Search PubMed⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

K Flemming

Publications and source records attributed to K Flemming.

At least 19 recordsLinked to original sources
PubMed2006

Therapeutic ultrasound for pressure ulcers.

BACKGROUND: Pressure ulcers have been recorded as occurring in 5 to 32% of patients admitted to a UK District General Hospital (the precise rate depends on case-mix) and 4 to 7% in the community. They represent a major burden of sickness and reduced quality of life for patients and their carers, and are costly to health service providers. Pressure ulcers are treated by using wound dressings, relieving pressure on the wound, by treating concurrent conditions which may delay healing, and by the use of physical therapies such as electrical stimulation, laser therapy and ultrasound. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effect of therapeutic ultrasound on the healing of pressure ulcers. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Cochrane Wounds Group Specialised Register and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials in May 2006. In addition we hand searched journals, conference proceedings, bibliographies and reference lists of articles. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing therapeutic ultrasound with sham ultrasound or standard treatment. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two authors independently checked the result of the search to identify relevant RCTs. Details of eligible studies were extracted and summarised using a data extraction sheet. Attempts were made to obtain missing information by contacting authors. Data extraction was checked by a second author. Meta-analysis was used to combine the results of trials where the interventions and outcome measures were sufficiently similar. MAIN RESULTS: Three trials involving 146 people were included. Two RCTs compared ultrasound therapy with sham ultrasound and the third compared a combination of ultrasound and ultraviolet light with laser and with standard treatment. Neither of the two RCTs comparing ultrasound with sham found a significant difference in healing rates. The trials were pooled, in the absence of significant heterogeneity. There was no evidence of benefit associated with the use of ultrasound in the treatment of pressure ulcers. In the three-arm comparison there was no statistically significant difference in ulcers healed. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There is no evidence of benefit of ultrasound therapy in the treatment of pressure ulcers. However, the possibility of beneficial or harmful effect cannot be ruled out due to the small number of trials, some with methodological limitations and small numbers of participants. Further research is needed.

Humans↗
PubMed2006

Electromagnetic therapy for treating pressure ulcers.

BACKGROUND: Pressure ulcers are defined as areas "of localized damage to the skin and underlying tissue caused by pressure, shear, friction and/or the combination of these". In the UK, pressure ulcers occur in 5 to 32% of District General Hospitals people and in 4 to 7% of people in community settings. Electromagnetic therapy, in which electrodes produce an electromagnetic field across the wound, may improve healing of chronic wounds such as pressure ulcers. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of electromagnetic therapy on the healing of pressure ulcers. SEARCH STRATEGY: For this first update, we searched the Cochrane Wounds Group Specialised Register (last searched October 2005); CENTRAL (The Cochrane Library 2005, Issue 4); MEDLINE (1966 to October 2005); EMBASE (1980 to October 2005); and CINAHL (1982 to October 2005). SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials comparing electromagnetic therapy with sham electromagnetic therapy, or other (standard) treatment. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: For this first update, two authors independently scrutinized the results of the search to identify relevant RCTs and obtained full reports of potentially eligible studies. For the original review, details of eligible studies were extracted and summarised using a data extraction sheet. Attempts were made to obtain missing data by contacting authors. Data extraction was checked by a second author. Meta-analysis was applied to combine the results of trials when the interventions and outcome measures were sufficiently similar. MAIN RESULTS: This update identified no new trials. Two RCTs were identified for inclusion in the original review (total of 60 participants). One was a three-armed study comparing electromagnetic therapy with electromagnetic therapy in combination with standard therapy, and with standard therapy alone, on 17 female and 13 male with grade II and III pressure ulcers. The other study compared electromagnetic therapy with sham therapy in 30 male participants with a spinal cord injury and a grade II or grade III pressure ulcer.Neither study found a statistically significant difference between the healing rates of pressure ulcers in people treated with electromagnetic therapy compared with those in the control group. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: The results provide no evidence of benefit in using electromagnetic therapy to treat pressure ulcers. However, the possibility of a beneficial or harmful effect cannot be ruled out, due to the fact that there were only two included trials both with methodological limitations and small numbers of participants. Further research is recommended.

Electric Stimulation Therapy↗
PubMed2006

Electromagnetic therapy for treating venous leg ulcers.

BACKGROUND: Leg ulceration is a common, chronic, recurring condition. The estimated prevalence of leg ulcers in the UK population is 1.5 to 3 per 1000. Venous ulcers (also called stasis, or varicose ulcers) comprise 80 to 85% of all leg ulcers. Electromagnetic therapy is sometimes used as a treatment to assist the healing of chronic wounds such as venous leg ulcers. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of electromagnetic therapy on the healing of venous leg ulcers. SEARCH STRATEGY: For this first review update, we searched the Cochrane Wounds Group Specialised Register (last searched October 2005); CENTRAL (The Cochrane Library 2005, Issue 4); MEDLINE (1966 to October 2005); EMBASE (1980 to October 2005); and CINAHL (1982 to October 2005). SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials comparing electromagnetic therapy with sham electromagnetic therapy or other treatments. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: For the original review, details of eligible studies were extracted and summarised using a data extraction sheet. Attempts were made to obtain missing data by contacting authors. A second reviewer checked data extraction. Meta-analysis was applied to combine the results of trials where the interventions and outcome measures were adequately similar. For this first update, two reviewers independently scrutinized the results of the search to identify relevant RCTs and obtained full reports of potentially eligible studies. In the case of disagreements, a final decision was made either after discussion between two reviewers or consultation with a third party (a member of the Cochrane Wounds Group). MAIN RESULTS: This update identified no new trials. A total of three eligible RCTs were identified by the original review. Two trials compared the use of electromagnetic therapy with sham therapy and one trial compared it with standard topical treatments. One trial found a difference in healing rates of borderline statistical significance between electromagnetic therapy and sham therapy, although the direction of treatment effect was consistently in favour of electromagnetic therapy, the difference was not statistically significant. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There is currently no reliable evidence of benefit of electromagnetic therapy in the healing of venous leg ulcers. Further research is needed.

Electric Stimulation Therapy↗
PubMed2001

Electromagnetic therapy for the treatment of pressure sores.

BACKGROUND: Electromagnetic therapy is used with the aim of improving the healing of chronic wounds such as pressure sores and venous leg ulcers OBJECTIVES: To assess the effectiveness of electromagnetic therapy in the treatment of pressure sores SEARCH STRATEGY: The Cochrane Wounds Group search strategy was used (see Scope) to search for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of electromagnetic therapy for the treatment of pressure sores SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials comparing electromagnetic therapy with sham electromagnetic therapy, or other (standard) treatment DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Results of searches were scrutinised by one reviewer (and checked by a second) to identify possible RCTs and full reports of these were obtained. Details of eligible studies were extracted and summarised using a data extraction sheet. Attempts were made to obtain missing data by contacting authors. Data extraction was checked by a second reviewer. MAIN RESULTS: A total of two eligible RCTs were identified for inclusion in this review. The first of these studies (Comorosan 1993) was a three armed study comparing electromagnetic therapy, electromagnetic therapy in combination with standard therapy, and standard therapy alone. The second study (Salzburg 1995) was a comparison between electromagnetic therapy and sham therapy on 30 male patients with a spinal cord injury and a grade two or grade three pressure sore. Neither study found a statistically significant difference between the healing rates of electromagnetic therapy treated and control group patients. REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS: The results suggest no evidence of a benefit in using electromagnetic therapy to treat pressure sores. However the possibility of a beneficial or harmful effect cannot be ruled out due to the fact there were only two trials with methodological limitations and small numbers of patients.

Electromagnetic Phenomena↗
PubMed2001

Electromagnetic therapy for the treatment of venous leg ulcers.

BACKGROUND: Electromagnetic therapy is used with the aim of improving the healing of chronic wounds such as pressure sores and venous leg ulcers OBJECTIVES: To assess the effectiveness of electromagnetic therapy in the treatment of venous leg ulcers SEARCH STRATEGY: The Cochrane Wounds group search strategy was used (see Scope) to search for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of electromagnetic therapy for the treatment of venous leg ulcers SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials comparing electromagnetic therapy with sham electromagnetic therapy or other (standard) treatment DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Results of searches were scrutinised by one reviewer (and checked by a second) to identify possible RCTs and full reports of these were obtained. Details of eligible studies were extracted and summarised using a data extraction sheet. Attempts were made to obtain missing data by contacting authors. Data extraction was checked by a second reviewer. MAIN RESULTS: A total of three eligible RCTs were identified. Two trials compared the use of electromagnetic therapy to sham (Ieran 1990; Kenkre 1996) and one trial (Stiller 1992) compared it with standard topical treatments. One of the trials found a difference in healing rates of borderline statistical significance between electromagnetic therapy and sham, although the direction of treatment effect was consistently in favour of electromagnetic therapy the difference was not statistically significant. REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS: There is currently no reliable evidence of benefit of electromagnetic therapy in the healing of venous leg ulcers.

Electromagnetic Phenomena↗
PubMed2001

Systematic reviews of wound care management: (5) beds; (6) compression; (7) laser therapy, therapeutic ultrasound, electrotherapy and electromagnetic therapy.

BACKGROUND: Chronic wounds such as leg ulcers, diabetic foot ulcers and pressure sores are common in both acute and community healthcare settings. The prevention and treatment of these wounds involves many strategies: pressure-relieving beds, mattresses and cushions are universally used as measures for the prevention and treatment of pressure sores; compression therapy in a variety of forms is widely used for venous leg ulcer prevention and treatment; and a whole range of therapies involving laser, ultrasound and electricity is also applied to chronic wounds. This report covers the final three reviews from a series of seven. AIMS: To assess the clinical effectiveness and cost- effectiveness of: (1) pressure-relieving beds, mattresses and cushions for pressure sore prevention and treatment; (2) compression therapy for the prevention and treatment of leg ulcers; (3) low-level laser therapy, therapeutic ultrasound, electrotherapy and electromagnetic therapy for the treatment of chronic wounds. METHODS - DATA SOURCES: Nineteen electronic databases, including MEDLINE, CINAHL, EMBASE and the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register (CENTRAL), were searched. Relevant journals, conference proceedings and bibliographies of retrieved papers were handsearched. An expert panel was also consulted. METHODS - STUDY SELECTION: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) which evaluated these interventions were eligible for inclusion in this review if they used objective measures of outcome such as wound incidence or healing rates. RESULTS - BEDS, MATTRESSES AND CUSHIONS FOR PRESSURE SORE PREVENTION AND TREATMENT: A total of 45 RCTs were identified, of which 40 compared different mattresses, mattress overlays and beds. Only two trials evaluated cushions, one evaluated the use of sheepskins, and two looked at turning beds/kinetic therapy. RESULTS - COMPRESSION FOR LEG ULCERS: A total of 24 trials reporting 26 comparisons were included (two of prevention and 24 of treatment strategies). RESULTS - LOW-LEVEL LASER THERAPY, THERAPEUTIC ULTRASOUND, ELECTROTHERAPY AND ELECTROMAGNETIC THERAPY: Four RCTs of laser (for venous leg ulcers), 10 of therapeutic ultrasound (for pressure sores and venous leg ulcers), 12 of electrotherapy (for ischaemic and diabetic ulcers, and chronic wounds generally) and five of electromagnetic therapy (for venous leg ulcers and pressure sores) were included. Studies were generally small, and of poor methodological quality. CONCLUSIONS (1) Foam alternatives to the standard hospital foam mattress can reduce the incidence of pressure sores in people at risk, as can pressure-relieving overlays on the operating table. One study suggests that air-fluidised therapy may increase pressure sore healing rates. (2) Compression is more effective in healing venous leg ulcers than is no compression, and multi-layered high compression is more effective than single-layer compression. High-compression hosiery was more effective than moderate compression in preventing ulcer recurrence. (3) There is generally insufficient reliable evidence to draw conclusions about the contribution of laser therapy, therapeutic ultrasound, electrotherapy and electromagnetic therapy to chronic wound healing.

Bandages↗
PubMed2000

Therapeutic ultrasound for venous leg ulcers.

BACKGROUND: Ultrasound therapy is commonly used with the aim of improving the healing of chronic wounds such as pressure ulcers and venous leg ulcers. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effectiveness of therapeutic ultrasound in the treatment of venous leg ulcers. SEARCH STRATEGY: The Cochrane Wounds Group search strategy was used (see Scope) to search for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of therapeutic ultrasound for the treatment of venous leg ulcers. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials comparing therapeutic ultrasound with sham ultrasound, or other (standard) treatment DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Results of searches were scrutinised by one reviewer (and checked by a second) to identify possible RCTs and full reports of these were obtained. Details of eligible studies were extracted and summarised using a data extraction sheet. Attempts were made to obtain missing data by contacting authors. Data extraction was checked by a second reviewer. MAIN RESULTS: A total of seven eligible RCTs were identified. Four trials compared ultrasound therapy with sham ultrasound, three trials compared ultrasound therapy with standard treatment. None of the trials found a difference in healing rates between any of the therapies, though it is noteworthy that the direction of treatment effect was consistently in favour of ultrasound (though this did not reach significance in the individual studies). REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS: There is no good evidence of a benefit of ultrasound therapy in the healing of venous leg ulcers.

Humans↗
PubMed2000

Laser therapy for venous leg ulcers.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the effectiveness of low level laser therapy in the treatment of venous leg ulcers. SEARCH STRATEGY: Searches of 19 databases, hand searching of journals and conference proceedings from 1948 onwards, and examination of bibliographies. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials comparing low level laser therapy with: sham laser; no laser; non-coherent light. There was no restriction on date or language. The main outcome measure used was complete healing of the ulcers. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Data extraction was done by one reviewer and checked by a second. Meta analysis was used to combine the results of trials where the interventions and outcome measures were sufficiently similar. MAIN RESULTS: There were 4 eligible trials. Two RCTs compared laser therapy with sham, 1 with ultraviolet therapy and 1 with non-coherent, unpolarised red light. Neither of the two RCTs comparing laser with sham found a significant difference in healing rates; there was no significant of laser evident when the trials were pooled. A three-arm study compared: - laser therapy alone - laser therapy plus infrared light - non-coherent, unpolarised red light. Significantly more ulcers completely healed in the group receiving a combination of laser and infrared light compared with non-coherent, unpolarised red light. A fourth trial compared laser and ultraviolet light and found no difference. REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS: We have found no evidence of any benefit associated with low level laser therapy on venous leg ulcer healing. One small study suggests that a combination of laser and infrared light may promote the healing of venous ulcers, however more research is needed.

Humans↗
PubMed2000

Therapeutic ultrasound for pressure sores.

BACKGROUND: Pressure sores have been recorded as occurring in 4-10% of patients admitted to a UK District General Hospital (the precise rate depends on case-mix) and in an unknown proportion of patients in the community. They represent a major burden of sickness and reduced quality of life for patients and their carers, and are costly to health service providers. Pressure sores can be treated by using wound dressings, relieving pressure on the wound, by treating concurrent conditions which may delay healing, and by the use of physical therapies such as electrical stimulation, laser therapy and ultrasound. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effectiveness of the use of therapeutic ultrasound in the treatment of pressure sores. SEARCH STRATEGY: The Cochrane Wounds Groups search strategy was used (see Scope) to search for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of therapeutic ultrasound for the treatment of pressure sores up to December 1999. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials comparing therapeutic ultrasound with sham ultrasound or other (standard) treatment. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Results of searches were scrutinised by one reviewer to identify possible RCTs and full reports of these were obtained. Details of eligible studies were extracted and summarised using a data extraction sheet. Attempts were made to obtain missing information by contacting authors. Data extraction was checked by a second reviewer. Meta-analysis was used to combine the results of trials where the interventions and outcome measures were sufficiently similar. MAIN RESULTS: A total of 3 eligible RCTs were identified. Two RCTs compared ultrasound therapy with sham and the third compared a combination of ultrasound and ultraviolet light with laser and with standard treatment. Neither of the two RCTs comparing ultrasound with sham found a significant difference in healing rates. The trials were pooled, in the absence of significant heterogeneity. There was no evidence of benefit associated with the use of ultrasound in the treatment of pressure sores. In the three-arm comparison there was a significant increase in the weekly healing rates associated with the ultrasound/ultraviolet combination compared with laser but no statistically significant difference between ultrasound/ultraviolet and control. REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS: The results suggest no apparent evidence of a benefit of ultrasound therapy in the treatment of pressure sores. However the possibility of a beneficial or a harmful effect cannot be ruled out due to the small number of trials with methodogical limitations and small numbers of participants.

Humans↗
PubMed1994

[The problems of spotted breeds of rabbits. 4. Morpho- and histometric findings in the CNS and thyroid glands and the hormone content in blood at slaughter of hybrid rabbits, and estimation of the heterosis effect].

Morpho- und histometric investigations of brains, pituitary and thyroid glands as well as thyroid-related functional parameters in the blood of purebred and hybrid rabbits revealed a predisposition to hypothyreotic conditions in homozygous, megacolon-prone genotypes. In addition to this also a hypoganglionotic state in different gut wall localizations was confirmed; pituitary traits however did not indicate a primary contribution of this gland to the syndrome, though some alterations were found, which are interpreted as secondary sv. symptomatic. Gender influences varied hormonal characteristics and disease manifestations too: A dramatic fall in severely diseased does with respect to T3-concentration as well as a seemingly more inactive thyroid gland compared to bucks underline hormonal influences. As a consequence of these results it is concluded, that hybridisation within spotted rabbits does not amend the inclination to megacolon in animals homozygous for the K (En) gene, though it may influence its manifestation.

Animals↗
PubMed1984

Radiopharmacology: hazard or/and benefit.

In the beginning of medical radiology, only the benefit of ionizing radiation was obvious, and radiation was handled and applied generously. After late effects had become known, the radiation exposure was reduced to doses following which no such effects were found. Thus, it was assumed that one could obtain an optimal medical benefit without inducing any hazard. Later, due to experimental findings, hypotheses arose (linear dose-effect response, no time factor) which led to the opinion that even low and lowest radiation doses were relevant for the induction of late effects. A radiation fear grew, which was unintentionally strengthened by radiation protection decrees: even for low doses a radiation risk could be calculated. Therefore, it was believed that there could still exist a radiation hazard, and the radiation benefit remained in question. If, however, all presently known facts are considered, one must conclude that large radiation doses are hazardous and low doses are inefficient, whereas lowest doses have a biopositive effect. Ionizing radiation, therefore, may cause both, hazard as well as benefit. Which of the two effects prevails is determined by the level of dose.

Abnormalities, Radiation-Induced↗