Recent Advance Analysis of Recovery in Hospitalized People with COVID-19: A Systematic Review.

INTRODUCTION: COVID-19 is a public health emergency all around the world. Severe illness occurred in about 14% of patients and 5% of patients developed critical illness, but the prognosis for these patients remains unclear. OBJECTIVE: To describe the prognosis in hospitalized adults with COVID-19. METHODS: The MEDLINE, EMBASE, AMED, and COCHRANE databases were searched for studies published up to 28 June 2021 without language restrictions. Descriptors were related to "COVID-19" and "prognosis". Prospective inception cohort studies that assessed morbidity, mortality and recovery in hospitalized people over 18 years old with COVID-19 were included. Two independent reviewers selected eligible studies and extracted the available data. Acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) and multiple organ failure (MOFS) were considered as outcomes for morbidity and discharge was considered for recovery. The Quality in Prognosis Studies (QUIPS) tool was used to assess risk of bias. Analyses were performed using Comprehensive Meta-Analysis (version 2.2.064). RESULTS: We included 30 inception cohort studies investigating 13,717 people hospitalized with COVID-19 from different countries. The mean (SD) age was 60.90 (21.87) years, and there was high proportion of males (76.19%) and people with comorbidities (e.g., 49.44% with hypertension and 29.75% with diabetes). Findings suggested a high occurrence of morbidity, mainly related to ARDS. Morbidity rates varied across studies from 19% to 36% in hospital wards, and from 13% to 90% in Intensive Care Units-ICU. Mortality rates ranged from 4% to 38% in hospital wards and from 8% to 51% in ICU. Recovery rates ranged up to 94% and 65% in hospital wards and ICU, respectively. The included studies had high risk of bias in the confounding domain. CONCLUSIONS: The prognosis of people hospitalized with COVID-19 is an issue for the public health system worldwide, with high morbidity and mortality rates, mainly in ICU and for patients with comorbidities. Its prognosis emphasizes the need for appropriate prevention and management strategies.

Effectiveness of conservative therapy in tendinopathy-related shoulder pain: A systematic review of randomized controlled trials.

OBJECTIVE: Systematic review investigated efficacy of conservative therapy on pain and function in people with tendinopathy-related shoulder pain. METHODS: Searches were conducted on six databases. All randomized controlled trials investigating efficacy of any conservative therapy on pain and function in people with tendinopathy-related shoulder pain were included. Estimates for each specific conservative therapy were presented as weighted mean differences (WMDs) or mean differences (MDs), with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Quality of the evidence was assessed using GRADE. RESULTS: Five randomized controlled trials were included. Extracorporeal shock-wave therapy (ESWT) was effective on pain at short-term (i.e., ≤3 months) when compared with control (WMD = -1.7 out of 101 points, -3.1 to -0.3; n = 158). Individual trials also suggested effects of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) (-13.7 to -2.3; n = 365) and extracorporeal radial pressure pulse therapy (rESWT) (-40.0 to -27.0; n = 79). Laser therapy and ESWT were not effective on pain and function at short-term, respectively. No trials investigated medium- or long-term effects, and quality of the evidence ranged from low to very low quality. CONCLUSIONS: Conservative therapies currently available for the rotator cuff management and biceps tendinopathy are not supported by low to very-low quality evidence.

Y balance test has no correlation with the Stability Index of the Biodex Balance System.

STUDY DESIGN: A cross-sectional study design. BACKGROUND: The Stability Index of the Biodex Balance System (SI-BBS) and Y Balance Test (YBT) has been used in studies assessing postural stability but no studies have verified the association of the YBT with the SI-BBS. OBJECTIVE: To analyze the association of the Y Balance Test (YBT) with the Stability Index of the Biodex Balance System (SI-BBS) to evaluate postural stability. METHODS: Forty participants who engaged in recreational physical activities, 12 of whom had a history of injury to the lower limbs. Was used the SI-BBS and the anterior, posterolateral, posteromedial, and composite measures of the YBT. The order of execution of the tests and of the lower limbs evaluated was randomized and blind tested by two evaluators. RESULTS: Pearson's correlation coefficient was used to check the strength of the relationship between the distances achieved on the YBT and the SI-BBS. The YBT showed excellent reliability in the anterior, posteromedial, and posterolateral directions. However, the YBT showed no statistically significant correlation with any variables in the SI-BBS, indicating poor validity between YBT and SI-BBS assessments of postural stability in people with and without history of lower limb injuries. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this study showed the YBT is not correlated with the SI-BBS as an assessment of postural stability. This finding has implications for researchers and clinicians using YBT results as the only measure of postural stability.