PP110 The Prophylactic Removal Of Impacted Third Molars: A Systematic Review

2018 ◽  
Vol 34 (S1) ◽  
pp. 107-108
Author(s):  
Gerlinde Pilkington ◽  
Juliet Hounsome ◽  
Tara Renton ◽  
Rumona Dickson

Introduction:Impacted third molars (I3Ms) are blocked from fully erupting; many I3Ms are asymptomatic, however there could be pain and pathological changes. Historically, I3Ms were removed prophylactically. Current options in the United Kingdom include either retention with standard care (watchful waiting), or removal due to pathological changes. We conducted a systematic review of the prophylactic removal of asymptomatic impacted mandibular third molars (IM3Ms) compared with standard care.Methods:We searched five electronic databases from 1999 onwards. Inclusion criteria: randomized and non-randomized trials, observational studies, and systematic reviews (SRs) comparing the prophylactic removal of IM3Ms with standard care or studies assessing the outcomes of either approach; outcomes included pathology associated with retention, postoperative complications, adverse effects of treatment and health-related quality of life. Two reviewers independently screened all titles and/or abstracts, applied inclusion criteria to potentially relevant publications, and quality assessed and data extracted the included studies. No meta-analysis or network meta-analyses were undertaken.Results:Following screening of 11,373 references, 13 studies (four cohort studies and nine SRs) were included. One cohort study investigated the prophylactic removal of asymptomatic IM3Ms in comparison with standard care and retention, two investigated the prophylactic removal of asymptomatic IM3Ms, and one studied the retention and standard care of asymptomatic IM3Ms. Two studies reporting surgical complications found no serious complications; however, one study reported intense pain and postoperative infection. Pathological changes due to retention of asymptomatic IM3Ms were reported by three studies. Nine SRs of the management of third molars were included in this review, however none focused solely on IM3Ms.Conclusions:Consistent with previous systematic reviews, we found no RCT data to support or refute the prophylactic removal of asymptomatic IM3Ms, despite extensive searching of the literature. The review however did identify evidence from two longitudinal studies demonstrating the outcomes when asymptomatic IM3Ms are left in situ.

2021 ◽  
pp. 105381512199192
Author(s):  
Andréane Lavallée ◽  
Gwenaëlle De Clifford-Faugère ◽  
Ariane Ballard ◽  
Marilyn Aita

This systematic review and meta-analysis examined the effectiveness of parent–infant interventions for parents of preterm infants on parental sensitivity compared to standard care or active comparators. This review follows the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines and was prospectively registered in the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO; registration ID: CRD42016047083). Database searches were performed from inception to 2020 to identify eligible randomized controlled trials. Two review authors independently selected studies, extracted data, and assessed the risk of bias using the Cochrane risk of bias assessment tool and quality of evidence using the Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) guidelines. A total of 19 studies ( n = 2,111 participants) were included and 14 were suitable to be pooled in our primary outcome meta-analysis. Results show no significant effect of parent–infant interventions over standard care or basic educational programs, on parental sensitivity. Results may not necessarily be due to the ineffectiveness of the interventions but rather due to implementation failure or high risk of bias of included studies.


2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Rosemond Qian-Xiu Tan ◽  
Wai Tak Victor Li ◽  
Wing-Zi Shum ◽  
Sheung Chit Chu ◽  
Hang-Long Li ◽  
...  

Abstract Background The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has caused recurring and major outbreaks in multiple human populations around the world. The plethora of clinical presentations of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has been described extensively, of which olfactory dysfunction (OD) was established as an important and common extrapulmonary manifestation of COVID-19 infection. The aim of this protocol is to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis on peer-reviewed articles which described clinical data of OD in COVID-19 patients. Methods This research protocol has been prospectively registered with the Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO; CRD42020196202). CINAHL, ClinicalTrials.gov, Cochrane Central, EMBASE, MEDLINE and PubMed, as well as Chinese medical databases China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), VIP and WANFANG, will be searched using keywords including ‘COVID-19’, ‘coronavirus disease’, ‘2019-nCoV’, ‘SARS-CoV-2’, ‘novel coronavirus’, ‘anosmia’, ‘hyposmia’, ‘loss of smell’, and ‘olfactory dysfunction’. Systematic review and meta-analysis will be conducted according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) and the Meta-analyses Of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (MOOSE) guidelines. Articles will be screened according to pre-specified inclusion and exclusion criteria to extract studies that include new clinical data investigating the effect of COVID-19 on olfactory dysfunction. Included articles will be reviewed in full; data including patient demographics, clinical characteristics of COVID-19-related OD, methods of olfactory assessment and relevant clinical outcomes will be extracted. Statistical analyses will be performed using the Comprehensive Meta-Analysis version 3. Discussion This systematic review and meta-analysis protocol will aim to collate and synthesise all available clinical evidence regarding COVID-19-related OD as an important neurosensory dysfunction of COVID-19 infection. A comprehensive search strategy and screening process will be conducted to incorporate broad clinical data for robust statistical analyses and representation. The outcome of the systematic review and meta-analysis will aim to improve our understanding of the symptomatology and clinical characteristics of COVID-19-related OD and identify knowledge gaps in its disease process, which will guide future research in this specific neurosensory defect. Systematic review registration PROSPERO registration number: CRD42020196202.


BMJ Open ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 7 (9) ◽  
pp. e017868
Author(s):  
Joey S.W. Kwong ◽  
Sheyu Li ◽  
Wan-Jie Gu ◽  
Hao Chen ◽  
Chao Zhang ◽  
...  

IntroductionEffective selection of coronary lesions for revascularisation is pivotal in the management of symptoms and adverse outcomes in patients with coronary artery disease. Recently, instantaneous ‘wave-free’ ratio (iFR) has been proposed as a new diagnostic index for assessing the severity of coronary stenoses without the need of pharmacological vasodilation. Evidence of the effectiveness of iFR-guided revascularisation is emerging and a systematic review is warranted.Methods and analysisThis is a protocol for a systematic review of randomised controlled trials and controlled observational studies. Electronic sources including MEDLINE via Ovid, Embase, Cochrane databases and ClinicalTrials.gov will be searched for potentially eligible studies investigating the effects of iFR-guided strategy in patients undergoing coronary revascularisation. Studies will be selected against transparent eligibility criteria and data will be extracted using a prestandardised data collection form by two independent authors. Risk of bias in included studies and overall quality of evidence will be assessed using validated methodological tools. Meta-analysis will be performed using the Review Manager software. Our systematic review will be performed according to the guidance from the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions and the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement.Ethics and disseminationEthics approval is not required. Results of the systematic review will be disseminated as conference proceedings and peer-reviewed journal publication.Trial registration numberThis protocol is registered in the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO), registration number CRD42017065460.


2021 ◽  
Vol 9 (F) ◽  
pp. 453-463
Author(s):  
Andrian Fajar Kusumadewi ◽  
Carla Raymondalexas Marchira ◽  
Widyandana Widyandana ◽  
Ronny Tri Wirasto

BACKGROUND: The mental health of medical students has long been a topic of concern in many countries. Much research in Europe reported that around 30% of medical students suffered from anxiety. Anxiety disorders have significant physical and emotional consequences. Various studies show that excessive, unmanaged stress related to poor academic performance in medical students leads to cynical personalities, lack of empathy, and suicidal ideas. AIM: This study aimed to identify studies for psychotherapy interventions carried out in medical students and analyze each impact on anxiety level in medical students. METHODS: This systematic review was conducted with evidence sourced from 2000 to 2020. The review process followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. The study was registered with the Prospective Registering of Systematic Reviews database (Protocol ID: CRD42020180650). RESULTS: Twenty-three studies meet the inclusion criteria, and there are various psychotherapy interventions to deal with anxiety. Most studies reported that students who received mindfulness-based interventions reported lower anxiety, depression, and stress. CONCLUSION: There are various interventions carried out to decrease stress levels, depression, and anxiety in medical students. The most effective psychotherapy was found in cognitive and behavior intervention and mindfulness intervention.


2019 ◽  
Vol 100 (3) ◽  
pp. 312-316
Author(s):  
Jeremiah W. Jaggers ◽  
David Kondrat

This article provides an overview of the systematic review and the meta-analysis. These tools provide a comprehensive picture of current research. What follows is an abridged explanation of each of these techniques. This approach is intended to provide a fundamental overview for social work practitioners, so that they may more readily access important research, while minimizing the time spent doing so.


2019 ◽  
Vol 36 (04) ◽  
pp. 261-270
Author(s):  
Yasser Al Omran ◽  
Ali Abdall-Razak ◽  
Catrin Sohrabi ◽  
Tiffanie-Marie Borg ◽  
Hayat Nadama ◽  
...  

Abstract Background Augmented reality (AR) uses a set of technologies that overlays digital information into the real world, giving the user access to both digital and real-world environments in congruity. AR may be specifically fruitful in reconstructive microsurgery due to the dynamic nature of surgeries performed and the small structures encountered in these operations. The aim of this study was to conduct a high-quality preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses (PRISMA) and assessment of multiple systematic reviews 2 (AMSTAR 2) compliant systematic review evaluating the use of AR in reconstructive microsurgery. Methods A systematic literature search of Medline, EMBASE, and Web of Science databases was performed using appropriate search terms to identify all applications of AR in reconstructive microsurgery from inception to December 2018. Articles that did not meet the objectives of the study were excluded. A qualitative synthesis was performed of those articles that met the inclusion criteria. Results A total of 686 articles were identified from title and abstract review. Five studies met the inclusion criteria. Three of the studies used head-mounted displays, one study used a display monitor, and one study demonstrated AR using spatial navigation technology. The augmented reality microsurgery score was developed and applied to each of the AR technologies and scores ranged from 8 to 12. Conclusion Although higher quality studies reviewing the use of AR in reconstructive microsurgery is needed, the feasibility of AR in reconstructive microsurgery has been demonstrated across different subspecialties of plastic surgery. AR applications, that are reproducible, user-friendly, and have clear benefit to the surgeon and patient, have the greatest potential utility. Further research is required to validate its use and overcome the barriers to its implementation.


Animals ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 9 (11) ◽  
pp. 957 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dannielle Glencorse ◽  
Kate Plush ◽  
Susan Hazel ◽  
Darryl D’Souza ◽  
Michelle Hebart

There are conflicting reports regarding the effect of farrowing house accommodation on piglet performance. The aim of this investigation was to use a systematic review and meta-analyses to summarise the results of publications that focused on direct comparisons between full confinement conventional crates and various designs of loose-housed farrowing pens from loading until weaning. Literature searches in Scopus, BIOSIS Previews, Cab Abstracts, and Web of Science identified 6695 articles. Twenty-two publications were retained for the systematic review and individual meta-analyses after screening for inclusion criteria. The random effects meta-analyses were performed on crate versus pen for number of piglets born alive, number of stillborn piglets, pre-weaning mortality, and number of piglets weaned. Additionally, the modifiers of confinement length (no confinement from loading until weaning or partial confinement for shorter periods of time in the early stages post parturition), enrichment (no enrichment or enrichment provided), and pen size (small, medium, or large) were examined. There was a 14% increase in the relative risk of piglet mortality in farrowing pens when they were compared with crates (p = 0.0015). The number of stillborns per litter was not different between the pen and crate. However, when providing enrichment in the pens, there was an increase in stillborns within farrowing crates versus pens (p = 0.009). There was no overall effect on piglets that were born alive or number weaned. As there is no difference between piglets born alive and mortality is significantly higher in farrowing pens, a reduction in the number of piglets weaned was expected but not observed, which was possibly due to the lack of weaning details provided in the publications. This was the first systematic review and meta-analysis conducted on the performance of farrowing accommodation and identified that farrowing pens do compromise post-natal piglet survival. Future efforts should focus on improving sow comfort in the farrowing crate to maximize both piglet and sow welfare.


BMJ Open ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 8 (7) ◽  
pp. e022359 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tao Wang ◽  
Xue Wang ◽  
Kun Yang ◽  
Jing Zhang ◽  
Jichang Luo ◽  
...  

IntroductionAtherosclerotic intracranial artery stenosis (ICAS) is one of most common causes of stroke, which is the second-leading cause of death worldwide. Medical, surgical and endovascular therapy are three major treatments for ICAS. Currently, medical therapy is considered as the standard of care for most patients with ICAS, while extracranial to intracranial bypass is only used in rare situations. Balloon angioplasty alone, balloon-mounted stent and self-expanding stent, collectively called endovascular treatment, have shown promising potentials in treating specific subgroups of patients with symptomatic ICAS; however, their comparative safety and efficacy is still unclear. Therefore, a systematic review with network meta-analysis is needed to establish a hierarchy of these endovascular treatments.Methods and analysisThe Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Protocols was followed to establish this protocol. The search will be limited to studies published from 1 January 2000 to the formal search date. Major databases including Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, EMBASE, Chinese Biomedical Literature Database, conference proceedings and grey literature database will be searched for clinical studies comparing at least two interventions for patients with symptomatic ICAS. Primary outcomes include short-term and long-term mortality or stroke rate. Random effects pairwise and network meta-analyses of included studies will be performed on STATA (V.14, StataCorp, 2015). The surface under the cumulative ranking curve and mean rank will be calculated in order to establish a hierarchy of the endovascular treatments. Evaluation of the risk of bias, heterogeneity, consistency, transitivity and quality of evidence will follow the recommendations of the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions.Ethics and disseminationEthics approval is not needed as systematic review is based on published studies. Study findings will be presented at international conferences and published on a peer-reviewed journal.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42018084055; Pre-results.


BMJ Open ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 9 (2) ◽  
pp. e027904 ◽  
Author(s):  
Łukasz Przepiórka ◽  
Przemysław Kunert ◽  
Jarosław Żyłkowski ◽  
Jan Fortuniak ◽  
Patrycja Larysz ◽  
...  

IntroductionThe ongoing need for dural tenting sutures in a contemporary neurosurgical practice has been questioned in the literature for over two decades. In the past, these sutures were supposed to prevent blood collecting in the potential space between the skull and the dura by elevating the latter. Theoretically, with modern haemostasis and proper postoperative care, this technique should not be necessary and the surgery time can be shortened. Unfortunately, there is no evidence-based proof to either support or reject this hypothesis.Methods and analysisThe systematic review will be performed according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) statement and The Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. Eight electronic databases of peer-reviewed journals will be searched, as well as other sources. Eligible articles will be assessed against inclusion criteria. The intervention is not tenting the dura and this will be compared with the usual dural tenting sutures. Where possible, ‘summary of findings’ tables will be generated.Ethics and disseminationEthical committee approval is not required for a systematic review protocol. Findings will be presented at international neurosurgical conferences and published in a peer-reviewed medical journal.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42018097089.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document