-
International Journal of Nursing Studies Dec 2023Pressure injuries are a fundamental safety concern in older people living in nursing homes. Recent studies report a disparate body of evidence on pressure injury... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Pressure injuries are a fundamental safety concern in older people living in nursing homes. Recent studies report a disparate body of evidence on pressure injury prevalence and incidence in this population.
OBJECTIVES
To systematically quantify the prevalence and incidence of pressure injuries among older people living in nursing homes, and to identify the most frequently occurring PI stage(s) and anatomical location(s).
DESIGN
Systematic review and meta-analysis.
SETTING(S)
Nursing homes, aged care, or long-term care facilities.
PARTICIPANTS
Older people, 60 years and older.
METHODS
Cross-sectional and cohort studies reporting on either prevalence or incidence of pressure injuries were included. Studies published in English from 2000 onwards were systematically searched in Medline, PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, CINAHL and ProQuest. Screening, data extraction and quality appraisal were undertaken independently by two or more authors and adjudicated by another. Outcomes included pressure injury point prevalence, cumulative incidence, and nursing home acquired pressure injury rate. In meta-analyses, Cochrane's Q test and the I statistic were used to explore heterogeneity. Random effects models were used in the presence of substantial heterogeneity. Sources of heterogeneity were investigated by subgroup analyses and meta-regression.
RESULTS
3384 abstracts were screened, and 47 full-text studies included. In 30 studies with 355,784 older people, the pooled pressure injury prevalence for any stage was 11.6 % (95 % CI 9.6-13.7 %). Fifteen studies with 5,421,798 older people reported the prevalence of pressure injury excluding stage I and the pooled estimate was 7.2 % (95 % CI 6.2-8.3 %). The pooled incidence for pressure injury of any stage in four studies with 10,645 older people was 14.3 % (95 % CI 5.5-26.2 %). Nursing home acquired pressure injury rate was reported in six studies with 79,998 older people and the pooled estimate was 8.5 % (95 % CI 4.4-13.5 %). Stage I and stage II pressure injuries were the most common stages reported. The heel (34.1 %), sacrum (27.2 %) and foot (18.4 %) were the three most reported locations of pressure injuries. Meta-regression results indicated a reduction in pressure injury prevalence over the years of data collection.
CONCLUSION
The burden of pressure injuries among older people in nursing homes is similar to hospitalised patients and requires a targeted approach to prevention as is undertaken in hospitals. Future studies using robust methodologies focusing on epidemiology of pressure injury development in older people are needed to conduct as the first step of preventing pressure injuries.
REGISTRATION NUMBER
PROSPERO CRD42022328367.
TWEETABLE ABSTRACT
Pressure injury rates in nursing homes are comparable to hospital rates indicating the need for targeted programmes similar to those in hospitals.
Topics: Humans; Aged; Pressure Ulcer; Incidence; Prevalence; Cross-Sectional Studies; Nursing Homes
PubMed: 37801939
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2023.104605 -
Revista Da Escola de Enfermagem Da U S P 2016To analyze the prevalence of falls and frailty syndrome and the association between these two syndromes in the elderly population. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
OBJECTIVE
To analyze the prevalence of falls and frailty syndrome and the association between these two syndromes in the elderly population.
METHOD
Systematic review, without restriction of dates, in English, Portuguese and Spanish languages, in the databases PubMed, CINAHL, LILACS and in the SciElo virtual library. The association between both variables was extracted from the studies (Odds Ratio and 95% Confidence Intervals).
RESULTS
The review included 19 studies published between 2001 and 2015. The prevalence of falls in the frail elderly population was between 6.7% and 44%; in the pre-frail, between 10.0% and 52.0%, and in the non-frail, between 7.6% and 90.4%. The association between both variables presented a value of OR 1.80 (95% CI 1.51-2.13).
CONCLUSION
There is evidence that falls are associated to the frailty in the elderly. Other factors may influence this association, such as age, sex, data collection instrument of the studies, place where they live and the process of senescence.
OBJETIVO
Analisar a prevalência de quedas e da síndrome da fragilidade e a associação entre essas duas síndromes na população idosa.
MÉTODO
Revisão sistemática, sem restrição de datas, nos idiomas inglês, português e espanhol, nas bases de dados PubMed, CINAHL, LILACS e na biblioteca virtual SciElo. A associação entre ambas as variáveis foi extraída dos próprios artigos (Odds Ratio e os Intervalos de Confiança de 95%).
RESULTADOS
Foram incluídos na revisão 19 artigos publicados entre 2001 e 2015. A prevalência de queda no idoso frágil esteve entre 6,7% e 44%; nos pré-frágeis, entre 10,0% e 52,0%, e nos não frágeis, entre 7,6% e 90,4%. A associação entre ambas as variáveis apresentou o valor de OR 1,80 (IC 95% 1,51-2,13).
CONCLUSÃO
Há evidências de que a queda está associada à fragilidade do idoso. Outros fatores podem influenciar essa associação, como idade, sexo, instrumento de coleta de dados dos estudos, local onde vive e o próprio processo de senescência.
Topics: Accidental Falls; Aged; Frail Elderly; Humans; Prevalence; Syndrome
PubMed: 28198967
DOI: 10.1590/S0080-623420160000700018 -
JAMA Pediatrics Apr 2022Pediatric guidelines suggest that infants younger than 2 years avoid screen time altogether, while children aged 2 to 5 years receive no more than 1 hour per day.... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
IMPORTANCE
Pediatric guidelines suggest that infants younger than 2 years avoid screen time altogether, while children aged 2 to 5 years receive no more than 1 hour per day. Although these guidelines have been adopted around the world, substantial variability exists in adherence to the guidelines, and precise estimates are needed to inform public health and policy initiatives.
OBJECTIVE
To derive the pooled prevalence via meta-analytic methods of children younger than 2 years and children aged 2 to 5 years who are meeting guidelines about screen time.
DATA SOURCES
Searches were conducted in MEDLINE, PsycINFO, and Embase up to March 2020.
STUDY SELECTION
Studies were included if participants were 5 years and younger and the prevalence of meeting (or exceeding) screen time guidelines was reported.
DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS
Data extraction followed Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Two independent reviewers extracted all relevant data. Random-effects meta-analyses were used to derive the mean prevalence rates.
MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES
Prevalence of meeting screen time guidelines.
RESULTS
From 63 studies, 95 nonoverlapping samples with a total of 89 163 participants were included. For children younger than 2 years, the pooled prevalence of meeting the screen time guideline (0 h/d) was 24.7% (95% CI, 19.0%-31.5%). Moderator analyses revealed that prevalence of meeting screen time guidelines varied as a function of year of data collection (increased over time), measurement method (higher when questionnaires compared with interview), and type of device use (higher when a combination of screen use activities compared with television/movies only). For children aged 2 to 5 years, the mean prevalence of meeting the screen time guideline (1 h/d) was 35.6% (95% CI, 30.6%-40.9%). Moderator analyses revealed that the prevalence of meeting screen time guidelines varied as a function of type of device use (higher when screen time was television/movies only compared with a combination of screen use activities).
CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE
The findings of this meta-analysis indicate that only a minority of children 5 years and younger are meeting screen time guidelines. This highlights the need to provide support and resources to families to best fit evidence-based recommendations into their lives.
Topics: Child; Child, Preschool; Humans; Infant; Motion Pictures; Prevalence; Screen Time; Surveys and Questionnaires; Television
PubMed: 35157028
DOI: 10.1001/jamapediatrics.2021.6386 -
Sports Medicine (Auckland, N.Z.) Aug 2022Running overuse injuries (ROIs) occur within a complex, partly injury-specific interplay between training loads and extrinsic and intrinsic risk factors. Biomechanical...
Running-Related Biomechanical Risk Factors for Overuse Injuries in Distance Runners: A Systematic Review Considering Injury Specificity and the Potentials for Future Research.
BACKGROUND
Running overuse injuries (ROIs) occur within a complex, partly injury-specific interplay between training loads and extrinsic and intrinsic risk factors. Biomechanical risk factors (BRFs) are related to the individual running style. While BRFs have been reviewed regarding general ROI risk, no systematic review has addressed BRFs for specific ROIs using a standardized methodology.
OBJECTIVE
To identify and evaluate the evidence for the most relevant BRFs for ROIs determined during running and to suggest future research directions.
DESIGN
Systematic review considering prospective and retrospective studies. (PROSPERO_ID: 236,832).
DATA SOURCES
PubMed. Connected Papers. The search was performed in February 2021.
ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA
English language. Studies on participants whose primary sport is running addressing the risk for the seven most common ROIs and at least one kinematic, kinetic (including pressure measurements), or electromyographic BRF. A BRF needed to be identified in at least one prospective or two independent retrospective studies. BRFs needed to be determined during running.
RESULTS
Sixty-six articles fulfilled our eligibility criteria. Levels of evidence for specific ROIs ranged from conflicting to moderate evidence. Running populations and methods applied varied considerably between studies. While some BRFs appeared for several ROIs, most BRFs were specific for a particular ROI. Most BRFs derived from lower-extremity joint kinematics and kinetics were located in the frontal and transverse planes of motion. Further, plantar pressure, vertical ground reaction force loading rate and free moment-related parameters were identified as kinetic BRFs.
CONCLUSION
This study offers a comprehensive overview of BRFs for the most common ROIs, which might serve as a starting point to develop ROI-specific risk profiles of individual runners. We identified limited evidence for most ROI-specific risk factors, highlighting the need for performing further high-quality studies in the future. However, consensus on data collection standards (including the quantification of workload and stress tolerance variables and the reporting of injuries) is warranted.
Topics: Biomechanical Phenomena; Cumulative Trauma Disorders; Data Collection; Humans; Prospective Studies; Retrospective Studies; Risk Factors; Running
PubMed: 35247202
DOI: 10.1007/s40279-022-01666-3 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Jan 2019General health checks are common elements of health care in some countries. They aim to detect disease and risk factors for disease with the purpose of reducing... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
General health checks are common elements of health care in some countries. They aim to detect disease and risk factors for disease with the purpose of reducing morbidity and mortality. Most of the commonly used individual screening tests offered in general health checks have been incompletely studied. Also, screening leads to increased use of diagnostic and therapeutic interventions, which can be harmful as well as beneficial. It is therefore important to assess whether general health checks do more good than harm. This is the first update of the review published in 2012.
OBJECTIVES
To quantify the benefits and harms of general health checks.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, two other databases and two trials registers on 31 January 2018. Two review authors independently screened titles and abstracts, assessed papers for eligibility and read reference lists. One review author used citation tracking (Web of Knowledge) and asked trial authors about additional studies.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomised trials comparing health checks with no health checks in adults unselected for disease or risk factors. We did not include geriatric trials. We defined health checks as screening for more than one disease or risk factor in more than one organ system.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently extracted data and assessed the risk of bias in the trials. We contacted trial authors for additional outcomes or trial details when necessary. When possible, we analysed the results with a random-effects model meta-analysis; otherwise, we did a narrative synthesis.
MAIN RESULTS
We included 17 trials, 15 of which reported outcome data (251,891 participants). Risk of bias was generally low for our primary outcomes. Health checks have little or no effect on total mortality (risk ratio (RR) 1.00, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.97 to 1.03; 11 trials; 233,298 participants and 21,535 deaths; high-certainty evidence, I = 0%), or cancer mortality (RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.92 to 1.12; 8 trials; 139,290 participants and 3663 deaths; high-certainty evidence, I = 33%), and probably have little or no effect on cardiovascular mortality (RR 1.05, 95% CI 0.94 to 1.16; 9 trials; 170,227 participants and 6237 deaths; moderate-certainty evidence; I = 65%). Health checks have little or no effect on fatal and non-fatal ischaemic heart disease (RR 0.98, 95% CI 0.94 to 1.03; 4 trials; 164,881 persons, 10,325 events; high-certainty evidence; I = 11%), and probably have little or no effect on fatal and non-fatal stroke (RR 1.05 95% CI 0.95 to 1.17; 3 trials; 107,421 persons, 4543 events; moderate-certainty evidence, I = 53%).
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
General health checks are unlikely to be beneficial.
Topics: Adult; Cause of Death; Diagnosis; Disease; Health Promotion; Humans; Morbidity; Primary Prevention; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 30699470
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD009009.pub3 -
Journal of Sport and Health Science Jan 2024The Compendium of Physical Activities was published in 1993 to improve the comparability of energy expenditure values assigned to self-reported physical activity (PA)...
BACKGROUND
The Compendium of Physical Activities was published in 1993 to improve the comparability of energy expenditure values assigned to self-reported physical activity (PA) across studies. The original version was updated in 2000, and again in 2011, and has been widely used to support PA research, practice, and public health guidelines.
METHODS
This 2024 update was tailored for adults 19-59 years of age by removing data from those ≥60 years. Using a systematic review and supplementary searches, we identified new activities and their associated measured metabolic equivalent (MET) values (using indirect calorimetry) published since 2011. We replaced estimated METs with measured values when possible.
RESULTS
We screened 32,173 abstracts and 1507 full-text papers and extracted 2356 PA energy expenditure values from 701 papers. We added 303 new PAs and adjusted 176 existing MET values and descriptions to reflect the addition of new data and removal of METs for older adults. We added a Major Heading (Video Games). The 2024 Adult Compendium includes 1114 PAs (912 with measured and 202 with estimated values) across 22 Major Headings.
CONCLUSION
This comprehensive update and refinement led to the creation of The 2024 Adult Compendium, which has utility across research, public health, education, and healthcare domains, as well as in the development of consumer health technologies. The new website with the complete lists of PAs and supporting resources is available at https://pacompendium.com.
Topics: Humans; Aged; Middle Aged; Exercise; Human Activities; Energy Metabolism; Data Collection
PubMed: 38242596
DOI: 10.1016/j.jshs.2023.10.010 -
Journal of Medical Internet Research Apr 2021Blockchain technology has the potential to enable more secure, transparent, and equitable data management. In the health care domain, it has been applied most frequently... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Blockchain technology has the potential to enable more secure, transparent, and equitable data management. In the health care domain, it has been applied most frequently to electronic health records. In addition to securely managing data, blockchain has significant advantages in distributing data access, control, and ownership to end users. Due to this attribute, among others, the use of blockchain to power personal health records (PHRs) is especially appealing.
OBJECTIVE
This review aims to examine the current landscape, design choices, limitations, and future directions of blockchain-based PHRs.
METHODS
Adopting the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses) guidelines, a cross-disciplinary systematic review was performed in July 2020 on all eligible articles, including gray literature, from the following 8 databases: ACM, IEEE Xplore, MEDLINE, ScienceDirect, Scopus, SpringerLink, Web of Science, and Google Scholar. Three reviewers independently performed a full-text review and data abstraction using a standardized data collection form.
RESULTS
A total of 58 articles met the inclusion criteria. In the review, we found that the blockchain PHR space has matured over the past 5 years, from purely conceptual ideas initially to an increasing trend of publications describing prototypes and even implementations. Although the eventual application of blockchain in PHRs is intended for the health care industry, the majority of the articles were found in engineering or computer science publications. Among the blockchain PHRs described, permissioned blockchains and off-chain storage were the most common design choices. Although 18 articles described a tethered blockchain PHR, all of them were at the conceptual stage.
CONCLUSIONS
This review revealed that although research interest in blockchain PHRs is increasing and that the space is maturing, this technology is still largely in the conceptual stage. Being the first systematic review on blockchain PHRs, this review should serve as a basis for future reviews to track the development of the space.
Topics: Blockchain; Delivery of Health Care; Electronic Health Records; Health Records, Personal; Humans; Technology
PubMed: 33847591
DOI: 10.2196/25094 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Dec 2017Classical galactosaemia is an autosomal recessive inborn error of metabolism caused by a deficiency of the enzyme galactose-1-phosphate uridyltransferase. This is a rare... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Classical galactosaemia is an autosomal recessive inborn error of metabolism caused by a deficiency of the enzyme galactose-1-phosphate uridyltransferase. This is a rare and potentially lethal condition that classically presents in the first week of life once milk feeds have commenced. Affected babies may present with any or all of the following: cataracts; fulminant liver failure; prolonged jaundice; or Escherichia coli sepsis. Once the diagnosis is suspected, feeds containing galactose must be stopped immediately and replaced with a soya-based formula. The majority of babies will recover, however a number will not survive. There are long-term complications of galactosaemia, despite treatment, including learning disabilities and female infertility. It has been postulated that galactosaemia could be detected on newborn screening and this would prevent the immediate severe liver dysfunction and sepsis.
OBJECTIVES
To assess whether there is evidence that newborn screening for galactosaemia prevents or reduces mortality and morbidity and improves clinical outcomes in affected neonates and the quality of life in older children.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Cystic Fibrosis and Genetic Disorders Group Trials Register comprising references identified from electronic database searches, handsearches of relevant journals and conference abstract books. We also searched online trials registries and the reference lists of relevant articles and reviews.Date of the most recent search of Cochrane Cystic Fibrosis Group's Trials Register: 18 December 2017.Date of the most recent search of additional resources: 11 October 2017.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomised controlled studies and controlled clinical studies, published or unpublished comparing the use of any newborn screening test to diagnose infants with galactosaemia and presenting a comparison between a screened population versus a non-screened population.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
No studies of newborn screening for galactosaemia were found.
MAIN RESULTS
No studies were identified for inclusion in the review.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
We were unable to identify any eligible studies for inclusion in this review and hence it is not possible to draw any conclusions based on randomised controlled studies. However, we are aware of uncontrolled studies which support the efficacy of newborn screening for galactosaemia. There are a number of reviews and economic analyses of non-trial literature suggesting that screening is appropriate.
Topics: Galactosemias; Humans; Infant, Newborn; Neonatal Screening
PubMed: 29274129
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD012272.pub2 -
Bulletin of the World Health... Sep 2015To describe tools used for the assessment of maternal and child health issues in humanitarian emergency settings. (Review)
Review
OBJECTIVE
To describe tools used for the assessment of maternal and child health issues in humanitarian emergency settings.
METHODS
We systematically searched MEDLINE, Web of Knowledge and POPLINE databases for studies published between January 2000 and June 2014. We also searched the websites of organizations active in humanitarian emergencies. We included studies reporting the development or use of data collection tools concerning the health of women and children in humanitarian emergencies. We used narrative synthesis to summarize the studies.
FINDINGS
We identified 100 studies: 80 reported on conflict situations and 20 followed natural disasters. Most studies (76/100) focused on the health status of the affected population while 24 focused on the availability and coverage of health services. Of 17 different data collection tools identified, 14 focused on sexual and reproductive health, nine concerned maternal, newborn and child health and four were used to collect information on sexual or gender-based violence. Sixty-nine studies were done for monitoring and evaluation purposes, 18 for advocacy, seven for operational research and six for needs assessment.
CONCLUSION
Practical and effective means of data collection are needed to inform life-saving actions in humanitarian emergencies. There are a wide variety of tools available, not all of which have been used in the field. A simplified, standardized tool should be developed for assessment of health issues in the early stages of humanitarian emergencies. A cluster approach is recommended, in partnership with operational researchers and humanitarian agencies, coordinated by the World Health Organization.
Topics: Altruism; Child Health; Data Collection; Emergencies; Humans; Maternal Health
PubMed: 26478629
DOI: 10.2471/BLT.14.148429 -
The Canadian Journal of Neurological... Apr 2016Introduction Dementia is a common neurological condition affecting many older individuals that leads to a loss of independence, diminished quality of life, premature... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
UNLABELLED
Introduction Dementia is a common neurological condition affecting many older individuals that leads to a loss of independence, diminished quality of life, premature mortality, caregiver burden and high levels of healthcare utilization and cost. This is an updated systematic review and meta-analysis of the worldwide prevalence and incidence of dementia.
METHODS
The MEDLINE and EMBASE databases were searched for relevant studies published between 2000 (1985 for Canadian papers) and July of 2012. Papers selected for full-text review were included in the systematic review if they provided an original population-based estimate for the incidence and/or prevalence of dementia. The reference lists of included articles were also searched for additional studies. Two individuals independently performed abstract and full-text review, data extraction, and quality assessment of the papers. Random-effects models and/or meta-regression were used to generate pooled estimates by age, sex, setting (i.e., community, institution, both), diagnostic criteria utilized, location (i.e., continent) and year of data collection.
RESULTS
Of 16,066 abstracts screened, 707 articles were selected for full-text review. A total of 160 studies met the inclusion criteria. Among individuals 60 and over residing in the community, the pooled point and annual period prevalence estimates of dementia were 48.62 (CI95%: 41.98-56.32) and 69.07 (CI95%: 52.36-91.11) per 1000 persons, respectively. The respective pooled incidence rate (same age and setting) was 17.18 (CI95%: 13.90-21.23) per 1000 person-years, while the annual incidence proportion was 52.85 (CI95%: 33.08-84.42) per 1,000 persons. Increasing participant age was associated with a higher dementia prevalence and incidence. Annual period prevalence was higher in North America than in South America, Europe and Asia (in order of decreasing period prevalence) and higher in institutional compared to community and combined settings. Sex, diagnostic criteria (except for incidence proportion) and year of data collection were not associated with statistically significant different estimates of prevalence or incidence, though estimates were consistently higher for females than males.
CONCLUSIONS
Dementia is a common neurological condition in older individuals. Significant gaps in knowledge about its epidemiology were identified, particularly with regard to the incidence of dementia in low- and middle-income countries. Accurate estimates of prevalence and incidence of dementia are needed to plan for the health and social services that will be required to deal with an aging population.
Topics: Age Factors; Databases, Bibliographic; Dementia; Female; Humans; Incidence; Male; Prevalence
PubMed: 27307127
DOI: 10.1017/cjn.2016.18