Conectar
Cancer screening is a pivotal method for reducing mortality from disease, but the screening coverage is still lower than expected. Telehealth interventions demonstrated significant benefits in cancer care, yet there is currently no consensus on their impact on facilitating cancer screening or on the most effective remote technology.
A network meta-analysis was conducted to detect the impact of telehealth interventions on cancer screening and to identify the most effective teletechnologies.
Six English databases were searched from inception until July 2023 to yield relevant randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Two individual authors completed the literature selection, data extraction, and methodological evaluations using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool. Traditional pairwise analysis and network meta-analysis were performed to identify the overall effects and compare different teletechnologies.
Thirty-four eligible RCTs involving 131,644 participants were enrolled. Overall, telehealth interventions showed statistically significant effects on the improvement of cancer screening. Subgroup analyses revealed that telehealth interventions were most effective for breast and cervical cancer screening, and rural populations also experienced benefits, but there was no improvement in screening for older adults. The network meta-analysis indicated that mobile applications, video plus telephone, and text message plus telephone were associated with more obvious improvements in screening than other teletechnologies.
Our study identified that telehealth interventions were effective for the completion of cancer screening and clarified the exact impact of telehealth on different cancer types, ages, and rural populations. Mobile applications, video plus telephone, and text message plus telephone are the three forms of teletechnologies most likely to improve cancer screening. More well-designed RCTs involving direct comparisons of different teletechnologies are needed in the future.
Telehealth interventions should be encouraged to facilitate cancer screening, and the selection of the optimal teletechnology based on the characteristics of the population is also necessary.
To assess the effectiveness of different nonpharmacological treatments for severe radiation-induced oral mucositis in patients with head and neck cancer.
Radiation-induced oral mucositis is highly prevalent in patients with head and neck cancer. Current medications for radiation-induced oral mucositis are limited in effectiveness and susceptible to side effects, and while there is an increasing adoption of nonpharmacological interventions, the optimal one remains unclear.
Systematic review and network meta-analysis based on the PRISMA-NMA guidelines.
Six databases were searched. Two authors independently performed the literature screening, data extraction and methodological quality assessment of the included studies. Traditional pairwise meta-analysis was performed by R Studio. A network meta-analysis was then conducted to assess the effects of nonpharmacological interventions for severe radiation-induced oral mucositis in patients with head and neck cancer.
Fifty-two studies involving seven types of nonpharmacological interventions were enrolled. The network meta-analysis indicated that natural plant-based therapies might be the most effective, health education interventions might be the second most effective, and honey might be the third most effective interventions for reducing the incidence of severe radiation-induced oral mucositis. For reducing the incidence of severe oral mucositis-related pain, the pairwise meta-analysis showed that only natural plant-based therapies and health education interventions were effective.
Nonpharmacological interventions are effective in the management of severe radiation-induced oral mucositis among patients with head and neck cancer.
Nonpharmacological interventions are a category of safe and effective adjunctive therapies that should be encouraged in clinical practice.
CRD42023400745.
Current studies have revealed that acceptance and commitment therapy (ACT) can alleviate the adverse effects of cancer; however, its effectiveness on the psychological flexibility, fatigue, sleep disturbance, and quality of life of patients with cancer remains unclear.
The aims of this study were to identify the effectiveness of ACT on psychological flexibility, fatigue, sleep disturbance, and quality of life of patients with cancer, and to explore moderators.
PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, CENTRAL, PsycINFO, CINAHL, CNKI, VIP, and Wanfang electronic databases were searched from inception to September 29, 2022. The Cochrane Collaboration's risk-of-bias assessment tool II and the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation approach were used to evaluate evidence certainty. The data were analyzed using R Studio. The study protocol was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42022361185).
The study included 19 relevant studies (1643 patients) published between 2012 and 2022. The pooled results showed that ACT significantly improved psychological flexibility (mean difference [MD] = −4.22, 95% CI [−7.86, −0.58], p = .02) and quality of life (Hedges' g = 0.94, 95% CI [0.59, 1.29], Z = 5.31, p < .01) but did not significantly improve fatigue (Hedges' g = −0.03, 95% CI [−0.24, 0.18], p = .75) or sleep disturbance (Hedges' g = −0.26, 95% CI [−0.82, 0.30], p = .37) in patients with cancer. Additional analyses revealed a 3-month sustainable effect on psychological flexibility (MD = −4.36, 95% CI [−8.67, −0.05], p < .05), and moderation analysis showed that intervention duration (β = −1.39, p < .01) and age (β = 0.15, p = .04) moderated the effects of ACT on psychological flexibility and sleep disturbance, respectively.
Acceptance and commitment therapy demonstrates effectiveness for psychological flexibility and quality of life of patients with cancer, but there is a lack of evidence regarding its effects on fatigue and sleep disturbance. In clinical practice, ACT should be designed in more detail and rounded to achieve better results.
FreshRSS 