Effects of isokinetic muscle strengthening on muscle strength, mobility, and gait in post-stroke patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis

2018 ◽  
Vol 33 (3) ◽  
pp. 381-394 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sarah Souza Pontes ◽  
Ana Louise Reis de Carvalho ◽  
Katna de Oliveira Almeida ◽  
Murilo Pires Neves ◽  
Ingara Fernanda Silva Ribeiro Schindler ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Muscle Strength ◽  
Randomized Controlled Trials ◽  
Weighted Mean Difference ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Cochrane Central Register ◽  
Stroke Patients ◽  
Muscle Strengthening ◽  
Post Stroke ◽  
Randomized Controlled

Objective: To investigate whether isokinetic muscle strengthening improves muscle strength, mobility, and gait in post-stroke patients. Methods: We searched for randomized controlled trials at PubMed/Medline, SciELO, PEDro, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, from the earliest date available to June 2018. Randomized controlled trials that examined the effects of isokinetic muscle strengthening versus other rehabilitation interventions or control in post-stroke patients were included. Study quality was evaluated using the PEDro scale. Weighted mean difference (WMD) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated, and heterogeneity was assessed using the I2 test. Results: In total, 13 studies (347 patients) focusing on the use of isokinetic in rehabilitation following stroke were included. All trials were of low-to-moderate quality. Isokinetic muscle strengthening improved muscle strength WMD 0.8 (95% CI: 0.2, 1.4; N = 96), mobility WMD −2.03 seconds (95% CI: −2.9, −1.1; N = 111) and gait speed WMD 0.9 m/s (95% CI: 0.05, 1.8; N = 87). Conclusion: Isokinetic muscle strengthening seems to be a useful strategy for improving muscle strength, mobility, and gait in post-stroke patients.

scholarly journals Convalescent plasma therapy for COVID-19 patients: a protocol of a prospective meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Trials ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 22 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Lajos Szakó ◽  
Nelli Farkas ◽  
Szabolcs Kiss ◽  
Szilárd Váncsa ◽  
Noémi Zádori ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Confidence Interval ◽  
Randomized Controlled Trials ◽  
Organ Failure ◽  
Weighted Mean Difference ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Cochrane Central Register ◽  
Plasma Therapy ◽  
Monthly Basis ◽  
Randomized Controlled

Abstract Background Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is an infection with possible serious consequences. The plasma of recovered patients might serve as treatment, which we aim to assess in the form of a prospective meta-analysis focusing on mortality, multi-organ failure, duration of intensive care unit stay, and adverse events. Methods A systematic search was conducted to find relevant registered randomized controlled trials in five trial registries. A comprehensive search will be done continuously on a monthly basis in MEDLINE (via PubMed), Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), and Web of Science to find the results of previously registered randomized controlled trials. The selection will be done by two independent authors. Data extraction will be carried out by two other independent reviewers. Disagreements will be resolved by a third investigator. An update of the search of the registries and the first search of the databases will be done on the 21st of July. Data synthesis will be performed following the recommendations of the Cochrane Collaboration. In the case of dichotomous outcomes (mortality and organ failure), we will calculate pooled risk ratios with a 95% confidence interval (CI) from two-by-two tables (treatment Y/N, outcome Y/N). Data from models with multivariate adjustment (hazard ratios, odds ratio, risk ratio) will be preferred for the analysis. P less than 0.05 will be considered statistically significant. In the case of ICU stay, weighted mean difference with a 95% confidence interval will be calculated. Heterogeneity will be tested with I2, and χ2 tests. Meta-analysis will be performed if at least 3 studies report on the same outcome and population. Discussion Convalescent plasma therapy is a considerable alternative in COVID-19, which we aim to investigate in a prospective meta-analysis.

The Impact of Immersive and Non-Immersive Virtual Reality Trends in Sensorimotor Recovery of Post-Stroke Patients-A Meta-Analysis

2021 ◽  
Vol 9 (5) ◽  
pp. 555-564
Author(s):  
Jaza Rizvi ◽  
◽  
Abid Khan ◽  
Sumaira Imran Farooqui ◽  
Bashir Ahmed Soomro ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Virtual Reality ◽  
Randomized Controlled Trials ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Stroke Patients ◽  
Post Stroke ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Sensorimotor Recovery ◽  
The Impact

Virtual Reality (VR) is an approach in stroke rehabilitation with ever-improving technological advancement for targeted motor rehabilitation by providing a user interface in a simulated environment with proprioceptive and visual feedback. This meta-analysis intended to evaluate the impact of immersive and non-immersive VR-based interventions compared to conventional rehabilitation in sensorimotor recovery following stroke. Randomized Controlled Trials based on the impact of VR, either immersive or non-immersive type in comparison to conventional rehabilitation on post-stroke patients (>18 years) sensorimotor recovery were searched on six databases including Google Scholar, PEDro, MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, EMBASE, and Web of Science from August to November 2020. A total of 17 randomized controlled trials on VR based intervention showed significant improvement in sensorimotor recovery following a stroke in overall FMA outcomes in comparison to the control group with pool effects in terms of SMD in a random effect model showed an impact of 0.498 at 95% CI (p<0.001) depicts a moderate effect size. An immersive and non-immersive emerging VR trend appears to be a promising therapeutic tool in sensorimotor recovery following stroke.

Effect of Probiotic Consumption on Immune Response in Athletes: A Meta-analysis

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rahele Tavakoly ◽  
Amir Hadi ◽  
Nahid Rafie ◽  
Behrouz Talaei ◽  
Wolfgang Marx ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Randomized Controlled Trials ◽  
Weighted Mean Difference ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Monocyte Count ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Immunological Markers ◽  
Online Databases ◽  
Immunological Effects

AbstractThe possible effect of probiotic interventions on immunological markers in athletes is inconclusive. Therefore, to synthesize and quantitatively analyze the existing evidence on this topic, systematic literature searches of online databases PubMed, Scopus, Cochrane Library, and ISI Web of Sciences was carried out up to February 2021 to find all randomized controlled trials (RCTs) concerning the immunological effects of probiotics in athletes. In the random-effects model, weighted mean difference (WMD) and 95% confidence interval (CI) explained the net effect. The authors assessed the likelihood of publication bias via Egger’s and Begg’s statistics. A total of 13 RCTs (836 participants) were retrieved. Probiotic consumption reduced lymphocyte T cytotoxic count significantly (WMD=−0.08 cells×109/L; 95% CI: −0.15 to −0.01; p=0.022) with evidence of moderate heterogeneity (I 2=59.1%, p=0.044) and monocyte count when intervention duration was ≤ 4 weeks (WMD=−0.08 cells×109/L; 95% CI: −0.16 to −0.001; I 2=0.0%). Furthermore, leukocyte count was significantly elevated (WMD=0.48 cells×109/L; 95% CI: 0.02 to 0.93; I 2=0.0%) when multi-strain probiotics were used. Probiotic supplements may improve immunological markers, including lymphocyte T cytotoxic, monocyte, and leukocyte in athletes. Further randomized controlled trials using diverse strains of probiotics and consistent outcome measures are necessary to allow for evidence-based recommendations.

scholarly journals Network Meta-Analysis of Different Clinical Commonly Used Drugs for the Treatment of Hypertrophic Scar and Keloid

2021 ◽  
Vol 8 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sha Yang ◽  
Yujia J. Luo ◽  
Cong Luo
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Randomized Controlled Trials ◽  
Topical Treatment ◽  
Hypertrophic Scar ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Treatment Strategies ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Cochrane Central Register ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Silicone Gels

Background: There is no uniform treatment for pathological scars, including keloids and hypertrophic scars, in clinic currently. Previously, multiple randomized controlled trials have examined the clinical efficacy of different treatments. Nonetheless, the results are inconsistent, and many treatments have not been directly compared. This makes it difficult to conclude which approach is more favorable, in terms of efficacy and safety, for the treatment of pathological scarring. This study aimed at evaluating the efficacy of different injection and topical treatment strategies for hypertrophic scar and keloid.Methods: Relevant literature from PubMed, Medline, Embase, Scopus, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CCRCT), and WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (WHO-ICTRP) were searched, from database inception through November 2020. Randomized clinical trials evaluating different treatment strategies of pathological scars, including triamcinolone acetonide (TAC), verapamil (VER), 5-fluorouracil (5-FU), botulinum toxin A (BTA), bleomycin (BLM), and silicone gels were included in the study.Results: The network meta-analysis included a total of 2,009 patients from 29 studies. A network meta-analysis of injection and topical treatment strategies showed that the efficacy of TAC combined with BTA was best in the treatment of pathological scars. Combination therapies of TAC with 5-FU and TAC with BTA significantly improved the clinical efficiency. However, there was no statistically significant difference between other treatment strategies. The order of efficacy predicted by the surface under the cumulative ranking (SUCRA) curve was as follows: TAC+BTA (82.2%) &gt; TAC+5-FU (69.8%) &gt; BTA (67.3%) &gt; 5-FU+silicone (59.4%) &gt; TAC+silicone (58.3%) &gt; 5-FU (49.8%) &gt; BLM (42.0%) &gt; TAC (26.7%) &gt; VER (26.2%) &gt; silicone (18.3%). There was no publication bias revealed based on the funnel diagram.Conclusion: This study recommends intralesional injection of TAC-BTA and TAC-5-FU combined therapies. But for patients who cannot tolerate the side effects, the use of silicone gels in combination with TAC is recommended. However, these conclusions need to be further confirmed by more randomized controlled trials.

scholarly journals The efficacy and safety of intrathecal bupivacaine alone versus bupivacaine combined with magnesium sulfate in adults using spinal anesthesia: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mi-Zhou Wang ◽  
Rui Dong ◽  
Li-Na Jia ◽  
Deng-Bin Ai ◽  
Jian-Hua Zhang
Keyword(s):  
Adverse Events ◽  
Randomized Controlled Trials ◽  
Magnesium Sulfate ◽  
Motor Block ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Sensory Block ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Cochrane Central Register ◽  
Rescue Analgesia ◽  
Randomized Controlled

Abstract Background: Several studies have investigated the effects of intrathecal magnesium sulfate as an adjuvant for bupivacaine; however, their conclusions are inconsistent. Therefore, it is necessary to conduct a meta-analysis on this topic.Methods We searched Pubmed, EMBASE (OvidSP) and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing the effect of intrathecal bupivacaine combined with magnesium sulfate versus bupivacaine alone in adults using spinal anesthesia.Results Eighteen studies that met our inclusion criteria were included in our analysis. We found that the addition of intrathecal magnesium sulfate to bupivacaine provided a longer duration of analgesia (SMD 0.99; 95% CI [0.45, 1.52], P = 0.0003, I2 = 93%), prolonged the duration of sensory block (MD=106.69; 95% CI, 60.93-152.45; P<0.00001), delayed the onset of sensory block (SMD 1.20; 95% CI [0.65, 1.75], P =<0.0001, I2 = 91%) and motor block (SMD 1.46; 95% CI [0.23, 2.69], P =0.02, I2 = 96%), decreased the requirement for rescue analgesia (SMD -0.81; 95% CI [-1.06, -0.56], P < 0.00001, I2 = 11%). For duration of motor block, and incidence of postoperative adverse events (such as nausea and vomiting, hypotension, bradycardia, pruritus, shivering and neurological deficit), no statistically differences were observed between the 2 groups.Conclusions Our meta-analysis demonstrated that intrathecal magnesium sulfate combined with bupivacaine prolongs the dusration of analgesia, without an impact on the adverse events. However, the quality of evidence was very low when using GRADE to assess it. Given adverse effects before use, more high-quality trials with large samples are required before magnesium sulfate is routinely used as a intrathecal adjunct.

scholarly journals The Effectiveness of Tocilizumab in the Treatment of COVID-19 in Adults: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Chun Chen ◽  
ZeMei Zhou ◽  
Jing Zhang
Keyword(s):  
Randomized Controlled Trials ◽  
Hospital Discharge ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Cochrane Central Register ◽  
Composite Outcome ◽  
Control Groups ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Serious Infection ◽  
And Control

Abstract Background: Since December 2019, COVID-19 has spread to the world which leads to a global health threat. We aimed to investigate the effectiveness of tocilizumab on COVID-19 patients.Methods: We systematically searched PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) and WHO international Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) from their inception to March 10, 2021 for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on tocilizumab supplementation in adults with COVID-19 disease. The primary outcomes were mortality at 28-30 day and 60-day, incidence of mechanical ventilation (MV), composite outcome of death or MV, time to hospital discharge, and intensive care unit (ICU) admissions. A random-effects meta-analysis model was used to pool studies. Results: Eleven studies with a total of 6,579 patients were included in our meta-analysis, of which 3,406 and 3,173 were respectively assigned to the tocilizumab and control groups. Tocilizumab could significantly reduce 28-30 day mortality (RR = 0.89, 95% CI 0.80-0.99, P = 0.04), incidence of MV (RR= 0.79, 95% CI 0.71-0.89, P = 0.0001), composition outcome of MV or death (RR = 0.81, 95% CI 0.72-0.90, P = 0.0002), time to hospital discharge (HR = 1.30, 95% CI 1.16-1.45, P ＜ 0.00001 ), ICU admissions (RR = 0.64, 95% CI 0.47-0.88, P = 0.006), serious infection (RR = 0.61, 95% CI 0.40-0.94, P = 0.02) and events of serious adverse advents (RR = 0.64, 95% CI 0.47-0.86, P = 0.004). There was no significant difference between tocilizumab and control groups in 60-day mortality and adverse events (AEs).Conclusions: Tocilizumab could reduce the short-term mortality, incidence of MV, composite outcome of death or MV, ICU admissions, serious infection and events of serious adverse advents, and shorten the time to hospital discharge in hospitalized patients with COVID-19. The optimal effective dose needs to be confirmed by further studies.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document