4.5 Review

Systematic review of topical capsaicin for the treatment of chronic pain

Journal

BMJ-BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL
Volume 328, Issue 7446, Pages 991-994

Publisher

BMJ PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1136/bmj.38042.506748.EE

Keywords

-

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objective To determine the efficacy and safety of topically applied capsaicin for chronic pain from neuropathic or musculoskeletal disorders. Data sources Cochrane Library, Medline, Embase, PubMed, an in-house database, and contact with manufacturers of topical capsaicin. Study selection Randomised controlled trials comparing topically applied capsaicin with placebo or in adults with chronic pain. another treatment Data extraction Primary outcome was dichotomous information for the number of patients with around at least 50% pain reduction. Outcomes were extracted at four weeks for musculoskeletal conditions and eight weeks for neuropathic conditions. Secondary outcomes were adverse events mid withdrawals due to adverse events. Data synthesis Six double blind placebo controlled trials ( 56 patients) were pooled for analysis of neuropathic conditions. The relative benefit from topical capsaicin 0.075% compared with placebo was 1.4 (95% confidence interval 1.2 to 1.7) and the number needed to treat was 5.7 (4.0 to 10.0). Three double blind placebo controlled trials (368 patients) were pooled for analysis of musculoskeletal conditions. The relative benefit from topical capsaicin 0.025% or plaster compared with placebo was 1.5 (1.1 to 2.0) and die number needed to treat was S. 1 (4.6 to 34). Around one third of patients experienced local adverse events with capsaicin, which would not have been the case with placebo. Conclusions Although topically applied capsaicin has moderate to poor efficacy in the treatment of chronic musculoskeletal or neuropathic pain, it may be useful as an adjunct or sole therapy for a small number of patients who are unresponsive to, or intolerant of, other treatments.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available