所有资源

共检索到2
...
Extracorporeal Shock Wave Therapy for Treating Foot Ulcers in Adults With Type 1 and Type 2 Diabetes: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials
Extracorporeal shock wave therapy (ESWT) as a new adjuvant therapy has shown a potential capability to promote diabetic foot ulcer (DFU) healing. The purpose of this study was to assess the efficacy and safety of ESWT on the healing of DFUs. The Cochrane Library, PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, China Biology Medicine and reference lists were searched for studies published up to December 2018. Randomized controlled trials of any design, including ESWT for patients with DFU, were included. Two reviewers extracted data, including the wound surface area (WSA), percentage of re-epithelialization, population of complete cure and unchanged and other related outcomes. Eight randomized controlled trials (N=339) were included. ESWT was found to be associated with a greater reduction of WSA by 1.54 cm2, and increase of re-epithelialization by 26.31%. A greater population with complete cure was found at the end of treatment (risk ratio [RR] = 2.22; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.46 to 3.40); however, there was no statistically significant difference at the end of follow up (p=0.052). It can also reduce treatment inefficiency by 4.8-fold (95% CI, 0.12 to 0.37). In addition, ESWT also showed a higher superiority than hyperbaric oxygen therapy in the population for complete cure and unchanged ulcer (RR=1.83; 95% CI, 1.14 to 2.94 and RR=0.25; 95% CI, 0.13 to 0.48, respectively). ESWT is a feasible adjuvant treatment for DFUs. It can effectively improve the complete cure rate, shorten the healing period of DFUs and significantly reduce treatment ineffectiveness. This can provide new therapeutic ideas for clinical practice of intractable and recurrent DFUs.
期刊论文
...
Effects of pharmacy-based interventions on the control and management of diabetes in adults: A systematic review and meta-analysis
OBJECTIVES: The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to evaluate the effects of pharmacy-based interventions on clinical outcomes associated with diabetes-related complications as well as on nonclinical outcomes in people with diabetes. METHODS: We searched 4 main databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials) for studies that considered clinical and nonclinical outcomes of pharmacy-based interventions among people with diabetes. Clinical outcomes included patients' mean reductions of glycated hemoglobin (A1C) levels and body mass indexes (BMIs). Nonclinical outcomes included patients' healthcare utilization and quality of life. A meta-analysis was conducted to estimate the pooled net mean difference in clinical outcomes between the pharmacy-intervention and the control groups. RESULTS: Of the 44 studies included in the systematic review, 32 studies reported results from randomized controlled trials measuring reductions of A1C levels in 4,132 patients. Meta-analysis revealed that the standardized absolute mean difference in reduction of A1C levels from baseline to the time of the last follow up significantly favoured the pharmacy intervention versus the control group (0.96%; 95% CI 0.71 to 1.22; p<0.001). Of the studies, 13 reported BMI kg/m2 in 1,827 patients. The estimation of standardized absolute mean difference in reduction of BMI unit calculated through meta-analysis was 0.61 (95% CI 0.20 to 1.03; p=0.000) in favour of the pharmacy-intervention group. CONCLUSIONS: Pharmacy-based interventions have significant positive effects on controlling 2 major risks factors associated with diabetes-related complications: A1C levels and BMI. However, there is a dearth of evidence about the effects of pharmacy-based intervention on nonclinical outcomes, including healthcare utilization and quality of life.
研究证据
  • 首页
  • 1
  • 末页
  • 跳转
当前展示1-2条  共2条,1页