-
Sports Health 2017Taping is commonly used in the management of several musculoskeletal conditions, including patellofemoral pain syndrome (PFPS). Specific guidelines for taping are... (Review)
Review
CONTEXT
Taping is commonly used in the management of several musculoskeletal conditions, including patellofemoral pain syndrome (PFPS). Specific guidelines for taping are unknown.
OBJECTIVE
To investigate the efficacy of knee taping in the management of PFPS. Our hypothesis was that tension taping and exercise would be superior to placebo taping and exercise as well as to exercise or taping alone.
DATA SOURCES
The PubMed/MEDLINE, Cochrane, Rehabilitation and Sports Medicine Source, and CINAHL databases were reviewed for English-language randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating the efficacy of various taping techniques that were published between 1995 and April 2015. Keywords utilized included taping, McConnell, kinesio-taping, kinesiotaping, patellofemoral pain, and knee.
STUDY SELECTION
Studies included consisted of RCTs (level 1 or 2) with participants of all ages who had anterior knee or patellofemoral pain symptoms and had received nonsurgical management using any taping technique.
STUDY DESIGN
Systematic review.
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE
Level 2.
DATA EXTRACTION
A checklist method was used to determine selection, performance, detection, and attrition bias for each article. A quality of evidence grading was then referenced using the validated PEDro database for RCTs. Three difference comparison groups were compared: tension taping and exercise versus placebo taping and exercise (group 1), placebo taping and exercise versus exercise alone (group 2), and tension taping and exercise versus taping alone (group 3).
RESULTS
Five RCTs with 235 total patients with multiple intervention arms were included. Taping strategies included McConnell and Kinesiotaping. Visual analog scale (VAS) scores indicated improvement in all 3 comparison groups (group 1: 91 patients, 39% of total, mean VAS improvement 44.9 [tension taping + exercise] vs 66 [placebo taping + exercise]; group 2: 56 patients, 24% of total, mean VAS improvement 66 [placebo taping + exercise] vs 47.6 [exercise alone]; and group 3: 112 patients, 48% of total, mean VAS improvement 44.9 [tension taping + exercise] vs 14.1 [taping alone]).
CONCLUSION
This systematic review supports knee taping only as an adjunct to traditional exercise therapy for PFPS; however, it does not support taping in isolation.
Topics: Athletic Performance; Athletic Tape; Exercise Therapy; Humans; Pain Measurement; Patellofemoral Pain Syndrome; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 28617653
DOI: 10.1177/1941738117710938 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Jul 2022Schizophrenia is a disabling psychotic disorder characterised by positive symptoms of delusions, hallucinations, disorganised speech and behaviour; and negative symptoms... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Schizophrenia is a disabling psychotic disorder characterised by positive symptoms of delusions, hallucinations, disorganised speech and behaviour; and negative symptoms such as affective flattening and lack of motivation. Cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) is a psychological intervention that aims to change the way in which a person interprets and evaluates their experiences, helping them to identify and link feelings and patterns of thinking that underpin distress. CBT models targeting symptoms of psychosis (CBTp) have been developed for many mental health conditions including schizophrenia. CBTp has been suggested as a useful add-on therapy to medication for people with schizophrenia. While CBT for people with schizophrenia was mainly developed as an individual treatment, it is expensive and a group approach may be more cost-effective. Group CBTp can be defined as a group intervention targeting psychotic symptoms, based on the cognitive behavioural model. In group CBTp, people work collaboratively on coping with distressing hallucinations, analysing evidence for their delusions, and developing problem-solving and social skills. However, the evidence for effectiveness is far from conclusive.
OBJECTIVES
To investigate efficacy and acceptability of group CBT applied to psychosis compared with standard care or other psychosocial interventions, for people with schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder.
SEARCH METHODS
On 10 February 2021, we searched the Cochrane Schizophrenia Group's Study-Based Register of Trials, which is based on CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, four other databases and two trials registries. We handsearched the reference lists of relevant papers and previous systematic reviews and contacted experts in the field for supplemental data.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We selected randomised controlled trials allocating adults with schizophrenia to receive either group CBT for schizophrenia, compared with standard care, or any other psychosocial intervention (group or individual).
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We complied with Cochrane recommended standard of conduct for data screening and collection. Where possible, we calculated risk ratio (RR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) for binary data and mean difference (MD) and 95% CI for continuous data. We used a random-effects model for analyses. We assessed risk of bias for included studies and created a summary of findings table using GRADE.
MAIN RESULTS
The review includes 24 studies (1900 participants). All studies compared group CBTp with treatments that a person with schizophrenia would normally receive in a standard mental health service (standard care) or any other psychosocial intervention (group or individual). None of the studies compared group CBTp with individual CBTp. Overall risk of bias within the trials was moderate to low. We found no studies reporting data for our primary outcome of clinically important change. With regard to numbers of participants leaving the study early, group CBTp has little or no effect compared to standard care or other psychosocial interventions (RR 1.22, 95% CI 0.94 to 1.59; studies = 13, participants = 1267; I = 9%; low-certainty evidence). Group CBTp may have some advantage over standard care or other psychosocial interventions for overall mental state at the end of treatment for endpoint scores on the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) total (MD -3.73, 95% CI -4.63 to -2.83; studies = 12, participants = 1036; I = 5%; low-certainty evidence). Group CBTp seems to have little or no effect on PANSS positive symptoms (MD -0.45, 95% CI -1.30 to 0.40; studies =8, participants = 539; I = 0%) and on PANSS negative symptoms scores at the end of treatment (MD -0.73, 95% CI -1.68 to 0.21; studies = 9, participants = 768; I = 65%). Group CBTp seems to have an advantage over standard care or other psychosocial interventions on global functioning measured by Global Assessment of Functioning (GAF; MD -3.61, 95% CI -6.37 to -0.84; studies = 5, participants = 254; I = 0%; moderate-certainty evidence), Personal and Social Performance Scale (PSP; MD 3.30, 95% CI 2.00 to 4.60; studies = 1, participants = 100), and Social Disability Screening Schedule (SDSS; MD -1.27, 95% CI -2.46 to -0.08; studies = 1, participants = 116). Service use data were equivocal with no real differences between treatment groups for number of participants hospitalised (RR 0.78, 95% CI 0.38 to 1.60; studies = 3, participants = 235; I = 34%). There was no clear difference between group CBTp and standard care or other psychosocial interventions endpoint scores on depression and quality of life outcomes, except for quality of life measured by World Health Organization Quality of Life Assessment Instrument (WHOQOL-BREF) Psychological domain subscale (MD -4.64, 95% CI -9.04 to -0.24; studies = 2, participants = 132; I = 77%). The studies did not report relapse or adverse effects.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Group CBTp appears to be no better or worse than standard care or other psychosocial interventions for people with schizophrenia in terms of leaving the study early, service use and general quality of life. Group CBTp seems to be more effective than standard care or other psychosocial interventions on overall mental state and global functioning scores. These results may not be widely applicable as each study had a low sample size. Therefore, no firm conclusions concerning the efficacy of group CBTp for people with schizophrenia can currently be made. More high-quality research, reporting useable and relevant data is needed.
Topics: Adult; Cognitive Behavioral Therapy; Hallucinations; Humans; Psychotic Disorders; Quality of Life; Schizophrenia
PubMed: 35866377
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD009608.pub2 -
International Journal of Environmental... Mar 2023This systematic review is conducted to evaluate the effect of high-intensity interval training (HIIT) and moderate-intensity continuous training (MICT) on body... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Effect of High-Intensity Interval Training vs. Moderate-Intensity Continuous Training on Fat Loss and Cardiorespiratory Fitness in the Young and Middle-Aged a Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
OBJECTIVES
This systematic review is conducted to evaluate the effect of high-intensity interval training (HIIT) and moderate-intensity continuous training (MICT) on body composition and cardiorespiratory fitness (CRF) in the young and middle-aged.
METHODS
Seven databases were searched from their inception to 22 October 2022 for studies (randomized controlled trials only) with HIIT and MICT intervention. Meta-analysis was carried out for within-group (pre-intervention vs. post-intervention) and between-group (HIIT vs. MICT) comparisons for change in body mass (BM), body mass index (BMI), waist circumference (WC), percent fat mass (PFM), fat mass (FM), fat-free mass (FFM), and CRF.
RESULTS
A total of 1738 studies were retrieved from the database, and 29 studies were included in the meta-analysis. Within-group analyses indicated that both HIIT and MICT can bring significant improvement in body composition and CRF, except for FFM. Between-group analyses found that compared to MICT, HIIT brings significant benefits to WC, PFM, and VO.
CONCLUSIONS
The effect of HIIT on fat loss and CRF in the young and middle-aged is similar to or better than MICT, which might be influenced by age (18-45 years), complications (obesity), duration (>6 weeks), frequency, and HIIT interval. Despite the clinical significance of the improvement being limited, HIIT appears to be more time-saving and enjoyable than MICT.
Topics: Middle Aged; Humans; Adolescent; Young Adult; Adult; High-Intensity Interval Training; Cardiorespiratory Fitness; Obesity; Body Mass Index; Body Composition
PubMed: 36981649
DOI: 10.3390/ijerph20064741 -
Aging Apr 2020We aimed to investigate the association between physical activity and successful aging among middle-aged and older adults and study how this association changes with age... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
We aimed to investigate the association between physical activity and successful aging among middle-aged and older adults and study how this association changes with age and time.
RESULTS
The mean score of Newcastle-Ottawa Scale assessment was 8.0±0.8. Physically active middle-aged and older adults were more likely to age successfully than sedentary adults (OR=1.64, 95%CI: 1.40-1.94). The effect of physical activity was stronger in the younger group (OR=1.71, 95%CI: 1.41-2.08) than on the older group (OR=1.54, 95%CI: 1.13-2.08). However, the protective effect of physical activity reduced annually by approximately 3%.
CONCLUSIONS
Physical activity promotes successful aging among middle-aged and older adults especially in the younger population. Being physically active at middle and old age is beneficial to successful aging.
METHODS
We searched for the relevant studies in three online databases: Pubmed, Web of Science, and Embase. Fifteen community-based cohort studies were included. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale assessment Form was used for quality assessment. Overall, 189,192 participants aged 43.9-79.0 years were analyzed. The odds ratio for successful aging of the most physically active group compared with sedentary group was analyzed. Subgroup analysis was conducted by age group. Univariate Meta-regression was performed according to follow-up years.
Topics: Age Factors; Aged; Aging; Exercise; Humans; Middle Aged
PubMed: 32350152
DOI: 10.18632/aging.103057 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Nov 2016Despite the widely documented risks of not breastfeeding, initiation rates remain relatively low in many high-income countries, particularly among women in lower-income... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Despite the widely documented risks of not breastfeeding, initiation rates remain relatively low in many high-income countries, particularly among women in lower-income groups. In low- and middle-income countries, many women do not follow World Health Organization (WHO) recommendations to initiate breastfeeding within the first hour after birth. This is an update of a Cochrane Review, first published in 2005.
OBJECTIVES
To identify and describe health promotion activities intended to increase the initiation rate of breastfeeding.To evaluate the effectiveness of different types of breastfeeding promotion activities, in terms of changing the number of women who initiate breastfeeding.To evaluate the effectiveness of different types of breastfeeding promotion activities, in terms of changing the number of women who initiate breastfeeding early (within one hour after birth).
SEARCH METHODS
We searched Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth's Trials Register (29 February 2016) and scanned reference lists of all articles obtained.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomised controlled trials (RCTs), with or without blinding, of any breastfeeding promotion intervention in any population group, except women and infants with a specific health problem.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently assessed trial reports for inclusion, extracted data and assessed trial quality. Discrepancies were resolved through discussion and a third review author was involved when necessary. We contacted investigators to obtain missing information.
MAIN RESULTS
Twenty-eight trials involving 107,362 women in seven countries are included in this updated review. Five studies involving 3,124 women did not contribute outcome data and we excluded them from the analyses. The methodological quality of the included trials was mixed, with significant numbers of studies at high or unclear risk of bias due to: inadequate allocation concealment (N = 20); lack of blinding of outcome assessment (N = 20); incomplete outcome data (N = 19); selective reporting (N = 22) and bias from other potential sources (N = 17). Healthcare professional-led breastfeeding education and support versus standard care The studies pooled here compare professional health workers delivering breastfeeding education and support during the prenatal and postpartum periods with standard care. Interventions included promotion campaigns and counselling, and all took place in a formal setting. There was evidence from five trials involving 564 women for improved rates ofbreastfeeding initiation among women who received healthcare professional-led breastfeeding education and support (average risk ratio (RR) 1.43, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.07 to 1.92; Tau² = 0.07, I² = 62%, low-quality evidence) compared to those women who received standard care. We downgraded evidence due to design limitations and heterogeneity. The outcome of early initiation of breastfeeding was not reported in the studies under this comparison. Non-healthcare professional-led breastfeeding education and support versus standard care There was evidence from eight trials of 5712 women for improved rates of breastfeeding initiation among women who received interventions from non-healthcare professional counsellors and support groups (average RR 1.22, 95% CI 1.06 to 1.40; Tau² = 0.02, I² = 86%, low-quality evidence) compared to women who received standard care. In three trials of 76,373 women, there was no clear difference between groups in terms of the number of women practicing early initiation of breastfeeding (average RR 1.70, 95% CI 0.98 to 2.95; Tau² = 0.18, I² = 78%, very low-quality evidence). We downgraded the evidence for a combination of design limitations, heterogeneity and imprecision (wide confidence intervals crossing the line of no effect). Other comparisonsOther comparisons in this review also looked at the rates of initiation of breastfeeding and there were no clear differences between groups for the following comparisons of combined healthcare professional-led education with peer support or community educator versus standard care (2 studies, 1371 women) or attention control (1 study, 237 women), breastfeeding education using multimedia (a self-help manual or a video) versus routine care (2 studies, 497 women); early mother-infant contact versus standard care (2 studies, 309 women); and community-based breastfeeding groups versus no breastfeeding groups (1 study, 18,603 women). None of these comparisons reported data on early initiation of breastfeeding.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
This review found low-quality evidence that healthcare professional-led breastfeeding education and non-healthcare professional-led counselling and peer support interventions can result in some improvements in the number of women beginning to breastfeed. The majority of the trials were conducted in the USA, among women on low incomes and who varied in ethnicity and feeding intention, thus limiting the generalisability of these results to other settings.Future studies would ideally be conducted in a range of low- and high-income settings, with data on breastfeeding rates over various timeframes, and explore the effectiveness of interventions that are initiated prior to conception or during pregnancy. These might include well-described interventions, including health education, early and continuing mother-infant contact, and initiatives to help mothers overcome societal barriers to breastfeeding, all with clearly defined outcome measures.
Topics: Breast Feeding; Counseling; Female; Health Education; Humans; Peer Group; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 27827515
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD001688.pub3 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Mar 2017Individual counselling from a smoking cessation specialist may help smokers to make a successful attempt to stop smoking. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Individual counselling from a smoking cessation specialist may help smokers to make a successful attempt to stop smoking.
OBJECTIVES
The review addresses the following hypotheses:1. Individual counselling is more effective than no treatment or brief advice in promoting smoking cessation.2. Individual counselling is more effective than self-help materials in promoting smoking cessation.3. A more intensive counselling intervention is more effective than a less intensive intervention.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Tobacco Addiction Group Specialized Register for studies with counsel* in any field in May 2016.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomized or quasi-randomized trials with at least one treatment arm consisting of face-to-face individual counselling from a healthcare worker not involved in routine clinical care. The outcome was smoking cessation at follow-up at least six months after the start of counselling.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Both authors extracted data in duplicate. We recorded characteristics of the intervention and the target population, method of randomization and completeness of follow-up. We used the most rigorous definition of abstinence in each trial, and biochemically-validated rates where available. In analysis, we assumed that participants lost to follow-up continued to smoke. We expressed effects as a risk ratio (RR) for cessation. Where possible, we performed meta-analysis using a fixed-effect (Mantel-Haenszel) model. We assessed the quality of evidence within each study using the Cochrane 'Risk of bias' tool and the GRADE approach.
MAIN RESULTS
We identified 49 trials with around 19,000 participants. Thirty-three trials compared individual counselling to a minimal behavioural intervention. There was high-quality evidence that individual counselling was more effective than a minimal contact control (brief advice, usual care, or provision of self-help materials) when pharmacotherapy was not offered to any participants (RR 1.57, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.40 to 1.77; 27 studies, 11,100 participants; I = 50%). There was moderate-quality evidence (downgraded due to imprecision) of a benefit of counselling when all participants received pharmacotherapy (nicotine replacement therapy) (RR 1.24, 95% CI 1.01 to 1.51; 6 studies, 2662 participants; I = 0%). There was moderate-quality evidence (downgraded due to imprecision) for a small benefit of more intensive counselling compared to brief counselling (RR 1.29, 95% CI 1.09 to 1.53; 11 studies, 2920 participants; I = 48%). None of the five other trials that compared different counselling models of similar intensity detected significant differences.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
There is high-quality evidence that individually-delivered smoking cessation counselling can assist smokers to quit. There is moderate-quality evidence of a smaller relative benefit when counselling is used in addition to pharmacotherapy, and of more intensive counselling compared to a brief counselling intervention.
Topics: Behavior Therapy; Counseling; Humans; Psychotherapy, Group; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Self-Help Groups; Smoking; Smoking Cessation; Smoking Prevention; Tobacco Use Cessation Devices
PubMed: 28361496
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD001292.pub3 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Oct 2021Substance use disorders (SUDs) are highly prevalent and associated with a substantial public health burden. Although evidence-based interventions exist for treating... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Substance use disorders (SUDs) are highly prevalent and associated with a substantial public health burden. Although evidence-based interventions exist for treating SUDs, many individuals remain symptomatic despite treatment, and relapse is common.Mindfulness-based interventions (MBIs) have been examined for the treatment of SUDs, but available evidence is mixed.
OBJECTIVES
To determine the effects of MBIs for SUDs in terms of substance use outcomes, craving and adverse events compared to standard care, further psychotherapeutic, psychosocial or pharmacological interventions, or instructions, waiting list and no treatment.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the following databases up to April 2021: Cochrane Drugs and Alcohol Specialised Register, CENTRAL, PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, CINAHL and PsycINFO. We searched two trial registries and checked the reference lists of included studies for relevant randomized controlled trials (RCTs).
SELECTION CRITERIA
RCTs testing a MBI versus no treatment or another treatment in individuals with SUDs. SUDs included alcohol and/or drug use disorders but excluded tobacco use disorders. MBIs were defined as interventions including training in mindfulness meditation with repeated meditation practice. Studies in which SUDs were formally diagnosed as well as those merely demonstrating elevated SUD risk were eligible.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane.
MAIN RESULTS
Forty RCTs met our inclusion criteria, with 35 RCTs involving 2825 participants eligible for meta-analysis. All studies were at high risk of performance bias and most were at high risk of detection bias. Mindfulness-based interventions (MBIs) versus no treatment Twenty-four RCTs included a comparison between MBI and no treatment. The evidence was uncertain about the effects of MBIs relative to no treatment on all primary outcomes: continuous abstinence rate (post: risk ratio (RR) = 0.96, 95% CI 0.44 to 2.14, 1 RCT, 112 participants; follow-up: RR = 1.04, 95% CI 0.54 to 2.01, 1 RCT, 112 participants); percentage of days with substance use (post-treatment: standardized mean difference (SMD) = 0.05, 95% CI -0.37 to 0.47, 4 RCTs, 248 participants; follow-up: SMD = 0.21, 95% CI -0.12 to 0.54, 3 RCTs, 167 participants); and consumed amount (post-treatment: SMD = 0.10, 95% CI -0.31 to 0.52, 3 RCTs, 221 participants; follow-up: SMD = 0.33, 95% CI 0.00 to 0.66, 2 RCTs, 142 participants). Evidence was uncertain for craving intensity and serious adverse events. Analysis of treatment acceptability indicated MBIs result in little to no increase in study attrition relative to no treatment (RR = 1.04, 95% CI 0.77 to 1.40, 21 RCTs, 1087 participants). Certainty of evidence for all other outcomes was very low due to imprecision, risk of bias, and/or inconsistency. Data were unavailable to evaluate adverse events. Mindfulness-based interventions (MBIs) versus other treatments (standard of care, cognitive behavioral therapy, psychoeducation, support group, physical exercise, medication) Nineteen RCTs included a comparison between MBI and another treatment. The evidence was very uncertain about the effects of MBIs relative to other treatments on continuous abstinence rate at post-treatment (RR = 0.80, 95% CI 0.45 to 1.44, 1 RCT, 286 participants) and follow-up (RR = 0.57, 95% CI 0.28 to 1.16, 1 RCT, 286 participants), and on consumed amount at post-treatment (SMD = -0.42, 95% CI -1.23 to 0.39, 1 RCT, 25 participants) due to imprecision and risk of bias. The evidence suggests that MBIs reduce percentage of days with substance use slightly relative to other treatments at post-treatment (SMD = -0.21, 95% CI -0.45 to 0.03, 5 RCTs, 523 participants) and follow-up (SMD = -0.39, 95% CI -0.96 to 0.17, 3 RCTs, 409 participants). The evidence was very uncertain about the effects of MBIs relative to other treatments on craving intensity due to imprecision and inconsistency. Analysis of treatment acceptability indicated MBIs result in little to no increase in attrition relative to other treatments (RR = 1.06, 95% CI 0.89 to 1.26, 14 RCTs, 1531 participants). Data were unavailable to evaluate adverse events.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
In comparison with no treatment, the evidence is uncertain regarding the impact of MBIs on SUD-related outcomes. MBIs result in little to no higher attrition than no treatment. In comparison with other treatments, MBIs may slightly reduce days with substance use at post-treatment and follow-up (4 to 10 months). The evidence is uncertain regarding the impact of MBIs relative to other treatments on abstinence, consumed substance amount, or craving. MBIs result in little to no higher attrition than other treatments. Few studies reported adverse events.
Topics: Cognitive Behavioral Therapy; Craving; Humans; Mindfulness; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Recurrence; Substance-Related Disorders
PubMed: 34668188
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD011723.pub2 -
International Urogynecology Journal Jun 2022Urinary incontinence (UI) is prevalent in antenatal and postnatal women. Pelvic floor muscle training (PFMT) is the first-line treatment for UI. Group-based PFMT... (Review)
Review
INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS
Urinary incontinence (UI) is prevalent in antenatal and postnatal women. Pelvic floor muscle training (PFMT) is the first-line treatment for UI. Group-based PFMT provides a way for professionals to deliver this intervention to more women who need to prevent and/or treat UI. This review aims to (1) assess the effectiveness of group-based PFMT in preventing and treating UI in antenatal and postnatal women and (2) explore the characteristics of group-based intervention and factors which had an impact on the success of group-based PFMT.
METHODS
Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were included in this review. A comprehensive search was conducted in PubMed, Embase, Medline, PsycINFO, Maternity and Infant Care Database, CINAHL, Chinese Biomedical Literature Database, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, VIP Database and Wanfang Database. The overall quality was assessed using Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations (GRADE). RCTs which included pregnant and/or postnatal women with or without UI investigating the effectiveness of group-based PFMT were included.
RESULTS
Five RCTs were included in this review. The overall quality of the results of the included studies was low. Delivering group-based PFMT during pregnancy significantly reduced the prevalence of UI in both the pregnant period [risk ratio (RR) = 0.67, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.57 to 0.80, P < 0.00001] and the postnatal period [RR = 0.66, 95% CI 0.52 to 0.84, P = 0.0008]. Only one RCT delivered group-based PFMT during the postnatal period.
CONCLUSION
Evidence of weak quality supports the effectiveness of undertaking group-based PFMT in pregnancy to prevent UI during pregnancy and the postnatal period. No evidence showed the effectiveness of undertaking group-based PFMT in the postnatal period.
Topics: China; Exercise Therapy; Female; Humans; Pelvic Floor; Pregnancy; Treatment Outcome; Urinary Incontinence
PubMed: 34453550
DOI: 10.1007/s00192-021-04960-2 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Mar 2020Alcohol use disorder (AUD) confers a prodigious burden of disease, disability, premature mortality, and high economic costs from lost productivity, accidents, violence,... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Alcohol use disorder (AUD) confers a prodigious burden of disease, disability, premature mortality, and high economic costs from lost productivity, accidents, violence, incarceration, and increased healthcare utilization. For over 80 years, Alcoholics Anonymous (AA) has been a widespread AUD recovery organization, with millions of members and treatment free at the point of access, but it is only recently that rigorous research on its effectiveness has been conducted.
OBJECTIVES
To evaluate whether peer-led AA and professionally-delivered treatments that facilitate AA involvement (Twelve-Step Facilitation (TSF) interventions) achieve important outcomes, specifically: abstinence, reduced drinking intensity, reduced alcohol-related consequences, alcohol addiction severity, and healthcare cost offsets.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Drugs and Alcohol Group Specialized Register, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), PubMed, Embase, CINAHL and PsycINFO from inception to 2 August 2019. We searched for ongoing and unpublished studies via ClinicalTrials.gov and the World Health Organization (WHO) International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) on 15 November 2018. All searches included non-English language literature. We handsearched references of topic-related systematic reviews and bibliographies of included studies.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs), quasi-RCTs and non-randomized studies that compared AA or TSF (AA/TSF) with other interventions, such as motivational enhancement therapy (MET) or cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT), TSF treatment variants, or no treatment. We also included healthcare cost offset studies. Participants were non-coerced adults with AUD.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We categorized studies by: study design (RCT/quasi-RCT; non-randomized; economic); degree of standardized manualization (all interventions manualized versus some/none); and comparison intervention type (i.e. whether AA/TSF was compared to an intervention with a different theoretical orientation or an AA/TSF intervention that varied in style or intensity). For analyses, we followed Cochrane methodology calculating the standard mean difference (SMD) for continuous variables (e.g. percent days abstinent (PDA)) or the relative risk (risk ratios (RRs)) for dichotomous variables. We conducted random-effects meta-analyses to pool effects wherever possible.
MAIN RESULTS
We included 27 studies containing 10,565 participants (21 RCTs/quasi-RCTs, 5 non-randomized, and 1 purely economic study). The average age of participants within studies ranged from 34.2 to 51.0 years. AA/TSF was compared with psychological clinical interventions, such as MET and CBT, and other 12-step program variants. We rated selection bias as being at high risk in 11 of the 27 included studies, unclear in three, and as low risk in 13. We rated risk of attrition bias as high risk in nine studies, unclear in 14, and low in four, due to moderate (> 20%) attrition rates in the study overall (8 studies), or in study treatment group (1 study). Risk of bias due to inadequate researcher blinding was high in one study, unclear in 22, and low in four. Risks of bias arising from the remaining domains were predominantly low or unclear. AA/TSF (manualized) compared to treatments with a different theoretical orientation (e.g. CBT) (randomized/quasi-randomized evidence) RCTs comparing manualized AA/TSF to other clinical interventions (e.g. CBT), showed AA/TSF improves rates of continuous abstinence at 12 months (risk ratio (RR) 1.21, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.03 to 1.42; 2 studies, 1936 participants; high-certainty evidence). This effect remained consistent at both 24 and 36 months. For percentage days abstinent (PDA), AA/TSF appears to perform as well as other clinical interventions at 12 months (mean difference (MD) 3.03, 95% CI -4.36 to 10.43; 4 studies, 1999 participants; very low-certainty evidence), and better at 24 months (MD 12.91, 95% CI 7.55 to 18.29; 2 studies, 302 participants; low-certainty evidence) and 36 months (MD 6.64, 95% CI 1.54 to 11.75; 1 study, 806 participants; low-certainty evidence). For longest period of abstinence (LPA), AA/TSF may perform as well as comparison interventions at six months (MD 0.60, 95% CI -0.30 to 1.50; 2 studies, 136 participants; low-certainty evidence). For drinking intensity, AA/TSF may perform as well as other clinical interventions at 12 months, as measured by drinks per drinking day (DDD) (MD -0.17, 95% CI -1.11 to 0.77; 1 study, 1516 participants; moderate-certainty evidence) and percentage days heavy drinking (PDHD) (MD -5.51, 95% CI -14.15 to 3.13; 1 study, 91 participants; low-certainty evidence). For alcohol-related consequences, AA/TSF probably performs as well as other clinical interventions at 12 months (MD -2.88, 95% CI -6.81 to 1.04; 3 studies, 1762 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). For alcohol addiction severity, one study found evidence of a difference in favor of AA/TSF at 12 months (P < 0.05; low-certainty evidence). AA/TSF (non-manualized) compared to treatments with a different theoretical orientation (e.g. CBT) (randomized/quasi-randomized evidence) For the proportion of participants completely abstinent, non-manualized AA/TSF may perform as well as other clinical interventions at three to nine months follow-up (RR 1.71, 95% CI 0.70 to 4.18; 1 study, 93 participants; low-certainty evidence). Non-manualized AA/TSF may also perform slightly better than other clinical interventions for PDA (MD 3.00, 95% CI 0.31 to 5.69; 1 study, 93 participants; low-certainty evidence). For drinking intensity, AA/TSF may perform as well as other clinical interventions at nine months, as measured by DDD (MD -1.76, 95% CI -2.23 to -1.29; 1 study, 93 participants; very low-certainty evidence) and PDHD (MD 2.09, 95% CI -1.24 to 5.42; 1 study, 286 participants; low-certainty evidence). None of the RCTs comparing non-manualized AA/TSF to other clinical interventions assessed LPA, alcohol-related consequences, or alcohol addiction severity. Cost-effectiveness studies In three studies, AA/TSF had higher healthcare cost savings than outpatient treatment, CBT, and no AA/TSF treatment. The fourth study found that total medical care costs decreased for participants attending CBT, MET, and AA/TSF treatment, but that among participants with worse prognostic characteristics AA/TSF had higher potential cost savings than MET (moderate-certainty evidence).
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
There is high quality evidence that manualized AA/TSF interventions are more effective than other established treatments, such as CBT, for increasing abstinence. Non-manualized AA/TSF may perform as well as these other established treatments. AA/TSF interventions, both manualized and non-manualized, may be at least as effective as other treatments for other alcohol-related outcomes. AA/TSF probably produces substantial healthcare cost savings among people with alcohol use disorder.
Topics: Adult; Alcoholics Anonymous; Alcoholism; Cognitive Behavioral Therapy; Female; Health Care Costs; Humans; Male; Middle Aged; Motivational Interviewing; Psychotherapy; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 32159228
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD012880.pub2 -
Journal of Geriatric Physical Therapy...A clinical practice guideline on physical therapist management of patients with suspected or confirmed osteoporosis was developed by a volunteer guideline development...
A clinical practice guideline on physical therapist management of patients with suspected or confirmed osteoporosis was developed by a volunteer guideline development group (GDG) that was appointed by the Academy of Geriatric Physical Therapy (APTA Geriatrics). The GDG consisted of an exercise physiologist and 6 physical therapists with clinical and methodological expertise. The guideline was based on a systematic review of existing clinical practice guidelines, followed by application of the ADAPTE methodological process described by Guidelines International Network for adapting guidelines for cultural and professional utility. The recommendations contained in this guideline are derived from the 2021 Scottish Intercollegiate Guideline Network (SIGN) document: Management of Osteoporosis and the Prevention of Fragility Fractures. These guidelines are intended to assist physical therapists practicing in the United States, and implementation in the context of the US health care system is discussed.
Topics: Aged; Exercise; Humans; Osteoporosis; Physical Therapists; Physical Therapy Modalities
PubMed: 35384943
DOI: 10.1519/JPT.0000000000000346