scholarly journals Acupuncture response rates in chronic constipation: A protocol for the systematic review and meta-analysis

Author(s):  
Lu Wang ◽  
◽  
Meng-han Xi ◽  
Hai-yan Qin ◽  
Wei Cao ◽  
...  
Cephalalgia ◽  
2021 ◽  
pp. 033310242110181
Author(s):  
Florian Frank ◽  
Hanno Ulmer ◽  
Victoria Sidoroff ◽  
Gregor Broessner

Background The approval of monoclonal antibodies for prevention of migraine has revolutionized treatment for patients. Oral preventatives are still considered first line treatments as head-to-head trials comparing them with antibodies are lacking. Methods The main purpose of this study was to provide a comparative overview of the efficacy of three commonly prescribed migraine preventative medication classes. For this systematic review and meta-analysis, we searched the databases CENTRAL, EMBASE, and MEDLINE until 20 March 2020. We included RCTs reporting the 50% response rates for topiramate, Botulinum Toxin Type A and monoclonal antibodies against CGRP(r). Studies were excluded if response rates were not reported, treatment allocation was unclear, or if study quality was insufficient. Primary outcome measure were the 50% response rates. The pooled odds ratios with 95% confidence intervals were calculated with the random effects model. The study was registered at PROSPERO (CRD42020222880). Findings We identified 6552 reports. Thirty-two were eligible for our review. Studies assessing monoclonal antibodies included 13,302 patients and yielded pooled odds ratios for the 50% response rate of 2.30 (CI: 2.11–2.50). Topiramate had an overall effect estimate of 2.70 (CI: 1.97–3.69) with 1989 included patients and Botulinum Toxin Type A achieved 1.28 (CI: 0.98–1. 67) with 2472 patients included. Interpretation Topiramate, botulinum toxin type A and monoclonal antibodies showed higher odds ratios in achieving a 50% response rate compared to placebo. Topiramate numerically demonstrated the greatest effect size but also the highest drop-out rate.


BMJ Open ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (7) ◽  
pp. e044676
Author(s):  
Arash Ardavani ◽  
Hariz Aziz ◽  
Bethan E Phillips ◽  
Brett Doleman ◽  
Imran Ramzan ◽  
...  

BackgroundMeans-based analysis of maximal rate of oxygen consumption (VO2max) has traditionally been used as the exercise response indicator to assess the efficacy of endurance (END), high intensity interval (HIIT) and resistance exercise training (RET) for improving cardiorespiratory fitness and whole-body health. However, considerable heterogeneity exists in the interindividual variability response to the same or different training modalities.ObjectivesWe performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to investigate exercise response rates in the context of VO2max: (1) in each training modality (END, HIIT and RET) versus controls, (2) in END versus either HIIT or RET and (3) exercise response rates as measured by VO2max versus other indicators of positive exercise response in each exercise modality.MethodsThree databases (EMBASE, MEDLINE, CENTRAL) and additional sources were searched. Both individual response rate and population average data were incorporated through continuous data, respectively. Of 3268 identified manuscripts, a total of 29 studies were suitable for qualitative synthesis and a further 22 for quantitative. Stratification based on intervention duration (less than 12 weeks; more than or equal to 12 weeks) was undertaken.ResultsA total of 62 data points were procured. Both END and HIIT training exhibited differential improvements in VO2max based on intervention duration. VO2max did not adequately differentiate between END and HIIT, irrespective of intervention length. Although none of the other exercise response indicators achieved statistical significance, LT and HRrest demonstrated common trajectories in pooled and separate analyses between modalities. RET data were highly limited. Heterogeneity was ubiquitous across all analyses.ConclusionsThe potential for LT and HRrest as indicators of exercise response requires further elucidation, in addition to the exploration of interventional and intrinsic sources of heterogeneity.


Pain Medicine ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
pp. 41-54 ◽  
Author(s):  
Aaron Conger ◽  
Daniel M Cushman ◽  
Rebecca A Speckman ◽  
Taylor Burnham ◽  
Masaru Teramoto ◽  
...  

Abstract Objective Determine the effectiveness of fluoroscopically guided cervical transforaminal epidural steroid injection (CTFESI) for the treatment of radicular pain. Design Systematic review and meta-analysis. Subjects Persons aged ≥18 years with cervical radicular pain due to disc herniation or degenerative spondylosis. Comparison Sham, placebo procedure, or active standard of care treatment, excluding alternative versions of epidural steroid injection. Outcomes The primary outcome measure was patient-reported improvement in pain of at least 50% from baseline, assessed four or more weeks after the treatment intervention. Secondary outcomes included validated functional assessment tools and avoidance of spinal surgery. Methods Randomized or nonrandomized comparative studies and nonrandomized studies without internal control were included. Three reviewers independently assessed publications in the Medline, PubMed, and Cochrane databases up to July 2018. The Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) system was used to evaluate risk of bias and overall quality of evidence. A meta-analysis was conducted for comparative measures of effect and for within-group response rates if applicable. Results There were no studies with an internal comparison group (control group) meeting the review’s definition of comparison group. Therefore, comparative measures of effect were not calculated. In cohort studies, pooled response rates were 48% (95% confidence interval [CI] = 34–61%) at one month and 55% (95% CI = 45–64%) at three months. Conclusions Approximately 50% of patients experience ≥50% pain reduction at short- and intermediate-term follow-up after CTFESI. However, the literature is very low quality according the GRADE criteria, primarily due to a lack of studies with placebo/sham or active standard of care control comparison groups.


PLoS ONE ◽  
2015 ◽  
Vol 10 (9) ◽  
pp. e0135702 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kamlesh Khunti ◽  
Hamidreza Mani ◽  
Felix Achana ◽  
Nicola Cooper ◽  
Laura J. Gray ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document