ANTI-INFLAMMATORIES FOR DELAYED ONSET MUSCLE SORENESS: SYSTEMATIC REVIEW AND META-ANALYSIS

• Autor(a) principal: Nahon,Roberto Lohn
• Data de Publicação: 2021
• Outros Autores: Lopes,Jaqueline Santos Silva, Magalhães Neto,Anibal Monteiro de, Machado,Aloa de Souza, Cameron,Luiz Claudio
• Tipo de documento: Artigo
• Idioma: eng
• Título da fonte: Revista brasileira de medicina do esporte (Online)
• Texto Completo: http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1517-86922021000600646
• topic: Pharmacology; Medical overuse; Sports medicine; Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAID); Recovery of function

ABSTRACT Objective: To investigate the effectiveness of pharmacological interventions in the treatment of delayed onset muscle soreness (DOMS). Design: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled clinical trials (RCTs). Data sources: The PubMed/MEDLINE, EMBASE, SPORTDiscus, Scielo and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) databases were searched for RCTs published prior to August 3, 2020. Eligibility criteria for selecting studies: Studies that 1) used an RCT design; 2) evaluated the effectiveness of steroidal or nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) in treating DOMS; and 3) therapeutically used drugs after exercise were included. Results: In total, 26 studies (patients = 934) were eligible for inclusion in the qualitative analysis on the treatment of DOMS. The results of the meta-analysis showed no superiority between the use and non-use of NSAIDs in the improvement of late muscle pain, as no statistically significant differences were verified (21 studies, n= 955; standard mean difference (SMD)= 0.02; 95% confidence interval (CI) −0.58, 0.63; p=0.94; I2=93%). The quality of the synthesized evidence was very low according to the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) criteria, and there was significant heterogeneity among the included studies. Conclusion: The results demonstrate that NSAIDs are not superior to controls/placebos in treating DOMS. The inclusion of both studies with dose-response protocols and those with exercise protocols may have influenced the results. In addition, the high risk of bias identified reveals that limitations need to be considered when interpreting the results. Level of evidence I; ystematic review of RCT (Randomized and Controlled Clinical Trials).