-
Annals of Physical and Rehabilitation... Jun 2016Osteoarthritis (OA) is a public health problem that will probably increase in the future with the aging of the population. Crenobalneotherapy is commonly used to treat... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Osteoarthritis (OA) is a public health problem that will probably increase in the future with the aging of the population. Crenobalneotherapy is commonly used to treat OA, but evidence from previous reviews was not sufficient. This systematic review aimed to identify the best evidence for the clinical effect of crenobalneotherapy for knee OA.
METHODS
We systematically searched MEDLINE via PubMed, PEDRO and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials for articles published up to September 2015. Articles were included if trials were comparative, if one or more of the subgroups had knee OA with separate data, and if spa therapy or any hydrotherapy techniques involving mineral water or mineral mud was compared to any other intervention or no treatment. Statistical validity, external validity and quality of side effects assessment were evaluated by personal checklists. Risk of bias was assessed by the CLEAR NTP.
RESULTS
Treatments (hot mineral water baths, mud therapy, hot showers, and sometimes massage and supervised water exercises) delivered in spa centers across Europe and the Middle East seem to improve symptoms in knee OA. They may be effective for pain and function. There are conflicting results about the effect on quality of life and drug consumption.
CONCLUSIONS
Improvements with spa therapy for knee OA appear to be clinically relevant until 3 to 6 months and sometimes 9 months.
Topics: Balneology; Europe; Exercise Therapy; Health Resorts; Humans; Hydrotherapy; Massage; Middle East; Osteoarthritis, Knee; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 26996955
DOI: 10.1016/j.rehab.2016.01.010 -
Asian Journal of Surgery Feb 2022
Topics: Humans; Therapeutic Irrigation
PubMed: 34969571
DOI: 10.1016/j.asjsur.2021.12.019 -
British Medical Journal Nov 1916
PubMed: 20768374
DOI: 10.1136/bmj.2.2917.721 -
Journal of Physical Therapy Science Jul 2013[Purpose] This study set out to investigate the effects of leg immersion in warm water on pain, and stiffness of patients with stroke-induced chronic osteoarthritis....
[Purpose] This study set out to investigate the effects of leg immersion in warm water on pain, and stiffness of patients with stroke-induced chronic osteoarthritis. [Subjects] Forty-four patients with chronic stroke were randomly assigned to either the whirlpool group (n=24) or the control group (n=20). [Methods] Subjects in the whirlpool group immersed their legs in a whirlpool bath at 40 °C for 40 minutes 5 times a week for 8 weeks. The control group of patients was instructed to perform activities as usual without using a whirlpool bath. Pre-immersion and post-immersion measurements of the Western Ontario and McMaster University arthritis index (WOMAC)-pain and stiffness indexes were compared to determine the effects of the intervention. The paired t-test was performed to test the significance of differences before and after the experiment. The independent t-test was conducted in order to test the significance of differences between the whirlpool and control groups. Statistical significance was accepted for values of p<0.05. [Results] The WOMAC-pain score, and stiffness index were significantly lower after the intervention. [Conclusion] Immersion of the lower extremities in a whirlpool bath was beneficial for patients with chronic stroke-induced knee osteoarthritis.
PubMed: 24259873
DOI: 10.1589/jpts.25.873 -
Medical Hypotheses Jan 2021COVID-19 is a new contagious disease caused by a new coronavirus known as severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). COVID-19 is a disease that has... (Review)
Review
COVID-19 is a new contagious disease caused by a new coronavirus known as severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). COVID-19 is a disease that has reached every continent in the world; it has overloaded the medical system worldwide and it has been declared a pandemic by the World Health Organization. Currently there is no definite treatment for COVID-19. We realize that host immunity is a critical factor in the outcome of coronavirus 2 infection. Here, however, we review the pathophysiology of the disease with a focus on searching for what we can do to combat this new disease. From this, we find that coronavirus is sensitive to heat. We have thus focused on this area of vulnerability of the virus. The emphasis of this hypothesis is on the action of body heat-internal (fever) and external (heat treatment)-in activating the immune system and its antiviral activities, and specifically related to the coronavirus. We hypothesize from this review that heat treatments has the potential to prevent COVID-19 and to decrease the severity of mild and moderate cases of Coronavirus. We propose heat treatments for this uncontrolled worldwide coronavirus pandemic while studies are being done to test the effectiveness of heat treatments in the prevention and treatment of COVID-19.
Topics: COVID-19; Combined Modality Therapy; Host Microbial Interactions; Humans; Hydrotherapy; Hyperthermia, Induced; Models, Biological; Pandemics; SARS-CoV-2; Severity of Illness Index
PubMed: 33303302
DOI: 10.1016/j.mehy.2020.110363 -
The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery.... May 2007Modern principles for the treatment of open fractures include stabilisation of the bone and management of the soft tissues. Wound debridement and irrigation is thought... (Review)
Review
Modern principles for the treatment of open fractures include stabilisation of the bone and management of the soft tissues. Wound debridement and irrigation is thought to be the mainstay in reducing the incidence of infection. Although numerous studies on animals and humans have focused on the type of irrigation performed, little is known of the factors which influence irrigation. This paper evaluates the evidence, particularly with regard to additives and the mode of delivery of irrigation fluid. Normal saline should be used and although many antiseptics and antibiotics have been employed, no consensus has been reached as to the ideal additive. Despite the advocates of high-pressure methods highlighting the improved dilutional ability of such techniques, the results are inconclusive and these irrigation systems are not without complications. New systems for debridement are currently being investigated, and an ideal method has yet to be determined.
Topics: Animals; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Bacteria; Debridement; Fractures, Open; Humans; Intraoperative Care; Pressure; Sodium Chloride; Therapeutic Irrigation
PubMed: 17540739
DOI: 10.1302/0301-620X.89B5.19286 -
Innere Medizin (Heidelberg, Germany) Dec 2022Kneipp therapy comprises the five naturopathic elements of water, exercise, nutrition, medicinal herbs and order of life. As a traditional method, it has been proven in... (Review)
Review
Kneipp therapy comprises the five naturopathic elements of water, exercise, nutrition, medicinal herbs and order of life. As a traditional method, it has been proven in self-treatment at home, but as a holistic therapy concept it is also used in many medical practices both for the prevention and therapy of functional disorders and in the treatment of organic diseases and ailments. While naturopathic and complementary medical procedures are highly accepted by the population and the medical profession, and exercise and nutrition therapy in particular are already largely integrated into conventional medicine, the implementation of evidence-based medicine (EbM) in internal medicine practice represents a major challenge for Kneipp therapy. This is especially true for Kneipp hydrotherapy. Unlike in the 1980s and 1990s, when Kneipp therapy was scientifically recognized due to numerous preclinical, human physiological and some clinical studies, the change of perspective in medicine towards EbM has resulted in a research deficit in the field of clinical trials. The demand for scientific evidence is contrasted by a lack of reliable data and an overall heterogeneous study situation or study quality; however, existing studies point to positive or significant effects, so that further research activities are urgently necessary. Some of these studies are presented in this article.
Topics: Humans; Naturopathy; Internal Medicine; Hydrotherapy; Research Design; Evidence-Based Medicine
PubMed: 36350357
DOI: 10.1007/s00108-022-01423-8 -
Journal of Primary Care & Community... 2020To provide family physicians with a practical, evidence-based approach to managing patients with cerumen impaction. Methods: MEDLINE, The Cochrane Library, and the... (Review)
Review
To provide family physicians with a practical, evidence-based approach to managing patients with cerumen impaction. Methods: MEDLINE, The Cochrane Library, and the Turning Research Into Practice (TRIP) database were searched for English-language cerumen impaction guidelines and reviews. All such articles published between 1992 and 2018 were reviewed, with most providing level II and III evidence. Cerumen impaction is a common presentation seen in primary care and cerumen removal is one of the most common otolaryngologic procedures performed in general practice. Cerumen impaction is often harmless but can be accompanied by more serious symptoms. Cerumenolytics and irrigation of the ear canal are reasonable first-line therapies and can be used in conjunction or isolation. If irrigation and cerumenolytics are contraindicated, manual removal is appropriate, but the tools necessary are not commonplace in primary care clinics and specialized training may be required to prevent adverse outcomes. Family physicians play a key role in the assessment and management of cerumen impaction and are well equipped to do so. Knowledge of the available techniques for cerumen removal as well as their contraindications ensures that cerumen is removed safely and effectively. When cerumen removal cannot be removed safely in a primary care setting, referral to Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery is appropriate.
Topics: Cerumen; Family Practice; General Practice; Humans; Physicians, Primary Care; Therapeutic Irrigation
PubMed: 31994443
DOI: 10.1177/2150132720904181 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Oct 2020Establishing the subgroup analysis of the fallopian tubes (tubes) is a commonly undertaken diagnostic investigation for women with subfertility. This is usually achieved... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Establishing the subgroup analysis of the fallopian tubes (tubes) is a commonly undertaken diagnostic investigation for women with subfertility. This is usually achieved by flushing contrast medium through the tubes and visualising patency on radiographs, ultrasonography or laparoscopy. Many women were noted to conceive in the first three to six months after tubal flushing, raising the possibility that tubal flushing could also be a treatment for infertility. There has been debate about which contrast medium should be used (water-soluble or oil-soluble media) as this may influence pregnancy rates. An important adverse event during tubal flushing is intravasation (backflow of contrast medium into the blood or lymphatic vessels),which could lead to embolism although it is asymptomatic in most cases.
OBJECTIVES
To evaluate the effectiveness and safety of tubal flushing with oil-soluble contrast media (OSCM) and water-soluble contrast media (WSCM) on subsequent fertility outcomes in women with subfertility.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Gynaecology and Fertility Group Specialised Register of controlled trials, MEDLINE, Embase, CENTRAL, PsycINFO, reference lists of identified articles and trial registries. The most recent search was conducted in April 2020.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing tubal flushing with OSCM, WSCM with each other or with no treatment, in women with subfertility.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently selected the trials, assessed risk of bias and extracted data. We contacted study authors for additional information. The overall quality of the evidence was assessed using GRADE methods.
MAIN RESULTS
Fifteen trials involving 3864 women were included in this systematic review. Overall, the quality of evidence varied from very low to moderate: the main limitations were risk of bias, heterogeneity and imprecision. OSCM versus no treatment Four studies (506 women) were included in this comparison. Tubal flushing with OSCM may increase the odds of live birth (odds ratio (OR) 3.27, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.57 to 6.85, 3 RCTs, 204 women, I = 0, low-quality evidence). This suggests that if the chance of live birth following no treatment is assumed to be 11%, the chance following tubal flushing with OSCM would be between 16% and 46%. Tubal flushing with OSCM may increase in the odds of clinical pregnancy (OR 3.54, 95% CI 2.08 to 6.02, 4 RCTs, 506 women, I = 18%, low-quality evidence). This suggests that if the chance of clinical pregnancy following no treatment is assumed to be 9%, the chance following tubal flushing with OSCM would be between 17% and 37%. No study measured intravasation or other adverse events such as infection, haemorrhage and congenital abnormalities. WSCM versus no treatment Only one study (334 women) was included in this comparison. We are uncertain whether tubal flushing with WSCM increase live birth compared to no treatment (OR 1.13, 95% CI 0.67 to 1.91, 1 RCT, 334 women, low-quality evidence). This suggests that if the chance of live birth following no treatment is assumed to be 21%, the chance following tubal flushing with WSCM would be between 15% and 33%. We are uncertain whether tubal flushing with WSCM increases clinical pregnancy compared to no treatment (OR 1.14, 95% CI 0.71 to 1.84, 1 RCT, 334 women, low-quality evidence). This suggests that if the chance of clinical pregnancy following no treatment is assumed to be 27%, the chance following tubal flushing with WSCM would be between 29% and 40%. One case with pelvic infection was reported in the WSCM group and no case with infection in the no treatment group in a one study (334 women). Meta-analysis was not performed due to the rare events. No study measured intravasation or other adverse events such as infection, haemorrhage and congenital abnormalities. OSCM versus WSCM Six studies (2598 women) were included in this comparison. Three studies reported live birth, including two with higher live birth in the OSCM group (OR 1.64, 95% CI 1.27 to 2.11, 1119 women; OR 3.45, 95% CI 1.97 to 6.03, 398 women); and one with insufficient evidence of a difference between groups (OR 0.92, 95% CI 0.60 to 1.40, 533 women). Given the substantial heterogeneity observed (I = 86%), meta-analysis was not performed. Tubal flushing with OSCM probably increased in the odds of intravasation (asymptomatic) compared to tubal flushing with WSCM (OR 5.00, 95% CI 2.25 to 11.12, 4 RCTs, 1912 women, I = 0, moderate-quality evidence). This suggests that if the chance of intravasation following tubal flushing with WSCM is assumed to be 1%, the chance following tubal flushing with OSCM would be between 2% and 9%. Tubal flushing with OSCM may increase the odds of clinical pregnancy (OR 1.42, 95% CI 1.10 to 1.85, 6 RCTs, 2598 women, I = 41%, low-quality evidence). This suggests that if the chance of clinical pregnancy following tubal flushing with WSCM is assumed to be 26%, the chance following tubal flushing with OSCM would be between 28% and 39%. We are uncertain whether tubal flushing with OSCM decreases the odds of infection (OR 0.22, 95% CI 0.04 to 1.22, 2 RCTs, 662 women, I = 0, very low-quality evidence) or haemorrhage (OR 0.65, 95% CI 0.40 to 1.06, 2 RCTs, 662 women, I = 0, very low-quality evidence). Three neonates with congenital abnormalities were reported in the OSCM group while no congenital abnormality was reported in the WSCM group in one study (1119 women). No meta-analysis was performed due to the rare events.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
The evidence suggests that compared to no treatment, tubal flushing with OSCM may increase the chance of live birth and clinical pregnancy, while it is uncertain whether tubal flushing with WSCM improves those outcomes. Compared to tubal flushing with WSCM, OSCM may improve clinical pregnancy while meta-analysis was impossible for live birth due to heterogeneity. Evidence also suggests that OSCM is associated with an increased risk of asymptomatic intravasation. Overall, adverse events, especially long-term adverse events, are poorly reported across studies.
Topics: Bias; Contrast Media; Fallopian Tubes; Female; Humans; Infertility, Female; Live Birth; Oils; Pregnancy; Pregnancy Rate; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Solubility; Therapeutic Irrigation; Water
PubMed: 33053612
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD003718.pub5 -
BMJ Open Jul 2023Hydrotherapy is a traditional prevention and treatment strategy. This study's aim is to systematically review all available randomised controlled trials (RCTs)...
OBJECTIVE
Hydrotherapy is a traditional prevention and treatment strategy. This study's aim is to systematically review all available randomised controlled trials (RCTs) investigating clinical effects of hydrotherapy according to Kneipp which is characterised by cold water applications.
METHODS
RCTs on disease therapy and prevention with Kneipp hydrotherapy were included. Study participants were patients and healthy volunteers of all age groups. MEDLINE (via PubMed), Scopus, Central, CAMbase, and opengrey.eu were systematically searched through April 2021 without language restrictions and updated by searching PubMed until April 6th 2023. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane tool version 1.ResultsTwenty RCTs (N=4247) were included. Due to high heterogeneity of the RCTs, no meta-analysis was performed. Risk of bias was rated as unclear in most of the domains. Of 132 comparisons, 46 showed significant positive effects in favour of hydrotherapy on chronic venous insufficiency, menopausal symptoms, fever, cognition, emotional function and sickness absenteeism. However, 81 comparisons showed no differences between groups and 5 were in favour of the respective control group. Only half of the studies reported safety issues.
CONCLUSION
Although RCTs on Kneipp hydrotherapy seem to show positive effects in some conditions and outcomes, it remains difficult to ascertain treatment effects due to the high risk of bias and heterogeneity of most of the considered studies. Further high-quality RCTs on Kneipp hydrotherapy are urgently warranted.
PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER
CRD42021237611.
Topics: Humans; Hydrotherapy; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 37423627
DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2022-070951