scholarly journals Neuropathic Pain and Rehabilitation: A Systematic Review of International Guidelines

Diagnostics ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
pp. 74
Author(s):  
Andrea Bernetti ◽  
Francesco Agostini ◽  
Alessandro de Sire ◽  
Massimiliano Mangone ◽  
Lucrezia Tognolo ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Neuropathic Pain ◽  
English Language ◽  
Pain Treatment ◽  
Rehabilitation Program ◽  
Pharmacological Intervention ◽  
Rehabilitative Treatment ◽  
Relevant Role ◽  
Rehabilitative Intervention ◽  
Somatosensory Nervous System

Background: Neuropathic pain is an injury or disease of the central and/or peripheral somatosensory nervous system, and it has a significant impact on quality of life, especially since it is often refractory to treatment. Rehabilitative intervention is considered in various guidelines on neuropathic pain treatment, although not in an organic nor detailed way. The aim of this systematic review was to analyze the most indicated therapeutic strategies, providing rehabilitative recommendations in the management of neuropathic pain. Methods: A systematic review was performed according to PRISMA guidelines. The scientific search, carried out until July 2020, considered guidelines in English language of the last thirteen years. Results: Six guidelines were analyzed, from which emerges that a multidisciplinary approach, comprehensive of pharmacologic and nonpharmacologic interventions, should drive neuropathic pain management. A relevant role in non-pharmacological intervention is played by rehabilitation, through an adequate tailored rehabilitation program and physical therapies. Conclusion: This analysis highlights the importance of rehabilitation but also the lack of evidence on various rehabilitative practices. Arises hence the need for further studies in this field to better define a rehabilitative treatment strategy.

Effectiveness of mHealth Interventions on Physical Activity and Physical Fitness in Outpatient and Home-Based Cardiac Rehabilitation Programs: A Systematic Review (Preprint)

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sheeba Nadarajah ◽  
Susan Buchholz ◽  
Kristen Dickins
Keyword(s):  
Physical Activity ◽  
Systematic Review ◽  
Physical Fitness ◽  
Cardiac Rehabilitation ◽  
Text Messaging ◽  
English Language ◽  
Rehabilitation Program ◽  
Cardiac Rehabilitation Program ◽  
Mixed Effect ◽  
Home Based

BACKGROUND Globally, cardiovascular disease is the leading cause of death. Cardiovascular mortality can be decreased by participation in cardiac rehabilitation. Researchers are exploring the use of mHealth technology in cardiac rehabilitation. OBJECTIVE The aim of this systematic review is to examine the effectiveness of randomized controlled trials that use a mHealth intervention as a part of an outpatient and/or home-based cardiac rehabilitation program on improving physical activity and physical fitness outcomes. METHODS For this systematic review, mHealth interventions were limited to text messaging, mobile apps, and use of a mobile phone network for data transmission, used to deliver cardiac rehabilitation program. Using six databases, the search strategy included published English language studies through 2016. Data was extracted independently by two reviewers, and then synthesized. RESULTS The initial search yielded 149 articles, of which 15 articles that represented nine studies met inclusion criteria. Articles were published from 2010 to 2016 and came from two continents. The majority (84%) of participants were male. Generally, the participant mean age was late 50s to early 60s. Text messaging was the most frequently used intervention. The results of the physical activity and physical fitness findings were mixed. Effect sizes for intervention as measured by the 6-minute walk test ranged from 0.46 to 0.58 and peak VO2 ranged from 0.03 to 1.35. CONCLUSIONS Globally, use of mHealth in outpatient and/or home-based cardiac rehabilitation is being studied with greater attention. However, these studies are limited by geography, gender, and age. Therefore, further research in the area of cardiac rehabilitation and mHealth is recommended, especially in developing countries, among women, and older adults.

scholarly journals Food-Derived Natural Compounds for Pain Relief in Neuropathic Pain

2016 ◽  
Vol 2016 ◽  
pp. 1-12 ◽  
Author(s):  
Eun Yeong Lim ◽  
Yun Tai Kim
Keyword(s):  
Neuropathic Pain ◽  
Pain Relief ◽  
Immune Responses ◽  
Pain Treatment ◽  
Physical Dependence ◽  
Natural Compounds ◽  
Number Of Patients ◽  
Potential Benefits ◽  
Somatosensory Nervous System ◽  
Injury Causes

Neuropathic pain, defined as pain caused by a lesion or disease of the somatosensory nervous system, is characterized by dysesthesia, hyperalgesia, and allodynia. The number of patients with this type of pain has increased rapidly in recent years. Yet, available neuropathic pain medicines have undesired side effects, such as tolerance and physical dependence, and do not fully alleviate the pain. The mechanisms of neuropathic pain are still not fully understood. Injury causes inflammation and immune responses and changed expression and activity of receptors and ion channels in peripheral nerve terminals. Additionally, neuroinflammation is a known factor in the development and maintenance of neuropathic pain. During neuropathic pain development, the C-C motif chemokine receptor 2 (CCR2) acts as an important signaling mediator. Traditional plant treatments have been used throughout the world for treating diseases. We and others have identified food-derived compounds that alleviate neuropathic pain. Here, we review the natural compounds for neuropathic pain relief, their mechanisms of action, and the potential benefits of natural compounds with antagonistic effects on GPCRs, especially those containing CCR2, for neuropathic pain treatment.

scholarly journals Neuropathic Pain in Acute and Subacute Neuropathies: A Systematic Review

2018 ◽  
Vol 1 (21;1) ◽  
pp. 111-120 ◽  
Author(s):  
Artemios K. Artemiadis
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Neuropathic Pain ◽  
Observational Studies ◽  
Search Strategy ◽  
Diagnostic Tools ◽  
Common Symptom ◽  
Peripheral Neuropathies ◽  
Inclusion Criteria ◽  
Medline Search ◽  
Somatosensory Nervous System

Background: Neuropathic pain (NP) is a common symptom caused by lesions or diseases of the somatosensory nervous system. Acute/subacute peripheral neuropathies (APN) are rare, however can be particularly painful. Objectives: The aim of this systematic review was to estimate the incidence of NP in APN and overview the various etiologies of such neuropathies. Study Design: Systematic review. Setting: Medline search. Methods: We hand-searched Medline for observational studies published between 1995 and 2017. Results: Our search strategy identified 1,400 papers. Of these, 70 met our inclusion criteria and were included in this review. Out of a total of 2,341 patients, 1,139 patients were diagnosed with NP (pooled incidence of NP 48.7%). In Guillain-Barré syndrome (GBS), the commonest cause of APN, the pooled estimate of NP was 34.8%. Other causes of painful APN include immunemediated, vasculitic, metabolic, nutritional, toxic, paraneoplastic, and infectious. Limitations: An important limitation was that GBS accounted for the majority of patients with APN, as such the calculated incidence reflected mainly this disease entity. Another important limitation was that very few studies targeted primarily NP. Thus, it is highly likely that observational studies reporting NP were missed. Finally there could always be a publication bias due to underreporting and gray literature. Conclusions: NP is a cardinal manifestation of APN. The use of validated diagnostic tools and accepted diagnostic criteria of NP is recommended for both clinical and research purposes. Key words: Neuropathic, pain, acute, subacute, neuropathy, polyneuropathy, frequency, incidence

scholarly journals SYSTEMATIC REVIEW ON THE PSYCHOMETRIC, RELIABILITY AND VALIDITY PROPERTIES OF TRANSLATED NEUROPATHIC PAIN SCREENING TOOLS (DN4, LANSS AND PDQ) 1 JANUARY 2005 – 19 JULY 2019

2021 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
pp. 51-67
Author(s):  
T. R. Fagbohun
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Neuropathic Pain ◽  
Sensitivity And Specificity ◽  
English Language ◽  
Reliability And Validity ◽  
High Sensitivity ◽  
Screening Tools ◽  
Internal Reliability ◽  
Good Internal Consistency ◽  
Local Languages

Background. Different neuropathic pain screening tools (DN4, LANSS and PDQ) have been developed, translated into several local languages, and validated. To determine the reliability of these tools and their ability to differentiate between diagnosing neuropathic pain quality from nociceptive pain, a systematic review was conducted to synchronize properties and suggest the reliability of the translated version of these neuropathic pain-screening tools. Objective. To conduct an evidence-based systematic review to assess the psychometric, reliability and validity of the translated version of DN4, LANSS and PDQ between January 2005 and 2019. Methods. Two independent reviewers adopted the use of online (Internet) search machine (Pubmed, Scopus and Web of science) to search for the relevant articles based on JBI (Joanna Briggs Institute) inclusion criteria. Data extracted from the articles were synthesis in tabular form. Results. Twenty-six articles were included from DN4 (n=11), LANSS (n=8) and PDQ (n=4) translated from English language to eight local languages. The sensitivity and specificity of the DN4 studies ranged from 75% to 98% and 37.3% to 96%, respectively. The internal reliability (α) of the translated version of the DN4 ranged from 0.55-0.862. The sensitivity and specificity of the LANSS studies ranged from 75% to 98% and 37.3% to 96%, respectively. The internal reliability (α) of the translated version of the LANSS ranged 0.67-0.96. The sensitivity and specificity of the PDQ studies ranged from 75% to 98% and 37.3% to 96%, respectively. The internal reliability (α) of the translated version of the PDQ ranged 0.81-0.86. Conclusions. All the translated instruments reviewed showed good internal consistency of the items, high sensitivity and Positive predictive value (PPV) but not to a suitable level compared with the original version. Therefore, these screening tools are suggested to be used in conjunction with the clinical testing for appropriate diagnosis of patients with neuropathic pain quality.

scholarly journals Neuropathic pain treatment between drug therapy and supplement effects

2019 ◽  
Vol 8 (11) ◽  
pp. 2573
Author(s):  
Mohammed Abdul Muttalib
Keyword(s):  
Neuropathic Pain ◽  
Pain Treatment ◽  
Medical Condition ◽  
Medical Procedure ◽  
Over The Counter ◽  
Cell Systems ◽  
Serious Illness ◽  
Topical Lidocaine ◽  
Somatosensory Nervous System ◽  
Strong Medicine

Neuropathic pain (NP) is a medical condition induced by diseases or lesions in the primary or inner cell systems that influence somatosensory nervous system buildings. Central NP, including backbone pain; multiple sclerosis, is recurrent. NP has an important impact on the life of patients and a strong economic impact on people and the society. some small neuropathy responds like a NSAID, aspirin and ibuprofen to an over-the-counter drug. More strong medicine (such as anti-depressants and serotonin-epinephrine reuptake inhibitors), anticonvulsants (pregabalin and gabapentin), and topical lidocaine-these are recognized as the most advanced neuropathical treatment-is also needed for other serious circumstances to increase ache leadership. Supplemental drugs, such as beta lipoic acid, acetyl-L-carnitine, benfotiamine, taurine and others, have been studied for neuropathic pain relieve under doctors to guarantee safe use and not bring any medicines that may interact with the dietary supplement. A medical procedure has been investigated for a neuro-lipoic pain relief. In specific, owing to the power of drug contrast with alternative products and owing to the effect of some drugs, it was considered that the drugs are (in spite of their side effects) more helpful and efficient to relieve neuropathic pain than the option, since neuropathic pain represents a serious illness and needs a more strong and effective therapy technology (particularly in severe cases).

scholarly journals B12 as a Treatment for Peripheral Neuropathic Pain: A Systematic Review

Nutrients ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 12 (8) ◽  
pp. 2221
Author(s):  
Thomas Julian ◽  
Rubiya Syeed ◽  
Nicholas Glascow ◽  
Efthalia Angelopoulou ◽  
Panagiotis Zis
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Systematic Review ◽  
Nervous System ◽  
Neuropathic Pain ◽  
Post Herpetic Neuralgia ◽  
Peripheral Neuropathic Pain ◽  
Treatment Regimens ◽  
Level Ii ◽  
Somatosensory Nervous System

Neuropathic pain describes a range of unpleasant sensations caused by a lesion or disease of the somatosensory nervous system. The sensations caused by neuropathic pain are debilitating and improved treatment regimens are sought in order to improve the quality of life of patients. One proposed treatment for neuropathic pain is vitamin B12, which is thought to alleviate pain by a number of mechanisms including promoting myelination, increasing nerve regeneration and decreasing ectopic nerve firing. In this paper, the evidence for B12 as a drug treatment for neuropathic pain is reviewed. Twenty four published articles were eligible for inclusion in this systematic review in which a range of treatment regimens were evaluated including both B12 monotherapy and B12 in combination with other vitamins or conventional treatments, such as gabapentinoids. Overall, this systematic review demonstrates that there is currently some evidence for the therapeutic effect of B12 in the treatment of post-herpetic neuralgia (level II evidence) and the treatment of painful peripheral neuropathy (level III evidence).

Chasing the Anchor: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Perceptual Anchoring Deficits in Developmental Dyslexia

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kurt D Shulver ◽  
Nicholas A Badcock
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Reading Ability ◽  
English Language ◽  
Prediction Interval ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Visual Assessment ◽  
Individual Performance ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Significant Heterogeneity ◽  
Eligibility Criteria

We report the results of a systematic review and meta-analysis investigating the relationship between perceptual anchoring and dyslexia. Our goal was to assess the direction and degree of effect between perceptual anchoring and reading ability in typical and atypical (dyslexic) readers. We performed a literature search of experiments explicitly assessing perceptual anchoring and reading ability using PsycInfo (Ovid, 1860 to 2020), MEDLINE (Ovid, 1860 to 2019), EMBASE (Ovid, 1883 to 2019), and PubMed for all available years up to June (2020). Our eligibility criteria consisted of English-language articles and, at minimum, one experimental group identified as dyslexic - either by reading assessment at the time, or by previous diagnosis. We assessed for risk of bias using an adapted version of the Newcastle-Ottawa scale. Six studies were included in this review, but only five (n = 280 participants) were included in the meta-analysis (we were unable to access the necessary data for one study).The overall effect was negative, large and statistically significant; g = -0.87, 95% CI [-1.47, 0.27]: a negative effect size indicating less perceptual anchoring in dyslexic versus non-dyslexic groups. Visual assessment of funnel plot and Egger’s test suggest minimal bias but with significant heterogeneity; Q (4) = 9.70, PI (prediction interval) [-2.32, -0.58]. The primary limitation of the current review is the small number of included studies. We discuss methodological limitations, such as limited power, and how future research may redress these concerns. The variability of effect sizes appears consistent with the inherent variability within subtypes of dyslexia. This level of dispersion seems indicative of the how we define cut-off thresholds between typical reading and dyslexia populations, but also the methodological tools we use to investigate individual performance.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document