Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 20 de 24
Filter
1.
J Headache Pain ; 25(1): 16, 2024 Feb 05.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38311738

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: To compare the outcomes associated with the use of lasmiditan, rimegepant, ubrogepant, and zavegepant for the acute management of migraine headaches. METHODS: We searched four electronic databases from database inception to August 31, 2023, to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that report efficacy and safety for the acute treatment of migraine. The risk of bias in the included RCTs was evaluated according to the Cochrane tool, and the certainty of evidence using the CINeMA approach. We conducted frequentist network meta-analyses (NMA) to summarise the evidence. Data were analyzed using R-4.3.1. RESULTS: A total of 18 eligible studies including 10 different types of interventions with 22,429 migraine patients were included. NMA results showed that compared to ubrogepant (25 mg and 50 mg) and zavegepant, lasmiditan (100 mg and 200 mg) exhibits an elevated probability of achieving pain relief within a 2-hour interval. Similarly, relative to zavegepant, rimegepant (75 mg) and ubrogepant (50 mg and 100 mg) demonstrate an enhanced likelihood of sustaining pain relief over a 24-hour period. Furthermore, in contrast to ubrogepant (25 mg) and lasmiditan (50 mg), rimegepant (75 mg) presents a heightened probability of achieving freedom from photophobia within 2 h. Regarding safety, lasmiditan carries the highest risk of adverse events, which are associated with an increased incidence of adverse effects, including dizziness, somnolence, asthenia, paresthesia, and fatigue. CONCLUSIONS: In this NMA, a spectrum of evidence ranging from very low to high levels underscores the favorable efficacy and tolerability of rimegepant 75 mg and ubrogepant 100 mg, positioning them as potential candidates for the acute management of migraine. Concurrently, lasmiditan (100 mg and 200 mg) exhibits notable efficacy, albeit accompanied by an increased susceptibility to adverse events. These findings should still be approached with caution, primarily due to the intrinsic limitations associated with indirect comparisons.


Subject(s)
Benzamides , Calcitonin Gene-Related Peptide , Migraine Disorders , Piperidines , Pyridines , Adult , Humans , Benzamides/therapeutic use , Calcitonin Gene-Related Peptide/antagonists & inhibitors , Migraine Disorders/drug therapy , Network Meta-Analysis , Pain , Piperidines/therapeutic use , Pyridines/therapeutic use , Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic , Treatment Outcome
2.
ACS Appl Mater Interfaces ; 16(7): 9224-9230, 2024 Feb 21.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38335011

ABSTRACT

Soft robots have great potential applications in manufacturing, disaster rescue, medical treatment, etc. Artificial muscle is one of the most important components of a soft robot. In previous years, hydrogel actuators that can be controllably deformed by the stimuli of external signals have been developed as good candidates for muscle-like materials. In this article, we successfully prepared a chemical fuel-driven self-resettable bilayer hydrogel actuator mimicking natural muscles with the aid of a new negative feedback reaction network. The actuator can temporarily deform upon the addition of H+ (chemical fuel). Subsequently, H+ accelerated the reaction between BrO3- and Fe(CN)64-, which consume H+. It resulted in the spontaneous recovery of the pH as well as the shape of the actuator. Such an actuator exhibits a great similarity with natural muscles in actuation mechanisms and automaticity in the manipulation compared to the widely reported stimuli-responsive hydrogel actuators. This illustrates that fuel-driven self-resettable hydrogel is a promising dynamic material for mimicking the functions of living creatures.


Subject(s)
Hydrogels , Robotics , Muscles , Robotics/methods
3.
J Evid Based Med ; 16(4): 520-533, 2023 Dec.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38102895

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the most effective and best-tolerated drugs for treating diseased smokers. METHODS: Eight databases were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) involving different pharmacological interventions for smoking cessation in disease patients (January 2023). Network meta-analysis was performed using STATA 15.1 software. The Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool assessed the risk of bias, and confidence in evidence was assessed using CINeMA. RESULTS: A total of 60 RCTs involving 13,009 patients of 12 disease categories were included. All trials reported 13 interventions, resulting in 78 comparisons. Network meta-analysis showed that varenicline (OR = 2.30, 95% CI (1.77, 3.00)) and bupropion (OR = 1.65, 95% CI (1.29, 2.11)) showed favorable abstinence effects compared to placebo in the cardiovascular disease population. Nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) had better withdrawal advantages than placebo (OR = 11.18, 95% CI (2.25, 55.54)) in the chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) population. Some combination treatments showed better results than monotherapy, such as bupropion + NRT was superior to bupropion (OR = 8.45, 95% CI (1.84, 38.89)) and NRT (OR = 4.98, 95% CI (1.25, 19.78)) in mental illness population. The final surface under the cumulative ranking curve indicated that bupropion + NRT achieved the best smoking cessation effect. Overall confidence in the evidence was low. In a comparison of drugs, the results showed that bupropion + NRT had the best safety. CONCLUSIONS: Most interventions show the benefit of quitting smoking compared with placebo, including monotherapy and combination therapy. Moreover, varenicline or bupropion combined with NRT is superior to some monotherapies.


Subject(s)
Smoking Cessation , Humans , Smoking Cessation/methods , Bupropion/therapeutic use , Varenicline/therapeutic use , Nicotinic Agonists/therapeutic use , Smokers , Network Meta-Analysis
4.
Rural Remote Health ; 23(4): 8275, 2023 11.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38031243

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: Health workers in rural and remote areas shoulder heavy responsibilities for rural residents. This systematic review aims to assess the effectiveness of continuing education programs for health workers in rural and remote areas. METHODS: Eight electronic databases were searched on 28 November 2021. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-experimental studies evaluating the effectiveness of continuing education for health workers in rural and remote areas were included. The quality of the studies was assessed using the risk of bias tool provided by Effective Practice and Organization of Care. A meta-analysis was performed for eligible trials, and the other findings were presented as a narrative review because of inconsistent study types and outcomes. RESULTS: A total of 17 studies were included, four of which were RCTs. The results of the meta-analysis showed that compared to no intervention, continuing education programs significantly improved the knowledge awareness rate of participants (odds ratio=4.09, 95% confidence interval 2.51-6.67, p<0.05). Qualitative analysis showed that 12 studies reported on the level of knowledge of participants, with all showing positive changes. Eight studies measured the performance of health workers in rural and remote areas, with 87.50% (n=7) finding improved performance. Two studies reported on the impact of continuing education programs for health workers in rural and remote areas on patient health, with only one showing a positive change. One study from India measured the health of communities, which showed a positive change. CONCLUSION: The results of this study showed that continuing education programs are an effective way to address the lack of knowledge and skills among health workers in rural and remote areas. Few studies have examined the effectiveness of education programs for health workers in rural and remote areas in improving patient health outcomes. It is not yet known whether the delivery of continuing education programs to health workers in rural areas has a positive impact on patient and community health. Future attention should continue to be paid to the impact on these outcomes.


Subject(s)
Education, Continuing , Health Personnel , Humans , Health Personnel/education , Educational Status , Public Health/education , India
5.
J Addict Med ; 17(5): 536-543, 2023.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37788606

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: An overview, meta-analysis, and trial sequential analysis were conducted to evaluate the efficacy and safety of varenicline for smoking cessation. METHODS: Systematic reviews (SRs) and randomized controlled trials evaluating varenicline versus placebo for smoking cessation were included. A forest plot was used to summarize the effect size of the included SRs. Traditional meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis (TSA) were performed using Stata software and TSA 0.9 software, respectively. Finally, the Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation approach was used to assess the quality of evidence for the abstinence effect. RESULTS: A total of 13 SRs and 46 randomized controlled trials were included. Twelve review studies showed that varenicline was superior to placebo for smoking cessation. The meta-analysis results showed that, compared with the placebo, varenicline significantly increased the odds of smoking cessation (odds ratio = 2.54, 95% confidence interval = 2.20-2.94, P < 0.05, moderate quality). Subgroup analysis showed that there were significant differences in smokers with disease and general smokers ( P < 0.05). Differences were also found in the follow-up time at 12, 24, and 52 weeks ( P < 0.05). The common adverse events were nausea, vomit, abnormal dreams, sleep disturbances, headache, depression, irritability, indigestion, and nasopharyngitis ( P < 0.05). The TSA results confirmed the evidence for the effect of varenicline on smoking cessation. CONCLUSIONS: Existing evidence supports the superiority of varenicline over a placebo for smoking cessation. Varenicline had mild to moderate adverse events but was well tolerated. Future trials should investigate varenicline in combination with other smoking cessation approaches and compare it with other interventions.


Subject(s)
Smoking Cessation , Varenicline , Humans , Smoking Cessation/methods , Varenicline/adverse effects
6.
BMC Med ; 21(1): 378, 2023 09 29.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37775745

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Although non-pharmacological smoking cessation measures have been widely used among smokers, current research evidence on the effects of smoking cessation is inconsistent and of mixed quality. Moreover, there is a lack of comprehensive evidence synthesis. This study seeks to systematically identify, describe, and evaluate the available evidence for non-pharmacological interventions in smoking populations through evidence mapping (EM), and to search for best-practice smoking cessation programs. METHODS: A comprehensive search for relevant studies published from the establishment of the library to January 8, 2023, was conducted in PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, the Cochrane Library, CNKI, CBM, Wan Fang, and VIP. Two authors independently assessed eligibility and extracted data. The PRISMA statement and AMSTAR 2 tool were used to evaluate the report quality and methodology quality of systematic reviews/meta-analyses (SRs/MAs), respectively. Bubble plots were utilized to display information, such as the study population, intervention type, evidence quality, and original study sample size. RESULTS: A total of 145 SRs/MAs regarding non-pharmacological interventions for smoking cessation were investigated, with 20 types of interventions identified. The most commonly used interventions were cognitive behaviour education (n = 32, 22.07%), professional counselling (n = 20, 13.79%), and non-nicotine electronic cigarettes (e-cigarettes) (n = 13, 8.97%). Among them, counselling and behavioural support can improve smoking cessation rates, but the effect varies depending on the characteristics of the support provided. These findings are consistent with previous SRs/MAs. The general population (n = 108, 74.48%) was the main cohort included in the SRs/MAs. The total score of PRISMA for the quality of the reports ranged from 8 to 27, and 13 studies (8.97%) were rated as high confidence, and nine studies (6.21%) as moderate confidence, in the AMSTAR 2 confidence rating. CONCLUSIONS: The abstinence effect of cognitive behaviour education and money incentive intervention has advantages, and non-nicotine e-cigarettes appear to help some smokers transition to less harmful replacement tools. However, the methodological shortcomings of SRs/MAs should be considered. Therefore, to better guide future practice in the field of non-pharmacological smoking cessation, it is essential to improve the methodological quality of SRs and carry out high-quality randomized controlled trials (RCTs).


Subject(s)
Electronic Nicotine Delivery Systems , Smoking Cessation , Humans , Counseling , Smoking/epidemiology , Smoking Cessation/methods , Smoking Prevention , Systematic Reviews as Topic , Meta-Analysis as Topic
7.
JMIR Public Health Surveill ; 9: e44745, 2023 07 26.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37494100

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Sedentary time in workplaces has been linked to increased risks of chronic occupational diseases, obesity, and overall mortality. Currently, there is a burgeoning research interest in the implementation of multicomponent interventions aimed at decreasing sedentary time among office workers, which encompass a comprehensive amalgamation of individual, organizational, and environmental strategies. OBJECTIVE: This meta-analysis aims at evaluating the effectiveness of multicomponent interventions to mitigate occupational sedentary behavior at work compared with no intervention. METHODS: PubMed, Web of Science, EMBASE, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) databases were searched from database inception until March 2023 to obtain randomized controlled trials (RCTs) assessing the efficacy of multicomponent interventions on occupational sedentary behavior among office-based workers. Two reviewers independently extracted the data and assessed the risk of bias by using the Cochrane Collaboration's risk of bias tool. The average intervention effect on sedentary time was calculated using Stata 15.1. Mean differences (MDs) with 95% CIs were used to calculate the continuous variables. Subgroup analyses were performed to determine whether sit-stand workstation, feedback, and prompt elements played an important role in multicomponent interventions. Further, the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation) system was used to evaluate the certainty of evidence. RESULTS: A total of 11 RCTs involving 1894 patients were included in the analysis. Five studies were rated as low risk of bias, 2 as unclear risk of bias, and 4 as high risk. The meta-analysis results showed that compared with no intervention, multicomponent interventions significantly reduced occupational sitting time (MD=-52.25 min/8-h workday, 95% CI -73.06 to -31.44; P<.001) and occupational prolonged sitting time (MD=-32.63 min/8-h workday, 95% CI -51.93 to -13.33; P=.001) and increased occupational standing time (MD=44.30 min/8-h workday, 95% CI 23.11-65.48; P<.001), whereas no significant differences were found in occupational stepping time (P=.06). The results of subgroup analysis showed that compared with multicomponent interventions without installment of sit-stand workstations, multicomponent interventions with sit-stand workstation installment showed better effects for reducing occupational sitting time (MD=-71.95 min/8-h workday, 95% CI -92.94 to -51.15), increasing occupational standing time (MD=66.56 min/8-h workday, 95% CI 43.45-89.67), and reducing occupational prolonged sitting time (MD=-47.05 min/8-h workday, 95% CI -73.66 to -20.43). The GRADE evidence summary showed that all 4 outcomes were rated as moderate certainty. CONCLUSIONS: Multicomponent interventions, particularly those incorporating sit-stand workstations for all participants, are effective at reducing workplace sedentary time. However, given their cost, further research is needed to understand the effectiveness of low-cost/no-cost multicomponent interventions.


Subject(s)
Sedentary Behavior , Workplace , Humans , Time Factors
8.
Addict Biol ; 28(8): e13303, 2023 08.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37500482

ABSTRACT

To evaluate the effectiveness, safety and tolerability of antidepressants in helping smokers quit tobacco dependence, five databases were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTS ) on different antidepressant interventions involving smoking cessation in populations (September 2022). The STATA 15.1 software was used to perform network meta-analysis. The Cochrane bias risk tool was used to assess the risk of bias, and CINeMA was used to evaluate the evidence credibility for the effect of different interventions on smoking cessation. In all, 107 RCTs involving 42 744 patients were included. Seven studies were rated as having a low risk of bias. All trials reported 18 interventions and 153 pairwise comparisons were generated. The network meta-analysis showed that compared with placebo, varenicline + bupropion (OR = 3.53, 95% CI [2.34, 5.34]), selegiline + nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) (OR = 3.78, 95% CI [1.20, 11.92]), nortriptyline + NRT (OR = 2.33, 95% CI [1.21, 4.47), nortriptyline (OR = 1.58, 95% CI [1.11,2.26]), naltrexone + bupropion (OR = 3.84, 95% CI [1.39, 10.61]), bupropion + NRT (OR = 2.29, 95% CI [1.87, 2.81]) and bupropion (OR = 1.70, 95% CI [1.53, 1.89]) showed benefits with respect to smoking cessation. In addition, bupropion + NRT showed better effects than bupropion (OR = 1.35, 95% CI [1.12, 1.64]) and NRT (OR = 1.38, 95% CI [1.13, 1.69]) alone. The final cumulative ranking curve showed that varenicline + bupropion was the most likely to be the best intervention. There was moderate- to very-low-certainty evidence that most interventions showed benefits for smoking cessation compared with placebo, including monotherapy and combination therapies. Varenicline + bupropion had a higher probability of being the best intervention for smoking cessation.


Subject(s)
Alcoholism , Smoking Cessation , Humans , Smoking Cessation/methods , Bupropion/adverse effects , Varenicline/adverse effects , Nortriptyline/adverse effects , Network Meta-Analysis , Smoking , Tobacco Use Cessation Devices , Antidepressive Agents/therapeutic use , Alcoholism/drug therapy
9.
Am J Prev Med ; 65(2): 327-336, 2023 08.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36893951

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: Smoking is a risk factor for most chronic diseases and premature death, with a global prevalence of more than 1 billion people who smoke. This network meta-analysis aimed to investigate the impact of different behavioral interventions on smoking cessation. METHODS: Four electronic databases were searched for RCTs from inception to August 29, 2022. The risk of bias for the included RCTs was evaluated using the revised version of Cochrane tool for assessing risk of bias and the certainty of evidence using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation approach. The network meta-analysis was performed using Stata 16SE and R 4.1.3 software. RESULTS: A total of 119 included RCTs enrolled 118,935 participants. For the 7-day-point prevalence abstinence rate, video counseling had a best intervention effect than brief advice, followed by financial incentives, self-help materials plus telephone counseling, motivational interview, health education, telephone counseling, and text messages. For the 30-day-point prevalence abstinence rate, face-to-face cognitive education and financial incentives were superior to brief advice. For the continuous abstinence rate, motivational interview and financial incentives were more effective than brief advice. The certainty of evidence was very low to moderate for these studies. DISCUSSION: From the results of the network meta-analysis, different behavioral interventions resulted in positive impacts on smoking cessation compared with that of brief advice, especially video counseling, face-to-face cognitive education, and motivational interviews. Owing to the poor quality of evidence, high-quality trials should be conducted in the future to provide more robust evidence.


Subject(s)
Smoking Cessation , Humans , Smoking Cessation/methods , Network Meta-Analysis , Behavior Therapy , Counseling/methods , Health Education
10.
J Clin Epidemiol ; 153: 1-12, 2023 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36351510

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: To evaluate and map the reporting and methodological quality of network meta-analysis (NMA) on acupuncture. METHODS: Published acupuncture NMAs were searched through eight databases from inception to February 2022. The reporting and methodological quality of included studies was assessed using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses for Network Meta-Analysis (PRISMA-NMA) statement and the Assessment of Multiple Systematic Reviews 2 (AMSTAR-2) checklist. RESULTS: A total of 113 NMAs were identified. Most (99, 87.61%) studies were performed in China. Most studies focused on multiple acupuncture techniques (82.30%), and the main studied ailments were pain and poststroke sequelae (20.24%). The median (interquartile range (IQR)) score of the reporting quality was 26.5 (25-28.5). However, poor reporting rates in the protocol and registration (33.63%) and geometry of the network (35.40%), especially for China-based studies, were identified. The methodological quality of only 2 (1.77%) English studies was high. The reporting rate of Chinese studies was below 15% on each of items 4, 7, 10, and 12. CONCLUSION: The reporting quality of the NMAs was moderate, but the methodological quality was very low. The reporting and methodological quality of future NMAs, especially for Chinese studies, need further improvement.


Subject(s)
Acupuncture Therapy , Network Meta-Analysis , Humans , Checklist , Publications , Research Design
11.
Gen Thorac Cardiovasc Surg ; 71(1): 1-11, 2023 Jan.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36175611

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: This meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the value of the chest digital drainage system for the postoperative management of patients who have undergone pulmonary resection. METHODS: We searched the PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, and Web of Science databases for included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on the application of digital drainage systems versus the analog drainage system for patients with lung disease after pulmonary resection. Dichotomous variables were evaluated using risk ratios (RRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs), and mean and standardized mean differences (MDs and SMDs, respectively) with 95% CIs were used to calculate continuous variables. Statistical analyses were performed using Stata and RevMan software. RESULTS: In total, 12 RCTs involving 2000 patients were analyzed. Significant differences in duration of chest tube placement (SMD = -0.49; 95% CI = -0.78 to -0.20), length of hospital stay (MD =-0.79 days; 95% CI = -1.24 to -0.34), and number of chest tube clamping tests (RR = 0.74; 95% CI = 0.36-1.49) were observed between the two groups, which did not significant differ in the occurrence of prolonged air leak or cardiopulmonary complication rate. CONCLUSIONS: The digital chest drainage system is mainly advantageous in the duration of chest tube placement, length of hospital stay, and number of chest tube clamping tests. Future research should evaluate the requirements and economic impact of using digital system in routine clinical practice.


Subject(s)
Drainage , Pneumonectomy , Humans , Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic , Drainage/adverse effects , Chest Tubes , Length of Stay , Postoperative Complications/therapy
12.
Front Pharmacol ; 13: 1012433, 2022.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36353488

ABSTRACT

Objective: A network meta-analysis based on randomized controlled trials was conducted to investigate the effects of pharmacological interventions on smoking cessation. Methods: English databases were searched to obtain randomized controlled trials reporting the effect of pharmacological interventions on smoking cessation. The risk of bias for the included trials was assessed using Cochrane Handbook tool. Stata 15.1 software was used to perform network meta-analysis, and GRADE approach was used to assess the evidence credibility on the effects of different interventions on smoking cessation. Results: A total of 159 studies involving 60,285 smokers were included in the network meta-analysis. The analysis involved 15 interventions and which yielded 105 pairs of comparisons. Network meta-analysis showed that varenicline was more helpful for smoking cessation than other monotherapies, such as nicotine replacement therapy [Odds Ratio (OR) = 1.42, 95% confidence interval (CI) (1.16, 1.73)] and bupropion [OR = 1.52, 95% CI (1.22, 1.89)]. Furthermore, combined interventions were superior to monotherapy in achieving smoking cessation, such as varenicline plus bupropion over bupropion [OR = 2.00, 95% CI (1.11, 3.61)], varenicline plus nicotine replacement therapy over nicotine replacement therapy [OR = 1.84, 95% CI (1.07, 3.18)], and nicotine replacement therapy plus mecamylamine over naltrexone [OR = 6.29, 95% CI (1.59, 24.90)]. Finally, the surface under the cumulative ranking curve value indicated that nicotine replacement therapy plus mecamylamine had the greatest probability of becoming the best intervention. Conclusion: Most pharmacological interventions demonstrated a benefit in smoking cessation compared with placebo, whether monotherapy or combination therapy. Moreover, confirmed evidence suggested that some combination treatments, such as varenicline plus bupropion and nicotine replacement therapy plus mecamylamine have a higher probability of being the best smoking cessation in.

13.
Drug Alcohol Depend ; 241: 109672, 2022 Dec 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36332593

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Based on randomized controlled trials, a network meta-analysis was conducted to compare treatment effects across varenicline and related smoking interventions. METHODS: English databases were screened for randomized controlled trials reporting the effect of varenicline as treatment for smoking. The risk of bias in included trials was assessed using the Cochrane Handbook tool. Stata 15.1 software was used to perform network meta-analysis, and the GRADE approach was used to assess the evidence credibility on the tobacco treatment effects of different interventions. RESULTS: Thirty-four studies involving 26,130 smokers were included in the network meta-analysis. Varenicline and 11 other interventions were reported, yielding 66 pairs of comparisons. Network meta-analysis showed that varenicline monotherapy or its combination with other interventions were superior in achieving smoking cessation compared to bupropion, nicotine replacement therapy, counselling, and placebo. Furthermore, compared to the varenicline, evident abstinence superiority was found in varenicline + bupropion (odds ratio = 1.49, 95% confidence interval [1.02, 2.18]). Finally, the surface under the cumulative ranking curve value indicated that varenicline + bupropion has the highest probability to become the best intervention. CONCLUSIONS: Varenicline monotherapy increased the odds of smoking cessation further than bupropion monotherapy, nicotine replacement therapy, counselling, and placebo, while varenicline combined with other interventions may even achieve a better abstinence effect. More credible evidence has been reported indicating that the combination of varenicline and bupropion is a superior treatment for smoking.


Subject(s)
Smoking Cessation , Humans , Varenicline/therapeutic use , Network Meta-Analysis , Nicotinic Agonists/therapeutic use , Tobacco Use Cessation Devices , Bupropion/therapeutic use , Benzazepines/therapeutic use
14.
Int J Colorectal Dis ; 37(11): 2263-2276, 2022 Nov.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36251040

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE: Accumulating evidence showed that probiotics therapy might be effective in treating diarrhea-predominant irritable bowel syndrome (IBS-D). This study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of probiotics therapy for the treatment of IBS-D. METHODS: We performed a comprehensive literature search in eight electronic databases, and gray literature from inception to August 4, 2021. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of probiotics therapy for the treatment of IBS-D were included and the quality was assessed using the risk of bias tool recommended by the Cochrane Handbook version 5.1.0. RevMan 5.4 software was used to perform the meta-analysis on the outcomes of IBS-D symptoms, abdominal pain, quality of life, and abdominal distension. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach was used to assess the certainty of evidence. RESULTS: Ten RCTs evaluating 943 patients were identified. Only one study had unclear risk of bias, while nine studies had a high risk of bias. The meta-analysis results showed that, compared to the placebo, probiotics therapy significantly decreased the score of IBS-D symptoms (SMD = - 0.55, 95% CI: [- 0.83, - 0.27], P < 0.05), abdominal pain (SMD = - 0.43, 95% CI: [- 0.57, - 0.29], P < 0.05), and abdominal distension (SMD = - 0.45, 95%CI: [- 0.81, - 0.09], P < 0.05). There was no statistical difference in the quality of life. However, all the certainty of evidence was very low. CONCLUSION: Very low certainty evidence showed that probiotics might be an effective treatment for improving the IBS-D symptoms, abdominal pain, and abdominal distension, in adult IBS-D patients. However, these conclusions should be supported by high-quality evidence.


Subject(s)
Irritable Bowel Syndrome , Probiotics , Adult , Humans , Irritable Bowel Syndrome/complications , Irritable Bowel Syndrome/therapy , Irritable Bowel Syndrome/diagnosis , Abdominal Pain/etiology , Abdominal Pain/therapy , Probiotics/therapeutic use , Treatment Outcome , Diarrhea/etiology , Diarrhea/therapy
15.
Int J Nurs Stud ; 136: 104362, 2022 Dec.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36206617

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Smoking is responsible for 9 out of 10 deaths related to chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and this number can be reduced by quitting smoking. In this study, the effect of different interventions on smoking cessation of patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease was assessed through a network meta-analysis. METHODS: Eight databases were searched to obtain randomized controlled trials involving different interventions for smoking cessation in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease patients. The Cochrane Handbook tool was employed to assess the risk bias of included studies. Network meta-analysis was performed using STATA software. RESULTS: A total of 23 studies involving 13,480 patients were included. Eight studies were rated as having a high risk of bias, seven studies had a low risk, and in eight studies, the risk was unclear. All studies employed 13 different interventions, including eight monotherapies and five combination therapies. Network meta-analysis showed that a combination of behavioral therapy and pharmacotherapy was superior in achieving patients' smoking cessation compared to monotherapy. Moreover, varenicline was more helpful for smoking cessation than other single interventions. The final surface under the cumulative ranking curve value indicated that cognitive behavior therapy combined with bupropion achieved the best smoking cessation effect. CONCLUSIONS: The obtained results indicate that a combination of behavioral therapy and pharmacotherapy is most powerful in helping chronic obstructive pulmonary disease patients to quit smoking. Researchers should focus more on the safety of pharmacotherapeutic interventions. Moreover, more high-quality trials investigating the stability of evidence levels of different interventions on abstinence must be conducted.


Subject(s)
Pulmonary Disease, Chronic Obstructive , Smoking Cessation , Humans , Smoking Cessation/methods , Nicotinic Agonists/therapeutic use , Network Meta-Analysis , Varenicline/therapeutic use , Pulmonary Disease, Chronic Obstructive/therapy
16.
Nutrients ; 14(12)2022 Jun 15.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35745212

ABSTRACT

To perform a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of probiotics in the treatment of constipation-predominant irritable bowel syndrome (IBS-C), we searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing probiotic care versus placebos for patients with IBS-C in five comprehensive databases (March 2022). The risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Collaboration Risk of Bias Tool. RevMan 5.3 was used to perform a meta-analysis on stool consistency, abdominal pain, bloating, quality of life (QoL), fecal Bifidobacterium and Lactobacillus counts, and adverse events. The GRADE approach was used to evaluate the certainty of the evidence. Ten RCTs involving 757 patients were included. Only three studies were rated as having a low risk of bias. The meta-analysis results show that, compared to the placebo, probiotics significantly improved stool consistency (MD = 0.72, 95% CI (0.18, 1.26), p < 0.05, low quality) and increased the number of fecal Bifidobacteria (MD = 1.75, 95% CI (1.51, 2.00), p < 0.05, low quality) and Lactobacillus (MD = 1.69, 95% CI (1.48, 1.89), p < 0.05, low quality), while no significant differences were found in abdominal pain scores, bloating scores, QoL scores, or the incidence of adverse events (p > 0.05). The low-to-very low certainty evidence suggests that probiotics might improve the stool consistency of patients with IBS-C and increase the number of Bifidobacteria and Lactobacilli in feces with good safety. However, more high-quality studies with large samples are needed to verify the findings.


Subject(s)
Irritable Bowel Syndrome , Probiotics , Abdominal Pain/etiology , Abdominal Pain/therapy , Bifidobacterium , Constipation/therapy , Flatulence , Humans , Irritable Bowel Syndrome/drug therapy , Irritable Bowel Syndrome/therapy , Lactobacillus , Probiotics/adverse effects , Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic , Treatment Outcome
17.
Addict Behav ; 131: 107329, 2022 08.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35397262

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: A network meta-analysis (NMA) was conducted to investigate the effect of varenicline (VAR), bupropion (BUP), and nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) on smoking cessation. METHODS: Eight databases were searched in May 2021, and only randomized controlled trials (RCTs) using varenicline, bupropion, or NRT (single or combined) for smoking cessation were included. The risk of bias in the included RCTs was assessed using the Cochrane Handbook tool. Stata 15.1 software was used to perform NMA, and the quality of the evidence was evaluated using Confidence in Network Meta-analysis (CINeMA). FINDINGS: Twenty RCTs involving 16,702 smokers were included. The risk of bias results showed that 10 RCTs were rated as high, three were low, and seven were unclear. A total of 21 pairs were compared based on seven interventions. The NMA showed that, compared to the placebo (PLA), the other six interventions had significant efficacy in smoking cessation, where VAR + BUP showed the best effect of all treatments (odds ratio (OR) = 6.08, 95% confidence interval (CI) [3.47, 10.66]). Moreover, VAR + BUP was superior to VAR + NRT (OR = 1.66, 95% CI [1.07, 2.59]) and the three monotherapies (VAR, BUP, and NRT). In the monotherapies, the results of pairwise comparisons of VAR, BUP, and NRT did not show significant differences. Finally, the surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) value indicated that VAR + BUP had the greatest probability of becoming the best intervention. CONCLUSIONS: The efficacy of VAR, BUP, and NRT alone increased the odds of smoking abstinence better than the placebo, combined interventions were superior to monotherapy, and VAR combined with other interventions had a better smoking cessation effect.


Subject(s)
Bupropion , Smoking Cessation , Bupropion/therapeutic use , Humans , Network Meta-Analysis , Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic , Smoking Cessation/methods , Tobacco Use Cessation Devices , Varenicline/therapeutic use
18.
Asian J Surg ; 45(1): 8-14, 2022 Jan.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33895050

ABSTRACT

The aim of this study was to explore and analyze the main features of the top 100 most-cited original articles, systematic reviews (SRs)/meta-analyses (MAs) in the field of robotic surgery, through scientometric analysis. VOSviewer and Excel 2019 were employed to conduct this scientometric study. We found that the majority of original articles (72/100) were published during the 2000s, while the majority of the top 100 most-cited SRs/MAs (91/100) during the 2010s. The USA was the most dominant country (n = 78), Henry Ford Health System was the most productive institution (n = 10), and Menon M was the largest contributing first author (n = 5) of the top 100 most-cited original articles. The USA was the most dominant country (n = 33), University of Padua was the most productive institution (n = 9), and Ficarra V was the largest contributing first author (n = 4) of the top 100 most-cited SRs/MAs. The top 100 most-cited original articles in robotic surgery have focused on the feasibility, outcomes and learning curve of robotic surgery for various neoplasms and cancers. The top 100 most-cited SRs/MAs have focused on the differences between robotic surgery and other types of surgery, with respect to the learning curve, costs, outcomes and experience in treating neoplasms, cancer and other diseases. In the future, the formation of cross-institutional and cross-disciplinary cooperation teams should be promoted and corresponding regulations and standards for specific diseases should be developed to regulate and promote the development of robotic surgery.


Subject(s)
Neoplasms , Robotic Surgical Procedures , Bibliometrics , Humans
19.
J Clin Epidemiol ; 141: 64-73, 2022 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34520849

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: This study collected randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published in the social sciences in China and assessed their risk of bias and reporting quality. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: Three databases were systematically searched for publications from January 2000 to June 2020 for RCTs in the social sciences published by Chinese researchers. The risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Collaboration Risk of Bias Tool, and reporting quality was assessed using the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials for Social and Psychological Interventions (CONSORT-SPI). RESULTS: A total of 316 RCTs were identified, including 204 articles in English and 112 articles in Chinese. The most frequently researched interventions focused on education (33.9%), and the most frequently studied population were students (32.9%). Eighty-seven percent of RCTs had intermediate reporting quality. Twenty-four of the 43 CONSORT-SPI sub-items had a compliance rate of less than 50%. Most RCTs had an unclear risk of bias for blinding outcome assessors (84.5%), blinding participants and personnel (82.9%), allocation concealment (73.1%), and random sequence generation (68.0%). A low proportion of CONSORT-SPI items were reported and, high proportion of the papers had unclear risk of bias. CONCLUSION: The quality and reporting of RCTs in the social sciences needs improvement in China, especially for reporting methods and results. Most studies had an unclear risk of bias as they lacked important methodological information.


Subject(s)
Data Management , Publications , Bias , China , Humans , Social Sciences
20.
Surg Innov ; 29(2): 203-214, 2022 Apr.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34187226

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: In the last 30 years, significant progress in the field of surgery has been achieved with the advent of robotic surgery. In this study, we aimed to conduct a bibliometric analysis to identify the distribution and characteristics overall and of the top 100 most-cited studies about robotic surgery versus open surgery. METHODS: A systematic search was conducted on March 26, 2021 using Web of Science Core Collection. Two reviewers independently screened documents, and the top 100 most-cited studies were identified. Excel 2019 and VOSviewer were used to collect the data, and visual information was obtained. RESULTS: A total of 2306 documents were searched from the Web of Science Core Collection, and 1065 journals and 2913 institutes were extracted. A significant growth was observed in the last 15 years. The number of citations from the United States accounted for 33.31% of the total number of citations. There were nine American institutes and one Swedish institute in the top 10 institutes. Four journals in the field of urology or gynecology were present in the top 10 published journals. Few global communications between authors, institutes, and countries authors were observed. CONCLUSION: The lack of close cooperation among scientific research institutions may have affected the industrialization process of surgical robots. Some developing countries, including South America and Africa, should seize the development opportunity of robotic surgery to improve the level of domestic research on robotic surgery.


Subject(s)
Robotic Surgical Procedures , Bibliometrics , United States
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...