In modern implant-based immediate breast reconstruction, it has become common to use biological acellular dermal and synthetic matrices in combination with a tissue expander or an implant. The aim of this systematic review was to examine differences in recurrence of cancer, impact on oncological treatment, health related quality of life, complications and aesthetic outcome between matrix and no matrix in immediate breast reconstruction. Systematic searches, data extraction and assessment of methodological quality were performed according to predetermined criteria. Fifty-one studies were eligible and included in the review. The certainty of evidence for overall complication rate and implant loss is low (GRADE ⊕⊕□ □). The certainty of evidence for delay of adjuvant treatment, implant loss, infection, capsular contraction and aesthetic outcome is very low (GRADE ⊕□ □ □). No study reported data on recurrence of cancer or health related quality of life. In conclusion, there is a lack of high quality studies that compare the use of matrix with no matrix in immediate breast reconstruction. Specifically, there are no data on risk of recurrence of cancer, delay of adjuvant treatment and Health related quality of life (HRQoL). In addition, there is a risk of bias in many studies. It is often unclear what complications have been included and how they have been diagnosed, and how and when capsular contracture and aesthetic outcome have been evaluated. Controlled trials that further analyse the impact of radiotherapy, type of matrix and type of procedure (one or two stages) are necessary.
ObjectivesThis study investigates the effects of the core elements of the Swedish model for physical activity on prescription (PAP) by evaluating studies that compared adults who received PAP with adults who did not receive PAP. All participants were adults identified by a healthcare professional as in need of increased physical activity. Primary outcome was level of physical activity.DesignSystematic review.Eligibility criteria(1) Published 1999. (2) Systematic review, randomised controlled trial (RCT), non-RCT or case series (for adverse events). (3) ≥12 weeks’ follow-up. (4) Performed in the Nordic countries. (5) Presented in English, Swedish, Norwegian or Danish.Data sourcesSystematic searches in PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Library, AMED, CINAHL and SweMed+ in September 2017. Included articles were evaluated using checklists to determine risk of bias.ResultsNine relevant articles were included: seven RCTs, one cohort study and one case series. Primary outcome was reported in seven articles from six studies (five RCTs, one cohort study, 642 participants). Positive results were reported from three of the five RCTs and from the cohort study. No study reported any negative results. Swedish PAP probably results in an increased level of physical activity (GRADE⊕⊕⊕Ο).ConclusionsAlthough the number of the reviewed articles was relatively modest, this systematic review shows that PAP in accordance with the Swedish model probably increases the level of physical activity. As a model for exercise prescription, Swedish PAP may be considered as part of regular healthcare to increase physical activity in patients.
The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to study the effectiveness of psychological interventions in adults and adolescents with poor oral health. The review follows the PRISMA guidelines for systematic reviews. The PICO format (population, intervention, comparison, and outcome) was used to define eligible studies. The populations were adults or adolescents (≥13 y of age and independent of others) with poor oral health (defined as dental caries, periodontal disease, and/or peri-implantitis). The interventions were psychological and/or behavioral models and theories, in comparison with traditional oral health education/information. The primary outcomes were dental caries, periodontitis, gingivitis, and peri-implantitis. Secondary outcomes were dental plaque, oral health-related behavior, health-related quality of life, health beliefs and attitudes, self-perceived oral health, and complications/risks. The systematic literature search identified 846 articles in December 2013 and 378 articles in July 2015. In total, 11 articles on 9 randomized controlled trials were found to meet the inclusion criteria. These reported on adults with periodontal disease, and several used motivational interviewing (MI) as their mode of intervention. The CONSORT guidelines and the GRADE approach were used for study appraisal and rating of evidence. The meta-analysis showed no statistically significant differences in gingivitis or plaque presence. In addition, a meta-analysis on MI compared with education/information found no statistically significant differences in gingivitis presence. Only 1 meta-analysis-on psychological interventions versus education/information regarding the plaque index-showed a small but statistically significant difference. There were also statistically significant differences reported in favor of psychological interventions in oral health behavior and self-efficacy in toothbrushing. However, the clinical relevance of these differences is difficult to estimate. The certainty of evidence was low. Future research needs to address several methodological issues and not only study adults with periodontal disease but also adolescents and patients with dental caries and peri-implantitis.
Data indicate that prognosis can be improved if liver resection and lymph node resection is performed in patients with tumour stage T1b or higher. There is no evidence supporting resection of the bile duct or adjacent organs if it is not necessary in order to achieve radicality.
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.