Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 446

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 7 of the 7 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Quantitive systematic review of topically applied non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs

Open access
Moore, R A, Tramer, M R, Carroll, D, Wiffen, P J, McQuay, H J·1998·BMJ

Abstract

Abstract Objective: To review the effectiveness and safety of topical non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs in acute and chronic pain conditions. Design: Quantitive systematic review of randomised controlled trials. Data sources: 86 trials involving 10 160 patients. Main outcome measures: Measures of treatment success approximating at least 50% reduction in pain, local and systemic adverse effects. Analysis at 1 week for acute and 2 weeks for chronic conditions with relative benefit and number needed to treat. Results: In acute pain conditions (soft tissue trauma, strains, and sprains) placebo controlled trials had a relative benefit of 1.7 (1.5 to 1.9), the number needed to treat was 3.9 (3.4 to 4.4). With analysis by drug (at least three trials), ketoprofen (number needed to treat 2.6), felbinac (3.0), ibuprofen (3.5), and piroxicam (4.2) had significant efficacy. Benzydamine and indomethacin were no different from placebo. In chronic pain conditions (osteoarthritis, tendinitis) placebo controlled trials had a relative benefit of 2.0 (1.5 to 2.7); the number needed to treat was 3.1 (2.7 to 3.8). Small trials (<40 treated patients) exaggerated effectiveness of topical non-steroidals by 33% in acute conditions but not in chronic conditions. There was no relation between trial quality and treatment effect. In both acute and chronic pain local and systemic adverse events and withdrawal from the study related to the drug had a low incidence and were no different from placebo. Conclusion: Topical non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs are effective in relieving pain in acute and chronic conditions. Key messages Topical non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs are widely thought to be ineffective, despite licensed status To evaluate their effectiveness and safety we conducted a quantitive systematic review of all relevant randomised trials In acute conditions like strains and sprains topical non-steroidals were significantly better than placebo over 1 week with a number needed to treat of 3.9 (3.4 to 4.4). For drugs with at least three placebo controlled trials ketoprofen (number needed to treat 2.6), felbinac (3.0), ibuprofen (3.5), and piroxicam (4.2) had significant efficacy In chronic conditions like arthritis and rheumatism topical non-steroidals were significantly better than placebo over 2 weeks with a number needed to treat of 3.1 (2.7 to 3.8) In both acute and chronic pain local and systemic adverse events and withdrawal related to tested drug had a low incidence and were no different from placebo

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1136/bmj.316.7128.333

Cites

7 of 7 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 7 references

Cited by

See all 446

Metadata

Authors
Moore, R. A., Tramer, M. R., Carroll, D., Wiffen, P. J., & McQuay, H. J.
Venue
BMJ
Publisher
BMJ
Published
1998-01-31
Volume
316
Issue
7128
Pages
333-338
ISSN
  • 0007-1447 (ISSN-L)
  • 0959-8138
  • 1468-5833
OpenAlex
W2031268164
Cited by
446
References
7
FWCI
2.82
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Quantitive systematic review of topically applied non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1136/bmj.316.7128.333
The paper
Moore, R. A., Tramer, M. R., Carroll, D., Wiffen, P. J., & McQuay, H. J. (1998). Quantitive systematic review of topically applied non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs. BMJ. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.316.7128.333

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.