神经肌肉电刺激对慢性阻塞性肺病急性加重患者的疗效:系统回顾和荟萃分析。

IF 1.5 Q3 REHABILITATION
Kazuki Okura, Tadayoshi Nonoyama, Manaka Shibuya, Shuhei Yamamoto, Shohei Kawachi, Kenichi Nishie, Katsutoshi Nakayama
{"title":"神经肌肉电刺激对慢性阻塞性肺病急性加重患者的疗效:系统回顾和荟萃分析。","authors":"Kazuki Okura, Tadayoshi Nonoyama, Manaka Shibuya, Shuhei Yamamoto, Shohei Kawachi, Kenichi Nishie, Katsutoshi Nakayama","doi":"10.1002/pri.2076","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background and purpose: </strong>This study aimed to investigate the effectiveness and acceptability of neuromuscular electrical stimulation (NMES) in patients with acute exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to investigate the effectiveness and accessibility of NMES and compared them with usual care in patients with acute exacerbation of COPD by searching databases such as MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials published up to April 2022. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) involving patients with COPD who were treated within 3 weeks of acute exacerbation onset were included. The risk of bias was assessed using the RoB 2 tools. We pooled limb muscle strength and adverse events and performed a comparison between NMES and usual care. The quality of evidence was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation approach.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Five RCTs, including 168 patients, met the eligibility criteria. The meta-analysis showed that limb muscle strength was significantly higher in the NMES group (four studies with 148 patients; standardized mean difference, 0.95; 95% confidence interval, 0.60-1.30; p < 0.001). The quality of evidence was very low due to the risk of bias within the studies, imprecision of the estimates, and small number of studies. Any adverse events served as outcomes in three studies (86 patients), although no adverse events occurred.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>NMES is safe for patients with acute exacerbation of COPD and may maintain and improve limb muscle strength; however, the quality of evidence was very low.</p>","PeriodicalId":47243,"journal":{"name":"Physiotherapy Research International","volume":"29 2","pages":"e2076"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Effectiveness of neuromuscular electrical stimulation in patients with acute exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: A systematic review and meta-analysis.\",\"authors\":\"Kazuki Okura, Tadayoshi Nonoyama, Manaka Shibuya, Shuhei Yamamoto, Shohei Kawachi, Kenichi Nishie, Katsutoshi Nakayama\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/pri.2076\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background and purpose: </strong>This study aimed to investigate the effectiveness and acceptability of neuromuscular electrical stimulation (NMES) in patients with acute exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to investigate the effectiveness and accessibility of NMES and compared them with usual care in patients with acute exacerbation of COPD by searching databases such as MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials published up to April 2022. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) involving patients with COPD who were treated within 3 weeks of acute exacerbation onset were included. The risk of bias was assessed using the RoB 2 tools. We pooled limb muscle strength and adverse events and performed a comparison between NMES and usual care. The quality of evidence was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation approach.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Five RCTs, including 168 patients, met the eligibility criteria. The meta-analysis showed that limb muscle strength was significantly higher in the NMES group (four studies with 148 patients; standardized mean difference, 0.95; 95% confidence interval, 0.60-1.30; p < 0.001). The quality of evidence was very low due to the risk of bias within the studies, imprecision of the estimates, and small number of studies. Any adverse events served as outcomes in three studies (86 patients), although no adverse events occurred.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>NMES is safe for patients with acute exacerbation of COPD and may maintain and improve limb muscle strength; however, the quality of evidence was very low.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":47243,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Physiotherapy Research International\",\"volume\":\"29 2\",\"pages\":\"e2076\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-04-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Physiotherapy Research International\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1002/pri.2076\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"REHABILITATION\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Physiotherapy Research International","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/pri.2076","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"REHABILITATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景和目的:本研究旨在探讨神经肌肉电刺激(NMES)对慢性阻塞性肺疾病(COPD)急性加重期患者的有效性和可接受性:我们通过检索 MEDLINE、EMBASE 和 Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials 等数据库(截至 2022 年 4 月),对 NMES 的有效性和可接受性进行了系统回顾和荟萃分析,并与常规护理进行了比较。纳入的随机对照试验(RCT)涉及在急性加重发作后 3 周内接受治疗的慢性阻塞性肺病患者。使用RoB 2工具评估了偏倚风险。我们对肢体肌肉力量和不良事件进行了汇总,并对 NMES 和常规护理进行了比较。证据质量采用建议、评估、发展和评价分级法进行评估:五项研究性临床试验(包括 168 名患者)符合资格标准。荟萃分析表明,NMES 组的肢体肌力明显更高(4 项研究,148 名患者;标准化平均差异,0.95;95% 置信区间,0.60-1.30;P 结论:NMES 对急性期患者是安全的:NMES 对慢性阻塞性肺病急性加重患者是安全的,并可维持和改善肢体肌力;但证据质量很低。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Effectiveness of neuromuscular electrical stimulation in patients with acute exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Background and purpose: This study aimed to investigate the effectiveness and acceptability of neuromuscular electrical stimulation (NMES) in patients with acute exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD).

Methods: We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to investigate the effectiveness and accessibility of NMES and compared them with usual care in patients with acute exacerbation of COPD by searching databases such as MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials published up to April 2022. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) involving patients with COPD who were treated within 3 weeks of acute exacerbation onset were included. The risk of bias was assessed using the RoB 2 tools. We pooled limb muscle strength and adverse events and performed a comparison between NMES and usual care. The quality of evidence was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation approach.

Results: Five RCTs, including 168 patients, met the eligibility criteria. The meta-analysis showed that limb muscle strength was significantly higher in the NMES group (four studies with 148 patients; standardized mean difference, 0.95; 95% confidence interval, 0.60-1.30; p < 0.001). The quality of evidence was very low due to the risk of bias within the studies, imprecision of the estimates, and small number of studies. Any adverse events served as outcomes in three studies (86 patients), although no adverse events occurred.

Conclusion: NMES is safe for patients with acute exacerbation of COPD and may maintain and improve limb muscle strength; however, the quality of evidence was very low.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.30
自引率
5.90%
发文量
53
期刊介绍: Physiotherapy Research International is an international peer reviewed journal dedicated to the exchange of knowledge that is directly relevant to specialist areas of physiotherapy theory, practice, and research. Our aim is to promote a high level of scholarship and build on the current evidence base to inform the advancement of the physiotherapy profession. We publish original research on a wide range of topics e.g. Primary research testing new physiotherapy treatments; methodological research; measurement and outcome research and qualitative research of interest to researchers, clinicians and educators. Further, we aim to publish high quality papers that represent the range of cultures and settings where physiotherapy services are delivered. We attract a wide readership from physiotherapists and others working in diverse clinical and academic settings. We aim to promote an international debate amongst the profession about current best evidence based practice. Papers are directed primarily towards the physiotherapy profession, but can be relevant to a wide range of professional groups. The growth of interdisciplinary research is also key to our aims and scope, and we encourage relevant submissions from other professional groups. The journal actively encourages submissions which utilise a breadth of different methodologies and research designs to facilitate addressing key questions related to the physiotherapy practice. PRI seeks to encourage good quality topical debates on a range of relevant issues and promote critical reflection on decision making and implementation of physiotherapy interventions.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信