Changing stroke rehab and research worldwide now.Time is Brain! trillions and trillions of neurons that DIE each day because there are NO effective hyperacute therapies besides tPA(only 12% effective). I have 523 posts on hyperacute therapy, enough for researchers to spend decades proving them out. These are my personal ideas and blog on stroke rehabilitation and stroke research. Do not attempt any of these without checking with your medical provider. Unless you join me in agitating, when you need these therapies they won't be there.

What this blog is for:

My blog is not to help survivors recover, it is to have the 10 million yearly stroke survivors light fires underneath their doctors, stroke hospitals and stroke researchers to get stroke solved. 100% recovery. The stroke medical world is completely failing at that goal, they don't even have it as a goal. Shortly after getting out of the hospital and getting NO information on the process or protocols of stroke rehabilitation and recovery I started searching on the internet and found that no other survivor received useful information. This is an attempt to cover all stroke rehabilitation information that should be readily available to survivors so they can talk with informed knowledge to their medical staff. It lays out what needs to be done to get stroke survivors closer to 100% recovery. It's quite disgusting that this information is not available from every stroke association and doctors group.

Wednesday, February 20, 2019

Systematic review of systematic reviews for medical cannabinoids

And this is why most medical marijuana legislation is bogus, it is not written correctly, if proven in clinical trials anywhere in the world it should be available to patients.  Your doctor likely won't ever suggest marijuana for spasticity, so  bypass them in legal states or Canada. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Systematic review of systematic reviews for medical cannabinoids

Pain, nausea and vomiting, spasticity, and harms

G. Michael Allan, Caitlin R. Finley, Joey Ton, Danielle Perry, Jamil Ramji, Karyn Crawford, Adrienne J. Lindblad, Christina Korownyk and Michael R. Kolber

Abstract

Objective To determine the effects of medical cannabinoids on pain, spasticity, and nausea and vomiting, and to identify adverse events.
Data sources MEDLINE, the Cochrane Database, and the references of included studies were searched.
Study selection Systematic reviews with 2 or more randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that focused on medical cannabinoids for pain, spasticity, or nausea and vomiting were included. For adverse events, any meta-analysis for the conditions listed or of adverse events of cannabinoids was included.
Synthesis From 1085 articles, 31 relevant systematic reviews were identified including 23 for pain, 5 for spasticity, 6 for nausea and vomiting, and 12 for adverse events. Meta-analysis of 15 RCTs found more patients taking cannabinoids attained at least a 30% pain reduction: risk ratio (RR) of 1.37 (95% CI 1.14 to 1.64), number needed to treat (NNT) of 11. Sensitivity analysis found study size and duration affected findings (subgroup differences, P ≤ .03), with larger and longer RCTs finding no benefit. Meta-analysis of 4 RCTs found a positive global impression of change in spasticity (RR = 1.45, 95% CI 1.08 to 1.95, NNT = 7). Other results were not consistently statistically significant, but when positive, a 30% or more improvement in spasticity had an NNT of 10. Meta-analysis of 7 RCTs for control of nausea and vomiting after chemotherapy found an RR of 3.60 (95% CI 2.55 to 5.09) with an NNT of 3. Adverse effects caused more patients to stop treatment (number needed to harm [NNH] of 8 to 22). Individual adverse events were very common, including dizziness (NNH = 5), sedation (NNH = 5), confusion (NNH = 15), and dissociation (NNH = 20). “Feeling high” was reported in 35% to 70% of users. The GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) evaluation reduced evidence ratings of benefit to low or very low.
Conclusion There is reasonable evidence that cannabinoids improve nausea and vomiting after chemotherapy. They might improve spasticity (primarily in multiple sclerosis). There is some uncertainty about whether cannabinoids improve pain, but if they do, it is neuropathic pain and the benefit is likely small. Adverse effects are very common, meaning benefits would need to be considerable to warrant trials of therapy.
Medical cannabinoids have been advocated for an extensive variety of conditions, from glaucoma to cancer.1 Unfortunately, bias is pervasive throughout the medical cannabinoid literature, including in randomized controlled trials (RCTs).2 This is compounded by poor reporting in the media, with 79% of medical cannabinoid newspaper stories providing inappropriate information, most of which was sensationalism.3
The interest in medical cannabinoids has varied broadly among prescribers, from enthusiasm4 to reluctance.5 A survey found that about one-quarter of physicians in a region of Quebec prescribed medical cannabinoids, primarily (about 90%) nabilone, but they thought more education on prescribing would be helpful.6 A needs assessment survey found that Canadian physicians wanted more information about the risks and potential therapeutic uses of medical cannabinoids.7 While Canadian organizations have responded by providing guidance documents8 and patient information,9 these documents lack numeric information and GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) evaluation10 regarding risks and benefits to adequately promote shared, informed decision making.
Two large and comprehensive reviews have examined the use of cannabinoids for various medical conditions.1,2 If cannabinoids are effective, the evidence suggests that they are most likely to work for chronic pain, nausea and vomiting associated with chemotherapy, and spasticity associated with chronic neurologic conditions like multiple sclerosis.1,2 However, a key consideration for any medical intervention is the potential adverse events or harms that could arise from the therapy.
Our purpose was to complete a systematic review to provide evidence for a medical cannabinoid prescribing guideline. We focused on the conditions for which medical cannabinoids have the best evidence base and the highest likelihood of having medical advantages. Therefore, our objective was to complete 4 distinct systematic reviews of systematic reviews on medical cannabinoids for pain, nausea and vomiting, spasticity, and adverse events. On completion, we hoped to have clear guidance for prescribers and their patients, as well as to provide adequate information to promote shared, informed decision making.

No comments:

Post a Comment