Interventions for nausea and vomiting in early pregnancy

Anne Matthews, David M Haas, Dónal P O'Mathúna, Therese Dowswell, Anne Matthews, David M Haas, Dónal P O'Mathúna, Therese Dowswell

Abstract

Background: Nausea, retching and vomiting are very commonly experienced by women in early pregnancy. There are considerable physical, social and psychological effects on women who experience these symptoms. This is an update of a review of interventions for nausea and vomiting in early pregnancy last published in 2014.

Objectives: To assess the effectiveness and safety of all interventions for nausea, vomiting and retching in early pregnancy, up to 20 weeks' gestation.

Search methods: We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register, the Cochrane Complementary Medicine Field's Trials Register (19 January 2015) and reference lists of retrieved studies.

Selection criteria: All randomised controlled trials of any intervention for nausea, vomiting and retching in early pregnancy. We excluded trials of interventions for hyperemesis gravidarum, which are covered by another Cochrane review. We also excluded quasi-randomised trials and trials using a cross-over design.

Data collection and analysis: Four review authors, in pairs, reviewed the eligibility of trials and independently evaluated the risk of bias and extracted the data for included trials.

Main results: Forty-one trials involving 5449 women, met the inclusion criteria. These trials covered many interventions, including acupressure, acustimulation, acupuncture, ginger, chamomile, lemon oil, mint oil, vitamin B6 and several antiemetic drugs. There were no included studies of dietary and other lifestyle interventions. Evidence regarding the effectiveness of P6 acupressure, auricular (ear) acupressure and acustimulation of the P6 point was limited. Acupuncture (P6 or traditional) showed no significant benefit to women in pregnancy. The use of ginger products may be helpful to women, but the evidence of effectiveness was limited and not consistent, though three recent studies support ginger over placebo. There was only limited evidence from trials to support the use of pharmacological agents including vitamin B6, Doxylamine-pyridoxoine and other anti-emetic drugs to relieve mild or moderate nausea and vomiting. There was little information on maternal and fetal adverse outcomes and on psychological, social or economic outcomes.We were unable to pool findings from studies for most outcomes due to heterogeneity in study participants, interventions, comparison groups, and outcomes measured or reported. The methodological quality of the included studies was mixed. Risk of bias was low related to performance bias, detection bias and attrition bias for most studies. Selection bias risk was unclear for many studies and almost half of the studies did not fully or clearly report all pre-specified outcomes.

Authors' conclusions: Given the high prevalence of nausea and vomiting in early pregnancy, women and health professionals need clear guidance about effective and safe interventions, based on systematically reviewed evidence. There is a lack of high-quality evidence to support any particular intervention. This is not the same as saying that the interventions studied are ineffective, but that there is insufficient strong evidence for any one intervention. The difficulties in interpreting and pooling the results of the studies included in this review highlight the need for specific, consistent and clearly justified outcomes and approaches to measurement in research studies.

Conflict of interest statement

No declarations of interest.

Figures

1
1
Methodological quality summary: review authors' judgements about each methodological quality item for each included study.
2
2
Methodological quality graph: review authors' judgements about each methodological quality item presented as percentages across all included studies.
1.1. Analysis
1.1. Analysis
Comparison 1 P6 Acupressure versus placebo, Outcome 1 Severity of nausea after treatment (of 4 days) using a 10 cm VAS.
1.2. Analysis
1.2. Analysis
Comparison 1 P6 Acupressure versus placebo, Outcome 2 No improvement in intensity of symptoms (while using wristbands) reported.
1.3. Analysis
1.3. Analysis
Comparison 1 P6 Acupressure versus placebo, Outcome 3 Mean nausea score after day 3 using VAS.
1.4. Analysis
1.4. Analysis
Comparison 1 P6 Acupressure versus placebo, Outcome 4 Mean nausea score days 1‐3 (average).
1.5. Analysis
1.5. Analysis
Comparison 1 P6 Acupressure versus placebo, Outcome 5 Mean total scores (Rhodes Index) days 1‐3 (average).
1.6. Analysis
1.6. Analysis
Comparison 1 P6 Acupressure versus placebo, Outcome 6 Total Rhodes Index score on the 3rd day of intervention.
1.7. Analysis
1.7. Analysis
Comparison 1 P6 Acupressure versus placebo, Outcome 7 Severity of vomiting after treatment (of 4 days) as number of vomiting episodes.
1.8. Analysis
1.8. Analysis
Comparison 1 P6 Acupressure versus placebo, Outcome 8 Mean emesis scores days 1‐3 (average).
2.1. Analysis
2.1. Analysis
Comparison 2 P6 Acupressure versus vitamin B6, Outcome 1 Nausea scores on day 3.
2.2. Analysis
2.2. Analysis
Comparison 2 P6 Acupressure versus vitamin B6, Outcome 2 Poor symptom relief/amount of rescue medication (number of tablets).
3.1. Analysis
3.1. Analysis
Comparison 3 Auricular acupressure versus placebo, Outcome 1 Nausea/vomiting score (combined Rhodes Index score) on day 6 (3 days after treatment started).
3.2. Analysis
3.2. Analysis
Comparison 3 Auricular acupressure versus placebo, Outcome 2 Number of anti‐emetic drugs used on day 6 (3 days after treatment started).
4.1. Analysis
4.1. Analysis
Comparison 4 Acustimulation therapy at P6 point versus placebo, Outcome 1 Weight gain (in lbs) over 3 week period.
4.2. Analysis
4.2. Analysis
Comparison 4 Acustimulation therapy at P6 point versus placebo, Outcome 2 Dehydration: occurrences reported.
4.3. Analysis
4.3. Analysis
Comparison 4 Acustimulation therapy at P6 point versus placebo, Outcome 3 Ketonuria at the end of the trial.
5.1. Analysis
5.1. Analysis
Comparison 5 Traditional acupuncture versus placebo, Outcome 1 Mean nausea score on day 7.
5.2. Analysis
5.2. Analysis
Comparison 5 Traditional acupuncture versus placebo, Outcome 2 Mean dry retching score on day 7.
5.3. Analysis
5.3. Analysis
Comparison 5 Traditional acupuncture versus placebo, Outcome 3 Mean vomiting score on day 7.
6.1. Analysis
6.1. Analysis
Comparison 6 P6 Acupuncture versus placebo, Outcome 1 Mean nausea score on day 7.
6.2. Analysis
6.2. Analysis
Comparison 6 P6 Acupuncture versus placebo, Outcome 2 Mean dry retching score on day 7.
6.3. Analysis
6.3. Analysis
Comparison 6 P6 Acupuncture versus placebo, Outcome 3 Mean vomiting score on day 7.
7.1. Analysis
7.1. Analysis
Comparison 7 Traditional acupuncture versus P6 acupuncture, Outcome 1 Mean nausea score on day 7.
7.2. Analysis
7.2. Analysis
Comparison 7 Traditional acupuncture versus P6 acupuncture, Outcome 2 Mean dry retching score on day 7.
7.3. Analysis
7.3. Analysis
Comparison 7 Traditional acupuncture versus P6 acupuncture, Outcome 3 Mean vomiting score on day 7.
8.1. Analysis
8.1. Analysis
Comparison 8 Ginger versus placebo, Outcome 1 Mean nausea score (using Rhodes Index) on day 3.
8.2. Analysis
8.2. Analysis
Comparison 8 Ginger versus placebo, Outcome 2 Total Rhodes Index score on day 3.
8.3. Analysis
8.3. Analysis
Comparison 8 Ginger versus placebo, Outcome 3 Total Rhodes Index score on the 3rd day of intervention.
8.4. Analysis
8.4. Analysis
Comparison 8 Ginger versus placebo, Outcome 4 Total Rhodes Index score after 1 week treatment.
8.5. Analysis
8.5. Analysis
Comparison 8 Ginger versus placebo, Outcome 5 Little improvement in nausea.
8.6. Analysis
8.6. Analysis
Comparison 8 Ginger versus placebo, Outcome 6 Improvement in nausea (mean change score) over 4 days of treatment: women available to follow up.
8.7. Analysis
8.7. Analysis
Comparison 8 Ginger versus placebo, Outcome 7 Improvement in nausea (mean change score) over 4 days of treatment: ITT analysis.
8.8. Analysis
8.8. Analysis
Comparison 8 Ginger versus placebo, Outcome 8 Improvement in nausea intensity after treatment (day 5).
8.9. Analysis
8.9. Analysis
Comparison 8 Ginger versus placebo, Outcome 9 Average change in nausea score for days 1‐4, using 10cm VAS.
8.10. Analysis
8.10. Analysis
Comparison 8 Ginger versus placebo, Outcome 10 Symptoms improved (better or much better versus same).
8.11. Analysis
8.11. Analysis
Comparison 8 Ginger versus placebo, Outcome 11 Mean vomiting severity (using Rhodes Index) on day 3.
8.12. Analysis
8.12. Analysis
Comparison 8 Ginger versus placebo, Outcome 12 Number of women continuing vomiting at day 6.
8.13. Analysis
8.13. Analysis
Comparison 8 Ginger versus placebo, Outcome 13 Spontaneous abortion.
8.14. Analysis
8.14. Analysis
Comparison 8 Ginger versus placebo, Outcome 14 Caesarean delivery.
9.1. Analysis
9.1. Analysis
Comparison 9 Ginger versus P6 Acupressure, Outcome 1 Total Rhodes Index score on the 3rd day of intervention.
10.1. Analysis
10.1. Analysis
Comparison 10 Ginger versus chamomile, Outcome 1 Rhodes Index score after 1 week treatment.
11.1. Analysis
11.1. Analysis
Comparison 11 Ginger versus vitamin B6, Outcome 1 Nausea vomiting score day 3.
11.2. Analysis
11.2. Analysis
Comparison 11 Ginger versus vitamin B6, Outcome 2 Post‐treatment number of vomiting episodes: day 3.
11.3. Analysis
11.3. Analysis
Comparison 11 Ginger versus vitamin B6, Outcome 3 No improvement in symptoms.
11.4. Analysis
11.4. Analysis
Comparison 11 Ginger versus vitamin B6, Outcome 4 Spontaneous abortion.
11.5. Analysis
11.5. Analysis
Comparison 11 Ginger versus vitamin B6, Outcome 5 Stillbirth.
11.6. Analysis
11.6. Analysis
Comparison 11 Ginger versus vitamin B6, Outcome 6 Congenital abnormality.
11.7. Analysis
11.7. Analysis
Comparison 11 Ginger versus vitamin B6, Outcome 7 Antepartum haemorrhage/abruption, placenta praevia.
11.8. Analysis
11.8. Analysis
Comparison 11 Ginger versus vitamin B6, Outcome 8 Pregnancy‐induced hypertension.
11.9. Analysis
11.9. Analysis
Comparison 11 Ginger versus vitamin B6, Outcome 9 Pre‐eclampisa.
11.10. Analysis
11.10. Analysis
Comparison 11 Ginger versus vitamin B6, Outcome 10 Preterm birth.
11.11. Analysis
11.11. Analysis
Comparison 11 Ginger versus vitamin B6, Outcome 11 Arrhythmia.
11.12. Analysis
11.12. Analysis
Comparison 11 Ginger versus vitamin B6, Outcome 12 Headache.
11.13. Analysis
11.13. Analysis
Comparison 11 Ginger versus vitamin B6, Outcome 13 Heartburn.
11.14. Analysis
11.14. Analysis
Comparison 11 Ginger versus vitamin B6, Outcome 14 Sedation or drowsiness.
11.15. Analysis
11.15. Analysis
Comparison 11 Ginger versus vitamin B6, Outcome 15 Caesarean delivery.
12.1. Analysis
12.1. Analysis
Comparison 12 Ginger versus metoclopramide, Outcome 1 Mean score for nausea (using Rhodes Index) on day 3.
12.2. Analysis
12.2. Analysis
Comparison 12 Ginger versus metoclopramide, Outcome 2 Mean score for vomiting (using Rhodes Index) on day 3.
12.3. Analysis
12.3. Analysis
Comparison 12 Ginger versus metoclopramide, Outcome 3 Rhodes Index score on day 3.
13.1. Analysis
13.1. Analysis
Comparison 13 Ginger versus dimenhydrinate, Outcome 1 Drowsiness.
13.2. Analysis
13.2. Analysis
Comparison 13 Ginger versus dimenhydrinate, Outcome 2 Heartburn.
14.1. Analysis
14.1. Analysis
Comparison 14 Lemon oil versus placebo, Outcome 1 Mean PUQE score on day 3 of intervention.
14.2. Analysis
14.2. Analysis
Comparison 14 Lemon oil versus placebo, Outcome 2 Mean difference of total PUQE scores from baseline to day 3 of intervention.
14.3. Analysis
14.3. Analysis
Comparison 14 Lemon oil versus placebo, Outcome 3 Satisfaction with the given treatment.
15.1. Analysis
15.1. Analysis
Comparison 15 Mint oil versus placebo, Outcome 1 Severity of nausea on day 4.
15.2. Analysis
15.2. Analysis
Comparison 15 Mint oil versus placebo, Outcome 2 Vomiting intensity on day 4.
16.1. Analysis
16.1. Analysis
Comparison 16 Chamomile versus placebo, Outcome 1 Rhodes Index score after 1 week treatment.
17.1. Analysis
17.1. Analysis
Comparison 17 Vitamin B6 versus placebo, Outcome 1 Mean reduction in nausea score after 3 days.
17.2. Analysis
17.2. Analysis
Comparison 17 Vitamin B6 versus placebo, Outcome 2 Number of patients with emesis post‐therapy.
18.1. Analysis
18.1. Analysis
Comparison 18 Vitamin B6 (high dose) versus Vitamin B6 (low dose), Outcome 1 Mean change in PUQE score from baseline to 2 weeks.
19.1. Analysis
19.1. Analysis
Comparison 19 Vitamin B6 versus dimenhydrinate, Outcome 1 Nausea and vomiting score after 3 days of treatment using Rhodes Index.
19.2. Analysis
19.2. Analysis
Comparison 19 Vitamin B6 versus dimenhydrinate, Outcome 2 Drowsiness.
20.1. Analysis
20.1. Analysis
Comparison 20 Hydroxyzine versus placebo, Outcome 1 No relief from nausea.
20.2. Analysis
20.2. Analysis
Comparison 20 Hydroxyzine versus placebo, Outcome 2 Spontaneous abortion (1st or 2nd trimester).
20.3. Analysis
20.3. Analysis
Comparison 20 Hydroxyzine versus placebo, Outcome 3 Perinatal mortality.
21.1. Analysis
21.1. Analysis
Comparison 21 Dicyclomine/ doxylamine/ pyridoxine versus placebo, Outcome 1 No improvement of symptoms.
22.1. Analysis
22.1. Analysis
Comparison 22 Doxylamine and pyridoxine versus placebo, Outcome 1 Mean difference in nausea/vomiting/retching (PUQE score) baseline to day 15.
22.2. Analysis
22.2. Analysis
Comparison 22 Doxylamine and pyridoxine versus placebo, Outcome 2 Requests for compassionate use of drug after day 14.
22.3. Analysis
22.3. Analysis
Comparison 22 Doxylamine and pyridoxine versus placebo, Outcome 3 Headache.
22.4. Analysis
22.4. Analysis
Comparison 22 Doxylamine and pyridoxine versus placebo, Outcome 4 Somnolence.
22.5. Analysis
22.5. Analysis
Comparison 22 Doxylamine and pyridoxine versus placebo, Outcome 5 Difference in global assessment of well‐being from baseline to day 15.
22.6. Analysis
22.6. Analysis
Comparison 22 Doxylamine and pyridoxine versus placebo, Outcome 6 Time loss from employment in days.
23.1. Analysis
23.1. Analysis
Comparison 23 Thiethylperazine versus placebo, Outcome 1 Poor relief from symptoms.
24.1. Analysis
24.1. Analysis
Comparison 24 Fluphenazine‐pyridoxine versus placebo, Outcome 1 Poor response to treatment.
25.1. Analysis
25.1. Analysis
Comparison 25 Metoclopramide versus placebo, Outcome 1 Mean score for nausea (using Rhodes Index) on day 3.
25.2. Analysis
25.2. Analysis
Comparison 25 Metoclopramide versus placebo, Outcome 2 Mean score for vomiting (using Rhodes Index) on day 3.
26.1. Analysis
26.1. Analysis
Comparison 26 Ondansetron versus metoclopramide, Outcome 1 Average number of nausea episodes on day 3 after treatment..
26.2. Analysis
26.2. Analysis
Comparison 26 Ondansetron versus metoclopramide, Outcome 2 Average number of vomiting episodes on day 3 after treatment..
27.1. Analysis
27.1. Analysis
Comparison 27 Ondansetron versus pyridoxine‐doxylamine, Outcome 1 Clinically significant (≥25mm on VAS) reduction in nausea after 5 days of treatment.
27.2. Analysis
27.2. Analysis
Comparison 27 Ondansetron versus pyridoxine‐doxylamine, Outcome 2 Sedation.
27.3. Analysis
27.3. Analysis
Comparison 27 Ondansetron versus pyridoxine‐doxylamine, Outcome 3 Constipation.

Source: PubMed

3
구독하다