Safety and efficacy of mesotherapy in musculoskeletal disorders: A systematic review of randomized controlled trials with meta-analysis

OBJECTIVES: To conduct a systematic review of randomized controlled trials about the safety (number and severity of adverse events) and efficacy (pain reduction and functional improvement) of mesotherapy in musculoskeletal disorders, and to compare them with other therapeutic options, in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) statement.METHODS: A search of PubMed, Cochrane Library and Scopus database resulted in an initial total of 16,253 records. A total of 931 articles were included in the study. A final total of 7 articles, published from 1 Jan 1999 until 30 Apr 2020 were selected. Two independent reviewers selected potentially relevant studies based on the inclusion criteria for full-text reading. They evaluated the methodological quality of each study and included only studies of high methodological quality, according to the Physiotherapy Evidence Database scale.RESULTS: Seven studies were included in the meta-analysis, and visual analogue scale scores before and after mesotherapy were considered. A statistically significant reduction in visual analogue scale score in the mesotherapy group was reported in comparison with the control group in all except 1 of the trials. Mesotherapy was found to be a safe procedure with mild and temporary side-effects, such as nausea, fatigue, numbness, sweating, headache, ecchymosis, bleeding, pain and local reaction at the injection site.CONCLUSION: Mesotherapy proved to be more effective than systemic therapy in the treatment of local pain and functional limitations caused by a variety of musculoskeletal conditions. However, because of the heterogeneity of the analysed studies in terms of injected drugs, administration technique, associated treatments, frequency and total number of sessions, more randomized controlled trials are needed, comparing a standardized mesotherapy protocol with a systemic treatments

Are workplace health promotion programs effective at improving presenteeism in workers? a systematic review and best evidence synthesis of the literature

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p><it>Presenteeism </it>is highly prevalent and costly to employers. It is defined as being present at work, but limited in some aspect of job performance by a health problem.</p> <p>Workplace health promotion (WHP) is a common strategy used to enhance on-the-job productivity. The primary objective is to determine if WHP programs are effective in improving presenteeism. The secondary objectives are to identify characteristics of successful programs and potential risk factors for presenteeism.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>The Cochrane Library, Medline, and other electronic databases were searched from 1990 to 2010. Reference lists were examined, key journals were hand-searched and experts were contacted. Included studies were original research that contained data on at least 20 participants (≥ 18 years of age), and examined the impacts of WHP programs implemented at the workplace. The <it>Effective Public Health Practice Project Tool for Quantitative Studies </it>was used to rate studies. 'Strong' and 'moderate' studies were abstracted into evidence tables, and a best evidence synthesis was performed. Interventions were deemed successful if they improved the outcome of interest. Their program components were identified, as were possible risk factors contributing to presenteeism.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>After 2,032 titles and abstracts were screened, 47 articles were reviewed, and 14 were accepted (4 strong and 10 moderate studies). These studies contained preliminary evidence for a positive effect of some WHP programs. Successful programs offered organizational leadership, health risk screening, individually tailored programs, and a supportive workplace culture. Potential risk factors contributing to presenteeism included being overweight, a poor diet, a lack of exercise, high stress, and poor relations with co-workers and management. Limitations: This review is limited to English publications. A large number of reviewed studies (70%) were inadmissible due to issues of bias, thus limiting the amount of primary evidence. The uncertainties surrounding presenteeism measurement is of significant concern as a source of bias.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>The presenteeism literature is young and heterogeneous. There is preliminary evidence that some WHP programs can positively affect presenteeism and that certain risk factors are of importance. Future research would benefit from standard presenteeism metrics and studies conducted across a broad range of workplace settings.</p

Bacterial biofilm associated with a case of capsular contracture

Capsular contracture is one of the most common complications of implant-based breast augmentation. Despite its prevalence, the etiology of capsular contracture remains controversial although the surface texture of the breast implant, the anatomical position of the prosthesis and the presence of bacterial biofilm could be considered trigger factors. In fact, all medical implants are susceptible to bacterial colonization and biofilm formation. The present study demonstrated the presence of microbial biofilm constituted by cocci in a breast implant obtained from a patient with Baker grade II capsular contracture. This suggests that subclinical infection can be present and involved in low-grade capsular contracture

Effects of hyaluronic acid injections on pain and functioning in patients affected by tendinopathies: a narrative review

BACKGROUND: Tendinopathies are overuse tendon injuries showing load-dependant pain, stiffness, weakness of movement in the affected area, and impairment in the movements. The scientific interest on the role of Hyaluronic Acid (HA) for the management of tendinopathies has been increased due to its anti-inflammatory and lubricative properties. OBJECTIVE: To collect evidence regarding the effectiveness and safety of HA injections in reducing pain in patients affected by tendinopathies. METHODS: A scientific literature search was conducted using the PubMed, Medline and PEDro electronic databases. The databases were searched since their inception until July 2021. The search was limited to English language articles. Different combinations of the terms and MeSH terms 'tendinopathy', 'tendinosis', 'tendinitis', 'hyaluronic acid', 'hyaluronate', 'infiltration', 'hyaluronic injections', 'viscosupplementation' connected with various boolean operators were used for other electronic databases. RESULTS: One hundred and one records were identified from the selected databases plus three additional papers identified by the authors through other sources. After removing duplicated papers and title/abstract screening, 19 studies were included in our review (eight papers on shoulder, three on elbow, four on hand, one on knee, and three on ankle). CONCLUSION: The results showed that none of the studies report severe adverse effects and most of them support the use of HA injections in tendinopathies, with a special attention to pain reduction and functional assessment. Further studies are warranted to better investigate effects and methods of administration of HA in tendinopathies

Identifying factors likely to influence compliance with diagnostic imaging guideline recommendations for spine disorders among chiropractors in North America: a focus group study using the Theoretical Domains Framework

Background: The Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF) was developed to investigate determinants of specific clinical behaviors and inform the design of interventions to change professional behavior. This framework was used to explore the beliefs of chiropractors in an American Provider Network and two Canadian provinces about their adherence to evidence-based recommendations for spine radiography for uncomplicated back pain. The primary objective of the study was to identify chiropractors’ beliefs about managing uncomplicated back pain without xrays and to explore barriers and facilitators to implementing evidence-based recommendations on lumbar spine xrays. A secondary objective was to compare chiropractors in the United States and Canada on their beliefs regarding the use of spine x-rays. Methods: Six focus groups exploring beliefs about managing back pain without x-rays were conducted with a purposive sample. The interview guide was based upon the TDF. Focus groups were digitally recorded, transcribed verbatim, and analyzed by two independent assessors using thematic content analysis based on the TDF. Results: Five domains were identified as likely relevant. Key beliefs within these domains included the following: conflicting comments about the potential consequences of not ordering x-rays (risk of missing a pathology, avoiding adverse treatment effects, risks of litigation, determining the treatment plan, and using x-ray-driven techniques contrasted with perceived benefits of minimizing patient radiation exposure and reducing costs; beliefs about consequences); beliefs regarding professional autonomy, professional credibility, lack of standardization, and agreement with guidelines widely varied (social/professional role & identity); the influence of formal training, colleagues, and patients also appeared to be important factors (social influences); conflicting comments regarding levels of confidence and comfort in managing patients without x-rays (belief about capabilities); and guideline awareness and agreements (knowledge). Conclusions: Chiropractors’ use of diagnostic imaging appears to be influenced by a number of factors. Five key domains may be important considering the presence of conflicting beliefs, evidence of strong beliefs likely to impact the behavior of interest, and high frequency of beliefs. The results will inform the development of a theorybased survey to help identify potential targets for behavioral-change strategies

Adherence to spinal imaging guidelines and utilization of lumbar spine diagnostic imaging for low back pain at a Canadian Chiropractic College: A historical clinical cohort study

Background Diagnostic imaging is useful for assessing low back pain (LBP) when a clinician suspects a specific underlying pathology. Evidence-based imaging guidelines assist clinicians in appropriately determining the need for imaging when assessing LBP. A previous study reported high adherence to three clinical guidelines, with utilization rate of 12.3% in imaging of LBP patients attending a chiropractic teaching clinic. A new imaging guideline for spinal disorders has been published and used in teaching. Thus, the aims of our study were to assess the adherence to the new guideline and X-ray utilization in new episodes of LBP. Methods We conducted a historical clinical cohort study using patient electronic health record audits at seven teaching clinics over a period of 20 months. Records of patients who were at least 18 years of age, presented with a new onset of LBP, and consented to data collection were included. Abstracted data included patient demographics, the number and type of red flags, and the decision to image. Rate of guideline adherence (proportion of those not recommended for imaging, given no red flags) and rate of image utilization were descriptively analyzed. Results We included 498 patients in this study. At least 81% of included patients had one or more red flags reported. The most commonly reported individual red flag was age ≥ 50 (43.8%) followed by pain at rest (15.7%). In those referred for imaging, age ≥ 50 (93.3%) was the most frequently reported red flag. No red flag(s) were identified in 93 patient records, and none were referred for imaging of their LBP, yielding an adherence rate of 100% (95% CI 96, 100%). A total of 17 of 498 patients were recommended for imaging for their low back pain, resulting in an imaging utilization rate of 3.4% (95% CI 1.8, 5.0%). Conclusion The imaging utilization rate was 3.4%, lower than 12.3% previously reported at a chiropractic teaching clinic. None without red flags were referred for imaging, yielding a 100%, adherence rate to current LBP imaging guidelines. Future research should consider currency of guideline, accuracy of red flags and factors influencing clinicians’ decision, when assessing imaging adherence rates