Cargando…
Atraumatic versus traumatic lumbar puncture needles: a systematic review and meta-analysis protocol
INTRODUCTION: Lumbar puncture is one of the oldest and most commonly performed procedures in medicine, used to diagnose and treat disease. Headache following lumbar puncture remains a frequent complication, causing significant patient discomfort and often requiring narcotic analgesia or invasive the...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BMJ Publishing Group
2017
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5387934/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28363928 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2016-014478 |
_version_ | 1782521038823751680 |
---|---|
author | Nath, Siddharth Badhiwala, Jetan H Alhazzani, Waleed Nassiri, Farshad Belley-Cote, Emilie Koziarz, Alex Shoamanesh, Ashkan Banfield, Laura Oczkowski, Wieslaw Sharma, Mike Sahlas, Demetrios Reddy, Kesava Farrokhyar, Forough Singh, Sheila Sharma, Sunjay Zytaruk, Nicole Selim, Magdy Almenawer, Saleh A |
author_facet | Nath, Siddharth Badhiwala, Jetan H Alhazzani, Waleed Nassiri, Farshad Belley-Cote, Emilie Koziarz, Alex Shoamanesh, Ashkan Banfield, Laura Oczkowski, Wieslaw Sharma, Mike Sahlas, Demetrios Reddy, Kesava Farrokhyar, Forough Singh, Sheila Sharma, Sunjay Zytaruk, Nicole Selim, Magdy Almenawer, Saleh A |
author_sort | Nath, Siddharth |
collection | PubMed |
description | INTRODUCTION: Lumbar puncture is one of the oldest and most commonly performed procedures in medicine, used to diagnose and treat disease. Headache following lumbar puncture remains a frequent complication, causing significant patient discomfort and often requiring narcotic analgesia or invasive therapy. Needle tip design has been proposed to affect the incidence of headache postlumbar puncture, with pencil-point ‘atraumatic’ needles thought to reduce its incidence in comparison to bevelled ‘traumatic’ needles. Despite this, the use of atraumatic needles and knowledge of their existence remains significantly limited among clinicians. This study will systematically review the evidence on atraumatic lumbar puncture needles and compare them with traumatic needles across a variety of clinical outcomes. METHODS AND ANALYSES: We will include published randomised controlled trials (RCTs), observational studies and abstracts, with no publication type or language restrictions. Search strategies will be designed to peruse the MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science, ClinicalTrials.gov, CINAHL, WHO Clinical Trials Database and Cochrane Library databases. We will also implement strategies to search the grey literature. 3 reviewers will thoroughly and independently examine the search results, complete data abstraction and conduct quality assessment. Included RCTs will be assessed using the Cochrane risk of bias assessment tool and eligible observational studies will be examined using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. We will examine the outcomes of: headache and its type, intensity, duration and treatment; backache; success rate; hearing disturbance and nerve root irritation. The primary outcome will be the incidence of postdural puncture headache. We will calculate pooled estimates, relative risks for dichotomous outcomes and weighted mean differences for continuous outcomes, with corresponding 95% CIs. Statistical heterogeneity will be measured using Cochran's Q test and quantified using the I(2) statistic. We will also conduct prespecified subgroup and sensitivity analyses to examine if covariates exist and to explore potential heterogeneity. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Research ethics board approval is not required for this study as it draws from published data and raises no concerns related to patient privacy. This review will provide a comprehensive assessment of the evidence on atraumatic needles for lumbar puncture and is directed to a wide audience. Results from the review will be disseminated extensively through conferences and submitted to a peer-reviewed journal for publication. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42016047546. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-5387934 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2017 |
publisher | BMJ Publishing Group |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-53879342017-05-03 Atraumatic versus traumatic lumbar puncture needles: a systematic review and meta-analysis protocol Nath, Siddharth Badhiwala, Jetan H Alhazzani, Waleed Nassiri, Farshad Belley-Cote, Emilie Koziarz, Alex Shoamanesh, Ashkan Banfield, Laura Oczkowski, Wieslaw Sharma, Mike Sahlas, Demetrios Reddy, Kesava Farrokhyar, Forough Singh, Sheila Sharma, Sunjay Zytaruk, Nicole Selim, Magdy Almenawer, Saleh A BMJ Open Evidence Based Practice INTRODUCTION: Lumbar puncture is one of the oldest and most commonly performed procedures in medicine, used to diagnose and treat disease. Headache following lumbar puncture remains a frequent complication, causing significant patient discomfort and often requiring narcotic analgesia or invasive therapy. Needle tip design has been proposed to affect the incidence of headache postlumbar puncture, with pencil-point ‘atraumatic’ needles thought to reduce its incidence in comparison to bevelled ‘traumatic’ needles. Despite this, the use of atraumatic needles and knowledge of their existence remains significantly limited among clinicians. This study will systematically review the evidence on atraumatic lumbar puncture needles and compare them with traumatic needles across a variety of clinical outcomes. METHODS AND ANALYSES: We will include published randomised controlled trials (RCTs), observational studies and abstracts, with no publication type or language restrictions. Search strategies will be designed to peruse the MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science, ClinicalTrials.gov, CINAHL, WHO Clinical Trials Database and Cochrane Library databases. We will also implement strategies to search the grey literature. 3 reviewers will thoroughly and independently examine the search results, complete data abstraction and conduct quality assessment. Included RCTs will be assessed using the Cochrane risk of bias assessment tool and eligible observational studies will be examined using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. We will examine the outcomes of: headache and its type, intensity, duration and treatment; backache; success rate; hearing disturbance and nerve root irritation. The primary outcome will be the incidence of postdural puncture headache. We will calculate pooled estimates, relative risks for dichotomous outcomes and weighted mean differences for continuous outcomes, with corresponding 95% CIs. Statistical heterogeneity will be measured using Cochran's Q test and quantified using the I(2) statistic. We will also conduct prespecified subgroup and sensitivity analyses to examine if covariates exist and to explore potential heterogeneity. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Research ethics board approval is not required for this study as it draws from published data and raises no concerns related to patient privacy. This review will provide a comprehensive assessment of the evidence on atraumatic needles for lumbar puncture and is directed to a wide audience. Results from the review will be disseminated extensively through conferences and submitted to a peer-reviewed journal for publication. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42016047546. BMJ Publishing Group 2017-03-31 /pmc/articles/PMC5387934/ /pubmed/28363928 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2016-014478 Text en Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://www.bmj.com/company/products-services/rights-and-licensing/ This is an Open Access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ |
spellingShingle | Evidence Based Practice Nath, Siddharth Badhiwala, Jetan H Alhazzani, Waleed Nassiri, Farshad Belley-Cote, Emilie Koziarz, Alex Shoamanesh, Ashkan Banfield, Laura Oczkowski, Wieslaw Sharma, Mike Sahlas, Demetrios Reddy, Kesava Farrokhyar, Forough Singh, Sheila Sharma, Sunjay Zytaruk, Nicole Selim, Magdy Almenawer, Saleh A Atraumatic versus traumatic lumbar puncture needles: a systematic review and meta-analysis protocol |
title | Atraumatic versus traumatic lumbar puncture needles: a systematic review and meta-analysis protocol |
title_full | Atraumatic versus traumatic lumbar puncture needles: a systematic review and meta-analysis protocol |
title_fullStr | Atraumatic versus traumatic lumbar puncture needles: a systematic review and meta-analysis protocol |
title_full_unstemmed | Atraumatic versus traumatic lumbar puncture needles: a systematic review and meta-analysis protocol |
title_short | Atraumatic versus traumatic lumbar puncture needles: a systematic review and meta-analysis protocol |
title_sort | atraumatic versus traumatic lumbar puncture needles: a systematic review and meta-analysis protocol |
topic | Evidence Based Practice |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5387934/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28363928 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2016-014478 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT nathsiddharth atraumaticversustraumaticlumbarpunctureneedlesasystematicreviewandmetaanalysisprotocol AT badhiwalajetanh atraumaticversustraumaticlumbarpunctureneedlesasystematicreviewandmetaanalysisprotocol AT alhazzaniwaleed atraumaticversustraumaticlumbarpunctureneedlesasystematicreviewandmetaanalysisprotocol AT nassirifarshad atraumaticversustraumaticlumbarpunctureneedlesasystematicreviewandmetaanalysisprotocol AT belleycoteemilie atraumaticversustraumaticlumbarpunctureneedlesasystematicreviewandmetaanalysisprotocol AT koziarzalex atraumaticversustraumaticlumbarpunctureneedlesasystematicreviewandmetaanalysisprotocol AT shoamaneshashkan atraumaticversustraumaticlumbarpunctureneedlesasystematicreviewandmetaanalysisprotocol AT banfieldlaura atraumaticversustraumaticlumbarpunctureneedlesasystematicreviewandmetaanalysisprotocol AT oczkowskiwieslaw atraumaticversustraumaticlumbarpunctureneedlesasystematicreviewandmetaanalysisprotocol AT sharmamike atraumaticversustraumaticlumbarpunctureneedlesasystematicreviewandmetaanalysisprotocol AT sahlasdemetrios atraumaticversustraumaticlumbarpunctureneedlesasystematicreviewandmetaanalysisprotocol AT reddykesava atraumaticversustraumaticlumbarpunctureneedlesasystematicreviewandmetaanalysisprotocol AT farrokhyarforough atraumaticversustraumaticlumbarpunctureneedlesasystematicreviewandmetaanalysisprotocol AT singhsheila atraumaticversustraumaticlumbarpunctureneedlesasystematicreviewandmetaanalysisprotocol AT sharmasunjay atraumaticversustraumaticlumbarpunctureneedlesasystematicreviewandmetaanalysisprotocol AT zytaruknicole atraumaticversustraumaticlumbarpunctureneedlesasystematicreviewandmetaanalysisprotocol AT selimmagdy atraumaticversustraumaticlumbarpunctureneedlesasystematicreviewandmetaanalysisprotocol AT almenawersaleha atraumaticversustraumaticlumbarpunctureneedlesasystematicreviewandmetaanalysisprotocol |