scholarly journals A Systematic Literature Review of Brain Neurostimulation Therapies for the Treatment of Pain

Pain Medicine ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 21 (7) ◽  
pp. 1415-1420
Author(s):  
Timothy R Deer ◽  
Steven Falowski ◽  
Jeff E Arle ◽  
Jan Vesper ◽  
Julie Pilitsis ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Literature Review ◽  
Systematic Literature Review ◽  
Task Force ◽  
Work Group ◽  
The United States ◽  
Risk Of Bias ◽  
Current Evidence ◽  
Level Of Evidence ◽  
Bias Assessment ◽  
Moderate Evidence

Abstract Objective To conduct a systematic literature review of brain neurostimulation for pain. Design Grade the evidence for deep brain neurostimulation (DBS). Methods An international, interdisciplinary work group conducted a literature search for brain stimulation. Abstracts were reviewed to select studies for grading. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) meeting inclusion/exclusion criteria were graded by two independent reviewers. General inclusion criteria were prospective trials (RCTs and observational) that were not part of a larger or previously reported group. Excluded studies were retrospective or existed only as abstracts. Studies were graded using the modified Interventional Pain Management Techniques–Quality Appraisal of Reliability and Risk of Bias Assessment, the Cochrane Collaborations Risk of Bias assessment, and the United States Preventative Services Task Force level-of-evidence criteria. Results Two high-quality RCTs and three observational trials supported DBS, resulting in Level II (moderate) evidence. Conclusion Moderate evidence supports DBS to treat chronic pain. Additional Level I RCTs are needed to further the strength of the evidence in this important area of medicine, but the current evidence suggests that DBS should be considered as an option in treating complex pain cases.

scholarly journals A Systematic Literature Review of Dorsal Root Ganglion Neurostimulation for the Treatment of Pain

Pain Medicine ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 21 (8) ◽  
pp. 1581-1589 ◽  
Author(s):  
Timothy R Deer ◽  
Corey W Hunter ◽  
Pankaj Mehta ◽  
Dawood Sayed ◽  
Jay S Grider ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Dorsal Root Ganglion ◽  
Literature Review ◽  
Systematic Literature Review ◽  
Dorsal Root ◽  
Task Force ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Risk Of Bias ◽  
Level Of Evidence ◽  
Bias Assessment ◽  
Randomized Controlled

Abstract Objective To conduct a systematic literature review of dorsal root ganglion (DRG) stimulation for pain. Design Grade the evidence for DRG stimulation. Methods An international, interdisciplinary work group conducted a literature search for DRG stimulation. Abstracts were reviewed to select studies for grading. General inclusion criteria were prospective trials (randomized controlled trials and observational studies) that were not part of a larger or previously reported group. Excluded studies were retrospective, too small, or existed only as abstracts. Studies were graded using the modified Interventional Pain Management Techniques–Quality Appraisal of Reliability and Risk of Bias Assessment, the Cochrane Collaborations Risk of Bias assessment, and the US Preventative Services Task Force level-of-evidence criteria. Results DRG stimulation has Level II evidence (moderate) based upon one high-quality pivotal randomized controlled trial and two lower-quality studies. Conclusions Moderate-level evidence supports DRG stimulation for treating chronic focal neuropathic pain and complex regional pain syndrome.

scholarly journals A Systematic Literature Review of Peripheral Nerve Stimulation Therapies for the Treatment of Pain

Pain Medicine ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 21 (8) ◽  
pp. 1590-1603
Author(s):  
Timothy R Deer ◽  
Michael F Esposito ◽  
W Porter McRoberts ◽  
Jay S Grider ◽  
Dawood Sayed ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Literature Review ◽  
Peripheral Nerve ◽  
Systematic Literature Review ◽  
Nerve Stimulation ◽  
Strong Evidence ◽  
Task Force ◽  
Risk Of Bias ◽  
Peripheral Nerve Stimulation ◽  
Level Of Evidence ◽  
Bias Assessment

Abstract Objective To conduct a systematic literature review of peripheral nerve stimulation (PNS) for pain. Design Grade the evidence for PNS. Methods An international interdisciplinary work group conducted a literature search for PNS. Abstracts were reviewed to select studies for grading. Inclusion/exclusion criteria included prospective randomized controlled trials (RCTs) with meaningful clinical outcomes that were not part of a larger or previously reported group. Excluded studies were retrospective, had less than two months of follow-up, or existed only as abstracts. Full studies were graded by two independent reviewers using the modified Interventional Pain Management Techniques–Quality Appraisal of Reliability and Risk of Bias Assessment, the Cochrane Collaborations Risk of Bias assessment, and the US Preventative Services Task Force level-of-evidence criteria. Results Peripheral nerve stimulation was studied in 14 RCTs for a variety of painful conditions (headache, shoulder, pelvic, back, extremity, and trunk pain). Moderate to strong evidence supported the use of PNS to treat pain. Conclusion Peripheral nerve stimulation has moderate/strong evidence. Additional prospective trials could further refine appropriate populations and pain diagnoses.

scholarly journals A Systematic Literature Review of Spine Neurostimulation Therapies for the Treatment of Pain

Pain Medicine ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 21 (7) ◽  
pp. 1421-1432 ◽  
Author(s):  
Timothy R Deer ◽  
Jay S Grider ◽  
Tim J Lamer ◽  
Jason E Pope ◽  
Steven Falowski ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Literature Review ◽  
Complex Regional Pain Syndrome ◽  
Systematic Literature Review ◽  
Task Force ◽  
Pain Syndrome ◽  
Risk Of Bias ◽  
Intractable Pain ◽  
High Quality ◽  
Bias Assessment ◽  
Failed Back Surgery

Abstract Objective To conduct a systematic literature review of spinal cord stimulation (SCS) for pain. Design Grade the evidence for SCS. Methods An international, interdisciplinary work group conducted literature searches, reviewed abstracts, and selected studies for grading. Inclusion/exclusion criteria included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of patients with intractable pain of greater than one year’s duration. Full studies were graded by two independent reviewers. Excluded studies were retrospective, had small numbers of subjects, or existed only as abstracts. Studies were graded using the modified Interventional Pain Management Techniques–Quality Appraisal of Reliability and Risk of Bias Assessment, the Cochrane Collaborations Risk of Bias assessment, and the US Preventative Services Task Force level-of-evidence criteria. Results SCS has Level 1 evidence (strong) for axial back/lumbar radiculopathy or neuralgia (five high-quality RCTs) and complex regional pain syndrome (one high-quality RCT). Conclusions High-level evidence supports SCS for treating chronic pain and complex regional pain syndrome. For patients with failed back surgery syndrome, SCS was more effective than reoperation or medical management. New stimulation waveforms and frequencies may provide a greater likelihood of pain relief compared with conventional SCS for patients with axial back pain, with or without radicular pain.

Current evidence for a strategic approach to the management of rheumatoid arthritis with disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs: a systematic literature review informing the EULAR recommendations for the management of rheumatoid arthritis

2010 ◽  
Vol 69 (6) ◽  
pp. 987-994 ◽  
Author(s):  
R Knevel ◽  
M Schoels ◽  
T W J Huizinga ◽  
D Aletaha ◽  
G R Burmester ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Rheumatoid Arthritis ◽  
Literature Review ◽  
Clinical Outcome ◽  
Physical Function ◽  
Systematic Literature Review ◽  
Structural Damage ◽  
Task Force ◽  
Treatment Strategies ◽  
Current Evidence ◽  
Eular Recommendations

ObjectivesTo perform a systematic literature review of effective strategies for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA).MethodsAs part of a European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) Task Force investigation, a literature search was carried out from January 1962 until February 2009 in PubMed/Ovid Embase/Cochrane and EULAR/American College of Rheumatism (ACR)) abstracts (2007/2008) for studies with a treatment strategy adjusted to target a predefined outcome. Articles were systematically reviewed and clinical outcome, physical function and structural damage were compared between intensive and less intensive strategies. The results were evaluated by an expert panel to consolidate evidence on treatment strategies in RA.ResultsThe search identified two different kinds of treatment strategies: strategies in which the reason for treatment adjustment differed between the study arms (‘steering strategies’, n=13) and strategies in which all trial arms used the same clinical outcome to adjust treatment with different pharmacological treatments (‘medication strategies’, n=7). Both intensive steering strategies and intensive medication strategies resulted in better outcome than less intensive strategies in patients with early active RA.ConclusionIntensive steering strategies and intensive medication strategies produce a better clinical outcome, improved physical function and less structural damage than conventional steering or treatment. Proof in favour of any steering method is lacking and the best medication sequence is still not known.

scholarly journals Efficacy and safety of non-pharmacological, pharmacological and surgical treatment for hand osteoarthritis: a systematic literature review informing the 2018 update of the EULAR recommendations for the management of hand osteoarthritis

RMD Open ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 4 (2) ◽  
pp. e000734 ◽  
Author(s):  
Féline P B Kroon ◽  
Loreto Carmona ◽  
Jan W Schoones ◽  
Margreet Kloppenburg
Keyword(s):  
Literature Review ◽  
Systematic Literature Review ◽  
Task Force ◽  
Treatment Options ◽  
Risk Of Bias ◽  
Hand Osteoarthritis ◽  
Efficacy And Safety ◽  
Pharmacological Treatments ◽  
Surgical Interventions ◽  
Positive Results

To update the evidence on efficacy and safety of non-pharmacological, pharmacological and surgical interventions for hand osteoarthritis (OA), a systematic literature review was performed up to June 2017, including (randomised) controlled trials or Cochrane systematic reviews. Main efficacy outcomes were pain, function and hand strength. Risk of bias was assessed. Meta-analysis was performed when advisable. Of 7036 records, 127 references were included, of which 50 studies concerned non-pharmacological, 64 pharmacological and 12 surgical interventions. Many studies had high risk of bias, mainly due to inadequate randomisation or blinding. Beneficial non-pharmacological treatments included hand exercise and prolonged thumb base splinting, while single trials showed positive results for joint protection and using assistive devices. Topical and oral non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) proved equally effective, while topical NSAIDs led to less adverse events. Single trials demonstrated positive results for chondroitin sulfate and intra-articular glucocorticoid injections in interphalangeal joints. Pharmacological treatments for which no clear beneficial effect was shown include paracetamol, intra-articular thumb base injections of glucocorticoids or hyaluronic acid, low-dose oral glucocorticoids, hydroxychloroquine and anti-tumour necrosis factor. No trials compared surgery to sham or non-operative treatment. No surgical intervention for thumb base OA appeared more effective than another, although in general more complex procedures led to more complications. No interventions slowed radiographic progression. In conclusion, an overview of the evidence on efficacy and safety of treatment options for hand OA was presented and informed the task force for the updated European League Against Rheumatism management recommendations for hand OA.

scholarly journals Digital Storytelling in Older Adults With Typical Aging, and With Mild Cognitive Impairment or Dementia: A Systematic Literature Review

2021 ◽  
pp. 073346482110154
Author(s):  
Adriana Maria Rios Rincon ◽  
Antonio Miguel Cruz ◽  
Christine Daum ◽  
Noelannah Neubauer ◽  
Aidan Comeau ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Older Adults ◽  
Cognitive Impairment ◽  
Mild Cognitive Impairment ◽  
Literature Review ◽  
Systematic Literature Review ◽  
Digital Storytelling ◽  
Level Of Evidence ◽  
Form Of Life ◽  
Self Confidence ◽  
Care Partners

The rates of dementia are on the rise as populations age. Storytelling is commonly used in therapies for persons living with dementia and can be in the form of life review, and reminiscence therapy. A systematic literature review was conducted to examine the range and extent of the use of digital technologies for facilitating storytelling in older adults and their care partners, and to identify the processes and methods, the technologies used and their readiness levels, the evidence, and the associated outcomes. Eight electronic databases were searched: Medline, EMBASE, PsycINFO, CINAHL, Abstracts in Social Gerontology, ERIC, Web of Science, and Scopus. We included 34 studies. Mild cognitive impairment or dementia represented over half of medical conditions reported in the studies. Overall, our findings indicate that the most common use of digital storytelling was to support older adults’ memory, reminiscence, identity, and self-confidence; however, the level of evidence of its effectiveness was low.

scholarly journals Asian American Older Adults and Social Isolation: A Systematic Literature Review

2020 ◽  
Vol 4 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. 328-328
Author(s):  
Simona Kwon ◽  
Deborah Min ◽  
Stella Chong
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Older Adults ◽  
Literature Review ◽  
Social Isolation ◽  
Asian Americans ◽  
Systematic Literature Review ◽  
Asian American ◽  
Minority Group ◽  
The United States ◽  
Eligibility Criteria

Abstract Asian Americans are the fastest growing racial and ethnic minority group in the United States, whose population is aging considerably. Previous studies indicate that social isolation and loneliness disproportionately affects older adults and predicts greater physical, mental, and cognitive decline. A systematic literature review using PRISMA guidelines was conducted to address this emerging need to understand the scope of research focused on social isolation and loneliness among the disparity population of older Asian Americans. Four interdisciplinary databases were searched: PubMed, CINAHL, PsycINFO, and AgeLine; search terms included variations on social isolation, loneliness, Asian Americans, and older adults. Articles were reviewed based on six eligibility criteria: (1) research topic relevance, (2) study participants aged >60 years, (3) Asian immigrants as main participants, (4) conducted in the United States, (5) published between 1995-2019, and (6) printed in the English language. The search yielded 799 articles across the four databases and 61 duplicate articles were removed. Abstracts were screened for the 738 remaining studies, 107 of which underwent full-text review. A total of 56 articles met the eligibility criteria. Synthesis of our review indicates that existing research focuses heavily on Chinese and Korean American immigrant communities, despite the heterogeneity of the diverse Asian American population. Studies were largely observational and employed community-based sampling. Critical literature gaps exist surrounding social isolation and loneliness in Asian American older adults, including the lack of studies on South Asian populations. Future studies should prioritize health promotion intervention research and focus on diverse understudied Asian subgroups.

Current Evidence of the Management of Undifferentiated Spondyloarthritis: A Systematic Literature Review

2011 ◽  
Vol 40 (5) ◽  
pp. 421-429.e3 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jose De La Mata ◽  
Jesús Maese ◽  
Juan A. Martinez ◽  
Piedad Rosario ◽  
Estibaliz Loza
Keyword(s):  
Literature Review ◽  
Systematic Literature Review ◽  
Current Evidence ◽  
Undifferentiated Spondyloarthritis

scholarly journals USE OF FLUNARIZINE AS A PREVENTIVE FOR VESTIBULAR MIGRAINE CRISES IN COMPARISON WITH OTHER DRUGS: SYSTEMATIC LITERATURE REVIEW

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lara Estupina Braghieri ◽  
Paula Lopes ◽  
Osmar Person ◽  
Fernando Junior ◽  
Priscila Bogar
Keyword(s):  
Literature Review ◽  
Systematic Literature Review ◽  
Randomized Clinical Trials ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Vestibular Migraine ◽  
Moderate Degree ◽  
Level Of Evidence ◽  
Grade Method ◽  
Episodic Vertigo ◽  
Preventive Drug

INTRODUCTION: Vestibular migraine is the main cause of episodic vertigo and the second most common cause of dizziness in adults. Treatment for vestibular migraine encompasses the prevention of crises and the control of acute symptoms. Flunarizine works by preventing the contraction of labyrinthine vessels and altering blood flow, thus preventing symptoms. Due to the high prevalence of the disease, its negative impacts on individual health and increased expenditure on public health, preventive pharmacological and non-pharmacological treatment must be implemented early. PURPOSE: To evaluate the efficacy of Flunarizine as a preventive for migraine and vestibular crises compared to other preventive drugs. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Scientific articles were searched in the databases using the terms (vestibular migraine OR migrainous vertigo) AND (flunarizine) AND (prophylaxis). Subsequently, a systematic literature review and meta-analysis was performed, including 3 randomized clinical trials comparing flunarizine and other preventive drugs in terms of efficacy and safety for preventing migraine vertigo attacks. The studies were analyzed using a ROB table, analysis using the GRADE method and meta-analysis. RESULTS: Qualitatively, the analysis showed that flunariniza was positive for decreasing the frequency of vertigo in cases of vestibular migraine, with a moderate degree of evidence, a relative risk of 0.34 and a confidence interval of 0.15 to 0.76. CONCLUSIONS: There are few studies available in the scientific literature on the use of flunarizine in vestibular migraine, many of which are heterogeneous among themselves, mainly in the way of evaluating and monitoring patients, carried out mainly through subjective methods. The meta-analysis showed a positive result for flunarizine as a preventive drug for the studied population. Furthermore, in all the studies analyzed, no serious side effects resulting from the use of the medication were reported, which makes it safe for patients to use. Flunarizine is a good drug for the prevention of vestibular migraine, especially in reducing the number of attacks, with a good level of evidence.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document