An evidence-based approach to the diagnosis and management of parastomal hernias reveals the lack of evidence on several topics, which need to be addressed by multicenter trials. Parastomal hernia prevention using a prophylactic mesh for end colostomies reduces parastomal herniation. Clinical outcomes should be audited and adverse events must be reported.
BackgroundThis study aimed to evaluate anxiety and pain following perioperative music interventions compared with control conditions in adult patients.MethodsEleven electronic databases were searched for full‐text publications of RCTs investigating the effect of music interventions on anxiety and pain during invasive surgery published between 1 January 1980 and 20 October 2016. Results and data were double‐screened and extracted independently. Random‐effects meta‐analysis was used to calculate effect sizes as standardized mean differences (MDs). Heterogeneity was investigated in subgroup analyses and metaregression analyses. The review was registered in the PROSPERO database as CRD42016024921.ResultsNinety‐two RCTs (7385 patients) were included in the systematic review, of which 81 were included in the meta‐analysis. Music interventions significantly decreased anxiety (MD –0·69, 95 per cent c.i. –0·88 to –0·50; P < 0·001) and pain (MD –0·50, –0·66 to –0·34; P < 0·001) compared with controls, equivalent to a decrease of 21 mm for anxiety and 10 mm for pain on a 100‐mm visual analogue scale. Changes in outcome corrected for baseline were even larger: MD –1·41 (–1·89 to –0·94; P < 0·001) for anxiety and –0·54 (–0·93 to –0·15; P = 0·006) for pain. Music interventions provided during general anaesthesia significantly decreased pain compared with that in controls (MD –0·41, –0·64 to –0·18; P < 0·001). Metaregression analysis found no significant association between the effect of music interventions and age, sex, choice and timing of music, and type of anaesthesia. Risk of bias in the studies was moderate to high.ConclusionMusic interventions significantly reduce anxiety and pain in adult surgical patients.
Oxygen is an important factor for wound healing. Although several different therapies investigated the use of oxygen to aid wound healing, the results of these studies are not unequivocal. This systematic review summarizes the clinical and experimental studies regarding different oxygen therapies for promoting wound healing, and evaluates the outcomes according the methodological details. A systematic literature search was conducted using Embase, Medline, Web of Science, Cochrane, PubMed publisher, and Google Scholar libraries. Clinical and experimental studies investigating oxygen for wound healing were selected. Included articles were categorized according to the kind of therapy, study design, and wound type. The methodological details were extracted and analyzed. Sixty-five articles were identified and divided in three different oxygen therapies: Local oxygen therapy, hyperbaric oxygen therapy, and supplemental inspired oxygen therapy. More than half of the included local oxygen and hyperbaric oxygen studies had one or more significant positive outcomes, 77 and 63%, respectively. Supplemental inspired oxygen therapy during gastrointestinal and vascular surgery was more likely to have a positive result than during other surgical interventions reducing surgical site infections. These many positive outcomes promote the use of oxygen treatment in the stimulation of wound healing. However, the lack of clinical studies and vast methodological diversity made it impossible to perform a proper comparison within and between the different therapies. Further randomized clinical studies are warranted to examine the value of these therapies, especially studies that investigate the more patient-friendly oxygen dressings and topical wound oxygen therapies. Also, to achieve more solid and consistent data, studies should use more standardized methods and subjects.
CA adhesives are the strongest and most homogenous group in terms of mechanical strength. Hydrogels (FG, AB) are heterogeneous, with lower mechanical strength than CA. FG are mechanically the weakest adhesives. Rheological profiles correlate to mechanical strength and may be useful for predicting mechanical performance.
PurposeIncisional hernia (IH) is the most frequent complication after abdominal surgery. The diagnostic modality, observer, definition, and diagnostic protocol used for the diagnosis of IH potentially influence the reported prevalence. The objective of this systematic review is to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of different modalities used to identify IH.MethodsEmbase, MEDLINE OvidSP, Web of Science, Google Scholar, and Cochrane databases were searched to identify studies diagnosing IH. Studies comparing the IH detection rate of two different diagnostic modalities or inter-observer variability of one modality were included. Quality assessment of studies was done by Cochrane Collaboration’s tool. Article selection and data collection were performed independently by two researchers. PROSPERO registration: CRD42017062307.ResultsFifteen studies representing a total of 2986 patients were included. Inter-observer variation for CT-scan ranged from 11.2 to 69% (n = 678). Disagreement between ultrasound and CT-scan ranged between 6.6 and 17% (n = 221). Ten studies compared physical examination to CT-scan or ultrasound. Disagreement between physical examination and imaging ranged between 7.6 and 39% (n = 1602). Between 15 and 58% of IHs were solely detected by imaging (n = 483). Relative increase in IH prevalence for imaging compared to physical examination ranged from 0.92 to 2.4 (n = 1922).ConclusionsUltrasound or CT-scan will result in substantial additional IH diagnosis. Lack of consensus regarding the definition of IH might contribute to the disagreement rates. Both the observer and diagnostic modality used could be additional factors explaining variability in IH prevalence and should be reported in IH research.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.