-
The Journal of Clinical Endocrinology... Jul 2021Clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) are key instruments to implement the practice of evidence-based medicine. We aimed to evaluate the methodological quality and...
CONTEXT
Clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) are key instruments to implement the practice of evidence-based medicine. We aimed to evaluate the methodological quality and variations in CPGs recommendations on the diagnosis and management of polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS).
EVIDENCE ACQUISITION
We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, and CENTRAL until December 2020 for all evidence-based CPGs and consensus statements on PCOS. We extracted data in duplicate to map clinical recommendations across prespecified disease domains and assessed CPGs methodological quality of using the Appraisal of Guidelines, Research & Evaluation II tool.
EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS
We included 13 PCOS CPGs published between 2007 and 2018. CPGs recommendations were mostly focused on screening for and managing metabolic disease (12/13, 92%), followed by cardiovascular risk assessment (10/13, 77%). Mental health (8/13, 62%) and diagnosis in adolescents (7/13, 54%) were the least reported domains. Most CPGs had a high quality for scope and purpose description (12/13, 92%) while stakeholder's involvement and applicability of recommendations to clinical practice were appropriate in only 2 CPGs (2/13, 15%). We identified inconsistency in recommendations on PCOS diagnosis in adolescents, optimal lifestyle interventions, hirsutism and acne treatments, interventions to reduce the risk of ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome, the frequency and screening criteria for metabolic and cardiovascular disease, and optimal screening tools for mental health illness in women with PCOS.
CONCLUSION
Current CPGs on the diagnosis and management of PCOS vary in their scope and methodological quality, which may hinder evidence translation into clinical practice. We identified disease domains with existing evidence gap to guide future research and guideline updates.
Topics: Disease Management; Evidence-Based Medicine; Female; Humans; Polycystic Ovary Syndrome; Practice Guidelines as Topic; Quality Assurance, Health Care
PubMed: 33839790
DOI: 10.1210/clinem/dgab232 -
Obesity Facts 2021The very low-calorie ketogenic diet (VLCKD) has been recently proposed as an appealing nutritional strategy for obesity management. The VLCKD is characterized by a low... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
The very low-calorie ketogenic diet (VLCKD) has been recently proposed as an appealing nutritional strategy for obesity management. The VLCKD is characterized by a low carbohydrate content (<50 g/day), 1-1.5 g of protein/kg of ideal body weight, 15-30 g of fat/day, and a daily intake of about 500-800 calories.
OBJECTIVES
The aim of the current document is to suggest a common protocol for VLCKD and to summarize the existing literature on its efficacy in weight management and weight-related comorbidities, as well as the possible side effects.
METHODS
This document has been prepared in adherence with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Literature searches, study selection, methodology development, and quality appraisal were performed independently by 2 authors and the data were collated by means of a meta-analysis and narrative synthesis.
RESULTS
Of the 645 articles retrieved, 15 studies met the inclusion criteria and were reviewed, revealing 4 main findings. First, the VLCKD was shown to result in a significant weight loss in the short, intermediate, and long terms and improvement in body composition parameters as well as glycemic and lipid profiles. Second, when compared with other weight loss interventions of the same duration, the VLCKD showed a major effect on reduction of body weight, fat mass, waist circumference, total cholesterol and triglyceridemia as well as improved insulin resistance. Third, although the VLCKD also resulted in a significant reduction of glycemia, HbA1c, and LDL cholesterol, these changes were similar to those obtained with other weight loss interventions. Finally, the VLCKD can be considered a safe nutritional approach under a health professional's supervision since the most common side effects are usually clinically mild and easily to manage and recovery is often spontaneous.
CONCLUSIONS
The VLCKD can be recommended as an effective dietary treatment for individuals with obesity after considering potential contra-indications and keeping in mind that any dietary treatment has to be personalized. Prospero Registry: The assessment of the efficacy of VLCKD on body weight, body composition, glycemic and lipid parameters in overweight and obese subjects: a meta-analysis (CRD42020205189).
Topics: Adult; Diet, Ketogenic; Humans; Obesity; Obesity Management; Overweight; Weight Loss
PubMed: 33882506
DOI: 10.1159/000515381 -
Drug Safety Nov 2013Underlying systems factors have been seen to be crucial contributors to the occurrence of medication errors. By understanding the causes of these errors, the most... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Underlying systems factors have been seen to be crucial contributors to the occurrence of medication errors. By understanding the causes of these errors, the most appropriate interventions can be designed and implemented to minimise their occurrence.
OBJECTIVE
This study aimed to systematically review and appraise empirical evidence relating to the causes of medication administration errors (MAEs) in hospital settings.
DATA SOURCES
Nine electronic databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, International Pharmaceutical Abstracts, ASSIA, PsycINFO, British Nursing Index, CINAHL, Health Management Information Consortium and Social Science Citations Index) were searched between 1985 and May 2013.
STUDY SELECTION
Inclusion and exclusion criteria were applied to identify eligible publications through title analysis followed by abstract and then full text examination. English language publications reporting empirical data on causes of MAEs were included. Reference lists of included articles and relevant review papers were hand searched for additional studies. Studies were excluded if they did not report data on specific MAEs, used accounts from individuals not directly involved in the MAE concerned or were presented as conference abstracts with insufficient detail.
DATA APPRAISAL AND SYNTHESIS METHODS
A total of 54 unique studies were included. Causes of MAEs were categorised according to Reason's model of accident causation. Studies were assessed to determine relevance to the research question and how likely the results were to reflect the potential underlying causes of MAEs based on the method(s) used.
RESULTS
Slips and lapses were the most commonly reported unsafe acts, followed by knowledge-based mistakes and deliberate violations. Error-provoking conditions influencing administration errors included inadequate written communication (prescriptions, documentation, transcription), problems with medicines supply and storage (pharmacy dispensing errors and ward stock management), high perceived workload, problems with ward-based equipment (access, functionality), patient factors (availability, acuity), staff health status (fatigue, stress) and interruptions/distractions during drug administration. Few studies sought to determine the causes of intravenous MAEs. A number of latent pathway conditions were less well explored, including local working culture and high-level managerial decisions. Causes were often described superficially; this may be related to the use of quantitative surveys and observation methods in many studies, limited use of established error causation frameworks to analyse data and a predominant focus on issues other than the causes of MAEs among studies.
LIMITATIONS
As only English language publications were included, some relevant studies may have been missed.
CONCLUSIONS
Limited evidence from studies included in this systematic review suggests that MAEs are influenced by multiple systems factors, but if and how these arise and interconnect to lead to errors remains to be fully determined. Further research with a theoretical focus is needed to investigate the MAE causation pathway, with an emphasis on ensuring interventions designed to minimise MAEs target recognised underlying causes of errors to maximise their impact.
Topics: Data Collection; Databases, Factual; Drug Prescriptions; Hospitals, Teaching; Humans; Medication Errors; Models, Theoretical; Patient Care Team; Pharmaceutical Preparations; Quality Assurance, Health Care; Workload
PubMed: 23975331
DOI: 10.1007/s40264-013-0090-2 -
Anaesthesia Aug 2021The aim of this systematic review was to develop recommendations for the management of postoperative pain after primary elective total hip arthroplasty, updating the...
The aim of this systematic review was to develop recommendations for the management of postoperative pain after primary elective total hip arthroplasty, updating the previous procedure-specific postoperative pain management (PROSPECT) guidelines published in 2005 and updated in July 2010. Randomised controlled trials and meta-analyses published between July 2010 and December 2019 assessing postoperative pain using analgesic, anaesthetic, surgical or other interventions were identified from MEDLINE, Embase and Cochrane databases. Five hundred and twenty studies were initially identified, of which 108 randomised trials and 21 meta-analyses met the inclusion criteria. Peri-operative interventions that improved postoperative pain include: paracetamol; cyclo-oxygenase-2-selective inhibitors; non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs; and intravenous dexamethasone. In addition, peripheral nerve blocks (femoral nerve block; lumbar plexus block; fascia iliaca block), single-shot local infiltration analgesia, intrathecal morphine and epidural analgesia also improved pain. Limited or inconsistent evidence was found for all other approaches evaluated. Surgical and anaesthetic techniques appear to have a minor impact on postoperative pain, and thus their choice should be based on criteria other than pain. In summary, the analgesic regimen for total hip arthroplasty should include pre-operative or intra-operative paracetamol and cyclo-oxygenase-2-selective inhibitors or non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, continued postoperatively with opioids used as rescue analgesics. In addition, intra-operative intravenous dexamethasone 8-10 mg is recommended. Regional analgesic techniques such as fascia iliaca block or local infiltration analgesia are recommended, especially if there are contra-indications to basic analgesics and/or in patients with high expected postoperative pain. Epidural analgesia, femoral nerve block, lumbar plexus block and gabapentinoid administration are not recommended as the adverse effects outweigh the benefits. Although intrathecal morphine 0.1 mg can be used, the PROSPECT group emphasises the risks and side-effects associated with its use and provides evidence that adequate analgesia may be achieved with basic analgesics and regional techniques without intrathecal morphine.
Topics: Arthroplasty, Replacement, Hip; Humans; Pain Management; Pain, Postoperative; Practice Guidelines as Topic
PubMed: 34015859
DOI: 10.1111/anae.15498 -
PloS One 2015One-third of all medication errors causing harm to hospitalized patients occur in the medication preparation and administration phase, which is predominantly a nursing... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
One-third of all medication errors causing harm to hospitalized patients occur in the medication preparation and administration phase, which is predominantly a nursing activity. To monitor, evaluate and improve the quality and safety of this process, evidence-based quality indicators can be used.
OBJECTIVES
The aim of study was to identify evidence-based quality indicators (structure, process and outcome) for safe in-hospital medication preparation and administration.
METHODS
MEDLINE, EMBASE and CINAHL were searched for relevant studies published up to January 2015. Additionally, nine databases were searched to identify relevant grey literature. Two reviewers independently selected studies if (1) the method for quality indicator development combined a literature search with expert panel opinion, (2) the study contained quality indicators on medication safety, and (3) any of the quality indicators were applicable to hospital medication preparation and administration. A multidisciplinary team appraised the studies independently using the AIRE instrument, which contains four domains and 20 items. Quality indicators applicable to in-hospital medication preparation and administration were extracted using a structured form.
RESULTS
The search identified 1683 studies, of which 64 were reviewed in detail and five met the inclusion criteria. Overall, according to the AIRE domains, all studies were clear on purpose; most of them applied stakeholder involvement and used evidence reasonably; usage of the indicator in practice was scarcely described. A total of 21 quality indicators were identified: 5 structure indicators (e.g. safety management and high alert medication), 11 process indicators (e.g. verification and protocols) and 5 outcome indicators (e.g. harm and death). These quality indicators partially cover the 7 rights.
CONCLUSION
Despite the relatively small number of included studies, the identified quality indicators can serve as an excellent starting point for further development of nursing specific quality indicators for medication safety. Especially on the right patient, right route, right time and right documentation there is room future development of quality indicators.
Topics: Databases, Factual; Drug Prescriptions; Evidence-Based Medicine; Humans; Medication Errors; Pharmaceutical Preparations; Quality Indicators, Health Care
PubMed: 25884623
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0122695 -
British Journal of Clinical Pharmacology May 2012Interest in patient adherence has increased in recent years, with a growing literature that shows the pervasiveness of poor adherence to appropriately prescribed... (Review)
Review
Interest in patient adherence has increased in recent years, with a growing literature that shows the pervasiveness of poor adherence to appropriately prescribed medications. However, four decades of adherence research has not resulted in uniformity in the terminology used to describe deviations from prescribed therapies. The aim of this review was to propose a new taxonomy, in which adherence to medications is conceptualized, based on behavioural and pharmacological science, and which will support quantifiable parameters. A systematic literature review was performed using MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, the Cochrane Library and PsycINFO from database inception to 1 April 2009. The objective was to identify the different conceptual approaches to adherence research. Definitions were analyzed according to time and methodological perspectives. A taxonomic approach was subsequently derived, evaluated and discussed with international experts. More than 10 different terms describing medication-taking behaviour were identified through the literature review, often with differing meanings. The conceptual foundation for a new, transparent taxonomy relies on three elements, which make a clear distinction between processes that describe actions through established routines ('Adherence to medications', 'Management of adherence') and the discipline that studies those processes ('Adherence-related sciences'). 'Adherence to medications' is the process by which patients take their medication as prescribed, further divided into three quantifiable phases: 'Initiation', 'Implementation' and 'Discontinuation'. In response to the proliferation of ambiguous or unquantifiable terms in the literature on medication adherence, this research has resulted in a new conceptual foundation for a transparent taxonomy. The terms and definitions are focused on promoting consistency and quantification in terminology and methods to aid in the conduct, analysis and interpretation of scientific studies of medication adherence.
Topics: Databases, Factual; Disease Management; Drug Monitoring; Humans; Medication Adherence; Patient Care Management; Pharmaceutical Preparations
PubMed: 22486599
DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2125.2012.04167.x -
Medicine Aug 2018The contemporary demographics and prevalence of Meckel's diverticulum, clinical presentation and management is not well described. Thus, this article aims to review the... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
The contemporary demographics and prevalence of Meckel's diverticulum, clinical presentation and management is not well described. Thus, this article aims to review the recent literature concerning Meckel's diverticulum.
METHODS
A systematic PubMed/Medline database search using the terms "Meckel" and "Meckel's" combined with "diverticulum." English language articles published from January 1, 2000 to July 31, 2017 were considered. Studies reporting on the epidemiology of Meckel's diverticulum were included.
RESULTS
Of 857 articles meeting the initial search criteria, 92 articles were selected. Only 4 studies were prospective. The prevalence is reported between 0.3% and 2.9% in the general population. Meckels' diverticulum is located 7 to 200 cm proximal to the ileocecal valve (mean 52.4 cm), it is 0.4 to 11.0 cm long (mean 3.05 cm), 0.3 to 7.0 cm in diameter (mean 1.58 cm), and presents with symptoms in 4% to 9% of patients. The male-to-female (M:F 1.5-4:1) gender distribution is reported up to 4 times more frequent in men. Symptomatic patients are usually young. Of the pediatric symptomatic patients, 46.7% have obstruction, 25.3% have hemorrhage, and 19.5% have inflammation as presenting symptom. Corresponding values for adults are 35.6%, 27.3%, and 29.4%. Ectopic gastric tissue is present in 24.2% to 71.0% of symptomatic Meckel's diverticulum, is associated with hemorrhage and is the most common form of ectopic tissue, followed by ectopic pancreatic tissue present in 0% to 12.0%.
CONCLUSION
The epidemiological patterns and clinical presentation appears stable in the 21st century. A symptomatic Meckel's diverticulum is managed by resection. The issue of prophylactic in incidental Meckel's diverticulum resection remains controversial.
Topics: Adolescent; Adult; Aged; Child; Child, Preschool; Choristoma; Disease Management; Female; Humans; Ileocecal Valve; Male; Meckel Diverticulum; Middle Aged; Pancreas; Prevalence; Sex Distribution; Stomach; Young Adult
PubMed: 30170459
DOI: 10.1097/MD.0000000000012154 -
The Journal of Investigative Dermatology Nov 2016Systematic reviews are increasingly utilized in the medical literature to summarize available evidence on a research question. Like other studies, systematic reviews are... (Review)
Review
Systematic reviews are increasingly utilized in the medical literature to summarize available evidence on a research question. Like other studies, systematic reviews are at risk for bias from a number of sources. A systematic review should be based on a formal protocol developed and made publicly available before the conduct of the review; deviations from a protocol with selective presentation of data can result in reporting bias. Evidence selection bias occurs when a systematic review does not identify all available data on a topic. This can arise from publication bias, where data from statistically significant studies are more likely to be published than those that are not statistically significant. Systematic reviews are also susceptible to bias that arises in any of the included primary studies, each of which needs to be critically appraised. Finally, competing interests can lead to bias in favor of a particular intervention. Awareness of these sources of bias is important for authors and consumers of the scientific literature as they conduct and read systematic reviews and incorporate their findings into clinical practice and policy making.
Topics: Dermatology; Disease Management; Humans; Research Design; Selection Bias; Skin Diseases
PubMed: 27772550
DOI: 10.1016/j.jid.2016.08.021 -
Chiropractic & Manual Therapies May 2022To identify and descriptively compare medication recommendations among low back pain (LBP) clinical practice guidelines (CPG). (Review)
Review
OBJECTIVE
To identify and descriptively compare medication recommendations among low back pain (LBP) clinical practice guidelines (CPG).
METHODS
We searched PubMed, Cochrane Database of Systematic Review, Index to Chiropractic Literature, AMED, CINAHL, and PEDro to identify CPGs that described the management of mechanical LBP in the prior five years. Two investigators independently screened titles and abstracts and potentially relevant full text were considered for eligibility. Four investigators independently applied the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE) II instrument for critical appraisal. Data were extracted for pharmaceutical intervention, the strength of recommendation, and appropriateness for the duration of LBP.
RESULTS
316 citations were identified, 50 full-text articles were assessed, and nine guidelines with global representation met the eligibility criteria. These CPGs addressed pharmacological treatments with or without non-pharmacological treatments. All CPGS focused on the management of acute, chronic, or unspecified duration of LBP. The mean overall AGREE II score was 89.3% (SD 3.5%). The lowest domain mean score was for applicability, 80.4% (SD 5.2%), and the highest was Scope and Purpose, 94.0% (SD 2.4%). There were ten classifications of medications described in the included CPGs: acetaminophen, antibiotics, anticonvulsants, antidepressants, benzodiazepines, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), opioids, oral corticosteroids, skeletal muscle relaxants (SMRs), and atypical opioids.
CONCLUSIONS
Nine CPGs, included ten medication classes for the management of LBP. NSAIDs were the most frequently recommended medication for the treatment of both acute and chronic LBP as a first line pharmacological therapy. Acetaminophen and SMRs were inconsistently recommended for acute LBP. Meanwhile, with less consensus among CPGs, acetaminophen and antidepressants were proposed as second-choice therapies for chronic LBP. There was significant heterogeneity of recommendations within many medication classes, although oral corticosteroids, benzodiazepines, anticonvulsants, and antibiotics were not recommended by any CPGs for acute or chronic LBP.
Topics: Acetaminophen; Adrenal Cortex Hormones; Analgesics, Opioid; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal; Anticonvulsants; Antidepressive Agents; Benzodiazepines; Humans; Low Back Pain; Pharmaceutical Preparations
PubMed: 35562756
DOI: 10.1186/s12998-022-00435-3 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Mar 2018Many women would like to avoid pharmacological or invasive methods of pain management in labour and this may contribute to the popularity of complementary methods of... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Many women would like to avoid pharmacological or invasive methods of pain management in labour and this may contribute to the popularity of complementary methods of pain management. This review examined currently available evidence on the use of relaxation therapies for pain management in labour. This is an update of a review first published in 2011.
OBJECTIVES
To examine the effects of mind-body relaxation techniques for pain management in labour on maternal and neonatal well-being during and after labour.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth's Trials Register (9 May 2017), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library, Issue 5 2017), MEDLINE (1966 to 24 May 2017), CINAHL (1980 to 24 May 2017), the Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (18 May 2017), ClinicalTrials.gov (18 May 2017), the ISRCTN Register (18 May 2017), the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) (18 May 2017), and reference lists of retrieved studies.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomised controlled trials (including quasi randomised and cluster trials) comparing relaxation methods with standard care, no treatment, other non-pharmacological forms of pain management in labour or placebo.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently assessed trials for inclusion and risk of bias, extracted data and checked them for accuracy. We attempted to contact study authors for additional information. We assessed evidence quality with GRADE methodology.
MAIN RESULTS
This review update includes 19 studies (2519 women), 15 of which (1731 women) contribute data. Interventions examined included relaxation, yoga, music and mindfulness. Approximately half of the studies had a low risk of bias for random sequence generation and attrition bias. The majority of studies had a high risk of bias for performance and detection bias, and unclear risk of bias for, allocation concealment, reporting bias and other bias. We assessed the evidence from these studies as ranging from low to very low quality, and therefore the effects below should be interpreted with caution.RelaxationWe found that relaxation compared to usual care provided lowered the intensity of pain (measured on a scale of 0 to 10 with low scores indicating less pain) during the latent phase of labour (mean difference (MD) -1.25, 95% confidence interval (CI) -1.97 to -0.53, one trial, 40 women). Four trials reported pain intensity in the active phase; there was high heterogeneity between trials and very low-quality evidence suggested that there was no strong evidence that the effects were any different between groups for this outcome (MD -1.08, 95% CI -2.57 to 0.41, four trials, 271 women, random-effects analysis). Very low-quality evidence showed that women receiving relaxation reported greater satisfaction with pain relief during labour (risk ratio (RR) 8.00, 95% CI 1.10 to 58.19, one trial, 40 women), and showed no clear benefit for satisfaction with childbirth experience (assessed using different scales) (standard mean difference (SMD) -0.03, 95% CI -0.37 to 0.31, three trials, 1176 women). For safety outcomes there was very low-quality evidence of no clear reduction in assisted vaginal birth (average RR 0.61, 95% CI 0.20 to 1.84, four trials, 1122 women) or in caesarean section rates (average RR 0.73, 95% CI 0.26 to 2.01, four trials, 1122 women). Sense of control in labour, and breastfeeding were not reported under this comparison.YogaWhen comparing yoga to control interventions there was low-quality evidence that yoga lowered pain intensity (measured on a scale of 0 to 10) with low scores indicating less pain) (MD -6.12, 95% CI -11.77 to -0.47, one trial, 66 women), greater satisfaction with pain relief (MD 7.88, 95% CI 1.51 to 14.25, one trial, 66 women) and greater satisfaction with childbirth experience (MD 6.34, 95% CI 0.26 to 12.42 one trial, 66 women (assessed using the Maternal Comfort Scale with higher score indicating greater comfort). Sense of control in labour, breastfeeding, assisted vaginal birth, and caesarean section were not reported under this comparison.MusicWhen comparing music to control interventions there was evidence of lower pain intensity in the latent phase for women receiving music (measured on a scale of 0 to 10 with low scores indicating less pain) (MD -0.73, 95% CI -1.01 to -0.45, random-effects analysis, two trials, 192 women) and very low-quality evidence of no clear benefit in the active phase (MD -0.51, 95% CI -1.10 to 0.07, three trials, 217 women). Very low-quality evidence suggested no clear benefit in terms of reducing assisted vaginal birth (RR 0.41, 95% CI 0.08 to 2.05, one trial, 156 women) or caesarean section rate (RR 0.78, 95% CI 0.36 to 1.70, two trials, 216 women). Satisfaction with pain relief, sense of control in labour, satisfaction with childbirth experience, and breastfeeding were not reported under this comparison.Audio analgesiaOne trial evaluating audio analgesia versus control only reported one outcome and showed no evidence of benefit in satisfaction with pain relief.MindfulnessOne trial evaluating mindfulness versus usual care found an increase in sense of control for the mindfulness group (using the Childbirth Self-Efficacy Inventory) (MD 31.30, 95% CI 1.61 to 60.99, 26 women). There is no strong evidence that the effects were any different between groups for satisfaction in childbirth, or for caesarean section rate, need for assisted vaginal delivery or need for pharmacological pain relief. No other outcomes were reported in this trial.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Relaxation, yoga and music may have a role with reducing pain, and increasing satisfaction with pain relief, although the quality of evidence varies between very low to low. There was insufficient evidence for the role of mindfulness and audio-analgesia. The majority of trials did not report on the safety of the interventions. Further randomised controlled trials of relaxation modalities for pain management in labour are needed. Trials should be adequately powered and include clinically relevant outcomes such as those described in this review.
Topics: Analgesia, Obstetrical; Cesarean Section; Female; Humans; Labor Pain; Mindfulness; Music Therapy; Pain Management; Pain Measurement; Patient Satisfaction; Pregnancy; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Relaxation Therapy; Supine Position; Yoga
PubMed: 29589650
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD009514.pub2