What a pain in the … back: a review of current treatment options with a focus on naproxen sodium

Steven M. Weisman, Giovanni Ciavarra, Grant Cooper
{"title":"What a pain in the … back: a review of current treatment options with a focus on naproxen sodium","authors":"Steven M. Weisman, Giovanni Ciavarra, Grant Cooper","doi":"10.3389/jpps.2024.12384","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Non-specific low back pain (LBP) represents a challenging and prevalent condition that is one of the most common symptoms leading to primary care physician visits. While established guidelines recommend prioritizing non-pharmacological approaches as the primary course of action, pharmacological treatments are advised when non-pharmacological approaches are ineffective or based on patient preference. These guidelines recommend non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) or skeletal muscle relaxers (SMRs) as the first-line pharmacological options for acute or subacute LBP, while NSAIDs are the exclusive first-line pharmacological option for chronic LBP. Although SMRs are generally effective for acute LBP, the available evidence does not support the view that they improve functional recovery, and their comparative efficacy to NSAIDs and other analgesics remains unknown, while studies have shown them to introduce adverse events without significantly reducing LBP. Moreover, opioids continue to be widely prescribed for LBP, despite limited evidence for effectiveness and known risks of addiction and overdose. Broader use of non-opioid pharmacotherapy, including the appropriate use of OTC options, is critical to addressing the opioid crisis. The balance of evidence indicates that NSAIDs have a favorable benefit-risk profile when compared to other available pharmacological treatment options for non-specific LBP, a condition that is primarily acute in nature and well-suited for self-treatment with OTC analgesics. While clinical guidelines do not differentiate between NSAIDs, evidence indicates that OTC naproxen sodium effectively relieves pain across multiple types of pain models, and furthermore, the 14-h half-life of naproxen sodium allows sustained, all day pain relief with reduced patient pill burden as compared to shorter acting options. Choosing the most appropriate approach for managing LBP, including non-pharmacological options, should be based on the patient’s condition, severity of pain, potential risks, and individual patient preference and needs.","PeriodicalId":503670,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Pharmacy & Pharmaceutical Sciences","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Pharmacy & Pharmaceutical Sciences","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3389/jpps.2024.12384","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Non-specific low back pain (LBP) represents a challenging and prevalent condition that is one of the most common symptoms leading to primary care physician visits. While established guidelines recommend prioritizing non-pharmacological approaches as the primary course of action, pharmacological treatments are advised when non-pharmacological approaches are ineffective or based on patient preference. These guidelines recommend non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) or skeletal muscle relaxers (SMRs) as the first-line pharmacological options for acute or subacute LBP, while NSAIDs are the exclusive first-line pharmacological option for chronic LBP. Although SMRs are generally effective for acute LBP, the available evidence does not support the view that they improve functional recovery, and their comparative efficacy to NSAIDs and other analgesics remains unknown, while studies have shown them to introduce adverse events without significantly reducing LBP. Moreover, opioids continue to be widely prescribed for LBP, despite limited evidence for effectiveness and known risks of addiction and overdose. Broader use of non-opioid pharmacotherapy, including the appropriate use of OTC options, is critical to addressing the opioid crisis. The balance of evidence indicates that NSAIDs have a favorable benefit-risk profile when compared to other available pharmacological treatment options for non-specific LBP, a condition that is primarily acute in nature and well-suited for self-treatment with OTC analgesics. While clinical guidelines do not differentiate between NSAIDs, evidence indicates that OTC naproxen sodium effectively relieves pain across multiple types of pain models, and furthermore, the 14-h half-life of naproxen sodium allows sustained, all day pain relief with reduced patient pill burden as compared to shorter acting options. Choosing the most appropriate approach for managing LBP, including non-pharmacological options, should be based on the patient’s condition, severity of pain, potential risks, and individual patient preference and needs.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
......背部疼痛:以萘普生钠为重点的当前治疗方案回顾
非特异性腰背痛(LBP)是一种具有挑战性的常见疾病,也是导致初级保健医生就诊的最常见症状之一。虽然既定指南建议优先采用非药物疗法作为主要治疗方法,但在非药物疗法无效或患者偏好的情况下,建议采用药物疗法。这些指南建议将非甾体抗炎药(NSAIDs)或骨骼肌松弛剂(SMRs)作为急性或亚急性腰痛的一线药物治疗方案,而非甾体抗炎药则是慢性腰痛的唯一一线药物治疗方案。虽然肌肉止痛剂对急性枸杞痛普遍有效,但现有证据并不支持它们能改善功能恢复的观点,而且它们与非甾体抗炎药和其他镇痛药的疗效比较仍是未知数,研究表明它们会带来不良反应,但不会显著减轻枸杞痛。此外,尽管阿片类药物的有效性证据有限,且已知存在成瘾和过量使用的风险,但此类药物仍被广泛用于治疗枸杞痛。更广泛地使用非阿片类药物疗法,包括适当使用非处方药,对于解决阿片类药物危机至关重要。平衡证据表明,与其他可用的药物治疗方案相比,非甾体抗炎药在治疗非特异性腰背痛方面具有有利的收益-风险特征,这种疾病主要是急性的,非常适合使用非处方药镇痛剂进行自我治疗。虽然临床指南并未对非甾体抗炎药进行区分,但有证据表明,非处方药萘普生钠可有效缓解多种类型疼痛模型的疼痛,此外,与作用时间较短的药物相比,萘普生钠的半衰期为 14 小时,可全天候持续缓解疼痛,减轻患者的药片负担。应根据患者的病情、疼痛的严重程度、潜在风险以及患者的个人偏好和需求,选择最合适的方法来治疗腰背痛,包括非药物疗法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Lipoprotein lipase as a target for obesity/diabetes related cardiovascular disease Community pharmacists as antimicrobial resistance stewards: a narrative review on their contributions and challenges in low- and middle-income countries Real-world community hospital hyperglycemia management in noncritically ill, type 2 diabetic patients: a comparison between basal-bolus insulin and correctional insulin Investigating the effect of prescribing status and patient characteristics on the therapeutic outcomes in patients with diabetes using a leftover drug adjustment protocol Obesity management for the treatment of type 2 diabetes: emerging evidence and therapeutic approaches
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1