Treinamento muscular inspiratório para asma: revisão sistemática com metanálise

In asthmatic, the lung hyperinflation leaves the inspiratory muscle at a suboptimal position in length-tension relationship, reducing the capacity of to generate tension. The increase in transversal section area of the inspiratory muscles could reverse or delay the deterioration of inspiratory muscle function. Objective: To evaluate the evidence for the efficacy of inspiratory muscle training (IMT) with an external resistive device in patients with asthma. Methods: A systematic review with meta-analysis was carried out. The sources researched were the Cochrane Airways Group Specialised Register of trials, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (The Cochrane Library Issue 11 of 12, 2012), MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, CINAHL, AMED, ClinicalTrials.gov and reference lists of articles. All databases were searched from their inception up to November 2012 and there was no restriction on the language of publication. Randomised controlled trials that involved the use of an external inspiratory muscle training device versus a control (sham or no inspiratory training device) were considered for inclusion. Two reviewers independently selected articles for inclusion, evaluated risk of bias in studies and extracted data. Results: A total of five studies involving 113 asthmatic patients were included. Three clinical trials were produced by the same group. The included studies showed a significant increase in maximal inspiratory pressure (MD 13.34 cmH2O, 95% CI 4.70 to 21.98), although the confidence intervals were wide. There was no statistically significant difference between the IMT group and the control group for maximal expiratory pressure, peak expiratory flow rate, forced expiratory volume in one second, forced vital capacity, sensation of dyspnea and use of beta2-agonist. There were no studies describing exacerbation events that required a course of oral and inhaled corticosteroids or emergency department visits, inspiratory muscle endurance, hospital admissions and days of work or school. Conclusions: There is no conclusive evidence in this review to support or refute inspiratory muscle training for asthma, once the evidence was limited by the small number of studies included, number of participants in them together with the risk of bias. More well conducted randomized controlled trials are needed, such trials should investigate respiratory muscle strength, exacerbation rate, lung function, symptoms, hospital admissions, use of medications and days off work or school. IMT should also be assessed in the context of more severe asthma

Observação da ação na reabilitação do membro superior de pacientes com acidente vascular cerebral: uma revisão sistemática com metanálise

Background: stroke causes long-term impairments, limitation of activities and restriction in participation in daily life situations, especially for upper limb impairment (UL). Action Observation (AO) has been used for the rehabilitation of UL in these patients. It's a multisensory therapy which consists in observing a healthy subject performing a motor task, followed by physical practice. Objectives: assess whether the AO improves motor function of UL and dependence for activities of daily living (ADLs) of stroke patients or cause any adverse effects. Search methods: a search strategy was words and terms used for the identification of articles, in the following scientific basis Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials; MEDLINE; PsycINFO; CINAHL and LILACS. In addition to manual search of the references of articles and search for theses and dissertations in Portal Capes and LILACS. The identification of the studies was conducted from October to December 2015, being the last search on December 3. Selection criteria: randomised controlled trials (RCT) involving adults with stroke who had deficits in upper limb function and used AO as an intervention. Data collection and analysis: the data extracted from the studies were used to analyze the risk of bias, the effect of the treatment and the quality of the body of evidence. Main results: 6 studies were included, totaling 270 patients. The primary outcome analyzed was the motor function of MS. Were combined in meta-analyzes studies comparing AO versus placebo or an active control, considering the immediate and long-term effect (n=241). Regarding the motor function of the arm (5 trials), the estimated effect for the therapy was not significant. However, when considering the hand function estimating the effect was favorable to the group that conducted the AO, in short (mean difference = 6.93, 95% CI 1.48 to 12.39; P = 0.01) and long-term (mean difference = 7.57; 95% CI 1.34 the 13.80; p = 0.02). Unable to perform the analysis for functional dependency. The studies showed a low or uncertain risk of bias, but the quality of evidence the body was considered low and very low quality. Authors’ conclusions: AO was effective in improving hand function of stroke patients. Despite the low quality evidence that the use of OA in clinical practice should not be discouraged. RCT new studies should be conducted with greater methodological rigor and larger samples, covering important outcomes such as functional dependence for ADLs.