Dataset Information

Fascial Manipulation Technique in the Conservative Management of Morton's Syndrome: A Pilot Study.

ABSTRACT:

Background and objective

Morton's syndrome (MS) is a common cause of neuropathic chronic forefoot pain, characterised by the development of a swelling of the common digital plantar nerve, whose aetiology is not fully known. There is currently no gold standard of treatment; nonoperative management commonly involves manual therapies, orthoses therapy and infiltrative techniques, while surgery is indicated after failure of conservative measures. The present preliminary study prospectively evaluates patients affected by MS treated by Fascial Manipulation technique (FM), a noninvasive manual therapy, focused on the release of the deep fascia, reducing its stiffness.

Materials and methods

Patients with clinical and sonographic diagnosis of MS with at least a 4-month history of neuropathic symptoms underwent a cycle of three weekly FM sessions. Clinical follow-up, including VAS and AOFAS scores, was performed 21 days (T1) and 3 months (T2) after treatment.

Results

Nine patients, among 28 recruited initially, completed the manual therapy sessions and relative follow-up points. This noninvasive pain treatment led to significant improvement of VAS (p = 0.0034) and AOFAS scores (p = 0.0240) at the first follow-up (T1). At 3-month follow-up (T2), both scores decreased slightly, remaining however superior to the pre-treatment values. Only VAS was still significant (p = 0.0184).

Conclusions

Despite the small size of the case series, this pilot study is unique in supporting Fascial Manipulation in the nonoperative treatment of MS. Further studies are needed with a large cohort of gender balanced patients to confirm the encouraging results obtained.

SUBMITTER: Biz C

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8345745 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:RationaleThe feasibility and clinical outcomes of conservative fluid management after sepsis resuscitation remain unknown.ObjectivesTo evaluate the effect of a conservative fluid management protocol on fluid balance and intensive care unit (ICU)-free days among patients with sepsis.MethodsIn a single-center phase II/III randomized trial, we enrolled adults with suspected infection, ≥2 systemic inflammatory response syndrome criteria, and either shock (mean arterial pressure <60 mm Hg or vasopressors) or respiratory insufficiency (mechanical ventilation or oxygen saturation <97% and fraction of inspired oxygen ≥0.3). Patients were randomized 1:1 to usual care or a conservative fluid management protocol. The protocol restricted intravenous fluid administration during shock to treatment of oliguria or increasing vasopressor requirement. In the absence of shock, loop diuretic infusion targeted equal fluid input and output each study day. The primary outcomes were mean daily fluid balance (phase II) and ICU-free days (phase III).ResultsAt the completion of phase II (n = 30), the difference in mean daily fluid balance between groups (-398 mL) was less than the prespecified threshold (-500 mL) and the trial was stopped. Patients in the conservative fluid management (n = 15) and usual care (n = 15) groups experienced similar cumulative fluid input (8450 mL vs 7049 mL; P = .90) of which only 14% was intravenous crystalloid or colloid. Loop diuretic infusion occurred more frequently in the conservative fluid management group (40% vs 0%; P = .02), and cumulative fluid output was 10 645 mL in the conservative fluid management group compared to 6286 mL in the usual care group (P = .39). Hemodynamic, respiratory, and renal function did not differ between the groups.ConclusionsIn this phase II trial, a conservative fluid management protocol did not decrease mean daily fluid balance by more than 500 mL among patients with sepsis.RegistrationClinicaltrials.gov; NCT02159079.

Project description:ObjectivesTo examine the association of early invasive management of acute coronary syndrome with adverse renal outcomes and survival, and to determine whether the risks or benefits of early invasive management differ in people with pre-existing chronic kidney disease.DesignPropensity score matched cohort study.SettingAcute care hospitals in Alberta, Canada, 2004-09.Participants10,516 adults with non-ST elevation acute coronary syndrome.InterventionsParticipants were stratified by baseline estimated glomerular filtration rate and matched 1:1 on their propensity score for early invasive management (coronary catheterisation within two days of hospital admission).Main outcome measuresRisks of acute kidney injury, kidney injury requiring dialysis, progression to end stage renal disease, and all cause mortality were compared between those who received early invasive treatment versus conservative treatment.ResultsOf 10,516 included participants, 4276 (40.7%) received early invasive management. After using propensity score methods to assemble a matched cohort of conservative management participants with characteristics similar to those who received early invasive management (n=6768), early invasive management was associated with an increased risk of acute kidney injury (10.3% v 8.7%, risk ratio 1.18, 95% confidence interval 1.03 to 1.36; P=0.019), but no difference in the risk of acute kidney injury requiring dialysis (0.4% v 0.3%, 1.20, 0.52 to 2.78; P=0.670). Over a median follow-up of 2.5 years, the risk of progression to end stage renal disease did not differ between the groups (0.3 v 0.4 events per 100 person years, hazard ratio 0.91, 95% confidence interval 0.55 to 1.49; P=0.712); however, early invasive management was associated with reduced long term mortality (2.4 v 3.4 events per 100 person years, 0.69, 0.58 to 0.82; P<0.001). These associations were consistent among people with pre-existing reduced estimated glomerular filtration rate and with alternate definitions for early invasive management.ConclusionsCompared with conservative management, early invasive management of acute coronary syndrome is associated with a small increase in risk of acute kidney injury but not dialysis or long term progression to end stage renal disease.

Project description:BackgroundIdiopathic nephrotic syndrome has a relapsing-remitting course in the majority of pediatric patients, demanding vigilant monitoring and self-management. A novel, expert-designed, user-informed mobile application (app), UrApp©, was created to support management tasks, including home urine protein monitoring.MethodsThe UrApp Pilot Study (ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04075656) is a randomized trial comparing UrApp-supported nephrotic syndrome management with standard-of-care with parallel process evaluation of the intervention delivery. Sixty caregivers of children with newly diagnosed, steroid-sensitive nephrotic syndrome will be randomized 1:1 to UrApp-supported care or standard-of-care. Follow-up will be 1 year, with primary outcomes of adherence to urine monitoring and medications assessed at 6 and 12 months. Secondary outcomes at 6 and 12 months include self-efficacy, quality-of-life, hospitalizations and delayed relapse diagnoses. A mixed-methods approach will evaluate UrApp engagement, use retention, features used, user perceptions, and contextual barriers and facilitators of UrApp use. User behavior will be assessed for relationships to the primary and secondary outcomes. A Stakeholder Committee of volunteer trial participants, clinicians, and engineers will examine the trial results and design a pragmatic UrApp-enhanced nephrotic syndrome intervention with potential for wide implementation. The final UrApp intervention will be tested in a user-centered hybrid effectiveness-implementation trial designed with stakeholder input.DiscussionThe UrApp Pilot Study examines the efficacy of a novel app designed specifically for nephrotic syndrome. The protocol involves dual efficacy and process evaluation aims to increase efficiency and incorporates the stakeholders' perspective in formative assessment to inform intervention redesign and the design of a future user-centered trial.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04075656. Registered on September 2, 2019, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04075656.

Project description:In the Fluid and Catheter Treatment Trial (FACTT) of the National Institutes of Health Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome Network, a conservative fluid protocol (FACTT Conservative) resulted in a lower cumulative fluid balance and better outcomes than a liberal fluid protocol (FACTT Liberal). Subsequent Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome Network studies used a simplified conservative fluid protocol (FACTT Lite). The objective of this study was to compare the performance of FACTT Lite, FACTT Conservative, and FACTT Liberal protocols.Retrospective comparison of FACTT Lite, FACTT Conservative, and FACTT Liberal. Primary outcome was cumulative fluid balance over 7 days. Secondary outcomes were 60-day adjusted mortality and ventilator-free days through day 28. Safety outcomes were prevalence of acute kidney injury and new shock.ICUs of Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome Network participating hospitals.Five hundred three subjects managed with FACTT Conservative, 497 subjects managed with FACTT Liberal, and 1,124 subjects managed with FACTT Lite.Fluid management by protocol.Cumulative fluid balance was 1,918 ± 323 mL in FACTT Lite, -136 ± 491 mL in FACTT Conservative, and 6,992 ± 502 mL in FACTT Liberal (p < 0.001). Mortality was not different between groups (24% in FACTT Lite, 25% in FACTT Conservative and Liberal, p = 0.84). Ventilator-free days in FACTT Lite (14.9 ± 0.3) were equivalent to FACTT Conservative (14.6 ± 0.5) (p = 0.61) and greater than in FACTT Liberal (12.1 ± 0.5, p < 0.001 vs Lite). Acute kidney injury prevalence was 58% in FACTT Lite and 57% in FACTT Conservative (p = 0.72). Prevalence of new shock in FACTT Lite (9%) was lower than in FACTT Conservative (13%) (p = 0.007 vs Lite) and similar to FACTT Liberal (11%) (p = 0.18 vs Lite).FACTT Lite had a greater cumulative fluid balance than FACTT Conservative but had equivalent clinical and safety outcomes. FACTT Lite is an alternative to FACTT Conservative for fluid management in Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome.