Search

Introduction: Migraine is a chronic paroxymal neurological disorder characterized by attacks of moderate to severe headache and reversible neurological and systemic symptoms. Treatment of migraine includes acute therapies, that aim to reduce the intensity of pain of each attack, and preventive therapies that should decrease the frequency of headache recurrence. The objective of this systematic review was to assess the efficacy and safety of acupuncture for the prophylaxis of episodic or chronic migraine in adult patients compared to pharmacological treatment. Methods: We included randomized-controlled trials published in western languages that compared any treatment involving needle insertion (with or without manual or electrical stimulation) at acupuncture points, pain points or trigger points, with any pharmacological prophylaxis in adult (≥18 years) with chronic or episodic migraine with or without aura according to the criteria of the International Headache Society. Results: Nine randomized trials were included encompassing 1,484 patients. At the end of intervention we found a small reduction in favor of acupuncture for the number of days with migraine per month: (SMD: -0.37; 95% CI -1.64 to -0.11), and for response rate (RR: 1.46; 95% CI 1.16-1.84). We found a moderate effect in the reduction of pain intensity in favor of acupuncture (SMD: -0.36; 95% CI -0.60 to -0.13), and a large reduction in favor of acupuncture in both the dropout rate due to any reason (RR 0.39; 95% CI 0.18 to 0.84) and the dropout rate due to adverse event (RR 0.26; 95% CI 0.09 to 0.74). Quality of evidence was moderate for all these primary outcomes. Results at longest follow-up confirmed these effects. Conclusions: Based on moderate certainty of evidence, we conclude that acupuncture is mildly more effective and much safer than medication for the prophylaxis of migraine., Competing Interests: The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2020 Giovanardi, Cinquini, Aguggia, Allais, Campesato, Cevoli, Gentili, Matrà and Minozzi.)

Background: Signs of serious clinical events overlap with those of sepsis. We hypothesised that any education on severe sepsis/septic shock may affect the outcome of all hospital patients. We designed this study to assess the trend of the mortality rate of adults admitted to hospital for at least one night in relationship with a hospital staff educational program dedicated to severe sepsis/septic shock., Methods: This study was performed in six Italian hospitals in the same region. Multidisciplinary Sepsis Teams members were selected by each hospital management among senior staff. The education included the following steps: i) the Teams were taught about adult learning, problem based learning, and Surviving Sepsis guidelines, and provided with educational material (literature, electronic presentations, scenarios of clinical cases for training and booklets); ii) they started delivering courses and seminars each to their own hospital staff in the last quarter of 2007.To analyse mortality, we selected adult patients, admitted for at least one night to the wards or units present in all the study hospitals and responsible for 80% of hospital deaths. We fitted a Poisson model with monthly hospital mortality rates from December 2003 to August 2009 as dependent variable. The effect of the educational program on hospital mortality was measured as two dummy variables identifying a first (November 2007 to December 2008) and a second (January to August 2009) education period. The analysis was adjusted for a linear time trend, seasonality and monthly average values of age, Charlson score, length of stay in hospital and urgent/non-urgent admission., Results: The hospital staff educated reached 30.6% at the end of June 2009. In comparison with the pre-education period, the Relative Risk of death of the patient population considered was 0.93 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.87-0.99; p 0.025) for in-patients in the first, and 0.89 (95% CI 0.81-0.98; p 0.012) for those in the second period after education., Conclusion: Our hypothesis that a program educating hospital staff to early detection and treatment of severe sepsis/septic shock may affect the outcome of all hospital patients is original, but it has to be corroborated by other experiences.