Warning: file_get_contents(https://eutils.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/eutils/elink.fcgi?dbfrom=pubmed&id=33263249&cmd=llinks): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests
in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 215
Rehabilitation and COVID-19: a rapid living systematic review 2020 by Cochrane Rehabilitation Field Update as of October 31st, 2020 #MMPMID33263249
Negrini F; de Sire A; Andrenelli E; Lazzarini SG; Patrini M; Ceravolo MG
Eur J Phys Rehabil Med 2021[Feb]; 57 (1): 166-170 PMID33263249show ga
INTRODUCTION: This living systematic review presents the monthly update of the second edition of the rapid living systematic review 2020 conducted by Cochrane Rehabilitation REH-COVER Action Steering Committee. The aim of this study was to update the monthly COVID-19 and rehabilitation literature research up to October 31(st), 2020. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: Methodology described in the second edition of the rapid living systematic review 2020 conducted by Cochrane Rehabilitation REH-COVER action was applied. PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, Scopus, Web of Science, and PEDro databases were searched, and papers related to COVID-19 and rehabilitation were retrieved and summarized descriptively. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: The database search retrieved 2704 publications. Duplicates were removed, and 1185 unique records were screened for inclusion. After screening titles, abstracts and full-texts, 22 papers were included in the present review. According to OCEBM 2011 Levels of Evidence table, 17 studies (77%) fall within the level of evidence 4 category, while the remainder (23%) are categorized as level of evidence 3. Most studies (N.=19; 86%) provided epidemiological data about the disease natural history/determining factor or the clinical presentation of COVID-19 infection, while only two studies focused on health service organization and intervention efficacy. CONCLUSIONS: The most recent published COVID-19 research relevant to rehabilitation primarily provides data on the clinical course and the clinical presentation of the pathology, rather than on rehabilitation interventions or service delivery. Studies with high levels of evidence regarding the efficacy of interventions, long-term monitoring, or new health service organization models are lacking.
Eur+J+Phys+Rehabil+Med 2021 ; 57 (1): 166-170
