Background: Scapulohumeral periarthritis commonly afflicts individuals in their middle age. Its etiology is multifaceted, and treatment presents a challenge with a high risk of recurrence. The main symptoms include shoulder pain and limited joint mobility, seriously affect the quality of life of the patients. Recent research indicate that acupuncture combined with bloodletting cupping can significantly improve the function of activity of shoulder joint and the pain in individuals with scapulohumeral periarthritis. However, these studies have typically been limited in scope, therefore additional research to substantiate the efficacy and safety of these intervention. Methods: To evaluate the efficacy of acupuncture combined with bloodletting cupping for treating patients with scapulohumeral periarthritis. We conducted an online search of databases in both Chinese and English, including PubMed, the Cochrane Library, Embase, Web of Science, CNKI, Wangfang Data, China Science and Technology Journal Database (VIP) and Chinese BioMedical Literature Database (CBM), to collect randomized controlled trials (RCTs) concerning the use of acupuncture combined with bloodletting cupping in scapulohumeral periarthritis patients. We also examined the references within the identified literature. Search utilised subject headings and free-text terms in both languages, without racial restrictions, for records up to April 3, 2024. Two researchers independently screened the literature, extracted data, and evaluated their qualities. RevMan 5.3 software was used for meta-analysis of the included studies. The protocol of this review was recorded in the International Platform of Registered Systematic Review and Meta-analysis Protocols (PROSPERO). Its registration number is CRD42023454614. Results: This review incorporated 22 RCTs involving a total of 1,774 patients. The results of meta-analysis showed that the clinical effective rate (RR=1.25, 95%CI [1.20, 1.30], P＜0.00001) of treating scapulohumeral periarthritis with acupuncture combined with bloodletting cupping was higher in the experimental group than in the control group. The all of Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) score (MD=-1.70, 95% CI [-2.17, -1.22], P＜0.00001). Melle score (SMD=-2.45, 95% CI [-2.55, -2.34], P=0.007]) and recurrence rate (RR=0.23, 95% CI [0.07, 0.77], P=0.02) were lower in the experimental group than in the control group with statistical significance (P<0.05). Conclusion: The acupuncture combined with bloodletting cupping for the treatment of shoulder impingement syndrome demonstrates definite efficacy and safety, with superior clinical effectiveness, pain relief, improvement in shoulder joint mobility, and reduction in recurrence compared to acupuncture alone. Therefore, it is worthy of being promoted and applied clinically.

Background: Recently specific interactions and crosslinks between the gut microbiota and the lungs have been recognized, particularly with regard to respiratory immune and anti-microbial reactions. This is often known as the “gut-lung axis” or “a common mucosal immunological system”. Objective: The aim of the current systematic review was to evaluate evidence, from published clinical trials and cohort studies, if probiotics may have an effect in improving and managing COVID-19 symptoms. Materials and methods: The available studies were searched through a comprehensive search of electronic databases that included PubMed, Science Direct, Scirus, ISI Web of Knowledge, Google Scholar and CENTRAL (Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials), using a combination of the following keywords: “COVID-19" OR "SARS-CoV-2" AND "Microbiota" OR "Probiotics” OR “Gut Lung Axis”. The literature was reviewed until August 31, 2022. Results: Only 3 studies were included. One of them evaluated the efficacy of probiotics in COVID-19 patients to obtain complete remission of all signs and symptoms. The clinical trial proves that probiotics have a significant effect on complete remission of all signs and symptoms of COVID-19 patients with statistical significant difference. Only one clinical trial out of the 3 included studies had evaluated the need for O2 therapy during the study between the probiotics and control groups, but without statistical significant difference. No statistical significant difference between the probiotics group and placebo group was observed regarding fatal prognosis during the only clinical trial that measured death as an outcome. Conclusion: We couldn’t judge on these results as they are insufficient data for pooling and meta-analysis. However, what we can say is “Most probably Probiotics have no role in treatment of COVID-19 infection”.

Background: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is a newly emerging human disease caused by a novel coronavirus, causing a global pandemic crisis. Probiotics and/or colchicine may be considered as options for treatment since they have anti-viral, anti-inflammatory, and immunomodulatory effects. The aim of the current review was to assess the effectiveness of probiotic supplements and colchicine on symptoms, duration, and progression of mild and moderate cases of COVID-19 infection. Review: A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial in the United States with 182 participants who were randomly assigned to receive daily oral probiotic (Lactobacillus rhamnosus) LGG or placebo for 28 days. The study indicated that LGG is well-tolerated and is associated with a delay in the onset of COVID-19 infection, a reduction in the incidence of symptoms, and alterations in the structure of the gut microbiome when administered as post-exposure prophylaxis within seven days of exposure. Colchicine may lessen mortality and the need for mechanical ventilation in mild-to-moderate COVID-19 patients, according to a systematic review and meta-analysis. Conclusion: Probiotics and/or colchicine may be viable treatment options for COVID-19 patients. To examine the efficacy of probiotics and colchicine in the treatment of COVID-19, it is necessary to conduct additional clinical trials and provide clinicians with evidence, as there are currently insufficient studies to support this conclusion.

Background: Sleep deprivation is increasingly prevalent among young adults due to academic, occupational, and social demands, making them susceptible to circadian disruption. Executive functioning—encompassing working memory, inhibitory control, and cognitive flexibility is essential for academic and professional success. This meta-analysis quantifies the effect of sleep deprivation on executive functioning in healthy young adults. Practical Implications: These findings highlight the need for evidence-based interventions such as university-level sleep education programs, flexible academic scheduling, and workplace policies promoting adequate sleep to optimize cognitive performance and productivity among young adults. Methods: Following PRISMA 2020 guidelines, PubMed, Scopus, PsycINFO, and Web of Science were searched (January 2000–March 2024) for studies assessing acute (<6 hours sleep or ≥24 hours total deprivation) or chronic (<6 hours/night over multiple days) sleep deprivation in young adults. Outcomes included validated executive function tests (e.g., Stroop, N-Back). Random-effects meta-analysis (Hedges’ g) was conducted using R (version 4.3.2) with metafor/meta packages. Heterogeneity (I², Q-test), sensitivity (leave-one-out), and publication bias (funnel plot, Egger’s test) were evaluated. Results: Out of 2,478 screened studies, 39 met inclusion criteria (n=4,578). Sleep deprivation had a moderate-to-large detrimental effect on executive functioning (Hedges’ g = -0.62, 95% CI [-0.78, -0.45], p<0.001). Subdomain analysis revealed greatest impairment in working memory (g = -0.71), followed by inhibitory control (g = -0.59) and cognitive flexibility (g = -0.49) (all p<0.001). Moderate heterogeneity was present (I² = 58%), with results robust to sensitivity analysis. Egger’s test indicated no significant publication bias (p=0.22). Interpretation: Sleep deprivation significantly impairs executive functioning in young adults, especially working memory. Interventions improve sleep may enhance cognitive performance and should be integrated into public health strategies and educational policies. Future research should assess chronic restriction and individual vulnerability factors.

Introduction: The city of Wuhan in China reported the first case of coronavirus, termed as SARS-CoV-2, in December 2019. To date, 187,827,660 cases have been reported to the WHO (3). With current research focusing on potential therapeutic agents for the coronavirus disease and vaccines, there remain major gaps in our understanding of the pathophysiology and clinical course of this viral pneumonia. Secondary infections are one of them. In this systematic review, we analyze the outcomes of two fungal infections in patients of COVID-19, viz. Mucormycosis and candida. Methodology: A systematic review has been done on secondary infections with mucor and candida fungi in patients of COVID-19. Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) guidelines were used. Twenty-three studies were included in the final analysis. Our review included studies from various countries across the globe. The risk of bias was analyzed using the NIH Quality Assessment Tool for Case Series Studies. This study did not require ethical approval as data was obtained from already available databases, and patients were not directly involved. Results: A total of 23 articles were included in the final review and the total number of patients included was 79 Male: female ratio was calculated to be 1.6 and the average age of patients was 52 years (ranging from 24-86 years). Various types of comorbidities were seen in the included patients, the most common being diabetes mellitus. Among the 18 patients in the cohort of mucormycosis, 7 patients died and four studies did not report patient outcomes. Among the 61 patients, 13 patients died and one patient was still ventilated at the time of publication. Conclusion: Secondary infections after COVID-19 are a cause of major concerns. Further studies and case reports are needed to better understand the various other types of secondary infections and also to formulate strategies to prevent these.