scholarly journals Impact of a daily exercise dose on knee joint cartilage – a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials in healthy animals

2017 ◽  
Vol 25 ◽  
pp. S189-S190
Author(s):  
A. Bricca ◽  
C.B. Juhl ◽  
A.J. Grodzinsky ◽  
E.M. Roos
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Knee Joint ◽  
Randomised Controlled Trials ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Joint Cartilage ◽  
Daily Exercise ◽  
Exercise Dose ◽  
Randomised Controlled

Is patellofemoral pain preventable? A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials

2020 ◽  
pp. bjsports-2020-102973
Author(s):  
Adam G Culvenor ◽  
Marienke van Middelkoop ◽  
Erin M Macri ◽  
Kay M Crossley
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Randomised Controlled Trials ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Patellofemoral Pain ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Eligibility Criteria ◽  
Military Recruits ◽  
Exercise Dose ◽  
Exercise Programmes ◽  
Randomised Controlled

ObjectiveTo evaluate the effectiveness of interventions to reduce the risk of incident patellofemoral pain.DesignSystematic review and meta-analysis, with strength of evidence evaluated separately for each intervention type.Data sourcesMEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, Web of Science and SPORTDiscus.Eligibility criteria for selecting studiesRandomised controlled trials evaluating the effectiveness of interventions to reduce patellofemoral pain risk compared with a control/non-exposed group.ResultsThirteen trials of mostly military recruits and young athletes analysed six different interventions. There was low certainty evidence from two trials (227 participants) that patellofemoral braces worn during physical activity (compared with no brace) effectively reduced the risk of patellofemoral pain (risk ratio (RR) 0.40, 95% CI 0.22 to 0.73; I2=24.0%). There was low certainty evidence from one trial (320 participants) that running technique retraining to (run softer) reduced patellofemoral pain risk (RR 0.21, 95% CI 0.07 to 0.60). There was low certainty evidence from four trials (3364 participants) that multicomponent (strengthening/neuromuscular) exercise programmes did not significantly reduce the risk of patellofemoral pain (RR 0.49, 95% CI 0.18 to 1.36; I2=64.9%), although broad CIs may reflect exercise dose variations among studies. There was very low certainty evidence from four trials (2314 participants) that foot orthoses (compared with flat inserts/no orthosis) did not significantly reduce the risk of patellofemoral pain (RR 0.63, 95% CI 0.35 to 1.13; I2=0.0%). Static stretching and a running programme that progressed intensity (compared with volume) did not significantly influence patellofemoral pain risk (single studies).ConclusionThere is low-level evidence that patellofemoral braces and running technique retraining can reduce the risk of patellofemoral pain by 60%–79%.

Do sleep interventions change sleep duration in children aged 0-5 years? A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials

2021 ◽  
pp. 101498
Author(s):  
LouiseJ. Fangupo ◽  
Jillian J. Haszard ◽  
Andrew N. Reynolds ◽  
Albany W. Lucas ◽  
Deborah R. McIntosh ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Sleep Duration ◽  
Randomised Controlled Trials ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Randomised Controlled

scholarly journals Comparative efficacy and safety of interventions for treating head lice: a protocol for systematic review and network meta-analysis

2021 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. e001129
Author(s):  
Bill Stevenson ◽  
Wubshet Tesfaye ◽  
Julia Christenson ◽  
Cynthia Mathew ◽  
Solomon Abrha ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Randomised Controlled Trials ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Grey Literature ◽  
Risk Of Bias ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Head Lice ◽  
Efficacy And Safety ◽  
Randomised Controlled ◽  
Meta Analyses

BackgroundHead lice infestation is a major public health problem around the globe. Its treatment is challenging due to product failures resulting from rapidly emerging resistance to existing treatments, incorrect treatment applications and misdiagnosis. Various head lice treatments with different mechanism of action have been developed and explored over the years, with limited report on systematic assessments of their efficacy and safety. This work aims to present a robust evidence summarising the interventions used in head lice.MethodThis is a systematic review and network meta-analysis which will be reported in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses statement for network meta-analyses. Selected databases, including PubMed, Embase, MEDLINE, Web of Science, CINAHL and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials will be systematically searched for randomised controlled trials exploring head lice treatments. Searches will be limited to trials published in English from database inception till 2021. Grey literature will be identified through Open Grey, AHRQ, Grey Literature Report, Grey Matters, ClinicalTrials.gov, WHO International Clinical Trials Registry and International Standard Randomised Controlled Trials Number registry. Additional studies will be sought from reference lists of included studies. Study screening, selection, data extraction and assessment of methodological quality will be undertaken by two independent reviewers, with disagreements resolved via a third reviewer. The primary outcome measure is the relative risk of cure at 7 and 14 days postinitial treatment. Secondary outcome measures may include adverse drug events, ovicidal activity, treatment compliance and acceptability, and reinfestation. Information from direct and indirect evidence will be used to generate the effect sizes (relative risk) to compare the efficacy and safety of individual head lice treatments against a common comparator (placebo and/or permethrin). Risk of bias assessment will be undertaken by two independent reviewers using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool and the certainty of evidence assessed using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations guideline for network meta-analysis. All quantitative analyses will be conducted using STATA V.16.DiscussionThe evidence generated from this systematic review and meta-analysis is intended for use in evidence-driven treatment of head lice infestations and will be instrumental in informing health professionals, public health practitioners and policy-makers.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42017073375.

scholarly journals Corticosteroid Injection Alone or Combined with Surgical Excision of Keloids versus Other Therapies Including Ionising Radiotherapy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomised Controlled Trials

2021 ◽  
Vol 2 (2) ◽  
pp. 41-54
Author(s):  
Ru Wang ◽  
Patricia L. Danielsen ◽  
Magnus S. Ågren ◽  
Janine Duke ◽  
Fiona Wood ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Randomised Controlled Trials ◽  
Corticosteroid Injection ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Interferon Α ◽  
Surgical Removal ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Intralesional Corticosteroid ◽  
Intralesional Injections ◽  
Randomised Controlled

Keloid scars are difficult to manage and remain a therapeutic challenge. Corticosteroid therapy alone or ionising radiation (radiotherapy) alone or combined with surgery are first-line treatments, but the scientific justification for these treatments is unclear. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) is to assess the effects of intralesional corticosteroid injection in treating keloids or preventing their recurrence after surgical removal. Searches for RCTs were conducted through the MEDLINE, EMBASE, EBSCO and Cochrane databases from January 1974 to September 2017. Two authors independently reviewed study eligibility, extracted data, analysed the results, and assessed methodological quality. Sixteen RCTs that included more than 814 patients were scrutinised. The quality of evidence for most outcomes was moderate to high. In 10 RCTs, corticosteroid intralesional injections were compared with 5-fluorouracil, etanercept, cryosurgery, botulinum toxin, topical corticosteroid under a silicone dressing, and radiotherapy. Corticosteroid intralesional injections were more effective than radiotherapy (RR 3.3, 95% CI: 1.4–8.1) but equipotent with the other interventions. In conjunction with keloid excision, corticosteroid treatment was compared with radiotherapy, interferon α-2b and verapamil. In two RCTs, there were fewer keloid recurrences (RR 0.43, 95% CI: 0.21–0.89) demonstrated with adjuvant radiotherapy than with corticosteroid injections. More high-quality, large-scale RCTs are required to establish the effectiveness of corticosteroids and other therapies in keloid management.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document