Dietary protein and blood pressure: an umbrella review of systematic reviews and evaluation of the evidence.

INTRODUCTION: This umbrella review aimed to investigate the evidence of an effect of dietary intake of total protein, animal and plant protein on blood pressure (BP), and hypertension (PROSPERO: CRD42018082395). METHODS: PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Database were systematically searched for systematic reviews (SRs) of prospective studies with or without meta-analysis published between 05/2007 and 10/2022. The methodological quality and outcome-specific certainty of evidence were assessed by the AMSTAR 2 and NutriGrade tools, followed by an assessment of the overall certainty of evidence. SRs investigating specific protein sources are described in this review, but not included in the assessment of the overall certainty of evidence. RESULTS: Sixteen SRs were considered eligible for the umbrella review. Ten of the SRs investigated total protein intake, six animal protein, six plant protein and four animal vs. plant protein. The majority of the SRs reported no associations or effects of total, animal and plant protein on BP (all "possible" evidence), whereby the uncertainty regarding the effects on BP was particularly high for plant protein. Two SRs addressing milk-derived protein showed a reduction in BP; in contrast, SRs investigating soy protein found no effect on BP. The outcome-specific certainty of evidence of the SRs was mostly rated as low. DISCUSSION/CONCLUSION: This umbrella review showed uncertainties whether there are any effects on BP from the intake of total protein, or animal or plant proteins, specifically. Based on data from two SRs with milk protein, it cannot be excluded that certain types of protein could favourably influence BP.

Pelvic floor muscle training with biofeedback or feedback from a physiotherapist for urinary and anal incontinence after childbirth - a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Childbirth is one of the biggest risk factors for incontinence. Urinary and anal incontinence can cause pain and social limitations that affect social life, cohabitation, and work. There is currently no up-to-date literature study on the effect of pelvic floor muscle training with feedback from a physiotherapist, which involves verbal instructions based on vaginal and anal digital palpation, compared to treatment without feedback (e.g., recommendations for pelvic floor muscle training). AIM: The objective of this systematic review was to examine the scientific evidence regarding the impact of pelvic floor muscle training (PFMT) with feedback from a physiotherapist and/or biofeedback on urinary and anal incontinence in women during the first six months following vaginal delivery, compared to treatment without feedback. METHODS: The literature search was conducted in the databases PubMed, Cochrane, and CINAHL. In addition, a manual search was conducted. The search terms consisted of MeSH terms and synonyms in the respective search block including population, intervention, and study design, as well as the terms pelvic floor and postpartum. An evaluation of each included study was conducted for methodological quality, evidence value, and clinical relevance. RESULTS: Eight studies were included, three of which showed a significant difference between groups, in favor of the intervention group that received pelvic floor muscle training with feedback from a physiotherapist and/or biofeedback. Due to the varying results and insufficient quality for the majority of the studies, the scientific basis was considered insufficient. CONCLUSION: The scientific evidence for pelvic floor muscle training with feedback from a physiotherapist or biofeedback on postpartum urinary and anal incontinence compared to treatment without feedback is considered insufficient. Further research on the subject is needed. The study is registered in PROSPERO CRD42022361296.

[Overview of systematic reviews of Chinese herbal injections for sepsis].

In this study, an overview of systematic reviews/Meta-analysis(SR/MA) of Chinese herbal injections for sepsis was performed to provide references for clinical practice and promote the quality improvement of clinical evidence. Eight Chinese and English databases such as CNKI, Medline, and EMbase were electronically searched for SR/MA of Chinese herbal injections for sepsis from database inception to June 2022. AMSTAR 2, PRISMA 2020, and GRADE system, combined with Recommendations for Clinical Evidence Grading on Traditional Chinese Medicine Based on Evidence Body, were applied to evaluate the methodological quality, reporting quality, and evidence quality of the included articles. Twenty-seven articles of SR/MA were included, containing four Chinese herbal injections(Xuebijing Injection, Shenfu Injection, Shenmai Injection, and Shengmai Injection). AMSTAR 2 checklist showed that the methodological quality of the SR/MA ranged from moderate to very low. Item 2(prior study design) was the critical item with poor scores, and the non-critical items with poor scores were items 3(explain the selection of the study designs), items 10(report on the sources of funding), and items 16(conflicts of interest stated). In terms of PRISMA 2020, items in eight topics with complete reporting of missing>50%, including search strategy, certainty assessment, results of syntheses, certainty of evidence, registration and protocol, support, competing interests, availability of data, code and other materials. The included SR/MA involved 30 outcome indicators. Evidence quality of mortality, APACHE Ⅱ, and safety, the top three outcome indicators, was evaluated, and all of them were graded as the medium level. The lack of random allocation sequence, allocation concealment mechanism, blinding, and trial sample size was the main reason for the reduction of the evidence level. The available evidence shows that Chinese herbal injections can serve as an effective and safe adjunctive treatment for sepsis, which can reduce mortality, inhibit inflammation, improve coagulation function, and regulate immune function, tissue perfusion, and oxygenation in patients with sepsis. However, the quality of SR/MA was suboptimal, and more high-quality SR/MA is needed to provide evidence to support the efficacy and safety of Chinese herbal injections in the treatment of sepsis.

Overview of systematic reviews of Chinese herbal injections for sepsis / 中国中药杂志

In this study, an overview of systematic reviews/Meta-analysis(SR/MA) of Chinese herbal injections for sepsis was performed to provide references for clinical practice and promote the quality improvement of clinical evidence. Eight Chinese and English databases such as CNKI, Medline, and EMbase were electronically searched for SR/MA of Chinese herbal injections for sepsis from database inception to June 2022. AMSTAR 2, PRISMA 2020, and GRADE system, combined with Recommendations for Clinical Evidence Grading on Traditional Chinese Medicine Based on Evidence Body, were applied to evaluate the methodological quality, reporting quality, and evidence quality of the included articles. Twenty-seven articles of SR/MA were included, containing four Chinese herbal injections(Xuebijing Injection, Shenfu Injection, Shenmai Injection, and Shengmai Injection). AMSTAR 2 checklist showed that the methodological quality of the SR/MA ranged from moderate to very low. Item 2(prior study design) was the critical item with poor scores, and the non-critical items with poor scores were items 3(explain the selection of the study designs), items 10(report on the sources of funding), and items 16(conflicts of interest stated). In terms of PRISMA 2020, items in eight topics with complete reporting of missing>50%, including search strategy, certainty assessment, results of syntheses, certainty of evidence, registration and protocol, support, competing interests, availability of data, code and other materials. The included SR/MA involved 30 outcome indicators. Evidence quality of mortality, APACHE Ⅱ, and safety, the top three outcome indicators, was evaluated, and all of them were graded as the medium level. The lack of random allocation sequence, allocation concealment mechanism, blinding, and trial sample size was the main reason for the reduction of the evidence level. The available evidence shows that Chinese herbal injections can serve as an effective and safe adjunctive treatment for sepsis, which can reduce mortality, inhibit inflammation, improve coagulation function, and regulate immune function, tissue perfusion, and oxygenation in patients with sepsis. However, the quality of SR/MA was suboptimal, and more high-quality SR/MA is needed to provide evidence to support the efficacy and safety of Chinese herbal injections in the treatment of sepsis.

Significance of Utilizing Checklists and Statements for Improvement of the Quality of Studies Concerning Hot Springs: evidence grading and various study designs of epidemiological and clinical studies / 日本温泉気候物理医学会雑誌

The purpose of this study was to review several kinds of checklists and statements of studies in human subjects, and to examine reporting methods in order to improve the quality of studies concerning hot springs.<br>For randomized controlled trials (RCTs), “the CONSORT Statement” (Moher et al. <i>JAMA</i> 2001) consisting of 22 terms is the most well known checklist. In addition, different versions and new checklists have been developed depending upon the content of the studies (such as intervention methods) or field of the studies. There is also “the QUOROM Statement” (Moher et al. <i>Lancet</i> 1999) for a systematic review (SR) of RCTs, “the TREND Statement” (Jarlais et al. <i>Am J Public Health</i> 2004) for nonrandomized controlled trials, “the STROBE Statement” (Elm et al. <i>Ann Inter Med</i> 2007) for observational studies, and “the MOOSE Checklist” (Stroup et al. <i>JAMA</i> 2000) as a SR of observational studies. With regard to studies on hot springs, however, terms in the checklists and the statements described above are insufficient or inappropriate because of difficulties in performing such studies in a blinded manner, and the diversity of intervention methods, such as the quellen charakter.<br>Improvement of the quality of reports is important for validation of evidence. In order to improve the quality of assessments and reports of studies on hot springs, it may be necessary to develop a unique checklist based on the above-described statements and checklists.