Effectiveness of Nonpharmacologic Treatments of Burning Mouth Syndrome: A Systematic Review.

IF 16.4 1区 化学 Q1 CHEMISTRY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY Accounts of Chemical Research Pub Date : 2021-06-01 DOI:10.11607/ofph.2868
Marco Cabras, Alessio Gambino, Roberto Broccoletti, Simona De Paola, Savino Sciascia, Paolo G Arduino
{"title":"Effectiveness of Nonpharmacologic Treatments of Burning Mouth Syndrome: A Systematic Review.","authors":"Marco Cabras, Alessio Gambino, Roberto Broccoletti, Simona De Paola, Savino Sciascia, Paolo G Arduino","doi":"10.11607/ofph.2868","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"AIMS\nTo assess the efficacy of nonpharmacologic treatments for burning mouth syndrome (BMS).\n\n\nMETHODS\nPubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were systematically searched. Reference lists from the latest systematic reviews (2015 to 2020) on BMS treatment in the PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library databases were also scrutinized. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) or clinical controlled trials (CCTs) in English were considered eligible. Trials on photobiomodulation were excluded to avoid redundancy with recent publications. Risk of bias was established through the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool for RCTs and the Risk of Bias in Nonrandomized Studies of Interventions (ROBINS-I) tool for CCTs.\n\n\nRESULTS\nThis review included 27 RCTs and 6 open clinical trials (OCTs) describing 14 different nonpharmacologic interventions. Eleven trials experimented with 600 to 800 mg/day of alpha-lipoic acid for 30 to 120 days, with 7 placebo-controlled studies showing significant pain relief. Four trials tested topical and systemic capsaicin for 7 to 30 days, with 2 placebo-controlled studies revealing significant efficacy. Four of the 5 trials testing acupuncture offered favorable evidence of pain relief. Two trials reported significant pain relief after a 2- to 3-month regimen with tongue protectors and showed no difference after aloe vera addition. Short-term pain relief was reported in anecdotal placebo-controlled trials deploying tocopherol, catuama, ultramicronized palmitoylethanolamide, group psychotherapy, cognitive therapy, and repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation of the prefrontal cortex. Most therapies were safe.\n\n\nCONCLUSION\nEvidence was collected from highly biased, short-term, heterogenous studies mainly focused on BMS-related pain, with scarce data on quality of life, psychologic status, dysgeusia, and xerostomia. Long-term effectiveness of nonpharmacologic treatments should be further investigated, with a more rigorous, bias-proof study design.","PeriodicalId":1,"journal":{"name":"Accounts of Chemical Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":16.4000,"publicationDate":"2021-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Accounts of Chemical Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.11607/ofph.2868","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"化学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CHEMISTRY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

AIMS To assess the efficacy of nonpharmacologic treatments for burning mouth syndrome (BMS). METHODS PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were systematically searched. Reference lists from the latest systematic reviews (2015 to 2020) on BMS treatment in the PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library databases were also scrutinized. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) or clinical controlled trials (CCTs) in English were considered eligible. Trials on photobiomodulation were excluded to avoid redundancy with recent publications. Risk of bias was established through the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool for RCTs and the Risk of Bias in Nonrandomized Studies of Interventions (ROBINS-I) tool for CCTs. RESULTS This review included 27 RCTs and 6 open clinical trials (OCTs) describing 14 different nonpharmacologic interventions. Eleven trials experimented with 600 to 800 mg/day of alpha-lipoic acid for 30 to 120 days, with 7 placebo-controlled studies showing significant pain relief. Four trials tested topical and systemic capsaicin for 7 to 30 days, with 2 placebo-controlled studies revealing significant efficacy. Four of the 5 trials testing acupuncture offered favorable evidence of pain relief. Two trials reported significant pain relief after a 2- to 3-month regimen with tongue protectors and showed no difference after aloe vera addition. Short-term pain relief was reported in anecdotal placebo-controlled trials deploying tocopherol, catuama, ultramicronized palmitoylethanolamide, group psychotherapy, cognitive therapy, and repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation of the prefrontal cortex. Most therapies were safe. CONCLUSION Evidence was collected from highly biased, short-term, heterogenous studies mainly focused on BMS-related pain, with scarce data on quality of life, psychologic status, dysgeusia, and xerostomia. Long-term effectiveness of nonpharmacologic treatments should be further investigated, with a more rigorous, bias-proof study design.
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
非药物治疗灼口综合征的疗效:系统综述。
目的:评价非药物治疗灼口综合征(BMS)的疗效。方法:系统检索PubMed、Scopus、Web of Science和Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials。还仔细检查了PubMed、Scopus、Web of Science和Cochrane图书馆数据库中关于BMS治疗的最新系统评价(2015年至2020年)的参考文献列表。随机对照试验(RCTs)或临床对照试验(CCTs)在英语中被认为是合格的。光生物调节的试验被排除在外,以避免与最近的出版物重复。通过Cochrane随机对照试验的偏倚风险工具和随机对照试验的非随机干预研究的偏倚风险(ROBINS-I)工具确定偏倚风险。结果:本综述包括27项随机对照试验和6项开放式临床试验(OCTs),描述了14种不同的非药物干预措施。11项试验以600至800毫克/天的α -硫辛酸为剂量,持续30至120天,其中7项安慰剂对照研究显示显著缓解疼痛。四项试验测试了局部和全身辣椒素7至30天,其中两项安慰剂对照研究显示显着的疗效。5项针灸试验中有4项提供了缓解疼痛的有利证据。两项试验报告在使用护舌器2至3个月后疼痛明显缓解,而添加芦荟后无差异。在轶事安慰剂对照试验中,使用生育酚、卡图马、超微化棕榈酰乙醇酰胺、团体心理治疗、认知疗法和重复经颅磁刺激前额皮质,短期疼痛得到缓解。大多数疗法都是安全的。结论:证据收集自高度偏倚、短期、异质性的研究,主要集中于bms相关疼痛,缺乏生活质量、心理状态、语言障碍和口干的数据。非药物治疗的长期有效性应进一步研究,更严格,无偏倚的研究设计。
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
Accounts of Chemical Research
Accounts of Chemical Research 化学-化学综合
CiteScore
31.40
自引率
1.10%
发文量
312
审稿时长
2 months
期刊介绍: Accounts of Chemical Research presents short, concise and critical articles offering easy-to-read overviews of basic research and applications in all areas of chemistry and biochemistry. These short reviews focus on research from the author’s own laboratory and are designed to teach the reader about a research project. In addition, Accounts of Chemical Research publishes commentaries that give an informed opinion on a current research problem. Special Issues online are devoted to a single topic of unusual activity and significance. Accounts of Chemical Research replaces the traditional article abstract with an article "Conspectus." These entries synopsize the research affording the reader a closer look at the content and significance of an article. Through this provision of a more detailed description of the article contents, the Conspectus enhances the article's discoverability by search engines and the exposure for the research.
期刊最新文献
Management of Cholesteatoma: Hearing Rehabilitation. Congenital Cholesteatoma. Evaluation of Cholesteatoma. Management of Cholesteatoma: Extension Beyond Middle Ear/Mastoid. Recidivism and Recurrence.
×
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