Skip navigation

Topical salicylate for acute and chronic pain

 

Clinical bottom line

In acute conditions in three trials with 182 patients topical salicylate was significantly better than placebo with an NNT of 2.1 (1.7 to 2.8).

In chronic conditions in six trials with 429 patients topical salicylate was significantly better than placebo with an NNT of 5.3 (CI 3.6 to 10.2), but larger, more valid studies were without significant effect.

Local adverse events and withdrawals were generally rare in trials that reported them.


Background

Rubefacients are believed to work by counter-irritation, to relieve pain in the muscles, joints and tendons and in non-articular musculoskeletal conditions, rather than as NSAIDs that inhibit cyclo-oxygenase responsible for prostaglandin biosynthesis and the development of inflammation. Rubefacients are usually used as adjuvants to other therapies, such as oral analgesics, support bandages, rest, ice and compression, and may be particularly useful for patients who cannot tolerate the adverse events associated with some oral analgesics.

Reference


L Mason, RA Moore, S Derry, JE Edwards, HJ McQuay, PJ Wiffen. Systematic review of efficacy of topical rubefacients containing salicylates for the treatment of acute and chronic pain. BMJ 2004 328: 995-998.


Systematic review

Extensive searches looked for randomised, active or placebo-controlled trials in adult patients experiencing either acute (strains, sprains and sports injuries) or chronic (arthritis, musculoskeletal) pain.

Results

Acute pain

Three placebo controlled trials (one of low validity) had information from 182 patients. The mean percentage of patients with at least 50% pain relief was 67% with topical salicylate and was 18% with placebo. Treatment with rubefacient was significantly better than placebo with and NNT of 2.1 (1.7 to 2.8) for at least 50% pain relief at seven days in acute conditions compared with placebo (Table 1).

Table 1: Topical salicylates in acute and chronic pain

Success with
Condition
Trials
Patients
Treatment
Placebo
RB (95% CI)
NNT (95% CI)
Acute pain
efficacy (all trials) 3 182 60/90 17/92 3.6 (2.4 to 5.6) 2.1 (1.7 to 2.8)
local AE 5 418 4/208 4/210 1.1 (0.4 to 3.5) not significant
Chronic pain
efficacy (all trials) 6 429† 125/230 80/225 1.5 (1.3 to 1.9) 5.3 (3.6 to 10.2)
Validity score 8 or less 3 176 55/92 22/84 2.2 (1.5 to 3.3) 3.0 (2.1 to 5.0)
Validity score 9 or more 3 279 70/138 58/141 1.3 (0.98 to 1.6) not significant

 

Chronic pain

Six placebo controlled trials (three of low validity) had information from 403 patients (Figure 1). The mean percentage of patients with at least 50% pain relief was 54% with topical salicylate and was 36% with placebo. Treatment with rubefacient was significantly better than placebo with an NNT of 5.3 (3.6 to 10) for at least 50% pain relief at 14 days in acute conditions compared with placebo (Table 1).

Figure 1: Trials of topical salicylate in chronic pain (low validity scores blue, high validity scores yellow)

Better trials had less effect. For the three trials of higher validity, there was no difference between topical salicylate and placebo (Table 1).

Adverse events

Adverse event reporting was poor, but few were reported.

Comment

The evidence for efficacy of topical salicylates was poor. There were only two acute pain studies with decent validity scores, and only three in chronic pain. Valid chronic pain studies showed no difference between topical salicylate and placebo, while the acute pain studies could have been overturned if any negative studies emerged.