Telehealth for Substance Use Disorders: A Rapid Review for the 2021 U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs and U.S. Department of Defense Guidelines for Management of Substance Use Disorders.

BACKGROUND: Approximately 20.4 million Americans met criteria for a substance use disorder (SUD) in 2019; however, only about 12.2% of persons with an SUD receive specialty care. Telehealth offers alternatives to traditional forms of substance use treatment. PURPOSE: To synthesize recent findings on the efficacy of telehealth for SUDs. DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE, Embase, PubMed, and the Cochrane Library from January 2015 through August 2021 (English language only). STUDY SELECTION: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of adults with a diagnosis of SUD based on the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders or International Classification of Diseases. DATA EXTRACTION: One investigator abstracted data and assessed study quality, and a second checked for accuracy. DATA SYNTHESIS: This rapid review synthesized evidence from 17 RCTs. Evidence is very uncertain that telehealth provided as videoconference therapy (1 RCT) or web-based cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) (3 RCTs) has similar effects to in-person therapy for improving abstinence from alcohol or cannabis. Low-strength evidence suggests that web-based CBT has similar effects for improving abstinence in multiple SUDs (2 RCTs). Low-strength evidence suggests that adding supportive text messaging to follow-up care improves abstinence and amount of alcohol per day (2 RCTs) but does not improve emergency department visits or frequency of consumption (2 RCTs). Enhanced telephone monitoring likely reduces readmissions for SUD detoxification compared with usual follow-up alone (1 RCT) but does not reduce days of substance use (low-strength evidence). LIMITATION: Narrative synthesis, heterogeneity of telehealth interventions, no assessment of publication bias, and study methodology. CONCLUSION: Evidence is very uncertain that telehealth is similar to in-person care for SUD outcomes. Limited evidence suggests some benefit of adding telehealth to usual SUD care. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs Veterans Health Administration.

Pain Management Modalities after Total Knee Arthroplasty: A Network Meta-analysis of 170 Randomized Controlled Trials.

BACKGROUND: Optimal analgesia for total knee arthroplasty remains challenging. Many modalities have been used, including peripheral nerve block, periarticular infiltration, and epidural analgesia. However, the relative efficacy of various modalities remains unknown. The authors aimed to quantify and rank order the efficacy of available analgesic modalities for various clinically important outcomes. METHODS: The authors searched multiple databases, each from inception until July 15, 2016. The authors used random-effects network meta-analysis. For measurements repeated over time, such as pain, the authors considered all time points to enhance reliability of the overall effect estimate. Outcomes considered included pain scores, opioid consumption, rehabilitation profile, quality of recovery, and complications. The authors defined the optimal modality as the one that best balanced pain scores, opioid consumption, and range of motion in the initial 72 postoperative hours. RESULTS: The authors identified 170 trials (12,530 patients) assessing 17 treatment modalities. Overall inconsistency and heterogeneity were acceptable. Based on the surface under the cumulative ranking curve, the best five for pain at rest were femoral/obturator, femoral/sciatic/obturator, lumbar plexus/sciatic, femoral/sciatic, and fascia iliaca compartment blocks. For reducing opioid consumption, the best five were femoral/sciatic/obturator, femoral/obturator, lumbar plexus/sciatic, lumbar plexus, and femoral/sciatic blocks. The best modality for range of motion was femoral/sciatic blocks. Femoral/sciatic and femoral/obturator blocks best met our criteria for optimal performance. Considering only high-quality studies, femoral/sciatic seemed best. CONCLUSIONS: Blocking multiple nerves was preferable to blocking any single nerve, periarticular infiltration, or epidural analgesia. The combination of femoral and sciatic nerve block appears to be the overall best approach. Rehabilitation parameters remain markedly understudied.

Does Ondansetron Modify Sympathectomy Due to Subarachnoid Anesthesia?: Meta-analysis, Meta-regression, and Trial Sequential Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Disagreement among many underpowered studies has led to an equivocal understanding of the efficacy of the 5-HT3 antagonist ondansetron in preventing the consequences of sympathectomy after subarachnoid anesthesia. The authors assessed the efficacy of ondansetron with respect to the overall quality and statistical power of the meta-analyses. METHODS: The authors used a standard and a newer method of meta-analysis, trial sequential analysis (TSA), to estimate adjusted CIs based on how much information has been accrued. They also used random-effects meta-analyses techniques, small trial bias assessment, selection models, sensitivity analyses, and the Grading of Recommendations on Assessment, Development, and Evaluation system. These results from the aforementioned techniques were compared, and importance of consideration of these factors was discussed. RESULTS: Fourteen randomized placebo-controlled trials (1,045 subjects) were identified and analyzed. By using conventional meta-analyses, the authors determined that ondansetron was associated with reduction in the incidence of hypotension (relative risk = 0.62 [95% CI, 0.46 to 0.83], P = 0.001; TSA-adjusted CI, 0.34 to 1.12; I = 60%, P = 0.002) and bradycardia (relative risk = 0.44 [95% CI, 0.26 to 0.73], P = 0.001; TSA-adjusted CI, 0.05 to 3.85; I = 0%, P = 0.84). However, the authors found indications of bias among these trials. TSAs demonstrated that the meta-analysis lacked adequate information size and did not achieve statistical significance when adjusted for sparse data and repetitive testing. The Grading of Recommendations on Assessment, Development, and Evaluation system showed that the results had low to very low quality of evidence. CONCLUSIONS: The analyses fail to confirm evidence that ondansetron reduces the incidence of hypotension and bradycardia after subarachnoid anesthesia due to the risk of bias and information sizes less than the required. As results from meta-analysis are given significant weight, it is important to carefully evaluate the quality of the evidence that is input.

Improving Analgesic Efficacy and Safety of Thoracic Paravertebral Block for Breast Surgery: A Mixed-Effects Meta-Analysis.

BACKGROUND: While most trials of thoracic paravertebral nerve blocks (TPVB) for breast surgery show benefit, their effect on postoperative pain intensity, opioid consumption, and prevention of chronic postsurgical pain varies substantially across studies. Variability may result from use of different drugs and techniques. OBJECTIVES: To examine the use of TPVB in breast surgery, and to determine which method(s) provide optimal efficacy and safety. STUDY DESIGN: Mixed-Effects Meta-Analysis. METHODS: We conducted a systematic review of randomized trials comparing TPVB to no intervention using random-effects models. To evaluate the contributions of various techniques, clinical approaches were included as moderators in mixed-effects models. RESULTS: A total of 24 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) with 1,822 patients were included. Use of TPVB decreased postoperative pain scores at rest and movement at the first 2, 24, 48, and 72 hours. TPVB modestly decreased intraoperative and postoperative opioid consumption, reduced nausea and vomiting, and shortened hospitalization, but to a probably clinically irrelevant degree. Blocks also appeared to reduce the incidence of chronic postsurgical pain at 6 months. Adding fentanyl to the TPVB improved pain at rest (at 24, 48, and 72 hours) and movement (at 24 and 72 hours). Multilevel blocks provided better postoperative pain control, but only during movement (at 2, 48, and 72 hours). Fewer procedural complications (especially hypotension, epidural spread, and Horner's syndrome) occurred when anatomical landmarks were supplemented with ultrasound guidance. LIMITATIONS: The number of studies available was limited in the meta-analytic model of incidence of chronic post-surgical pain. CONCLUSION: TPVB reduces postoperative pain and opioid consumption, and has a limited beneficial effect on the quality of recovery. From all the techniques that were evaluated, only the addition of fentanyl, and performing multilevel blocks were associated with improved acute analgesia. TPVB may reduce chronic postsurgical pain at 6 months.