Electroacupuncture versus solifenacin for women with urgency-predominant mixed urinary incontinence: a protocol for a three-armed non-inferiority randomized controlled trial.
- 作者列表："Sun Y","Liu Y","Su T","Sun J","Wu Y","Liu Z
BACKGROUND:Among women suffering from urinary incontinence (UI), about one-third are diagnosed with mixed urinary incontinence (MUI), among which urgency-predominant MUI causes more shame and inconvenience to patients. The treatments for urgency-predominant MUI have limited guidelines and previous studies have indicated that electroacupuncture (EA) might be a safe and effective option. The present study aims to evaluate the effect of EA on women with urgency-predominant MUI. METHODS:The study is a multicentered, three-armed, non-inferiority randomized clinical trial. A total of 282 female patients with urgency-predominant MUI will be randomly divided into three groups, namely the EA group, sham electroacupuncture (SA) group, and solifenacin treatment group at a ratio of 1:1:1. Thirty-six sessions of acupuncture treatment over 12 weeks and solifenacin treatment over 36 weeks will be provided. The primary outcome will be the decrease of urgency urinary incontinence (UUI) episodes after 12-week treatment. Secondary outcomes will include changes in incontinence episodes, urinary frequency, urgency, severity of symptoms, and influence on quality of life, assessed using the International Consultation on Incontinence Questionnaire Short Form (ICIQ SF) and Overactive Bladder Questionnaire Short Form (OAB-q SF). All patients will be continuously followed up until week 36 and their allocations will be statistically analyzed. DISCUSSION:Though placebo of solifenacin is rather difficult to access and all patients in the trial cannot be fully blinded, the present study will serve as an introduction of three-armed, randomized, non-inferiority, and sham acupuncture-controlled clinical trials to the acupuncture field, in an attempt to compare the effects of EA and solifenacin for treating women with urgency-predominant MUI. TRIAL REGISTRATION:ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT03787654. Registered on 25 December, 2018.
背景: 在患有尿失禁 (UI) 的女性中，约3分之1被诊断为混合性尿失禁 (MUI)，其中以尿急为主的MUI给患者带来更多的耻辱和不便。急迫性MUI的治疗指南有限，先前的研究表明电针 (EA) 可能是一种安全有效的选择。本研究旨在评估EA对急迫性MUI女性的影响。 方法: 本研究是一项多中心、三臂、非劣效性随机临床试验。将282例以尿急为主的女性患者按1:1:1的比例随机分为3组，分别为电针组、假电针 (SA) 组、索利那新治疗组。将提供超过12周的36次针灸治疗和超过36周的索利那新治疗。主要结果将是治疗12周后急迫性尿失禁 (UUI) 发作的减少。次要结局将包括失禁发作、尿频、尿急、症状严重程度和对生活质量的影响的变化，使用国际失禁咨询问卷简表 (ICIQ SF) 和膀胱过度活动症问卷简表 (OAB-q SF) 进行评估。所有患者将连续随访至第36周，并对其分配进行统计分析。 讨论: 尽管索利那新的安慰剂很难获得，而且试验中的所有患者都不能完全失明，但本研究将作为三臂、随机、非劣效性和假针灸对照临床试验引入针灸领域，试图比较EA和索利那新治疗急迫性MUI妇女的效果。 试验注册: ClinicalTrials.gov: nct03787654。2018年12月25日登记。
METHODS:BACKGROUND:Anxiety and distress behaviors during anesthesia induction are associated with negative postoperative outcomes for pediatric patients. Documenting behavioral responses to induction is useful to evaluate induction quality at hospitals and to optimize future anesthetics for returning patients, but we lack a simple tool for clinical documentation. The Induction Compliance Checklist is a tool for grading induction behaviors that is well validated for research purposes, but it is not practical for routine documentation in busy clinical practice settings. The Child Induction Behavioral Assessment tool was developed to provide a simple and easy to use electronic tool for clinical documentation of induction behaviors. The aim of this study was to test the Child Induction Behavioral Assessment tool's concurrent validity with the Induction Compliance Checklist and the interrater reliability. METHODS:This prospective, observational study included 384 pediatric patients undergoing anesthesia inhalation induction. Concurrent validity with the Induction Compliance Checklist and interrater reliability of the Child Induction Behavioral Assessment were evaluated. Two researchers alternated scoring the Induction Compliance Checklist. The 2 researchers independently scored the Child Induction Behavioral Assessment. The anesthesia clinician caring for the patient also independently scored the Child Induction Behavioral Assessment by completing their routine documentation in the patient's medical record. Two age groups were evaluated (ages 1-3 and 4-12 years old). RESULTS:Clinicians' and researchers' Child Induction Behavioral Assessment scores demonstrated a strong correlation with the Induction Compliance Checklist (P < .0001). There was an excellent agreement between the 2 researchers' Child Induction Behavioral Assessment scores for the younger and older age groups, respectively (Kappa [95% CI] = 0.97 (0.94-0.99); K = 0.94 (0.89-0.99)]. The agreement between the researchers and the 117 clinicians who documented Child Induction Behavioral Assessment assessments in the medical record was good overall (intraclass correlation coefficient = 0.70), with fair agreement with the 1- to 3-year-old patients (intraclass correlation coefficient = 0.56) and good agreement for the 4- to 12-year-old patients (intraclass correlation coefficient = 0.74). CONCLUSIONS:The Child Induction Behavioral Assessment scale is a simple and practical electronic tool used to document pediatric behavioral responses to anesthesia inductions. This study provides evidence of the tool's validity and reliability for inhalation inductions. Future research is needed at other hospitals to confirm validity.
METHODS:BACKGROUND:Fentanyl and morphine are the 2 most commonly added opioids to bupivacaine for spinal anesthesia during cesarean delivery. Numerous clinical trials have assessed efficacy and safety of different doses of fentanyl added to intrathecal bupivacaine for spinal anesthesia, yet its benefit, harm, and optimal dose remain unclear. This study aimed to systematically review the evidence of the efficacy of fentanyl when added to intrathecal bupivacaine alone and when added to bupivacaine with morphine for spinal anesthesia during cesarean delivery. METHODS:Key electronic databases (PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library) were searched for randomized controlled trials in the cesarean delivery population. The primary outcome was the failure rate of spinal anesthesia, as assessed by the need for either conversion to general anesthesia or intraoperative analgesic supplementation. Two reviewers independently extracted the data using a standardized electronic form. Results are expressed as relative risks or mean differences with 95% CIs. RESULTS:Seventeen randomized controlled clinical trials (most judged as low or unclear risk of bias) with 1064 participants provided data for the meta-analysis. Fentanyl added to intrathecal bupivacaine alone reduced the need for intraoperative supplemental analgesia (relative risk, 0.18; 95% CI, 0.11-0.27; number needed to treat, 4) and the incidence of nausea/vomiting (relative risk, 0.41; 95% CI, 0.24-0.70; number needed to treat, 6.5), with longer time to first postoperative analgesia request (mean difference, 91 minutes; 95% CI, 69-113). No difference was observed regarding the need for conversion to general anesthesia (relative risk, 0.67; 95% CI, 0.12-3.57), the incidence of hypotension, the onset of sensory block, or the duration of motor block. However, the addition of intrathecal fentanyl was associated with higher incidence of intraoperative pruritus (relative risk, 5.89; 95% CI, 2.07-16.79; number needed to harm, 13.5). The inclusion of fentanyl to intrathecal bupivacaine-morphine compared to intrathecal bupivacaine-morphine alone conferred a similar benefit, with a significantly reduced need for intraoperative supplemental analgesia (relative risk, 0.16; 95% CI, 0.03-0.95; number needed to treat, 9). Analysis using a funnel plot indicated a possibility of publication bias in included studies. CONCLUSIONS:Current evidence suggests a benefit of using fentanyl as both an additive to intrathecal bupivacaine alone and to intrathecal bupivacaine combined with morphine for cesarean delivery under spinal anesthesia. The possibility of publication bias, small sample size, and high risk of bias in some of the included studies warrant treating the results with caution.
METHODS::Ophthalmic pediatric regional anesthesia has been widely described, but infrequently used. This review summarizes the available evidence supporting the use of conduction anesthesia in pediatric ophthalmic surgery. Key anatomic differences in axial length, intraocular pressure, and available orbital space between young children and adults impact conduct of ophthalmic regional anesthesia. The eye is near adult size at birth and completes its growth rapidly while the orbit does not. This results in significantly diminished extraocular orbital volumes for local anesthetic deposition. Needle-based blocks are categorized by relation of the needle to the extraocular muscle cone (ie, intraconal or extraconal) and in the cannula-based block, by description of the potential space deep to the Tenon capsule. In children, blocks are placed after induction of anesthesia by a pediatric anesthesiologist or ophthalmologist, via anatomic landmarks or under ultrasonography. Ocular conduction anesthesia confers several advantages for eye surgery including analgesia, akinesia, ablation of the oculocardiac reflex, and reduction of postoperative nausea and vomiting. Short (16 mm), blunt-tip needles are preferred because of altered globe-to-orbit ratios in children. Soft-tip cannulae of varying length have been demonstrated as safe in sub-Tenon blockade. Ultrasound technology facilitates direct, real-time visualization of needle position and local anesthetic spread and reduces inadvertent intraconal needle placement. The developing eye is vulnerable to thermal and mechanical insults, so ocular-rated transducers are mandated. The adjuvant hyaluronidase improves ocular akinesia, decreases local anesthetic dosage requirements, and improves initial block success; meanwhile, dexmedetomidine increases local anesthetic potency and prolongs duration of analgesia without an increase in adverse events. Intraconal blockade is a relative contraindication in neonates and infants, retinoblastoma surgery, and in the presence of posterior staphylomas and buphthalmos. Specific considerations include pertinent pediatric ophthalmologic topics, block placement in the syndromic child, and potential adverse effects associated with each technique. Recommendations based on our experience at a busy academic ophthalmologic tertiary referral center are provided.