Despite evidence of the long-term implications of unrelieved pain during infancy, it is evident that infant pain is still under-managed and unmanaged. Inadequately managed pain in infancy, a period ...of exponential development, can have implications across the lifespan. Therefore, a comprehensive and systematic review of pain management strategies is integral to appropriate infant pain management. This is an update of a previously published review update in the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (2015, Issue 12) of the same title.
To assess the efficacy and adverse events of non-pharmacological interventions for infant and child (aged up to three years) acute pain, excluding kangaroo care, sucrose, breastfeeding/breast milk, and music.
For this update, we searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE-Ovid platform, EMBASE-OVID platform, PsycINFO-OVID platform, CINAHL-EBSCO platform and trial registration websites (ClinicalTrials.gov; International Clinical Trials Registry Platform) (March 2015 to October 2020). An update search was completed in July 2022, but studies identified at this point were added to 'Awaiting classification' for a future update. We also searched reference lists and contacted researchers via electronic list-serves. We incorporated 76 new studies into the review. SELECTION CRITERIA: Participants included infants from birth to three years in randomised controlled trials (RCTs) or cross-over RCTs that had a no-treatment control comparison. Studies were eligible for inclusion in the analysis if they compared a non-pharmacological pain management strategy to a no-treatment control group (15 different strategies). In addition, we also analysed studies when the unique effect of adding a non-pharmacological pain management strategy onto another pain management strategy could be assessed (i.e. additive effects on a sweet solution, non-nutritive sucking, or swaddling) (three strategies). The eligible control groups for these additive studies were sweet solution only, non-nutritive sucking only, or swaddling only, respectively. Finally, we qualitatively described six interventions that met the eligibility criteria for inclusion in the review, but not in the analysis. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: The outcomes assessed in the review were pain response (reactivity and regulation) and adverse events. The level of certainty in the evidence and risk of bias were based on the Cochrane risk of bias tool and the GRADE approach. We analysed the standardised mean difference (SMD) using the generic inverse variance method to determine effect sizes. MAIN RESULTS: We included total of 138 studies (11,058 participants), which includes an additional 76 new studies for this update. Of these 138 studies, we analysed 115 (9048 participants) and described 23 (2010 participants) qualitatively. We described qualitatively studies that could not be meta-analysed due to being the only studies in their category or statistical reporting issues. We report the results of the 138 included studies here. An SMD effect size of 0.2 represents a small effect, 0.5 a moderate effect, and 0.8 a large effect. The thresholds for the I
interpretation were established as follows: not important (0% to 40%); moderate heterogeneity (30% to 60%); substantial heterogeneity (50% to 90%); considerable heterogeneity (75% to 100%). The most commonly studied acute procedures were heel sticks (63 studies) and needlestick procedures for the purposes of vaccines/vitamins (35 studies). We judged most studies to have high risk of bias (103 out of 138), with the most common methodological concerns relating to blinding of personnel and outcome assessors. Pain responses were examined during two separate pain phases: pain reactivity (within the first 30 seconds after the acutely painful stimulus) and immediate pain regulation (after the first 30 seconds following the acutely painful stimulus). We report below the strategies with the strongest evidence base for each age group. In preterm born neonates, non-nutritive sucking may reduce pain reactivity (SMD -0.57, 95% confidence interval (CI) -1.03 to -0.11, moderate effect; I
= 93%, considerable heterogeneity) and improve immediate pain regulation (SMD -0.61, 95% CI -0.95 to -0.27, moderate effect; I
= 81%, considerable heterogeneity), based on very low-certainty evidence. Facilitated tucking may also reduce pain reactivity (SMD -1.01, 95% CI -1.44 to -0.58, large effect; I
= 93%, considerable heterogeneity) and improve immediate pain regulation (SMD -0.59, 95% CI -0.92 to -0.26, moderate effect; I
= 87%, considerable heterogeneity); however, this is also based on very low-certainty evidence. While swaddling likely does not reduce pain reactivity in preterm neonates (SMD -0.60, 95% CI -1.23 to 0.04, no effect; I
= 91%, considerable heterogeneity), it has been shown to possibly improve immediate pain regulation (SMD -1.21, 95% CI -2.05 to -0.38, large effect; I
= 89%, considerable heterogeneity), based on very low-certainty evidence. In full-term born neonates, non-nutritive sucking may reduce pain reactivity (SMD -1.13, 95% CI -1.57 to -0.68, large effect; I
= 82%, considerable heterogeneity) and improve immediate pain regulation (SMD -1.49, 95% CI -2.20 to -0.78, large effect; I
= 92%, considerable heterogeneity), based on very low-certainty evidence. In full-term born older infants, structured parent involvement was the intervention most studied. Results showed that this intervention has little to no effect in reducing pain reactivity (SMD -0.18, 95% CI -0.40 to 0.03, no effect; I
= 46%, moderate heterogeneity) or improving immediate pain regulation (SMD -0.09, 95% CI -0.40 to 0.21, no effect; I
= 74%, substantial heterogeneity), based on low- to moderate-certainty evidence. Of these five interventions most studied, only two studies observed adverse events, specifically vomiting (one preterm neonate) and desaturation (one full-term neonate hospitalised in the NICU) following the non-nutritive sucking intervention. The presence of considerable heterogeneity limited our confidence in the findings for certain analyses, as did the preponderance of evidence of very low to low certainty based on GRADE judgements.
Overall, non-nutritive sucking, facilitated tucking, and swaddling may reduce pain behaviours in preterm born neonates. Non-nutritive sucking may also reduce pain behaviours in full-term neonates. No interventions based on a substantial body of evidence showed promise in reducing pain behaviours in older infants. Most analyses were based on very low- or low-certainty grades of evidence and none were based on high-certainty evidence. Therefore, the lack of confidence in the evidence would require further research before we could draw a definitive conclusion.
Background
Loneliness and social isolation are significant public health problems that are being exacerbated during the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic. Little is known about the associations ...between loneliness and symptom burden in oncology patients before and during the pandemic. Study purposes include determining the prevalence of loneliness in a sample of oncology patients; evaluating for differences in demographic, clinical, and symptom characteristics between lonely and nonlonely patients; and determining which demographic, clinical, and symptom characteristics were associated with membership in the lonely group.
Methods
A convenience sample (n = 606) completed online surveys that evaluated the severity of loneliness, social isolation, and common symptoms (ie, anxiety, depression, fatigue, sleep disturbance, cognitive dysfunction, and pain) in oncology patients. Parametric and nonparametric tests were used to evaluate for differences in scores between the lonely and nonlonely groups. Logistic regression analysis was used to determine risk factors for membership in the loneliness group.
Results
Of the 606 patients, 53.0% were categorized in the lonely group. The lonely group reported higher levels of social isolation, as well as higher symptom severity scores for all of the symptoms evaluated. In the multivariate model, being unmarried, having higher levels of social isolation, as well as higher levels of anxiety and depressive symptoms were associated with membership in the lonely group.
Conclusions
Study findings suggest that a significant number of oncology patients are experiencing loneliness, most likely as a result of mandate social distancing and isolation procedures. The symptom burden of these patients is extremely high and warrants clinical evaluation and interventions.
Little is known about the experience of loneliness in oncology patients during COVID‐19. Of the 606 patients in this study, 53% report a clinically meaningful level of loneliness. Associations are found between loneliness and higher levels of social isolation, anxiety, and depressive symptoms.
We study the May 12, 2019, Mw 6.0 (hereafter Laurel earthquake) and a June 26, 2019, Mw 6.2 (hereafter Manaca earthquake) earthquakes located in a complex strike-slip to subduction transition zone in ...the Costa Rica-Panama border using a dense local network of broadband and strong-motion instruments, concluding that the Laurel mainshock data (hypocenter, centroid, and focal mechanism), concurrently with its aftershock distribution, indicate an almost vertical north-south oriented, dextral strike-slip fault. This fault ruptured at depths between 10 and 30 km in the lower crust of Panama Microplate and the geometry implies a shallow influence of the Panama fracture zone. Meanwhile, for the Manaca earthquake, the aftershocks are concentrated on a 25 km long NW-SE trend, with a depth between 20 and 45 km. One of the nodal planes of the focal mechanism of the Manaca earthquake, as well as the centroid location coincides with the aftershock locations trend, supporting the hypothesis that a nearby steeply dipping sinistral strike-slip fault originated this event. Earthquake locations and focal mechanism analyses of collected data from global and local earthquake catalogs suggest that the strong coupling caused by the subduction of the Cocos Ridge and Nazca plate is largely accommodated by outer arc crustal block migration with a combination of NW-SE sinistral and N-S dextral strike-slip faults deforming the overriding Panama Microplate. Sinistral motion of crustal blocks, on the Costa Rica side, are consistent with observed motions along with the Azuero-Sona fault system and Coiba Faults on the Panamanian side.
•Our results show a reactivation of an existing deeper crustal faults at the southern border between Costa Rica and Panama.•Subduction of the Cocos plate and its assiciated ridge is the dominant tectonic force in SE Costa Rica.•The subduction of the Cocos Ridge is reflected in the overlying continental Panama Microplate as active crustal faults.•An integrative state-of-the-art tectonic model is presented for the southern Costa Rica – Panama border region.
There is currently an outbreak of respiratory disease caused by a novel coronavirus. The virus has been named severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) and the disease it causes ...has been named coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). More than 16% of patients developed acute respiratory distress syndrome, and the fatality ratio was 1%–2%. No specific treatment has been reported. Herein, we examined the effects of favipiravir (FPV) versus lopinavir (LPV)/ritonavir (RTV) for the treatment of COVID-19. Patients with laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 who received oral FPV (Day 1: 1600 mg twice daily; Days 2–14: 600 mg twice daily) plus interferon (IFN)-α by aerosol inhalation (5 million international unit (IU) twice daily) were included in the FPV arm of this study, whereas patients who were treated with LPV/RTV (Days 1–14: 400 mg/100 mg twice daily) plus IFN-α by aerosol inhalation (5 million IU twice daily) were included in the control arm. Changes in chest computed tomography (CT), viral clearance, and drug safety were compared between the two groups. For the 35 patients enrolled in the FPV arm and the 45 patients in the control arm, all baseline characteristics were comparable between the two arms. A shorter viral clearance median time was found for the FPV arm versus the control arm (4 d (interquartile range (IQR): 2.5–9) versus 11 d (IQR: 8–13), P < 0.001). The FPV arm also showed significant improvement in chest CT compared with the control arm, with an improvement rate of 91.43% versus 62.22% (P = 0.004). After adjustment for potential confounders, the FPV arm also showed a significantly higher improvement rate in chest CT. Multivariable Cox regression showed that FPV was independently associated with faster viral clearance. In addition, fewer adverse events were found in the FPV arm than in the control arm. In this open-label before-after controlled study, FPV showed better therapeutic responses on COVID-19 in terms of disease progression and viral clearance. These preliminary clinical results provide useful information of treatments for SARS-CoV-2 infection.
Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is likely to have long-term mental health effects on individuals who have recovered from COVID-19. Rightly, there is a global response for recognition and planning ...on how to deal with mental health problems for everyone impacted by the global pandemic. This does not just include COVID-19 patients but the general public and health care workers as well. There is also a need to understand the role of the virus itself in the pathophysiology of mental health disorders and longer-term mental health sequelae. Emerging evidence suggests that COVID-19 patients develop neurological symptoms such as headache, altered consciousness, and paraesthesia. Brain tissue oedema and partial neurodegeneration have also been observed in an autopsy. In addition, there are reports that the virus has the potential to cause nervous system damage. Together, these findings point to a possible role of the virus in the development of acute psychiatric symptoms and long-term neuropsychiatric sequelae of COVID-19. The brain pathologies associated with COVID-19 infection is likely to have a long-term impact on cognitive processes. Evidence from other viral respiratory infections, such as severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS), suggests a potential development of psychiatric disorders, long-term neuropsychiatric disorders, and cognitive problems. In this paper, we will review and evaluate the available evidence of acute and possible long-term neuropsychiatric manifestations of COVID-19. We will discuss possible pathophysiological mechanisms and the implications this will have on preparing a long-term strategy to monitor and manage such patients.
COVID-19 is the most significant global crisis of any of our lifetimes. The numbers have been stupefying, whether of infection and mortality, the scale of public health measures, or the economic ...consequences of shutdown. Coronavirus Politics identifies key threads in the global comparative discussion that continue to shed light on COVID-19 and shape debates about what it means for scholarship in health and comparative politics. Editors Scott L. Greer, Elizabeth J. King, Elize Massard da Fonseca, and André Peralta-Santos bring together over 30 authors versed in politics and the health issues in order to understand the health policy decisions, the public health interventions, the social policy decisions, their interactions, and the reasons. The book’s coverage is global, with a wide range of key and exemplary countries, and contains a mixture of comparative, thematic, and templated country studies. All go beyond reporting and monitoring to develop explanations that draw on the authors' expertise while engaging in structured conversations across the book.
COVID-19: A promising cure for the global panic Vellingiri, Balachandar; Jayaramayya, Kaavya; Iyer, Mahalaxmi ...
The Science of the total environment,
07/2020, Letnik:
725
Journal Article
Recenzirano
Odprti dostop
The novel Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is caused by SARS-CoV-2, which is the causative agent of a potentially fatal disease that is of great global public health concern. The outbreak of ...COVID-19 is wreaking havoc worldwide due to inadequate risk assessment regarding the urgency of the situation. The COVID-19 pandemic has entered a dangerous new phase. When compared with SARS and MERS, COVID-19 has spread more rapidly, due to increased globalization and adaptation of the virus in every environment. Slowing the spread of the COVID-19 cases will significantly reduce the strain on the healthcare system of the country by limiting the number of people who are severely sick by COVID-19 and need hospital care. Hence, the recent outburst of COVID-19 highlights an urgent need for therapeutics targeting SARS-CoV-2. Here, we have discussed the structure of virus; varying symptoms among COVID-19, SARS, MERS and common flu; the probable mechanism behind the infection and its immune response. Further, the current treatment options, drugs available, ongoing trials and recent diagnostics for COVID-19 have been discussed. We suggest traditional Indian medicinal plants as possible novel therapeutic approaches, exclusively targeting SARS-CoV-2 and its pathways.
Display omitted
•SARS-COV-2 is structurally similar to SARS-COV.•The mechanism of SARS-COV-2 in the host cell may be comparable to SARS-COV.•SARS-CoV-2 invade the immune and nervous system.•There is an urgent need for novel treatment options for COVID-19.•Indian medicinal plants are likely to be potential drugs for the treatment of COVID-19.
Abstract
Background
Patients hospitalized with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) frequently require mechanical ventilation and have high mortality rates. However, the impact of viral burden on ...these outcomes is unknown.
Methods
We conducted a retrospective cohort study of patients hospitalized with COVID-19 from 30 March 2020 to 30 April 2020 at 2 hospitals in New York City. Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) viral load was assessed using cycle threshold (Ct) values from a reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction assay applied to nasopharyngeal swab samples. We compared characteristics and outcomes of patients with high, medium, and low admission viral loads and assessed whether viral load was independently associated with intubation and in-hospital mortality.
Results
We evaluated 678 patients with COVID-19. Higher viral load was associated with increased age, comorbidities, smoking status, and recent chemotherapy. In-hospital mortality was 35.0% (Ct <25; n = 220), 17.6% (Ct 25–30; n = 216), and 6.2% (Ct >30; n = 242) with high, medium, and low viral loads, respectively (P < .001). The risk of intubation was also higher in patients with a high viral load (29.1%) compared with those with a medium (20.8%) or low viral load (14.9%; P < .001). High viral load was independently associated with mortality (adjusted odds ratio aOR, 6.05; 95% confidence interval CI, 2.92–12.52) and intubation (aOR, 2.73; 95% CI, 1.68–4.44).
Conclusions
Admission SARS-CoV-2 viral load among hospitalized patients with COVID-19 independently correlates with the risk of intubation and in-hospital mortality. Providing this information to clinicians could potentially be used to guide patient care.
We evaluated 678 hospitalized patients with coronavirus disease 2019 and found that 35.0% of patients with a high severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 viral load on admission died compared with 17.6% and 6.2% of patients with medium and low viral loads, respectively.
Gabapentin is commonly used to treat neuropathic pain (pain due to nerve damage). This review updates a review published in 2014, and previous reviews published in 2011, 2005 and 2000.
To assess the ...analgesic efficacy and adverse effects of gabapentin in chronic neuropathic pain in adults.
For this update we searched CENTRAL), MEDLINE, and Embase for randomised controlled trials from January 2014 to January 2017. We also searched the reference lists of retrieved studies and reviews, and online clinical trials registries.
We included randomised, double-blind trials of two weeks' duration or longer, comparing gabapentin (any route of administration) with placebo or another active treatment for neuropathic pain, with participant-reported pain assessment.
Two review authors independently extracted data and assessed trial quality and potential bias. Primary outcomes were participants with substantial pain relief (at least 50% pain relief over baseline or very much improved on Patient Global Impression of Change scale (PGIC)), or moderate pain relief (at least 30% pain relief over baseline or much or very much improved on PGIC). We performed a pooled analysis for any substantial or moderate benefit. Where pooled analysis was possible, we used dichotomous data to calculate risk ratio (RR) and number needed to treat for an additional beneficial outcome (NNT) or harmful outcome (NNH). We assessed the quality of the evidence using GRADE and created 'Summary of findings' tables.
We included four new studies (530 participants), and excluded three previously included studies (126 participants). In all, 37 studies provided information on 5914 participants. Most studies used oral gabapentin or gabapentin encarbil at doses of 1200 mg or more daily in different neuropathic pain conditions, predominantly postherpetic neuralgia and painful diabetic neuropathy. Study duration was typically four to 12 weeks. Not all studies reported important outcomes of interest. High risk of bias occurred mainly due to small size (especially in cross-over studies), and handling of data after study withdrawal.In postherpetic neuralgia, more participants (32%) had substantial benefit (at least 50% pain relief or PGIC very much improved) with gabapentin at 1200 mg daily or greater than with placebo (17%) (RR 1.8 (95% CI 1.5 to 2.1); NNT 6.7 (5.4 to 8.7); 8 studies, 2260 participants, moderate-quality evidence). More participants (46%) had moderate benefit (at least 30% pain relief or PGIC much or very much improved) with gabapentin at 1200 mg daily or greater than with placebo (25%) (RR 1.8 (95% CI 1.6 to 2.0); NNT 4.8 (4.1 to 6.0); 8 studies, 2260 participants, moderate-quality evidence).In painful diabetic neuropathy, more participants (38%) had substantial benefit (at least 50% pain relief or PGIC very much improved) with gabapentin at 1200 mg daily or greater than with placebo (21%) (RR 1.9 (95% CI 1.5 to 2.3); NNT 5.9 (4.6 to 8.3); 6 studies, 1277 participants, moderate-quality evidence). More participants (52%) had moderate benefit (at least 30% pain relief or PGIC much or very much improved) with gabapentin at 1200 mg daily or greater than with placebo (37%) (RR 1.4 (95% CI 1.3 to 1.6); NNT 6.6 (4.9 to 9.9); 7 studies, 1439 participants, moderate-quality evidence).For all conditions combined, adverse event withdrawals were more common with gabapentin (11%) than with placebo (8.2%) (RR 1.4 (95% CI 1.1 to 1.7); NNH 30 (20 to 65); 22 studies, 4346 participants, high-quality evidence). Serious adverse events were no more common with gabapentin (3.2%) than with placebo (2.8%) (RR 1.2 (95% CI 0.8 to 1.7); 19 studies, 3948 participants, moderate-quality evidence); there were eight deaths (very low-quality evidence). Participants experiencing at least one adverse event were more common with gabapentin (63%) than with placebo (49%) (RR 1.3 (95% CI 1.2 to 1.4); NNH 7.5 (6.1 to 9.6); 18 studies, 4279 participants, moderate-quality evidence). Individual adverse events occurred significantly more often with gabapentin. Participants taking gabapentin experienced dizziness (19%), somnolence (14%), peripheral oedema (7%), and gait disturbance (14%).
Gabapentin at doses of 1800 mg to 3600 mg daily (1200 mg to 3600 mg gabapentin encarbil) can provide good levels of pain relief to some people with postherpetic neuralgia and peripheral diabetic neuropathy. Evidence for other types of neuropathic pain is very limited. The outcome of at least 50% pain intensity reduction is regarded as a useful outcome of treatment by patients, and the achievement of this degree of pain relief is associated with important beneficial effects on sleep interference, fatigue, and depression, as well as quality of life, function, and work. Around 3 or 4 out of 10 participants achieved this degree of pain relief with gabapentin, compared with 1 or 2 out of 10 for placebo. Over half of those treated with gabapentin will not have worthwhile pain relief but may experience adverse events. Conclusions have not changed since the previous update of this review.
PDF
