(143) Pain self-management interventions that are effective and practical in rural settings: results from a systematic literature review

2014 ◽  
Vol 15 (4) ◽  
pp. S11
Author(s):  
P. Joshi ◽  
L. Ochs ◽  
K. Ito ◽  
A. Adcock ◽  
V. Springmann ◽  
...  
RMD Open ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
pp. e001512
Author(s):  
Nadia M T Roodenrijs ◽  
Attila Hamar ◽  
Melinda Kedves ◽  
György Nagy ◽  
Jacob M van Laar ◽  
...  

ObjectivesTo summarise, by a systematic literature review (SLR), the evidence regarding pharmacological and non-pharmacological therapeutic strategies in difficult-to-treat rheumatoid arthritis (D2T RA), informing the EULAR recommendations for the management of D2T RA.MethodsPubMed, Embase and Cochrane databases were searched up to December 2019. Relevant papers were selected and appraised.ResultsTwo hundred seven (207) papers studied therapeutic strategies. Limited evidence was found on effective and safe disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) in patients with comorbidities and other contraindications that limit DMARD options (patients with obesity, hepatitis B and C, risk of venous thromboembolisms, pregnancy and lactation). In patients who previously failed biological (b-)DMARDs, all currently used b/targeted synthetic (ts-)DMARDs were found to be more effective than placebo. In patients who previously failed a tumour necrosis factor inhibitor (TNFi), there was a tendency of non-TNFi bDMARDs to be more effective than TNFis. Generally, effectiveness decreased in patients who previously failed a higher number of bDMARDs. Additionally, exercise, psychological, educational and self-management interventions were found to improve non-inflammatory complaints (mainly functional disability, pain, fatigue), education to improve goal setting, and self-management programmes, educational and psychological interventions to improve self-management.The identified evidence had several limitations: (1) no studies were found in patients with D2T RA specifically, (2) heterogeneous outcome criteria were used and (3) most studies had a moderate or high risk of bias.ConclusionsThis SLR underscores the scarcity of high-quality evidence on the pharmacological and non-pharmacological treatment of patients with D2T RA. Effectiveness of b/tsDMARDs decreased in RA patients who had failed a higher number of bDMARDs and a subsequent b/tsDMARD of a previously not targeted mechanism of action was somewhat more effective. Additionally, a beneficial effect of non-pharmacological interventions was found for improvement of non-inflammatory complaints, goal setting and self-management.


2020 ◽  
Vol 79 (Suppl 1) ◽  
pp. 957-957
Author(s):  
N. M. T. Roodenrijs ◽  
A. Hamar ◽  
M. Kedves ◽  
G. Nagy ◽  
J. M. Van Laar ◽  
...  

Background:Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients treated according to European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) recommendations failing ≥2 biological or targeted synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (b/tsDMARDs) with a different mode of action who still have complaints which may be suggestive of active disease may be defined as suffering from ‘difficult-to-treat RA’. Management recommendations for RA focus predominantly on the earlier phases of the disease and specific recommendations for difficult-to-treat RA patients are currently lacking.1Objectives:To systematically summarise evidence in the literature on pharmacological and non-pharmacological therapeutic strategies for difficult-to-treat RA patients, informing the 2020 EULAR recommendations for the management of difficult-to-treat RA.Methods:A systematic literature review (SLR) was performed: PubMed, Embase and Cochrane databases were searched up to December 2019. Relevant papers were selected and appraised.Results:Thirty articles were selected for therapeutic strategies in patients with limited DMARD options due to contraindications, 73 for patients in whom previous b/tsDMARDs were not effective (‘true refractory RA’), and 51 for patients with predominantly non-inflammatory complaints. For patients with limited DMARD options, limited evidence was found on effective DMARD options for patients with concomitant obesity, and on safe DMARD options for patients with concomitant hepatitis B and C. In patients who failed ≥2 bDMARDs, tocilizumab, tofacitinib, baricitinib, upadacitinib and filgotinib were found to be more effective than placebo, but evidence was insufficient to prioritise. In patients who failed ≥1 bDMARD, there was a tendency of non-tumour necrosis factor inhibitor (TNFi) bDMARDs to be more effective than TNFi (Figure 1). Generally, b/tsDMARDs become less effective when patients failed more bDMARDs, this tendency was not clear for upadacitinib and filgotinib (Figure 2). In patients with predominantly non-inflammatory complaints (mainly function, pain and fatigue), exercise, education, psychological and self-management interventions were found to be of additional benefit.Conclusion:This SLR underscores the scarcity of evidence on the optimal treatment of difficult-to-treat RA patients. As difficult-to-treat RA is a newly defined disease state, all evidence is to an extent indirect. Several b/tsDMARDs were found to be effective in patients who failed ≥2 bDMARDs and generally effectiveness decreased with a higher number of failed bDMARDs. Additionally, a beneficial effect of non-pharmacological interventions was found on non-inflammatory complaints.References:[1] Smolen JSet al. Ann Rheum Dis2020. Epub ahead of print.Disclosure of Interests:Nadia M. T. Roodenrijs: None declared, Attila Hamar: None declared, Melinda Kedves: None declared, György Nagy: None declared, Jacob M. van Laar Grant/research support from: MSD, Genentech, Consultant of: MSD, Roche, Pfizer, Eli Lilly, BMS, Désirée van der Heijde Consultant of: AbbVie, Amgen, Astellas, AstraZeneca, BMS, Boehringer Ingelheim, Celgene, Cyxone, Daiichi, Eisai, Eli-Lilly, Galapagos, Gilead Sciences, Inc., Glaxo-Smith-Kline, Janssen, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, Regeneron, Roche, Sanofi, Takeda, UCB Pharma; Director of Imaging Rheumatology BV, Paco Welsing: None declared


2021 ◽  
pp. 496-507
Author(s):  
Rifki S. Nompo ◽  
Andria Pragholapati ◽  
Angela L. Thome

Anxiety is a feeling of helplessness, and worry about things that are not clear, as well as a comprehensive feeling that something bad is going to happen. Anxiety is experienced subjectively and communicated interpersonally, at the same time feelings of anxiety are a necessary survival instinct. The Neuro-Linguistic Programming (NLP) is a communicative approach employs a positive view of anxiety and how it can help shape life changes, and that is the topic of this article. This research method uses a Systematic Literature Review, investigating Garuda, Pubmed, ScienceDirect, and Proquest, using boolean for keyword neurolinguistics programming (NLP) and anxiety. The inclusion criteria used were Indonesian and English language articles written within the last 5 years (from 2015 until 2020). The exclusion criteria used by the article were abstract writing style, inaccessible, or lacking national accreditation. Articles were tested with Critical Appraisal Tools. The studies indicate that good communication using NLP can help reduce anxiety and can promote changes in a person’s behavior patterns. There are several NLP techniques including sensory acuity, reframing, anchoring, rapport, and pacing, and leading. NLP can improve knowledge, skills and attitudes, communication skills, self-management, mental health, reduce work stress, and self-efficacy.   Keywords: Anxiety, Neuro-Linguistic Programming, NLP


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Souraya Sidani

Abstract: Objective This systematic literature review aims to identify diabetes self-management education (DSME) features to improve diabetes education for Black African/Caribbean and Hispanic/Latin American women with Type 2 diabetes mellitus. Methods We conducted a literature search in six health databases for randomized controlled trials and comparative studies. Success rates of intervention features were calculated based on effectiveness in improving glycosolated hemoglobin (HbA1c), anthropometrics, physical activity, or diet outcomes. Calculations of rate differences assessed whether an intervention feature positively or negatively affected an outcome. Results From 13 studies included in our analysis, we identified 38 intervention features in relation to their success with an outcome. Five intervention features had positive rate differences across at least three outcomes: hospital-based interventions, group interventions, the use of situational problem-solving, frequent sessions, and incorporating dietitians as interventionists. Six intervention features had high positive rate differences (i.e. ≥50%) on specific outcomes. Conclusion Different DSME intervention features may influence broad and specific self-management outcomes for women of African/Caribbean and Hispanic/Latin ethnicity. Practical implications With the emphasis on patient-centered care, patients and care providers can consider options based on DSME intervention features for its broad and specific impact on outcomes to potentially make programming more effective.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document