Dataset Information

Kinesiotaping for postoperative oedema - what is the evidence? A systematic review.

ABSTRACT: Background:Postoperative oedema is a common condition affecting wound healing and function. Traditionally, manual lymphatic drainage is employed to reduce swelling. Kinesiotaping might be an alternative resource-sparing approach. This article explores current evidence for the effectiveness of kinesiotaping for the reduction of oedema in the postoperative setting. Methods:A systematic literature search was performed on the basis of five databases (Pubmed, CINAHL, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Clinicaltrials.gov) for studies published between January 2000 and October 2019.Only prospective controlled trials were included. Case studies, uncontrolled case series, studies on oedema caused by other etiologies than by surgery, as well as studies on malignant disease related oedema (especially breast cancer related oedema) were excluded.Articles were screened by title, abstract, and full text and the references were searched for further publications on the topic. A narrative and quantitative (using STATA) analysis was performed. Results:One thousand two hundred sixty-three articles were screened, twelve were included in the analysis. All studies evaluated either oedema after extremity surgery or maxillofacial interventions, and showed relevant methodological flaws. Only three studies employed an active comparator. Of the twelve included studies ten found positive evidence for kinesiotape application for the reduction of swelling and beneficial effects on secondary outcome parameters such as pain and patient satisfaction. The available trials were heterogenic in pathology and all were compromised by a high risk of bias. Conclusion:There is some evidence for the efficacy of kinesiotaping for the treatment of postoperative oedema. This evidence is, however, not yet convincing given the limitations of the published trials. Methodologically sound comparison to standard of care or an active comparator is indispensable for an evaluation of effectiveness. In addition, assessments of patient comfort and cost-benefit analyses are necessary to evaluate the potential relevance of this novel technique in daily practice. Systematic review registration number:International prospective register of systematic reviews (PROSPERO) ID 114129).

SUBMITTER: Hormann J

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7052984 | biostudies-literature | 2020

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Kinesiotaping for postoperative oedema - what is the evidence? A systematic review.

Hörmann Julie J Vach Werner W Jakob Marcel M Seghers Saskia S Saxer Franziska F

BMC sports science, medicine & rehabilitation 20200302

<h4>Background</h4>Postoperative oedema is a common condition affecting wound healing and function. Traditionally, manual lymphatic drainage is employed to reduce swelling. Kinesiotaping might be an alternative resource-sparing approach. This article explores current evidence for the effectiveness of kinesiotaping for the reduction of oedema in the postoperative setting.<h4>Methods</h4>A systematic literature search was performed on the basis of five databases (Pubmed, CINAHL, Embase, Cochrane L ...[more]

PMID: 32158546

Similar Datasets

Project description:PurposeTo evaluate the efficacy of intravitreal dexamethasone implant (DEX) for the treatment of macular oedema secondary to vitrectomy for epiretinal membrane (ERM) and retinal detachment (RD) by conducting a systematic review with meta-analysis of published studies.MethodsStudies reporting clinical outcomes of DEX use for the treatment of macular oedema secondary to ERM and RD vitrectomy were searched on PubMed and Embase databases. The primary outcome was best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) change between baseline and post-DEX treatment, reported as mean difference (MD) with 95% confidence interval (CI). Mean central macular thickness (CMT) change was assessed as a secondary outcome. Postimplant adverse events, including intraocular pressure rise and cataract development, were reported as well.ResultsFive uncontrolled studies, 1 nonrandomized controlled study, and 1 randomized controlled study were included, with a total of 5 cohorts and 3 cohorts in the ERM group and RD group, respectively. Considering the last available follow-up, a significant improvement in postimplant BCVA was found in the overall population, irrespective of the indication for vitrectomy (MD = -0.28, 95% CI = -0.37, -0.20; p < 0.001), but with significant heterogeneity. In either group, mean BCVA significantly improved following the implant (in the ERM group, MD = -0.31, 95% CI = -0.40, -0.22; in the RD group, MD = -0.22, 95% CI = -0.41, -0.03), with no difference between the two groups (p=0.41). However, there was significant heterogeneity in both groups. Considering the last available follow-up, a significant CMT reduction was found in the overall population, irrespective of the indication for vitrectomy (MD = -129.75, 95% CI = -157.49, -102.01; p < 0.001). In the ERM group, a significant CMT reduction was shown following DEX (MD = -133.41, 95% CI = -155.37, -111.45; p < 0.001), with no heterogeneity. In the RD group, mean CMT reduction was borderline significant (MD = -128.37, 95% CI = -253.57, -3.18; p=0.040), with significant heterogeneity. No difference in CMT improvement was found between the two groups (p=0.94).ConclusionThis meta-analysis showed that DEX yielded a significant improvement in visual and anatomical outcomes, even if limited by significant heterogeneity. Dexamethasone implant represents an effective treatment for postoperative macular oedema secondary to ERM and RD vitrectomy.

Project description:ObjectivesThe aim of this systematic review is to appraise the evidence for the use of anti-VEGF drugs and steroids in diabetic macular oedema (DMO) as assessed by change in best corrected visual acuity (BCVA), central macular thickness and adverse eventsData sourceMEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science with Conference Proceedings and the Cochrane Library (inception to July 2012). Certain conference abstracts and drug regulatory web sites were also searched.Study eligibility criteria, participants and interventionsRandomised controlled trials were used to assess clinical effectiveness and observational trials were used for safety. Trials which assessed triamcinolone, dexamethasone, fluocinolone, bevacizumab, ranibizumab, pegaptanib or aflibercept in patients with DMO were included.Study appraisal and synthesis methodsRisk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane risk of bias tool. Study results are narratively described and, where appropriate, data were pooled using random effects meta-analysis.ResultsAnti-VEGF drugs are effective compared to both laser and placebo and seem to be more effective than steroids in improving BCVA. They have been shown to be safe in the short term but require frequent injections. Studies assessing steroids (triamcinolone, dexamethasone and fluocinolone) have reported mixed results when compared with laser or placebo. Steroids have been associated with increased incidence of cataracts and intraocular pressure rise but require fewer injections, especially when steroid implants are used.LimitationsThe quality of included studies varied considerably. Five of 14 meta-analyses had moderate or high statistical heterogeneity.Conclusions and implications of key findingsThe anti-VEGFs ranibizumab and bevacizumab have consistently shown good clinical effectiveness without major unwanted side effects. Steroid results have been mixed and are usually associated with cataract formation and intraocular pressure increase. Despite the current wider spectrum of treatments for DMO, only a small proportion of patients recover good vision (?20/40), and thus the search for new therapies needs to continue.

Project description:ObjectivesTo review systematically the randomised controlled trial (RCT) evidence for treatment of macular oedema due to central retinal vein occlusion (CRVO).Data sourcesMEDLINE, EMBASE, CDSR, DARE, HTA, NHSEED, CENTRAL and meeting abstracts (January 2005 to March 2013).Study eligibility criteria, participants and interventionsRCTs with at least 12 months of follow-up assessing pharmacological treatments for CRVO were included with no language restrictions.Study appraisal and synthesis methods2 authors screened titles and abstracts and conducted data extracted and Cochrane risk of bias assessment. Meta-analysis was not possible due to lack of comparable studies.Results8 studies (35 articles, 1714 eyes) were included, assessing aflibercept (n=2), triamcinolone (n=2), bevacizumab (n=1), pegaptanib (n=1), dexamethasone (n=1) and ranibizumab (n=1). In general, bevacizumab, ranibizumab, aflibercept and triamcinolone resulted in clinically significant increases in the proportion of participants with an improvement in visual acuity of ≥15 letters, with 40-60% gaining ≥15 letters on active drugs, compared to 12-28% with sham. Results for pegaptanib and dexamethasone were mixed. Steroids were associated with cataract formation and increased intraocular pressure. No overall increase in adverse events was found with bevacizumab, ranibizumab, aflibercept or pegaptanib compared with control. Quality of life was poorly reported. All studies had a low or unclear risk of bias.LimitationsAll studies evaluated a relatively short primary follow-up (1 year or less). Most had an unmasked extension phase. There was no head-to-head evidence. The majority of participants included had non-ischaemic CRVO.Conclusions and implications of key findingsBevacizumab, ranibizumab, aflibercept and triamcinolone appear to be effective in treating macular oedema secondary to CRVO. Long-term data on effectiveness and safety are needed. Head-to-head trials and research to identify 'responders' is needed to help clinicians make the right choices for their patients. Research aimed to improve sight in people with ischaemic CRVO is required.

Project description:BackgroundSwimming-induced pulmonary oedema (SIPE) can affect people with no underlying health problems, but may be life threatening and is poorly understood. The aim of this systematic review was to synthesise the evidence on SIPE incidence, prevalence, risk factors, short- and long-term outcomes, recurrence and effectiveness of interventions to prevent recurrences.MethodsWe carried out a literature search using bibliographic databases and reference lists. Risk of bias was assessed by adapting existing quality assessment tools including those developed by the National Heart Lung and Blood Institute.ResultsNine studies met the inclusion criteria. Quantitative synthesis was not possible because of study heterogeneity. Five studies, which differed from each other in case definition, swimming environment, population characteristics and denominators, reported an incidence of 0.01% of UK triathlons raced over 5 years in unspecified swimming environments (one study, not fully reported, of men and women of unspecified age); 0.5% of river races swum over 3 days in Sweden (one study, of men and women up to the age of 70); and 1.8-26.7% of time trials in the sea around Israel (three studies of male teenage military trainees). One study reported that 1.4% of triathletes in the USA had experienced SIPE. One study found that hypertension, female sex, fish oil use, long course distance and another lower initial lung volumes and flows were risk factors for SIPE. A third study reported that higher mean pulmonary artery pressures and pulmonary artery wedge pressures, and lower tidal volumes were associated with SIPE. Three studies suggested that SIPE symptoms usually resolve within 24 h, although a restrictive deficit in lung function persisted for a week in one small study. We found no studies that reported deaths from SIPE. The single small study of longer-term outcomes reported no difference between affected and unaffected swimmers. Two studies suggested that around 30% of people report recurrences of SIPE. Two very small uncontrolled studies of the effect of sildenafil for recurrence prevention were inconclusive.ConclusionsSIPE may be an important public health problem affecting the growing number of recreational open water swimmers. Further research should clarify the frequency of SIPE among recreational open water swimmers, confirm reported risk factors and explore others, explore long-term consequences and test interventions to prevent recurrences.

Project description:Introduction: Opioid misuse and overprescription have contributed to a national public health crisis in the United States. Postoperatively, patients are often left with unused opioids, which pose a risk for diversion if not appropriately disposed of. Patients are infrequently provided instructions on safe disposal methods of surplus opioids. Purpose: We sought to determine the current rates of disposal of unused opioids and the reported disposal mechanisms for unused opioids that were prescribed for acute postoperative pain control. Methods: A systematic review was performed of the PubMed, Cochrane, and Embase databases for relevant articles from their earliest entries through October 2, 2019. We used the search terms "opioid" or "narcotic" and "disposal" and "surgery." Studies were considered for inclusion if they reported the rate of disposal of unused opioids following surgery. A screening strategy was used to identify relevant articles using Covidence. For studies meeting inclusion criteria, relevant information was extracted. Results: Sixteen studies met inclusion criteria. We found that surplus opioid disposal rates varied widely, from 4.9% to 87.0%. Among studies with no intervention (opioid disposal education or drug disposal kit/bag), rates of opioid disposal ranged from 4.9% to 46.5%. While 7 studies used opioid disposal education as an intervention, only 3 showed a significant increase in surplus opioid disposal compared with standard care. All 3 studies that used an opioid disposal kit or bag as an intervention demonstrated significant increases in opioid disposal. Conclusions: Baseline rates of surplus opioid disposal are relatively low in the postoperative setting. Our findings suggest that opioid disposal kits significantly increase rates of surplus opioid disposal postoperatively. Further research, including a large-scale cost-benefit analysis, will be necessary prior to recommending widespread implementation of drug disposal kits or bags.

Dataset Information

Kinesiotaping for postoperative oedema - what is the evidence? A systematic review.

Publications

Kinesiotaping for postoperative oedema - what is the evidence? A systematic review.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets