|
1. No reliable evidence of benefit from HBOT |
Citation/s: Packard M. The Cornell Study. http://www.netnet.net/mums/
Lead author's name and fax: Maureen Packard (no contacts given)
Three-part Clinical Question: In moderate to severe cerebral palsy
children (1 to 5 years), does HBOT improve neuro/psycho/motor function?
Search Terms: hyperbaric oxygen therapy, cerebral palsy, paediatric
The Study:
Non-blinded randomised controlled trial without intention-to-treat.
The Study Patients: Developmentally delayed by >33% in one area
neurocognitive or motor skill assessment, and who have not had seizures in the
last 6 months. Average age at commencement of study 30 months, average motor age
7.5 months, average cognitive age and language age 12 months.
Control group (N = 14; 11 analysed): Nil specific (received delayed HBOT
at 6 months after experimental group).
Experimental group (N = 12; 9 analysed): 40 one hour sessions HBOT at 1.5
ATA over 8 weeks
The Evidence:
|
Outcome |
Time to Outcome |
Overall patients |
Overall parents |
|
|
|
|
Middle
ear barotrauma requiring intervention |
any time |
45% |
35% |
|
|
|
|
95% Confidence Intervals: |
|
|
|
|||
|
Improved
parental disability inventory (PEDI) |
8 weeks |
P<0.05 |
|
|
|
|
|
95% Confidence Intervals: |
|
|
|
|||
In the whole study, 9 of 20 children compressed (45%) required myringotomy or ventilation tubes for middle ear barotrauma, while 7 parents also required this intervention. We have assumed one parent compressed for each child.
Comments:
1. A non-blinded study where the only reported significant differences were of
parental assessment.
2. Small study with low power to detect important clinical differences.
3. Results poorly reported and usually for whole study rather than between group
comparison.
4. No peer review and internet publication only.
5. No account of the fate of dropouts.
Appraised by: Shamani Singham Prince of Wales Hospital, Sydney ; Thursday, 18
November 2004
Email: singhams@sesahs.nsw.gov.au
Kill or Update By: November 2006