-
International Journal of Environmental... Feb 2023In neonatology, neonates have traditionally been considered incapable of feeling pain, due to the immaturity of their nervous system. Currently, there is sufficient... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
In neonatology, neonates have traditionally been considered incapable of feeling pain, due to the immaturity of their nervous system. Currently, there is sufficient information on the perception of pain in neonates; however, this treatment at this crucial stage for development requires a better approach. For this reason, the aim of this study was to analyse the efficacy of non-pharmacological analgesia interventions during heel prick, and to assess their effects on heart rate (HR), premature infant pain profile (PIPP) and O saturation. A systematic review and meta-analysis was performed following the guidelines of the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses (PRISMA), and the Cochrane collaboration handbook. The databases PubMed, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, Scopus, CINAHL and Science Direct were searched until the end of January 2022. The DerSimonian and Laird methods were used to estimate the effect size with a 95% confidence interval (CI95%). Effect size estimates were 0.05 (95% CI: -0.19, 0.29) for HR, -0.02 (95% CI: -0.24, 0.21) for PIPP scale, and -0.12 (95% CI: -0.29, 0.05) for O saturation. The non-pharmacological interventions analysed (breastfeeding, kangaroo-mother care method, oral sucrose and non-nutritive sucking) were not statistically significant in reducing neonatal pain, but did influence the decrease in pain score and a faster stabilisation of vital signs.
Topics: Humans; Child; Punctures; Kangaroo-Mother Care Method; Pain; Pain Management; Heart Rate
PubMed: 36833919
DOI: 10.3390/ijerph20043226 -
Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews Apr 2022This systematic review and meta-analysis aims to identify and quantify the current available evidence of hypnosis efficacy to manage pain in patients with chronic... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
This systematic review and meta-analysis aims to identify and quantify the current available evidence of hypnosis efficacy to manage pain in patients with chronic musculoskeletal and neuropathic pain. Randomized Control Trials (RCTs) with hypnosis and/or self-hypnosis treatment used to manage musculoskeletal and/or neuropathic chronic pain in adults and assessing pain intensity were included. Reviews, meta-analyses, non-randomized clinical trials, case reports and meeting abstracts were excluded. Five databases, up until May 13th 2021, were used to search for RCTs using hypnosis to manage chronic musculoskeletal and/or neuropathic pain. The protocol is registered on PROSPERO register (CRD42020180298) and no specific funding was received for this review. The risk of bias asessement was conducted according to the revised Cochrane risk of bias tool for randomized control trials (RoB 2.0). Nine eligible RCTs including a total of 530 participants were considered. The main analyses showed a moderate decrease in pain intensity (Hedge's g: -0.42; p = 0.025 after intervention, Hedge's g: -0.37; p = 0.027 after short-term follow-up) and pain interference (Hedge's g: -0.39; p = 0.029) following hypnosis compared to control interventions. A significant moderate to large effect size of hypnosis compared to controls was found for at 8 sessions or more (Hedge's g: -0.555; p = 0.034), compared to a small and not statistically significant effect for fewer than 8 sessions (Hedge's g: -0.299; p = 0.19). These findings suggest that a hypnosis treatment lasting a minimum of 8 sessions could offer an effective complementary approach to manage chronic musculoskeletal and neuropathic pain. Future research is needed to delineate the relevance of hypnosis in practice and its most efficient prescription.
Topics: Adult; Chronic Pain; Humans; Hypnosis; Neuralgia; Pain Measurement
PubMed: 35192910
DOI: 10.1016/j.neubiorev.2022.104591 -
American Journal of Orthodontics and... Nov 2016The emphasis on dental esthetics has increased in recent years. There are, however, differences in esthetic perceptions among professional and lay groups. The aim of... (Review)
Review
INTRODUCTION
The emphasis on dental esthetics has increased in recent years. There are, however, differences in esthetic perceptions among professional and lay groups. The aim of this comprehensive review was to update previous reviews and answer the following research question: Can lay thresholds for acceptance of smile esthetic anomalies be defined?
METHODS
A systematic search in the medical literature (PubMed, PMC, NLM, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Clinical trials, Web of Knowledge, Scopus, Google Scholar, and LILACs) was performed to identify all peer-reviewed articles reporting data regarding evaluations of laypeople's perceptions of dental esthetic factors.
RESULTS
Of the 6032 analyzed articles, 66 studies were selected for the final review process. Among the selected articles investigated perceptions of diastema, 15 analyzed modifications in tooth size and shape, 8 considered incisor positions, 15 evaluated midline discrepancies, 16 investigated buccal corridors, 26 analyzed gingival display and design, 3 considered lip height, and 20 investigated miscellaneous factors. Threshold values were identified for the following features: diastema (0-2 mm), tooth size and shape of incisor position, midline discrepancy (0-3 mm), buccal corridors (5-16 mm), gingival exposure (1.5-4 mm), occlusal canting (0°-4°), and overbite (2-5 mm). Furthermore, few other smile characteristics were found to be significantly associated with perception of smile aesthetics, even though any threshold could be detected.
CONCLUSIONS
On the basis of the obtained results, threshold values for the main features of smile and dental esthetics could be identified. Limitations of the present study were the heterogeneity of data which made it impossible to perform a meta-analysis, and the lack of information about sample selection and selective outcome reporting.
Topics: Attitude to Health; Esthetics, Dental; Facial Expression; Humans; Mouth; Tooth
PubMed: 27871700
DOI: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2016.06.022 -
Journal of Psychiatric Research Dec 2018Common mental health problems (CMHPs), such as depression, anxiety disorder, obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD), and post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) are... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Common mental health problems (CMHPs), such as depression, anxiety disorder, obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD), and post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) are internalizing disorders with high comorbidity. University and college students are under many stressors and transitional events, and students fall within the age range when CMHPs are at their developmental peak. Compared to the expanded effort to explore and treat CMHPs, there has been no a meta-analysis that comprehensively reviewed the interventions for CMHPs and examined the effects of interventions for CMHPs in college students. The objective of this review is to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) examining interventions for CMHPs among university and college students and to estimate their post-intervention effect size (ES), as well as follow-up ES, for depression, anxiety disorder, OCD and PTSD separately. Meta-analytic procedures were conducted in accordance with PRISMA guidelines. We reviewed 7768 abstracts from which 331 full-text articles were reviewed and 51 RCTs were included in the analysis. We found moderate effect sizes for both depression (Hedges' g = -0.60) and anxiety disorder (Hedges' g = -0.48). There was no evidence that existing interventions for OCD or PTSD were effective in this population. For interventions with high number of papers, we performed subgroup analysis and found that cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) and mindfulness-based interventions were effective for both depression and generalized anxiety disorder (GAD), and attention/perception modification was effective for GAD; other interventions (i.e. art, exercise and peer support) had the highest ES for both depression and GAD among university and college students.
Topics: Anxiety Disorders; Depressive Disorder; Humans; Psychotherapy; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Stress Disorders, Post-Traumatic; Students; Universities
PubMed: 30300732
DOI: 10.1016/j.jpsychires.2018.09.018 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Mar 2021There is a common perception that smoking generally helps people to manage stress, and may be a form of 'self-medication' in people with mental health... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
There is a common perception that smoking generally helps people to manage stress, and may be a form of 'self-medication' in people with mental health conditions. However, there are biologically plausible reasons why smoking may worsen mental health through neuroadaptations arising from chronic smoking, leading to frequent nicotine withdrawal symptoms (e.g. anxiety, depression, irritability), in which case smoking cessation may help to improve rather than worsen mental health.
OBJECTIVES
To examine the association between tobacco smoking cessation and change in mental health.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Tobacco Addiction Group's Specialised Register, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, and the trial registries clinicaltrials.gov and the International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, from 14 April 2012 to 07 January 2020. These were updated searches of a previously-conducted non-Cochrane review where searches were conducted from database inception to 13 April 2012. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included controlled before-after studies, including randomised controlled trials (RCTs) analysed by smoking status at follow-up, and longitudinal cohort studies. In order to be eligible for inclusion studies had to recruit adults who smoked tobacco, and assess whether they quit or continued smoking during the study. They also had to measure a mental health outcome at baseline and at least six weeks later.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We followed standard Cochrane methods for screening and data extraction. Our primary outcomes were change in depression symptoms, anxiety symptoms or mixed anxiety and depression symptoms between baseline and follow-up. Secondary outcomes included change in symptoms of stress, psychological quality of life, positive affect, and social impact or social quality of life, as well as new incidence of depression, anxiety, or mixed anxiety and depression disorders. We assessed the risk of bias for the primary outcomes using a modified ROBINS-I tool. For change in mental health outcomes, we calculated the pooled standardised mean difference (SMD) and 95% confidence interval (95% CI) for the difference in change in mental health from baseline to follow-up between those who had quit smoking and those who had continued to smoke. For the incidence of psychological disorders, we calculated odds ratios (ORs) and 95% CIs. For all meta-analyses we used a generic inverse variance random-effects model and quantified statistical heterogeneity using I. We conducted subgroup analyses to investigate any differences in associations between sub-populations, i.e. unselected people with mental illness, people with physical chronic diseases. We assessed the certainty of evidence for our primary outcomes (depression, anxiety, and mixed depression and anxiety) and our secondary social impact outcome using the eight GRADE considerations relevant to non-randomised studies (risk of bias, inconsistency, imprecision, indirectness, publication bias, magnitude of the effect, the influence of all plausible residual confounding, the presence of a dose-response gradient).
MAIN RESULTS
We included 102 studies representing over 169,500 participants. Sixty-two of these were identified in the updated search for this review and 40 were included in the original version of the review. Sixty-three studies provided data on change in mental health, 10 were included in meta-analyses of incidence of mental health disorders, and 31 were synthesised narratively. For all primary outcomes, smoking cessation was associated with an improvement in mental health symptoms compared with continuing to smoke: anxiety symptoms (SMD -0.28, 95% CI -0.43 to -0.13; 15 studies, 3141 participants; I = 69%; low-certainty evidence); depression symptoms: (SMD -0.30, 95% CI -0.39 to -0.21; 34 studies, 7156 participants; I = 69%' very low-certainty evidence); mixed anxiety and depression symptoms (SMD -0.31, 95% CI -0.40 to -0.22; 8 studies, 2829 participants; I = 0%; moderate certainty evidence). These findings were robust to preplanned sensitivity analyses, and subgroup analysis generally did not produce evidence of differences in the effect size among subpopulations or based on methodological characteristics. All studies were deemed to be at serious risk of bias due to possible time-varying confounding, and three studies measuring depression symptoms were judged to be at critical risk of bias overall. There was also some evidence of funnel plot asymmetry. For these reasons, we rated our certainty in the estimates for anxiety as low, for depression as very low, and for mixed anxiety and depression as moderate. For the secondary outcomes, smoking cessation was associated with an improvement in symptoms of stress (SMD -0.19, 95% CI -0.34 to -0.04; 4 studies, 1792 participants; I = 50%), positive affect (SMD 0.22, 95% CI 0.11 to 0.33; 13 studies, 4880 participants; I = 75%), and psychological quality of life (SMD 0.11, 95% CI 0.06 to 0.16; 19 studies, 18,034 participants; I = 42%). There was also evidence that smoking cessation was not associated with a reduction in social quality of life, with the confidence interval incorporating the possibility of a small improvement (SMD 0.03, 95% CI 0.00 to 0.06; 9 studies, 14,673 participants; I = 0%). The incidence of new mixed anxiety and depression was lower in people who stopped smoking compared with those who continued (OR 0.76, 95% CI 0.66 to 0.86; 3 studies, 8685 participants; I = 57%), as was the incidence of anxiety disorder (OR 0.61, 95% CI 0.34 to 1.12; 2 studies, 2293 participants; I = 46%). We deemed it inappropriate to present a pooled estimate for the incidence of new cases of clinical depression, as there was high statistical heterogeneity (I = 87%).
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Taken together, these data provide evidence that mental health does not worsen as a result of quitting smoking, and very low- to moderate-certainty evidence that smoking cessation is associated with small to moderate improvements in mental health. These improvements are seen in both unselected samples and in subpopulations, including people diagnosed with mental health conditions. Additional studies that use more advanced methods to overcome time-varying confounding would strengthen the evidence in this area.
Topics: Affect; Anxiety; Confidence Intervals; Controlled Before-After Studies; Depression; Humans; Incidence; Mental Disorders; Mental Health; Middle Aged; Quality of Life; Smoking; Smoking Cessation; Social Interaction; Stress, Psychological; Tobacco Use Cessation
PubMed: 33687070
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD013522.pub2 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Sep 2017Neuropathic pain, which is due to nerve disease or damage, represents a significant burden on people and society. It can be particularly unpleasant and achieving... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Neuropathic pain, which is due to nerve disease or damage, represents a significant burden on people and society. It can be particularly unpleasant and achieving adequate symptom control can be difficult. Non-pharmacological methods of treatment are often employed by people with neuropathic pain and may include transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS). This review supersedes one Cochrane Review 'Transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) for chronic pain' (Nnoaham 2014) and one withdrawn protocol 'Transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) for neuropathic pain in adults' (Claydon 2014). This review replaces the original protocol for neuropathic pain that was withdrawn.
OBJECTIVES
To determine the analgesic effectiveness of TENS versus placebo (sham) TENS, TENS versus usual care, TENS versus no treatment and TENS in addition to usual care versus usual care alone in the management of neuropathic pain in adults.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, AMED, CINAHL, Web of Science, PEDro, LILACS (up to September 2016) and various clinical trials registries. We also searched bibliographies of included studies for further relevant studies.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomised controlled trials where TENS was evaluated in the treatment of central or peripheral neuropathic pain. We included studies if they investigated the following: TENS versus placebo (sham) TENS, TENS versus usual care, TENS versus no treatment and TENS in addition to usual care versus usual care alone in the management of neuropathic pain in adults.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently screened all database search results and identified papers requiring full-text assessment. Subsequently, two review authors independently applied inclusion/exclusion criteria to these studies. The same review authors then independently extracted data, assessed for risk of bias using the Cochrane standard tool and rated the quality of evidence using GRADE.
MAIN RESULTS
We included 15 studies with 724 participants. We found a range of treatment protocols in terms of duration of care, TENS application times and intensity of application. Briefly, duration of care ranged from four days through to three months. Similarly, we found variation of TENS application times; from 15 minutes up to hourly sessions applied four times daily. We typically found intensity of TENS set to comfortable perceptible tingling with very few studies titrating the dose to maintain this perception. Of the comparisons, we had planned to explore, we were only able to undertake a quantitative synthesis for TENS versus sham TENS. Insufficient data and large diversity in the control conditions prevented us from undertaking a quantitative synthesis for the remaining comparisons.For TENS compared to sham TENS, five studies were suitable for pooled analysis. We described the remainder of the studies in narrative form. Overall, we judged 11 studies at high risk of bias, and four at unclear risk. Due to the small number of eligible studies, the high levels of risk of bias across the studies and small sample sizes, we rated the quality of the evidence as very low for the pooled analysis and very low individual GRADE rating of outcomes from single studies. For the individual studies discussed in narrative form, the methodological limitations, quality of reporting and heterogeneous nature of interventions compared did not allow for reliable overall estimates of the effect of TENS.Five studies (across various neuropathic conditions) were suitable for pooled analysis of TENS versus sham TENS investigating change in pain intensity using a visual analogue scale. We found a mean postintervention difference in effect size favouring TENS of -1.58 (95% confidence interval (CI) -2.08 to -1.09, P < 0.00001, n = 207, six comparisons from five studies) (very low quality evidence). There was no significant heterogeneity in this analysis. While this exceeded our prespecified minimally important difference for pain outcomes, we assessed the quality of evidence as very low meaning we have very little confidence in this effect estimate and the true effect is likely to be substantially different from that reported in this review. Only one study of these five investigated health related quality of life as an outcome meaning we were unable to report on this outcome in this comparison. Similarly, we were unable to report on global impression of change or changes in analgesic use in this pooled analysis.Ten small studies compared TENS to some form of usual care. However, there was great diversity in what constituted usual care, precluding pooling of data. Most of these studies found either no difference in pain outcomes between TENS versus other active treatments or favoured the comparator intervention (very low quality evidence). We were unable to report on other primary and secondary outcomes in these single trials (health-related quality of life, global impression of change and changes in analgesic use).Of the 15 included studies, three reported adverse events which were minor and limited to 'skin irritation' at or around the site of electrode placement (very low quality evidence). Three studies reported no adverse events while the remainder did not report any detail with regard adverse events.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
In this review, we reported on the comparison between TENS and sham TENS. The quality of the evidence was very low meaning we were unable to confidently state whether TENS is effective for pain control in people with neuropathic pain. The very low quality of evidence means we have very limited confidence in the effect estimate reported; the true effect is likely to be substantially different. We make recommendations with respect to future TENS study designs which may meaningfully reduce the uncertainty relating to the effectiveness of this treatment modality.
Topics: Adult; Humans; Neuralgia; Pain Measurement; Quality of Life; Transcutaneous Electric Nerve Stimulation
PubMed: 28905362
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD011976.pub2 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... May 2020Stroke is caused by the interruption of blood flow to the brain (ischemic stroke) or the rupture of blood vessels within the brain (hemorrhagic stroke) and may lead to... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Stroke is caused by the interruption of blood flow to the brain (ischemic stroke) or the rupture of blood vessels within the brain (hemorrhagic stroke) and may lead to changes in perception, cognition, mood, speech, health-related quality of life, and function, such as difficulty walking and using the arm. Activity limitations (decreased function) of the upper extremity are a common finding for individuals living with stroke. Mental practice (MP) is a training method that uses cognitive rehearsal of activities to improve performance of those activities.
OBJECTIVES
To determine whether MP improves outcomes of upper extremity rehabilitation for individuals living with the effects of stroke. In particular, we sought to (1) determine the effects of MP on upper extremity activity, upper extremity impairment, activities of daily living, health-related quality of life, economic costs, and adverse effects; and (2) explore whether effects differed according to (a) the time post stroke at which MP was delivered, (b) the dose of MP provided, or (c) the type of comparison performed.
SEARCH METHODS
We last searched the Cochrane Stroke Group Trials Register on September 17, 2019. On September 3, 2019, we searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (the Cochrane Library), MEDLINE, Embase, the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), PsycINFO, Scopus, Web of Science, the Physiotherapy Evidence Database (PEDro), and REHABDATA. On October 2, 2019, we searched ClinicalTrials.gov and the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform. We reviewed the reference lists of included studies.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of adult participants with stroke who had deficits in upper extremity function (called upper extremity activity).
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors screened titles and abstracts of the citations produced by the literature search and excluded obviously irrelevant studies. We obtained the full text of all remaining studies, and both review authors then independently selected trials for inclusion. We combined studies when the review produced a minimum of two trials employing a particular intervention strategy and a common outcome. We considered the primary outcome to be the ability of the arm to be used for appropriate tasks, called upper extremity activity. Secondary outcomes included upper extremity impairment (such as quality of movement, range of motion, tone, presence of synergistic movement), activities of daily living (ADLs), health-related quality of life (HRQL), economic costs, and adverse events. We assessed risk of bias in the included studies and applied GRADE to assess the certainty of the evidence. We completed subgroup analyses for time since stroke, dosage of MP, type of comparison, and type of arm activity outcome measure.
MAIN RESULTS
We included 25 studies involving 676 participants from nine countries. For the comparison of MP in addition to other treatment versus the other treatment, MP in combination with other treatment appears more effective in improving upper extremity activity than the other treatment without MP (standardized mean difference [SMD] 0.66, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.39 to 0.94; I² = 39%; 15 studies; 397 participants); the GRADE certainty of evidence score was moderate based on risk of bias for the upper extremity activity outcome. For upper extremity impairment, results were as follows: SMD 0.59, 95% CI 0.30 to 0.87; I² = 43%; 15 studies; 397 participants, with a GRADE score of moderate, based on risk of bias. For ADLs, results were as follows: SMD 0.08, 95% CI -0.24 to 0.39; I² = 0%; 4 studies; 157 participants; the GRADE score was low due to risk of bias and small sample size. For the comparison of MP versus conventional treatment, the only outcome with available data to combine (3 studies; 50 participants) was upper extremity impairment (SMD 0.34, 95% CI -0.33 to 1.00; I² = 21%); GRADE for the impairment outcome in this comparison was low due to risk of bias and small sample size. Subgroup analyses of time post stroke, dosage of MP, or comparison type for the MP in combination with other rehabilitation treatment versus the other treatment comparison showed no differences. The secondary outcome of health-related quality of life was reported in only one study, and no study noted the outcomes of economic costs and adverse events.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Moderate-certainty evidence shows that MP in addition to other treatment versus the other treatment appears to be beneficial in improving upper extremity activity. Moderate-certainty evidence also shows that MP in addition to other treatment versus the other treatment appears to be beneficial in improving upper extremity impairment after stroke. Low-certainty evidence suggests that ADLs may not be improved with MP in addition to other treatment versus the other treatment. Low-certainty evidence also suggests that MP versus conventional treatment may not improve upper extremity impairment. Further study is required to evaluate effects of MP on time post stroke, the volume of MP required to affect outcomes, and whether improvement is maintained over the long term.
Topics: Arm; Combined Modality Therapy; Female; Humans; Imagination; Male; Paresis; Practice, Psychological; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Recovery of Function; Stroke; Stroke Rehabilitation
PubMed: 32449959
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD005950.pub5 -
Bulletin of Emergency and Trauma 2023To estimate the rate of driving hazard perception (HP), explicate the content of HP and determine its components. (Review)
Review
OBJECTIVE
To estimate the rate of driving hazard perception (HP), explicate the content of HP and determine its components.
METHODS
The present study is a systematic review and a meta-analysis which is carried out to gather data, to search Science Direct, PubMed, Scopus, PROQUEST, web of knowledge databases, Google scholar search engine and also to search manually from January 2000 to September 2021 with using related keywords. EndNote X20 software was used to manage and screening studies. Stata16 was used for meta-analysis. Thematic content analysis was used to analyze the findings. The entire review process was conducted by two authors, and disputes were referred to a third person.
RESULTS
Out of the 1167 founded articles, 50 were finally included in the study. According to 10 imported papers for meta-analysis includes 2770 sample size, general HP of drivers is estimated 3.33 [4.04-2.62 with CI 95, I2=89.72]. Also, HP for experienced and beginner drivers is estimated 3.26 [2.23-4.26 with CI 95, I2=89.47] and 3.42 [2.41-4.43 with CI 95, I2=89.68], respectively. Also, in the data meta-synthesis, 28 definitions of HP and 6 main components are identified to evaluate HP using thematic content analysis.
CONCLUSION
In this study, obtained results show that all people need constant and gradual training at all levels. A factor that can be effective to improve drivers' HP is to make drivers to take training courses and to pass standard tests at the time of obtaining driving license.
PubMed: 36818054
DOI: 10.30476/BEAT.2023.95410.1356 -
Brain & Spine 2022Smoking is a major cause of morbidity and mortality worldwide and is responsible for the death of more than 8 million people per year globally. Through a systematic... (Review)
Review
Smoking is a major cause of morbidity and mortality worldwide and is responsible for the death of more than 8 million people per year globally. Through a systematic literature review, we aim to review the harmful effects of tobacco smoking on degenerative spinal diseases (DSD). DSD is a debilitating disease and there is a need to identify if smoking can be an attributable contender for the occurrence of this disease, as it can open up avenues for therapeutic options. Sources such as PubMed and Embase were used to review literature, maintaining tobacco smoking and spinal diseases as inclusion factors, excluding any article that did not explore this relationship. Risk of bias was assessed using analysis of results, sample size and methods and limitations. Upon review of the literature, tobacco smoking was found to be a major risk factor for the occurrence of DSDs, particularly lumbar spinal diseases. Smokers also experienced a greater need for surgery and greater postoperative wound healing complications, increased pain perception, delay in recovery and decreased satisfaction after receiving surgery. These effects were noted along the entire spine. Many mechanisms of action have been identified in the literature that provide plausible pictures of how smoking leads to spinal degeneration, exploring possible primary targets which can open up opportunities to develop potential therapeutic agents. More studies on cervical and thoracic spinal degeneration would be beneficial in identifying the effect of nicotine on these spinal levels. Some limitations included insufficient sample size, inconclusive evidence and lack of sufficient repeat studies. However, there appears to be a sufficient amount of research on smoking directly contributing to lumbar spinal pathology.
PubMed: 36248118
DOI: 10.1016/j.bas.2022.100916 -
Clinical Oral Investigations Dec 2023The aim of this systematic review was to compare the expectation and perception of pain reported by patients before and after the installation of interradicular... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
OBJECTIVES
The aim of this systematic review was to compare the expectation and perception of pain reported by patients before and after the installation of interradicular mini-implants.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Electronic search was performed in six databases. Inclusion criteria were randomized controlled trials (RCTs) or non-randomized controlled clinical trials (nRCTs); studies using mini-implants in the interradicular region; assessment of pain intensity by visual analogue or numerical scale. The risk of bias assessment was based on the Rob 2 tool and Robins-I.
RESULTS
A total of 1566 articles were retrieved, and 21 met the eligibility criteria. Six were classified as high risk, one as critical and the other one as uncertain, according to the Robins-I tool. In articles evaluated by the Rob2 tool, ten were classified as serious risk and three as moderate risk. A meta-analysis was also performed. Weighted means were calculated among the studies using the random-effects model and forest plots were generated. Heterogeneity was assessed through the Q test and I statistics. It was observed, with moderate evidence, that on a scale of 0 to 10, the pain expectation (effect size 4.75) is higher than that effectively pain generated by the procedure (effect size 1.94).
CONCLUSION
Pain expectation was greater than that actually generated by the procedure, being almost non-existent 7 days postoperatively.
CLINICAL RELEVANCE
This study may help the clinician to reassure the patient regarding the sensations that could be experienced during and after the installation.
Topics: Humans; Motivation; Dental Implants; Pain; Pain Perception
PubMed: 37864604
DOI: 10.1007/s00784-023-05311-9