scholarly journals Effects of Composite Attachments on Orthodontic Clear Aligners Therapy: A Systematic Review

Materials ◽  
2022 ◽  
Vol 15 (2) ◽  
pp. 533
Author(s):  
Riccardo Nucera ◽  
Carolina Dolci ◽  
Angela Mirea Bellocchio ◽  
Stefania Costa ◽  
Serena Barbera ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Data Extraction ◽  
Risk Of Bias ◽  
Bias Assessment ◽  
Bodily Movement ◽  
Study Selection ◽  
Medium Risk ◽  
Clear Aligner ◽  
Anterior Root

This systematic review aims to highlight the differences between different clear aligner therapies that differ in the presence of attachments or in attachment configuration. Eight electronic databases were searched up to March 2020. Two authors independently proceeded to study selection, data extraction, and risk of bias assessment. The analysis of the results was carried out examining six groups of movements (mesio-distal tipping/bodily movement; anterior bucco-lingual tipping/root torque; posterior bucco-lingual tipping/expansion; intrusion; extrusion; rotation). Five clinical trials were selected and all of them showed a medium risk of bias. Literature showed that attachments mostly increase the effectiveness of orthodontic treatment with clear aligners, improving anterior root torque, rotation, and mesio-distal (M-D) movement; they are also important to increase posterior anchorage. However, some articles showed contradictory or not statistically significant results. Attachments also seem to improve intrusion, but the evidence about this movement, as well as extrusion, is lacking. No studies evaluated posterior bucco-lingual tipping/expansion. Further clinical trials are strongly suggested to clarify the influence of attachments and their number, size, shape, and position on each orthodontic movement.

scholarly journals Effect of treatments on skin microbiota in patients with atopic dermatitis: a protocol for systematic review

BMJ Open ◽  
2022 ◽  
Vol 12 (1) ◽  
pp. e053488
Author(s):  
Yang Guo ◽  
Xia Dou ◽  
Xing-ling Jian ◽  
Kao-yuan Zhang ◽  
Ying-jie Zheng ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Atopic Dermatitis ◽  
Data Extraction ◽  
Risk Of Bias ◽  
Microbial Interactions ◽  
Skin Microbiota ◽  
Clinical Trial Registry ◽  
Bias Assessment ◽  
Study Selection ◽  
Registration Number

IntroductionAtopic dermatitis (AD) is a chronic inflammatory skin disease and skin microbiota dysbiosis shows an important role in the pathogenesis of AD. Effects of treatment on skin microbiota for patients with AD have been evaluated in recent years; however, the results remained controversial across studies. This systematic review will summarise studies evaluating the effect of treatments on skin microbiota among patients with AD.Methods and analysisWe will search PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, ClinicalTrials.gov and Chinese Clinical Trial Registry in November 2021; other data sources will also be considered, including searching specific authors and screening references cited in the enrolled articles. Interventional studies, which enrolled patients with AD receiving treatments and reported treatment-related skin microbiota changes, will be included. Our primary outcomes include skin microbiota diversity and treatment-related differential microbes; the secondary outcomes include microbiota functions and microbial interactions. Risk of bias assessment will be performed using Cochrane risk-of-bias tool for randomised trials, risk of bias in non-randomised studies of interventions and methodological index for non-randomised studies. Two researchers will independently perform study selection, data extraction and risk of bias assessment, with disagreements resolved by group discussions. Subgroup analyses will be performed according to different types of treatment for AD.Ethics and disseminationEthics approval is not required for this systematic review. Findings will be disseminated via peer-reviewed publication or conference proceedings.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42021246566.

scholarly journals Effects of open-label placebos in clinical trials: a systematic review and meta-analysis

2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Melina von Wernsdorff ◽  
Martin Loef ◽  
Brunna Tuschen-Caffier ◽  
Stefan Schmidt
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Medical Condition ◽  
Data Extraction ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Risk Of Bias ◽  
Open Label ◽  
Cancer Related Fatigue ◽  
Promising Treatment ◽  
Irritable Bowel

AbstractOpen-label placebos (OLPs) are placebos without deception in the sense that patients know that they are receiving a placebo. The objective of our study is to systematically review and analyze the effect of OLPs in comparison to no treatment in clinical trials. A systematic literature search was carried out in February 2020. Randomized controlled trials of any medical condition or mental disorder comparing OLPs to no treatment were included. Data extraction and risk of bias rating were independently assessed. 1246 records were screened and thirteen studies were included into the systematic review. Eleven trials were eligible for meta-analysis. These trials assessed effects of OLPs on back pain, cancer-related fatigue, attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, allergic rhinitis, major depression, irritable bowel syndrome and menopausal hot flushes. Risk of bias was moderate among all studies. We found a significant overall effect (standardized mean difference = 0.72, 95% Cl 0.39–1.05, p < 0.0001, I2 = 76%) of OLP. Thus, OLPs appear to be a promising treatment in different conditions but the respective research is in its infancy. More research is needed, especially with respect to different medical and mental disorders and instructions accompanying the OLP administration as well as the role of expectations and mindsets.

scholarly journals Clinical effectiveness of convalescent plasma in hospitalized patients with COVID-19: a systematic review and meta-analysis

2021 ◽  
Vol 15 ◽  
pp. 175346662110280
Author(s):  
Roberto Ariel Abeldaño Zuñiga ◽  
Ruth Ana María González-Villoria ◽  
María Vanesa Elizondo ◽  
Anel Yaneli Nicolás Osorio ◽  
David Gómez Martínez ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Clinical Improvement ◽  
Data Extraction ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Clinical Effectiveness ◽  
Risk Of Bias ◽  
Hospitalized Patients ◽  
Low Risk ◽  
Controlled Clinical Trials

Aims: Given the variability of previously reported results, this systematic review aims to determine the clinical effectiveness of convalescent plasma employed in the treatment of hospitalized patients diagnosed with COVID-19. Methods: We conducted a systematic review of controlled clinical trials assessing treatment with convalescent plasma for hospitalized patients diagnosed with SARS-CoV-2 infection. The outcomes were mortality, clinical improvement, and ventilation requirement. Results: A total of 51 studies were retrieved from the databases. Five articles were finally included in the data extraction and qualitative and quantitative synthesis of results. The overall risk of bias in the reviewed articles was established at low-risk only in two trials. The meta-analysis suggests that there is no benefit of convalescent plasma compared with standard care or placebo in reducing the overall mortality and the ventilation requirement. However, there could be a benefit for the clinical improvement in patients treated with plasma. Conclusion: Current results led to assume that the convalescent plasma transfusion cannot reduce the mortality or ventilation requirement in hospitalized patients diagnosed with SARS-CoV-2 infection. More controlled clinical trials conducted with methodologies that ensure a low risk of bias are still needed. The reviews of this paper are available via the supplemental material section.

scholarly journals Aromatherapy for Symptom Relief in Patients with Burn: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Medicina ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 58 (1) ◽  
pp. 1
Author(s):  
Hye Won Lee ◽  
Lin Ang ◽  
Jung Tae Kim ◽  
Myeong Soo Lee
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Data Extraction ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Symptom Relief ◽  
Routine Care ◽  
Risk Of Bias ◽  
Review Author ◽  
Beneficial Effects ◽  
Study Selection ◽  
Meta Analyses

Background and Objectives: This review aimed to provide an updated review of evidence regarding the effects of aromatherapy in relieving symptoms of burn injuries, focusing on pain and physiological distress. Materials and Methods: Fifteen databases (including five English databases, four Korean medical databases, and four Iranian databases) and trial registries were searched for studies published between their dates of inception and July 2021. Two review authors individually performed study selection, data extraction, and risk of bias assessment, and any discrepancies were solved by a third review author. Results: Eight RCTs met our inclusion criteria and were analyzed in this updated systematic review. Our meta-analyses revealed that inhaled aromatherapy plus routine care showed beneficial effects in relieving pain after dressing, as compared to placebo plus routine care (p < 0.00001) and routine care alone (p = 0.02). Additionally, inhaled aromatherapy plus routine care (p < 0.00001) and aromatherapy massage plus routine care (p < 0.0001) also showed superior effects in calming anxiety, as compared to routine care alone. None of the included studies reported on AEs. Overall, the risk of bias across the studies was concerning. Conclusions: This updated review and synthesis of the studies had brought a more detailed understanding of the potential application of aromatherapy for easing the pain and anxiety of burn patients.

scholarly journals Prognostic models for predicting in-hospital paediatric mortality in resource-limited countries: a systematic review

BMJ Open ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (10) ◽  
pp. e035045
Author(s):  
Morris Ogero ◽  
Rachel Jelagat Sarguta ◽  
Lucas Malla ◽  
Jalemba Aluvaala ◽  
Ambrose Agweyu ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Low Income ◽  
Assessment Tool ◽  
Data Extraction ◽  
Model Development ◽  
Risk Of Bias ◽  
Prognostic Models ◽  
Risk Scores ◽  
Eligibility Criteria ◽  
Bias Assessment

ObjectivesTo identify and appraise the methodological rigour of multivariable prognostic models predicting in-hospital paediatric mortality in low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs).DesignSystematic review of peer-reviewed journals.Data sourcesMEDLINE, CINAHL, Google Scholar and Web of Science electronic databases since inception to August 2019.Eligibility criteriaWe included model development studies predicting in-hospital paediatric mortality in LMIC.Data extraction and synthesisThis systematic review followed the Checklist for critical Appraisal and data extraction for systematic Reviews of prediction Modelling Studies framework. The risk of bias assessment was conducted using Prediction model Risk of Bias Assessment Tool (PROBAST). No quantitative summary was conducted due to substantial heterogeneity that was observed after assessing the studies included.ResultsOur search strategy identified a total of 4054 unique articles. Among these, 3545 articles were excluded after review of titles and abstracts as they covered non-relevant topics. Full texts of 509 articles were screened for eligibility, of which 15 studies reporting 21 models met the eligibility criteria. Based on the PROBAST tool, risk of bias was assessed in four domains; participant, predictors, outcome and analyses. The domain of statistical analyses was the main area of concern where none of the included models was judged to be of low risk of bias.ConclusionThis review identified 21 models predicting in-hospital paediatric mortality in LMIC. However, most reports characterising these models are of poor quality when judged against recent reporting standards due to a high risk of bias. Future studies should adhere to standardised methodological criteria and progress from identifying new risk scores to validating or adapting existing scores.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42018088599.

scholarly journals Acupuncture for Managing Cancer-Related Insomnia: A Systematic Review of Randomized Clinical Trials

2016 ◽  
Vol 16 (2) ◽  
pp. 135-146 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tae-Young Choi ◽  
Jong In Kim ◽  
Hyun-Ja Lim ◽  
Myeong Soo Lee
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Sleep Quality ◽  
Randomized Clinical Trials ◽  
Data Extraction ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Sham Acupuncture ◽  
Risk Of Bias ◽  
The Other ◽  
Level Of Evidence

Background. Insomnia is a prominent complaint of cancer patients that can significantly affect their quality of life and symptoms related to sleep quality. Conventional drug approaches have a low rate of success in alleviating those suffering insomnia. The aim of this systematic review was to assess the efficacy of acupuncture in the management of cancer-related insomnia. Methods. A total of 12 databases were searched from their inception through January 2016 without language restriction. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs were included if acupuncture was used as the sole intervention or as an adjunct to another standard treatment for any cancer-related insomnia. The data extraction and the risk of bias assessments were performed by 2 independent reviewers. Results. Of the 90 studies screened, 6 RCTs were included. The risk of bias was generally unclear or low. Three RCTs showed equivalent effects on the Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index and 2 RCTs showed the similar effects on response rate to those of conventional drugs at the end of treatment. The other RCT showed acupuncture was better than hormone therapy in the numbers of hours slept each night and number of times woken up each night. The 3 weeks of follow-up in 2 RCTs showed superior effects of acupuncture compared with conventional drugs, and a meta-analysis showed significant effects of acupuncture. Two RCTs tested the effects of acupuncture on cancer-related insomnia compared with sham acupuncture. One RCT showed favourable effects, while the other trial failed to do so. Conclusion. There is a low level of evidence that acupuncture may be superior to sham acupuncture, drugs or hormones therapy. However, the number of studies and effect size are small for clinical significance. Further clinical trials are warranted.

scholarly journals Identifying patient-important outcomes for treatment of bipolar disorder: a systematic review protocol

BMJ Open ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (12) ◽  
pp. e050453
Author(s):  
Alessia D'Elia ◽  
Olivia Orsini ◽  
Stephanie Sanger ◽  
Alannah Hillmer ◽  
Nitika Sanger ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Bipolar Disorder ◽  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Systematic Reviews ◽  
Treatment Effectiveness ◽  
Data Extraction ◽  
Risk Of Bias ◽  
Observational Research ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
Randomised Controlled

IntroductionTreatment of bipolar disorder is the focus of several clinical trials, however the understanding of the outcomes for establishing treatment effectiveness within these trials is limited. Further, there is limited literature which reports on the outcomes considered to be important to patients, indicating that patient perspectives are often not considered when selecting outcomes of effectiveness within trials. This protocol describes a systematic review which aims to describe the outcomes being used within trials to measure treatment effectiveness, commenting on the inclusion of patient-important outcomes within previous trials.Methods and analysisThis protocol is reported using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses Protocols statement. OVID MEDLINE, OVID Embase, OVID APA PsycINFO, Web of Science, the Wiley Cochrane Library, ClinicalTrials.gov and the International Clinical Trials Registry Platform databases will be searched for eligible studies. Screening, full-text and data extraction stages will be completed in duplicate using the Covidence platform for systematic reviews. Eligible studies will include clinical trials of interventions in bipolar disorder, in order to identify outcomes used to assess treatment effectiveness, and qualitative studies, to determine which outcomes have been reported as important by patients. Risk of bias for included studies will be assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool for randomised controlled trials, and the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale for observational research.Ethics and disseminationThis review will involve dissemination to key stakeholders, including primary end users such as patients, clinicians and trialists. Knowledge translation tools will be generated to share the relevant conclusions of this review. Results will be communicated to the scientific community through peer-reviewed publications, conferences and workshops. No ethics approval will be sought as this study is based on literature.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42021214435.

scholarly journals Dental Composite Restorations Repair: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

2021 ◽  
pp. 707-738
Author(s):  
Abdulmohsen Al Rabiah ◽  
Alamri Zahrah ◽  
Tuwaym Malath ◽  
Al Daghri Ebtihal ◽  
Al Suhaibani Daniyah ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Prospective Cohort ◽  
Randomized Clinical Trials ◽  
Assessment Tool ◽  
Risk Of Bias ◽  
Dental Composite ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Cochrane Central Register ◽  
Bias Assessment

Background: Controversy exists in the literature regarding the most optimal repair procedure for improving the adhesion between the repair resin and the existing resin composite materials. Hence the aim of the present study was to do a systematic review and to analyze the adhesion potential of resin-based composites to similar and dissimilar composites and aimed to determine the possible dominant factors affecting the bond strength results. Materials & Methods: Randomized clinical trials (RCTs) and prospective cohort design were searched through electronic databases including MEDLINE, PubMed, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials for randomized clinical trials (RCTs) until July 2020 that compared different methods of composite restoration repair and a minimum mean follow-up time of 1 year. There were no restrictions on a particular treatment indication or outcome measures. Two authors independently conducted screening, risk of bias assessment, and data extraction of eligible trials in duplicate. We applied the Cochrane risk of bias assessment tool to consider the risk of bias. Results: We identified 10 articles; two of them were RCTs, and eight prospective cohort studies. There were 530 participants, with 990 teeth, dealing with resin-based composite (RBC) restorations. The intervention of defective restorations ranged from minimal intervention to total restoration replacement. The evaluation criteria were also varied with different evaluation protocols. The low number and heterogeneity of RCTs did not allow for meta-analyses. Conclusions: Although different repair protocols are mentioned in the literature according to the included studies, an appropriate and definitive conclusion can't be drawn. However, it seems repairs versus replacements should be considered as the first line of treatment when all factors lead to repair rather than replacement. Further randomized controlled trials with high methodological quality need to be conducted in order to establish evidence-based recommendations, particularly for RBC repair.

Efficacy and safety of opioid therapy guided by pharmacogenetics (PGx): a systematic review

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Federico Rodriguez Cairoli ◽  
Francisco Appiani ◽  
Juan Manuel Sambade ◽  
Daniel Comandé ◽  
Lina Camacho Arteaga ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
High Risk ◽  
Data Extraction ◽  
Opioid Therapy ◽  
Risk Of Bias ◽  
Efficacy And Safety ◽  
Chronic Postoperative Pain ◽  
Bias Assessment ◽  
Pain Improvement ◽  
Guided Therapy

Aim: To perform a systematic review to determine the efficacy/safety of PGx-guided opioid therapy for chronic/postoperative pain. Materials & methods: We searched PubMed and other specialized databases. Articles were considered if they compared the efficacy/safety of PGx-guided opioid therapy versus usual care. The risk of bias assessment was performed using Cochrane tools. Results: A total of 3794 records were retrieved. Only five were included for data extraction. A lower requirement of analgesics during postoperative in the PGx-guided intervention arm was reported in two studies. Also, two studies reported significant pain improvement in favor of the PGx-guided therapy when analyzing the subgroup of patients with a high-risk CYP2D6 phenotype. Conclusion: Despite the findings described, information on the efficacy/safety of this intervention is scarce.

scholarly journals The efficacy of antibiotics to control colibacillosis in broiler poultry: a systematic review

2019 ◽  
Vol 20 (2) ◽  
pp. 263-273
Author(s):  
Jan M. Sargeant ◽  
Michele D. Bergevin ◽  
Katheryn Churchill ◽  
Kaitlyn Dawkins ◽  
Bhumika Deb ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Data Extraction ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Antibiotic Use ◽  
Conversion Ratio ◽  
Risk Of Bias ◽  
Feed Conversion Ratio ◽  
Feed Conversion ◽  
Bias Assessment ◽  
Alternative Product

AbstractThe objective of this systematic review was to evaluate the efficacy of antibiotics to prevent or control colibacillosis in broilers. Studies found eligible were conducted controlled trials in broilers that evaluated an antibiotic intervention, with at least one of the following outcomes: mortality, feed conversion ratio (FCR), condemnations at slaughter, or total antibiotic use. Four electronic databases plus the gray literature were searched. Abstracts were screened for eligibility and data were extracted from eligible trials. Risk of bias was evaluated.Seven trials reported eligible outcomes in a format that allowed data extraction; all reported results for FCR and one also reported mortality. Due to the heterogeneity in the interventions and outcomes evaluated, it was not feasible to conduct meta-analysis.Qualitatively, for FCR, comparisons between an antibiotic and an alternative product did not show a significant benefit for either. Some of the comparisons between an antibiotic and a no-treatment placebo showed a numerical benefit to antibiotics, but with wide confidence intervals. The risk-of-bias assessment revealed concerns with reporting of key trial features.The results of this review do not provide compelling evidence for or against the efficacy of antibiotics for the control of colibacillosis.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document