Efficacy of searching in biomedical databases beyond MEDLINE in identifying randomised controlled trials on hyperbaric oxygen treatment.

Introduction: Literature searches are routinely used by researchers for conducting systematic reviews as well as by healthcare providers, and sometimes patients, to quickly guide their clinical decisions. Using more than one database is generally recommended but may not always be necessary for some fields. This study aimed to determine the added value of searching additional databases beyond MEDLINE when conducting a literature search of hyperbaric oxygen treatment (HBOT) randomised controlled trials (RCTs). Methods: This study consisted of two phases: a scoping review of all RCTs in the field of HBOT, followed by a a statistical analysis of sensitivity, precision, 'number needed to read' (NNR) and 'number unique' included by individual biomedical databases. MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Control Trials (CENTRAL), and Cumulated Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL) were searched without date or language restrictions up to December 31, 2022. Screening and data extraction were conducted in duplicate by pairs of independent reviewers. RCTs were included if they involved human subjects and HBOT was offered either on its own or in combination with other treatments. Results: Out of 5,840 different citations identified, 367 were included for analysis. CENTRAL was the most sensitive (87.2%) and had the most unique references (7.1%). MEDLINE had the highest precision (23.8%) and optimal NNR (four). Among included references, 14.2% were unique to a single database. Conclusions: Systematic reviews of RCTs in HBOT should always utilise multiple databases, which at minimum include MEDLINE, Embase, CENTRAL and CINAHL.

Hyperbaric medicine in Canadian undergraduate medical school curriculum.

INTRODUCTION: Hyperbaric oxygen treatment (HBOT) has fourteen approved indications in the management of acute and chronic diseases in various medical specialties. However, lack of physician knowledge and exposure to hyperbaric medicine may hinder the ability of patients to access this treatment option for approved indications. We aimed to determine the prevalence and nature of HBOT-related learning objectives in Canadian undergraduate medical education programs. METHODS: Pre-clerkship and clerkship learning objectives from responding Canadian medical schools' curricula were reviewed. These were acquired through the school websites or by emailing the faculties. Descriptive statistics were used to summarise the number of hyperbaric medicine objectives taught in Canadian medical schools, and within each institution. RESULTS: Learning objectives from seven of the 17 Canadian medical schools were received and reviewed. From the curriculum of the responding schools, only one objective was found to be related to hyperbaric medicine. Hyperbaric medicine was absent from the other six schools' objectives. CONCLUSIONS: Based on the responding Canadian medical schools, hyperbaric medicine objectives were mostly absent from undergraduate medical curricula. These findings illustrate a possible gap in HBOT education and the need for discussion regarding the design and implementation of HBOT educational initiatives in medical training.

Hyperbaric oxygen therapy for treatment of a late presenting ischaemic complication from hyaluronic acid cosmetic filler injection.

Vascular compromise and resulting ischaemic injury are known rare complications of cosmetic filler injections. Most hyaluronic acid vascular compromises present early and can be treated effectively by hyaluronidase. Here we present a case of ischaemic wound and mucosal necrosis after cosmetic facial hyaluronic acid injection that appeared within hours of injection but was not diagnosed and treated for 5 days. At day 5, the patient was treated with hyaluronidase injection immediately followed by 14 sessions of daily hyperbaric oxygen therapy (HBOT). Despite the delayed treatment, the patient had essentially complete recovery and the hyperbaric therapy was overall well-tolerated. Our case report suggests that hyaluronidase injection with concurrent daily HBOT sessions may be effective to allow recovery from late-presenting filler ischaemic complication. Furthermore, given the safety profile of HBOT, we suggest a more deliberate approach to this modality as a therapeutic adjunct by cosmetic practitioners when similar complications arise.

Efficacy and safety of hyperbaric oxygen treatment to treat COVID-19 pneumonia: a living systematic review update.

INTRODUCTION: As the COVID-19 pandemic evolves, new effective treatment options are essential for reducing morbidity and mortality as well as the strain placed on the healthcare system. Since publication of our initial review on hyperbaric oxygen treatment (HBOT) for hypoxaemic COVID-19 patients, interest in HBOT for COVID-19 has grown and additional studies have been published. METHODS: For this living systematic review update the previously published search strategy (excluding Google Scholar) was adopted with an extension from 01 February 2021 to 01 April 2022. Study inclusion criteria, data extraction, risk of bias estimation and dispute resolution methods were repeated. RESULTS: Two new studies enrolling 127 patients were included in this update, taking the total to eight studies with 224 patients. Both new studies were randomised controlled trials, one at moderate and one at high risk of bias. Across these eight studies, 114 patients were treated with HBOT. All reported improved clinical outcomes without observation of any serious adverse events. Meta-analysis remained unjustified given the high heterogeneity between studies and incomplete reporting. CONCLUSIONS: This updated living systematic review provides further evidence on the safety and effectiveness of HBOT to treat acute hypoxaemic COVID-19 patients.

A Delphi study to identify relevant scenarios as the first step toward an international hyperbaric medicine simulation curriculum.

INTRODUCTION: Evidence across healthcare specialties suggests that simulation-based education improves practices and patient outcomes. However, simulation has yet to be widely used in hyperbaric medicine education. We aimed to identify the most relevant clinical scenarios for inclusion in a simulation-based curriculum for hyperbaric medicine. METHODS: After ethics approval, we used a modified Delphi consensus method. We assembled an initial questionnaire and distributed it online in English and French to an international group of hyperbaric physicians and operators using a snowball recruitment technique. Participants rated the list of scenarios using a 5-point scale ranging from 1 (least relevant) to 5 (most relevant). Scenarios judged by at least 80% of participants to be relevant (score 4 or 5) were automatically included. Scenarios that did not meet this threshold and new scenarios suggested by participants during the first round were included in a second round. RESULTS: Seventy-one participants from nine countries, including both physicians and non-physicians, completed the first round and 34 completed the second. Five scenarios were identified as relevant: seizure, fire, cardiac arrest, pneumothorax, and technical deficiency such as power loss while operating the chamber. CONCLUSIONS: Five scenarios relevant for inclusion in the simulation-based curriculum in hyperbaric medicine were identified by expert consensus.

The Effectiveness and Safety of Hyperbaric Oxygen Therapy in Various Phenotypes of Inflammatory Bowel Disease: Systematic Review With Meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Accumulating evidence suggests that hyperbaric oxygen therapy (HBOT) may be effective for inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). Our systematic review aimed to quantify the effectiveness and safety of HBOT in various IBD phenotypes. METHODS: We performed a proportional meta-analysis. Multiple databases were systematically searched from inception through November 2020 without language restriction. We included studies that reported effectiveness and/or safety of HBOT in IBD. Weighted summary estimates with 95% confidence intervals (Cis) were calculated for clinical outcomes for each IBD phenotype using random-effects models. Study quality was assessed using the Cochrane evaluation handbook and National Institute of Health criteria. RESULTS: Nineteen studies with 809 patients total were eligible: 3 randomized controlled trials and 16 case series. Rates of clinical remission included 87% (95% CI, 10-100) for ulcerative colitis (n = 42), 88% (95% CI, 46-98) for luminal Crohn's disease (CD, n = 8), 60% (95% CI, 40-76) for perianal CD (n = 102), 31% (95% CI, 16-50) for pouch disorders (n = 60), 92% (95% CI, 38-100) for pyoderma gangrenosum (n = 5), and 65% (95% CI, 10-97) for perianal sinus/metastatic CD (n = 7). Of the 12 studies that reported on safety, 15% of patients (n = 30) had minor adverse events. Study quality was low in the majority of studies due to an absence of comparator arms, inadequate description of concomitant interventions, and/or lack of objective outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Limited high-quality evidence suggests that HBOT is safe and associated with substantial rates of clinical remission for multiple IBD phenotypes. Well-designed randomized controlled trials are warranted to confirm the benefit of HBOT in IBD.

Efficacy and safety of hyperbaric oxygen treatment in SARS-COV-2 (COVID-19) pneumonia: a systematic review.

INTRODUCTION: The need for intubation and mechanical ventilation among COVID-19 patients is associated with high mortality rates and places a substantial burden on the healthcare system. There is a strong pathophysiological rationale suggesting that hyperbaric oxygen treatment (HBOT), a low-risk and non-invasive treatment, may be beneficial for COVID-19 patients. This systematic review aimed to explore the potential effectiveness and safety of HBOT for treating patients with COVID-19. METHODS: Medline, Embase, Scopus, and Google Scholar were searched from December 2019 to February 2021, without language restrictions. The grey literature was searched via an internet search engine and targeted website and database searches. Reference lists of included studies were searched. Independent reviewers assessed studies for eligibility and extracted data, with disagreements resolved by consensus or a third reviewer. Risk of bias was assessed using the Newcastle Ottawa Scale. Data were summarised descriptively. RESULTS: Six publications (one cohort study, five case reports/series) met the inclusion criteria with a total of 37 hypoxaemic COVID-19 patients treated with HBOT. Of these 37 patients, the need for intubation and mechanical ventilation and in-hospital survival were assessed for 26 patients across three studies. Of these 26 patients, intubation and mechanical ventilation were not required for 24, and 23 patients survived. No serious adverse events of HBOT in COVID-19 patients were reported. No randomised trials have been published. CONCLUSIONS: Limited and weak evidence from non-randomised studies including one propensity-matched cohort study suggests HBOT is safe and may be a promising intervention to optimise treatment and outcomes in hypoxaemic COVID-19 patients. Randomised controlled studies are urgently needed.

Can preventive hyperbaric oxygen therapy optimise surgical outcome?: A systematic review of randomised controlled trials.

BACKGROUND: A primary underlying cause of postoperative complications is related to the surgical stress response, which may be mitigated by hyperbaric oxygen therapy (HBOT), the intermittent administration of oxygen at a pressure higher than the atmospheric pressure at sea level. Promising clinical studies have emerged suggesting HBOT's efficacy for reducing some postoperative complications. Notwithstanding, the effectiveness (if any) of HBOT across a range of procedures and postoperative outcomes has yet to be clearly quantified. OBJECTIVE: This systematic review aimed to summarise the existing literature on peri-operative HBOT to investigate its potential to optimise surgical patient outcome. DESIGN: A systematic review of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) with narrative summary of results. DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched without language restrictions through to 19 June 2018. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: Studies were included if they involved patients of any age undergoing any surgical procedure and provided with at least one HBOT session in the peri-operative period. Two independent reviewers screened the initial identified trials and determined those to be included. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool for RCTs. RESULTS: The search retrieved 775 references, of which 13 RCTs were included (627 patients). Ten RCTs (546 patients) reported treatment was effective for improving at least one of the patient outcomes assessed, while two studies (55 patients) did not find any benefit and one study (26 patients) found a negative effect. A wide range of patient outcomes were reported, and several other methodological limitations were observed among the included studies, such as limited use of sham comparator and lack of blinding. CONCLUSION: Peri-operative preventive HBOT may be a promising intervention to improve surgical patient outcome. However, future work should consider addressing the methodological weaknesses identified in this review. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The protocol (CRD42018102737) was registered with the International ProspectiveRegister of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO).

Nontechnical Skill Assessment of the Collective Surgical Team Using the Non-Technical Skills for Surgeons (NOTSS) System.

OBJECTIVE: To validate the Non-Technical Skills for Surgeons (NOTSS) system for assessment of the collective surgical teams' nontechnical skills after observing recordings of actual OR environment. BACKGROUND: The NOTSS system is a widely accepted tool to measure nontechnical skills of individual surgeons, and has mostly been used in the simulated setting. Surgical procedures are rarely performed by a single surgeon, but by a surgical team of attending surgeons, surgical assistants, and surgical trainees. Therefore, assessment of nontechnical skills may benefit from holistic assessment of the collective surgical teams. METHODS: Five trained participants assessed surgical team and attending surgeon using the NOTSS system after watching ten 20-minute long videos obtained from live OR. A set of reference ratings was provided by a multidisciplinary expert committee. We performed analyses to assess system sensitivity; examine inter-rater reliability of ratings; investigate concurrent construct validity; and assess feasibility and acceptability of using the NOTSS system to measure surgical team performance. RESULTS: There was adequate system sensitivity when comparing participants' and reference ratings. Inter-rater reliability among the participants' ratings was good except for decision-making category. The level of inter-rater reliability was similar when rating teams and attending surgeons. There was strong positive correlation between teams' and attending surgeons' NOTSS ratings at category [Pearson coefficient 0.86, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.82-0.89] and element levels (0.83, 95% CI 0.80-0.85), demonstrating evidence of concurrent construct validity. The participants felt that the use of NOTSS system to measure teams' nontechnical skills was acceptable and feasible to a fair extent. CONCLUSION: The NOTSS system, although developed for assessment of individual surgeons, is a useful tool for observing and rating surgical teams.

Evidence for simulation-based education in hyperbaric medicine: A systematic review.

INTRODUCTION: Evidence from many areas of healthcare suggests that skills learned during simulation transfer to clinical settings; however, this has not yet been investigated in hyperbaric medicine. This systematic review aimed to identify, summarize, and assess the impact of simulation-based education in hyperbaric medicine. METHODS: Eligible studies investigated the effect of simulation-based education for learning in hyperbaric medicine, used any design, and were published in English in a peer-reviewed journal. Learning outcomes across all Kirkpatrick levels were included. MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched. Pairs of independent reviewers assessed references for study eligibility. RESULTS: We found no article assessing the impact of simulation-based education in hyperbaric medicine published in English. Only one potentially relevant paper published in German was found. CONCLUSIONS: More research is needed to determine how the hyperbaric medicine community and their patients may benefit from simulation-based education to optimize both practice and patient care.

Reporting preclinical anesthesia study (REPEAT): Evaluating the quality of reporting in the preclinical anesthesiology literature.

Poor reporting quality may contribute to irreproducibility of results and failed 'bench-to-bedside' translation. Consequently, guidelines have been developed to improve the complete and transparent reporting of in vivo preclinical studies. To examine the impact of such guidelines on core methodological and analytical reporting items in the preclinical anesthesiology literature, we sampled a cohort of studies. Preclinical in vivo studies published in Anesthesiology, Anesthesia & Analgesia, Anaesthesia, and the British Journal of Anaesthesia (2008-2009, 2014-2016) were identified. Data was extracted independently and in duplicate. Reporting completeness was assessed using the National Institutes of Health Principles and Guidelines for Reporting Preclinical Research. Risk ratios were used for comparative analyses. Of 7615 screened articles, 604 met our inclusion criteria and included experiments reporting on 52 490 animals. The most common topic of investigation was pain and analgesia (30%), rodents were most frequently used (77%), and studies were most commonly conducted in the United States (36%). Use of preclinical reporting guidelines was listed in 10% of applicable articles. A minority of studies fully reported on replicates (0.3%), randomization (10%), blinding (12%), sample-size estimation (3%), and inclusion/exclusion criteria (5%). Statistics were well reported (81%). Comparative analysis demonstrated few differences in reporting rigor between journals, including those that endorsed reporting guidelines. Principal items of study design were infrequently reported, with few differences between journals. Methods to improve implementation and adherence to community-based reporting guidelines may be necessary to increase transparent and consistent reporting in the preclinical anesthesiology literature.