Efficacy of restitutive interventions for oculomotor deficits in adults with mild traumatic brain injury: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Mild traumatic brain injury (mTBI) can cause persistent symptoms suggestive of oculomotor deficits. This research synthesized evidence on restitutive interventions for reducing oculomotor deficits in adults with mTBI to understand if these interventions have clinical utility for improving recovery. METHODS: Medline, EMBASE, CINHAL, PsychInfo, and Scopus, databases were searched for experimental studies published in English. We rated risk of bias (RoB) using recommended tools, and the certainty of the evidence according to GRADE guidelines. We conducted meta-analyses for similar outcomes reported in at least two studies. RESULTS: Out of 5,328 citations, 12 studies (seven case series and five crossover design), with a combined sample size of 354 participants; (43% males) met the inclusion criteria and were analyzed. The analysis revealed a trend toward improvement of oculomotor deficits and visual tasks in response to restitutive intervention. None of the studies addressed sex or gender effects. All studies had high RoB, suggesting low certainty in the reported results. DISCUSSION: Restitutive interventions may be beneficial for adults with oculomotor deficits after mTBI, however overall certainty of the evidence remains low. Future efforts must include enhancing attention to study methodology and reporting, sex and gender analyses, and reaching a consensus on outcome measures. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42022352276.

Rehabilitation interventions for oculomotor deficits in adults with mild traumatic brain injury: a systematic review protocol.

INTRODUCTION: Mild traumatic brain injury (mTBI) is the most common form of TBI with many individuals suffering from symptoms suggestive of deficits in oculomotor function. Although the symptoms are often experienced transiently, almost 50% of individuals will experience persistent symptoms. Oculomotor deficits can last months after injury and decrease function and the ability to participate in work, school and sport. To date, rehabilitation interventions targeting oculomotor deficits in mTBI have been reported on in several studies with varying study designs; however, the effectiveness of these interventions on measures of oculomotor function has not been established. The purpose of this paper is to present a protocol for a systematic review that aims to examine the effectiveness of rehabilitation interventions for improving function in adults with oculomotor deficits after mTBI. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Systematic searches in Medline Ovid, EMBASE, PsycINFO, CINAHL and Scopus will be conducted to identify experimental studies published in English from each databases inception date to present, involving adult patients with mTBI and oculomotor deficits. Citations will be saved and managed in EndNote V.20. Two independent reviewers will identify eligible studies and perform data abstraction. Any discrepancies will be solved by discussion, and a third reviewer will be consulted if necessary. A meta-analysis will be conducted for outcomes reported in two or more studies. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Protocol guidelines will be followed for reporting. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This study does not involve primary data collection; therefore, formal ethical approval by an institutional review board is not required. Final results will be disseminated through open-access peer-reviewed publications. Abstracts will be presented at suitable national and international conferences or workshops. Furthermore, important information will be shared with clinical authorities, clinicians and at affiliated research institution-based websites and relevant servers. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42022352276.

Menopause, anti-Müllerian hormone and cognition in a cohort of women with persistent symptoms following TBI: a case for future research.

Objectives: Primary: To explore anti-Müllerian Hormone (AMH) levels in community dwelling women following TBI. Secondary: To explore the relation of AMH to menstrual cycle, cognition, distress and symptoms of menopause.Setting: Large adult TBI outpatient clinic in Toronto Canada.Research design: Prospective study of 10 women with persistent symptoms who were one or more years post TBI.Methods: Consenting participants provided a serum sample for AMH levels, and completed the Menopause Rating Scale (MRS), Symptom Checklist-90 r (SCL-90 r), Repeatable Battery for the Assessment of Neurological Status (RBANS) and a health questionnaire.Main outcomes and results: This study found lower than expected levels of AMH in 50% of participants relative to age matched norms and 50% of participants experienced new onset of menstrual changes. Also notable were findings of lower-than-expected cognitive scores in women over 35 and reports of menopause-related symptoms across all ages groups.Conclusions: As our understanding of the role of AMH grows, examining changes in this novel biomarker in the long-term post-TBI is warranted. Future research should be sufficiently powered to expand on and validate the study's findings.

Sex and gender differences in caregiving burden experienced by family caregivers of persons with dementia: A systematic review.

OBJECTIVES: Much is known about the demands of caregiving for persons with dementia (PWD) and its effects on family caregivers, however sex and gender aspects have received less attention. We synthesized the evidence on sex and gender distinctions in: (1) the caregiving burden and (2) the impact of caregiving on the physical and mental health of family caregivers of PWD. DESIGN: Systematic review. DATA SOURCES: Medline, Embase, PsycINFO and Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature between January 2007 and October 2019 were searched. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR SELECTING STUDIES: Included studies met the following criteria: (1) examine experiences and/or impacts of caregiving among family caregivers of individuals with any form of dementia; (2) report sex and/or gender distribution of study population and/or report results stratified by sex and/or gender, and (3) include both male and female family caregivers. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: Two independent reviewers extracted the data and assessed risk of bias using the Critical Appraisal Skills Program checklist and National Institutes of Health Quality Assessment Tool for Observational Cohort and Cross-sectional Studies. Data were synthesized using a narrative synthesis approach. RESULTS: A total of 22 studies were included. Caregiving burden was measured using various methods. A majority of studies reported higher burden among females. All studies that did not report a sex and gender difference in caregiving burden accounted for confounders. Findings on sex and gender differences on physical and mental health conditions were inconsistent with most studies failing to account for confounders in their analyses. CONCLUSIONS: Current evidence on sex and gender differences in caregiving burden, mental and physical health is limited. Findings suggest presence of sex and gender differences in caregiving burden. Given the variety of mental and physical health constructs that were examined, further research is required to substantiate the evidence. PROPSERO Registration Number: CRD 42018070032.

Sex and gender differences in caregiving burden experienced by family caregivers of persons with dementia: a systematic review protocol.

INTRODUCTION: While much is known about caregiving burden and its consequences on both caregivers and care recipients, reports on the sex and gender differences that may be present among family caregivers of persons with dementia (PWD) are lacking. Attention to and a synthesis of these sex and gender distinctions have direct implications on the planning and development of health services for this population. The current protocol outlines a strategy for a systematic review of the current evidence to identify and synthesise sex and gender distinctions in caregiving burden experienced by family caregivers of PWD. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: A comprehensive search strategy for studies that examine the sex and gender differences in caregiving impacts and experiences has been developed in collaboration with an information specialist at a university. All peer-reviewed English language studies on adult family caregivers of PWD, published from January 2007 to September 2017, found through Medline, Embase, PsycINFO, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature and bibliographies of identified articles, will be considered eligible. Study quality will be assessed using the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme checklists. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: As the first systematic review of its kind that focus on sex and gender differences in caregiving burden, findings will be relevant for healthcare practitioners and researchers who can better prescribe and develop interventions and technologies to better address the specific challenges and burden experienced by male and female family caregivers of PWD. Moreover, given that more than half of family caregivers are females; these sex and gender differences will also be pertinent to policy-makers when evaluating and planning of our healthcare systems to better meet the needs of this population. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42018070032.

Factors affecting return to work after injury or illness: best evidence synthesis of systematic reviews.

BACKGROUND: Work disability is a major personal, financial and public health burden. Predicting future work success is a major focus of research. OBJECTIVES: To identify common prognostic factors for return-to-work across different health and injury conditions and to describe their association with return-to-work outcomes. METHODS: Medline, Embase, PsychINFO, Cinahl, and Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews and the grey literature were searched from January 1, 2004 to September 1, 2013. Systematic reviews addressing return-to-work in various conditions and injuries were selected. Eligible studies were critically appraised using the Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network criteria to identify low risk of bias reviews. RESULTS: Of the 36,193 titles screened and the 94 eligible studies reviewed, 56 systematic reviews were accepted as low risk of bias. Over half of these focused on musculoskeletal disorders, which were primarily spine related (e.g., neck and low back pain). The other half of studies assessed workers with mental health or cardiovascular conditions, stroke, cancer, multiple sclerosis or other non-specified health conditions. Many factors have been assessed, but few consistently across conditions. Common factors associated with positive return-to-work outcomes were higher education and socioeconomic status, higher self-efficacy and optimistic expectations for recovery and return-to-work, lower severity of the injury/illness, return-to-work coordination, and multidisciplinary interventions that include the workplace and stakeholders. Common factors associated with negative return-to-work outcomes were older age, being female, higher pain or disability, depression, higher physical work demands, previous sick leave and unemployment, and activity limitations. CONCLUSIONS: Expectations of recovery and return-to-work, pain and disability levels, depression, workplace factors, and access to multidisciplinary resources are important modifiable factors in progressing return-to-work across health and injury conditions. Employers, healthcare providers and other stakeholders can use this information to facilitate return-to-work for injured/ill workers regardless of the specific injury or illness. Future studies should investigate novel interventions, and other factors that may be common across health conditions.