Summary of findings 2. Peppermint compared to placebo for treatment of postoperative nausea and vomiting.
Peppermint compared to placebo for treatment of postoperative nausea and vomiting | ||||||
Patient or population: adults and children having any type of surgical procedure under general anaesthesia, regional anaesthesia or sedation, as hospital inpatients or outpatients, with existing PONV Setting: hospital post‐anaesthesia care unit or same‐day surgery unit in USA Intervention: peppermint Comparison: placebo | ||||||
Outcomes | Anticipated absolute effects* (95% CI) | Relative effect (95% CI) | № of participants (studies) | Quality of the evidence (GRADE) | Comments | |
Risk with placebo | Risk with peppermint | |||||
Nausea severity Assessed with VAS at 5 minutes post‐initial treatment Scale from: 0 to 10 (higher indicates worse nausea) | The mean nausea severity was 2.8 (SD = 10.39) | SMD 0.18 SD lower (0.86 lower to 0.49 higher) | ‐ | 115 (4 RCTs) | ⊕⊕⊝⊝ Low1, 2 | Risk in placebo group based on control group in Anderson 2004 |
Nausea duration (nausea‐free at end of treatment) Measured by participant self‐report or medical or nursing observation |
See comment | ‐ | ‐ | ‐ | The studies reporting this comparison did not report this outcome. | |
Use of rescue antiemetics | See comment | ‐ | ‐ | ‐ | The studies reporting this comparison did not report this outcome. | |
Adverse events (common reactions to aromatherapy include skin rashes, dyspnoea, headache, cardiac arrhythmias, hypotension, hypertension or dizziness) |
See comment | ‐ | ‐ | ‐ | The studies reporting this comparison did not report this outcome. | |
Patient satisfaction with treatment Measured by a validated scale |
See comment | ‐ | ‐ | ‐ | The studies reporting this comparison did not report this outcome. | |
*The risk in the intervention group (and its 95% confidence interval) is based on the assumed risk in the comparison group and the relative effect of the intervention (and its 95% CI). CI: confidence interval; PONV: postoperative nausea and vomiting; RCT: randomized controlled trial; SD: standard deviation; SMD: standardized mean difference; VAS: visual analogue scale | ||||||
GRADE Working Group grades of evidence High quality: we are very confident that the true effect lies close to that of the estimate of the effect Moderate quality: we are moderately confident in the effect estimate: the true effect is likely to be close to the estimate of the effect, but there is a possibility that it is substantially different Low quality: our confidence in the effect estimate is limited: the true effect may be substantially different from the estimate of the effect Very low quality: we have very little confidence in the effect estimate: the true effect is likely to be substantially different from the estimate of effect |
1Risk of bias in included studies due to study designs, downgraded one level. 2Significant inconsistency between studies, downgraded one level.