scholarly journals Allergies to Titanium Dental Implants: What Do We Really Know about Them? A Scoping Review

Biology ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 9 (11) ◽  
pp. 404
Author(s):  
Rubén Comino-Garayoa ◽  
Jorge Cortés-Bretón Brinkmann ◽  
Jesús Peláez ◽  
Carlos López-Suárez ◽  
Jose María Martínez-González ◽  
...  

The purpose of this scoping review was to describe the current state of knowledge and understanding of allergies to titanium dental implants. A scoping review was conducted following the Prisma Extension for Scoping Reviews checklist. An electronic search was performed in five databases complemented by manual and grey literature searches. Fifty-two relevant papers were included for final review. Titanium particles can be released from the surfaces of dental implants in a process called tribocorrosion, which may contribute to bone loss due to inflammatory reaction. Diverse mechanisms have been described that may trigger allergy to titanium, as well as the clinical signs that manifest as the allergy develops. Allergies to titanium are uncommon but represent a real possibility that should not be overlooked in patients requiring prosthodontic rehabilitation with dental implants. Allergy can trigger a range of symptoms. Patients who have already been diagnosed with allergies to other metals will be more predisposed to suffering an allergy to titanium. Further investigation is needed in order to measure the true scope of these allergies.

2021 ◽  
Vol 4 ◽  
pp. 1-9
Author(s):  
Jelena Todic ◽  
M. Candace Christensen ◽  
Sheila M. McMahon

Background: #MeToo movement raised the profiles of restorative justice (RJ) and transformative justice (TJ) in the United States (US) as approaches to repairing harm resulting from sexual violence that center survivors’ needs and emphasize meaningful accountability for persons responsible for harm. This focus on RJ and TJ as viable approaches to sexual violence represents a departure from carceral interventions, which has dominated the US public discourse for decades. Given the shift, mapping the current state of knowledge is critical for practice, policy and research. This scoping review aims to map the available literature to provide an overview of RJ and TJ as responses to sexual violence. Methods/Design: The proposed scoping review will be conducted in accordance with the Joana Briggs Institute methodology for scoping reviews (Peters, Godfrey-Smith, & Mcinerney, 2017). The concept of interest is the use of RJ and TJ as responses to sexual violence. This scoping review will include both peer-reviewed and grey literature. We will employ a standardized extraction form and represent the data using a descriptive summary, charts and tables that align with the stated objectives. Discussion: Since the #MeToo movement emerged in 2017, public interest in RJ and TJ as meaningful responses to sexual violence has grown. This comprehensive scoping review will systematically organize the literature in order to understand the current landscape of evidence related to these approaches. Given the transformative potential of these interventions, past controversies, and current public interest in the approaches, understanding the current state of knowledge is critical for practice, policy and research.


2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
M. F. Van den Bosch ◽  
C. M. Wiepjes ◽  
M. Den Heijer ◽  
L. J. Schoonmade ◽  
R. E. G. Jonkman ◽  
...  

Abstract Background Gender-affirming hormone (GAH) therapy aims to support the transition of transgender people to their gender identity. GAHs can induce changes in their secondary sex characteristics such as the development of breasts in transgender females and increased muscle mass in transgender males. The face and its surrounding tissues also have an important role in gender confirmation. The aim of this scoping review is to systematically map the available evidence in order to provide an overview of the effects of GAH therapy on the hard and soft tissues of the craniofacial complex in transgender people. Methods/design The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Protocols (PRISMA) extension for Scoping Reviews was consulted for reporting this protocol. The methods were based on the Arksey and O’Malley’s framework and the Reviewer’s Manual of the Joanna Briggs Institute for conducting scoping reviews. Ten transgender people were involved in the development of the primary research question through short interviews. The eligibility criteria were defined for transgender people undergoing GAH therapy and for quantitative and qualitative outcomes on the hard and soft tissues of the craniofacial complex. Eligible sources of evidence include observational, experimental, qualitative, and mixed method studies. No exclusion criteria will be applied for the language of publication and the setting. To identify eligible sources of evidence, we will conduct searches from inception onwards in PubMed, Embase.com, the Cochrane Library, Web of Science Core Collection, Scopus, CINAHL, LIVIVO, and various grey literature sources such as Google Scholar. Two reviewers will independently select eligible studies in these information sources and will subsequently conduct data extraction. The same operators will chart, categorize, and summarize the extracted data. A narrative summary of findings will be conducted. Frequency counts of quantitative and qualitative data on items such as concepts, populations, interventions, and other characteristics of the eligible sources will be given. Where possible, these items will be mapped descriptively. Discussion We chose the scoping review over the systematic review approach, because the research questions are broad-spectrum and the literature is expected to be widely scattered. No systematic review has previously assessed this topic. Identifying knowledge gaps in this area and summarizing and disseminating research findings are important for a wide spectrum of stakeholders, in particular, for transgender people who want to undergo additional interventions such as plastic or orthognathic surgery or orthodontics. Systematic review registration This protocol was registered in the Open Science Framework: https://osf.io/e3qj6


BMJ Open ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
pp. e041894
Author(s):  
Joyce Kibaru ◽  
Pinky Kotecha ◽  
Abdulkarim Muhammad Iya ◽  
Beth Russell ◽  
Muzzammil Abdullahi ◽  
...  

IntroductionBladder cancer (BC) is the 10th common cancer worldwide and ranks seventh in Nigeria. This scoping review aims to identify the gaps in clinical care and research of BC in Nigeria as part of the development of a larger national research programme aiming to improve outcomes and care of BC.Methods and analysisThis review will be conducted according to Arksey and O’Malley scoping review methodology framework. The following electronic databases will be searched: Medline (using the PubMed interface), Ovid Gateway (Embase and Ovid), Cochrane library and Open Grey literature. Two independent reviewers will screen titles and abstracts and subsequently screen full-text studies for inclusion, any lack of consensus will be discussed with a third reviewer. Any study providing insight into the epidemiology or treatment pathway of BC (RCTs, observations, case series, policy paper) will be included. A data chart will be used to extract relevant data from the included studies. Results will be reported according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for scoping reviews. A consultation process will be carried out with a multidisciplinary team of Nigerian healthcare professionals, patients and scientists.Ethics and disseminationThe results will be disseminated through peer-reviewed publications. By highlighting the key gaps in the literature, this review can provide direction for future research and clinical guidelines in Nigeria (and other low-income and middle-income countries), where BC is more prevalent due to local risk factors and healthcare settings.


2021 ◽  
Vol 29 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. i23-i24
Author(s):  
M Murphy ◽  
K Bennett ◽  
S Ryan ◽  
C Hughes ◽  
A Lavan ◽  
...  

Abstract Introduction Older adults with cancer often require multiple medications (polypharmacy) comprising cancer-specific treatments, supportive care medications (e.g. analgesics) and medications for pre-existing conditions. The reported prevalence of polypharmacy in older adults with cancer ranges from 13–92% (1). Increasing numbers of medications pose risks of potentially inappropriate prescribing and medication non-adherence. Aim The aim of this scoping review was to provide an overview of evaluations of interventions to optimise medication prescribing and/or adherence in older adults with cancer, with a particular focus on the interventions, study populations and outcome measures that have been assessed in previous evaluations. Methods Four databases (PubMed, EMBASE, CINAHL, PsycINFO) were searched from inception to 29th November 2019 using relevant search terms (e.g. cancer, older adults, prescribing, adherence). Eligible studies evaluated interventions seeking to improve medication prescribing and/or adherence in older adults (≥65 years) with an active cancer diagnosis using a comparative evaluation (e.g. inclusion of a control group). All outcomes for studies that met inclusion criteria were included in the review. Two reviewers independently screened relevant abstracts for inclusion and performed data extraction. As a scoping review aims to provide a broad overview of existing literature, formal assessments of methodological quality of included studies were not undertaken. Extracted data were collated using tables and accompanying narrative descriptive summaries. The review was reported in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for scoping reviews (PRISMA-ScR) guidelines (2). Results The electronic searches yielded 21,136 citations (Figure 1). Nine studies met inclusion criteria. Included studies consisted of five randomised controlled trials (RCTs), including one cluster RCT, and four before-and-after study designs. Studies were primarily conducted in oncology clinics, ranging from single study sites to 109 oncology clinics. Sample sizes ranged from 33 to 4844 patients. All studies had a sample population with a mean/median age of ≥65 years, however, only two studies focused specifically on older populations. Interventions most commonly involved patient education (n=6), and were delivered by pharmacists or nurses. Five studies referred to the intervention development process and no studies reported any theoretical underpinning. Three studies reported on prescribing-related outcomes and seven studies reported on adherence-related outcomes, using different terminology and a range of assessments. Prescribing-related outcomes comprised assessments of medication appropriateness (using Beers criteria), drug-related problems and drug interactions. Adherence-related outcomes included assessments of self-reported medication adherence and calculation of patients’ medication possession ratio. Conclusion The main strength of this scoping review is that it provides a broad overview of the existing literature on interventions aimed at optimising medication prescribing and adherence in older adults with cancer. The review highlights a lack of robust studies specifically targeting this patient population and limited scope to pool outcome data across included studies. Limitations of the review were that searches were restricted to English language publications and no grey literature was searched. Future research should focus specifically on older patients with cancer, and exercise rigour during intervention development, evaluation and reporting in order to generate findings that could inform future practice. References 1. Maggiore RJ, Gross CP, Hurria A. Polypharmacy in older adults with cancer. The oncologist. 2010;15(5):507–22. 2. Tricco AC, Lillie E, Zarin W, O'Brien KK, Colquhoun H, Levac D, et al. PRISMA Extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR): Checklist and Explanation. Ann Intern Med. 2018;169(7):467–73.


2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Navin Kumar ◽  
Kamila Janmohamed ◽  
Kate Nyhan ◽  
Laura Forastiere ◽  
Wei-Hong Zhang ◽  
...  

Abstract Background Global responses to the COVID-19 pandemic have exposed and exacerbated existing socioeconomic and health inequities that disproportionately affect the sexual health and well-being of many populations, including people of color, ethnic minority groups, women, and sexual and gender minority populations. Although there have been several reviews published on COVID-19 and health disparities across various populations, none has focused on sexual health. We plan to conduct a scoping review that seeks to fill several of the gaps in the current knowledge of sexual health in the COVID-19 era. Methods A scoping review focusing on sexual health and COVID-19 will be conducted. We will search (from January 2020 onwards) CINAHL, Africa-Wide Information, Web of Science Core Collection, Embase, Gender Studies Database, Gender Watch, Global Health, WHO Global Literature on Coronavirus Disease Database, WHO Global Index Medicus, PsycINFO, MEDLINE, and Sociological Abstracts. Grey literature will be identified using Disaster Lit, Google Scholar, governmental websites, and clinical trials registries (e.g., ClinicalTrial.gov, World Health Organization, International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, and International Standard Randomized Controlled Trial Number Registry). Study selection will conform to the Joanna Briggs Institute Reviewers’ Manual 2015 Methodology for JBI Scoping Reviews. Only English language, original studies will be considered for inclusion. Two reviewers will independently screen all citations, full-text articles, and abstract data. A narrative summary of findings will be conducted. Data analysis will involve quantitative (e.g., frequencies) and qualitative (e.g., content and thematic analysis) methods. Discussion Original research is urgently needed to mitigate the risks of COVID-19 on sexual health. The planned scoping review will help to address this gap. Systematic review registrations Systematic Review Registration: Open Science Framework osf/io/PRX8E


2021 ◽  
Vol 103-B (7) ◽  
pp. 1189-1196
Author(s):  
Iain R. Murray ◽  
Navnit S. Makaram ◽  
Scott A. Rodeo ◽  
Marc R. Safran ◽  
Seth L. Sherman ◽  
...  

Aims The aim of this study was to prepare a scoping review to investigate the use of biologic therapies in the treatment of musculoskeletal injuries in professional and Olympic athletes. Methods Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) extension for scoping reviews and Arksey and O’Malley frameworks were followed. A three-step search strategy identified relevant published primary and secondary studies, as well as grey literature. The identified studies were screened with criteria for inclusion comprising clinical studies evaluating the use of biologic therapies in professional and Olympic athletes, systematic reviews, consensus statements, and conference proceedings. Data were extracted using a standardized tool to form a descriptive analysis and a thematic summary. Results A total of 202 studies were initially identified, and 35 met criteria for the scoping review; 33 (94.3%) were published within the last eight years, and 18 (51.4%) originated from the USA. Platelet rich plasma was the most studied biologic therapy, being evaluated in 33 (94.3%) studies. Ulnar collateral ligament and hamstring injuries were the conditions most studied (nine (25.7%) studies and seven (20.0%) studies, respectively). Athletes most frequently participated in baseball, soccer, and American football. Only two (5.7%) studies were level 1 evidence, with interpretation and comparison between studies limited by the variations in the injury profile, biologic preparations, and rehabilitation protocols. Conclusion There is diverse use of biologic therapies in the management of musculoskeletal injuries in professional and Olympic athletes. There is currently insufficient high-level evidence to support the widespread use of biologic therapies in athletes. Further research priorities include the development of condition/pathology-specific preparations of biologic therapies, and of outcome measures and imaging modalities sufficiently sensitive to detect differences in outcomes, should they exist. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2021;103-B(7):1189–1196.


2020 ◽  
Vol 17 ◽  
Author(s):  
Brett Williams ◽  
Bronwyn Beovich

Aim This study aimed to examine the quality of published paramedic scoping reviews against pre-existing frameworks to assess the extent to which they fulfil the requirements of this methodological approach. Subsequently, recommendations will be presented regarding improvements for future paramedic scoping reviews. Methods A scoping review was conducted guided by the PRISMA Extension for Scoping Reviews. A literature search was performed in six electronic databases as well as the grey literature to identify previous scoping reviews that focussed on paramedic or emergency medical service personnel. Relevant data were extracted from included articles and presented in narrative and tabular formats. Results The literature search initially identified 475 articles, of which 20 remained after title/abstract and full-text screening. There was a general increase in the number of studies published over time, the majority of articles (80%) had conducted their scoping review utilising published frameworks, and 75% of first authors were paramedics. Although many areas of these reports comply with published guidelines, there was an overall lack of consistency in the specific information included, the level of detail of that information, and the location of information within the reports. Conclusion All paramedic scoping studies should be reported with the use of a published framework to enable standardisation in the reporting, thus facilitating understanding, reproducibility, and utility. The PRISMA Extension for Scoping Reviews provides a checklist and thorough explanations of each step in the reporting process and is recommended for use with all future paramedic scoping reviews.


BMJ Open ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 9 (2) ◽  
pp. e025685 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mirjam Dieckelmann ◽  
Felix Reinhardt ◽  
Klaus Jeitler ◽  
Thomas Semlitsch ◽  
Jasper Plath ◽  
...  

IntroductionChronic heart failure (CHF) is a heterogeneous condition requiring complex treatment from diverse healthcare services. An increasingly holistic understanding of healthcare has resulted in contextual factors such as perceived quality of care, as well as patients’ acceptance, preferences and subjective expectations of health services, all gaining in importance. How patients with CHF experience the use of healthcare services has not been studied within the scope of a systematic review in a German healthcare context. The aim of this scoping review is therefore to review systematically the experiences of patients affected by CHF with healthcare services in Germany in the literature and to map the research foci. Further objectives are to identify gaps in evidence, develop further research questions and to inform decision makers concerned with improving healthcare of patients living with CHF.Methods and analysisThis scoping review will be based on a broad search strategy involving systematic and comprehensive electronic database searches in MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, PSYNDEX, CINAHL and Cochrane’s Database of Systematic Reviews, grey literature searches, as well as hand searches through reference lists and non-indexed key journals. The methodological procedure will be based on an established six-stage framework for conducting scoping reviews that includes two independent reviewers. Data will be systematically extracted, qualitatively and quantitatively analysed and summarised both narratively and visually. To ensure the research questions and extracted information are meaningful, a patient representative will be involved.Ethics and disseminationEthical approval will not be required to conduct this review. Results will be disseminated through a clearly illustrated report that will be part of a wider research project. Furthermore, it is intended that the review’s findings should be made available to relevant stakeholders through conference presentations and publication in peer-reviewed journals (knowledge transfer). Protocol registration in PROSPERO is not applicable for scoping reviews.


2019 ◽  
Vol 25 (1) ◽  
pp. 59-66 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael G Wilson ◽  
Aditya Nidumolu ◽  
Inna Berditchevskaia ◽  
Francois-Pierre Gauvin ◽  
Julia Abelson ◽  
...  

Objective Public deliberations are an increasingly popular tool to engage citizens in the development of health policies and programmes. However, limited research has been conducted on how to best synthesize and summarize information on health policy issues for citizens. To begin to address this gap, our aim was to map the literature on the preparation of information to support informed citizen deliberations related to health policy issues. Methods We conducted a scoping review where two reviewers screened the results of electronic database searches, grey literature searches and hand searches of organizational websites to identify empirical studies, scholarly commentaries, and publicly available organizational documents focused on synthesizing and summarizing information to inform citizen deliberation about health policy issues. Two reviewers categorized each included document according to themes/topics of deliberation, purpose of deliberation and the form of deliberation, and developed a summary of the key findings related to synthesizing and summarizing information to support informed citizen deliberations. Results There was limited reporting about whether and how information was synthesized. Evidence was typically organized based on the source used (e.g. by comparing the views of stakeholders or experts) or according to the areas that policymakers need to consider when making decisions (e.g. benefits, harms, costs and stakeholder perspectives related to policy options). Information was presented primarily through written materials (e.g. briefs and brochures), audiovisual resources (e.g. videos or presentations from stakeholders), but some interactive presentation approaches were also identified (e.g. through interactive arts-based approaches). Conclusions The choice and framing of information to inform citizen deliberations about health policy can strongly influence their understanding of a policy issue, and has the potential to impact the discussions and recommendations that emerge from deliberations. Our review confirmed that there remains a dearth of literature describing methods of the preparation of information to inform citizen deliberations about health policy issues. This highlights the need for further exploration of optimal strategies for citizen-friendly approaches to synthesizing and summarizing information for deliberations.


BMJ Open ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 9 (10) ◽  
pp. e033320 ◽  
Author(s):  
Fantu Abebe Eyowas ◽  
Marguerite Schneider ◽  
Biksegn Asrat Yirdaw ◽  
Fentie Ambaw Getahun

IntroductionMultimorbidity is the coexistence of two or more chronic non-communicable diseases (NCDs) in a given individual. Multimorbidity is increasing in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) and challenging health systems. Individuals with multimorbidity are facing the risk of premature mortality, lower quality of life and greater use of healthcare services. However, despite the huge challenge multimorbidity brings in LMICs, gaps remain in mapping and synthesising the available knowledge on the issue. The focus of this scoping review will be to synthesise the extent, range and nature of studies on the epidemiology and models of multimorbidity care in LMICs.MethodsPubMed (MEDLINE) will be the main database to be searched. For articles that are not indexed in the PubMed, Scopus, PsycINFO and Cochrane databases will be searched. Grey literature databases will also be explored. There will be no restrictions on study setting or year of publication. Articles will be searched using key terms, including comorbidity, co-morbidity, multimorbidity, multiple chronic conditions and model of care. Relevant articles will be screened by two independent reviewers and data will be charted accordingly. The result of this scoping review will be presented using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses Extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR) checklist and reporting guideline.Ethics and disseminationThis scoping review does not require ethical approval. Findings will be published in peer-reviewed journal and presented at scientific conferences.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document