scholarly journals Application of the Ipswich Touch Test for diabetic peripheral neuropathy screening: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BMJ Open ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (10) ◽  
pp. e046966
Author(s):  
Nan Zhao ◽  
Jingcan Xu ◽  
Qiuhong Zhou ◽  
Xinyi Li ◽  
Jiarui Chen ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Peripheral Neuropathy ◽  
Sensitivity And Specificity ◽  
Diabetic Peripheral Neuropathy ◽  
Tuning Fork ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Biomedical Literature ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
Traditional Methods ◽  
Registration Number

ObjectiveDiabetic peripheral neuropathy (DPN) is one of the most important risk factors of diabetic foot ulcers, and early screening and treatment of DPN are crucial. The Ipswich Touch Test (IPTT) is a new method for screening for DPN and, compared with traditional methods, is more simple to operate and requires no equipment. However, the screening accuracy of IPTT in patients with DPN has not been well characterised. We aim to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis to characterise the sensitivity and specificity of IPTT compared with traditional methods and to understand the potential screening value of IPTT.DesignSystematic review and meta-analysis.Data sourcesPubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, Wanfang, Chinese Biomedical Literature Database up to 16 April 2020.MethodsStata V.15.1 software was used for analysis, and the screening value of IPTT in DPN was described using 10 g monofilament (10g-MF), neuropathy disability scores (NDS), Pin prick, 128 Hz tuning fork, and ankle reflex as reference standards. Sensitivity, specificity and other measures of accuracy of IPTT for screening DPN were pooled based on a quality effects model. The protocol was registered with PROSPERO (42020168420).ResultsOf the 441 records retrieved, 7 studies were evaluated for the screening value of IPTT. Five studies with 10g-MF as the reference standard were included in the meta-analysis, and the pooled sensitivity and specificity were 0.77 (95％CI 0.69–0.84) and 0.96(95％CI 0.93–0.98), respectively, and the area under curve was 0.897. Compared with vibration perception threshold, IPTT showed a sensitivity between 0.76 and 1, and a specificity between 0.90 and 0.97. Compared with NDS, IPTT showed a sensitivity between 0.53 and 1, and a specificity between 0.90 and 0.97. Compared with Pin prick, IPTT showed a sensitivity and specificity of 0.8 and 0.88, respectively. Compared with 128 Hz tuning fork, IPTT showed a sensitivity and specificity of 0.4 and 0.27, respectively. Compared with ankle reflex, IPTT had a sensitivity of 0.2 and a specificity of 0.97.ConclusionsIPTT shows a high degree of agreement with other commonly used screening tools for DPN screening. It can be used clinically, especially in remote areas and in primary medical institutions, and by self-monitoring patients. More high-quality studies are needed to assess and promote more effective screening practices.PROSPERO registration numberRegistration Number is CRD (42020168420).

scholarly journals Study on acupuncture in the treatment of painful diabetic peripheral neuropathy based on rs-fMRI: a protocol for systematic review and meta-analysis

BMJ Open ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (8) ◽  
pp. e055874
Author(s):  
Mengyuan Li ◽  
Lin Yao ◽  
Haipeng Huang ◽  
Haizhu Zheng ◽  
Jiazhen Cao ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Peripheral Neuropathy ◽  
Diabetic Peripheral Neuropathy ◽  
Data Extraction ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Sensory Nerve ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
Therapeutic Effects ◽  
Painful Diabetic Peripheral Neuropathy ◽  
The Brain

IntroductionStudies have shown that acupuncture has significant therapeutic effects on painful diabetic peripheral neuropathy (PDPN) yet the precise mechanism of action underpinning these effects remains controversial. Resting-state functional MRI (rs-fMRI) is an advanced imaging technique that can be used to monitor changes in the activity of the brain, particularly in PDPN. However, the data from several studies remain inconclusive and there is currently no systematic review and meta-analysis for the use of rs-fMRI in PDPN.Methods and analysisIn this study, we will select all eligible studies published on or before 30 June 2021. Four English and four Chinese databases will be searched, specifically, PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, WanFang database, China Science Technology Journal Database (VIP) and China Doctor/Master Dissertations Full-text Database. Only clinical trials and the first cycle of a cross-over trial linked to acupuncture for PDPN will be included in the analysis. The main outcomes include the amplitude of low-frequency fluctuation, regional homogeneity, functional connectivity of the brain, bilateral superficial peroneal nerve sensory nerve conduction velocity, bilateral dorsal current perception threshold values and the degree of subjective pain. The secondary outcomes include biochemical indicators, the degree of depression and anxiety and changes in efficiency. The study selection, data extraction and risk of bias assessment will be performed by two investigators. For statistical analyses, Review Manager V.5.4 software will be used. If necessary, heterogeneity testing, data synthesis, and subgroup analysis will be performed.Ethics and disseminationOur systematic review and meta-analysis will be based on published literature for data extraction and will not include the use of individual patient data and so no ethical approval required.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42021211644.

scholarly journals Relative Efficacy and Safety of Pharmacotherapeutic Interventions for Diabetic Peripheral Neuropathy: A Systematic Review and Bayesian Network Meta-Analysis

2020 ◽  
Vol 1;24 (1;1) ◽  
pp. E1-E14
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Peripheral Neuropathy ◽  
Bayesian Network ◽  
Diabetic Peripheral Neuropathy ◽  
Adverse Drug Events ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Pain Reduction ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
Relative Efficacy ◽  
Efficacy And Safety

BACKGROUND: Diabetic peripheral neuropathy (DPN) is a most common devitalizing complication of diabetes mellitus, which is primarily characterized by sensory loss, paresthesia, prickling, pain, or allodynia. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the relative efficacy and safety of the interventions used in the DPN pain management and rank their order. STUDY DESIGN: A systematic review and Bayesian network meta-analysis (NMA). METHODS: Randomized, controlled trials were identified through a comprehensive, systematic literature exploration, primarily utilizing the PubMed, EMBASE, Ovid, and Cochrane Library databases. The efficacy and safety outcomes consist of the proportion of patients reporting either 30% or 50% pain reduction and overall withdrawal or withdrawal due to adverse drug events, respectively. Effect estimates from Bayesian NMA were presented as odds ratio (OR) with 95% credible intervals (CrI). Heterogeneity and convergence were assessed by using I2 and deviation information criteria. The risk of bias was evaluated by using Pedro Scale. RESULTS: A total of 3,246 potentially relevant trials were identified and screened, finally 43 trials consisting of 7,877 randomized patients met the inclusion criteria. Statistically significant treatment difference for 50% pain reduction was reported for duloxetine vs. placebo (OR: 2.50; CrI: 1.62-3.91), mirogabalin vs. placebo (OR: 3.25; CrI: 1.16-9.35), pregabalin vs. placebo (OR: 2.33; CrI: 1.69-3.27), duloxetine vs. carbamazepine (OR: 3.37; CrI: 1.07-10.90), mirogabalin vs. carbamazepine (OR: 4.39; CrI: 1.01-19.63), mirogabalin vs. lamotrigine (OR: 4.05: CrI: 1.07-15.77), pregabalin vs. lamotrigine (OR: 2.90, CrI: 1.19-7.22) and pregabalin vs. nortriptyline (OR: 4.10, CrI: 1.13-5.28). Nortriptyline reported the highest possibility of achieving 30% and 50% pain reduction. Sodium valproate and benztropine reported the highest probability of total withdrawals and withdrawals due to adverse drug events, respectively. LIMITATION: The different follow-up time of the included studies can result in the variation of intended results. CONCLUSION: Nortriptyline reported the advantage relative to other drugs in achieving 30% and 50% pain reduction from the baseline. Gabapentin reported a significance of 50% pain reduction relative to placebo. KEY WORDS: Diabetic painful neuropathy, network meta-analysis, evidence based medicine, Bayesian analysis

scholarly journals Reliability of recommended non-invasive chairside screening tests for diabetes-related peripheral neuropathy: a systematic review with meta-analyses

2021 ◽  
Vol 9 (2) ◽  
pp. e002528
Author(s):  
Ally McIllhatton ◽  
Sean Lanting ◽  
David Lambkin ◽  
Lucy Leigh ◽  
Sarah Casey ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Peripheral Neuropathy ◽  
Tuning Fork ◽  
Pooled Analysis ◽  
Screening Tests ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
Quality Appraisal ◽  
Perception Threshold ◽  
Rater Reliability ◽  
Meta Analyses

The objective is to determine, by systematic review, the reliability of testing methods for diagnosis of diabetes-related peripheral neuropathy (DPN) as recommended by the most recent guidelines from the International Diabetes Foundation, International Working Group on the Diabetic Foot and American Diabetes Association. Electronic searches of Cochrane Library, EBSCO Megafile Ultimate and EMBASE were performed to May 2021. Articles were included if they reported on the reliability of recommended chairside tests in diabetes cohorts. Quality appraisal was performed using a Quality Appraisal of Reliability Studies checklist and where possible, meta-analyses, with reliability reported as estimated Cohen’s kappa (95% CI). Seventeen studies were eligible for inclusion. Pooled analysis found acceptable inter-rater reliability of vibration perception threshold (VPT) (κ=0.61 (0.50 to 0.73)) and ankle reflex testing (κ=0.60 (0.55 to 0.64)), but weak inter-rater reliability for pinprick (κ=0.45 (0.22 to 0.69)) and 128 Hz tuning fork (κ=0.42 (0.15 to 0.70)), though intra-rater reliability of the 128 Hz tuning fork was moderate (κ=0.54 (0.37 to 0.73)). Inter-rater reliability of the four-site monofilament was acceptable (κ=0.61 (0.45 to 0.77)). These results support the clinical use of VPT, ankle reflexes and four-site monofilament for screening and ongoing monitoring of DPN as recommended by the latest guidelines. The reliability of temperature perception, pinprick, proprioception, three-site monofilament and Ipswich touch test when performed in people with diabetes remains unclear.

scholarly journals Does propofol ameliorate occurrence of postoperative cognitive dysfunction after general anaesthesia? A protocol of systematic review

2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Xi Zhao ◽  
Ze-qing Huang
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Cognitive Dysfunction ◽  
Short Term Memory ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Postoperative Cognitive Dysfunction ◽  
Biomedical Literature ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
Efficacy And Safety ◽  
China National Knowledge Infrastructure

Abstract Background Postoperative cognitive dysfunction (POCD) is a common condition after general anesthesia (GA). Previous studies have reported that propofol can ameliorate the occurrence of such disorder. However, its results are still inconsistent. Therefore, this systematic review will assess the efficacy and safety of propofol on POCD after GA. Methods Literature sources will be sought from inception to the present in Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, Web of Science, Scopus, Allied and Complementary Medicine Database, Chinese Biomedical Literature Database, and China National Knowledge Infrastructure for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) assessing the administration of propofol on POCD after GA. All searches will be carried out without limitations to language and publication status. Outcomes comprise of cognitive impairments changes, impairments in short-term memory, concentration, language comprehension, social integration, quality of life, and adverse events. Cochrane risk of bias tool will be utilized to assess study quality. We will evaluate the quality of evidence for each outcome using Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach. A narrative synthesis or a meta-analysis will be undertaken as appropriate. Discussion This study will systematically and comprehensively search literature and integrate evidence on the efficacy and safety of propofol on POCD after GA. Our findings will be of interest to clinicians and health-related policy makers. Systematic review registration PROSPERO CRD42020164096

scholarly journals Safety and efficacy of mycophenolate mofetil in treating neuromyelitis optica spectrum disorders: a protocol for systematic review and meta-analysis

BMJ Open ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (11) ◽  
pp. e040371
Author(s):  
Mengyu Han ◽  
Luqi Nong ◽  
Ziqiang Liu ◽  
You Chen ◽  
Yang Chen ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Mycophenolate Mofetil ◽  
Neuromyelitis Optica ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Grey Literature ◽  
Relevant Literature ◽  
Biomedical Literature ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
Neuromyelitis Optica Spectrum Disorders ◽  
Spectrum Disorders

IntroductionNeuromyelitis optica spectrum disorders (NMOSD) is an inflammatory and heterogeneous astrocyte disorder of the central nervous system with the characteristic of higher incidence in women and Asian people. Most patients with NMOSD have a course of recurrence and remission that is prone to cause paralysis and blindness. Several studies have confirmed the efficacy and promising prospect of mycophenolate mofetil (MMF) in the treatment of NMOSD. Yet its therapeutic effect and safety are controversial. Although there has been two published literature that is relevant to the topic of this study, both of them have certain defects, and they can only provide answers about the efficacy or safety of MMF in the treatment of NMOSD from partial perspectives or conclusions. This research aims to perform a direct and comprehensive systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate MMF’s effectiveness and safety in treating NMOSD.Methods and analysisThis systematic review will cover all comparative researches, from randomised controlled trials to cohort studies, and case–control study. A relevant literature search will be conducted in PubMed, Web of Science, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, Wanfang Database, China Science and Technology Journal Database and Chinese Biomedical Literature Database from their inception to 31 June 2020. We will also search registers of clinical trials, potential grey literature and abstracts from conferences. There are no limits on language and publication status. The reporting quality and risk of bias will be assessed by two researchers independently. Expanded Disability Status Scales and annualised relapse rate will be evaluated as the primary outcome. The secondary outcomes will consist of the frequency and severity of adverse events, best-corrected visual acuity, relapse-free rate and time to the next attack. A meta-analysis will be performed using RevMan V.5.3 software provided by the Cochrane Collaboration and Stata V.12.0.Ethics and disseminationBecause the data used for this systematic review will be exclusively extracted from published studies, ethical approval and informed consent of patients will not be required. The systematic review will be published in a peer-reviewed journal, presented at conferences and will be shared on social media platforms.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42020164179.

scholarly journals Is dezocine effective and safe in preventing opioids-induced cough during general anaesthesia induction? A protocol for systematic review and meta-analysis

BMJ Open ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (6) ◽  
pp. e035691
Author(s):  
Li-xian He ◽  
Ken Shao ◽  
Jie Ma ◽  
Yuan-yuan Zhao ◽  
Yun-tai Yao
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Adverse Effects ◽  
Treatment Effects ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Biomedical Literature ◽  
Sensitivity Analyses ◽  
Systemic Review ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
Significant Heterogeneity ◽  
Anaesthesia Induction

IntroductionCough is often observed when administrating a bolus of opioids. Opioid-induced cough (OIC) is mostly transient, benign and self-limiting, but could be associated with adverse effects. Numerous pharmacological and non-pharmacological interventions have been used to manage OIC with controversial efficacy and safety. Recent studies suggested that, pretreatment of intravenous dezocine (DZC) could completely suppress OIC during anaesthesia induction. To address this knowledge lack, we will perform a systemic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the efficacy of DZC on OIC and possible complications. We provide here a protocol that will outline the methods and analyses planned for the systematic review.MethodsPubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, Web of Science as well as Chinese BioMedical Literature & Retrieval System (SinoMed), China National Knowledge Infrastructure, Wanfang Data and VIP Data will be searched from 1978 to 31 December 2019 to identify all randomised controlled trials comparing DZC with placebo on the incidence and severity of OIC. Primary outcomes of interest include the incidence and severity of OIC. Secondary outcomes of interest include possible complications or adverse effects of DZC. Two authors will independently extract relevant variables and outcome data. For continuous variables, treatment effects will be calculated as weighted mean difference and 95% CI. For dichotomous data, treatment effects will be calculated as OR and 95% CI. Each outcome will be tested for heterogeneity, and randomised-effects or fixed-effects model will be used in the presence or absence of significant heterogeneity. Sensitivity analyses will be done by examining the influence of statistical model and individual trial(s) on estimated treatment effects. Publication bias will be explored through visual inspection of funnel plots of the outcomes. Statistical significance will be defined as p<0.05.Ethics and disseminationThis study is a protocol of meta-analysis of previously published literatures, ethical approval was not necessary according to the Ethical Committee of Fuwai Hospital. The study will be submitted to a peer-reviewed journal and disseminated via research presentations.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42019141255.

scholarly journals Pulmonary rehabilitation for pneumoconiosis: protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis

BMJ Open ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 9 (8) ◽  
pp. e025891 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hulei Zhao ◽  
Yang Xie ◽  
Jiajia Wang ◽  
Xuanlin Li ◽  
Jiansheng Li
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Pulmonary Rehabilitation ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Biomedical Literature ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
Diffuse Fibrosis ◽  
China National Knowledge Infrastructure ◽  
Ethical Approval ◽  
St George's Respiratory Questionnaire ◽  
Randomised Controlled

IntroductionPneumoconiosis is characterised by diffuse fibrosis in lung tissue, and its incidence is on the rise. At present, there are limited therapeutic options for pneumoconiosis. Pulmonary rehabilitation (PR) has been widely used to treat pneumoconiosis，however, there is limited evidence concerning its efficacy. Therefore, we plan to conduct a systematic review to investigate the efficacy and safety of PR for pneumoconiosis.Methods and analysisThe following databases will be searched from their inception to 1 April 2019: PubMed, Embase, The Cochrane Library, Web of Science, Chinese Biomedical Literature Database, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, Chongqing VIP and Wanfang Data. Randomised controlled trials of PR for pneumoconiosis will be included. Primary outcomes will include 6 min walk distance and St. George’s Respiratory Questionnaire. Study selection, extraction of data and assessment of study quality each will be independently undertaken. Statistical analysis will be conducted using Review Manager software.Ethics and disseminationThis systematic review will provide up-to-date information on PR for pneumoconiosis. The review does not require ethical approval and will be disseminated electronically through a peer-reviewed publication or conference presentations.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42018095266.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document