Tools for Practice Outils pour la pratique


#209 Is that cabbage in your bra? Cabbage leaves for breast engorgement


CLINICAL QUESTION
QUESTION CLINIQUE
Are cabbage leaves effective in managing breast engorgement due to breastfeeding?


BOTTOM LINE
RÉSULTAT FINAL
Women report higher levels of satisfaction with cabbage leaves than either routine care or cold gel packs (with an extra 1 in 4 and 1 in 6 reporting satisfaction, respectively)Cabbage leaves reduce pain (by ~1 point out of 10) and hardness (by ~0.4 points out of 6) associated with breast engorgement compared to usual careCabbage leaves likely do not need to be chilled.   



CFPCLearn Logo

Reading Tools for Practice Article can earn you MainPro+ Credits

La lecture d'articles d'outils de pratique peut vous permettre de gagner des crédits MainPro+

Join Now S’inscrire maintenant

Already a CFPCLearn Member? Log in

Déjà abonné à CMFCApprendre? Ouvrir une session



EVIDENCE
DONNÉES PROBANTES
Randomized controlled trial (RCT) of 227 breastfeeding mothers with engorgement, comparing application of cabbage leaves, cold gel packs, and routine care (education by lactation consultant).1 Interventions were applied for two hours, then 30 minute break, then applied two hours again.  
  • Versus routine care: 
    • Cabbage decreased pain at 30 minutesone and two hours by ~0.4-1 (on 10-point scale).
      • Bordering on clinically meaningful. 
    • Cabbage decreased breast hardness by 0.2-0.4 (on 6-point scale). 
      • Likely not clinically detectable. 
  • Versus gel packs: 
    • Cabbage decreased pain at two hours after second application by 0.5, other time points no difference. 
    • Cabbage decreased hardness at two hours after second application by 0.4, other time points no difference. 
  • No difference in breast feeding rates at three or six months. 
  • More women were satisfied or highly satisfied with cabbage (99%) tharoutine care (70%) or gel packs (81%), Numbers Needed to Treat (NNT)=4-6. 
  • Limitations: Unblindedinconsistent endpoint evaluations, number of women benefitting not reported. 
Systematic review of various interventions found three RCTs of 101 women:2 
  • One RCT: No difference in chilled versus room temperature cabbage.3 
  • One RCT: No difference in chilled gel packs versus chilled cabbage; 2/3 of women preferred cabbage (worked quicker), the other 1/3 preferred gel (lasted longer).4 
  • One RCT: No difference between cabbage extract cream and placebo.5 
  • LimitationsUnblindedsmall sample sizes.
Context: 
  • Leaves can be chilled in fridge for one hour or freezer for 15 minutes.1 
  • Cabbage leaves are inexpensive, widely available, are the appropriate shape, and have no known harms. 
  • Other treatments including hot/cold packs, acupuncture, and acupressure also poorly studied.2 Patient preference should guide therapy. 


Latest Tools for Practice
Derniers outils pour la pratique

#367 Oral Calcitonin Gene-related Peptide Antagonists: A painfully long name for the acute treatment of migraines

What are the risks and benefits of ubrogepant for the acute treatment of episodic migraines?
Read Lire 0.25 credits available Crédits disponibles

#366 Looking for Closure: Managing simple excisions or wounds efficiently

What are some options for efficiency in wound closure?
Read Lire 0.25 credits available Crédits disponibles

#365 Shrooms for Glooms: Evidence for psilocybin for depression

What are the benefits and harms of psilocybin for treatment-resistant/recurrent depression?
Read Lire 0.25 credits available Crédits disponibles

This content is certified for MainPro+ Credits, log in to access

Ce contenu est certifié pour les crédits MainPro+, Ouvrir une session


Author(s)
Auteur(s)
  • Adrienne J Lindblad BSP ACPR PharmD
  • Christina Korownyk MD CCFP

1. Wong BB, Chan YH, Leow MQH, et al. Int J Nurs Stud. 2017; 76:92-9.

2. Mangesi L, Zakarija-Grkovic I. Cochrane Database System Rev. 2016; 6:CD006946.

3. Roberts KL, Reiter M, Schuster D. J Hum Lact. 1995 Sep; 11(3):191-4.

4. Roberts KL. J Hum Lact. 1995 Mar; 11(1):17-20.

5. Roberts KL, Reiter M, Schuster D. J Hum Lact. 1998 Sep; 14(3):231-6.

Authors do not have any conflicts of interest to declare.

Les auteurs n’ont aucun conflit d’intérêts à déclarer.