofen 200 mg + codeine 30 mg; light pink ‐ ibuprofen 400 mg + codeine 25.6 mg; medium pink ‐ ibuprofen 400 mg + codeine 30 mg; red ‐ ibuprofen 400 mg + codeine 60 mg; blue ‐ ibuprofen 800 mg + codeine 60 mg.
Figuras y tablas -
Figure 4

Studies comparing ibuprofen plus codeine with placebo, with the outcome of at least 50% maximum pain relief over 4‐6 hours. Colour code: white ‐ ibuprofen 200 mg + codeine 15 mg; yellow ‐ ibuprofen 200 mg + codeine 30 mg; light pink ‐ ibuprofen 400 mg + codeine 25.6 mg; medium pink ‐ ibuprofen 400 mg + codeine 30 mg; red ‐ ibuprofen 400 mg + codeine 60 mg; blue ‐ ibuprofen 800 mg + codeine 60 mg.

Studies comparing ibuprofen plus codeine with same dose of ibuprofen, with the outcome of at least 50% maximum pain relief over 4‐6 hours. Colour code: darker yellow ‐ ibuprofen 200 mg + codeine 20 mg versus ibuprofen 200 mg; lighter yellow ‐ ibuprofen 400 mg + codeine 60 mg versus ibuprofen 400 mg.
Figuras y tablas -
Figure 5

Studies comparing ibuprofen plus codeine with same dose of ibuprofen, with the outcome of at least 50% maximum pain relief over 4‐6 hours. Colour code: darker yellow ‐ ibuprofen 200 mg + codeine 20 mg versus ibuprofen 200 mg; lighter yellow ‐ ibuprofen 400 mg + codeine 60 mg versus ibuprofen 400 mg.

Forest plot of comparison: ibuprofen + codeine (all doses) versus same dose of ibuprofen alone, outcome: 3.1 Participants with ≥ 50% pain relief.
Figuras y tablas -
Figure 6

Forest plot of comparison: ibuprofen + codeine (all doses) versus same dose of ibuprofen alone, outcome: 3.1 Participants with ≥ 50% pain relief.

Comparison 1 Ibuprofen 400 mg + high dose codeine versus placebo, Outcome 1 Participants with ≥ 50% pain relief.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.1

Comparison 1 Ibuprofen 400 mg + high dose codeine versus placebo, Outcome 1 Participants with ≥ 50% pain relief.

Comparison 1 Ibuprofen 400 mg + high dose codeine versus placebo, Outcome 2 Participants with any adverse event.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.2

Comparison 1 Ibuprofen 400 mg + high dose codeine versus placebo, Outcome 2 Participants with any adverse event.

Comparison 2 Ibuprofen + codeine (all doses) versus same dose of ibuprofen alone, Outcome 1 Participants with ≥ 50% pain relief.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 2.1

Comparison 2 Ibuprofen + codeine (all doses) versus same dose of ibuprofen alone, Outcome 1 Participants with ≥ 50% pain relief.

Comparison 1. Ibuprofen 400 mg + high dose codeine versus placebo

Outcome or subgroup title

No. of studies

No. of participants

Statistical method

Effect size

1 Participants with ≥ 50% pain relief Show forest plot

4

443

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

4.09 [2.82, 5.93]

2 Participants with any adverse event Show forest plot

4

443

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

1.18 [0.84, 1.66]

Figuras y tablas -
Comparison 1. Ibuprofen 400 mg + high dose codeine versus placebo
Comparison 2. Ibuprofen + codeine (all doses) versus same dose of ibuprofen alone

Outcome or subgroup title

No. of studies

No. of participants

Statistical method

Effect size

1 Participants with ≥ 50% pain relief Show forest plot

3

204

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

1.26 [1.01, 1.57]

Figuras y tablas -
Comparison 2. Ibuprofen + codeine (all doses) versus same dose of ibuprofen alone