RESUMO
INTRODUCTION: Music therapy and aromatherapy have been demonstrated effective for perioperative anxiety. However, the available studies have indicated discordant results about which adjunct treatment is better for perioperative anxiety. Therefore, we conducted this meta-analysis to explore the contrasting effects between them. METHODS: Six electronic databases were searched for clinical trials evaluating the efficacy of music therapy compared with aromatherapy in alleviating perioperative anxiety. The primary outcome was the postintervention anxiety level. Secondary outcomes included differences in blood pressure and heart rate before and after the intervention as well as pain scores at intraoperative and postoperative time points. The study protocol was registered on PROSPERO (CRD42021249737). RESULTS: Twelve studies (894 patients) were included. The anxiety level showed no statistically significant difference (SMD, 0.28; 95% CI: -0.12, 0.68; p = 0.17). The analysis of blood pressure and heart rate also did not identify statistically significant differences. Notably, the pain scores at the intraoperative time point suggested that aromatherapy was superior to music therapy (WMD, 0.29 cm; 95% CI: 0.05, 0.52; p = 0.02), while those at 4 h after surgery indicated the opposite results (WMD, -0.48 cm; 95% CI: -0.60, -0.36; p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Low-to-moderate quality evidence suggests that music therapy and aromatherapy have similar potential to relieve perioperative anxiety. The potential data indicate that the two therapies have different benefits in intervention duration and age distribution. More direct high-quality comparisons are encouraged in the future to verify this point.
Assuntos
Ansiedade , Aromaterapia , Musicoterapia , Humanos , Ansiedade/terapia , Frequência CardíacaRESUMO
INTRODUCTION: Evidence on the use of inhaled methoxyflurane in the management of trauma pain is conflicting and obfuscated. This study aimed to determine the efficacy and safety of inhaled methoxyflurane for trauma pain on the basis of published randomized controlled trials (RCTs). METHODS: RCTs assessing the efficacy of methoxyflurane in adults or adolescents with acute trauma pain published in PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Google Scholar were searched. The control groups were those that received placebo or standard analgesic treatment (SAT). The primary outcome was the change from baseline in pain scores during the first 30 min of treatment. Secondary outcomes included time to first pain relief, the proportion of patients experiencing pain relief, rescue analgesia rate, the treatment satisfaction of patients and investigators, and the methoxyflurane-related treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs). RESULTS: A total of nine RCTs (1806 patients) were identified. Results revealed that methoxyflurane provided a clinically unimportant benefit by improving the mean difference of change from baseline in pain intensity (from - 0.44 to - 1.23 cm, p < 0.001) at various time points within the first 20 min compared to control treatment. Besides, methoxyflurane decreased the time of onset of pain relief (mean difference - 5.29 min; 95% CI - 6.97 to - 3.62) and the proportion of patients who needed rescue analgesic medication (risk ratio 1.41; 95% CI 1.17-1.70) despite it increasing the risk of non-severe TEAEs (risk ratio 3.09; 95% CI 1.72-5.57). Notably, the benefit of almost all secondary pain-related outcomes was rendered clinically nonsignificant between methoxyflurane and SAT strata besides the time of onset of pain relief. The quality of evidence was low or very low in all outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: In emergency situations without effective therapy, this systematic review and meta-analysis provides low-quality evidence that methoxyflurane can be used as a rapid-acting and effective treatment for acute trauma pain, although its utilization is associated a risk of non-severe TEAEs. However, the current evidence does not support the notion that inhaled methoxyflurane offered superior analgesic efficacy to SAT. CLINICAL TRIAL NUMBER: PROSPERO registration number CRD42020223000.