Peripheral nerve stimulation for lower‐limb postoperative recovery: A systematic review and meta‐analysis of randomized controlled trials

IF 1.3 4区 心理学 Q3 PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY PsyCh journal Pub Date : 2024-09-17 DOI:10.1002/pchj.794
Jingxinmiao Lin, Dong Song, Yiheng Tu, Huijuan Zhang
{"title":"Peripheral nerve stimulation for lower‐limb postoperative recovery: A systematic review and meta‐analysis of randomized controlled trials","authors":"Jingxinmiao Lin, Dong Song, Yiheng Tu, Huijuan Zhang","doi":"10.1002/pchj.794","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Patients undergoing lower‐limb orthopedic surgery may experience multiple postoperative complications. Although peripheral nerve stimulation (PNS) is a promising non‐pharmacological approach that has been used in lower‐limb postoperative recovery, the clinical efficacy of PNS remains inconclusive. This study systematically searched three databases (PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library) for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that examined the treatment effects of PNSs in patients who underwent lower‐limb orthopedic surgery up to September 29, 2023. Two investigators independently identified studies, extracted data, and conducted meta‐analyses with Review Manager 5.4. The outcomes were pain relief (measured by reductions in pain intensity and analgesic consumption) and functional improvements (range of motion [ROM] and length of hospitalization [LOH]). A total of 633 patients including 321 in the experimental groups and 312 in the control groups from eight RCTs were included. PNS showed no significant effect on pain intensity, while analgesic consumption was marginally significantly reduced in the experimental group. Furthermore, no significant differences were observed regarding functional improvements in ROM or LOH after the intervention. Although PNS had no significant effect on pain relief or functional improvements, the intervention exhibited a marginally significant reduction in analgesic consumption. Future trials should be conducted with larger sample sizes, longer follow‐up periods, and more varied stimulation parameters.","PeriodicalId":20804,"journal":{"name":"PsyCh journal","volume":"210 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"PsyCh journal","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/pchj.794","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Patients undergoing lower‐limb orthopedic surgery may experience multiple postoperative complications. Although peripheral nerve stimulation (PNS) is a promising non‐pharmacological approach that has been used in lower‐limb postoperative recovery, the clinical efficacy of PNS remains inconclusive. This study systematically searched three databases (PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library) for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that examined the treatment effects of PNSs in patients who underwent lower‐limb orthopedic surgery up to September 29, 2023. Two investigators independently identified studies, extracted data, and conducted meta‐analyses with Review Manager 5.4. The outcomes were pain relief (measured by reductions in pain intensity and analgesic consumption) and functional improvements (range of motion [ROM] and length of hospitalization [LOH]). A total of 633 patients including 321 in the experimental groups and 312 in the control groups from eight RCTs were included. PNS showed no significant effect on pain intensity, while analgesic consumption was marginally significantly reduced in the experimental group. Furthermore, no significant differences were observed regarding functional improvements in ROM or LOH after the intervention. Although PNS had no significant effect on pain relief or functional improvements, the intervention exhibited a marginally significant reduction in analgesic consumption. Future trials should be conducted with larger sample sizes, longer follow‐up periods, and more varied stimulation parameters.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
外周神经刺激促进下肢术后恢复:随机对照试验的系统回顾和荟萃分析
接受下肢矫形手术的患者可能会出现多种术后并发症。尽管外周神经刺激(PNS)是一种很有前景的非药物疗法,已被用于下肢术后恢复,但其临床疗效仍无定论。本研究系统地检索了三个数据库(PubMed、Embase 和 Cochrane Library),以寻找截至 2023 年 9 月 29 日对下肢矫形手术患者进行 PNS 治疗效果研究的随机对照试验 (RCT)。两名研究人员独立鉴定了研究、提取了数据,并使用 Review Manager 5.4 进行了荟萃分析。研究结果包括疼痛缓解(以疼痛强度和镇痛药用量的减少来衡量)和功能改善(活动范围 [ROM] 和住院时间 [LOH])。八项研究共纳入了 633 名患者,其中实验组 321 人,对照组 312 人。PNS 对疼痛强度无明显影响,而实验组的镇痛药用量则略有减少。此外,干预后在 ROM 或 LOH 功能改善方面也未观察到明显差异。虽然 PNS 对疼痛缓解或功能改善没有显著影响,但干预后镇痛药用量略有明显减少。未来的试验应采用更大的样本量、更长的随访时间和更多样的刺激参数。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
PsyCh journal
PsyCh journal PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY-
CiteScore
2.70
自引率
12.50%
发文量
109
期刊介绍: PsyCh Journal, China''s first international psychology journal, publishes peer‑reviewed research articles, research reports and integrated research reviews spanning the entire spectrum of scientific psychology and its applications. PsyCh Journal is the flagship journal of the Institute of Psychology, Chinese Academy of Sciences – the only national psychology research institute in China – and reflects the high research standards of the nation. Launched in 2012, PsyCh Journal is devoted to the publication of advanced research exploring basic mechanisms of the human mind and behavior, and delivering scientific knowledge to enhance understanding of culture and society. Towards that broader goal, the Journal will provide a forum for academic exchange and a “knowledge bridge” between China and the World by showcasing high-quality, cutting-edge research related to the science and practice of psychology both within and outside of China. PsyCh Journal features original articles of both empirical and theoretical research in scientific psychology and interdisciplinary sciences, across all levels, from molecular, cellular and system, to individual, group and society. The Journal also publishes evaluative and integrative review papers on any significant research contribution in any area of scientific psychology
期刊最新文献
Unraveling the Intricacies of Curiosity: A Comprehensive Study of Its Measures in the Chinese Context. The Psychologically Rich Life Questionnaire in China. The technique of transforming symptom's symbol into emptiness: A mind-body therapy in the Chinese context. Psychometric evaluation of the Geneva Sentimentality Scale in Chinese college students. Influences of tea consumption on self-rated health and life satisfaction among older adults: Evidence from the CLHLS.
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1