Search PubMed⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search PubMed

Results for “Near-infrared spectroscopy (NIRS)”

Search indexed PubMed citations on genomics, clinical trials, systematic reviews and public health. Explore titles, authors and supplied subject terms, then open the PubMed record.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

75 records · Page 5Linked to original sources
PubMed2026

Feasibility of implementation, diagnostic accuracy, and end-user impact of an electronic health record (EHR)-based ureteral stent tracking tool in a pediatric population.

INTRODUCTION & OBJECTIVES: Ureteral stent tracking systems have reduced stent retention in adults, but their accuracy and impact in pediatrics have been minimally explored. With low event rates in children, such tools may yield high false positives, raising questions on balancing event prevention with provider burden. We aimed to evaluate the feasibility, diagnostic accuracy, and end-user impact of an Electronic Surveillance Tool for Evaluating Nephroureteral stent Tracking (eSTENT) at our institution. STUDY DESIGN: eSTENT, implemented in 1/2024, flags ureteral stents at risk for retention based on implant documentation, expected explant date, and explant documentation. Monthly reports are generated for stents missing explant documentation. We retrospectively evaluated the diagnostic performance of eSTENT from 1/2024-8/2025 at our pediatric hospital. A usability survey including a validated 1-7 implementation score (higher = easier implementation) was distributed to pediatric urologists and operating room nurses. RESULTS: Of 172 cases with ureteral stent placement, eSTENT flagged 28 events (16%) in 24 patients. Of these, 26 represented documentation gaps where explant had been appropriate. Two flags had no documentation of explant, representing near miss events that were identified. No retained stents occurred, consistent with high sensitivity and modest specificity. There were no flags in the last 6 months of the study period. Survey response rate was 100% for surgeons and 55% for nurses. Before eSTENT, stents were not routinely tracked. All surgeons and 93% of nurses reported no added burden, despite occasional misidentification of retained stents. Three surgeons found eSTENT beneficial, four were neutral, and free-text responses generally cited eSTENT's "fail safe" nature as positive. Nurses suggested improvements, including user support and integrated documentation reminders. The average implementation score among both groups was 6/7, indicating easy adoption. DISCUSSION: While the impact of stent tracking tools in adult literature has been positive, our study emphasizes the feasibility of broader adoption at a pediatric hospital. Integration of eSTENT may avoid the potentially devastating consequences of a retained stent. Prioritizing sensitivity over specificity appears acceptable for a "never event" in patient safety. Our study is limited by the retrospective nature of data collection and survey bias. CONCLUSIONS: Though no stents were retained in the study period, eSTENT appropriately flagged two cases without added burden to most end-users. Further optimization is warranted, but adoption in pediatric centers may enhance care reliability.

Humans↗
PubMed2026

Evaluating the utility of melatonin in spine surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials.

BACKGROUND: Spine surgery is increasingly performed worldwide, and acute postoperative stressors such as pain and anxiety remain highly prevalent despite historical management with opioids and other pharmacological agents. Recently, interest has emerged in melatonin administration given its endogenous physiological roles, low cost, favorable adverse event profile, and documented benefits throughout surgical literature. PURPOSE: This study aims to consolidate the existing evidence on melatonin's utility specifically in spine surgery, an area not yet comprehensively evaluated, to inform clinical practice and enhance spine surgeon comprehension. STUDY DESIGN/SETTING: Preregistered on PROSPERO, this systematic review queried PubMed/MEDLINE, CINAHL, SPORTDiscus, and Web of Science on November 21st, 2025, for studies reporting outcomes following melatonin administration in patients undergoing spine surgery. METHODS: Study quality was assessed using the Cochrane Risk-of-Bias 2 tool. Extracted variables included demographics, comparator medications, dosages, and other relevant details. Statistical analyses included frequency-weighted means (FWMs), associated standard deviations, narrative syntheses, and limited meta-analyses, where appropriate. RESULTS: A total of 6 moderate-quality randomized trials were included from 749 screened. Melatonin (3-10 mg) was administered to 227 patients (FWM age=43.3±8.6 years; 46.2% male; BMI=26.6±3.2 kg/m2), placebo to 125 patients (age=43.2±10.1 years; 60% male; BMI=28.5±4.3 kg/m2), and active pharmacologic comparators (fentanyl, gabapentin, dexmedetomidine, zolpidem) to 151 patients (age=46.6±8.9 years; 40.5% male; BMI=26.3±3.5 kg/m2). Procedures primarily involved uncomplicated lumbar laminectomies (1-4 levels), with outcomes assessed up to 24 hours postoperatively. Melatonin was associated with significant improvements in early postoperative VAS-pain scores, blood-pressure-related, analgesic-related, and anxiety-related outcomes versus placebo across most reporting studies. Compared with active pharmacologic agents, significant benefits were observed only in select nausea- and anxiety-related instances. Limited meta-analysis (n=2) demonstrated higher 24-hour VAS-pain for melatonin versus gabapentin, though mean difference was near-negligible and harbored extensive statistical constraints. CONCLUSION: Melatonin demonstrates variable utility following spine surgery, with generally consistent anxiolysis and frequent benefit versus placebo but less consistent and comparatively weaker efficacy relative to active pharmacologic comparators. Future outcome-homogenous studies incorporating more granular, expansive comparator arms and more robust quantitative analyses are needed to further elucidate melatonin's role in advancing spine care. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level II.

Humans↗
PubMed2026

Remotely Supervised, Home-Based Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation for Major Depressive Disorder: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Major depressive disorder affects over 280 million people worldwide, and access to effective treatment remains limited. Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) is a noninvasive option, and portable devices now allow for home-based delivery under varying degrees of remote supervision. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to systematically review and meta-analyze the efficacy, safety, feasibility, and acceptability of home-based and remotely supervised tDCS for depressive disorders. METHODS: Following the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) 2020 and PRISMA-S (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses literature search extension) guidelines, we searched MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, the Cochrane databases, ClinicalTrials.gov, and the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform up to July 2025, with backward and forward citation searching. Two reviewers independently screened records, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias (version 2 of the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool for randomized trials, Newcastle-Ottawa Scale for observational studies, and Critical Appraisal Skills Programme for qualitative studies) and certainty of evidence (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation; GRADE). RESULTS: This review included 12 distinct studies (16 reports), of which 6 (50%) were randomized sham-controlled trials forming the meta-analytic pool. Active home-based tDCS produced a small, statistically significant improvement over sham (pooled Hedges g=0.36, 95% CI 0.06-0.66; P=.03; I2=34.3%). The effect was not robust to removal of the single largest positive trial (omitting the one study from 2025: g=0.39, 95% CI -0.12 to 0.91), and trial-level results were mixed: the 2 largest trials (one unsupervised [n=210] and one self-administered [n=141]) were negative on their primary depression outcomes, whereas the largest real-time supervised trial (n=174) was positive (between-group 95% CI 0.51-4.01; P=.01). This estimate was concordant in direction with an independent peer-reviewed meta-analysis of overlapping trials, which reported a pooled Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale reduction (weighted mean difference -2.74, 95% CI -4.19 to -1.29) and Hamilton Depression Rating Scale reduction (weighted mean difference -2.24, 95% CI -4.16 to -1.49), attenuating to nonsignificance (P>.05) in major depressive disorder without comorbid cognitive impairment. The pooled effect fell at or near the minimal clinically important difference. GRADE certainty was moderate. Adverse events were predominantly mild: one pilot study was terminated early for skin lesions, and one nonfatal suicide attempt occurred in an unsupervised trial. CONCLUSIONS: Home-based and remotely supervised tDCS produces a small, statistically significant but clinically modest antidepressant effect that is sensitive to the inclusion of the largest positive trial, with the 2 largest trials being negative. The available controlled evidence does not establish supervision intensity as a determinant of efficacy. Current data are insufficient to recommend routine clinical adoption; adequately powered trials with standardized supervision and longer follow-up are needed.

Humans↗