Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 3 de 3
Filtrar
Más filtros










Base de datos
Intervalo de año de publicación
1.
BMJ ; 374: n1034, 2021 09 08.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34497047

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVE: To determine the benefits and harms of medical cannabis and cannabinoids for chronic pain. DESIGN: Systematic review and meta-analysis. DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE, EMBASE, AMED, PsycInfo, CENTRAL, CINAHL, PubMed, Web of Science, Cannabis-Med, Epistemonikos, and trial registries up to January 2021. STUDY SELECTION: Randomised clinical trials of medical cannabis or cannabinoids versus any non-cannabis control for chronic pain at ≥1 month follow-up. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: Paired reviewers independently assessed risk of bias and extracted data. We performed random-effects models meta-analyses and used GRADE to assess the certainty of evidence. RESULTS: A total of 32 trials with 5174 adult patients were included, 29 of which compared medical cannabis or cannabinoids with placebo. Medical cannabis was administered orally (n=30) or topically (n=2). Clinical populations included chronic non-cancer pain (n=28) and cancer related pain (n=4). Length of follow-up ranged from 1 to 5.5 months. Compared with placebo, non-inhaled medical cannabis probably results in a small increase in the proportion of patients experiencing at least the minimally important difference (MID) of 1 cm (on a 10 cm visual analogue scale (VAS)) in pain relief (modelled risk difference (RD) of 10% (95% confidence interval 5% to 15%), based on a weighted mean difference (WMD) of -0.50 cm (95% CI -0.75 to -0.25 cm, moderate certainty)). Medical cannabis taken orally results in a very small improvement in physical functioning (4% modelled RD (0.1% to 8%) for achieving at least the MID of 10 points on the 100-point SF-36 physical functioning scale, WMD of 1.67 points (0.03 to 3.31, high certainty)), and a small improvement in sleep quality (6% modelled RD (2% to 9%) for achieving at least the MID of 1 cm on a 10 cm VAS, WMD of -0.35 cm (-0.55 to -0.14 cm, high certainty)). Medical cannabis taken orally does not improve emotional, role, or social functioning (high certainty). Moderate certainty evidence shows that medical cannabis taken orally probably results in a small increased risk of transient cognitive impairment (RD 2% (0.1% to 6%)), vomiting (RD 3% (0.4% to 6%)), drowsiness (RD 5% (2% to 8%)), impaired attention (RD 3% (1% to 8%)), and nausea (RD 5% (2% to 8%)), but not diarrhoea; while high certainty evidence shows greater increased risk of dizziness (RD 9% (5% to 14%)) for trials with <3 months follow-up versus RD 28% (18% to 43%) for trials with ≥3 months follow-up; interaction test P=0.003; moderate credibility of subgroup effect). CONCLUSIONS: Moderate to high certainty evidence shows that non-inhaled medical cannabis or cannabinoids results in a small to very small improvement in pain relief, physical functioning, and sleep quality among patients with chronic pain, along with several transient adverse side effects, compared with placebo. The accompanying BMJ Rapid Recommendation provides contextualised guidance based on this body of evidence. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: https://osf.io/3pwn2.


Asunto(s)
Dolor en Cáncer/tratamiento farmacológico , Cannabinoides/efectos adversos , Dolor Crónico/tratamiento farmacológico , Marihuana Medicinal/administración & dosificación , Adulto , Cannabinoides/administración & dosificación , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Marihuana Medicinal/efectos adversos , Diferencia Mínima Clínicamente Importante , Dimensión del Dolor , Ensayos Clínicos Controlados Aleatorios como Asunto , Sueño/efectos de los fármacos
2.
CJEM ; 20(4): 550-555, 2018 07.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-28835305

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVE: Cannabinoid hyperemesis syndrome (CHS) is a paradoxical side effect of cannabis use. Patients with CHS often present multiple times to the emergency department (ED) with cyclical nausea, vomiting, and abdominal pain, and are discharged with various misdiagnoses. CHS studies to date are limited to case series. The objective was to examine the epidemiology of CHS cases presenting to two major urban tertiary care centre EDs and one urgent care centre over a 2-year period. METHODS: Using explicit variables, trained abstractors, and standardized abstraction forms, we abstracted data for all adults (ages 18 to 55 years) with a presenting complaint of vomiting and/or a discharge diagnosis of vomiting and/or cyclical vomiting, during a 2-year period. The inter-rater agreement was measured using a kappa statistic. RESULTS: We identified 494 cases: mean age 31 (+/-11) years; 36% male; and 19.4% of charts specifically reported cannabis use. Among the regular cannabis users (>three times per week), 43% had repeat ED visits for similar complaints. Moreover, of these patients, 92% had bloodwork done in the ED, 92% received intravenous fluids, 89% received antiemetics, 27% received opiates, 19% underwent imaging, 8% were admitted to hospital, and 8% were referred to the gastroenterology service. The inter-rater reliability for data abstraction was kappa=1. CONCLUSIONS: This study suggests that CHS may be an overlooked diagnosis for nausea and vomiting, a factor that can possibly contribute to unnecessary investigations and treatment in the ED. Additionally, this indicates a lack of screening for CHS on ED history, especially in quantifying cannabis use and eliciting associated symptoms of CHS.


Asunto(s)
Cannabinoides/efectos adversos , Servicio de Urgencia en Hospital/estadística & datos numéricos , Fumar Marihuana/efectos adversos , Fumar Marihuana/epidemiología , Vómitos/inducido químicamente , Adolescente , Adulto , Distribución por Edad , Canadá , Servicios Médicos de Urgencia/métodos , Servicios Médicos de Urgencia/estadística & datos numéricos , Femenino , Estudios de Seguimiento , Humanos , Incidencia , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Variaciones Dependientes del Observador , Estudios Retrospectivos , Medición de Riesgo , Índice de Severidad de la Enfermedad , Distribución por Sexo , Síndrome , Factores de Tiempo , Población Urbana , Vómitos/epidemiología , Vómitos/terapia , Adulto Joven
3.
CJEM ; 7(6): 387-90, 2005 Nov.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-17355704

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVE: There is an increasing awareness of unvaccinated adults presenting with epiglottitis to the emergency department. This study examines the clinical presentations and outcomes of diagnosed cases of adult epiglottitis presenting to all emergency departments in Hamilton, Ont., between 1999 and 2003. METHODS: We employed explicit protocols with defined variables, trained abstractors and standardized abstraction forms, and reviewed all diagnosed cases of adult epiglottitis during a 5-year period. Inter-rater agreement was measured using a kappa statistic. RESULTS: Inter-rater reliability for data abstraction was kappa = 1. From a total of 1 million emergency department admissions, 54 cases of epiglottitis were identified. The mean age was 49, and 69% of the patients were male. The 3 most frequently documented symptoms were sore throat (100%) odynophagia (94%) and inability to swallow secretions (63%). The 2 most frequently documented signs were swelling of the epiglottis/supraglottis (100%), and tachycardia (53%). Organisms were isolated from blood in 11% of the cases. There was a white blood cell count >20 x 10(9)/L in 4 of the cases (7.4%). From the 54 cases, 9 of the patients were intubated and all patients were safely discharged from hospital. CONCLUSION: Adults presenting with epiglottitis to the emergency department in Hamilton have good outcomes, with less airway management required than previously reported in children. Further study is needed to see if these conclusions are similar in other populations.

SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA
...