PICO question In calves undergoing castration without local or general anaesthesia, do non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) licensed for use in cattle in the UK administered either before, during or after the procedure reduce signs of postoperative pain? Clinical bottom line Category of research question Treatment The number and type of study designs reviewed Twenty studies were critically appraised. All were controlled trials, of which 17 were randomised. Only NSAIDs licensed for use in cattle in the UK were included in the search strategy and in appraised papers Strength of evidence Moderate Outcomes reported Five studies reported an improvement in both physiological and behavioural indicators of postcastration pain following NSAID administration and a further eight reported improvements in either physiological or behavioural parameters. Seven studies found no improvements in pain indicators Conclusion There is moderate evidence to suggest that NSAID administration before, during or after castration is able to reduce the signs of postoperative pain in calves castrated without anaesthesia. The degree to which pain is reduced is variable and depends upon factors including but not limited to castration method, specific NSAID given, dosage, administration and calf age
{"title":"Does UK licensed NSAID administration reduce signs of postoperative pain in calves castrated without local anaesthesia?","authors":"Alexandra Bartlett","doi":"10.18849/VE.V6I3.452","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.18849/VE.V6I3.452","url":null,"abstract":"PICO question \u0000In calves undergoing castration without local or general anaesthesia, do non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) licensed for use in cattle in the UK administered either before, during or after the procedure reduce signs of postoperative pain? \u0000 \u0000Clinical bottom line \u0000Category of research question \u0000Treatment \u0000The number and type of study designs reviewed \u0000Twenty studies were critically appraised. All were controlled trials, of which 17 were randomised. Only NSAIDs licensed for use in cattle in the UK were included in the search strategy and in appraised papers \u0000Strength of evidence \u0000Moderate \u0000Outcomes reported \u0000Five studies reported an improvement in both physiological and behavioural indicators of postcastration pain following NSAID administration and a further eight reported improvements in either physiological or behavioural parameters. Seven studies found no improvements in pain indicators \u0000Conclusion \u0000There is moderate evidence to suggest that NSAID administration before, during or after castration is able to reduce the signs of postoperative pain in calves castrated without anaesthesia. The degree to which pain is reduced is variable and depends upon factors including but not limited to castration method, specific NSAID given, dosage, administration and calf age \u0000 \u0000","PeriodicalId":257905,"journal":{"name":"Veterinary Evidence","volume":"22 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-07-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"134191332","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
PICO question In routine canine caesareans, is alfaxalone a superior anaesthetic induction agent than propofol in increasing the rate of survival and vigour of neonates? Clinical bottom line Category of research question Treatment The number and type of study designs reviewed Three randomised positive clinical trials have compared the efficacy between alfaxalone and propofol in routine canine caesarean sections for increased neonatal survival and vigour Strength of evidence Weak Outcomes reported Although two studies found alfaxalone to be associated with higher Apgar scores for neonates than propofol, each study nonetheless revealed positive vigour and high survival rates from the use of either alfaxalone or propofol. The evidence is too weak to suggest that one induction agent is superior to another. The selection between the two induction agents may not be the main concern in regard to neonatal depression and 24 hour survival post-delivery, provided that the entire canine caesarean protocol is thoroughly and carefully studied Conclusion Text here How to apply this evidence in practice The application of evidence into practice should take into account multiple factors, not limited to: individual clinical expertise, patient’s circumstances and owners’ values, country, location or clinic where you work, the individual case in front of you, the availability of therapies and resources. Knowledge Summaries are a resource to help reinforce or inform decision making. They do not override the responsibility or judgement of the practitioner to do what is best for the animal in their care.
{"title":"Comparison of alfaxalone versus propofol as anaesthetic induction agents in increasing the rate of survival and vigour of neonates","authors":"L. Sofyan, F. Martínez-Taboada","doi":"10.18849/ve.v6i2.344","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.18849/ve.v6i2.344","url":null,"abstract":"PICO question \u0000In routine canine caesareans, is alfaxalone a superior anaesthetic induction agent than propofol in increasing the rate of survival and vigour of neonates? \u0000 \u0000Clinical bottom line \u0000Category of research question \u0000Treatment \u0000The number and type of study designs reviewed \u0000Three randomised positive clinical trials have compared the efficacy between alfaxalone and propofol in routine canine caesarean sections for increased neonatal survival and vigour \u0000Strength of evidence \u0000Weak \u0000Outcomes reported \u0000Although two studies found alfaxalone to be associated with higher Apgar scores for neonates than propofol, each study nonetheless revealed positive vigour and high survival rates from the use of either alfaxalone or propofol. The evidence is too weak to suggest that one induction agent is superior to another. The selection between the two induction agents may not be the main concern in regard to neonatal depression and 24 hour survival post-delivery, provided that the entire canine caesarean protocol is thoroughly and carefully studied \u0000Conclusion \u0000Text here \u0000 \u0000How to apply this evidence in practice \u0000The application of evidence into practice should take into account multiple factors, not limited to: individual clinical expertise, patient’s circumstances and owners’ values, country, location or clinic where you work, the individual case in front of you, the availability of therapies and resources. \u0000Knowledge Summaries are a resource to help reinforce or inform decision making. They do not override the responsibility or judgement of the practitioner to do what is best for the animal in their care. \u0000 \u0000","PeriodicalId":257905,"journal":{"name":"Veterinary Evidence","volume":"175 ","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-06-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"120977142","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
PICO question In dogs with osteoarthritis how effective is treatment with tramadol in reducing the severity of the clinical signs associated with pain when compared to no treatment? Clinical bottom line Category of research question Treatment The number and type of study designs reviewed Two papers were critically reviewed. There was one randomised crossover controlled trial and one non-randomised controlled trial Strength of evidence Strong Outcomes reported Budsberg et al. (2018) found no significant differences in the objective gait analyses (vertical ground reaction forces, and peak vertical force) between baseline and end of treatment, between tramadol and placebo. Similarly, there was no significant difference in the proportion of dogs with positive response based on the subjective Canine Brief Pain Inventory questionnaire (CBPI) between tramadol and placebo. The positive control of carprofen yielded significant differences to both placebo and tramadol in all outcomes measured. Malek et al. (2012) found no significant differences in the objective outcomes measured (gait analyses, and total daily activity) between tramadol and placebo. There were significant improvements in the subjective CBPI (total score, pain severity and pain interference score) between the baseline and end of treatment, within the tramadol group. However, there was no significant difference in the percentage change of the total score, pain severity or pain interference score between all treatment groups including tramadol and placebo Conclusion In dogs with osteoarthritis, the use of tramadol alone did not demonstrate any significant analgesic effects How to apply this evidence in practice The application of evidence into practice should take into account multiple factors, not limited to: individual clinical expertise, patient’s circumstances and owners’ values, country, location or clinic where you work, the individual case in front of you, the availability of therapies and resources. Knowledge Summaries are a resource to help reinforce or inform decision making. They do not override the responsibility or judgement of the practitioner to do what is best for the animal in their care.
{"title":"In dogs with osteoarthritis, how effective is treatment with tramadol in providing analgesia?","authors":"A. Wong, F. Martínez-Taboada","doi":"10.18849/ve.v6i2.401","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.18849/ve.v6i2.401","url":null,"abstract":"PICO question \u0000In dogs with osteoarthritis how effective is treatment with tramadol in reducing the severity of the clinical signs associated with pain when compared to no treatment? \u0000 \u0000Clinical bottom line \u0000Category of research question \u0000Treatment \u0000The number and type of study designs reviewed \u0000Two papers were critically reviewed. There was one randomised crossover controlled trial and one non-randomised controlled trial \u0000Strength of evidence \u0000Strong \u0000Outcomes reported \u0000Budsberg et al. (2018) found no significant differences in the objective gait analyses (vertical ground reaction forces, and peak vertical force) between baseline and end of treatment, between tramadol and placebo. Similarly, there was no significant difference in the proportion of dogs with positive response based on the subjective Canine Brief Pain Inventory questionnaire (CBPI) between tramadol and placebo. The positive control of carprofen yielded significant differences to both placebo and tramadol in all outcomes measured. \u0000Malek et al. (2012) found no significant differences in the objective outcomes measured (gait analyses, and total daily activity) between tramadol and placebo. There were significant improvements in the subjective CBPI (total score, pain severity and pain interference score) between the baseline and end of treatment, within the tramadol group. However, there was no significant difference in the percentage change of the total score, pain severity or pain interference score between all treatment groups including tramadol and placebo \u0000Conclusion \u0000In dogs with osteoarthritis, the use of tramadol alone did not demonstrate any significant analgesic effects \u0000 \u0000How to apply this evidence in practice \u0000The application of evidence into practice should take into account multiple factors, not limited to: individual clinical expertise, patient’s circumstances and owners’ values, country, location or clinic where you work, the individual case in front of you, the availability of therapies and resources. \u0000Knowledge Summaries are a resource to help reinforce or inform decision making. They do not override the responsibility or judgement of the practitioner to do what is best for the animal in their care. \u0000 \u0000","PeriodicalId":257905,"journal":{"name":"Veterinary Evidence","volume":"8 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-06-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"125590062","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
PICO question In horses undergoing lameness investigation, does sedation with a2-adrenergic agonists alone versus sedation with a2-adrenergic agonists in combination with butorphanol tartrate effect the degree of lameness? Clinical bottom line Category of research question Diagnosis The number and type of study designs reviewed Six papers were critically reviewed. There were two crossover clinical studies, three crossover controlled clinical studies and a randomised controlled clinical study Strength of evidence Moderate Outcomes reported There was limited evidence to suggest that xylazine and romifidine in combination with butorphanol has an effect on forelimb lameness and that detomidine has an effect on hindlimb lameness. Most evidence suggests that xylazine alone or in combination with butorphanol has no effect on the lameness Conclusion In general, sedating a horse with an a2-adrenergic agonist alone or in combination with butorphanol tartrate does not change the baseline degree of lameness. Due to the large variation in the measurements, the small magnitude of few significant effects and the inconsistency of these significant findings, there is insufficient evidence to recommend avoiding the use of sedation in cases where it would increase the safety of those involved. However, regardless of protocol used, clinicians must appreciate the possibility of individual horse variation How to apply this evidence in practice The application of evidence into practice should take into account multiple factors, not limited to: individual clinical expertise, patient’s circumstances and owners’ values, country, location or clinic where you work, the individual case in front of you, the availability of therapies and resources. Knowledge Summaries are a resource to help reinforce or inform decision making. They do not override the responsibility or judgement of the practitioner to do what is best for the animal in their care.
{"title":"Can sedation be used for equine lameness investigation?","authors":"Helene Termansen, L. Meehan","doi":"10.18849/ve.v6i2.373","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.18849/ve.v6i2.373","url":null,"abstract":"PICO question \u0000In horses undergoing lameness investigation, does sedation with a2-adrenergic agonists alone versus sedation with a2-adrenergic agonists in combination with butorphanol tartrate effect the degree of lameness? \u0000 \u0000Clinical bottom line \u0000Category of research question \u0000Diagnosis \u0000The number and type of study designs reviewed \u0000Six papers were critically reviewed. There were two crossover clinical studies, three crossover controlled clinical studies and a randomised controlled clinical study \u0000Strength of evidence \u0000Moderate \u0000Outcomes reported \u0000There was limited evidence to suggest that xylazine and romifidine in combination with butorphanol has an effect on forelimb lameness and that detomidine has an effect on hindlimb lameness. \u0000Most evidence suggests that xylazine alone or in combination with butorphanol has no effect on the lameness \u0000Conclusion \u0000In general, sedating a horse with an a2-adrenergic agonist alone or in combination with butorphanol tartrate does not change the baseline degree of lameness. Due to the large variation in the measurements, the small magnitude of few significant effects and the inconsistency of these significant findings, there is insufficient evidence to recommend avoiding the use of sedation in cases where it would increase the safety of those involved. However, regardless of protocol used, clinicians must appreciate the possibility of individual horse variation \u0000 \u0000How to apply this evidence in practice \u0000The application of evidence into practice should take into account multiple factors, not limited to: individual clinical expertise, patient’s circumstances and owners’ values, country, location or clinic where you work, the individual case in front of you, the availability of therapies and resources. \u0000Knowledge Summaries are a resource to help reinforce or inform decision making. They do not override the responsibility or judgement of the practitioner to do what is best for the animal in their care. \u0000 \u0000","PeriodicalId":257905,"journal":{"name":"Veterinary Evidence","volume":"8 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-06-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"125459007","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Ellie Sellers, S. Baillie, R. Dean, S. Warman, H. Janicke, S. Arlt, Clare Boulton, M. Brennan, D. Brodbelt, Fiona J L Brown, L. Buckley, Myai Du, Emma Gallop, George Goran, D. Grindlay, Laura Haddock, J. Ireland, C. McGowan, H. Moberly, E. Place, Md. Mizanur Rahman, G. Rees, K. Reyher, Javier Sanchez, J. Schoeman, L. Urdes, J. VanLeeuwen, K. Verheyen
Abstract ‘EBVM Learning’ is a freely available resource created in 2015 by an international team with the support of RCVS Knowledge. The resource comprises a series of online modules teaching the fundamental concepts of evidence-based veterinary medicine (EBVM) (Ask, Acquire, Appraise, Apply & Assess) supported by case studies, exercises, worked examples and quizzes. The aim of the current study (undertaken in 2019) was to review ‘EBVM Learning’ to ensure its ongoing relevance and usefulness to the range of learners engaged in EBVM. Feedback was gathered from stakeholder groups using website statistics and feedback forms, a survey and semi-structured interviews to provide a combination of quantitative and qualitative data. Website statistics revealed an international audience and a steady increase in visitors exceeding 1,000 per month in August 2020. Feedback via the online form (n=35) and survey (n=71) indicated that the resource was well structured, with an appropriate level and amount of content, useful examples and quizzes and the majority of respondents would use it again. Semi-structured interviews of educators (n=5) and veterinarians (n=8) identified three themes: features of the ‘EBVM Learning’ resource (strengths, suggestions for improvement), embedding the resource in education (undergraduate, postgraduate) and promoting EBVM (challenges, motivation for engagement). At a project team workshop the results were used to plan updates to the existing content and to identify new ways to promote learning and engagement. An updated version of ‘EBVM Learning’ was developed. ‘EBVM Learning’ is helping to produce the next generation of evidence-based practitioners and enabling to engage in the concepts of EBVM as part of their clinical practice.
{"title":"Promoting Evidence-based Veterinary Medicine through the online resource ‘EBVM Learning’: User feedback","authors":"Ellie Sellers, S. Baillie, R. Dean, S. Warman, H. Janicke, S. Arlt, Clare Boulton, M. Brennan, D. Brodbelt, Fiona J L Brown, L. Buckley, Myai Du, Emma Gallop, George Goran, D. Grindlay, Laura Haddock, J. Ireland, C. McGowan, H. Moberly, E. Place, Md. Mizanur Rahman, G. Rees, K. Reyher, Javier Sanchez, J. Schoeman, L. Urdes, J. VanLeeuwen, K. Verheyen","doi":"10.18849/VE.V6I1.392","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.18849/VE.V6I1.392","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract \u0000‘EBVM Learning’ is a freely available resource created in 2015 by an international team with the support of RCVS Knowledge. The resource comprises a series of online modules teaching the fundamental concepts of evidence-based veterinary medicine (EBVM) (Ask, Acquire, Appraise, Apply & Assess) supported by case studies, exercises, worked examples and quizzes. The aim of the current study (undertaken in 2019) was to review ‘EBVM Learning’ to ensure its ongoing relevance and usefulness to the range of learners engaged in EBVM. Feedback was gathered from stakeholder groups using website statistics and feedback forms, a survey and semi-structured interviews to provide a combination of quantitative and qualitative data. \u0000Website statistics revealed an international audience and a steady increase in visitors exceeding 1,000 per month in August 2020. Feedback via the online form (n=35) and survey (n=71) indicated that the resource was well structured, with an appropriate level and amount of content, useful examples and quizzes and the majority of respondents would use it again. Semi-structured interviews of educators (n=5) and veterinarians (n=8) identified three themes: features of the ‘EBVM Learning’ resource (strengths, suggestions for improvement), embedding the resource in education (undergraduate, postgraduate) and promoting EBVM (challenges, motivation for engagement). At a project team workshop the results were used to plan updates to the existing content and to identify new ways to promote learning and engagement. An updated version of ‘EBVM Learning’ was developed. \u0000‘EBVM Learning’ is helping to produce the next generation of evidence-based practitioners and enabling to engage in the concepts of EBVM as part of their clinical practice. \u0000 \u0000","PeriodicalId":257905,"journal":{"name":"Veterinary Evidence","volume":"39 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-02-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"130552381","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
2020 will be a year to remember! One of the standout features for me has been the speed with which ‘science’ has responded to the crisis in terms of developing and disseminating new information to the community highlighting the importance of digital communication – a space that Veterinary Evidence comfortably occupies. The availability of pre peer-reviewed papers has become the norm but it has also emphasised the essential need and benefit of the peer-review process as a significant number of pre-review papers have not made it through to ‘publication’ as issues were identified during the peer-review process. As Editor-in-chief it makes me proud and thankful that Veterinary Evidence has a strong but agile peer-review process and I would like to thank all of our editors and reviewers for their continued support and their diligence in meeting demanding timelines during of these challenging times allowing Veterinary Evidence to publish more content than ever before. Without your highly valued knowledge, expertise and insights Veterinary Evidence would not be growing into the key knowledge source that it is today. The Veterinary Evidence Editorial Board Meeting was held for the first time digitally on 7 December with the largest number of editorial board members able to attend. Members from across the globe were able to take part in wide and varied discussions around the development of the journal, resulting in important strategic initiatives and some key action points to pursue. The availability of the board to attend digitally will facilitate more frequent meetings allowing the journal to be more inclusive, and responsive to the changing landscape, as well as providing a digital recording of the event available for those board members unable to attend. Key areas discussed included development of the format of PICOs and further refining the process for approving them, strategies to encourage engagement and submissions from veterinary nurses, and the development of policies to encourage diversity and inclusion within the board and contributors to the journal, as well as ways to increase the reach of the journal. Having only been Editor-in-chief since September, I have been very impressed by how active and dedicated our reviewers and board members are and how dynamic and forward-looking Veterinary Evidence is as it matures into a key contributor to veterinary literature. None of this would be possible without your support for which I am very grateful.
{"title":"Thank You to Our 2020 Reviewers","authors":"K. Sturgess","doi":"10.18849/VE.V6I1.464","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.18849/VE.V6I1.464","url":null,"abstract":"2020 will be a year to remember! One of the standout features for me has been the speed with which ‘science’ has responded to the crisis in terms of developing and disseminating new information to the community highlighting the importance of digital communication – a space that Veterinary Evidence comfortably occupies. The availability of pre peer-reviewed papers has become the norm but it has also emphasised the essential need and benefit of the peer-review process as a significant number of pre-review papers have not made it through to ‘publication’ as issues were identified during the peer-review process. \u0000As Editor-in-chief it makes me proud and thankful that Veterinary Evidence has a strong but agile peer-review process and I would like to thank all of our editors and reviewers for their continued support and their diligence in meeting demanding timelines during of these challenging times allowing Veterinary Evidence to publish more content than ever before. Without your highly valued knowledge, expertise and insights Veterinary Evidence would not be growing into the key knowledge source that it is today. \u0000The Veterinary Evidence Editorial Board Meeting was held for the first time digitally on 7 December with the largest number of editorial board members able to attend. Members from across the globe were able to take part in wide and varied discussions around the development of the journal, resulting in important strategic initiatives and some key action points to pursue. The availability of the board to attend digitally will facilitate more frequent meetings allowing the journal to be more inclusive, and responsive to the changing landscape, as well as providing a digital recording of the event available for those board members unable to attend. \u0000Key areas discussed included development of the format of PICOs and further refining the process for approving them, strategies to encourage engagement and submissions from veterinary nurses, and the development of policies to encourage diversity and inclusion within the board and contributors to the journal, as well as ways to increase the reach of the journal. Having only been Editor-in-chief since September, I have been very impressed by how active and dedicated our reviewers and board members are and how dynamic and forward-looking Veterinary Evidence is as it matures into a key contributor to veterinary literature. None of this would be possible without your support for which I am very grateful. \u0000 \u0000","PeriodicalId":257905,"journal":{"name":"Veterinary Evidence","volume":"145 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-01-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"132986194","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
PICO question In adult dogs with naturally occurring medial meniscal tears concurrent to cranial cruciate ligament disease does meniscal release confer the same benefits in lameness resolution as meniscectomy? Clinical bottom line Category of research question Treatment The number and type of study designs reviewed A single prospective cross-sectional study was reviewed, that fulfilled the criteria Strength of evidence None Outcomes reported Meniscal release, meniscectomy (partial, hemi- or complete), or the two combined performed for concurrent medial meniscal pathology at time of surgery for naturally occurring cranial cruciate ligament (CCL) rupture resulted in an acceptable long-term outcome. Difference in outcome between the techniques was not reported Conclusion There is no evidence that meniscal release provides an equal or superior treatment option for medial meniscal injury treated at the time of surgery for CCL rupture when compared to meniscectomy. The study critically reviewed performed meniscal release via radial transection through the meniscotibial ligament, and therefore does not represent mid-body abaxial radial release. Neither is this summary appropriate for considering prophylactic meniscal release of the normal meniscus. In addition, the surgical treatments for cranial cruciate ligament rupture were either ‘Tightrope’ or tibial plateau levelling osteotomy (TPLO) procedures. Further studies are required to compare clinical outcome between meniscal release or meniscectomy for treatment of concurrent meniscal tears How to apply this evidence in practice The application of evidence into practice should take into account multiple factors, not limited to: individual clinical expertise, patient’s circumstances and owners’ values, country, location or clinic where you work, the individual case in front of you, the availability of therapies and resources. Knowledge Summaries are a resource to help reinforce or inform decision making. They do not override the responsibility or judgement of the practitioner to do what is best for the animal in their care.
{"title":"Does meniscal release confer similar clinical benefits to meniscal tear treatment when compared to meniscectomy?","authors":"B. Garland","doi":"10.18849/ve.v5i4.339","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.18849/ve.v5i4.339","url":null,"abstract":"PICO question \u0000In adult dogs with naturally occurring medial meniscal tears concurrent to cranial cruciate ligament disease does meniscal release confer the same benefits in lameness resolution as meniscectomy? \u0000 \u0000Clinical bottom line \u0000Category of research question \u0000Treatment \u0000The number and type of study designs reviewed \u0000A single prospective cross-sectional study was reviewed, that fulfilled the criteria \u0000Strength of evidence \u0000None \u0000Outcomes reported \u0000Meniscal release, meniscectomy (partial, hemi- or complete), or the two combined performed for concurrent medial meniscal pathology at time of surgery for naturally occurring cranial cruciate ligament (CCL) rupture resulted in an acceptable long-term outcome. Difference in outcome between the techniques was not reported \u0000Conclusion \u0000There is no evidence that meniscal release provides an equal or superior treatment option for medial meniscal injury treated at the time of surgery for CCL rupture when compared to meniscectomy. The study critically reviewed performed meniscal release via radial transection through the meniscotibial ligament, and therefore does not represent mid-body abaxial radial release. Neither is this summary appropriate for considering prophylactic meniscal release of the normal meniscus. In addition, the surgical treatments for cranial cruciate ligament rupture were either ‘Tightrope’ or tibial plateau levelling osteotomy (TPLO) procedures. Further studies are required to compare clinical outcome between meniscal release or meniscectomy for treatment of concurrent meniscal tears \u0000 \u0000How to apply this evidence in practice \u0000The application of evidence into practice should take into account multiple factors, not limited to: individual clinical expertise, patient’s circumstances and owners’ values, country, location or clinic where you work, the individual case in front of you, the availability of therapies and resources. \u0000Knowledge Summaries are a resource to help reinforce or inform decision making. They do not override the responsibility or judgement of the practitioner to do what is best for the animal in their care. \u0000 \u0000","PeriodicalId":257905,"journal":{"name":"Veterinary Evidence","volume":"66 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-12-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"125607987","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
PICO question In cats with traumatic coxofemoral injury, does total hip replacement (THR) offer improved outcome when compared with femoral head and neck excision (FHNE) arthroplasty? Clinical bottom line Category of research question Treatment The number and type of study designs reviewed One paper was critically reviewed. It was a non-randomised retrospective observational study Strength of evidence Moderate evidence Outcomes reported THR results in superior clinical outcome and owner satisfaction compared to FHNE in cats Conclusion In cats with traumatic coxofemoral injury, although the evidence is not conclusive and somewhat limited, the literature reviewed here suggests that THR offers a superior outcome in feline patients. There is currently insufficient evidence to determine if there is a difference in long-term outcome, complications or osteoarthritis (OA) development following THR or FHNE in feline patients How to apply this evidence in practice The application of evidence into practice should take into account multiple factors, not limited to: individual clinical expertise, patient’s circumstances and owners’ values, country, location or clinic where you work, the individual case in front of you, the availability of therapies and resources. Knowledge Summaries are a resource to help reinforce or inform decision making. They do not override the responsibility or judgement of the practitioner to do what is best for the animal in their care.
{"title":"Should we offer total hip replacement to feline patients?","authors":"K. Smithers","doi":"10.18849/ve.v5i4.347","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.18849/ve.v5i4.347","url":null,"abstract":"PICO question \u0000In cats with traumatic coxofemoral injury, does total hip replacement (THR) offer improved outcome when compared with femoral head and neck excision (FHNE) arthroplasty? \u0000 \u0000Clinical bottom line \u0000Category of research question \u0000Treatment \u0000The number and type of study designs reviewed \u0000One paper was critically reviewed. It was a non-randomised retrospective observational study \u0000Strength of evidence \u0000Moderate evidence \u0000Outcomes reported \u0000THR results in superior clinical outcome and owner satisfaction compared to FHNE in cats \u0000Conclusion \u0000In cats with traumatic coxofemoral injury, although the evidence is not conclusive and somewhat limited, the literature reviewed here suggests that THR offers a superior outcome in feline patients. \u0000There is currently insufficient evidence to determine if there is a difference in long-term outcome, complications or osteoarthritis (OA) development following THR or FHNE in feline patients \u0000 \u0000How to apply this evidence in practice \u0000The application of evidence into practice should take into account multiple factors, not limited to: individual clinical expertise, patient’s circumstances and owners’ values, country, location or clinic where you work, the individual case in front of you, the availability of therapies and resources. \u0000Knowledge Summaries are a resource to help reinforce or inform decision making. They do not override the responsibility or judgement of the practitioner to do what is best for the animal in their care. \u0000 \u0000","PeriodicalId":257905,"journal":{"name":"Veterinary Evidence","volume":"9 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-12-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"128592526","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Unfortunately the original version of the article had the following error.
不幸的是，文章的原始版本有以下错误。
{"title":"Erratum to: In canine acute diarrhoea with no identifiable cause, does daily oral probiotic improve the clinical outcomes?","authors":"Jacqueline Oi Ping Tong","doi":"10.18849/ve.v5i4.437","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.18849/ve.v5i4.437","url":null,"abstract":"Unfortunately the original version of the article had the following error.","PeriodicalId":257905,"journal":{"name":"Veterinary Evidence","volume":"9 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-12-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"126394667","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
PICO question In dogs, is oral or topical administration of garlic, compared to no treatment, efficacious at preventing or reducing parasitism by fleas? Clinical bottom line Category of research question Treatment The number and type of study designs reviewed Zero Strength of evidence Critical appraisal of the selected papers meeting the inclusion criteria collectively provide zero evidence in terms of their experimental design and implementation Outcomes reported The outcomes reported were none Conclusion It is concluded that there is a lack of peer-reviewed scientific in vivo evidence to address the PICO How to apply this evidence in practice The application of evidence into practice should take into account multiple factors, not limited to: individual clinical expertise, patient’s circumstances and owners’ values, country, location or clinic where you work, the individual case in front of you, the availability of therapies and resources. Knowledge Summaries are a resource to help reinforce or inform decision-making. They do not override the responsibility or judgement of the practitioner to do what is best for the animal in their care.
{"title":"Can garlic prevent, repel or kill fleas that infest dogs?","authors":"L. Buckley","doi":"10.18849/ve.v5i3.311","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.18849/ve.v5i3.311","url":null,"abstract":"PICO question \u0000In dogs, is oral or topical administration of garlic, compared to no treatment, efficacious at preventing or reducing parasitism by fleas? \u0000 \u0000Clinical bottom line \u0000Category of research question \u0000Treatment \u0000The number and type of study designs reviewed \u0000Zero \u0000Strength of evidence \u0000Critical appraisal of the selected papers meeting the inclusion criteria collectively provide zero evidence in terms of their experimental design and implementation \u0000Outcomes reported \u0000The outcomes reported were none \u0000Conclusion \u0000It is concluded that there is a lack of peer-reviewed scientific in vivo evidence to address the PICO \u0000 \u0000How to apply this evidence in practice \u0000The application of evidence into practice should take into account multiple factors, not limited to: individual clinical expertise, patient’s circumstances and owners’ values, country, location or clinic where you work, the individual case in front of you, the availability of therapies and resources. \u0000Knowledge Summaries are a resource to help reinforce or inform decision-making. They do not override the responsibility or judgement of the practitioner to do what is best for the animal in their care. \u0000 \u0000","PeriodicalId":257905,"journal":{"name":"Veterinary Evidence","volume":"25 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-08-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"132861014","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：