ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE OF REVIEW: Surgical site infections are a recognised complication of cochlear implant (CI) surgery with significant morbidity. Our aim was to search for the optimum prevention and management strategy to deal with this issue. TYPE OF REVIEW: Systematic review. SEARCH STRATEGY: A systematic literature search was undertaken from the databases of Embase, CINAHL, MEDLINE® , Web of Science, Scopus and Cochrane Library according to the predefined inclusion and exclusion criteria. EVALUATION METHOD: All relevant titles, abstracts and full-text articles were reviewed by two authors who resolved any differences by discussion and consultation with senior authors. RESULTS: Fourteen articles were included in our review. The overall quality of evidence was low with the vast majority of the studies being retrospective case series and expert opinions. No randomised controlled trials were noted. We found consistent reports that intraoperative prophylactic antibiotics should be given to all patients undergoing CI and that the vast majority of CI wound infections had grown Staphylococcal spp. or Pseudomonas spp. CONCLUSION: Our review has not identified any reliable or reproducible strategies to prevent and deal with wound infections after CI. We strongly encourage further research within this field and would suggest that a consensus of opinions from a multidisciplinary panel of experts may be a pragmatic way forward as an effective guide.
Subject(s)
Cochlear Implantation , Surgical Wound Infection/prevention & control , HumansABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Despite the rapidly growing number of digital assessment tools for screening and diagnosing mental health disorders, little is known about their diagnostic accuracy. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this systematic review and meta-analysis is to establish the diagnostic accuracy of question- and answer-based digital assessment tools for diagnosing a range of highly prevalent psychiatric conditions in the adult population. METHODS: The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Protocols (PRISMA-P) will be used. The focus of the systematic review is guided by the population, intervention, comparator, and outcome framework (PICO). We will conduct a comprehensive systematic literature search of MEDLINE, PsychINFO, Embase, Web of Science Core Collection, Cochrane Library, Applied Social Sciences Index and Abstracts (ASSIA), and Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL) for appropriate articles published from January 1, 2005. Two authors will independently screen the titles and abstracts of identified references and select studies according to the eligibility criteria. Any inconsistencies will be discussed and resolved. The two authors will then extract data into a standardized form. Risk of bias will be assessed using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2 (QUADAS-2) tool, and a descriptive analysis and meta-analysis will summarize the diagnostic accuracy of the identified digital assessment tools. RESULTS: The systematic review and meta-analysis commenced in November 2020, with findings expected by May 2021. CONCLUSIONS: This systematic review and meta-analysis will summarize the diagnostic accuracy of question- and answer-based digital assessment tools. It will identify implications for clinical practice, areas for improvement, and directions for future research. TRIAL REGISTRATION: PROSPERO International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews CRD42020214724; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42020214724. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/25382.
ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVES: This review summarizes current evidence on causes and management strategies for delayed pain post-cochlear implantation (CI) surgery, without clinical evidence of inflammation or infection. METHODS: The systematic review was undertaken in line with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic review and Meta-Analysis Protocols 2015 guidelines. A literature search was undertaken, with inclusion of patients who underwent CI and presented with delayed pain (>3 months post-operatively) around their device site without an identifiable cause. Analysis was undertaken using MATLAB (MathWorks, Natick, MA) and the R-software package (www.r-project.org). RESULTS: 4 articles (48 patients), all retrospective case series, met inclusion criteria. The mean onset of pain post-CI was 60 months and mean follow-up was 15.8 months, there was no difference in the prevalence of pain between device brands (p=0.13). The majority (90%) did not have any hearing deterioration, and investigations did not reveal a cause for the pain in any of the patients. In terms of management, medical therapies, including oral therapy (analgesia, non-steroidal anti-inflammatories, antibiotics) and local treatments (topical, injections) resolved pain in 41% and 63%, respectively. Surgical intervention (explantation, magnet replacement, tympanic neurectomy), where undertaken, resolved pain in 100%. A minority had an identifiable infective microorganism cultured from intra-operative soft tissue or biofilm samples. CONCLUSIONS: Evidence for the causes and management of delayed pain post-CI without clinical evidence of inflammation is scarce. A stepwise approach is deemed best, with decisions being made on an individual basis, evaluating each patient's specific circumstances and priorities. Further evaluation of explanted devices would allow for better understanding of the causes and treatment of this group of patients.