The effect of different types of abdominal binders on intra-abdominal pressure

The efficacy of abdominal binders in reducing postoperative pain and distress after cesarean delivery: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the efficacy of abdominal binders in reducing postoperative pain, patient distress and surgical postoperative sequelae after cesarean delivery (CD).

METHODS

A comprehensive search in electronic databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane Central) was performed up to February 2021. Selection criteria included randomized clinical trials investigating the application or not of abdominal binder after CD. The primary outcome was postoperative pain, measured using the visual analog scale (VAS) pain score. Secondary outcomes were divided into short- and long-term postoperative outcomes, including patient distress, need for additional pain medications, time to mobilization, return to normal daily activities, surgical site infection, fascial dehiscence or incisional hernia, and rectus abdominis diastasis. The summary measures were reported as mean difference with 95 % confidence intervals (CI) using the random effects model of DerSimonian and Laird. An I² (Higgins I²) value of greater than 0% was used to identify heterogeneity.

RESULTS

Four RCTs involving 601 women were included for meta-analysis: 310 (51.6 %) were randomized to the abdominal binder and 291 (48.4 %) to no abdominal binder group. There was no statistically significant difference between the two groups for VAS score either at 24 h (MD -0.97, 95 % CI -2.23 to 0.30; p = 0.13) and at 48 h (MD -0.30, 95 % CI -0.71 to 0.11; p = 0.15). Conversely, there was a significant reduction in postoperative distress (SDS) both at 24 h (MD -2.23, 95 % CI -3.77 to -0.70; p = 0.004) and 48 h (MD -2.37, 95 % CI -3.86 to -0.87; p = 0.002).

CONCLUSION

The present meta-analysis shows that the use of abdominal binders after CD significantly reduces patient distress.

Outcome of abdominal binder in midline abdominal wound Dehiscence in terms of pain, psychological satisfaction and need for reclosure

Objective

To assess the role of abdominal binder in patients with midline wound dehiscence after elective or emergency laparotomy in terms of pain, psychological satisfaction and need for reclosure.

Methods

It was a comparative study done at EAST Surgical Ward of Mayo Hospital, Lahore from 1^st January 2018 to 31^st December 2019. One hundred and sixty-two (162) patients were included in this study with post-operative midline abdominal wound dehiscence and after informed consent by consecutive non probability sampling technique. Patients were divided into two groups by lottery method into eighty-one patients each. Group-A included patients where abdominal binder was applied and Group-B included patients without abdominal binder. In both groups pain score, psychological satisfaction and need for reclosure was assessed and compared.

Results

Patients with abdominal binder shows significantly less pain (P value =0.000) and more psychological satisfaction (P value = 0.000) as compared to the patients where abdominal binder was not used. However, there was no difference in reducing the need for reclosure in patients who use abdominal binder (P value = 0.063).

Conclusion

Although abdominal binder helps in reducing the pain and improving the psychological satisfaction in patients with midline abdominal wound dehiscence yet it doesn't help in healing of wound and reclosure of the dehisced abdominal wound is needed.

The effectiveness of the abdominal binder in relieving pain after cesarean delivery: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

Abdominal binder is a non-pharmacological method of relieving pain after surgical procedures.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the effectiveness of the abdominal binder in relieving pain and distress scores after cesarean delivery (CD).

SEARCH STRATEGY

The following terms were searched: cesarean section, cesarean, caesarean, abdominal deliveries, C-section, abdominal delivery, abdominal binding, binder, and abdominal binder.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) with patients undergoing CD receiving an abdominal binder compared with non-users of the abdominal binder.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Five electronic databases were searched until November 2019. Records were screened for eligibility. Data were extracted independently and analyzed. The main outcomes were pain and distress scores.

RESULTS

The final analysis included six RCTs. Overall effect estimate favored the abdominal binder group over the control group in the following outcomes: VAS pain scores after 24 h (mean difference [MD] -1.76; 95% confidence interval [CI] -3.14 to -0.39; P = 0.01), VAS scores after 48 h (MD -1.21; 95% CI -1.51 to -0.90; P < 0.001), distress score after 24 h (MD -1.87; 95% CI -3.01 to -0.73; P = 0.001), and distress score after 48 h (MD -1.87; 95% CI -3.07 to -0.67; P = 0.002).

CONCLUSION

The abdominal binder could be an effective, simple, non-pharmacological option of relieving pain and distress after CD.

The Clinical Effects of Abdominal Binder on Abdominal Surgery: A Meta-analysis

Objective. We conducted a meta-analysis to quantitatively evaluate the effects of abdominal binder in abdominal surgeries. Methods. Through literature retrieval in globally recognized databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane Central), trials investigating the application of abdominal binder in abdominal surgeries were systematically reviewed. The main outcomes, namely, 6-minute walk test (6MWT), visual analog scale (VAS) pain score, and symptom distress scale (SDS) score, were pooled to make an overall estimation. I² index was calculated to identify heterogeneity, and sensitivity analysis was performed to validate the stability of main results and explore the source of heterogeneity. A funnel plot and Egger's test were applied to assess publication bias. Results. Ten randomized controlled trials consisting of 968 subjects were ultimately included for the pooled estimation. Abdominal binder significantly increased the distance of 6MWT with standard mean difference (SMD) of .555 (P < .001) and decreased the scores of VAS and SDS with SMD of -.979 (P < .001) and -.716 (P < .001), respectively. Despite of the significant heterogeneity indicated by I² index statistic, the results of sensitivity analysis revealed the reliability of the main conclusions. While we identified no obvious publication bias regarding 6MWT (Egger's test P = .321), it seemed that significant publication biases existed with respect to the estimation of VAS (P < .001) and SDS (P = .006). Conclusion. The current meta-analysis verified that abdominal binder efficiently promoted recovery after abdominal surgeries in terms of facilitating mobilization, alleviating pain, and reducing postoperative distress. More rigorously designed clinical trials with large sample size are expected to further elaborate its clinical value.