Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 20 de 227
Filtrar
1.
Chiropr Man Therap ; 29(1): 8, 2021 Feb 17.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33596925

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: A small proportion of chiropractors, osteopaths, and other manual medicine providers use spinal manipulative therapy (SMT) to manage non-musculoskeletal disorders. However, the efficacy and effectiveness of these interventions to prevent or treat non-musculoskeletal disorders remain controversial. OBJECTIVES: We convened a Global Summit of international scientists to conduct a systematic review of the literature to determine the efficacy and effectiveness of SMT for the primary, secondary and tertiary prevention of non-musculoskeletal disorders. GLOBAL SUMMIT: The Global Summit took place on September 14-15, 2019 in Toronto, Canada. It was attended by 50 researchers from 8 countries and 28 observers from 18 chiropractic organizations. At the summit, participants critically appraised the literature and synthesized the evidence. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE: We searched MEDLINE, Embase, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health, and the Index to Chiropractic Literature from inception to May 15, 2019 using subject headings specific to each database and free text words relevant to manipulation/manual therapy, effectiveness, prevention, treatment, and non-musculoskeletal disorders. Eligible for review were randomized controlled trials published in English. The methodological quality of eligible studies was assessed independently by reviewers using the Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network (SIGN) criteria for randomized controlled trials. We synthesized the evidence from articles with high or acceptable methodological quality according to the Synthesis without Meta-Analysis (SWiM) Guideline. The final risk of bias and evidence tables were reviewed by researchers who attended the Global Summit and 75% (38/50) had to approve the content to reach consensus. RESULTS: We retrieved 4997 citations, removed 1123 duplicates and screened 3874 citations. Of those, the eligibility of 32 articles was evaluated at the Global Summit and 16 articles were included in our systematic review. Our synthesis included six randomized controlled trials with acceptable or high methodological quality (reported in seven articles). These trials investigated the efficacy or effectiveness of SMT for the management of infantile colic, childhood asthma, hypertension, primary dysmenorrhea, and migraine. None of the trials evaluated the effectiveness of SMT in preventing the occurrence of non-musculoskeletal disorders. Consensus was reached on the content of all risk of bias and evidence tables. All randomized controlled trials with high or acceptable quality found that SMT was not superior to sham interventions for the treatment of these non-musculoskeletal disorders. Six of 50 participants (12%) in the Global Summit did not approve the final report. CONCLUSION: Our systematic review included six randomized clinical trials (534 participants) of acceptable or high quality investigating the efficacy or effectiveness of SMT for the treatment of non-musculoskeletal disorders. We found no evidence of an effect of SMT for the management of non-musculoskeletal disorders including infantile colic, childhood asthma, hypertension, primary dysmenorrhea, and migraine. This finding challenges the validity of the theory that treating spinal dysfunctions with SMT has a physiological effect on organs and their function. Governments, payers, regulators, educators, and clinicians should consider this evidence when developing policies about the use and reimbursement of SMT for non-musculoskeletal disorders.

2.
Am J Prev Med ; 2020 Nov 20.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33229143

RESUMO

CONTEXT: This study is a systematic review of interventions to improve adherence to guideline recommendations for prescribing opioids for chronic noncancer pain. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: Investigators searched CINAHL, Embase, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, the Cochrane Library, and Joanna Briggs Institute Evid Based Pract database from inception until June 3, 2019. Interventional studies to improve adherence to recommendations made by opioid guidelines for chronic noncancer pain in North America were eligible if outcomes included adherence to guideline recommendations or change in quantity of opioids prescribed. Data were extracted independently and in duplicate. Quantitative synthesis was performed using random effects meta-analysis. Confidence in evidence was determined using the Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: A total of 20 studies (8 controlled and 12 prospective cohort) involving 1,491 providers and 72 clinics met inclusion. Interventions included education, audit and feedback, interprofessional support, shared decision making, and multifaceted strategies. Multifaceted interventions improved the use of urine drug testing (n=2, or =2.31, 95% CI=1.53, 3.49, z=3.98, p<0.01; high-certainty evidence), treatment agreements (n=2, or =1.96, 95% CI=1.47, 2.61, z=4.56, p<0.01; moderate-certainty evidence), and mental health screening (n=2, 2.57-fold, 95% CI=1.56, 4.24, z=2.32, p=0.02; low-certainty evidence) when prescribing opioids for chronic noncancer pain. Very low-certainty evidence suggests that several interventions improved the use of treatment agreements, urine drug testing, and prescription drug monitoring programs. CONCLUSIONS: Mostly very low-certainty evidence supports a number of interventions for improving adherence to risk management strategies when prescribing opioids for chronic noncancer pain; however, the effect on patient important outcomes (e.g., overdose, addiction, death) is uncertain.

3.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33196584

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Forty percent of long bone fractures involve the tibia. These fractures are associated with prolonged recovery and may adversely affect patients' long-term physical functioning; however, there is limited evidence to inform what factors influence functional recovery in this patient population. QUESTION/PURPOSE: In a secondary analysis of a previous randomized trial, we asked: What fracture-related, demographic, social, or rehabilitative factors were associated with physical function 1 year after reamed intramedullary nailing of open or closed tibial shaft fractures? METHODS: This is a secondary (retrospective) analysis of a prior randomized trial (Trial to Re-evaluate Ultrasound in the Treatment of Tibial Fractures; TRUST trial). In the TRUST trial, 501 patients with unilateral open or closed tibial shaft fractures were randomized to self-administer daily low-intensity pulsed ultrasound or use a sham device, of which 15% (73 of 501) were not followed for 1 year due to early study termination as a result of futility (no difference between active and sham interventions). Of the remaining patients, 70% (299 of 428) provided full data. All fractures were fixed using reamed (298 of 299) or unreamed (1 of 299) intramedullary nailing. Thus, we excluded the sole fracture fixed using unreamed intramedullary nailing. The co-primary study outcomes of the TRUST trial were time to radiographic healing and SF-36 physical component summary (SF-36 PCS) scores at 1-year. SF-36 PCS scores range from 0 to 100, with higher scores being better, and the minimum clinically important difference (MCID) is 5 points. In this secondary analysis, based on clinical and biological rationale, we selected factors that may be associated with physical functioning as measured by SF-36 PCS scores. All selected factors were inserted simultaneously into a multivariate linear regression analysis. RESULTS: After adjusting for potentially confounding factors, such as age, gender, and injury severity, we found that no factor showed an association that exceeded the MCID for physical functioning 1 year after intramedullary nailing for tibial shaft fractures. The independent variables associated with lower physical functioning were current smoking status (mean difference -3.0 [95% confidence interval -5 to -0.5]; p = 0.02), BMI > 30 kg/m (mean difference -3.0 [95% CI -5.0 to -0.3]; p = 0.03), and receipt of disability benefits or involvement in litigation, or plans to be (mean difference -3.0 [95% CI -5.0 to -1]; p = 0.007). Patients who were employed (mean difference 4.6 [95% CI 2.0 to 7]; p < 0.001) and those who were advised by their surgeon to partially or fully bear weight postoperatively (mean difference 2.0 [95% CI 0.1 to 4.0]; p = 0.04) were associated with higher physical functioning. Age, gender, fracture severity, and receipt of early physical therapy were not associated with physical functioning at 1-year following surgical fixation. CONCLUSION: Among patients with tibial fractures, none of the factors we analyzed, including smoking status, receipt of disability benefits or involvement in litigation, or BMI, showed an association with physical functioning that exceeded the MCID. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, therapeutic study.

5.
Trials ; 21(1): 896, 2020 Oct 28.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33115541

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Clearly structured and comprehensive protocols are an essential component to ensure safety of participants, data validity, successful conduct, and credibility of results of randomized clinical trials (RCTs). Funding agencies, research ethics committees (RECs), regulatory agencies, medical journals, systematic reviewers, and other stakeholders rely on protocols to appraise the conduct and reporting of RCTs. In response to evidence of poor protocol quality, the Standard Protocol Items: Recommendations for Interventional Trials (SPIRIT) guideline was published in 2013 to improve the accuracy and completeness of clinical trial protocols. The impact of these recommendations on protocol completeness and associations between protocol completeness and successful RCT conduct and publication remain uncertain. OBJECTIVES AND METHODS: Aims of the Adherence to SPIrit REcommendations (ASPIRE) study are to investigate adherence to SPIRIT checklist items of RCT protocols approved by RECs in the UK, Switzerland, Germany, and Canada before (2012) and after (2016) the publication of the SPIRIT guidelines; determine protocol features associated with non-adherence to SPIRIT checklist items; and assess potential differences in adherence across countries. We assembled an international cohort of RCTs based on 450 protocols approved in 2012 and 402 protocols approved in 2016 by RECs in Switzerland, the UK, Germany, and Canada. We will extract data on RCT characteristics and adherence to SPIRIT for all included protocols. We will use multivariable regression models to investigate temporal changes in SPIRIT adherence, differences across countries, and associations between SPIRIT adherence of protocols with RCT registration, completion, and publication of results. We plan substudies to examine the registration, premature discontinuation, and non-publication of RCTs; the use of patient-reported outcomes in RCT protocols; SPIRIT adherence of RCT protocols with non-regulated interventions; the planning of RCT subgroup analyses; and the use of routinely collected data for RCTs. DISCUSSION: The ASPIRE study and associated substudies will provide important information on the impact of measures to improve the reporting of RCT protocols and on multiple aspects of RCT design, trial registration, premature discontinuation, and non-publication of RCTs observing potential changes over time.

6.
J Orthop Trauma ; 34 Suppl 3: S55-S63, 2020 Nov.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33027167

RESUMO

OBJECTIVES: To identify factors associated with the development of prolonged pain after hip fracture surgery. DESIGN: Secondary analysis of a randomized controlled trial. SETTING: Eighty hospitals in 10 countries. PATIENTS/PARTICIPANTS: One thousand four hundred forty-one hip fracture patients in the HEALTH trial. INTERVENTIONS: Total hip arthroplasty or hemiarthroplasty. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Moderate-to-severe pain (at least 2 activities on the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis questionnaire pain subscale with scores ≥2) at 12 and 24 months after hip arthroplasty. RESULTS: Of 840 and 726 patients with complete baseline data and outcomes at 1-year and 2-year follow-up, 96 (11.4%) and 80 (11.0%) reported moderate-to-severe pain, respectively. An increased risk of pain at both 1 and 2 years after surgery was associated with reporting moderate-to-severe hip pain before fracture [absolute risk increase (ARI) 15.3%, 95% confidence interval (CI) 6.44%-24.35%; ARI 12.5%, 95% CI 2.85%-22.12%, respectively] and prefracture opioid use (ARI 15.6%, 95% CI 5.41%-25.89%; ARI 21.1%; 95% CI 8.23%-34.02%, respectively). Female sex was associated with an increased risk of persistent pain at 1 year (ARI 6.2%, 95% CI 3.53%-8.84%). A greater risk of persistent pain at 2 years was associated with younger age (≤79-year-old; ARI 6.3%; 95% CI 2.67%-9.91%) and higher prefacture functional status (ARI 10.7%; 95% CI 3.80%-17.64%). CONCLUSIONS: Among hip fracture patients undergoing arthroplasty, approximately one in 10 will experience moderate-to-severe pain up to 2 years after surgery. Younger age, female sex, higher functioning prefracture, living with hip pain prefracture, and use of prescription opioids were predictive of persistent pain. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic Level II. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

7.
J Clin Epidemiol ; 128: 93-100, 2020 Dec.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32987165

RESUMO

OBJECTIVES: Surveys can provide important information about what people think or do. There is little guidance about how to use surveys in decision-making. This article provides guidance for how to appraise and use a survey to answer health care questions. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: A guidance article about the use a survey of a selected sample of people, who completed a self-report tool about their knowledge, beliefs and opinions, behaviors and experiences, or personal attributes. We use survey examples, one scenario, and a specific survey for illustration. RESULTS: Decision makers should consider the credibility and applicability of the results of a survey. Key threats to credibility depend on the representativeness of the population and likelihood that it provides an accurate picture of the population's knowledge, attitudes, or self-reported practices. If survey investigators do not use rigorous strategies to develop or pretest questions, there is a greater risk that results will be misleading. Decision makers may want to consider the precision of estimates and whether it would change their decisions. Finally, they need to decide how similar the surveyed population is to their specific population before applying results. CONCLUSIONS: Decision makers can follow this guidance to critically appraise, interpret, and apply the results of surveys to health care questions.

8.
Ann Intern Med ; 173(9): 730-738, 2020 Nov 03.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32805127

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Patients and clinicians can choose from several treatment options to address acute pain from non-low back, musculoskeletal injuries. PURPOSE: To assess the comparative effectiveness of outpatient treatments for acute pain from non-low back, musculoskeletal injuries by performing a network meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials (RCTs). DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, PEDro (Physiotherapy Evidence Database), and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials to 2 January 2020. STUDY SELECTION: Pairs of reviewers independently identified interventional RCTs that enrolled patients presenting with pain of up to 4 weeks' duration from non-low back, musculoskeletal injuries. DATA EXTRACTION: Pairs of reviewers independently extracted data. Certainty of evidence was evaluated by using the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) approach. DATA SYNTHESIS: The 207 eligible studies included 32 959 participants and evaluated 45 therapies. Ninety-nine trials (48%) enrolled populations with diverse musculoskeletal injuries, 59 (29%) included patients with sprains, 13 (6%) with whiplash, and 11 (5%) with muscle strains; the remaining trials included various injuries ranging from nonsurgical fractures to contusions. Topical nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory agents (NSAIDs) proved to have the greatest net benefit, followed by oral NSAIDs and acetaminophen with or without diclofenac. Effects of these agents on pain were modest (around 1 cm on a 10-cm visual analogue scale, approximating the minimal important difference). Regarding opioids, compared with placebo, acetaminophen plus an opioid improved intermediate pain (1 to 7 days) but not immediate pain (≤2 hours), tramadol was ineffective, and opioids increased the risk for gastrointestinal and neurologic harms (all moderate-certainty evidence). LIMITATIONS: Only English-language studies were included. The number of head-to-head comparisons was limited. CONCLUSION: Topical NSAIDs, followed by oral NSAIDs and acetaminophen with or without diclofenac, showed the most convincing and attractive benefit-harm ratio for patients with acute pain from non-low back, musculoskeletal injuries. No opioid achieved benefit greater than that of NSAIDs, and opioids caused the most harms. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: National Safety Council. (PROSPERO: CRD42018094412).

9.
Ann Intern Med ; 173(9): 721-729, 2020 Nov 03.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32805130

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Opioids are frequently prescribed for acute musculoskeletal injuries and may result in long-term use and consequent harms. PURPOSE: To explore factors associated with persistent opioid use after its prescription for acute musculoskeletal injury. DATA SOURCES: Searches of multiple electronic databases, without language restrictions, from inception to 6 January 2020, and reference lists of selected articles. STUDY SELECTION: Observational studies of adults with opioid prescriptions for outpatient acute musculoskeletal injuries, in an adjusted model, that explored risk factors for prolonged use. DATA EXTRACTION: 6 reviewers, working in pairs, independently extracted data, rated the quality of studies, and evaluated the certainty of evidence. DATA SYNTHESIS: 14 cohorts with 13 263 393 participants were included. The overall prevalence of prolonged opioid use after musculoskeletal injury for high-risk populations (that is, patients receiving workers' compensation benefits, Veterans Affairs claimants, or patients with high rates of concurrent substance use disorder) was 27% (95% CI, 18% to 37%). The prevalence among low-risk populations was 6% (CI, 4% to 8%; P for interaction < 0.001). Moderate-certainty evidence showed increased odds of persistent opioid use with older age (absolute risk increase [ARI] for every 10-year increase, 1.1% [CI, 0.7% to 1.5%]) and physical comorbidity (ARI, 0.9% [CI, 0.1% to 1.7%]). Low-certainty evidence suggested increased risk for persistent opioid use with past or current substance use disorder (ARI, 10.5% [CI, 4.2% to 19.8%]), prescriptions lasting more than 7 days (median ARI, 4.5%), and higher morphine milligram equivalents per day. LIMITATION: Sparse, heterogeneous data with suboptimal adjustment for potential confounders. CONCLUSION: Avoiding prescribing opioids for acute musculoskeletal injuries to patients with past or current substance use disorder, and restricting duration to 7 days or less and using lower doses when they are prescribed, are potentially important targets to reduce rates of persistent opioid use. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: National Safety Council. (PROSPERO: CRD42018104968).

10.
Br J Anaesth ; 125(5): 779-801, 2020 11.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32798067

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Despite common use, the benefit of adding steroids to local anaesthetics (SLA) for chronic non-cancer pain (CNCP) injections is uncertain. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of English-language RCTs to assess the benefit and safety of adding steroids to local anaesthetics (LA) for CNCP. METHODS: We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, and CENTRAL databases from inception to May 2019. Trial selection and data extraction were performed in duplicate. Outcomes were guided by the Initiative in Methods, Measurements, and Pain Assessment in Clinical Trials (IMMPACT) statement with pain improvement as the primary outcome and pooled using random effects model and reported as relative risks (RR) or mean differences (MD) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). RESULTS: Among 5097 abstracts, 73 trials were eligible. Although SLA increased the rate of success (42 trials, 3592 patients; RR=1.14; 95% CI, 1.03-1.25; number needed to treat [NNT], 13), the effect size decreased by nearly 50% (NNT, 22) with the removal of two intrathecal injection studies. The differences in pain scores with SLA were not clinically meaningful (54 trials, 4416 patients, MD=0.44 units; 95% CI, 0.24-0.65). No differences were observed in other outcomes or adverse events. No subgroup effects were detected based on clinical categories. Meta-regression showed no significant association with steroid dose or length of follow-up and pain relief. CONCLUSIONS: Addition of cortico steroids to local anaesthetic has only small benefits and a potential for harm. Injection of local anaesthetic alone could be therapeutic, beyond being diagnostic. A shared decision based on patient preferences should be considered. If used, one must avoid high doses and series of steroid injections. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: PROSPERO #: CRD42015020614.


Assuntos
Corticosteroides/uso terapêutico , Anestésicos Locais/uso terapêutico , Dor Crônica/tratamento farmacológico , Manejo da Dor/métodos , Corticosteroides/efeitos adversos , Anestésicos Locais/efeitos adversos , Humanos , Ensaios Clínicos Controlados Aleatórios como Assunto , Resultado do Tratamento
11.
BMJ ; 370: m2898, 2020 08 26.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32847800

RESUMO

OBJECTIVE: To assess the risk of bias associated with missing outcome data in systematic reviews. DESIGN: Imputation study. SETTING: Systematic reviews. POPULATION: 100 systematic reviews that included a group level meta-analysis with a statistically significant effect on a patient important dichotomous efficacy outcome. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Median percentage change in the relative effect estimate when applying each of the following assumption (four commonly discussed but implausible assumptions (best case scenario, none had the event, all had the event, and worst case scenario) and four plausible assumptions for missing data based on the informative missingness odds ratio (IMOR) approach (IMOR 1.5 (least stringent), IMOR 2, IMOR 3, IMOR 5 (most stringent)); percentage of meta-analyses that crossed the threshold of the null effect for each method; and percentage of meta-analyses that qualitatively changed direction of effect for each method. Sensitivity analyses based on the eight different methods of handling missing data were conducted. RESULTS: 100 systematic reviews with 653 randomised controlled trials were included. When applying the implausible but commonly discussed assumptions, the median change in the relative effect estimate varied from 0% to 30.4%. The percentage of meta-analyses crossing the threshold of the null effect varied from 1% (best case scenario) to 60% (worst case scenario), and 26% changed direction with the worst case scenario. When applying the plausible assumptions, the median percentage change in relative effect estimate varied from 1.4% to 7.0%. The percentage of meta-analyses crossing the threshold of the null effect varied from 6% (IMOR 1.5) to 22% (IMOR 5) of meta-analyses, and 2% changed direction with the most stringent (IMOR 5). CONCLUSION: Even when applying plausible assumptions to the outcomes of participants with definite missing data, the average change in pooled relative effect estimate is substantive, and almost a quarter (22%) of meta-analyses crossed the threshold of the null effect. Systematic review authors should present the potential impact of missing outcome data on their effect estimates and use this to inform their overall GRADE (grading of recommendations assessment, development, and evaluation) ratings of risk of bias and their interpretation of the results.


Assuntos
Metanálise como Assunto , Projetos de Pesquisa/normas , Revisões Sistemáticas como Assunto , Viés , Interpretação Estatística de Dados , Humanos , Ensaios Clínicos Controlados Aleatórios como Assunto
12.
Cureus ; 12(5): e8314, 2020 May 27.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32607297

RESUMO

Objectives Nonunions of tibial shaft fractures have profound implications on patient quality of life and are associated with physical and mental suffering. Radiographic Union Score for Tibia Fractures (RUST) may serve as an important prognostic tool for identifying patients at a high risk of nonunion. Design We used data from the Study to Prospectively Evaluate Reamed Intramedullary Nails in Patients with Tibial Fractures (SPRINT) and Fluid Lavage of Open Wounds (FLOW) trials to explore the association of three-month RUST scores with nonunion in patients with tibial shaft fractures treated with intramedullary nailing. We performed a retrospective cohort study nested within two multi-center, randomized controlled trials. Participants The patients included in the current study: (1) sustained a tibial shaft fracture and were enrolled in the SPRINT or FLOW randomized trials, (2) had initial operative management with intramedullary nailing, (3) showed radiographic evidence of an unhealed fracture at the three-month follow-up, and (4) their healing status (union or nonunion) was captured at 12-months postoperatively. Intervention Multivariable binary logistic regression was carried out to identify factors associated with nonunion, including open versus closed injury, fracture severity, fracture gap, and three-month RUST score. We determined the concordance statistic (c statistic) for our regression model both with and without the RUST score. Outcome Measurements and Results Of the 155 tibial fracture patients with complete data available for analysis, the overall rate of nonunion at 12 months was 30% (n=47). The mean three-month RUST score in patients with nonunion at 12 months was 4.8 (standard deviation (SD) 1.1) as compared to 6.3 (SD 1.7) for those healed at 12 months. In our multivariable regression analysis, open fractures conferred five-fold greater odds of nonunion at 12 months as compared to closed fractures (odds ratio (OR) 4.76, 95% confidence interval (CI):1.71-13.30). Further, three-month RUST scores of 4 and 5-6 were associated with a 47% (95% CI: 18%-73%) and 23% (4.5-51.5%) absolute risk increase of nonunion as compared to a score of ≥ 7, respectively. The addition of RUST scores to our adjusted regression model improved the c statistic from 0.70 (95%CI: 0.61-0.79) to 0.81 (95%CI: 0.74-0.88). Conclusion A third of patients with tibial shaft fractures who have failed to heal by three months will show nonunion at one year. Open fractures and lower three-month RUST scores are strongly associated with a higher risk of nonunion at one year. Further research is needed to establish whether prognosis in this high-risk group can be modified.

13.
Br J Anaesth ; 125(3): 346-357, 2020 09.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32611524

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: The prevalence and intensity of persistent post-surgical pain (PPSP) after breast cancer surgery are uncertain. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to further elucidate this issue. METHODS: We searched MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, and PsycINFO, from inception to November 2018, for observational studies reporting persistent pain (≥3 months) after breast cancer surgery. We used random-effects meta-analysis and the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations approach to rate quality of evidence. RESULTS: We included 187 observational studies with 297 612 breast cancer patients. The prevalence of PPSP ranged from 2% to 78%, median 37% (inter-quartile range: 22-48%); the pooled prevalence was 35% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 32-39%). The pooled pain intensity was 3.9 cm on a 10 cm visual analogue scale (95% CI: 3.6-4.2 cm). Moderate-quality evidence supported the subgroup effects of PPSP prevalence for localized pain vs any pain (29% vs 44%), moderate or greater vs any pain (26% vs 44%), clinician-assessed vs patient-reported pain (23% vs 36%), and whether patients underwent sentinel lymph node biopsy vs axillary lymph node dissection (26% vs 43%). The adjusted analysis found that the prevalence of patient-reported PPSP (any severity/location) was 46% (95% CI: 36-56%), and the prevalence of patient-reported moderate-to-severe PPSP at any location was 27% (95% CI: 10-43%). CONCLUSIONS: Moderate-quality evidence suggests that almost half of all women undergoing breast cancer surgery develop persistent post-surgical pain, and about one in four develop moderate-to-severe persistent post-surgical pain; the higher prevalence was associated with axillary lymph node dissection. Future studies should explore whether nerve sparing for axillary procedures reduces persistent post-surgical pain after breast cancer surgery.


Assuntos
Neoplasias da Mama/cirurgia , Dor Crônica/epidemiologia , Estudos Observacionais como Assunto , Dor Pós-Operatória/epidemiologia , Neoplasias da Mama/epidemiologia , Feminino , Humanos , Prevalência , Índice de Gravidade de Doença
15.
Compr Psychiatry ; 102: 152188, 2020 Oct.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32653594

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Regulatory changes are increasing access to both medical cannabis and cannabis in general. As such, understanding patterns of recreational and medical cannabis use is a high public health priority. OBJECTIVES: Patterns of cannabis use (recreational and medical), other substance use, and psychiatric symptoms were characterized in a large sample of community adult cannabis users in Canada, prior to federal cannabis legalization. METHODS: This was a self-report assessment of 709 cannabis users (Mean age = 30.19 (11.82) years; 55.01% female). Patterns of overall substance use and psychiatric symptomatology were compared based on recreational/medical cannabis status. RESULTS: Overall, 61.4% of participants endorsed exclusively recreational use, while 38.6% reported some level of medical use. Of all medical users, only 23.4% reported authorization from a health professional. Recreational cannabis users typically reported infrequent use (less than weekly), whereas medical users modally reported daily use. Compared to recreational users, medical users reported more problematic cannabis use in addition to greater psychiatric symptomatology (anxiety, depression and trauma). Interestingly, a large majority of medical users also reported using recreationally (80.6%), while exclusive medical use was less common (19.3%). This dual motives group reported more daily cannabis use and more alcohol and tobacco use. Compared to medical-only users, individuals using cannabis for both medical and recreational purposes more often used cannabis to treat psychiatric conditions. CONCLUSIONS: These findings reveal the differences in cannabis use patterns and preferences between recreational and medical users, and even within medical users. In particular, dual motives individuals, who use cannabis for both positively and negatively reinforcing purposes, may warrant special attention as a subpopulation.

16.
BMC Fam Pract ; 21(1): 109, 2020 06 13.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32534565

RESUMO

The 2017 Canadian opioid Guideline made both strong recommendations, indicating that all or almost all fully informed patients would choose the recommended course of action, and weak recommendations, in which different choices are appropriate for individual patients based on their values and preferences. The Guideline's recommendation to taper legacy patients prescribed high-dose opioid therapy is weak, and mandatory tapering is expressly discouraged.


Assuntos
Analgésicos Opioides , Médicos de Família , Canadá , Humanos , Padrões de Prática Médica , Pesquisa Qualitativa
17.
Clin Epidemiol ; 12: 527-535, 2020.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32547244

RESUMO

Background: How systematic review authors address missing data among eligible primary studies remains uncertain. Objective: To assess whether systematic review authors are consistent in the way they handle missing data, both across trials included in the same meta-analysis, and with their reported methods. Methods: We first identified 100 eligible systematic reviews that included a statistically significant meta-analysis of a patient-important dichotomous efficacy outcome. Then, we successfully retrieved 638 of the 653 trials included in these systematic reviews' meta-analyses. From each trial report, we extracted statistical data used in the analysis of the outcome of interest to compare with the data used in the meta-analysis. First, we used these comparisons to classify the "analytical method actually used" for handling missing data by the systematic review authors for each included trial. Second, we assessed whether systematic reviews explicitly reported their analytical method of handling missing data. Third, we calculated the proportion of systematic reviews that were consistent in their "analytical method actually used" across trials included in the same meta-analysis. Fourth, among systematic reviews that were consistent in the "analytical method actually used" across trials and explicitly reported on a method for handling missing data, we assessed whether the "analytical method actually used" and the reported methods were consistent. Results: We were unable to determine the "analytical method reviews actually used" for handling missing outcome data among 397 trials. Among the remaining 241, systematic review authors most commonly conducted "complete case analysis" (n=128, 53%) or assumed "none of the participants with missing data had the event of interest" (n=58, 24%). Only eight of 100 systematic reviews were consistent in their approach to handling missing data across included trials, but none of these reported methods for handling missing data. Among seven reviews that did explicitly report their analytical method of handling missing data, only one was consistent in their approach across included trials (using complete case analysis), and their approach was inconsistent with their reported methods (assumed all participants with missing data had the event). Conclusion: The majority of systematic review authors were inconsistent in their approach towards reporting and handling missing outcome data across eligible primary trials, and most did not explicitly report their methods to handle missing data. Systematic review authors should clearly identify missing outcome data among their eligible trials, specify an approach for handling missing data in their analyses, and apply their approach consistently across all primary trials.

18.
Lancet Glob Health ; 8(5): e711-e720, 2020 05.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32353318

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: The Lancet Commission on Global Surgery established the Three Delays framework, categorising delays in accessing timely surgical care into delays in seeking care (First Delay), reaching care (Second Delay), and receiving care (Third Delay). Globally, knowledge gaps regarding delays for fracture care, and the lack of large prospective studies informed the rationale for our international observational study. We investigated delays in hospital admission as a surrogate for accessing timely fracture care and explored factors associated with delayed hospital admission. METHODS: In this prospective observational substudy of the ongoing International Orthopaedic Multicenter Study in Fracture Care (INORMUS), we enrolled patients with fracture across 49 hospitals in 18 low-income and middle-income countries, categorised into the regions of China, Africa, India, south and east Asia, and Latin America. Eligible patients were aged 18 years or older and had been admitted to a hospital within 3 months of sustaining an orthopaedic trauma. We collected demographic injury data and time to hospital admission. Our primary outcome was the number of patients with open and closed fractures who were delayed in their admission to a treating hospital. Delays for patients with open fractures were defined as being more than 2 h from the time of injury (in accordance with the Lancet Commission on Global Surgery) and for those with closed fractures as being a delay of more than 24 h. Secondary outcomes were reasons for delay for all patients with either open or closed fractures who were delayed for more than 24 h. We did logistic regression analyses to identify risk factors of delays of more than 2 h in patients with open fractures and delays of more than 24 h in patients with closed fractures. Logistic regressions were adjusted for region, age, employment, urban living, health insurance, interfacility referral, method of transportation, number of fractures, mechanism of injury, and fracture location. We further calculated adjusted relative risk (RR) from adjusted odds ratios, adjusted for the same variables. This study was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02150980, and is ongoing. FINDINGS: Between April 3, 2014, and May 10, 2019, we enrolled 31 255 patients with fractures, with a median age of 45 years (IQR 31-62), of whom 19 937 (63·8%) were men, and 14 524 (46·5%) had lower limb fractures, making them the most common fractures. Of 5256 patients with open fractures, 3778 (71·9%) were not admitted to hospital within 2 h. Of 25 999 patients with closed fractures, 7141 (27·5%) were delayed by more than 24 h. Of all regions, Latin America had the greatest proportions of patients with delays (173 [88·7%] of 195 patients with open fractures; 426 [44·7%] of 952 with closed fractures). Among patients delayed by more than 24 h, the most common reason for delays were interfacility referrals (3755 [47·7%] of 7875) and Third Delays (cumulatively interfacility referral and delay in emergency department: 3974 [50·5%]), while Second Delays (delays in reaching care) were the least common (423 [5·4%]). Compared with other methods of transportation (eg, walking, rickshaw), ambulances led to delay in transporting patients with open fractures to a treating hospital (adjusted RR 0·66, 99% CI 0·46-0·93). Compared with patients with closed lower limb fractures, patients with closed spine (adjusted RR 2·47, 99% CI 2·17-2·81) and pelvic (1·35, 1·10-1·66) fractures were most likely to have delays of more than 24 h before admission to hospital. INTERPRETATION: In low-income and middle-income countries, timely hospital admission remains largely inaccessible, especially among patients with open fractures. Reducing hospital-based delays in receiving care, and, in particular, improving interfacility referral systems are the most substantial tools for reducing delays in admissions to hospital. FUNDING: National Health and Medical Research Council of Australia, Canadian Institutes of Health Research, McMaster Surgical Associates, and Hamilton Health Sciences.


Assuntos
Países em Desenvolvimento , Fraturas Ósseas/terapia , Admissão do Paciente/estatística & dados numéricos , Tempo para o Tratamento/estatística & dados numéricos , Adulto , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Estudos Prospectivos , Fatores Socioeconômicos
19.
CMAJ Open ; 8(2): E338-E345, 2020.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32371527

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Historically, some chiropractors have been critical of vaccination, and this has been the subject of recent media attention in Canada. We explored the association between media attention and public dissemination of vaccination information on Canadian chiropractors' websites. METHODS: In 2016, we identified all Canadian chiropractors' websites that provided information on vaccination by extracting details from the regulatory college website for each province using the search engine on their "find a chiropractor" page. We assessed the quality of information using the Web Resource Rating Tool (scores range from 0% [worst] to 100% [best]), determined whether vaccination was portrayed in a positive, neutral or negative manner, and conducted thematic analysis of vaccination content. We revisited all identified websites in 2019 to explore for changes to posted vaccination material. RESULTS: In July 2016, of 3733 chiropractic websites identified, 94 unique websites provided information on vaccination: 59 (63%) gave negative messaging, 19 (20%) were neutral and 16 (17%) were positive. The quality of vaccination content on the websites was generally poor, with a median Web Resource Rating Tool score of 19%. We identified 4 main themes: there are alternatives to vaccination, vaccines are harmful, evidence regarding vaccination and health policy regarding vaccination. From 2012 to 2016, there was 1 Canadian newspaper story concerning antivaccination statements by chiropractors, whereas 51 news articles were published on this topic between 2017 and 2019. In April 2019, 45 (48%) of the 94 websites we had identified in 2016 had removed all vaccination content or had been discontinued. INTERPRETATION: In 2016, a minority of Canadian chiropractors provided vaccination information on their websites, the majority of which portrayed vaccination negatively. After substantial national media attention, about half of all vaccination material on chiropractors' websites was removed within several years.

20.
Complement Ther Clin Pract ; 39: 101106, 2020 May.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32379647

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: The use of natural health products (NHPs) is common in North America. In 2003, we found that 42% of NHP users had not disclosed this information to their primary care medical doctors (MDs). We repeated our survey in 2018/2019 to explore if the rate of NHP use disclosure had improved. METHODS: From November 2018-February 2019, a 21-item survey about NHP use and disclosure was administered to adult patients who visited the Robert Schad Naturopathic Clinic in Toronto, Canada. RESULTS: Almost all patients surveyed were using NHPs (99%), and 46% were using NHPs and prescription medication concurrently. Consistent with our 2003 findings, 42% of respondents who used NHPs did not disclose this information to their MD. CONCLUSION: Disclosure of NHP use to MDs by naturopathic patients is limited and remained unchanged over the past 15 years. Future research should explore primary care MDs' hesitancy to inquire about patient NHP use.


Assuntos
Produtos Biológicos/uso terapêutico , Revelação/tendências , Naturopatia , Relações Médico-Paciente , Atenção Primária à Saúde , Adolescente , Adulto , Idoso , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais , Instituições de Assistência Ambulatorial , Canadá , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Médicos de Atenção Primária , Inquéritos e Questionários , Adulto Jovem
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA