Search

Sometimes out of necessity and sometimes out of convenience, medicine is wasteful. Resource stewardship is a critical and expanding field for reducing wasteful practices. Numerous international organizations are driving resource stewardship globally, including >20 countries worldwide participating in Choosing Wisely initiatives. However, opportunities for environmental stewardship have been long overlooked. Planetary health, climate action, and environmental stewardship in medicine consider opportunities which offer a co-benefit to the planet while improving or maintaining appropriate patient care across the healthcare continuum, including acute care, transitions in care, and postacute care, as well as in primary, secondary, and tertiary care settings. As rehabilitation is necessary across all healthcare settings, developing a culture among rehabilitation care providers that is conscientious about planetary health is imperative for sustainability of rehabilitation medicine and the health of our planet. We devised a recommendation for Choosing Wisely Canada's planetary health focus: don't dispose of adaptive equipment, mobility devices, orthoses, and prostheses that could be reused or recycled. This brief report discusses 1) why rehabilitation providers should engage with planetary health and climate action; 2) the rationale for the Choosing Wisely Canada Physical Medicine & Rehabilitation planetary health recommendation; and 3) existing avenues and novel opportunities for rehabilitation care providers worldwide to reduce waste in rehabilitation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To present an evidence-based review of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating interventions for the management of behavioral issues post moderate to severe traumatic brain injury (MSTBI), as part of an extensive database that has been conceptualized as a living systematic review. Methods: Systematic searches were conducted in MEDLINE, PubMed, Scopus, CINAHL, EMBASE and PsycINFO, up to and including December 2022, for articles published in the English language, in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. The quality of RCT was assessed using the Physiotherapy Evidence Database (PEDro) scale, and level of evidence was assigned using a modified Sackett scale. Results: Forty-six RCTs examining interventions and outcome measures related to behavioral issues post-MSTBI were included. These studies collectively enrolled 3,267 participants. The majority of RCTs were conducted in the United States (n = 27; 58.7%) and 28 (60.9%) were conducted after 2010. Of these, 27 RCTs examined non-pharmacological interventions and 19 examined pharmacological interventions. Effective pharmacological treatments included amantadine and dexmedetomidine. Effective non-pharmacological interventions included sensory stimulation in the acute phase, anger self-management programs, peer mentoring, problem-solving, and emotional regulation. Psychotherapy showed conflicting evidence. Conclusion: This evidence-based review provides a comprehensive overview of the research landscape of RCTs addressing behavior post-MSTBI. The findings from these RCTs may be valuable for health care professionals, researchers, and policymakers involved in the field of TBI and behavior. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To present an evidence-based review of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating interventions for mental health post-moderate to severe traumatic brain injury (post-MSTBI), as part of an extensive database that has been conceptualized as a living systematic review. Methods: Systematic searches were conducted for RCTs published in the English language in MEDLINE, PubMed, Scopus, CINAHL, EMBASE, and PsycINFO, up to and including December 2022, in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. The methodological quality of RCTs was assessed using the Physiotherapy Evidence Database scale, and the level of evidence was assigned using a modified Sackett scale. Results: Eighty-seven RCTs examining mental health interventions and outcome measures post-MSTBI were included. These studies collectively enrolled 6471 participants. A total of 41 RCTs (47.1%) were conducted in the United States and 56 studies (64.4%) were published after 2010. A total of 62 RCTs (71.3%) examined nonpharmacological interventions and 25 RCTs (28.7%) examined pharmacological interventions. Effective pharmacological treatments included desipramine and cerebrolysin; methylphenidate and rivastigmine showed conflicting evidence. Cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) was found to be effective for hopelessness, stress, and anxiety, compared to usual care; however, it may be as effective as supportive psychotherapy for depression. CBT combined with motivational interviewing may be as effective as CBT combined with nondirective counseling for depression, stress, and anxiety. Acceptance and commitment therapy was effective for anxiety, stress, and depression. Tai Chi, dance, and walking appeared to be effective for depression and stress, while other nonpharmacological treatments such as peer mentoring showed limited effectiveness. Conclusion: This evidence-based review provides a comprehensive overview of the research landscape of RCTs addressing mental health post-MSTBI. The findings from these RCTs may be valuable for health care professionals, researchers, and policymakers involved in the field of mental health and neurorehabilitation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To describe experiences and challenges when updating a living evidence-based review database of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on mental health and behavioral disorders in moderate to severe traumatic brain injury (MSTBI). Method: This commentary derives from our experience developing an extensive database of RCTs on MSTBI that has been conceptualized as a living evidence-based review. Our working group focused on mental health and behavior RCTs and reflected upon their experiences and challenges using the living systematic approach. We discuss challenges associated with metrics of study quality, injury etiology and severity, time post-injury, country of origin, and variability in outcome measures. Results: RCTs were conducted almost solely in high income countries, with smaller sample sizes, and most conducted in the chronic phase post-TBI. Issues related to lack of transparency, unclear and incomplete reporting of injury severity, etiology, and time post-injury remain a concern and can lead to challenges associated with interpretation of results, validity, and reliability of the data. There was significant heterogeneity regarding the use of outcome measures and constructs, underscoring the need for standardization. Conclusion: Lack of standardization and incomplete reporting of injury characteristics makes it difficult to compare data between RCTs of MSTBI, perform meta-analyses, and generate evidence-based clinical recommendations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

eHealth is currently a hot topic, but is certainly not a new one. The use of communications technology to relay health-related information or provide medical services has been around since the advent of this technology. It has been primarily over the last decade that eHealth has seen a global expansion, due to the far-reaching capabilities of the Internet and the widespread use of wireless technology. This paper will outline what eHealth is, what adherence is, and how eHealth can help with adherence, in cancer and supportive care particularly. It will discuss the current state of the art, and project into the future.

Standardization of first principles has transformed stroke rehabilitation in developed countries and helped guide the appropriate allocation of resources to ensure better outcomes for patients. There have been challenges in incorporating new evidence into stroke rehabilitation practices. The sheer number of RCTs can be daunting to the average clinician, made worse by the lack of a framework for their application. To develop a framework for the introduction of adjunct practices for the motor recovery of the upper extremity post stroke into clinical practice. A literature search following PRISMA guidelines revealed 1,307 RCTs involving rehabilitation interventions for the hemiparetic upper extremity post stroke. Therapies were divided into three categories of therapies: (1) Basic Conventional Therapy Approaches (<15% of interventions), (2) Adjunct Therapies Designed to Enhance Conventional Therapies (>85% of interventions), and (3) Treatment to Manage Complications (~9% of interventions). Adjunct Therapies, despite having a spectacular evidence base, are often not employed clinically. To encourage their clinical use, we have developed a framework that divides adjunct therapies into two categories: (1) Treatments that Stimulate the Brain (i.e. rTMS, mental practice, and virtual reality) and (2) Treatments that Peripherally Facilitate the Hemiparetic Upper Extremity (i.e. robotics, EMG Biofeedback, and Constraint-induced Movement Therapy). To allow stroke rehabilitation to continue to improve upper extremity recovery and outcomes, we propose a new intuitive framework that is based on a strong evidence base to guide clinicians and improve stroke rehabilitation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]