A systematic review of evidence for cannabis and cannabinoids as adjuvant therapy in palliative and supportive oncology care.

2020 ◽  
Vol 38 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 12091-12091
Author(s):  
Sebastian Jugl ◽  
Shailina Keshwani ◽  
Lauren Adkins ◽  
Coy D. Heldermon ◽  
Almut Winterstein ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Systematic Review ◽  
Cancer Patients ◽  
Systematic Reviews ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
The United States ◽  
Nausea And Vomiting ◽  
Medical Cannabis ◽  
Qualitative Synthesis ◽  
Oncology Care

12091 Background: Medical cannabis use is increasing significantly in the United States as states reduce restrictions. However, ambiguity concerning the evidence for medical cannabis efficacy and safety, especially in the field of oncology, is persistent. Clinicians therefore face challenges in examining benefits and risks of medical cannabis as adjuvant treatment for cancer patients. This study identifies and evaluates the most recent available evidence for the efficacy of cannabis and cannabinoids as adjuvant in supportive and/or palliative use in patients with cancer. Methods: Electronic databases searched included PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library to identify studies published following the latest available systematic review, between July 2016 through October 2019. Studies conducted outside the United States, studies not evaluating cannabis or cannabinoids in Oncology care, and preclinical studies were excluded. Findings were organized in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) framework. Lastly, qualitative synthesis was used to generate summary statements about the role of cannabis and cannabinoids as adjuvant in supportive and/or palliative cancer care. Results: We screened 2,267 articles and included 96 studies in our qualitative synthesis. Among those were 2 RCT’s (1 completed), 6 Systematic reviews with Meta-analysis, 4 Systematic reviews without Meta-analysis, 71 other types of reviews and 13 observational studies. The most frequently reported outcomes assessed were efficacy of cannabis and cannabinoids for: pain (40 of 96; 17 indicating improvement), nausea and vomiting (26 of 96; 20 indicating improvement), cachexia (22 of 96; 2 indicating improvement), and utilization patterns of cannabis and/or cannabinoids among cancer patients (8 of 96). Conclusions: Latest available prevalence estimates indicate that a significant proportion of patients in the United States with cancer use cannabis and/or cannabinoids (18.3-40.0%). There is substantial evidence for the effectiveness of cannabis and cannabinoids in treating cancer-related pain; specifically, oromucosal THC/CBD spray. There is conclusive evidence for the effectiveness of cannabis and cannabinoids in relieving chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting; specifically, oral THC. There is inconclusive evidence regarding the effectiveness of cannabis and cannabinoids in treating cancer-related cachexia.

scholarly journals Prevalence of Financial Fraud and Scams Among Older Adults in the United States: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

2017 ◽  
Vol 107 (8) ◽  
pp. e13-e21 ◽  
Author(s):  
David Burnes ◽  
Charles R. Henderson ◽  
Christine Sheppard ◽  
Rebecca Zhao ◽  
Karl Pillemer ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Systematic Review ◽  
Older Adults ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
The United States ◽  
Financial Fraud

scholarly journals Discontinuity of Cardiac Follow‐Up in Young People With Congenital Heart Disease Transitioning to Adulthood: A Systematic Review and Meta‐Analysis

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Philip Moons ◽  
Sandra Skogby ◽  
Ewa‐Lena Bratt ◽  
Liesl Zühlke ◽  
Ariane Marelli ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Systematic Review ◽  
Congenital Heart Disease ◽  
Heart Disease ◽  
Congenital Heart ◽  
Heart Defects ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Transition Programs ◽  
The United States

Background The majority of people born with congenital heart disease require lifelong cardiac follow‐up. However, discontinuity of care is a recognized problem and appears to increase around the transition to adulthood. We performed a systematic review and meta‐analysis to estimate the proportion of adolescents and emerging adults with congenital heart disease discontinuing cardiac follow‐up. In pooled data, we investigated regional differences, disparities by disease complexity, and the impact of transition programs on the discontinuity of care. Methods and Results Searches were performed in PubMed, Embase, Cinahl, and Web of Science. We identified 17 studies, which enrolled 6847 patients. A random effects meta‐analysis of single proportions was performed according to the DerSimonian‐Laird method. Moderator effects were computed to explore sources for heterogeneity. Discontinuity proportions ranged from 3.6% to 62.7%, with a pooled estimated proportion of 26.1% (95% CI, 19.2%–34.6%). A trend toward more discontinuity was observed in simple heart defects (33.7%; 95% CI, 15.6%–58.3%), compared with moderate (25.7%; 95% CI, 15.2%–40.1%) or complex congenital heart disease (22.3%; 95% CI, 16.5%–29.4%) ( P =0.2372). Studies from the United States (34.0%; 95% CI, 24.3%–45.4%), Canada (25.7%; 95% CI, 17.0%–36.7%), and Europe (6.5%; 95% CI, 5.3%–7.9%) differed significantly ( P =0.0004). Transition programs were shown to have the potential to reduce discontinuity of care (12.7%; 95% CI, 2.8%–42.3%) compared with usual care (36.2%; 95% CI, 22.8%–52.2%) ( P =0.1119). Conclusions This meta‐analysis showed that there is a high proportion of discontinuity of care in young people with congenital heart disease. The highest discontinuity proportions were observed in studies from the United States and in patients with simple heart defects. It is suggested that transition programs have a protective effect. Registration URL: www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero . Unique identifier: CRD42020182413.

Effectiveness of Physiotherapy to Promote Motor Recovery in Individuals with Stroke: A Systematic Review Protocol

2022 ◽  
Author(s):  
Shehong Zhang ◽  
Hongyu Xie ◽  
Chuanjie Wang ◽  
Fengfeng Wu ◽  
Xin Wang
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Motor Function ◽  
Systematic Reviews ◽  
Evaluation System ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Primary Data ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
Systematic Review Protocol ◽  
Qualitative Synthesis ◽  
Review Protocol

Abstract Introduction: Motor function is essential in our daily lives, one of the most common impairments caused by stroke is loss of functional movement. Over 70% of stroke survivors have motor or other neurological functional disabilities. However, rehabilitation of motor function suffered from a stroke can be rather difficult due to the complexity of organs and systems related to motor function, as well as the neural system that supported motor function. In particularly, previous evidence for the effectiveness of physiotherapy, a commonly prescribed intervention method for people with stroke, that recover motor function in people following a stroke is varied and limited in the chronic rehabilitation phase and therefore has never been reviewed systematically. With the progress of study in neurology and the development of novel tools for rehabilitation, results from more and more clinical trials are now available, thus here justifying conducting a systematic review. Methods and analysis: This systematic review protocol is developed in accordance with the methodology recommended by the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Protocols, as well as the Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions. Relevant studies will be identified by searching the databases. We will perform searches for relevant studies in databases, including PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, and Web of Science, Physiotherapy Evidence Database and Cochrane Library databases. The reference lists of included articles and reviews will be searched manually. The date range parameters used in searching all databases will be restricted between January 2001 and January 2021. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published will be included. The language used in the articles included was restricted to English. The GRADE (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation system from the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions) approach will be used to systematically appraise the quality of methodology. We will assess the risk of bias of the RCTs included using the Cochrane Collaboration’s tool and provide a qualitative synthesis. After that, we will consider conducting a meta-analysis if the final data across outcomes shows sufficient homogeneity. Ethics and dissemination: No ethical approval is needed as the proposed study does not involve the collection of primary data, and the results of this review will be disseminated via peer-reviewed publications and conference presentations. Trial registration number: CRD42021267069.

Racial Disparities in Screening Mammography in the United States: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

2017 ◽  
Vol 14 (2) ◽  
pp. 157-165.e9 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ahmed T. Ahmed ◽  
Brian T. Welch ◽  
Waleed Brinjikji ◽  
Wigdan H. Farah ◽  
Tara L. Henrichsen ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Systematic Review ◽  
Racial Disparities ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
The United States ◽  
Screening Mammography
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document