ABSTRACT
PURPOSE: To systematically assess the efficacy of psychological intervention for patients with head and neck cancer (HNC) in easing negative emotion and improving quality of life, so as to provide evidence-based reference for clinical psycho-intervention of HNC patients. METHODS: PubMed, Central, Embase, clinicaltrials.gov, ICTRP, Web of science, CBM, CNKI, VIP, and Wan Fang database were searched from inception to 15th, May for randomized controlled trails conducted to assess psychological intervention for HNC patients. The retrieval, screening, quality evaluation, and data extraction were elaborately proceeded by two reviewers independently. Meta analysis was performed using RevMan 5.4 software. RESULTS: Eighteen RCTs were included with 2 097 participants. Meta analysis showed that compared to control group, psychological intervention group manifested greater decrease in anxiety scores [SMD=-2.33, 95%CIï¼-2.96ï¼-1.70ï¼, Pï¼0.000 01] and depression scores [SMD=-2.26, 95%CIï¼-2.78ï¼-1.74ï¼, Pï¼0.000 01], and better increase in QOL scores [SMD=6.04, 95%CIï¼1.53ï¼10.56ï¼, P=0.009] and SQL-90 scores [MD=29.99, 95%CIï¼-36.22, -23.76ï¼ï¼Pï¼0.000 01]. CONCLUSIONS: The anxiety and depression of HNC patients can be effectively relieved through psychological intervention, so that their quality of life and metal health status can be improved. Due to the limitation of quality of included RCT , the result remains to be further validated by more well-designed and better-qualified study.
Subject(s)
Head and Neck Neoplasms , Quality of Life , Anxiety/therapy , Head and Neck Neoplasms/therapy , Humans , Psychosocial InterventionABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Both coil embolization (CE) and flow-diverting device (FDD) placement are widely used for treatment of intracranial aneurysms (IAs). The aim of this meta-analysis is to compare the relative clinical safety and efficacy of FDD and CE for the treatment of unruptured IAs. METHODS: The PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases were searched for relevant studies from the date of inception through April 2020. The primary endpoint for this meta-analysis was the 6-month rate of complete occlusion, while secondary endpoints included rates of retreatment, complications, and parental arterial patency. RESULTS: This meta-analysis includes 8 studies, which included 839 total patients that underwent FDD and 2734 that underwent CE. FDD group exhibited a significantly higher pooled 6-month complete occlusion rate (Pâ=â.02). The subgroup analysis demonstrated that FDD treatment was associated with significantly higher pooled 6-month complete occlusion rates in patients with large or giant IAs (Pâ<â.00001), whereas no differences in 6-month complete occlusion rates were observed between the FDD and CE groups of patients with non-large/giant IAs (Pâ=â.83). The pooled retreatment (Pâ=â.16) and complication (Pâ=â.15) rates were comparable between 2 groups. The CE group exhibited significantly higher pooled parent artery patency rate (Pâ=â.01). The funnel plots did not reveal any evidence of publication bias. CONCLUSIONS: FDDs can be used to effectively and safely treat large and giant IAs, achieving higher rates of complete occlusion than CE treatment. For non-large/giant IAs, we observed comparable efficacy between FDD and CE treatments.
