Différences
Ci-dessous, les différences entre deux révisions de la page.
| Les deux révisions précédentes Révision précédente Prochaine révision | Révision précédente | ||
|
acupuncture:evaluation:oncologie:03. fatigue en oncologie [29 Jan 2025 18:08] Nguyen Johan |
acupuncture:evaluation:oncologie:03. fatigue en oncologie [24 Oct 2025 18:12] (Version actuelle) Nguyen Johan [1.1.1. Hadoush 2025] |
||
|---|---|---|---|
| Ligne 13: | Ligne 13: | ||
| ==== Generic Acupuncture ==== | ==== Generic Acupuncture ==== | ||
| + | |||
| + | |||
| + | === Almassi 2025 (lung cancer) === | ||
| + | |||
| + | Almassi AA, Tang CY, Smith S. Comparison of Single Versus Multiple Nonpharmacological Interventions for the Management of Lung Cancer-Related Fatigue: A Systematic Review. Clin Respir J. 2025 Oct;19(10):e70132. https://doi.org/10.1111/crj.70132 | ||
| + | . | ||
| + | ^Background|Lung cancer is one of the common cancers globally. One of the adverse symptoms of lung cancer and its treatment is fatigue. Pharmacological interventions have not shown efficacy on cancer-related fatigue, and investigations on nonpharmacological interventions may be useful. This systematic review aims to evaluate the efficacy of nonpharmacological interventions on managing fatigue and quality of life outcomes among people undergoing treatment for lung cancer and evaluate if treatment efficacy differed between single and multimodal interventions.| | ||
| + | ^Methods|Relevant literature published in MEDLINE, Scopus, Cochrane Library, CINAHL, and ProQuest from January 2003 to January 2023 was included. Included studies must have: participants over 16 years of age receiving treatment such as chemotherapy, radiotherapy, and/or surgery, cancer-related fatigue (CRF) as an outcome, and must be randomized controlled trials. Two reviewers independently extracted data from eligible articles, and data analysis was performed using R 4.1.0 software.| | ||
| + | ^Results|Total of 14 randomized controlled trials were included and categorized into four groups: physical activities, traditional Chinese medicine (TCM), education, and dietary counselling. Our extensive search did not find any multimodal studies related to CRF in patients with lung cancer. Pooled results of this systematic review found that TCM and education interventions have a significant positive impact on fatigue in patients with lung cancer. Physical activity and dietary counselling were not effective in managing fatigue. None of the reported nonpharmacological interventions in this review significantly impact QoL.| | ||
| + | ^Conclusions|This review identified that TCM and educational programs improved CRF in patients with lung cancer. However, physical activities and dietary counselling did not show any improvements in fatigue for patients undergoing lung cancer treatment.| | ||
| + | |||
| + | |||
| + | === Hadoush 2025 === | ||
| + | |||
| + | |||
| + | Hadoush H, Almhasis R, Kassab M, Almasri NA, Al-Wardat M. Effectiveness of non-pharmacological interventions on pain and fatigue management in cancer survivors: a systematic review and meta-analysis study. J Bodyw Mov Ther. 2025 Oct;44:251-260. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbmt.2025.05.046 | ||
| + | ^Background|Pain and fatigue are among the most frequent and burdensome symptoms experienced by cancer survivors. Non-pharmacological interventions such as acupuncture, reflexology, and physical activity have been increasingly used to improve quality of life, but their relative effectiveness remains unclear.| | ||
| + | ^Objective|To evaluate the effectiveness of non-pharmacological interventions for the management of pain and fatigue in adult cancer survivors through a systematic review and meta-analysis.| | ||
| + | ^Methods|Only randomized controlled trials (RCTs) enrolling adults aged 18–80 years with a history of any cancer type were included. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool. Meta-analyses were performed in Review Manager software using standardized mean differences (SMDs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) under random-effects models.| | ||
| + | ^Results|Five RCTs including 283 participants demonstrated significant pain relief with acupuncture and reflexology (SMD = −0.69, 95% CI −1.29 to −0.10; Z = 2.28; p = 0.02; I² = 82%). In contrast, five RCTs with 370 participants (221 in intervention groups) showed only a minor effect of physical activity on pain control (SMD = −0.29, 95% CI −0.74 to 0.16; Z = 1.27; p = 0.20; I² = 76%). For fatigue management, four RCTs (368 participants) found minimal impact from physical activity (SMD = −0.06, 95% CI −0.46 to 0.33; Z = 0.30; p = 0.76; I² = 72%).| | ||
| + | ^Conclusion|Non-pharmacological interventions, particularly acupuncture and reflexology, show a positive therapeutic impact on pain management among cancer survivors, whereas their effects on fatigue remain negligible. Further high-quality RCTs are needed to confirm these findings and explore mechanisms underlying differential symptom responses.| | ||
| + | |||
| + | |||
| === Long 2024 === | === Long 2024 === | ||
