Oral cryotherapy (ice chips, ice-cold water, ice cubes or crushed ice held in the mouth during cancer treatment) vs no intervention or control intervention (control): Duration of interruptions to cancer treatment
It is very uncertain whether oral cryotherapy (ice chips, ice-cold water, ice cubes or crushed… changes duration of interruptions to cancer treatment compared with control (no treatment or standard/usual oral care, e.g. saline rinse) (very low certainty).
What each review found
Current versions only| Finding | Effect | Studies | GRADE certainty |
|---|---|---|---|
Oral cryotherapy (ice chips, ice-cold water, ice cubes or crushed ice held in the mouth during cancer treatment) vs Control (no treatment or standard/usual oral care, e.g. saline rinse) Duration of interruptions to cancer treatment · All patients with cancer who are receiving treatment · Fluorouracil (5FU) treatment for solid cancers It is very uncertain whether oral cryotherapy (ice chips, ice-cold water, ice cubes or crushed… changes duration of interruptions to cancer treatment compared with control (no treatment or standard/usual oral care, e.g. saline rinse) (very low certainty). Interventions for preventing oral mucositis in patients with cancer receiving treatment: oral cryotherapy (2015) · Cochrane All outcomes | MD -8 [-9.26, -6.74] | 1 study · 80 participants | Very low |
Findings are shown side by side, never pooled across reviews.
The reviews
| Review | Searched up to | Included studies | AMSTAR 2 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Interventions for preventing oral mucositis in patients with cancer receiving treatment: oral cryotherapy 2015 · Cochrane All outcomes | 2015-06 | list not extracted yet | Not assessed |
Studies behind the findings
None of these reviews ties its included studies to this outcome in the data here. Cochrane reviews and reviews with headline outcomes only do not list their studies yet.
How reviews are matched to this question
Reviews word the same question differently. Four decision models (TypeSafe's Jev, Liquid AI's d1-ultra, SubQ Snap and Baseten's Elephant) judged each wording of the population, intervention, comparator and outcome against the others; two wordings count as the same when at least three of them agree and none clearly disagrees, and findings count as this question only when all four elements match. Timing, setting and subgroup never split a question: they are shown on each finding.