Background:This study aims to develop an evidence-based clinical practice guideline of acupuncture in the treatment of patients with moderate and severe cancer pain. Methods:The development of this guideline was triggered by a systematic review published in JAMA Oncology in 2020. We searched databases and websites for evidence on patient preferences and values, and other resources of using acupuncture for treatment of cancer pain. Recommendations were developed through a Delphi consensus of an international multidisciplinary panel including 13 western medicine oncologists, Chinese medicine/acupuncture clinical practitioners, and two patient representatives. The certainty of evidence, patient preferences and values, resources, and other factors were fully considered in formulating the recommendations. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach was employed to rate the certainty of evidence and the strength of recommendations. Results:The guideline proposed three recommendations: (1) a strong recommendation for the treatment of acupuncture rather than no treatment to relieve pain in patients with moderate to severe cancer pain; (2) a weak recommendation for the combination treatments with acupuncture/acupressure to reduce pain intensity, decrease the opioid dose, and alleviate opioid-related side effects in moderate to severe cancer pain patients who are using analgesics; and (3) a strong recommendation for acupuncture in breast cancer patients to relieve their aromatase inhibitor-induced arthralgia. Conclusion:This proposed guideline provides recommendations for the management of patients with cancer pain. The small sample sizes of evidence limit the strength of the recommendations and highlights the need for additional research.

Objective: The study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of health education intervention for the control of blood pressure (BP) in older adults with hypertension. Methods: Five databases were searched in March 2018 for randomized controlled trials to manage hypertension in older adults by health education. The primary outcomes were changes in systolic and diastolic BP. RevMan5 was used for meta-analysis. Results: Seven articles with 1,105 participants were included. In them, 393 (35.56%) older adults participated in health education interventions in the form of courses, and 226 (20.45%), in health education sessions. The meta-analysis suggested an overall reduction in systolic BP after health education courses (SMD, standardized mean difference = 4.80, 95% CI: 7.01-2.59, p < .05). Similar results were observed after health education sessions (SMD = 11.73, 95% CI: 17.63-5.82, p < .05). The diastolic BP reduction showed no difference after the health education course (p = .09). The random effects meta-analysis suggested an overall reduction in diastolic BP after health education sessions (SMD = 5.39, 95% CI: 7.98-2.79, p < .05). Conclusion: Although different health education methods had different effects on hypertension control, overall, educational interventions can potentially lead to improved BP control.

Objective: To assess the effectiveness of non-pharmacological interventions for seniors with depressive symptoms. Methods: A comprehensive literature search was performed. We conducted network meta-analysis in two ways, intervention classes (psychosocial, psychotherapy, physical activity, combined, treatment as usual) and individual intervention (11 categories). Whenever included studies used different scales, the different instruments were converted to the units of the scale most frequently used (the Geriatric Depression Scale), such that the effect size was reported as a mean difference (MD) with 95% confidence interval (CI). The risk of bias of RCTs included in this review was assessed according to the Cochrane Handbook. Bayesian NMA was conducted using R-3.4.0 software. Results: A total of 35 RCTs with 3,797 enrolled patients were included. Compared to conventional treatment, physical activity and psychotherapy resulted in significant improvements in depressive symptoms (MD: 2.25, 95%CrI: 0.99-3.56; SUCRA = 86.07%; MD: 1.75, 95% CrI: 0.90-2.64; SUCRA = 66.44%, respectively). Similar results were obtained for music (MD: 2.6; 95% CrI: 0.84-4.35;SUCRA = 80.53%), life review (MD:1.92; 95% CrI:0.71-3.14; SUCRA = 65.62%), cognitive behavioral therapy (MD: 1.27; 95% CrI: 0.23-2.38; SUCRA = 45.4%), aerobic (MD: 1.84; 95% CrI: 0.39-3.36; SUCRA = 63%) and resistance training (MD: 1.72; 95% CrI: 0.06-3.42; SUCRA = 59.24%). Network meta-regression showed that there were no statistically significant subgroup effects. Conclusions: Physical activity and psychotherapy demonstrated statistically significant superiority over conventional treatment. Music and life review therapy proved the most promising individual interventions. However, conclusions are limited by the lack of sufficient sample size and consensus regarding intervention categories and so an adequately powered study is necessary to consolidate these findings.