METHODS: This systematic review was registered in the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO) and reported using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) guidelines. Only national, or international physical activity and/or sedentary behaviour guidelines were included in the review. Included guidelines targeted children and adolescents aged between 5 and 18 years. A grey literature search was undertaken incorporating electronic databases, custom Google search engines, targeted websites and international expert consultation. Guideline quality was assessed using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation II Instrument (AGREE II).
RESULTS: The search resulted in 50 national or international guidelines being identified. Twenty-five countries had a national guideline and there were three international guidelines (European Union, Nordic countries (used by Iceland, Norway and Sweden), World Health Organization (WHO)). Nineteen countries and the European Union adopted the WHO guidelines. Guidelines varied in relation to date of release (2008 to 2019), targeted age group, and guideline wording regarding: type, amount, duration, intensity, frequency and total amount of physical activity. Twenty-two countries included sedentary behaviour within the guidelines and three included sleep. Total scores for all domains of the AGREE II assessment for each guideline indicated considerable variability in guideline quality ranging from 25.8 to 95.3%, with similar variability in the six individual domains. Rigorous guideline development is essential to ensure appropriate guidance for population level initiatives.
CONCLUSIONS: This review revealed considerable variability between national/international physical activity guideline quality, development and recommendations, highlighting the need for rigorous and transparent guideline development methodologies to ensure appropriate guidance for population-based approaches. Where countries do not have the resources to ensure this level of quality, the adoption or adolopment (framework to review and update guidelines) of the WHO guidelines or guidelines of similar quality is recommended.
TRIAL REGISTRATION: Review registration: PROSPERO 2017 CRD42017072558.
PURPOSE: Investigating injury and illness epidemiology in professional Asian football.
STUDY DESIGN: Descriptive prospective study.
METHODS: Professional teams from the Asian Football Confederation (AFC) league were followed prospectively for three consecutive AFC seasons (2017 through 2019, 13 teams per season, 322 team months). Time-loss injuries and illnesses in addition to individual match and training exposure were recorded using standardised digital tools in accordance with international consensus procedures.
RESULTS: In total, 232 665 hours of exposure (88.6% training and 11.4% matches) and 1159 injuries were recorded; 496 (42.8%) occurred during matches, 610 (52.6%) during training; 32 (2.8%) were reported as 'not applicable' and for 21 injuries (1.8%) information was missing. Injury incidence was significantly greater during match play (19.2±8.6 injuries per 1000 hours) than training (2.8±1.4, p<0.0001), resulting in a low overall incidence of 5.1±2.2.The injury burden for match injuries was greater than from training injuries (456±336 days per 1000 hours vs 54±34 days, p<0.0001). The two specific injuries causing the greatest burden were complete ACL ruptures (0.14 injuries (95% CI 0.9 to 0.19) and 29.8 days lost (29.1 to 30.5) per 1000 hours) and hamstring strains (0.86 injuries (0.74 to 0.99) and 17.5 days (17.0 to 18.1) lost per 1000 hours).Reinjuries constituted 9.9% of all injuries. Index injuries caused 22.6±40.8 days of absence compared with 25.1±39 for reinjuries (p=0.62). The 175 illnesses recorded resulted in 1.4±2.9 days of time loss per team per month.
CONCLUSION: Professional Asian football is characterised by an overall injury incidence similar to that reported from Europe, but with a high rate of ACL ruptures and hamstring injury, warranting further investigations.
MATERIALS AND METHOD: Forty-five patients with dry socket were divided into two treatment groups. Group I dry socket patients (n = 30) received conventional treatment while group II patients (n = 15) were irradiated with LLLT at a setting of 200-mW, 6-J, continuous-wave mode using an R02 tipless handpiece (Fotona Er:YAG, Europe), on the buccal, lingual, and middle surfaces of the socket for 30 s from a delivery distance of 1 cm. Pain score and quantification of granulation tissue in the socket were recorded at 0, 4, and 7 days post-dry socket treatment.
RESULTS: Results showed that the LLLT-irradiated group II sockets showed a much lower VAS pain score of 1-2 as early as day 4, and a richer amount of granulation tissue compared to the conventional treated group I socket. The amount and rate of granulation tissue formation in the dry socket are inversely proportional to the pain score showing significant clinical effectiveness of LLLT on promoting the healing of the dry socket, with improvement in symptoms (P = .001). Conventionally treated dry sockets take at least 7 days to match the effective healing of an LLLT-irradiated dry socket.
CONCLUSION: LLLT irradiation influences biomodulation of dry socket healing by dampening inflammation, promoting vascularization, stimulating granulation, and controlling pain symptoms.
CLINICAL RELEVANCE: LLLT may be an additional effective tool for managing dry sockets in general dental practice.
OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to systematically summarise all global evidence on the economic burden of ADHD.
METHODS: A systematic search for published studies on costs of ADHD was conducted in EconLit, EMBASE, PubMed, ERIC, and PsycINFO. Additional literature was identified by searching the reference lists of eligible studies. The quality of the studies was assessed using the Larg and Moss checklist.
RESULTS: This review included 44 studies. All studies were conducted in high-income countries and were limited to North America and Europe except for four studies: two in Asia and two in Australia. Most studies were retrospective and undertook a prevalence-based study design. Analysis revealed a substantial economic impact associated with ADHD. Estimates based on total costs ranged from $US831.38 to 20,538 for per person estimates and from $US356 million to 20.27 billion for national estimates. Estimates based on marginal costs ranged from $US244.15 to 18,751.00 for per person estimates and from $US12.18 million to 141.33 billion for national estimates. Studies that calculated economic burden across multiple domains of direct, indirect, and education and justice system costs for both children and adults with ADHD reported higher costs and translated gross domestic product than did studies that captured only a single domain or age group.
CONCLUSIONS: Despite the wide variation in methodologies in studies reviewed, the literature suggests that ADHD imposes a substantial economic burden on society. There is a dire need for cost-of-illness research in low- and middle-income countries to better inform the treatment and management of ADHD in these countries. In addition, guidelines on the conduct and reporting of economic burden studies are needed as they may improve standardisation of cost-of-illness studies.