Psychosocial Impact of Virtual Cancer Care through Technology: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Caminiti C
PROVIDER: S-EPMC10093026 | biostudies-literature | 2023 Mar
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Psychosocial Impact of Virtual Cancer Care through Technology: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.
Caminiti Caterina C Annunziata Maria Antonietta MA Di Giulio Paola P Isa Luciano L Mosconi Paola P Nanni Maria Giulia MG Piredda Michela M Verusio Claudio C Diodati Francesca F Maglietta Giuseppe G Passalacqua Rodolfo R
Cancers 20230331 7
This meta-analysis of RCTs aimed to determine whether replacing face-to-face hospital care with telemedicine deteriorates psychosocial outcomes of adult cancer patients, in terms of quality of life (QoL), anxiety, distress, and depression. RCTs on interventions aimed at improving patient psychosocial outcomes were excluded. MEDLINE, EmBASE, and PsycInfo were searched on 13 May 2022 without language or date restrictions. In total, 1400 records were identified and 8 RCTs included (4434 subjects). ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description:BackgroundAn increasing number of patients have received prophylactic or therapeutic oral anticoagulants (OACs) for thromboembolic complications of diseases. The use of OACs is associated with both clinical benefits and risks. Considering the challenges imposed by this class of drugs, as well as the enormous progress made in portable device technology, it is possible that technology-based interventions may improve clinical benefits for patients and optimize anticoagulation management.ObjectiveThis study was designed to comprehensively evaluate the role of technology-based interventions in the management of OACs.MethodsWe searched 6 databases-PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, Scopus, and PsycINFO-to retrieve relevant studies published as of November 1, 2019, to evaluate the effect of technology-based interventions on oral anticoagulation management. RevMan (version 5.3; Cochrane) software was used to evaluate and analyze clinical outcomes. The methodological quality of studies was assessed by the Cochrane risk of bias tool.ResultsA total of 15 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were selected for analysis. They reported data for 2218 patients (1110 patients in the intervention groups and 1108 patients in the control groups). A meta-analysis was performed on the effectiveness and safety data reported in the RCTs. Technology-based interventions significantly improved the effectiveness of oral anticoagulation management (mean difference [MD]=6.07; 95% CI 0.84-11.30; I2=72%; P=.02). The safety of oral anticoagulation management was also improved, but the results were not statistically significant. Bleeding events were reduced (major bleeding events MD=1.02; 95% CI 0.78-1.32; I2=0%; P=.90; minor bleeding events MD=1.06, 95% CI 0.77-1.44; I2=41%; P=.73) and thromboembolism events were reduced (MD=0.71; 95% CI 0.49-1.01; I2=0%; P=.06). In general, patients were more satisfied with technology-based interventions, which could also improve their knowledge of anticoagulation management, improve their quality of life, and reduce mortality and hospitalization events.ConclusionsUsing technology to manage OACs can improve the effectiveness and safety of oral anticoagulation management, result in higher patient satisfaction, and allow greater understanding of anticoagulation.
| S-EPMC7391164 | biostudies-literature
Project description:We conducted meta-analyses of findings from randomized, placebo-controlled, short-term trials for acute mania in manic or mixed states of DSM (III-IV) bipolar I disorder in 56 drug-placebo comparisons of 17 agents from 38 studies involving 10,800 patients. Of drugs tested, 13 (76%) were more effective than placebo: aripiprazole, asenapine, carbamazepine, cariprazine, haloperidol, lithium, olanzapine, paliperdone, quetiapine, risperidone, tamoxifen, valproate, and ziprasidone. Their pooled effect size for mania improvement (Hedges' g in 48 trials) was 0.42 (confidence interval (CI): 0.36-0.48); pooled responder risk ratio (46 trials) was 1.52 (CI: 1.42-1.62); responder rate difference (RD) was 17% (drug: 48%, placebo: 31%), yielding an estimated number-needed-to-treat of 6 (all p<0.0001). In several direct comparisons, responses to various antipsychotics were somewhat greater or more rapid than lithium, valproate, or carbamazepine; lithium did not differ from valproate, nor did second generation antipsychotics differ from haloperidol. Meta-regression associated higher study site counts, as well as subject number with greater placebo (not drug) response; and higher baseline mania score with greater drug (not placebo) response. Most effective agents had moderate effect-sizes (Hedges' g=0.26-0.46); limited data indicated large effect sizes (Hedges' g=0.51-2.32) for: carbamazepine, cariprazine, haloperidol, risperidone, and tamoxifen. The findings support the efficacy of most clinically used antimanic treatments, but encourage more head-to-head studies and development of agents with even greater efficacy.
| S-EPMC3055677 | biostudies-other
Project description:Virtual reality (VR), a technology that provides a stimulated sensory experience, has recently been implemented in various fields of medicine. Several studies have investigated the efficacy of VR on preoperative anxiety. The purpose of this meta-analysis was to validate whether VR could relieve preoperative anxiety in patients undergoing surgery. Electronic databases were searched to identify all randomized controlled trials (RCTs) investigating the effect of VR on preoperative anxiety. The primary outcome was defined as the preoperative anxiety scores. We estimated the effect size using the standard mean difference (SMD) with a 95% confidence interval (CI) using a random effect model. Ultimately, 10 RCTs, with a total of 813 patients, were included in the final analysis. Preoperative anxiety was significantly lower in the VR group than in the control group (SMD -0.64, 95% CI -1.08 to -0.20, p = 0.004). In a subgroup analysis, the preoperative anxiety scores were lower in the VR group than in the control group in pediatric patients (SMD -0.71, 95% CI -1.14 to -0.27, p = 0.002), whereas a significant difference was not observed between the two groups in adult patients (p = 0.226). The results of this meta-analysis indicated that VR could decrease preoperative anxiety, especially in pediatric patients.
| S-EPMC7600416 | biostudies-literature
Project description:PurposeThe under-representation of Black people within critical care research limits the generalizability of randomized controlled trials (RCTs). This meta-epidemiologic study investigated the proportionate representation of Black people enrolled at USA and Canadian study sites from high impact critical care RCTs.SourceWe searched for critical care RCTs published in general medicine and intensive care unit (ICU) journals between 1 January 2016 and 31 December 2020. We included RCTs that enrolled critically ill adults at USA or Canadian sites and provided race-based demographic data by study site. We compared study-based racial demographics with site-level city-based demographics and pooled representation of Black people across studies, cities, and centres using a random effects model. We used meta-regression to explore the impact of the following variables on Black representation in critical care RCTs: country, drug intervention, consent model, number of centres, funding, study site city, and year of publication.Principal findingsWe included 21 eligible RCTs. Of these, 17 enrolled at only USA sites, two at only Canadian sites, and two at both USA and Canadian sites. Black people were under-represented in critical care RCTs by 6% compared with population-based city demographics (95% confidence interval, 1 to 11). Using meta-regression, after controlling for pertinent variables, the country of the study site was the only significant source of heterogeneity (P = 0.02).ConclusionBlack people are under-represented in critical care RCTs compared with site-level city-based demographics. Interventions are required to ensure adequate Black representation in critical care RCTs at both USA and Canadian study sites. Further research is needed to investigate the factors contributing to Black under-representation in critical care RCTs.
| S-EPMC10180607 | biostudies-literature
Project description:We aimed to assess the impact of L-carnitine on plasma Lp(a) concentrations through systematic review and meta-analysis of available RCTs. The literature search included selected databases up to 31(st) January 2015. Meta-analysis was performed using fixed-effects or random-effect model according to I(2) statistic. Effect sizes were expressed as weighted mean difference (WMD) and 95% confidence interval (CI). The meta-analysis showed a significant reduction of Lp(a) levels following L-carnitine supplementation (WMD: -8.82 mg/dL, 95% CI: -10.09, -7.55, p < 0.001). When the studies were categorized according to the route of administration, a significant reduction in plasma Lp(a) concentration was observed with oral (WMD: -9.00 mg/dL, 95% CI: -10.29, -7.72, p < 0.001) but not intravenous L-carnitine (WMD: -2.91 mg/dL, 95% CI: -10.22, 4.41, p = 0.436). The results of the meta-regression analysis showed that the pooled estimate is independent of L-carnitine dose (slope: -0.30; 95% CI: -4.19, 3.59; p = 0.878) and duration of therapy (slope: 0.18; 95% CI: -0.22, 0.59; p = 0.374). In conclusion, the meta-analysis suggests a significant Lp(a) lowering by oral L-carnitine supplementation. Taking into account the limited number of available Lp(a)-targeted drugs, L-carnitine might be an effective alternative to effectively reduce Lp(a). Prospective outcome trials will be required to fully elucidate the clinical value and safety of oral L-carnitine supplementation.
| S-EPMC4709689 | biostudies-other
Project description:BackgroundWorldwide, insomnia remains a highly prevalent public health problem. eHealth presents a novel opportunity to deliver effective, accessible, and affordable insomnia treatments on a population-wide scale. However, there is no quantitative integration of evidence regarding the effectiveness of eHealth-based psychosocial interventions on insomnia.ObjectiveWe aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of eHealth-based psychosocial interventions for insomnia and investigate the influence of specific study characteristics and intervention features on these effects.MethodsWe searched PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, PsycINFO, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials from database inception to February 16, 2021, for publications investigating eHealth-based psychosocial interventions targeting insomnia and updated the search of PubMed to December 6, 2021. We also screened gray literature for unpublished data. Eligible studies were randomized controlled trials of eHealth-based psychosocial interventions targeting adults with insomnia. Random-effects meta-analysis models were used to assess primary and secondary outcomes. Primary outcomes were insomnia severity and sleep quality. Meta-analyses were performed by pooling the effects of eHealth-based psychosocial interventions on insomnia compared with inactive and in-person conditions. We performed subgroup analyses and metaregressions to explore specific factors that affected the effectiveness. Secondary outcomes included sleep diary parameters and mental health-related outcomes.ResultsOf the 19,980 identified records, 37 randomized controlled trials (13,227 participants) were included. eHealth-based psychosocial interventions significantly reduced insomnia severity (Hedges g=-1.01, 95% CI -1.12 to -0.89; P<.001) and improved sleep quality (Hedges g=-0.58, 95% CI -0.75 to -0.41; P<.001) compared with inactive control conditions, with no evidence of publication bias. We found no significant difference compared with in-person treatment in alleviating insomnia severity (Hedges g=0.41, 95% CI -0.02 to 0.85; P=.06) and a significant advantage for in-person treatment in enhancing sleep quality (Hedges g=0.56, 95% CI 0.24-0.88; P<.001). eHealth-based psychosocial interventions had significantly larger effects (P=.01) on alleviating insomnia severity in clinical samples than in subclinical samples. eHealth-based psychosocial interventions that incorporated guidance from trained therapists had a significantly greater effect on insomnia severity (P=.05) and sleep quality (P=.02) than those with guidance from animated therapists or no guidance. Higher baseline insomnia severity and longer intervention duration were associated with a larger reduction in insomnia severity (P=.004). eHealth-based psychosocial interventions significantly improved each secondary outcome.ConclusionseHealth interventions for insomnia are effective in improving sleep and mental health and can be considered a promising treatment for insomnia. Our findings support the wider dissemination of eHealth interventions and their further promotion in a stepped-care model. Offering blended care could improve treatment effectiveness. Future research needs to elucidate which specific intervention components are most important to achieve intervention effectiveness. Blended eHealth interventions may be tailored to benefit people with low socioeconomic status, limited access to health care, or lack of eHealth literacy.
| S-EPMC10131777 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND:Carpal tunnel syndrome is a common compressive neuropathy of the median nerve. The efficacy and safety of endoscopic versus open carpal tunnel release remain controversial. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES:The purpose of this study was to determine whether endoscopic compared with open carpal tunnel release provides better symptom relief, validated outcome scores, short- and long-term strength, and/or digital sensibility; entails a differential risk of complications such as nerve injury, scar tenderness, pillar pain, and reoperation; allows an earlier return to work; and takes less operative time. METHODS:The English-language literature was searched using MEDLINE, the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. Randomized controlled trials that compared endoscopic and open carpal tunnel release were included in the meta-analysis. Methodologic quality was assessed with the Consolidated Standards Of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) checklist, and a sensitivity analysis was performed. Symptom relief, Boston Carpal Tunnel Questionnaire (BCTQ) scores, strength, digital sensibility, complications, reoperation, interval to return to work, and operative time were analyzed. Twenty-one randomized controlled trials containing 1859 hands were included. RESULTS:Endoscopically treated patients showed similar symptom relief and BCTQ scores; better early recovery of grip strength (mean difference [MD], 3.03 kg [0.08-5.98]; p = 0.04) and pinch strength (MD, 0.77 kg [0.33-1.22]; p < 0.001) but no advantage after 6 months; lower risk of scar tenderness (risk ratio [RR], 0.53 [0.35-0.82]; p = 0.005); higher risk of nerve injury (RR, 2.84 [1.08-7.46]; p = 0.03), most of which were transient neurapraxias. Similar risk of pillar pain and reoperation; an earlier return to work (MD, -8.73 days [-12.82 to -4.65]; p < 0.001); and reduced operative time (MD, -4.81 minutes [-9.23 to -0.39]; p = 0.03). CONCLUSIONS:High-level evidence from randomized controlled trials indicates that endoscopic release allows earlier return to work and improved strength during the early postoperative period. Results at 6 months or later are similar according to current data except that patients undergoing endoscopic release are at greater risk of nerve injury and lower risk of scar tenderness compared with open release. While endoscopic release may appeal to patients who require an early return to work and activities, surgeons should be cognizant of its elevated incidence of transient nerve injury amid its similar overall efficacy to open carpal tunnel release. Additional research is required to define the learning curve of endoscopic release and clarify the influence of surgeon volume on its safety.
| S-EPMC4317413 | biostudies-other
Project description:BACKGROUND: Patients with nocturnal hypertension are at higher risk for cardiovascular complications such as myocardial infarction and cerebrovascular insult. Published studies inconsistently reported decreases in nocturnal blood pressure with melatonin. METHODS: A meta-analysis of the efficacy and safety of exogenous melatonin in ameliorating nocturnal blood pressure was performed using a random effects model of all studies fitting the inclusion criteria, with subgroup analysis of fast-release versus controlled-release preparations. RESULTS: Seven trials (three of controlled-release and four of fast-release melatonin) with 221 participants were included. Meta-analysis of all seven studies did not reveal significant effects of melatonin versus placebo on nocturnal blood pressure. However, subgroup analysis revealed that controlled-release melatonin significantly reduced nocturnal blood pressure whereas fast-release melatonin had no effect. Systolic blood pressure decreased significantly with controlled-release melatonin (-6.1 mmHg; 95% confidence interval [CI] -10.7 to -1.5; P = 0.009) but not fast-release melatonin (-0.3 mmHg; 95% CI -5.9 to 5.30; P = 0.92). Diastolic blood pressure also decreased significantly with controlled-release melatonin (-3.5 mmHg; 95% CI -6.1 to -0.9; P = 0.009) but not fast-release melatonin (-0.2 mmHg; 95% CI -3.8 to 3.3; P = 0.89). No safety concerns were raised. CONCLUSION: Add-on controlled-release melatonin to antihypertensive therapy is effective and safe in ameliorating nocturnal hypertension, whereas fast-release melatonin is ineffective. It is necessary that larger trials of longer duration be conducted in order to determine the long-term beneficial effects of controlled-release melatonin in patients with nocturnal hypertension.
| S-EPMC3180511 | biostudies-other
Project description:BackgroundNeck pain is a prevalent condition that causes an enormous health care burden due to the lack of efficient therapies. As a promising technology, virtual reality (VR) has shown advantages in orthopedic rehabilitation. However, there is no meta-analysis evaluating the effectiveness of VR in neck pain management.ObjectiveThis study aims to review original randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating the effectiveness of VR for neck pain and to provide evidence for the clinical application of a new alternative approach for pain management.MethodsA total of 9 electronic databases were systematically searched for relevant articles published from inception to October 2022. RCTs in English or Chinese that investigated VR therapy for participants with neck pain were included. The methodological quality and the evidence level were assessed using the Cochrane Back and Neck Risk of Bias tool and the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) guideline, respectively.ResultsA total of 8 studies with 382 participants were included for the final analysis. For the pain intensity, the overall pooled effect size was 0.51, with a standardized mean difference (SMD) of -0.51 (95% CI -0.91 to -0.11; GRADE: moderate), favoring VR therapy compared with controls. Subgroups analyses revealed that significant differences in pain intensity were found in the multimodal intervention (VR in combination with other therapies) than in other interventions (SMD -0.45, 95% CI -0.78 to -0.13; GRADE: moderate), and better analgesic effects were also observed in patients with chronic neck pain receiving VR intervention (SMD -0.70, 95% CI -1.08 to -0.32; GRADE: moderate) and patients treated in the clinic or research unit (SMD -0.52, 95% CI -0.99 to -0.05; GRADE: moderate) than controls. Regarding other health outcomes, the VR experienced less disability, lower kinesiophobia, and greater kinematic function (cervical range of motion, mean and peak velocity). Nevertheless, the follow-up effects of VR therapy on pain intensity and disability were not found.ConclusionsExisting moderate evidence support VR as a beneficial nonpharmacological approach to improve pain intensity in patients with neck pain, with advantages to multimodal intervention, people with chronic neck pain, and clinic or research unit-based VR therapy. However, the limited quantity and high heterogeneity of the articles limit our findings.Trial registrationPROSPERO CRD42020188635; https://tinyurl.com/2839jh8w.
| S-EPMC10131665 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Breathing exercises have been shown to reduce mental health problems among clinical and non-clinical populations. Although virtual reality (VR) breathing interventions are assumed to have potential benefits, it remains unclear whether VR breathing interventions are more effective at improving mental health than non-VR breathing interventions. We conducted a systematic literature search in six electronic databases (Web of Science, PsycINFO, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Scopus, and PubMed) from inception to 30th September, 2022. We included randomized controlled trials in adults evaluating effects of VR compared to non-VR breathing interventions on primary outcomes of mental health (stress, anxiety and mood), and secondary outcomes of physiological stress measures (e.g., heart rate (HR), heart rate variability (HRV)). Within these selected studies, we explored differences in likeability and future use between VR and non-VR breathing interventions. 2.848 records were identified of which 65 full-text articles were assessed. Six RCTs were included, of which five were suitable for meta-analyses. Comparing VR to non-VR breathing interventions, there were no significant differences in overall mental health, stress, anxiety or mood, nor in HR or HRV. There was no evidence that participants liked VR breathing interventions more than non-VR, nor would use them more in the future. These results suggest that there is no evidence that VR breathing interventions are more effective than non-VR in improving mental health outcomes, HR, HRV. Further research is required to determine whether there may be advantages to longer-term VR-implementation and practice, and explore possible mechanisms.
| S-EPMC10869395 | biostudies-literature