Inclusion criteria
Types of participants
Adults (18-70 years of age) with Ardita (chronic or acute) are the participants to be included in this review. More specifically, the review will consider for inclusion studies that have examined the effectiveness of Naysa for treating acute or chronic Ardita in adults. An inclusive approach will be adopted with respect to geographical location of the participants with patients located in any country, and both rural and urban areas to be considered. Participants of any socio-economic status, both sexes and all ethnic origins will be considered.
Studies whose participants have been pregnant women, adults older than 70 years and patients with allergic rhinitis, fever, intracranial tumour/haemorrhage and bilateral facial palsy will be excluded from the review. The reason for the lower age limit of 18 is because oil based Nasya is not usually administered to children, according to the ancient textual source Astanga Hridaya Sootra Sthanna.23
Types of intervention(s) and comparator(s)
The review will include for consideration all quantitative studies conducted worldwide that have examined the effectiveness of nasal instillation of Ayurvedic oil-based herbal medicine. All studies that quantified the effectiveness of Nasya either administered by a therapist or by self administration in treating facial paralysis will be considered for inclusion. All dosages and frequencies of Nasya use will be considered and if possible how effectiveness varies with dosage and frequency of use will be detailed in the analysis.
All studies in which the comparator was conventional medical management or placebo will be considered for inclusion. However, studies of Ayurvedic Nasya medicine in conjunction with conventional medicine, if any, will be excluded. As the objective is not only to shed light on the effectiveness of Nasya for treating facial paralysis, but also the effectiveness of one kind of Nasya medicine compared to another, all studies that have compared the effectiveness of one Nasya instillation medicine compared to another will be considered.
Types of outcomes
The review will consider both Ayurvedic and Conventional medicine outcome assessment criterion as described in the research papers. With respect to the conventional medicine this will include, but not be limited to facial function as measured by the House-Brackmann grading24,25 of facial function measure. With respect to the Ayurvedic medicine approach this will include but not limited to Ayurvedic diagnostic scoring.14, 22
The House-Brackmann scale ranges between I (normal movement) and VI (no movement).25
Grade I
Normal symmetrical function
Grade II
Slight weakness noticeable only on close inspection
Complete eye closure with minimal effort
Slight asymmetry of smile with maximal effort
Synkinesis barely noticeable, contracture, or spasm absent
Grade III
Obvious weakness, but not disfiguring
May not be able to lift eyebrow
Complete eye closure and strong but asymmetrical mouth movement
Obvious, but not disfiguring synkinesis, mass movement or spasm
Grade IV
Obvious disfiguring weakness
Inability to lift brow
Incomplete eye closure and asymmetry of mouth with maximal effort
Severe synkinesis, mass movement, spasm
Grade V
Motion barely perceptible
Incomplete eye closure, slight movement corner mouth
Synkinesis, contracture, and spasm usually absent
Grade VI
No movement, loss of tone, no synkinesis, contracture, or spasm
The Ayurvedic facial function grading is done as follows, with a full score of 3 for complete, 2 for Half, 1 for Mild and a score of 0 for normal:22
1. Vaktrardhavakra:
Complete Mukhavakrata
Half Mukhavakrata
Mild Mukhavakrata
Normal
2. Vaksanga:
Complete Vaksanga
Pronouncing with great efforts
Pronouncing with less efforts
Normal speech (whistling)
3. Netravikriti:
Complete upward rolling of eye
Half of the upward rolling of eye
Partial upward rolling of eye
Normal
4. Lalasrava:
Constant (profuse) Lalasrava
Intermittent (moderate) Lalasrava
Partial (mild) Lalasrava
No Lalasrava
Types of studies
To answer the questions of whether Nasya is effective for treating facial paralysis in the population of interest and the relative effectiveness of the different Nasya that emerge as effective, the review will consider experimental and epidemiological study designs including randomized controlled trials, non-randomized controlled trials and quasi-experimental studies.
Search strategy
The search strategy aims to find both published and unpublished studies. A three-step search strategy will be utilized in the review. An initial limited search of MEDLINE and CINAHL will be undertaken followed by analysis of the text words contained in the title and abstract, and of the index terms used to describe articles. Second, a search using all identified keywords and index terms will then be undertaken, across all databases. Thirdly, the reference list of identified reports and articles will be searched for additional studies. If missing information in studies are found all efforts will be made to obtain them. A limitation of the proposal is that even though it is understood that there may be a number of studies that are published in languages besides English, only studies published in English will be considered. This is due to concerns about the cost and feasibility associated with translation.
The following databases will be searched to identify published studies:
PubMed
CINAHL
Cochrane (CENTRAL)
Scopus
Centre for Review and Dissemination databases
Turning Research into Practice TRIP
EMBASE
EBM Reviews
DHARA, DARE, AYUSH Research Portal (Govt of India) and HTA database.
To identify unpublished studies the following will be searched:
Google Scholar
Online clinical trials registers:
MedNar
ProQuest Dissertations
Theses
Studies published in English language will be considered for inclusion.
Examples of initial keywords that will be used in the exploratory stage of the search for studies in electronic databases are: Nasya, Ardita, Panchakarma and Ayurveda.
Informed by the findings from the initial exploratory searches in the range of databases to be covered, further key words will be identified and a detailed search strategy will be developed and implemented for each database.
Assessment of methodological quality
Papers selected for retrieval will be assessed by two independent reviewers for methodological validity prior to inclusion in the review using standardized critical appraisal instruments from the Joanna Briggs Institute Meta-Analysis of Statistics Assessment and Review Instrument (JBI-MAStARI) (Appendix I). Any disagreements that arise between the reviewers will be resolved through discussion, or with a third reviewer.
Data collection
Data will be extracted from papers included in the review using the standardized data extraction tool from JBI-MAStARI (Appendix II). The data extracted will include specific details about the interventions, populations, study methods and outcomes of significance to the review question and specific objectives.
Data synthesis
Quantitative data will, where possible, will be pooled in statistical meta-analysis using JBI-MAStARI. All results will be subject to double data entry. Effect sizes expressed as odds ratio (for categorical data) and weighted mean differences (for continuous data) and their 95% confidence intervals will be calculated for analysis. Where statistical pooling is not possible the findings will be presented in narrative form. Tables and figures will be used to aid in data presentation where appropriate.
Conflicts of interest
There are no conflicts of interest to report.
Acknowledgements
The primary reviewer would like to thank Morne Scheepers, fellow Master of Clinical Science Student, for agreeing to assist with critical appraisal in the proposed review.
References