-
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Mar 2019Breast cancer is the most common cancer in women. Diagnosis and treatment may drastically affect quality of life, causing symptoms such as sleep disorders, depression... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Breast cancer is the most common cancer in women. Diagnosis and treatment may drastically affect quality of life, causing symptoms such as sleep disorders, depression and anxiety. Mindfulness-based stress reduction (MBSR) is a programme that aims to reduce stress by developing mindfulness, meaning a non-judgmental, accepting moment-by-moment awareness. MBSR seems to benefit patients with mood disorders and chronic pain, and it may also benefit women with breast cancer.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the effects of mindfulness-based stress reduction (MBSR) in women diagnosed with breast cancer.
SEARCH METHODS
In April 2018, we conducted a comprehensive electronic search for studies of MBSR in women with breast cancer, in the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, Embase, and two trial registries (World Health Organization's International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (WHO ICTRP) and ClinicalTrials.gov). We also handsearched relevant conference proceedings.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomised clinical trials (RCTs) comparing MBSR versus no intervention in women with breast cancer.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. Using a standardised data form, the review authors extracted data in duplicate on methodological quality, participants, interventions and outcomes of interest (quality of life, fatigue, depression, anxiety, quality of sleep, overall survival and adverse events). For outcomes assessed with the same instrument, we used the mean difference (MD) as a summary statistic for meta-analysis; for those assessed with different instruments, we used the standardised mean difference (SMD). The effect of MBSR was assessed in the short term (end of intervention), medium term (up to 6 months after intervention) and long term (up to 24 months after intervention).
MAIN RESULTS
Fourteen RCTs fulfilled our inclusion criteria, with most studies reporting that they included women with early breast cancer. Ten RCTs involving 1571 participants were eligible for meta-analysis, while four studies involving 185 participants did not report usable results. Queries to the authors of these four studies were unsuccessful. All studies were at high risk of performance and detection bias since participants could not be blinded, and only 3 of 14 studies were at low risk of selection bias. Eight of 10 studies included in the meta-analysis recruited participants with early breast cancer (the remaining 2 trials did not restrict inclusion to a certain cancer type). Most trials considered only women who had completed cancer treatment.MBSR may improve quality of life slightly at the end of the intervention (based on low-certainty evidence from three studies with a total of 339 participants) but may result in little to no difference up to 6 months (based on low-certainty evidence from three studies involving 428 participants). Long-term data on quality of life (up to two years after completing MBSR) were available for one study in 97 participants (MD 0.00 on questionnaire FACT-B, 95% CI -5.82 to 5.82; low-certainty evidence).In the short term, MBSR probably reduces fatigue (SMD -0.50, 95% CI -0.86 to -0.14; moderate-certainty evidence; 5 studies; 693 participants). It also probably slightly reduces anxiety (SMD -0.29, 95% CI -0.50 to -0.08; moderate-certainty evidence; 6 studies; 749 participants), and it reduces depression (SMD -0.54, 95% CI -0.86 to -0.22; high-certainty evidence; 6 studies; 745 participants). It probably slightly improves quality of sleep (SMD -0.38, 95% CI -0.79 to 0.04; moderate-certainty evidence; 4 studies; 475 participants). However, these confidence intervals (except for short-term depression) are compatible with both an improvement and little to no difference.In the medium term, MBSR probably results in little to no difference in medium-term fatigue (SMD -0.31, 95% CI -0.84 to 0.23; moderate-certainty evidence; 4 studies; 607 participants). The intervention probably slightly reduces anxiety (SMD -0.28, 95% CI -0.49 to -0.07; moderate-certainty evidence; 7 studies; 1094 participants), depression (SMD -0.32, 95% CI -0.58 to -0.06; moderate-certainty evidence; 7 studies; 1097 participants) and slightly improves quality of sleep (SMD -0.27, 95% CI -0.63 to 0.08; moderate-certainty evidence; 4 studies; 654 participants). However, these confidence intervals are compatible with both an improvement and little to no difference.In the long term, moderate-certainty evidence shows that MBSR probably results in little to no difference in anxiety (SMD -0.09, 95% CI -0.35 to 0.16; 2 studies; 360 participants) or depression (SMD -0.17, 95% CI -0.40 to 0.05; 2 studies; 352 participants). No long-term data were available for fatigue or quality of sleep.No study reported data on survival or adverse events.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
MBSR may improve quality of life slightly at the end of the intervention but may result in little to no difference later on. MBSR probably slightly reduces anxiety, depression and slightly improves quality of sleep at both the end of the intervention and up to six months later. A beneficial effect on fatigue was apparent at the end of the intervention but not up to six months later. Up to two years after the intervention, MBSR probably results in little to no difference in anxiety and depression; there were no data available for fatigue or quality of sleep.
Topics: Anxiety; Breast Neoplasms; Depression; Fatigue; Female; Humans; Mindfulness; Quality of Life; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Sleep Wake Disorders; Stress, Psychological; Time Factors
PubMed: 30916356
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD011518.pub2 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Jan 2019Although people with haematological malignancies have to endure long phases of therapy and immobility, which is known to diminish their physical performance level, the... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Although people with haematological malignancies have to endure long phases of therapy and immobility, which is known to diminish their physical performance level, the advice to rest and avoid intensive exercises is still common practice. This recommendation is partly due to the severe anaemia and thrombocytopenia from which many patients suffer. The inability to perform activities of daily living restricts them, diminishes their quality of life and can influence medical therapy.
OBJECTIVES
In this update of the original review (published in 2014) our main objective was to re-evaluate the efficacy, safety and feasibility of aerobic physical exercise for adults suffering from haematological malignancies considering the current state of knowledge.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (the Cochrane Library, 2018, Issue 7) and MEDLINE (1950 to July 2018) trials registries (ISRCTN, EU clinical trials register and clinicaltrials.gov) and conference proceedings. We did not apply any language restrictions. Two review authors independently screened search results, disagreements were solved by discussion.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing an aerobic physical exercise intervention, intending to improve the oxygen system, in addition to standard care with standard care only for adults suffering from haematological malignancies. We also included studies that evaluated aerobic exercise in addition to strength training. We excluded studies that investigated the effect of training programmes that were composed of yoga, tai chi chuan, qigong or similar types of exercise. We also excluded studies exploring the influence of strength training without additive aerobic exercise as well as studies assessing outcomes without any clinical impact.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently screened search results, extracted data and assessed the quality of trials. We used risk ratios (RRs) for adverse events, mortality and 100-day survival, standardised mean differences (SMD) for quality of life (QoL), fatigue, and physical performance, and mean differences (MD) for anthropometric measurements.
MAIN RESULTS
In this update, nine trials could be added to the nine trials of the first version of the review, thus we included eighteen RCTs involving 1892 participants. Two of these studies (65 participants) did not provide data for our key outcomes (they analysed laboratory values only) and one study (40 patients) could not be included in the meta-analyses, as results were presented as changes scores only and not as endpoint scores. One trial (17 patients) did not report standard errors and could also not be included in meta-analyses. The overall potential risk of bias in the included trials is unclear, due to poor reporting.The majority of participants suffered from acute lymphoblastic leukaemia (ALL), acute myeloid leukaemia (AML), malignant lymphoma and multiple myeloma, and eight trials randomised people receiving stem cell transplantation. Mostly, the exercise intervention consisted of various walking intervention programmes with different duration and intensity levels.Our primary endpoint overall survival (OS) was only reported in one of these studies. The study authors found no evidence for a difference between both arms (RR = 0.67; P = 0.112). Six trials (one trial with four arms, analysed as two sub-studies) reported numbers of deceased participants during the course of the study or during the first 100 to 180 days. For the outcome mortality, there is no evidence for a difference between participants exercising and those in the control group (RR 1.10; 95% CI 0.79 to 1.52; P = 0.59; 1172 participants, low-certainty evidence).For the following outcomes, higher numbers indicate better outcomes, with 1 being the best result for the standardised mean differences. Eight studies analysed the influence of exercise intervention on QoL. It remains unclear, whether physical exercise improves QoL (SMD 0.11; 95% CI -0.03 to 0.24; 1259 participants, low-certainty evidence). There is also no evidence for a difference for the subscales physical functioning (SMD 0.15; 95% CI -0.01 to 0.32; 8 trials, 1329 participants, low-certainty evidence) and anxiety (SMD 0.03; 95% CI -0.30 to 0.36; 6 trials, 445 participants, very low-certainty evidence). Depression might slightly be improved by exercising (SMD 0.19; 95% CI 0.0 to 0.38; 6 trials, 445 participants, low-certainty evidence). There is moderate-certainty evidence that exercise probably improves fatigue (SMD 0.31; 95% CI 0.13 to 0.48; 9 trials, 826 patients).Six trials (435 participants) investigated serious adverse events. We are very uncertain, whether additional exercise leads to more serious adverse events (RR 1.39; 95% CI 0.94 to 2.06), based on very low-certainty evidence.In addition, we are aware of four ongoing trials. However, none of these trials stated, how many patients they will recruit and when the studies will be completed, thus, potential influence of these trials for the current analyses remains unclear.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Eighteen, mostly small RCTs did not identify evidence for a difference in terms of mortality. Physical exercise added to standard care might improve fatigue and depression. Currently, there is inconclusive evidence regarding QoL, physical functioning, anxiety and SAEs .We need further trials with more participants and longer follow-up periods to evaluate the effects of exercise intervention for people suffering from haematological malignancies. To enhance comparability of study data, development and implementation of core sets of measuring devices would be helpful.
Topics: Adult; Exercise; Exercise Tolerance; Feasibility Studies; Female; Hematologic Neoplasms; Humans; Male; Physical Conditioning, Human; Qigong; Quality of Life; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Resistance Training; Tai Ji; Yoga
PubMed: 30702150
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD009075.pub3 -
The Journal of Nutrition Nov 2021Maternal nutrition during pregnancy and lactation has profound effects on the development and lifelong health of the child. Long-chain PUFAs are particularly important...
BACKGROUND
Maternal nutrition during pregnancy and lactation has profound effects on the development and lifelong health of the child. Long-chain PUFAs are particularly important for myelination and the development of vision during the perinatal period.
OBJECTIVES
We conducted a systematic review to examine the relationship between supplementation with omega-3 fatty acids during pregnancy and/or lactation and neurodevelopment in children, to inform the Scientific Report of the 2020 Dietary Guidelines Advisory Committee.
METHODS
We identified articles on omega-3 fatty acid supplementation in pregnant and lactating women that included measures of neurodevelopment in their children (0-18 y) by searching PubMed, CENTRAL, Embase, and CINAHL Plus. After dual screening articles for inclusion, we qualitatively synthesized and graded the strength of evidence using pre-established criteria for assessing risk of bias, consistency, directness, precision, and generalizability.
RESULTS
We included 33 articles from 15 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and 1 prospective cohort study. Of the 8 RCTs that delivered omega-3 fatty acid dietary supplements during pregnancy alone (200-2200 mg/d DHA and 0-1100 mg/d EPA for approximately 20 wk), 5 studies reported ≥1 finding that supplementation improved measures of cognitive development in the infant or child by 6%-11% (P < 0.05), but all 8 studies also reported ≥1 nonsignificant (P > 0.05) result. There was inconsistent or insufficient evidence for other outcomes (language, social-emotional, physical, motor, or visual development; academic performance; risks of attention deficit disorder, attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder, autism spectrum disorder, anxiety, or depression) and for supplementation during lactation or both pregnancy and lactation. Populations with a lower socioeconomic status and adolescents were underrepresented and studies lacked racial and ethnic diversity.
CONCLUSIONS
Limited evidence suggests that omega-3 fatty acid supplementation during pregnancy may result in favorable cognitive development in the child. There was insufficient evidence to evaluate the effects of omega-3 fatty acid supplementation during pregnancy and/or lactation on other developmental outcomes.
Topics: Adolescent; Breast Feeding; Child; Dietary Supplements; Fatty Acids, Omega-3; Fatty Acids, Unsaturated; Female; Humans; Infant; Lactation; Pregnancy
PubMed: 34383914
DOI: 10.1093/jn/nxab238 -
Frontiers in Psychiatry 2023Stress in the healthcare environment causes negative effects in nurses such as burnout, anxiety, and depression. The COVID-19 pandemic has resulted in increased pressure...
BACKGROUND
Stress in the healthcare environment causes negative effects in nurses such as burnout, anxiety, and depression. The COVID-19 pandemic has resulted in increased pressure on medical staff globally, highlighting the potential benefits of mindfulness-based interventions in reducing nurses' stress levels. Despite numerous studies exploring the effect of mindfulness-based training on nurses, the results remain inconclusive.
OBJECTIVE
To systematically evaluate the impact of mindfulness training on nurse's performance and increase the certainty of existing evidence.
METHODS
This study searched various databases, including EBSCO, Embase, Web of Science, PubMed, ProQuest, Scopus, Cochrane Online Library, Wanfang, SinoMed, CNKI, and VIP, for randomized controlled trials on the impact of mindfulness-based interventions for nurses up until 02 December 2022. Two investigators independently screened and extracted data from the articles, while also assessing the risk of bias. The data was analyzed using RevMan 5.4 software.
RESULTS
This review identified 15 studies out of the 2,171 records retrieved, consisting of a total of 1,165 participants who were randomized. Post-intervention analysis provided very-low certainty evidence of moderate effectiveness of mindfulness-based training in reducing stress [standardized mean difference (SMD) = -0.81; 95% confidence interval (CI) = -1.11 to -0.52], with no significant effect on anxiety (SMD = -0.30; 95% CI = -0.72 to 0.13) or depression (SMD = -0.24; 95% CI = -0.55 to 0.07). However, the training was effective in reducing burnout, as demonstrated by the lower scores for emotional exhaustion (SMD = -4.27; 95% CI = -5.94 to -2.59) and depersonalization (SMD = -2.89; 95% CI = -4.24 to -1.54) and higher scores for personal accomplishment (SMD = 2.81; 95% CI = 0.12 to 5.50). There was a sustained improvement in stress levels in the short-term (≤3 months), with delayed benefits for burnout. However, only two studies were available for later follow-ups, and there was no significant evidence of long-term effects.
CONCLUSION
Mindfulness-based training may be a viable intervention for improving the psychological wellbeing of nurses, including reducing stress, burnout.
SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION
https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/, identifier CRD42023387081.
PubMed: 37599884
DOI: 10.3389/fpsyt.2023.1218340 -
Frontiers in Psychology 2021Eye Movement Desensitisation and Reprocessing (EMDR) is a treatment for post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). The technique is known to facilitate reprocessing of...
Eye Movement Desensitisation and Reprocessing (EMDR) is a treatment for post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). The technique is known to facilitate reprocessing of maladaptive memories that are thought to be central to this pathology. Here we investigate if EMDR therapy can be used in other conditions. We conducted a systematic literature search on PubMed, ScienceDirect, Scopus, and Web of Science. We searched for published empirical findings on EMDR, excluding those centred on trauma and PTSD, published up to 2020. The results were classified by psychiatric categories. Ninety articles met our research criteria. A positive effect was reported in numerous pathological situations, namely in addictions, somatoform disorders, sexual dysfunction, eating disorders, disorders of adult personality, mood disorders, reaction to severe stress, anxiety disorders, performance anxiety, Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder (OCD), pain, neurodegenerative disorders, mental disorders of childhood and adolescence, and sleep. Some studies reported that EMDR was successful in usually uncooperative (e.g., Dementia) or unproductive cases (e.g., aphasia). Moreover, in some severe medical conditions, when psychological distress was an obstacle, EMDR allowed the continuation of treatment-as-usual. Furthermore, the effects observed in non-pathological situations invite for translational research. Despite a generally positive outlook of EMDR as an alternative treatment option, more methodologically rigorous studies are needed. We discuss the advantages and limitations and possible implications for the hypothesised mechanisms of action.
PubMed: 34616328
DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2021.644369 -
Frontiers in Psychology 2022Since the turn of the century, Emotional Freedom Techniques (EFT) has come into widespread use in medical and psychological treatment settings. It is also used as...
BACKGROUND
Since the turn of the century, Emotional Freedom Techniques (EFT) has come into widespread use in medical and psychological treatment settings. It is also used as self-help by tens of millions of people each year. Clinical EFT, the manualized form of the method, has been validated as an "evidence-based" practice using criteria published by the American Psychological Association (APA) Division 12 Task Force on Empirically Validated Therapies. Its three essential ingredients are exposure, cognitive framing, and acupressure.
OBJECTIVES
In 2013 we published a paper defining Clinical EFT and reviewing published research. It has been viewed or downloaded over 36,000 times, indicating widespread interest in this treatment modality. Here we update our findings based on subsequently published literature and propose directions for future research.
METHOD
We performed a systematic review of the literature to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and meta-analyses. Retrieval of 4,167 results resulted in the identification of 56 RCTs ( = 2,013), 41 of which were published subsequent to our earlier review, as well as eight meta-analyses.
RESULTS
RCTs have found EFT treatment to be effective for (a) psychological conditions such as anxiety, depression, phobias, and posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD); (b) physiological issues such as pain, insomnia, and autoimmune conditions; (c) professional and sports performance; and (d) biological markers of stress. Meta-analyses evaluating the effect of EFT treatment have found it to be "moderate" to "large." Successful independent replication studies have been carried out for anxiety, depression, PTSD, phobias, sports performance, and cortisol levels. We outline the next steps in EFT research. These include determining its impact on cancer, heart disease, diabetes, and cognitive impairment; analysis of the large-scale datasets made possible by mobile apps; and delivery through channels such as virtual practitioner sessions, artificial intelligence agents, online courses, apps, virtual reality platforms, and standardized group therapy.
CONCLUSIONS
Subsequent research has confirmed the conclusions of earlier studies. These find Clinical EFT to be efficacious for a range of psychological and physiological conditions. Comparatively few treatment sessions are required, treatment is effective whether delivered in person or virtually, and symptom improvements persist over time. Treatment is associated with measurable biological effects in the dimensions of gene expression, brain synchrony, hormonal synthesis, and a wide range of biomarkers. Clinical EFT is a stable and mature method with an extensive evidence base. Its use in primary care settings as a safe, rapid, reliable, and effective treatment for both psychological and medical diagnoses continues to grow.
PubMed: 36438382
DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2022.951451 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Nov 2018The intensive care unit (ICU) stay has been linked with a number of physical and psychological sequelae, known collectively as post-intensive care syndrome (PICS).... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
The intensive care unit (ICU) stay has been linked with a number of physical and psychological sequelae, known collectively as post-intensive care syndrome (PICS). Specific ICU follow-up services are relatively recent developments in health systems, and may have the potential to address PICS through targeting unmet health needs arising from the experience of the ICU stay. There is currently no single accepted model of follow-up service and current aftercare programmes encompass a variety of interventions and materials. There is uncertain evidence about whether follow-up services effectively address PICS, and this review assesses this.
OBJECTIVES
Our main objective was to assess the effectiveness of follow-up services for ICU survivors that aim to identify and address unmet health needs related to the ICU period. We aimed to assess effectiveness in relation to health-related quality of life (HRQoL), mortality, depression and anxiety, post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), physical function, cognitive function, ability to return to work or education and adverse effects.Our secondary objectives were to examine different models of follow-up services. We aimed to explore: the effectiveness of service organisation (physician- versus nurse-led, face-to-face versus remote, timing of follow-up service); differences related to country (high-income versus low- and middle-income countries); and effect of delirium, which can subsequently affect cognitive function, and the effect of follow-up services may differ for these participants.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase and CINAHL on 7 November 2017. We searched clinical trials registers for ongoing studies, and conducted backward and forward citation searching of relevant articles.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomised and non-randomised studies with adult participants, who had been discharged from hospital following an ICU stay. We included studies that compared an ICU follow-up service using a structured programme and co-ordinated by a healthcare professional versus no follow-up service or standard care.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently assessed studies for inclusion, extracted data, assessed risk of bias, and synthesised findings. We used the GRADE approach to assess the certainty of the evidence.
MAIN RESULTS
We included five studies (four randomised studies; one non-randomised study), for a total of 1707 participants who were ICU survivors with a range of illness severities and conditions. Follow-up services were led by nurses in four studies or a multidisciplinary team in one study. They included face-to-face consultations at home or in a clinic, or telephone consultations or both. Each study included at least one consultation (weekly, monthly, or six-monthly), and two studies had up to eight consultations. Although the design of follow-up service consultations differed in each study, we noted that each service included assessment of participants' needs with referrals to specialist support if required.It was not feasible to blind healthcare professionals or participants to the intervention and we did not know whether this may have introduced performance bias. We noted baseline differences (two studies), and services included additional resources (two studies), which may have influenced results, and one non-randomised study had high risk of selection bias.We did not combine data from randomised studies with data from one non-randomised study. Follow-up services for improving long-term outcomes in ICU survivors may make little or no difference to HRQoL at 12 months (standardised mean difference (SMD) -0.0, 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.1 to 0.1; 1 study; 286 participants; low-certainty evidence). We found moderate-certainty evidence from five studies that they probably also make little or no difference to all-cause mortality up to 12 months after ICU discharge (RR 0.96, 95% CI 0.76 to 1.22; 4 studies; 1289 participants; and in one non-randomised study 79/259 deaths in the intervention group, and 46/151 in the control group) and low-certainty evidence from four studies that they may make little or no difference to PTSD (SMD -0.05, 95% CI -0.19 to 0.10, 703 participants, 3 studies; and one non-randomised study reported less chance of PTSD when a follow-up service was used).It is uncertain whether using a follow-up service reduces depression and anxiety (3 studies; 843 participants), physical function (4 studies; 1297 participants), cognitive function (4 studies; 1297 participants), or increases the ability to return to work or education (1 study; 386 participants), because the certainty of this evidence is very low. No studies measured adverse effects.We could not assess our secondary objectives because we found insufficient studies to justify subgroup analysis.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
We found insufficient evidence, from a limited number of studies, to determine whether ICU follow-up services are effective in identifying and addressing the unmet health needs of ICU survivors. We found five ongoing studies which are not included in this review; these ongoing studies may increase our certainty in the effect in future updates. Because of limited data, we were unable to explore whether one design of follow-up service is preferable to another, or whether a service is more effective for some people than others, and we anticipate that future studies may also vary in design. We propose that future studies are designed with robust methods (for example randomised studies are preferable) and consider only one variable (the follow-up service) compared to standard care; this would increase confidence that the effect is due to the follow-up service rather than concomitant therapies.
Topics: Anxiety; Cognition; Continuity of Patient Care; Critical Care; Depression; Humans; Intensive Care Units; Needs Assessment; Non-Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Physical Functional Performance; Practice Patterns, Nurses'; Program Evaluation; Quality of Life; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Return to Work; Stress Disorders, Post-Traumatic; Survivors; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 30388297
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD012701.pub2 -
British Journal of Sports Medicine May 2016The prime focus of research on sports injury has been on physical factors. This is despite our understanding that when an athlete sustains an injury it has psychosocial... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
The prime focus of research on sports injury has been on physical factors. This is despite our understanding that when an athlete sustains an injury it has psychosocial as well as physical impacts. Psychosocial factors have been suggested as prognostic influences on the outcomes of rehabilitation. The aim of this work was to address the question: are psychosocial factors associated with sports injury rehabilitation outcomes in competitive athletes?
STUDY DESIGN
Mixed studies systematic review (PROSPERO reg.CRD42014008667).
METHOD
Electronic database and bibliographic searching was undertaken from the earliest entry until 1 June 2015. Studies that included injured competitive athletes, psychosocial factors and a sports injury rehabilitation outcome were reviewed by the authors. A quality appraisal of the studies was undertaken to establish the risk of reporting bias.
RESULTS
25 studies were evaluated that included 942 injured competitive athletes were appraised and synthesised. Twenty studies had not been included in previous reviews. The mean methodological quality of the studies was 59% (moderate risk of reporting bias). Convergent thematic analysis uncovered three core themes across the studies: (1) emotion associated with rehabilitation outcomes; (2) cognitions associated with rehabilitation outcomes; and (3) behaviours associated with rehabilitation outcomes. Injury and performance-related fears, anxiety and confidence were associated with rehabilitation outcomes. There is gender-related, age-related and injury-related bias in the reviewed literature.
CONCLUSIONS
Psychosocial factors were associated with a range of sports injury rehabilitation outcomes. Practitioners need to recognise that an injured athlete's thoughts, feelings and actions may influence the outcome of rehabilitation.
Topics: Age Factors; Anxiety; Athletes; Athletic Injuries; Bias; Cognition; Emotions; Fear; Female; Humans; Male; Sex Factors; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 26887414
DOI: 10.1136/bjsports-2015-094850 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Jun 2019Decreased exercise capacity and health-related quality of life (HRQoL) are common in people following lung resection for non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Exercise... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Decreased exercise capacity and health-related quality of life (HRQoL) are common in people following lung resection for non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Exercise training has been demonstrated to confer gains in exercise capacity and HRQoL for people with a range of chronic conditions, including chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and heart failure, as well as in people with prostate and breast cancer. A programme of exercise training may also confer gains in these outcomes for people following lung resection for NSCLC. This systematic review updates our 2013 systematic review.
OBJECTIVES
The primary aim of this review was to determine the effects of exercise training on exercise capacity and adverse events in people following lung resection (with or without chemotherapy) for NSCLC. The secondary aims were to determine the effects of exercise training on other outcomes such as HRQoL, force-generating capacity of peripheral muscles, pressure-generating capacity of the respiratory muscles, dyspnoea and fatigue, feelings of anxiety and depression, lung function, and mortality.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched for additional randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (the Cochrane Library 2019, Issue 2 of 12), MEDLINE (via PubMed) (2013 to February 2019), Embase (via Ovid) (2013 to February 2019), SciELO (The Scientific Electronic Library Online) (2013 to February 2019), and PEDro (Physiotherapy Evidence Database) (2013 to February 2019).
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included RCTs in which participants with NSCLC who underwent lung resection were allocated to receive either exercise training, which included aerobic exercise, resistance exercise, or a combination of both, or no exercise training.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors screened the studies and identified those eligible for inclusion. We used either postintervention values (with their respective standard deviation (SD)) or mean changes (with their respective SD) in the meta-analyses that reported results as mean difference (MD). In meta-analyses that reported results as standardised mean difference (SMD), we placed studies that reported postintervention values and those that reported mean changes in separate subgroups. We assessed the certainty of evidence for each outcome by downgrading or upgrading the evidence according to GRADE criteria.
MAIN RESULTS
Along with the three RCTs included in the original version of this review (2013), we identified an additional five RCTs in this update, resulting in a total of eight RCTs involving 450 participants (180 (40%) females). The risk of selection bias in the included studies was low and the risk of performance bias high. Six studies explored the effects of combined aerobic and resistance training; one explored the effects of combined aerobic and inspiratory muscle training; and one explored the effects of combined aerobic, resistance, inspiratory muscle training and balance training. On completion of the intervention period, compared to the control group, exercise capacity expressed as the peak rate of oxygen uptake (VOpeak) and six-minute walk distance (6MWD) was greater in the intervention group (VOpeak: MD 2.97 mL/kg/min, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.93 to 4.02 mL/kg/min, 4 studies, 135 participants, moderate-certainty evidence; 6MWD: MD 57 m, 95% CI 34 to 80 m, 5 studies, 182 participants, high-certainty evidence). One adverse event (hip fracture) related to the intervention was reported in one of the included studies. The intervention group also achieved greater improvements in the physical component of general HRQoL (MD 5.0 points, 95% CI 2.3 to 7.7 points, 4 studies, 208 participants, low-certainty evidence); improved force-generating capacity of the quadriceps muscle (SMD 0.75, 95% CI 0.4 to 1.1, 4 studies, 133 participants, moderate-certainty evidence); and less dyspnoea (SMD -0.43, 95% CI -0.81 to -0.05, 3 studies, 110 participants, very low-certainty evidence). We observed uncertain effects on the mental component of general HRQoL, disease-specific HRQoL, handgrip force, fatigue, and lung function. There were insufficient data to comment on the effect of exercise training on maximal inspiratory and expiratory pressures and feelings of anxiety and depression. Mortality was not reported in the included studies.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Exercise training increased exercise capacity and quadriceps muscle force of people following lung resection for NSCLC. Our findings also suggest improvements on the physical component score of general HRQoL and decreased dyspnoea. This systematic review emphasises the importance of exercise training as part of the postoperative management of people with NSCLC.
Topics: Breathing Exercises; Carcinoma, Non-Small-Cell Lung; Exercise Therapy; Exercise Tolerance; Female; Forced Expiratory Volume; Health Status; Humans; Lung Neoplasms; Male; Muscle Strength; Oxygen Consumption; Postoperative Care; Quadriceps Muscle; Quality of Life; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Resistance Training; Time Factors
PubMed: 31204439
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD009955.pub3 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Oct 2020Virtual reality (VR) computer technology creates a simulated environment, perceived as comparable to the real world, with which users can actively interact. The...
BACKGROUND
Virtual reality (VR) computer technology creates a simulated environment, perceived as comparable to the real world, with which users can actively interact. The effectiveness of VR distraction on acute pain intensity in children is uncertain.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the effectiveness and adverse effects of virtual reality (VR) distraction interventions for children (0 to 18 years) with acute pain in any healthcare setting.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO and four trial registries to October 2019. We also searched reference lists of eligible studies, handsearched relevant journals and contacted study authors.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomised controlled trials (RCTs), including cross-over and cluster-RCTs, comparing VR distraction to no distraction, non-VR distraction or other VR distraction.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We used standard Cochrane methodological processes. Two reviewers assessed risk of bias and extracted data independently. The primary outcome was acute pain intensity (during procedure, and up to one hour post-procedure). Secondary outcomes were adverse effects, child satisfaction with VR, pain-related distress, parent anxiety, rescue analgesia and cost. We used GRADE and created 'Summary of findings' tables.
MAIN RESULTS
We included 17 RCTs (1008 participants aged four to 18 years) undergoing various procedures in healthcare settings. We did not pool data because the heterogeneity in population (i.e. diverse ages and developmental stages of children and their different perceptions and reactions to pain) and variations in procedural conditions (e.g. phlebotomy, burn wound dressings, physical therapy sessions), and consequent level of pain experienced, made statistical pooling of data impossible. We narratively describe results. We judged most studies to be at unclear risk of selection bias, high risk of performance and detection bias, and high risk of bias for small sample sizes. Across all comparisons and outcomes, we downgraded the certainty of evidence to low or very low due to serious study limitations and serious or very serious indirectness. We also downgraded some of the evidence for very serious imprecision. 1: VR distraction versus no distraction Acute pain intensity: during procedure Self-report: one study (42 participants) found no beneficial effect of non-immersive VR (very low-certainty evidence). Observer-report: no data. Behavioural measurements (observer-report): two studies, 62 participants; low-certainty evidence. One study (n = 42) found no beneficial effect of non-immersive VR. One study (n = 20) found a beneficial effect favouring immersive VR. Acute pain intensity: post-procedure Self-report: 10 studies, 461 participants; very low-certainty evidence. Four studies (n = 95) found no beneficial effect of immersive and semi-immersive or non-immersive VR. Five studies (n = 357) found a beneficial effect favouring immersive VR. Another study (n = 9) reported less pain in the VR group. Observer-report: two studies (216 participants; low-certainty evidence) found a beneficial effect of immersive VR, as reported by primary caregiver/parents or nurses. One study (n = 80) found a beneficial effect of immersive VR, as reported by researchers. Behavioural measurements (observer-report): one study (42 participants) found no beneficial effect of non-immersive VR (very low-certainty evidence). Adverse effects: five studies, 154 participants; very low-certainty evidence. Three studies (n = 53) reported no adverse effects. Two studies (n = 101) reported mild adverse effects (e.g. nausea) in the VR group. 2: VR distraction versus other non-VR distraction Acute pain intensity: during procedure Self-report, observer-report and behavioural measurements (observer-report): two studies, 106 participants: Self-report: one study (n = 65) found a beneficial effect favouring immersive VR and one (n = 41) found no evidence of a difference in mean pain change scores (very low-certainty evidence). Observer-report: one study (n = 65) found a beneficial effect favouring immersive VR and one (n = 41) found no evidence of a difference in mean pain change scores (low-certainty evidence). Behavioural measurements (observer-report): one study (n = 65) found a beneficial effect favouring immersive VR and one (n = 41) reported a difference in mean pain change scores with fewer pain behaviours in VR group (low-certainty evidence). Acute pain intensity: post-procedure Self-report: eight studies, 575 participants; very low-certainty evidence. Two studies (n = 146) found a beneficial effect favouring immersive VR. Two studies (n = 252) reported a between-group difference favouring immersive VR. One study (n = 59) found no beneficial effect of immersive VR versus television and Child Life non-VR distraction. One study (n = 18) found no beneficial effect of semi-immersive VR. Two studies (n = 100) reported no between-group difference. Observer-report: three studies, 187 participants; low-certainty evidence. One study (n = 81) found a beneficial effect favouring immersive VR for parent, nurse and researcher reports. One study (n = 65) found a beneficial effect favouring immersive VR for caregiver reports. Another study (n = 41) reported no evidence of a difference in mean pain change scores. Behavioural measurements (observer-report): two studies, 106 participants; low-certainty evidence. One study (n = 65) found a beneficial effect favouring immersive VR. Another study (n = 41) reported no evidence of a difference in mean pain change scores. Adverse effects: six studies, 429 participants; very low-certainty evidence. Three studies (n = 229) found no evidence of a difference between groups. Two studies (n = 141) reported no adverse effects in VR group. One study (n = 59) reported no beneficial effect in reducing estimated cyber-sickness before and after VR immersion. 3: VR distraction versus other VR distraction We did not identify any studies for this comparison.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
We found low-certainty and very low-certainty evidence of the effectiveness of VR distraction compared to no distraction or other non-VR distraction in reducing acute pain intensity in children in any healthcare setting. This level of uncertainty makes it difficult to interpret the benefits or lack of benefits of VR distraction for acute pain in children. Most of the review primary outcomes were assessed by only two or three small studies. We found limited data for adverse effects and other secondary outcomes. Future well-designed, large, high-quality trials may have an important impact on our confidence in the results.
Topics: Acute Pain; Adolescent; Attention; Bias; Child; Child, Preschool; Humans; Pain Management; Pain Measurement; Pain Perception; Pain, Procedural; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Virtual Reality
PubMed: 33089901
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD010686.pub2