医学
严格标准化平均差
随机对照试验
荟萃分析
焦虑
梅德林
围手术期
置信区间
相对风险
系统回顾
临床试验
物理疗法
内科学
出版偏见
麻醉
精神科
法学
政治学
作者
Taras Usichenko,Kevin Hua,Mike Cummings,Andreas Nowak,Klaus Hahnenkamp,Benno Brinkhaus,Joanna Dietzel
标识
DOI:10.1016/j.jclinane.2021.110581
摘要
Abstract Study objective Previous randomized controlled trials (RCTs) suggest that auricular stimulation (AS) is safe and effective in treatment of preoperative anxiety; however, a systematic evaluation is lacking. The aim was to summarize the evidence on efficacy and safety of AS for preoperative anxiety, as well as for other outcomes. Design We conducted a systematic review of RCTs including patients from all available populations. The search was done through MEDLINE (PubMed), EMBASE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), ISI Web of Science and Scopus Database from inception to June 2020. Study selection and data extraction were performed in by 2 independent reviewers with ability to resolve disagreements by a third author. Meta-analyses as well as the risk of bias and evidence quality assessments were performed according to the Cochrane 6.2, 2021 handbook recommendations. Interventions We compared AS with pharmacological and non-pharmacological interventions for different outcomes. Measurements We assessed the repercussion of the evaluated interventions over anxiety scores and their safety, physiological parameters, perioperative medications requirement and intensity of postoperative pain. Main results We have included 15 studies with 1603 patients. AS has presented reduced anxiety scores as compared to the sham control (Standardized Mean Difference (SMD) -0.72, 95% confidence interval (CI) -1.09 to −0.36, p Conclusions AS may be useful in treatment of preoperative anxiety. Due to heterogenous certainty in effect estimates, further research is needed to clarify the actual efficacy of AS for preoperative anxiety.
科研通智能强力驱动
Strongly Powered by AbleSci AI