Year
Publisher
Journal
Institution
1
Institution Country
Publication Type
Field Of Study
Topics
Open Access
Language
Filter 1
Year
Publisher
Journal
Institution
1
Institution Country
Publication Type
Field Of Study
Topics
Open Access
Language
Filter 1
Export
Sort by: Relevance
Minimal Intervention of Patient Education for Low Back Pain: A Systematic Review With Meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To explore the effects of minimal intervention of patient education (MIPE) for reducing disability and pain intensity in patients with low back pain (LBP). DESIGN: Intervention systematic review with meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. LITERATURE SEARCH: We searched the MEDLINE, Embase, CENTRAL, CINAHL, and PsycINFO databases from inception to May 2023. STUDY SELECTION CRITERIA: Trials comparing MIPE, consisting of a single session of patient education, to no or other interventions in patients with LBP. DATA SYNTHESIS: Random effects meta-analysis was conducted where possible. A noninferiority margin of 5 points (0-100 scale) was considered for noninferiority hypotheses. We assessed risk of bias using the revised Cochrane risk-of-bias tool (RoB 2), and certainty of evidence using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) framework. RESULTS: A total of 21 trials were included. There were no differences between MIPE and no intervention for effects on disability and pain intensity. There was low-certainty evidence that MIPE had inferior effects on short-term disability (mean difference = 3.62; 95% CI: 0.85, 6.38; 15 trials; n = 3066; I2 = 75%) and pain intensity (mean difference = 9.43; 95% CI: 1.31, 17.56; 10 trials; n = 1394; I2 = 90%) than other interventions. No differences were found for subsequent time points. CONCLUSION: As an intervention delivered in isolation, and without tailoring (ie, one-size-fits-all intervention), MIPE on average did not provide benefits for reducing disability and pain intensity over no or other interventions. We encourage clinicians to consider using additional/other or more tailored treatments when helping people manage LBP. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2024;54(2):1-13. Epub 16 November 2023. doi:10.2519/jospt.2023.11865.

Read full abstract
A concept for integrated care pathways for atopic dermatitis-A GA2 LEN ADCARE initiative.

The integrated care pathways for atopic dermatitis (AD-ICPs) aim to bridge the gap between existing AD treatment evidence-based guidelines and expert opinion based on daily practice by offering a structured multidisciplinary plan for patient management of AD. ICPs have the potential to enhance guideline recommendations by combining interventions and aspects from different guidelines, integrating quality assurance, and describing co-ordination of care. Most importantly, patients can enter the ICPs at any level depending on AD severity, resources available in their country, and economic factors such as differences in insurance reimbursement systems. The GA2 LEN ADCARE network and partners as well as all stakeholders, abbreviated as the AD-ICPs working group, were involved in the discussion and preparation of the AD ICPs during a series of subgroup workshops and meetings in years 2020 and 2021, after which the document was circulated within all GAL2 EN ADCARE centres. The AD-ICPs outline the diagnostic procedures, possible co-morbidities, different available treatment options including differential approaches for the pediatric population, and the role of the pharmacists and other stakeholders, as well as remaining unmet needs in the management of AD. The AD-ICPs provide a multidisciplinary plan for improved diagnosis, treatment, and patient feedback in AD management, as well as addressing critical unmet needs, including improved access to care, training specialists, implementation of educational programs, assessment on the impact of climate change, and fostering a personalised treatment approach. By focusing on these key areas, the initiative aims to pave the way for a brighter future in the management of AD.

Read full abstract
Open Access
Waldenström Macroglobulinemia diagnosis, risk assessment and treatment in Portugal – results from a Delphi-like Panel

Clinical features of Waldenström Macroglobulinemia (WM) are variable, often leading to heterogeneous decisions regarding patients’ diagnosis, risk stratification, and treatment. This study assessed the agreement rates on WM diagnosis, risk stratification, and active treatment strategies to capture how this heterogeneity may influence national practices among hematologists. A two-round Delphi-like Panel with 22 national hematologists experienced in WM was conducted online, where 33 statements were classified using a 4-point Likert scale. For each statement, the consensus level was set at 70% for “fully agree/disagree”; the majority level was defined as >70% in agreement or disagreement. After two rounds, no statements were categorized as consensus, and 15 out of 33 failed to obtain a qualified majority. Globally, the experts could not reach a qualified majority in approximately half of the sentences from each category (diagnosis, risk assessment, and therapeutic decision), indicating that contradictory opinions are transversal to all the topics involving WM. A lack of consensus in diagnosing and managing WM among Portuguese hematologists became evident. These results illustrate heterogeneity in clinical practices, and future research initiatives should be considered to improve and reinforce accepted guidelines for diagnosing, assessing, and treating WM patients.

Read full abstract
Open Access