RESUMO
Dental traumas in sports are common and have physical, social, psychological, and economic impacts. The aim of this study was to determine, through a systematic review, the prevalence of dental trauma in contact and non-contact sports. This review was submitted to PROSPERO (CRD42023421206). Included studies addressed the prevalence of dental trauma in young athletes and adults above 18 years, excluding reviews, editorials, symposiums, or those evaluating athletes under 18 years. A literature search was conducted using the databases PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, Embase, LIVIVO, SPORTDiscus, Dentistry & Oral Sciences Source (via EBSCO), and Lilacs and BBO, as well as gray literature. Bias risk was assessed using the Joanna Briggs Institute's Critical Appraisal Checklist. Data were synthesized considering study characteristics, population, sport, and outcomes. R Statistics software was used for all meta-analyses. A total of 1707 articles were identified. After applying eligibility criteria, eight were selected. Three studies, not previously observed, were later added after reading four systematic reviews on a similar topic. Fourteen contact sports and five non-contact sports were analyzed. The prevalence of dental trauma was 11.38% in contact sports and 5.24% in non-contact sports. Regardless of the type of sport, athletes face risks of dental trauma, with contact sports showing higher prevalence. The use of mouthguards is essential across all contact and non-contact sports as a preventive measure.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Stroke affects 15 million people per year worldwide. Despite recent developments in acute stroke treatment, prevention remains very important. Stroke has a high rate of recurrence; therefore secondary prevention is also important. Many clinical approaches to control risk factors have been proposed. One of these approaches is the prescription of beta-blockers that have effects beyond the reduction of blood pressure, which can reduce the recurrence of stroke. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the efficacy of beta-blockers for preventing stroke recurrence and for reducing death and major vascular events in people with a previous stroke or transient ischaemic attack (TIA), and to determine their safety, particularly with regard to the development of diabetes mellitus. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Stroke Group Trials Register (May 2014), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (CDSR) (The Cochrane Library 2014, Issue 5), the Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects (DARE) (May 2014), MEDLINE (1966 to May 2014), EMBASE (1980 to May 2014), and Latin American and Caribbean Health Sciences Literature (LILACS) (1982 to May 2014). We also searched ongoing trials registers and reference lists. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that included participants with previous stroke or TIA due to arterial thrombosis or embolism. The intervention was any beta-blocker versus control, or beta-blocker plus other treatment versus other treatment. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently screened the trials identified, appraised quality, and extracted data. MAIN RESULTS: We included two RCTs involving 2193 participants in the review. Both studies randomised participants to either beta-blocker (atenolol 5 mg) or placebo and were of a high methodological quality. We noted no statistical differences among the groups in risks of fatal and non-fatal stroke (risk ratio (RR) 0.94, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.76 to 1.18). For other outcomes analysed (major vascular events, death from all causes, death from cardiovascular causes) , we observed no significant differences between the groups. There were minor blood pressure reductions in the intervention group. Neither of the included studies reported the occurrence of diabetes among their outcomes or assessed quality of life. Adverse events were significantly more frequent in participants taking atenolol than in those given placebo, and were the most common reason given for discontinuing treatment (RR 1.85, 95% CI 1.45 to 2.35). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: To date, no available evidence supports the routine use of beta-blockers for secondary prevention after stroke or TIA. More studies with larger samples are needed.
Assuntos
Antagonistas de Receptores Adrenérgicos beta 1/uso terapêutico , Atenolol/uso terapêutico , Acidente Vascular Cerebral/prevenção & controle , Humanos , Ataque Isquêmico Transitório/prevenção & controle , Ensaios Clínicos Controlados Aleatórios como Assunto , Recidiva , Prevenção SecundáriaRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Stroke affects 15 million people per year worldwide. Despite recent developments in acute stroke treatment, prevention remains very important. Stroke has a high rate of recurrence; therefore secondary prevention is also important. Many clinical approaches to control risk factors have been proposed. One of these approaches is the prescription of beta-blockers that have effects beyond the reduction of blood pressure, which can reduce the recurrence of stroke. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the efficacy of beta-blockers for preventing stroke recurrence and for reducing death and major vascular events in people with a previous stroke or transient ischaemic attack (TIA), and to determine their safety, particularly with regard to the development of diabetes mellitus. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Stroke Group Trials Register (December 2011), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (CDSR) (The Cochrane Library 2011, Issue 12), the Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects (DARE) (December 2011), MEDLINE (1966 to December 2011), EMBASE (1980 to December 2011), and Latin American and Caribbean Health Sciences Literature (LILACS) (1982 to December 2011). We also searched ongoing trials registers and reference lists. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that included participants with previous stroke or TIA due to arterial thrombosis or embolism.The intervention was any beta-blocker versus control, or beta-blocker plus other treatment versus other treatment. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently screened the trials identified, appraised quality, and extracted data. MAIN RESULTS: We included two RCTs involving 2193 participants in the review. Both studies randomised participants to either beta-blocker (atenolol 5 mg) or placebo. No statistical differences were noted among the groups in risks of fatal and non-fatal stroke (risk ratio (RR) 0.94, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.75 to 1.17). For all other outcomes analysed (death from all causes, cardiac death, non-fatal myocardial infarction, major vascular events), we observed no significant differences between the groups. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: To date, no available evidence supports the routine use of beta-blockers for secondary prevention after stroke or TIA. More studies with larger samples are needed.