-
Cleveland Clinic Journal of Medicine Nov 2022Benign paroxysmal positional vertigo (BPPV), caused by wayward crystals ("rocks") in the semicircular canals of the inner ear, is the most common cause of brief symptoms... (Review)
Review
Benign paroxysmal positional vertigo (BPPV), caused by wayward crystals ("rocks") in the semicircular canals of the inner ear, is the most common cause of brief symptoms of vertigo secondary to head and body movements. Diagnosing and treating it are simple to do in the medical office. This article reviews the differential diagnosis for patients presenting with dizziness and vertigo, the pathophysiology of BPPV, how to diagnose it using maneuvers to elicit symptoms and nystagmus, how to interpret the nystagmus pattern to determine where the rocks are, and how to treat it using different maneuvers to reposition ("roll") the rocks back where they belong.
Topics: Humans; Benign Paroxysmal Positional Vertigo; Semicircular Canals; Dizziness; Nystagmus, Pathologic; Patient Positioning
PubMed: 36319052
DOI: 10.3949/ccjm.89a.21057 -
Emergency Medicine Clinics of North... Aug 2022Acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) occurs in up to 10% of patients with respiratory failure admitted through the emergency department. Use of noninvasive... (Review)
Review
Acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) occurs in up to 10% of patients with respiratory failure admitted through the emergency department. Use of noninvasive respiratory support has proliferated in recent years; clinicians must understand the relative merits and risks of these technologies and know how to recognize signs of failure. The cornerstone of ARDS care of the mechanically ventilated patient is low-tidal volume ventilation based on ideal body weight. Adjunctive therapies, such as prone positioning and neuromuscular blockade, may have a role in the emergency department management of ARDS depending on patient and department characteristics.
Topics: Humans; Patient Positioning; Positive-Pressure Respiration; Respiration, Artificial; Respiratory Distress Syndrome; Respiratory Insufficiency; Tidal Volume
PubMed: 35953211
DOI: 10.1016/j.emc.2022.05.002 -
Revista Latino-americana de Enfermagem Jan 2019to evaluate and classify patients according to the Risk Assessment Scale for Perioperative Pressure Injuries; verify the association between sociodemographic and... (Observational Study)
Observational Study
OBJECTIVES
to evaluate and classify patients according to the Risk Assessment Scale for Perioperative Pressure Injuries; verify the association between sociodemographic and clinical variables and the risk score; and identify the occurrence of pressure injuries due to surgical positioning.
METHOD
observational, longitudinal, prospective and quantitative study carried out in a teaching hospital with 278 patients submitted to elective surgeries. A sociodemographic and clinical characterization questionnaire and the Risk Assessment Scale for Perioperative Pressure Injuries were used. Descriptive, bivariate and logistic regression analyses were applied.
RESULTS
the majority of patients (56.5%) presented a high risk for perioperative pressure injury. Female sex, elderly group, and altered body mass index values were statistically significant (p < 0.05) for a higher risk of pressure injuries. In 77% of the patients, there were perioperative pressure injuries.
CONCLUSION
most of the participants presented a high risk for development of perioperative decubitus ulcers. The female sex, elderly group, and altered body mass index were significant factors for increased risk. The Risk Assessment Scale for Perioperative Pressure Injuries allows the early identification of risk of injury, subsidizing the adoption of preventive strategies to ensure the quality of perioperative care.
Topics: Adolescent; Adult; Aged; Female; Humans; Male; Middle Aged; Patient Positioning; Perioperative Care; Perioperative Nursing; Postoperative Complications; Pressure Ulcer; Risk Assessment; Socioeconomic Factors; Young Adult
PubMed: 30698218
DOI: 10.1590/1518-8345.2677-3117 -
BMJ Open Respiratory Research 2019The Faculty of Intensive Care Medicine and Intensive Care Society Guideline Development Group have used GRADE methodology to make the following recommendations for the...
The Faculty of Intensive Care Medicine and Intensive Care Society Guideline Development Group have used GRADE methodology to make the following recommendations for the management of adult patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). The British Thoracic Society supports the recommendations in this guideline. Where mechanical ventilation is required, the use of low tidal volumes (<6 ml/kg ideal body weight) and airway pressures (plateau pressure <30 cmHO) was recommended. For patients with moderate/severe ARDS (PF ratio<20 kPa), prone positioning was recommended for at least 12 hours per day. By contrast, high frequency oscillation was not recommended and it was suggested that inhaled nitric oxide is not used. The use of a conservative fluid management strategy was suggested for all patients, whereas mechanical ventilation with high positive end-expiratory pressure and the use of the neuromuscular blocking agent cisatracurium for 48 hours was suggested for patients with ARDS with ratio of arterial oxygen partial pressure to fractional inspired oxygen (PF) ratios less than or equal to 27 and 20 kPa, respectively. Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation was suggested as an adjunct to protective mechanical ventilation for patients with very severe ARDS. In the absence of adequate evidence, research recommendations were made for the use of corticosteroids and extracorporeal carbon dioxide removal.
Topics: Blood Gas Analysis; Combined Modality Therapy; Critical Care; Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation; Glucocorticoids; Humans; Patient Positioning; Prone Position; Respiration, Artificial; Respiratory Distress Syndrome; Societies, Medical; Tidal Volume; Treatment Outcome; United Kingdom
PubMed: 31258917
DOI: 10.1136/bmjresp-2019-000420 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Apr 2014A pressure ulcer (PU), also referred to as a 'pressure injury', 'pressure sore', or 'bedsore' is defined as an area of localised tissue damage that is caused by... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
A pressure ulcer (PU), also referred to as a 'pressure injury', 'pressure sore', or 'bedsore' is defined as an area of localised tissue damage that is caused by unrelieved pressure, friction or shearing forces on any part of the body. PUs commonly occur in patients who are elderly and less mobile, and carry significant human and economic impacts. Immobility and physical inactivity are considered to be major risk factors for PU development and the manual repositioning of patients in hospital or long-term care is a common pressure ulcer prevention strategy.
OBJECTIVES
The objectives of this review were to:1) assess the effects of repositioning on the prevention of PUs in adults, regardless of risk or in-patient setting;2) ascertain the most effective repositioning schedules for preventing PUs in adults; and3) ascertain the incremental resource consequences and costs associated with implementing different repositioning regimens compared with alternate schedules or standard practice.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the following electronic databases to identify reports of the relevant randomised controlled trials: the Cochrane Wounds Group Specialised Register (searched 06 September 2013), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (2013, Issue 8); Ovid MEDLINE (1948 to August, Week 4, 2013); Ovid EMBASE (1974 to 2013, Week 35); EBESCO CINAHL (1982 to 30 August 2013); and the reference sections of studies that were included in the review.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomised controlled trials (RCTs), published or unpublished, that assessed the effects of any repositioning schedule or different patient positions and measured PU incidence in adults in any setting.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently performed study selection, risk of bias assessment and data extraction.
MAIN RESULTS
We included three RCTs and one economic study representing a total of 502 randomised participants from acute and long-term care settings. Two trials compared the 30º and 90º tilt positions using similar repositioning frequencies (there was a small difference in frequency of overnight repositioning in the 90º tilt groups between the trials). The third RCT compared alternative repositioning frequencies.All three studies reported the proportion of patients developing PU of any grade, stage or category. None of the trials reported on pain, or quality of life, and only one reported on cost. All three trials were at high risk of bias.The two trials of 30º tilt vs. 90º were pooled using a random effects model (I² = 69%) (252 participants). The risk ratio for developing a PU in the 30º tilt and the standard 90º position was very imprecise (pooled RR 0.62, 95% CI 0.10 to 3.97, P=0.62, very low quality evidence). This comparison is underpowered and at risk of a Type 2 error (only 21 events).In the third study, a cluster randomised trial, participants were randomised between 2-hourly and 3-hourly repositioning on standard hospital mattresses and 4 hourly and 6 hourly repositioning on viscoelastic foam mattresses. This study was also underpowered and at high risk of bias. The risk ratio for pressure ulcers (any category) with 2-hourly repositioning compared with 3-hourly repositioning on a standard mattress was imprecise (RR 0.90, 95% CI 0.69 to 1.16, very low quality evidence). The risk ratio for pressure ulcers (any category) was compatible with a large reduction and no difference between 4-hourly repositioning and 6-hourly repositioning on viscoelastic foam (RR 0.73, 95% CI 0.53 to 1.02, very low quality evidence).A cost-effectiveness analysis based on data derived from one of the included parallel RCTs compared 3-hourly repositioning using the 30º tilt overnight with standard care consisting of 6-hourly repositioning using the 90º lateral rotation overnight. In this evaluation the only included cost was nursing time. The intervention was reported to be cost saving compared with standard care (nurse time cost per patient €206.6 vs €253.1, incremental difference €-46.5; 95%CI: €-1.25 to €-74.60).
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Repositioning is an integral component of pressure ulcer prevention and treatment; it has a sound theoretical rationale, and is widely recommended and used in practice. The lack of robust evaluations of repositioning frequency and position for pressure ulcer prevention mean that great uncertainty remains but it does not mean these interventions are ineffective since all comparisons are grossly underpowered. Current evidence is small in volume and at risk of bias and there is currently no strong evidence of a reduction in pressure ulcers with the 30° tilt compared with the standard 90º position or good evidence of an effect of repositioning frequency. There is a clear need for high-quality, adequately-powered trials to assess the effects of position and optimal frequency of repositioning on pressure ulcer incidence.The limited data derived from one economic evaluation means it remains unclear whether repositioning every 3 hours using the 30º tilt is less costly in terms of nursing time and more effective than standard care involving repositioning every 6 hours using a 90º tilt.
Topics: Adult; Aged; Beds; Cost-Benefit Analysis; Humans; Middle Aged; Patient Positioning; Pressure Ulcer; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Time Factors
PubMed: 24700291
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD009958.pub2 -
BMC Pulmonary Medicine Oct 2018Pulmonary function tests (PFTs) are routinely performed in the upright position due to measurement devices and patient comfort. This systematic review investigated the...
BACKGROUND
Pulmonary function tests (PFTs) are routinely performed in the upright position due to measurement devices and patient comfort. This systematic review investigated the influence of body position on lung function in healthy persons and specific patient groups.
METHODS
A search to identify English-language papers published from 1/1998-12/2017 was conducted using MEDLINE and Google Scholar with key words: body position, lung function, lung mechanics, lung volume, position change, positioning, posture, pulmonary function testing, sitting, standing, supine, ventilation, and ventilatory change. Studies that were quasi-experimental, pre-post intervention; compared ≥2 positions, including sitting or standing; and assessed lung function in non-mechanically ventilated subjects aged ≥18 years were included. Primary outcome measures were forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1), forced vital capacity (FVC, FEV1/FVC), vital capacity (VC), functional residual capacity (FRC), maximal expiratory pressure (PEmax), maximal inspiratory pressure (PImax), peak expiratory flow (PEF), total lung capacity (TLC), residual volume (RV), and diffusing capacity of the lungs for carbon monoxide (DLCO). Standing, sitting, supine, and right- and left-side lying positions were studied.
RESULTS
Forty-three studies met inclusion criteria. The study populations included healthy subjects (29 studies), lung disease (nine), heart disease (four), spinal cord injury (SCI, seven), neuromuscular diseases (three), and obesity (four). In most studies involving healthy subjects or patients with lung, heart, neuromuscular disease, or obesity, FEV1, FVC, FRC, PEmax, PImax, and/or PEF values were higher in more erect positions. For subjects with tetraplegic SCI, FVC and FEV1 were higher in supine vs. sitting. In healthy subjects, DLCO was higher in the supine vs. sitting, and in sitting vs. side-lying positions. In patients with chronic heart failure, the effect of position on DLCO varied.
CONCLUSIONS
Body position influences the results of PFTs, but the optimal position and magnitude of the benefit varies between study populations. PFTs are routinely performed in the sitting position. We recommend the supine position should be considered in addition to sitting for PFTs in patients with SCI and neuromuscular disease. When treating patients with heart, lung, SCI, neuromuscular disease, or obesity, one should take into consideration that pulmonary physiology and function are influenced by body position.
Topics: Humans; Lung; Posture; Respiratory Function Tests
PubMed: 30305051
DOI: 10.1186/s12890-018-0723-4 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Mar 2016Post-dural puncture headache (PDPH) is a common complication of lumbar punctures. Several theories have identified the leakage of cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) through the... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Post-dural puncture headache (PDPH) is a common complication of lumbar punctures. Several theories have identified the leakage of cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) through the hole in the dura as a cause of this side effect. It is therefore necessary to take preventive measures to avoid this complication. Prolonged bed rest has been used to treat PDPH once it has started, but it is unknown whether prolonged bed rest can also be used to prevent it. Similarly, the value of administering fluids additional to those of normal dietary intake to restore the loss of CSF produced by the puncture is unknown. This review is an update of a previously published review in the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (Issue 7, 2013) on "Posture and fluids for preventing post-dural puncture headache".
OBJECTIVES
To assess whether prolonged bed rest combined with different body and head positions, as well as administration of supplementary fluids after lumbar puncture, prevent the onset of PDPH in people undergoing lumbar puncture for diagnostic or therapeutic purposes.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, EMBASE, and LILACS, as well as trial registries up to February 2015.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We identified randomized controlled trials that compared the effects of bed rest versus immediate mobilization, head-down tilt versus horizontal position, prone versus supine positions during bed rest, and administration of supplementary fluids versus no/less supplementation, as prevention measures for PDPH in people who have undergone lumbar puncture.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently assessed the studies for eligibility through the web-based software EROS (Early Review Organizing Software). Two different review authors independently assessed risk of bias using the criteria outlined in the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. We resolved any disagreements by consensus. We extracted data on cases of PDPH, severe PDPH, and any headache after lumbar puncture and performed intention-to-treat analyses and sensitivity analyses by risk of bias. We assessed the evidence using GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) and created a 'Summary of findings' table.
MAIN RESULTS
We included 24 trials with 2996 participants in this updated review. The number of participants in each trial varied from 39 to 382. Most of the included studies compared bed rest versus immediate mobilization, and only two assessed the effects of supplementary fluids versus no supplementation. We judged the overall risk of bias of the included studies as low to unclear. The overall quality of evidence was low to moderate, downgraded because of the risk of bias assessment in most cases. The primary outcome in our review was the presence of PDPH.There was low quality evidence for an absence of benefits associated with bed rest compared with immediate mobilization on the incidence of severe PDPH (risk ratio (RR) 0.98; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.68 to 1.41; participants = 1568; studies = 9) and moderate quality evidence on the incidence of any headache after lumbar puncture (RR 1.16; 95% CI 1.02 to 1.32; participants = 2477; studies = 18). Furthermore, bed rest probably increased PDPH (RR 1.24; 95% CI 1.04 to 1.48; participants = 1519; studies = 12) compared with immediate mobilization. An analysis restricted to the most methodologically rigorous trials (i.e. those with low risk of bias in allocation method, missing data and blinding of outcome assessment) gave similar results. There was low quality evidence for an absence of benefits associated with fluid supplementation on the incidence of severe PDPH (RR 0.67; 95% CI 0.26 to 1.73; participants = 100; studies = 1) and PDPH (RR 1; 95% CI 0.59 to 1.69; participants = 100; studies = 1), and moderate quality evidence on the incidence of any headache after lumbar puncture (RR 0.94; 95% CI 0.66 to 1.34; participants = 200; studies = 2). We did not expect other adverse events and did not assess them in this review.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Since the previous version of this review, we found one new study for inclusion, but the conclusion remains unchanged. We considered the quality of the evidence for most of the outcomes assessed in this review to be low to moderate. As identified studies had shortcomings on aspects related to randomization and blinding of outcome assessment, we therefore downgraded the quality of the evidence. In general, there was no evidence suggesting that routine bed rest after dural puncture is beneficial for the prevention of PDPH onset. The role of fluid supplementation in the prevention of PDPH remains unclear.
Topics: Bed Rest; Early Ambulation; Fluid Therapy; Head; Humans; Patient Positioning; Post-Dural Puncture Headache; Posture; Spinal Puncture
PubMed: 26950232
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD009199.pub3 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Jun 2020A pressure injury (PI), also referred to as a 'pressure ulcer', or 'bedsore', is an area of localised tissue damage caused by unrelieved pressure, friction, or shearing... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
A pressure injury (PI), also referred to as a 'pressure ulcer', or 'bedsore', is an area of localised tissue damage caused by unrelieved pressure, friction, or shearing on any part of the body. Immobility is a major risk factor and manual repositioning a common prevention strategy. This is an update of a review first published in 2014.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the clinical and cost effectiveness of repositioning regimens(i.e. repositioning schedules and patient positions) on the prevention of PI in adults regardless of risk in any setting.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Wounds Specialised Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid Embase, and EBSCO CINAHL Plus on 12 February 2019. We also searched clinical trials registries for ongoing and unpublished studies, and scanned the reference lists of included studies as well as reviews, meta-analyses, and health technology reports to identify additional studies. There were no restrictions with respect to language, date of publication, or study setting.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomised controlled trials (RCTs), including cluster-randomised trials (c-RCTs), published or unpublished, that assessed the effects of any repositioning schedule or different patient positions and measured PI incidence in adults in any setting.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Three review authors independently performed study selection, 'Risk of bias' assessment, and data extraction. We assessed the certainty of the evidence using GRADE.
MAIN RESULTS
We identified five additional trials and one economic substudy in this update, resulting in the inclusion of a total of eight trials involving 3941 participants from acute and long-term care settings and two economic substudies in the review. Six studies reported the proportion of participants developing PI of any stage. Two of the eight trials reported within-trial cost evaluations. Follow-up periods were short (24 hours to 21 days). All studies were at high risk of bias. Funding sources were reported in five trials. Primary outcomes: proportion of new PI of any stage Repositioning frequencies: three trials compared different repositioning frequencies We pooled data from three trials (1074 participants) comparing 2-hourly with 4-hourly repositioning frequencies (fixed-effect; I² = 45%; pooled risk ratio (RR) 1.06, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.80 to 1.41). It is uncertain whether 2-hourly repositioning compared with 4-hourly repositioning used in conjunction with any support surface increases or decreases the incidence of PI. The certainty of the evidence is very low due to high risk of bias, downgraded twice for risk of bias, and once for imprecision. One of these trials had three arms (967 participants) comparing 2-hourly, 3-hourly, and 4-hourly repositioning regimens on high-density mattresses; data for one comparison was included in the pooled analysis. Another comparison was based on 2-hourly versus 3-hourly repositioning. The RR for PI incidence was 4.06 (95% CI 0.87 to 18.98). The third study comparison was based on 3-hourly versus 4-hourly repositioning (RR 0.20, 95% CI 0.04 to 0.92). The certainty of the evidence is low due to risk of bias and imprecision. In one c-RCT, 262 participants in 32 ward clusters were randomised between 2-hourly and 3-hourly repositioning on standard mattresses and 4-hourly and 6-hourly repositioning on viscoelastic mattresses. The RR for PI with 2-hourly repositioning compared with 3-hourly repositioning on standard mattress is imprecise (RR 0.90, 95% CI 0.69 to 1.16; very low-certainty evidence). The CI for PI include both a large reduction and no difference for the comparison of 4-hourly and 6-hourly repositioning on viscoelastic foam (RR 0.73, 95% CI 0.53 to 1.02). The certainty of the evidence is very low, downgraded twice due to high risk of bias, and once for imprecision. Positioning regimens: four trials compared different tilt positions We pooled data from two trials (252 participants) that compared a 30° tilt with a 90° tilt (random-effects; I² = 69%). There was no clear difference in the incidence of stage 1 or 2 PI. The effect of tilt is uncertain because the certainty of evidence is very low (pooled RR 0.62, 95% CI 0.10 to 3.97), downgraded due to serious design limitations and very serious imprecision. One trial involving 120 participants compared 30° tilt and 45° tilt with 'usual care' and reported no occurrence of PI events (low certainty evidence). Another trial involving 116 ICU patients compared prone with the usual supine positioning for PI. Reporting was incomplete and this is low certainty evidence. Secondary outcomes No studies reported health-related quality of life utility scores, procedural pain, or patient satisfaction. Cost analysis Two included trials also performed economic analyses. A cost-minimisation analysis compared the costs of 3-hourly and 4-hourly repositioning with 2-hourly repositioning schedule amongst nursing home residents. The cost of repositioning was estimated at CAD 11.05 and CAD 16.74 less per resident per day for the 3-hourly or 4-hourly regimen, respectively, compared with the 2-hourly regimen. The estimates of economic benefit were driven mostly by the value of freed nursing time. The analysis assumed that 2-, 3-, or 4-hourly repositioning is associated with a similar incidence of PI, as no difference in incidence was observed. A second study compared the nursing time cost of 3-hourly repositioning using a 30° tilt with standard care (6-hourly repositioning with a 90° lateral rotation) amongst nursing home residents. The intervention was reported to be cost-saving compared with standard care (nursing time cost per patient EUR 206.60 versus EUR 253.10, incremental difference EUR -46.50, 95% CI EUR -1.25 to EUR -74.60).
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Despite the addition of five trials, the results of this update are consistent with our earlier review, with the evidence judged to be of low or very low certainty. There remains a lack of robust evaluations of repositioning frequency and positioning for PI prevention and uncertainty about their effectiveness. Since all comparisons were underpowered, there is a high level of uncertainty in the evidence base. Given the limited data from economic evaluations, it remains unclear whether repositioning every three hours using the 30° tilt versus "usual care" (90° tilt) or repositioning 3-to-4-hourly versus 2-hourly is less costly relative to nursing time.
Topics: Aged; Beds; Cost-Benefit Analysis; Humans; Middle Aged; Patient Positioning; Pressure Ulcer; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Time Factors
PubMed: 32484259
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD009958.pub3 -
JPMA. the Journal of the Pakistan... Mar 2021To evaluate the effect of positioning on gross motor function and spasticity in spastic quadriplegic cerebral palsy children with Gross Motor Function Classification...
OBJECTIVES
To evaluate the effect of positioning on gross motor function and spasticity in spastic quadriplegic cerebral palsy children with Gross Motor Function Classification System level IV and V.
METHODS
A quasi-experimental study was conducted at two Paediatric Physical Therapy Centres from November 2018 to July 2019. The study comprised of seventy four children with quadriplegic cerebral palsy aged between 3 to 8 years. Data was obtained and gross motor functional abilities and spasticity were assessed by GMFM-88 and Modified Ashworth Scale, respectively. Twenty four-hour positioning in specific seats, night positioning and standing frames for six months. The child was being positioned 24 hours according to his challenges for the period of six months. Semi reclined positioning was performed to manage aspiration, oral leak and to develop retention. Prone positioning was done to develop righting reactions, functional sitting position was used in the treatment regime to attain better upright position and neutral pelvic standing using standing frames. SPSS 24 was used to analyse the data.
RESULTS
Paired t-test reported significant improvement in the test scores in lying position, rolling, sitting position, crawling, kneeling, standing, walking or running. Fifty-nine subjects exhibited improvement in spasticity before and after interventional procedures, while 15 showed no improvement (p<0.05).
CONCLUSIONS
Twenty-Four-hour proper body positioning and postural techniques improved gross motor functioning in all five dimensions of functioning. The overall spasticity in quadriplegic cerebral palsy children was also reduced due to appropriate positioning techniques.
Topics: Activities of Daily Living; Cerebral Palsy; Child; Child, Preschool; Humans; Muscle Spasticity; Posture; Walking
PubMed: 34057924
DOI: 10.47391/JPMA.1213 -
Neurologia (Barcelona, Spain) 2017One of the consequences of poor postural control in children with cerebral palsy is hip dislocation. This is due to the lack of weight-bearing in the sitting and... (Review)
Review
INTRODUCTION
One of the consequences of poor postural control in children with cerebral palsy is hip dislocation. This is due to the lack of weight-bearing in the sitting and standing positions. Orthotic aids can be used to prevent onset and/or progression.
OBJECTIVE
The aim of this study is to analyse the effectiveness of positioning systems in achieving postural control in patients with cerebral palsy, and discuss these findings with an emphasis on what may be of interest in the field of neurology.
DISCUSSION
We selected a total of 18 articles on interventions in cerebral palsy addressing posture and maintenance of ideal postures to prevent deformities and related problems. The main therapeutic approaches employed combinations of botulinum toxin and orthoses, which reduced the incidence of hip dislocation although these results were not significant. On the other hand, using positioning systems in 3 different positions decreases use of botulinum toxin and surgery in children under 5 years old. The drawback is that these systems are very uncomfortable.
CONCLUSION
Postural control systems helps control hip deformities in children with cerebral palsy. However, these systems must be used for prolonged periods of time before their effects can be observed.
Topics: Cerebral Palsy; Child; Hip Dislocation; Humans; Patient Positioning; Posture
PubMed: 26300497
DOI: 10.1016/j.nrl.2015.05.008