Skaaning Storm (chefash4)

To compare and rank the efficacy and safety of non-pharmacological interventions in the management of labour pain. Recently, various non-pharmacological interventions have been applied to manage labour pain and have shown positive effects. However, evidence identifying which type of non-pharmacological intervention is more efficient and safer is limited. Systematic review and Bayesian network meta-analysis based on PRISMA-NMA. Seven databases were searched from database inception-March 2020. Two reviewers independently performed study selection, quality appraisal and data extraction. Conventional meta-analysis was conducted using either fixed-effects model or random-effects model according to statistical heterogeneity. The Bayesian network meta-analysis was conducted using the consistency model. 43 studies involving nine non-pharmacological interventions were included. The Bayesian network meta-analysis showed that acupressure (SMD=-2.00, 95% CrI -3.09 to -0.94), aromatherapy (SMD=-2.01, 95% CrI -3.isk pregnant women. Non-pharmacological interventions for labour pain management are recommended to apply according to maternal women's preference and values. The results support the use of non-pharmacological interventions, especially aromatherapy and acupressure, to relieve labour pain in low-risk pregnant women. find more Non-pharmacological interventions for labour pain management are recommended to apply according to maternal women's preference and values. To compare the risk of phlebitis between midline catheters and peripherally inserted central catheters in infusion therapy with a meta-analysis. This was a systematic literature review and meta-analysis. Web of Science, PubMed, Scopus, Embase, Cochrane Library, ProQuest, CNKI, WanFang, VIP and SinoMed were searched from inception to May 2020. All studies comparing the risk of phlebitis between midline catheters and peripherally inserted central catheters were included. According to the inclusion and exclusion criteria, two authors independently assessed the literature and extracted the data. Meta-analyses were conducted to generate estimates of phlebitis risk in patients with midline catheters verse peripherally inserted central catheters, and publication bias was evaluated with RevMan 5.3. A total of seven studies were collected, involving 1377 participants. The incidence of phlebitis with midline catheters and peripherally inserted central catheters was 1.52% and 3.41%. Meta-analysis showed that the incidence of phlebitis has no significant difference between midline catheters and peripherally inserted central catheters. The sensitivity analysis shows that the results from this meta-analysis are fair in overall studies. All studies have no significant publication bias. This study provides the first systematic assessment of the risk of phlebitis between midline catheters and peripherally inserted central catheters. The incidence of phlebitis has no significant difference between them. There are many factors to consider when choosing vascular access devices. This study provides the first systematic assessment of the risk of phlebitis between midline catheters and peripherally inserted central catheters. The incidence of phlebitis has no significant difference between them. There are many factors to consider when choosing vascular access devices.Bisphenol S (BPS) is an organic chemical that has been used as a substitute for bisphenol A (BPA) in making polycarbonate plastics, epoxy resins, thermal receipt papers, and currency bills, as BPA has been reported to have dreadful effects on the living system. From this view point, the present study investigates whether BPS has the same or rather more toxic effects like BPA or not. Limited studies were carried out on the effect of BPS on fish. The hepatic antioxidant enzymes such as superoxide dismutase, cata