RESUMEN
Background: Mindfulness-based stress reduction/cognitive therapy has attained popularity as an adjunctive treatment for a plethora of medical and psychiatric conditions, however, its impact on chronic headaches is inconclusive. This review aims to assess the impact of MBSR/MBCT in alleviating the symptoms of chronic headaches. Data sources and data selection: PubMed and Cochrane CENTRAL were searched from inception till 1st May 2021. Randomized Control Trials evaluating mindfulness-based stress reduction/cognitive therapy with either passive comparators (usual care) or active comparators (e.g., Health education or cognitive behavioral therapy) for chronic headaches (Migraine, Tension-type, or cluster headaches), which evaluated either headache frequency, pain intensity or headache duration as primary outcome were eligible for inclusion. The Risk of Bias was evaluated using the Cochrane Collaboration's Risk of Bias Tool. Results: A total of ten Randomized Controlled Trials (five on migraine; three on tension-type; two with mixed samples) were evaluated. In comparison to usual care, mindfulness-based stress reduction/cognitive therapy did not illustrate significant changes in headache frequency (MD = -0.14; 95% CI -1.26 to 0.97; P = 0.80; Moderate Certainty), headache duration (MD = -0.27; 95% CI -3.51 to 2.97, P = 0.87; Low Certainty) or pain intensity (MD = -0.19; 95% CI -0.46 to 0.07; P = 0.15; Moderate Certainty). Conclusion: The results found are insignificant for the three primary outcomes, which may be due to the low number of participants and often a high or unclear risk of bias in the randomized control trials included. Perhaps more aggressive clinical trials with a larger sample size effectively demonstrate differences in outcomes before and after therapy for MBSR/MBCT could provide a more significant change.
RESUMEN
Background: Various anticoagulant therapies are prescribed to patients under physicians' discretion and recently Direct Oral Anticoagulants(DOAC) have been under trials to evaluate their safety and efficacy. In addition to this, the regimen of DOACs and Aspirin is of keen interest as researchers continue to find an optimal regimen to treat blood clots in patients. This study is a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials and observational studies that asses the safety and efficacy of DOAC with and without Aspirin. Methods: We queried MEDLINE and Cochrane CENTRAL from their inception to April 2021, for published and randomized controlled trials and observational studies in any language that compared dual (DOAC + ASA) therapy or mono (DOAC alone) therapy in patients with AF. The results from the studies were presented as risk ratios (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) and were pooled using a random-effects model. Endpoints of interest included major bleeding, myocardial infarction (MI), major adverse cardiovascular events (MACEs), hospitalizations, all-cause mortality, and stroke. Results: The risk of major bleeding was significantly lower in the DOAC alone group compared with DOAC plus aspirin group. Non-significant results were obtained (P value greater than 0.05) for other outcomes establishing that DOAC monotherapy was not superior to the combined regimen in reducing the risk of MACE, Stroke, Hospitalization, Death. Conclusion: Among patients with NVAF (Non valvular Atrial Fibrillation) and VTE (Venous thromboembolism) receiving anticoagulation prophylaxis, in terms of safety profile our comparisons showed a statistically significant reduction in Major Bleeding in DOAC Alone group compared with DOAC Plus Aspirin.