Search

Aim: The aim of this study was to identify the influencing factors of sleep disorders and sleep quality in healthcare workers during the COVID‐19 pandemic. Design: Systematic review and meta‐analysis of observational research. Methods: The databases of the Cochrane Library, Web of Science, PubMed, Embase, SinoMed database, CNKI, Wanfang Data, and VIP were systematically searched. The quality of studies was assessed using the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality evaluation criteria and the Newcastle–Ottawa scale. Results: A total of 29 studies were included, of which 20 were cross‐sectional studies, eight were cohort studies, and 1 was a case–control study; 17 influencing factors were finally identified. Greater risk of sleep disturbance was associated with female gender, single relationship status, chronic disease, insomnia history, less exercise, lack of social support, frontline work, days served in frontline work, department of service, night shift, years of work experience, anxiety, depression, stress, received psychological assistance, worried about being infected, and degree of fear with COVID‐19. Conclusions: During the COVID‐19 pandemic, healthcare workers did have worse sleep quality than the general population. The influencing factors of sleep disorders and sleep quality in healthcare workers are multifaceted. Identification and timely intervention of resolvable influencing factors are particularly important for preventing sleep disorders and improving sleep. Patient or Public Contribution: This is a meta‐analysis of previously published studies so there was no patient or public contribution. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aim: This study systematically compared the efficacy of various dressings that may prevent facial medical device‐related pressure injury (MRDPI) in medical staff during the COVID‐19 pandemic. Background: During the COVID‐19 pandemic, medical staff who are required to wear masks, goggles and other personal protective equipment (PPE) are susceptible to facial MRDPI, which exacerbates working conditions. Dressings can effectively prevent or alleviate MRDPI, but it is unclear which dressings are most effective. Design: A systematic review and network meta‐analysis, in accordance with PRISMA. Methods: A comprehensive literature search was conducted in four English and four Chinese databases to identify relevant studies published up to 8 September 2022. The selected studies were randomised controlled trials, with populations comprising medical staff who wore PPE during the COVID‐19 pandemic and included an observation and control group. Results: The network meta‐analysis of the 12 selected articles showed that foam dressing, hydrocolloid dressing and petrolatum gauze were better than conventional protection for preventing MRDPI. The surface under the cumulative ranking curve indicated that foam dressing was the best preventative. Conclusion: Foam dressing is more effective than other dressings in preventing facial MRDPI in medical staff. When PPE must be worn for many hours, such as during the COVID‐19 pandemic, medical staff can use foam dressings to prevent MRDPI. Relevance to clinical practice: The results support the use of dressings, especially foam dressings, to prevent MRDPI in healthcare workers. The appropriate dressings are recommended to prevent MRDPI associated with wearing PPE. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aim: This systematic review evaluated the quality of evidence for the prevention and management of facial pressure injuries in medical staff. Design: This review was presented in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta‐Analyses guidelines. Methods: We retrieved the relevant studies from 19 databases. Using the literature evaluation standards and evidence grading system of the Australian Joanna Briggs Institute Evidence‐Based Health Care Center, we evaluated the quality of the literature encompassing different types of research and assessed their levels of evidence. Results: A total of 13 studies were included, including seven expert consensuses, two recommended practices, one clinical decision, one best practice information booklet, one systematic review and one randomized controlled trial. In the end, 31 best evidence were summarized, including skin cleaning and care, PPE placement and movement, reasonable use of dressings, treatment measures and education and training. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Our study aimed to systematically evaluate the effect of acupuncture in patients with obstructive sleep apnea–hypopnea syndrome (OSAHS). Literature search of four Chinese databases and six English databases for studies published from the inception of each database to March 1, 2022 and identify relevant studies published in Chinese or English. Related randomized controlled trials of acupuncture for the treatment of OSAHS were included to analyze the efficacy of acupuncture. Two researchers independently reviewed all of the retrieved studies to screen for eligible studies and extract the required relevant data. Included studies were subjected to a methodological quality assessment using the Cochrane Manual 5.1.0, and to a meta‐analysis using Cochrane Review Manager version 5.4. A total of 19 studies with 1365 participants were examined. Compared with the control group, the apnea–hypopnea index, lowest oxygen saturation, Epworth Sleepiness Scale, interleukin‐6, tumor necrosis factor α, and nuclear factor κ‐B indicators all exhibited statistically significant changes. Thus, acupuncture was effective in alleviating the state of hypoxia and sleepiness and reduced the inflammatory response and disease severity among reported patients with OSAHS. Therefore, acupuncture could be widely used in the clinical treatment of OSAHS patients as a complementary strategy and warrants further study. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aim: To evaluate the incidence of facial pressure injuries in health‐care professionals during the COVID‐19 pandemic in a meta‐analysis. Methods: Related studies were obtained through electronic databases, including PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI) Chinese Scientific Journal (VIP) China Biomedical Literature service systems (CBM) and Wanfang Data (from inception to 27 November 2021). The pooled incidence and the 95% confidence interval of facial pressure injuries were calculated with Review Manager v5.4 software. Results: Overall, 16 studies with 14 430 health‐care professionals were included. Pooled results showed that the pooled incidence of facial pressure injury in health‐care professionals was 58.8% (95% CI: 49.0%–68.7%; p < 0.01). The results of the subgroup analysis showed that the incidence of facial pressure injury in these staff was high, and predominantly stage I pressure injury, in the following cases: in health‐care professionals who wore personal protective equipment for longer than 4 h, in those without any training experience, and on the nose. Conclusion: Administrators and researchers should pay attention to preventing facial pressure injury related to the wearing of personal protective equipment (PPE) by ensuring all health‐care professionals receive training and by limiting prolonged periods of use. Summary statement: What is already known about this topic? Facial pressure injury was one of the most common effects experiencedby health‐care professionals wearing facial PPE during COVID‐19, which seriously affected their facial comfort and self‐image.A number of studies have reported the incidence of facial pressure injury in health‐care professionals, but the evidence is inconsistent.Medical staff are the main force during the COVID‐19. What this paper adds? This study showed that the pooled incidence of facial pressure injury in health‐care professionals was 56.8% during COVID‐19.This study showed that there was a higher incidence of facial pressure injury in staff who wore PPE for longer than 4 h and in those without any training experience.This study showed that the nose was the most common part of the face with pressure injury, and Stage I pressure injury was the most prevalent injury type in health‐care professionals. The implications of this paper: This study may provide evidence for managers about the development of guidelines for health‐care professionals to prevent and manage facial pressure injuries and promote the health of health‐care professionals. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: This systematic review was conducted to gather available evidence on the effectiveness of muscle pedicle bone flap transplantation in adult patients with femoral neck fractures. Methods: Databases such as PubMed, EMBASE, IEEE, Web of Science, and Cochrane library were searched from their dates of inception until March 2021. Two reviewers independently selected the interventional studies on the assessment of the effectiveness of muscle pedicle bone flap transplantation for femoral neck fractures; data extraction and assessment of the methodological quality as per the Institute of Health Economics quality appraisal checklist were also performed by the reviewers. The effectiveness and complication outcomes were assessed by calculating the average rates. Results: Overall, 20 studies with 1022 patients were included in this review. Notably, the methodologic quality of the included studies was typically poor. The average effective rates were as follows: good, 73.4%; fair, 15.4%; and poor, 10.9%. Moreover, the average nonunion rate, average avascular necrosis rate, average collapse rate, and the overall reoperation rate were 9.0%, 6.7%, 4.7%, and 7.3%, respectively. Conclusions: This systematic review of heterogeneous studies with varying number of patients and varying surgical techniques indicated that muscle pedicle bone flap transplantation provides promising results with low rates of avascular necrosis and nonunion. Nevertheless, further controlled studies are required to ascertain the effectiveness of muscle pedicle bone flap transplantation in treating femoral neck fracture. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Some previous studies already investigated potential associations between folate metabolism enzyme polymorphisms and lung cancer (LC). However, the results of these studies were inconsistent. Thus, we performed this meta-analysis to explore associations between folate metabolism enzyme polymorphisms and LC in a larger pooled population. Systematic literature research of PubMed, WOS, Embase and CNKI was performed to identify eligible studies. Review Manager Version 5.3.3 was used to conduct statistical analyses. Totally 37 genetic association studies were included for analyses. The pooled analyses showed that MTRR rs1801394 (dominant model: p = 0.01; recessive model: p = 0.04; allele model: p = 0.005) and MTHFR rs1801133 (dominant model: p = 0.008; recessive model: p = 0.0003; allele model: p = 0.0002) polymorphisms were both significantly associated with susceptibility to LC in overall population. Subgroup analyses revealed similar significant findings for MTHFR rs1801133 polymorphism in East Asians. Significant associations with LC were also observed for MTRR rs1801394 and MTHFR rs1801133 polymorphisms in smokers. In conclusion, this meta-analysis indicated that MTRR rs1801394 was significantly associated with LC in smokers, and MTHFR rs1801133 polymorphisms was also significantly associated with LC in smokers and East Asians. These results suggested that these two polymorphisms could be used to identify individuals at high risk of developing LC in certain populations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]