RESUMO
Introduction: Limb paresis following a stroke is a common sequela that can impact patients' quality of life. Many rehabilitation strategies targeting the restoration of motor function exist. This systematic review and meta-analysis aim to evaluate the effects of contralaterally controlled functional electrical stimulation (CCFES) as a modality for limb rehabilitation. Unlike conventional neuromuscular electrical simulation (NMES), the contra-laterality in CCFES is achieved by two methods a bend angle sensor or an electromyographic bridge (EMGB) method, both of which targets signals from the unaffected limb. Method: This review study was performed following the preferred reporting item for systematic review and meta-analysis (PRISMA) guidelines. Records that met the inclusion criteria were extracted from the following databases: Medline, Embase, and Cochrane Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL). Additional articles were also retrieved from clinicaltrials.gov and China/Asia on Demand (CAOD). Only randomized controlled studies (RCTs) were included. Results: Sixteen RCTs met the inclusion criteria, and 14 of which were included in the quantitative analysis (meta-analysis). The results of the analysis show that when compared to conventional NMES, CCFES displayed a better improvement in the upper extremity Fugl-Meyer assessment (UEFMA) (SMD = 0.41, 95% CI: 0.21, 0.62, p-value <0.0001, I2 = 15%, GRADE: moderate), box and blocks test (BBT) (SMD = 0.48, 95% CI: 0.10, 0.86, p-value = 0.01, I2 = 0%, GRADE: very low), modified Barthel index (mBI) (SMD = 0.44, 95% CI: 0.16, 0.71, p-value = 0.002, I2 = 0%, GRADE: moderate), active range of motion (AROM) (SMD = 0.61, 95% CI: 0.29, 0.94, p-value = 0.0002, I2 = 23%, GRADE: moderate), and surface electromyography (sEMG) scores (SMD = 0.52, 95% CI: 0.14, 0.90, p-value = 0.008, I2 = 0%, GRADE: low). The results of the subgroup analysis for the type of sensor used in CCFES shows that an EMGB (SMD = 0.58, 95% CI: 0.33, 0.84, p-value <0.00001, I2 = 7%) is more effective than a bend angle sensor (SMD = 0.17, 95% CI: -0.12, 0.45, p-value = 0.25, I2 = 0%). Conclusion: The results of this study provide strong evidence that shows CCFES being a better electrical stimulation modality compared to conventional NMES. This could be explained by the fact that CCFES is bilateral in nature which offers a platform for better neuroplasticity following a stroke. There is still a need for high-quality studies with a standardized approach comparing CCFES to other treatment modalities. Systematic review registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=342670, identifier CRD42022342670.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Renal colic is a disease in which a calculus obstructs the urinary tract, resulting in severe pain do ureteric peristaltic movements. Other symptoms, such as hematuria, nausea, and vomiting, may accompany the pain. This network meta-analysis aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of different analgesic agents for the treatment of acute renal colic. METHODS: Medline, Embase, and CENTRAL databases were searched. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared different analgesic agents, either alone or in combination were included. For the management of acute renal colic, analgesic agents were selected based on the current standard medical practice. The medications included intravenous acetaminophen, ketamine, ketorolac, and morphine. This study sought to evaluate the pain score on the visual analog scale (VAS) at 15, 30, and 60 min; adverse events; and the utilization of rescue therapy. The efficacy of different analgesic agents was explored through a frequentist network meta-analysis using the Netmeta statistical package in R software. All treatments were ranked using the Netrank function, yielding P-scores. RESULTS: Twelve RCTs were deemed eligible. As per the P-scores, acetaminophen was the most effective in reducing pain score at 15 min (P-score = 0.74). Ketorolac was the most effective in reducing the pain score at 30 and 60 min (P-score = 0.84) (P-score = 0.99), whereas morphine was the least effective (P-score = 0.07). Moreover, morphine was correlated with the highest odds of adverse events after treatment (P-score = 0.89). Morphine was the most frequently required rescue therapy in cases of suboptimal pain relief (P-score = 0.96). CONCLUSION: This network meta-analysis demonstrated that ketorolac and acetaminophen were the most effective analgesic agents according to the pain score. Morphine showed the highest adverse event profile and the highest rate at which rescue therapy was required for the management of acute renal colic.
RESUMO
Opioids are the mainstay of treatment for acute pain in the emergency department. However, its misuse led to the investigation of alternative effective analgesic options for acute pain complaints such as ketamine. Therefore, this systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to determine the effectiveness of ketamine in comparison to opioids in the management of acute pain. This was a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials comparing ketamine to opioids for the relief of acute pain in the ED. Eligible studies were identified by searching the following electronic databases: Medline, Embase, and Central. Studies utilizing either the visual analog scale (VAS) or the numeric rating scale (NRS) for pain scoring in ketamine vs opioids were included. The revised Cochrane risk-of-bias tool for randomized trials was utilized. A random-effects model was performed, and all outcomes were pooled by the inverse variance weighting method. The total number of studies that met the criteria of systematic reviews was nine of which seven of them were included in the meta-analysis with 789 participants. The overall effect of NRS trials was the standardized mean difference (SMD) = -0.07, 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.31 to 0.17, P-value = 0.56, I2 =85%. While VAS trials showed an overall effect of SMD = -0.02, 95% CI -0.22 to 0.18, P = 0.84, I2 = 59%). Moreover, higher adverse events were reported in opioids; however, this was not statistically significant (SMD = 1.23, 95% CI 0.93-1.64, P = 0.15, I2 =38%). Ketamine for immediate pain relief at 15 minutes could be an effective alternative to opioids, but its overall effect in comparison to opioids for improving the pain has not shown a statistically significant difference. There was high heterogeneity in the included studies; thus, a sub-group analysis was performed.
RESUMO
OBJECTIVE: To determine the role of perioperative protocolized opioid-specific patient education on opioid consumption for individuals undergoing surgical procedures. METHODS: We searched Medline, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared protocolized perioperative opioid-specific patient education to the usual care for adult individuals undergoing surgical interventions. The standardized mean difference (SMD) was used to represent continuous outcomes while the risk ratio (RR) was used to represent dichotomous outcomes. RESULTS: In total, 15 RCTs that enrolled 2546 participants were deemed eligible. Protocolized opioid-specific patient education showed a significant reduction in postoperative opioid consumption and postoperative pain score compared to usual care (SMD= -0.15, 95% confidence interval [CI]: -0.28 to -0.03 and SMD= -0.17, 95% CI: -0.28 to -0.06, respectively). No significant difference was found between the protocolized opioid-specific patient education and the usual care in terms of the number of refill requests (RR=0.82, 95% CI: 0.50-1.34), patients with opioid leftovers (RR=0.92, 95% CI: 0.78-1.08), and patients taking opioids after hospital discharge. CONCLUSIONS: This meta-analysis demonstrated that protocolized opioid-specific patient education significantly reduces postoperative opioid consumption and pain score but has no influence on the number of opioid refill requests, opioid leftovers, and opioid use after hospital discharge. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Healthcare professionals may offer opioid-related educational sessions for the surgical patients during the perioperative period through a video-based material that emphasizes the role of alternative analgesics to opioids, patients' expectations about the post-operative pain, and the potential side effects of opioid consumptions.
