Home  About us  Contact
 

Medicine Reviews (medicine + review)

Distribution by Scientific Domains
Medical Sciences100%

Kinds of Medicine Reviews

  • based medicine review
    		•
  • evidence based medicine review
    		•

    Selected Abstracts

    Effectiveness of arthroscopic versus open surgical stabilisation for the management of traumatic anterior glenohumeral instability

    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF EVIDENCE BASED HEALTHCARE, Issue 2 2007
    Choong Ng BMedSci(Melb)
    Abstract Background, Anterior instability is a frequent complication following a traumatic glenohumeral dislocation. Frequently the underlying pathology associated with recurrent instability is a Bankart lesion. Surgical correction of Bankart lesions and other associated pathology is the key to successful treatment. Open surgical glenohumeral stabilisation has been advocated as the gold standard because of consistently low postoperative recurrent instability rates. However, arthroscopic glenohumeral stabilisation could challenge open surgical repair as the gold standard treatment for traumatic anterior glenohumeral instability. Objectives, Primary evidence that compared the effectiveness of arthroscopic versus open surgical glenohumeral stabilisation was systematically collated regarding best-practice management for adults with traumatic anterior glenohumeral instability. Search strategy, A systematic search was performed using 14 databases: MEDLINE, Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health (CINAHL), Allied and Complementary Medicine Database (AMED), ISI Web of Science, Expanded Academic ASAP, Proquest Medical Library, Evidence Based Medicine Reviews, Physiotherapy Evidence Database, TRIP Database, PubMed, ISI Current Contents Connect, Proquest Digital Dissertations, Open Archives Initiative Search Engine, Australian Digital Thesis Program. Studies published between January 1984 and December 2004 were included in this review. No language restrictions were applied. Selection criteria, Eligible studies were those that compared the effectiveness of arthroscopic versus open surgical stabilisation for the management of traumatic anterior glenohumeral instability, which had more than 2 years of follow up and used recurrent instability and a functional shoulder questionnaire as primary outcomes. Studies that used non-anatomical open repair techniques, patient groups that were specifically 40 years or older, or had multidirectional instability or other concomitant shoulder pathology were excluded. Data collection and analysis, Two independent reviewers assessed the eligibility of each study for inclusion into the review, the study design used and its methodological quality. Where any disagreement occurred, consensus was reached by discussion with an independent researcher. Studies were assessed for homogeneity by considering populations, interventions and outcomes. Where heterogeneity was present, synthesis was undertaken in a narrative format; otherwise a meta-analysis was conducted. Results, Eleven studies were included in the review. Two were randomised controlled trials. Evidence comparing arthroscopic and open surgical glenohumeral stabilisation was of poor to fair methodological quality. Hence, the results of primary studies should be interpreted with caution. Observed clinical heterogeneity in populations and outcomes was highlighted and should be considered when interpreting the meta-analysis. Authors also used variable definitions of recurrent instability and a variety of outcome measures, which made it difficult to synthesise results. When comparable data were pooled, there were no significant differences (P > 0.05) between the arthroscopic and open groups with respect to recurrent instability rates, Rowe score, glenohumeral external rotation range and complication rates. Conclusions, Statistically, it appears that both surgical techniques are equally effective in managing traumatic anterior glenohumeral instability. In light of the methodological quality of the included studies, it is not possible to validate arthoscopic stabilisation to match open surgical stabilisation as the gold standard treatment. Further research using multicentred randomised controlled trials with sufficient power and instability-specific questionnaires with sound psychometric properties is recommended to build on current evidence. The choice of treatment should be based on multiple factors between the clinician and the patient. [source]

    Lack of evidence of the effectiveness of primary brachial plexus surgery for infants (under the age of two years) diagnosed with obstetric brachial plexus palsy

    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF EVIDENCE BASED HEALTHCARE, Issue 4 2006
    Andrea Bialocerkowski PhD M App Sc (Physio) M App Sc (Physio) Grad Dip Public Health
    Abstract Background, Obstetric brachial plexus palsy, which occurs in 1,3 per 1000 live births, results from traction and/or compression of the brachial plexus in utero, during descent through the birth canal or during delivery. This results in a spectrum of injuries that range in extent of damage and severity and can lead to a lifelong impairment and functional difficulties associated with the use of the affected upper limb. Most infants diagnosed with obstetric brachial plexus palsy receive treatment, such as surgery to the brachial plexus, physiotherapy or occupational therapy, within the first months of life. However, there is controversy regarding the most effective form of management. This review follows on from our previous systematic review which investigated the effectiveness of primary conservative management in infants with obstetric brachial plexus palsy. This systematic review focuses on the effects of primary surgery. Objectives, The objective of this review was to systematically assess and collate all available evidence on effectiveness of primary brachial plexus surgery for infants with obstetric brachial plexus palsy. Search strategy, A systematic literature search was performed using 13 databases: TRIP, MEDLINE, CINAHL, Web of Science, Proquest 5000, Evidence Based Medicine Reviews, Expanded Academic ASAP, Meditext, Science Direct, the Physiotherapy Evidence Database, Proquest Digital Dissertations, Open Archives Initiative Search Engine, the Australian Digital Thesis program. Those studies that were reported in English and published between July 1992 to June 2004 were included in this review. Selection criteria, Quantitative studies that investigated the effectiveness of primary brachial plexus surgery for infants with obstetric brachial plexus palsy were eligible for inclusion into this review. This excluded studies where infants were solely managed conservatively or with pharmacological agents, or underwent surgery for the management of secondary deformities. Data collection and analysis, Two independent reviewers assessed the eligibility of each study for inclusion into the review, the study design used and its methodological quality. Where any disagreement occurred, consensus was reached by discussion. Studies were also assessed for clinical homogeneity by considering populations, interventions and outcomes. Where heterogeneity was present, synthesis was undertaken in a narrative format. Results, Twenty-one studies were included in the review. Most were ranked low on the hierarchy of evidence (no randomised controlled trials were found), and most had only fair methodological quality. Surgical intervention was variable, as were the eligibility criteria for surgery, the timing of surgery and the outcome instruments used to evaluate the effect of surgery. Therefore, it is difficult to draw conclusions regarding the effectiveness of primary brachial plexus surgery for infants with obstetric brachial plexus palsy. Conclusions, Although there is a wealth of information regarding the outcome following primary brachial plexus surgery it was not possible to determine whether this treatment is effective in increasing functional recovery in infants with obstetric brachial plexus palsy. Further research is required to develop standardised surgical criteria, and standardised outcome measures should be used at specific points in time during the recovery process to facilitate comparison between studies. Moreover, comparison groups are required to determine the relative effectiveness of surgery compared with other forms of management. [source]

    Effectiveness of primary conservative management for infants with obstetric brachial plexus palsy

    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF EVIDENCE BASED HEALTHCARE, Issue 2 2005
    Andrea Bialocerkowski PhD MAppSc(Phty) GradDipPublicHealth
    Executive summary Background, Obstetric brachial plexus palsy, a complication of childbirth, occurs in 1,3 per 1000 live births internationally. Traction and/or compression of the brachial plexus is thought to be the primary mechanism of injury and this may occur in utero, during the descent through the birth canal or during delivery. This results in a spectrum of injuries that vary in severity, extent of damage and functional use of the affected upper limb. Most infants receive treatment, such as conservative management (physiotherapy, occupational therapy) or surgery; however, there is controversy regarding the most appropriate form of management. To date, no synthesised evidence is available regarding the effectiveness of primary conservative management for obstetric brachial plexus palsy. Objectives, The objective of this review was to systematically assess the literature and present the best available evidence that investigated the effectiveness of primary conservative management for infants with obstetric brachial plexus palsy. Search strategy, A systematic literature search was performed using 14 databases: TRIP, MEDLINE, CINAHL, AMED, Web of Science, Proquest 5000, Evidence Based Medicine Reviews, Expanded Academic ASAP, Meditext, Science Direct, Physiotherapy Evidence Database, Proquest Digital Dissertations, Open Archives Initiative Search Engine, Australian Digital Thesis Program. Those studies that were reported in English and published over the last decade (July 1992 to June 2003) were included in this review. Selection criteria, Quantitative studies that investigated the effectiveness of primary conservative management for infants with obstetric brachial plexus palsy were eligible for inclusion in this review. This excluded studies that solely investigated the effect of primary surgery for these infants, management of secondary deformities and the investigation of the effects of pharmacological agents, such as botulinum toxin. Data collection and analysis, Two independent reviewers assessed the eligibility of each study for inclusion into the review, the study design used and its methodological quality. Where any disagreement occurred, consensus was reached by discussion. Studies were assessed for clinical homogeneity by considering populations, interventions and outcomes. Where heterogeneity was present, synthesis was undertaken in a narrative format. Results, Eight studies were included in the review. Most were ranked low on the Hierarchy of Evidence (no randomised controlled trials were found), and had only fair methodological quality. Conservative management was variable and could consist of active or passive exercise, splints or traction. All studies lacked a clear description of what constituted conservative management, which would not allow the treatment to be replicated in the clinical setting. A variety of outcome instruments were used, none of which had evidence of validity, reliability or sensitivity to detect change. Furthermore, less severely affected infants were selected to receive conservative management. Therefore, it is difficult to draw conclusions regarding the effectiveness of conservative management for infants with obstetric brachial plexus palsy. Conclusions, There is scant, inconclusive evidence regarding the effectiveness of primary conservative intervention for infants with obstetric brachial plexus palsy. Further research should be directed to develop outcome instruments with sound psychometric properties for infants with obstetric brachial plexus palsy and their families. These outcome instruments should then be used in well-designed comparative studies. [source]

    The trajectory of minor stroke recovery for men and their female spousal caregivers: literature review

    JOURNAL OF ADVANCED NURSING, Issue 6 2007
    Theresa L. Green
    Abstract Title.,The trajectory of minor stroke recovery for men and their female spousal caregivers: literature review Aim., This paper is a report of a narrative review to examine the current state of knowledge regarding the impact of minor stroke on male patients and their female spousal caregivers' recovery trajectory and quality of life. Background., Minor stroke survivors are often discharged early in the recovery process. The perception of the healthcare community that these patients and their female spousal caregivers will experience an uneventful recovery may lead to inadequate preparation for the postdischarge period. Methods., A range of databases was searched to identify papers addressing ,minor stroke', ,transitions', ,quality of life', ,chronic disease', ,caregivers' and ,spouse caregivers', including AARP Ageline, AMED, CINAHL, Evidence Based Medicine Reviews, MEDLINE and PsychInfo. Papers published in English from 1990 to December 2006 were included. Thirty-four papers were in the final data set. Results., Minor stroke survivors and their female spousal caregivers may experience major challenges in adaptations postdischarge. The trajectory of minor stroke recovery may necessitate a re-evaluation of life plans, rethinking of priorities and integration of resulting disabilities into current and emerging life situations for both stroke survivors and their female spousal caregivers. In many cases these adaptations are compounded by transitions associated with the normal ageing process. Conclusion., While there is extensive literature on stroke recovery and the role of caregivers in general, there is little available describing the recovery of minor stroke survivors in relation to the normal ageing process. Further research is needed examining recovery from a transitional perspective, to support nurses and other health professionals discharge planning. [source]

    Are peripheral and neuraxial blocks with ultrasound guidance more effective and safe in children?

    PEDIATRIC ANESTHESIA, Issue 2 2009
    KASIA RUBIN MD
    Summary Background and aims:, The efficacy and safety of ultrasound guided (USG) pediatric peripheral nerve and neuraxial blocks in children have not been evaluated. In this review, we have looked at the success rate, efficacy and complications with USG peripheral nerve blocks and compared with nerve stimulation or anatomical landmark based techniques in children. Methods:, All suitable studies in MEDLINE, EMBASE Drugs and Cochrane Evidence Based Medicine Reviews: Cochrane Database of Systemic Reviews databases were identified. In addition, citation review and hand search of recent pediatric anesthesia and surgical journals were done. All three authors read all selected articles independently and a consensus was achieved. All randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing USG peripheral and neuraxial blocks with other techniques in children were included. Results:, Ultrasound guidance has been demonstrated to improve block characteristics in children including shorter block performance time, higher success rates, shorter onset time, longer block duration, less volume of local anesthetic agents and visibility of neuraxial structures. Conclusion:, Clinical studies in children suggest that US guidance has some advantages over more traditional nerve stimulation,based techniques for regional block. However, the advantage of US guidance on safety over traditional has not been adequately demonstrated in children except ilio-inguinal blocks. [source]

    Nasogastric Aspiration and Lavage in Emergency Department Patients with Hematochezia or Melena Without Hematemesis

    ACADEMIC EMERGENCY MEDICINE, Issue 2 2010
    Nicholas Palamidessi MD
    Abstract Objectives:, The utility of nasogastric aspiration and lavage in the emergency management of patients with melena or hematochezia without hematemesis is controversial. This evidence-based emergency medicine review evaluates the following question: does nasogastric aspiration and lavage in patients with melena or hematochezia and no hematemesis differentiate an upper from lower source of gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding? Methods:, MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, and other databases were searched. Studies were selected for inclusion in the review if the authors had performed nasogastric aspiration (with or without lavage) in all patients with hematochezia or melena and performed esophagogastroduodenal endoscopy (EGD) in all patients. Studies were excluded if they enrolled patients with history of esophageal varices or included patients with hematemesis or coffee ground emesis (unless the data for patients without hematemesis or coffee ground emesis could be separated out). The outcome was identifying upper GI hemorrhage (active bleeding or high-risk lesions potentially responsible for hemorrhage) and the rate of complications associated with the nasogastric tube insertion. Quality of the included studies was assessed using standard criteria for diagnostic accuracy studies. Results:, Three retrospective studies met our inclusion and exclusion criteria. The prevalence of an upper GI source for patients with melena or hematochezia without hematemesis was 32% to 74%. According to the included studies, the diagnostic performance of the nasogastric aspiration and lavage for predicting upper GI bleeding is poor. The sensitivity of this test ranged from 42% to 84%, the specificity from 54% to 91%, and negative likelihood ratios from 0.62 to 0.20. Only one study reported the rate complications associated with nasogastric aspiration and lavage (1.6%). Conclusions:, Nasogastric aspiration, with or without lavage, has a low sensitivity and poor negative likelihood ratio, which limits its utility in ruling out an upper GI source of bleeding in patients with melena or hematochezia without hematemesis. ACADEMIC EMERGENCY MEDICINE 2010; 17:126,132 © 2010 by the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine [source]