-
Respiratory Medicine 2019Evidence to support the implementation of telehealth (TH) interventions in the management of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) varies throughout Europe.... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Evidence to support the implementation of telehealth (TH) interventions in the management of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) varies throughout Europe. Despite more than ten years of TH research in COPD management, it is still not possible to define which TH interventions are beneficial to which patient group. Therefore, informing policymakers on TH implementation is complicated. We aimed to examine the provision and efficacy of TH for COPD management to guide future decision-making.
METHODS
A mapping study of twelve systematic reviews of TH interventions for COPD management was conducted. This was followed by an in-depth review of fourteen clinical trials performed in Europe extracted from the systematic reviews. Efficacy outcomes for COPD management were synthesized.
RESULTS
The mapping study revealed that systematic reviews with a meta-analysis often report positive clinical outcomes. Despite this, we identified a lack of pragmatic trial design affecting the synthesis of reported outcomes. The in-depth review visualized outcomes for three TH categories, which revealed a plethora of heterogeneous outcomes. Suggestions for reporting within these three outcomes are synthesized as targets for future empirical research reporting.
CONCLUSION
The present study indicates the need for more standardized and updated systematic reviews. Policymakers should advocate for improved TH trial designs, focusing on the entire intervention's adoption process evaluation. One of the policymakers' priorities should be the harmonization of the outcome sets, which would be considered suitable for deciding about subsequent reimbursement. We propose possible outcome sets in three TH categories which could be used for discussion with stakeholders.
Topics: Delivery of Health Care, Integrated; Europe; Humans; Pulmonary Disease, Chronic Obstructive; Telemedicine
PubMed: 31614305
DOI: 10.1016/j.rmed.2019.09.005 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Apr 2018Major depression and other depressive conditions are common in people with cancer. These conditions are not easily detectable in clinical practice, due to the overlap... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Major depression and other depressive conditions are common in people with cancer. These conditions are not easily detectable in clinical practice, due to the overlap between medical and psychiatric symptoms, as described by diagnostic manuals such as the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) and International Classification of Diseases (ICD). Moreover, it is particularly challenging to distinguish between pathological and normal reactions to such a severe illness. Depressive symptoms, even in subthreshold manifestations, have been shown to have a negative impact in terms of quality of life, compliance with anti-cancer treatment, suicide risk and likely even the mortality rate for the cancer itself. Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) on the efficacy, tolerability and acceptability of antidepressants in this population are few and often report conflicting results.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the efficacy, tolerability and acceptability of antidepressants for treating depressive symptoms in adults (aged 18 years or older) with cancer (any site and stage).
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the following electronic bibliographic databases: the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL 2017, Issue 6), MEDLINE Ovid (1946 to June week 4 2017), Embase Ovid (1980 to 2017 week 27) and PsycINFO Ovid (1987 to July week 4 2017). We additionally handsearched the trial databases of the most relevant national, international and pharmaceutical company trial registers and drug-approving agencies for published, unpublished and ongoing controlled trials.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included RCTs comparing antidepressants versus placebo, or antidepressants versus other antidepressants, in adults (aged 18 years or above) with any primary diagnosis of cancer and depression (including major depressive disorder, adjustment disorder, dysthymic disorder or depressive symptoms in the absence of a formal diagnosis).
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently checked eligibility and extracted data using a form specifically designed for the aims of this review. The two authors compared the data extracted and then entered data into Review Manager 5 using a double-entry procedure. Information extracted included study and participant characteristics, intervention details, outcome measures for each time point of interest, cost analysis and sponsorship by a drug company. We used the standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane.
MAIN RESULTS
We retrieved a total of 10 studies (885 participants), seven of which contributed to the meta-analysis for the primary outcome. Four of these compared antidepressants and placebo, two compared two antidepressants, and one three-armed study compared two antidepressants and placebo. In this update we included one additional unpublished study. These new data contributed to the secondary analysis, while the results of the primary analysis remained unchanged.For acute-phase treatment response (6 to 12 weeks), we found no difference between antidepressants as a class and placebo on symptoms of depression measured both as a continuous outcome (standardised mean difference (SMD) -0.45, 95% confidence interval (CI) -1.01 to 0.11, five RCTs, 266 participants; very low certainty evidence) and as a proportion of people who had depression at the end of the study (risk ratio (RR) 0.82, 95% CI 0.62 to 1.08, five RCTs, 417 participants; very low certainty evidence). No trials reported data on follow-up response (more than 12 weeks). In head-to-head comparisons we only retrieved data for selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) versus tricyclic antidepressants, showing no difference between these two classes (SMD -0.08, 95% CI -0.34 to 0.18, three RCTs, 237 participants; very low certainty evidence). No clear evidence of a beneficial effect of antidepressants versus either placebo or other antidepressants emerged from our analyses of the secondary efficacy outcomes (dichotomous outcome, response at 6 to 12 weeks, very low certainty evidence). In terms of dropouts due to any cause, we found no difference between antidepressants as a class compared with placebo (RR 0.85, 95% CI 0.52 to 1.38, seven RCTs, 479 participants; very low certainty evidence), and between SSRIs and tricyclic antidepressants (RR 0.83, 95% CI 0.53 to 1.30, three RCTs, 237 participants). We downgraded the certainty (quality) of the evidence because the included studies were at an unclear or high risk of bias due to poor reporting, imprecision arising from small sample sizes and wide confidence intervals, and inconsistency due to statistical or clinical heterogeneity.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Despite the impact of depression on people with cancer, the available studies were very few and of low quality. This review found very low certainty evidence for the effects of these drugs compared with placebo. On the basis of these results, clear implications for practice cannot be deduced. The use of antidepressants in people with cancer should be considered on an individual basis and, considering the lack of head-to-head data, the choice of which agent to prescribe may be based on the data on antidepressant efficacy in the general population of individuals with major depression, also taking into account that data on medically ill patients suggest a positive safety profile for the SSRIs. To better inform clinical practice, there is an urgent need for large, simple, randomised, pragmatic trials comparing commonly used antidepressants versus placebo in people with cancer who have depressive symptoms, with or without a formal diagnosis of a depressive disorder.
Topics: Adjustment Disorders; Adult; Antidepressive Agents; Antidepressive Agents, Tricyclic; Depression; Depressive Disorder; Depressive Disorder, Major; Dysthymic Disorder; Humans; Neoplasms; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Selective Serotonin Reuptake Inhibitors
PubMed: 29683474
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD011006.pub3 -
BMC Public Health Jun 2021Youth suicide prevention in high-schools and universities is a public health priority. Our aim was to propose a research agenda to advance evidence-based suicide...
BACKGROUND
Youth suicide prevention in high-schools and universities is a public health priority. Our aim was to propose a research agenda to advance evidence-based suicide prevention in high-schools and universities by synthesizing and critically reviewing the research focus and methodologies used in existing intervention studies.
METHODS
Fourteen databases were systematically searched to identify studies which evaluate suicide prevention interventions delivered on high-school or university campuses, with before and after measures. Data from included studies (n = 43) were extracted to identify what, where, how and for whom interventions have been tested. Narrative synthesis was used to critically evaluate research focus and methodology. Study quality was assessed.
RESULTS
Research has focused primarily on selective interventions, with less attention on indicated and universal interventions. Most evidence comes from North America and high-income countries. The target of interventions has been: non-fatal suicidal behaviour; confidence and ability of staff/students to intervene in a suicidal crisis; suicide-related knowledge and attitudes; and suicide-related stigma. No studies included suicide deaths as an outcome, evaluated eco-systemic interventions, explored how context influences implementation, used multisite study designs, or focused explicitly on LGBTQ+ youth. Two studies evaluated digital interventions. Quality of the majority of studies was compromised by lack of methodological rigour, small samples, and moderate/high risk of bias. Interventions often assume the existence of an external well-functioning referral pathway, which may not be true in low-resource settings.
CONCLUSION
To advance evidence-based suicide prevention in educational settings we need to: conduct more high-quality clinical and pragmatic trials; promote research in low- and middle-income countries; test targeted interventions for vulnerable populations (like LGBTQ+ youth), evaluate interventions where death by suicide is the primary outcome; include translational studies and use implementation science to promote intervention uptake; evaluate the potential use of digital and eco-systemic interventions; and conduct multisite studies in diverse cultural settings.
Topics: Adolescent; Evidence-Based Practice; Humans; North America; Schools; Universities; Suicide Prevention
PubMed: 34112141
DOI: 10.1186/s12889-021-11124-w -
Journal of Clinical Epidemiology Jun 2016To assess the design and statistical methods used in cluster-randomized crossover (CRXO) trials. (Review)
Review
OBJECTIVE
To assess the design and statistical methods used in cluster-randomized crossover (CRXO) trials.
STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING
We undertook a systematic review of CRXO trials. Searches of MEDLINE, EMBASE, and CINAHL Plus; and citation searches of CRXO methodological articles were conducted to December 2014. We extracted data on design characteristics and statistical methods for sample size, data analysis, and handling of missing data.
RESULTS
Ninety-one trials including 139 end point analyses met the inclusion criteria. Trials had a median of nine clusters [interquartile range (IQR), 4-21] and median cluster-period size of 30 individuals (IQR, 14-77); 58 (69%) trials had two periods, and 27 trials (30%) included the same individuals in all periods. A rationale for the design was reported in only 25 trials (27%). A sample size justification was provided in 53 (58%) trials. Only nine (10%) trials accounted appropriately for the design in their sample size calculation. Ten of the 12 cluster-level analyses used a method that accounted for the clustering and multiple-period aspects of the design. In contrast, only 4 of the 127 individual-level analyses used a potentially appropriate method.
CONCLUSIONS
There is a need for improved application of appropriate analysis and sample size methods, and reporting, in CRXO trials.
Topics: Cluster Analysis; Cross-Over Studies; Epidemiologic Research Design; Humans; Research Report
PubMed: 26633599
DOI: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2015.11.013 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Apr 2018Aggressive, agitated or violent behaviour due to psychosis constitutes an emergency psychiatric treatment where fast-acting interventions are required. Risperidone is a... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Aggressive, agitated or violent behaviour due to psychosis constitutes an emergency psychiatric treatment where fast-acting interventions are required. Risperidone is a widely accessible antipsychotic that can be used to manage psychosis-induced aggression or agitation.
OBJECTIVES
To examine whether oral risperidone alone is an effective treatment for psychosis-induced aggression or agitation.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Schizophrenia Group's Study-Based Register of Trials (up to April 2017); this register is compiled by systematic searches of major resources (including AMED, BIOSIS CINAHL, Embase, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, PubMed, and registries of clinical trials) and their monthly updates, handsearches, grey literature, and conference proceedings. There are no language, date, document type, or publication status limitations for inclusion of records into the register.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing rapid use of risperidone and other drugs, combinations of drugs or placebo for people exhibiting aggression or agitation (or both) thought to be due to psychosis.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We independently inspected all citations from searches, identified relevant abstracts, and independently extracted data from all included studies. For binary data we calculated risk ratio (RR) and for continuous data we calculated mean difference (MD), all with 95% confidence intervals (CI) and used a fixed-effect model. We assessed risk of bias for the included studies and used the GRADE approach to produce a 'Summary of findings' tables.
MAIN RESULTS
The review now contains data from nine trials (total n = 582) reporting on five comparisons. Due to risk of bias, small size of trials, indirectness of outcome measures and a paucity of investigated and reported 'pragmatic' outcomes, evidence was graded as very-low quality. None of the included studies provided useable data on our primary outcome 'tranquillisation or asleep' by 30 minutes, repeated need for tranquillisation or any economic outcomes. Data were available for our other main outcomes of agitation or aggression, needing restraint, and incidence of adverse effects.Risperidone versus haloperidol (up to 24 hours follow-up)For the outcome, specific behaviour - agitation, no clear difference was found between risperidone and haloperidol in terms of efficacy, measured as at least 50% reduction in the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale - Psychotic Agitation Sub-score (PANSS-PAS) (RR 1.04, 95% CI 0.86 to 1.26; participants = 124; studies = 1; very low-quality evidence) and no effect was observed for need to use restraints (RR 2.00, 95% CI 0.43 to 9.21; participants = 28; studies = 1; very low-quality evidence). Incidence of adverse effects was similar between treatment groups (RR 0.94, 95% CI 0.54 to 1.66; participants = 124; studies = 1; very low-quality evidence).Risperidone versus olanzapineOne small trial (n = 29) reported useable data for the comparison risperidone versus olanzapine. No effect was observed for agitation measured as PANSS-PAS endpoint score at two hours (MD 2.50, 95% CI -2.46 to 7.46; very low-quality evidence); need to use restraints at four days (RR 1.43, 95% CI 0.39 to 5.28; very-low quality evidence); specific movement disorders measured as Behavioural Activity Rating Scale (BARS) endpoint score at four days (MD 0.20, 95% CI -0.43 to 0.83; very low-quality evidence).Risperidone versus quetiapineOne trial reported (n = 40) useable data for the comparison risperidone versus quetiapine. Aggression was measured using the Modified Overt Aggression Scale (MOAS) endpoint score at two weeks. A clear difference, favouring quetiapine was observed (MD 1.80, 95% CI 0.20 to 3.40; very-low quality evidence). No evidence of a difference between treatment groups could be observed for incidence of akathisia after 24 hours (RR 1.67, 95% CI 0.46 to 6.06; very low-quality evidence). Two participants allocated to risperidone and one allocated to quetiapine experienced myocardial ischaemia during the trial.Risperidone versus risperidone + oxcarbazepineOne trial (n = 68) measured agitation using the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale - Excited Component.(PANSS-EC) endpoint score and found a clear difference, favouring the combination treatment at one week (MD 2.70, 95% CI 0.42 to 4.98; very low-quality evidence), but no effect was observed for global state using Clinical Global Impression - Improvement (CGI-I) endpoint score at one week (MD -0.20, 95% CI -0.61 to 0.21; very-low quality evidence). Incidence of extrapyramidal symptoms after 24 hours was similar between treatment groups (RR 1.59, 95% CI 0.49 to 5.14; very-low quality evidence).Risperidone versus risperidone + valproic acidTwo trials compared risperidone with a combination of risperidone plus valproic acid. No clear differences between the treatment groups were observed for aggression (MOAS endpoint score at three days: MD 1.07, 95% CI -0.20 to 2.34; participants = 54; studies = 1; very low-quality evidence) or incidence of akathisia after 24 hours: RR 0.75, 95% CI 0.28 to 2.03; participants = 122; studies = 2; very low-quality evidence).
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Overall, results for the main outcomes show no real effect for risperidone. The only data available for use in this review are from nine under-sampled trials and the evidence available is of very low quality. This casts uncertainty on the role of risperidone in rapid tranquillisation for people with psychosis-induced aggression. High-quality pragmatic RCTs are feasible and are needed before clear recommendations can be drawn on the use of risperidone for psychosis-induced aggression or agitation.
Topics: Administration, Oral; Aggression; Antipsychotic Agents; Carbamazepine; Humans; Oxcarbazepine; Psychomotor Agitation; Psychotic Disorders; Quetiapine Fumarate; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Risperidone; Tranquilizing Agents; Valproic Acid
PubMed: 29634083
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD009412.pub2 -
Journal of Blood Medicine 2023Although hereditary von Willebrand disease (VWD) is the most common bleeding disorder, its epidemiology is not well understood. A systematic review (PROSPERO... (Review)
Review
INTRODUCTION
Although hereditary von Willebrand disease (VWD) is the most common bleeding disorder, its epidemiology is not well understood. A systematic review (PROSPERO CRD42020197674/CRD42021244374) on the epidemiology/burden of illness of VWD was conducted to better understand patients' unmet needs.
METHODS
Observational studies (published January 1, 2010 to April 14, 2021) were identified in MEDLINE and Embase databases, using free-text keywords and thesaurus terms for VWD and outcomes of interest. Pragmatic web-based searches of the gray literature, including conference abstracts, were performed, and reference lists of retained publications were manually searched for additional sources. Case reports and clinical trials (phase 1-3) were excluded. Outcomes of interest were incidence, prevalence, mortality, patient characteristics, burden of illness, and therapeutic management/treatments currently used for VWD.
RESULTS
Of the 3095 identified sources, 168 were included in this systematic review. Reported VWD prevalence (22 sources) ranged from 108.9 to 2200 per 100,000 in population-based studies and from 0.3 to 16.5 per 100,000 in referral-based studies. Reported times between first symptom onset and diagnosis (two sources; mean 669 days; median 3 years) highlighted gaps in timely VWD diagnosis. Bleeding events reported in 72-94% of the patients with VWD (all types; 27 sources) were mostly mucocutaneous including epistaxis, menorrhagia, and oral/gum bleeding. Poorer health-related quality of life (three sources) and greater health care resource utilization (three sources) were reported for patients with VWD than in general populations.
CONCLUSION
Available data suggest that patients with VWD experience high disease burden in terms of bleeding, poor quality of life, and health care resource utilization.
PubMed: 36891166
DOI: 10.2147/JBM.S389241 -
Journal of the American Medical... Feb 2020Older age is associated with multimorbidity and polypharmacy with high anticholinergic burden (ACB). High ACB is linked to adverse events such as poor physical... (Review)
Review
INTRODUCTION
Older age is associated with multimorbidity and polypharmacy with high anticholinergic burden (ACB). High ACB is linked to adverse events such as poor physical functioning, dementia, cardiovascular disease, and falls. Interventions are needed to reduce this burden.
AIMS/OBJECTIVES
The aim was to systematically review the literature to identify and describe studies of clinical and cost-effectiveness of interventions designed to reduce ACB in adults (≥65 years) on polypharmacy regimes, compared with usual care. The objective was to answer the following questions: What are the contents of the interventions? Were these interventions clinically effective? Were these interventions cost effective?.
DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS
Systematic review of interventions to reduce anticholinergic burden in adults aged 65 and older in any clinical setting.
METHODS
Eligible papers reported primary or secondary research describing any type of intervention including systematic reviews, randomized controlled trials (RCTs), controlled clinical trials, or nonrandomized pre-post intervention studies (PPIs) published in English from January 2010 to February 2019. Databases searched included CINAHL, Ovid MEDLINE, EMBASE, and The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL).
RESULTS
The search yielded 5862 records. Eight studies (4 RCTs, 4 PPIs) conducted in hospital (4), community (2), nursing homes (1), and retirement villages (1) met the inclusion criteria. Pharmacists, either individually or as part of a team, provided the intervention in the majority of studies (6/8). Most (7/8) involved individual patient medication review followed by feedback to the prescriber. Two of the 4 RCTs and all non-RCTs reported a decrease in ACB following the intervention. No study reported cost outcome.
CONCLUSIONS/IMPLICATIONS
Pharmacists may be well placed to implement an ACB reduction intervention. This is the first systematic review of interventions to reduce ACB in older adults, and it highlights the need for development and testing of high-quality pragmatic clinical and cost-effectiveness trials in community and specific patient populations at high risk of harm from ACB. [PROSPERO registration: CRD42018089764].
Topics: Aged; Cholinergic Antagonists; Cost-Benefit Analysis; Humans; Nursing Homes; Polypharmacy
PubMed: 31351858
DOI: 10.1016/j.jamda.2019.06.001 -
Archives of Physical Medicine and... Aug 2016To determine whether behavioral interventions are beneficial for adults with social communication difficulties after traumatic brain injury (TBI). (Review)
Review
OBJECTIVE
To determine whether behavioral interventions are beneficial for adults with social communication difficulties after traumatic brain injury (TBI).
DATA SOURCES
Electronic databases were searched through October 2013 to find behavioral intervention trials. Keywords used in our search were intervention, therapy, treatment, and program combined with pragmatic disorder, pragmatic impairment, social communication disorder/impairment, conversation disorder/impairment, social disorder/impairment, cognitive-linguistic and cognitive-communication deficit; adult; and traumatic brain injury, head injury, and brain injury. Hand searches of the reference lists of relevant articles were also conducted.
STUDY SELECTION
To be selected for detailed review, articles found in the initial search were assessed by 2 reviewers and had to meet the following criteria: (1) population (adults with TBI); (2) intervention (behavioral intervention); and (3) outcomes (changes in social communication). Articles needed to describe interventions that were delivered directly to adults with TBI with or without other people (such as significant others) involved. Of the 2181 articles initially identified, 15 were selected for detailed review.
DATA EXTRACTION
Data were independently extracted by members of the research team, then collated and reviewed by the team.
DATA SYNTHESIS
Of the 15 publications that met the study criteria, 7 were single-case design studies, 3 were randomized controlled trials, 1 was a nonrandomized controlled trial, and 4 were cohort studies. The methodological qualities of eligible articles were examined using the Physiotherapy Evidence Database and Single-Case Experimental Design rating scales. The interventions described in the studies fell into 2 broad categories: those addressing a specific impairment in social communication, and context-specific interventions with a holistic focus on social communication skills. Studies using context-sensitive approaches had been published more recently and were generally group studies with higher methodological quality.
CONCLUSIONS
Overall, interventions addressing social communication skills for people with TBI were found to be beneficial irrespective of treatment approach used. While the evidence base is small and with varying levels of scientific rigor, there is a body of quality evidence that supports the use of context-sensitive approaches. Further research is still required to determine the role of impairment-specific versus context-specific interventions when treating individuals with social communication difficulties after TBI to inform clinical decision-making.
Topics: Behavior Therapy; Brain Injuries, Traumatic; Clinical Trials as Topic; Humans; Physical Therapy Modalities; Social Communication Disorder
PubMed: 26679234
DOI: 10.1016/j.apmr.2015.11.005 -
Aripiprazole (intramuscular) for psychosis-induced aggression or agitation (rapid tranquillisation).The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Jan 2018People experiencing psychosis may become aggressive. Antipsychotics, such as aripiprazole in intramuscular form, can be used in such situations. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
People experiencing psychosis may become aggressive. Antipsychotics, such as aripiprazole in intramuscular form, can be used in such situations.
OBJECTIVES
To evaluate the effects of intramuscular aripiprazole in the treatment of psychosis-induced aggression or agitation (rapid tranquillisation).
SEARCH METHODS
On 11 December 2014 and 11 April 2017, we searched the Cochrane Schizophrenia Group's Study-based Register of Trials which is based on regular searches of CINAHL, BIOSIS, AMED, Embase, PubMed, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, and registries of clinical trials.
SELECTION CRITERIA
All randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that randomised people with psychosis-induced aggression or agitation to receive either intramuscular aripiprazole or another intramuscular intervention.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We independently inspected citations and, where possible, abstracts, ordered papers and re-inspected and quality assessed these. We included studies that met our selection criteria. At least two review authors independently extracted data from the included studies. We chose a fixed-effect model. We analysed dichotomous data using risk ratio (RR) and the 95% confidence intervals (CI). We analysed continuous data using mean differences (MD) and their CIs. We assessed risk of bias for included studies and used GRADE to create 'Summary of findings' tables.
MAIN RESULTS
Searching found 63 records referring to 21 possible trials. We could only include three studies, all completed over the last decade, with 885 participants, of which 707 were included for quantitative analyses in this systematic review. Due to limited comparisons, small size of trials and a paucity of investigated and reported 'pragmatic' outcomes, evidence was mostly graded as low or very low quality. No trials reported useful data for one of our primary outcomes of tranquil or asleep by 30 minutes. Economic outcomes were also not reported in the trials.When compared with placebo, fewer people in the aripiprazole group needed additional injections compared to the placebo group (2 RCTs, n = 382, RR 0.69, 95% CI 0.56 to 0.85, very low-quality evidence). Clinically important improvement in agitation at two hours favoured the aripiprazole group (2 RCTs, n = 382, RR 1.50, 95% CI 1.17 to 1.92, very low-quality evidence). The numbers of non-responders after the first injection also favoured aripiprazole (1 RCT, n = 263, RR 0.49, 95% CI 0.34 to 0.71, low-quality evidence). Although no effect was found, more people in the aripiprazole compared to the placebo group experienced adverse effects (1 RCT, n = 117, RR 1.51, 95% CI 0.93 to 2.46, very low-quality evidence).Aripiprazole required more injections compared to haloperidol (2 RCTs, n = 477, RR 1.28, 95% CI 1.00 to 1.63, very low-quality evidence), with no significant difference in agitation (2 RCTs, n = 477, RR 0.94, 95% CI 0.80 to 1.11, very low-quality evidence), and similar non-responders after first injection (1 RCT, n = 360, RR 1.18, 95% CI 0.78 to 1.79, low-quality evidence). Aripiprazole and haloperidol did not differ when taking into account the overall number of people that experienced at least one adverse effect (1 RCT, n = 113, RR 0.91, 95% CI 0.61 to 1.35, very low-quality evidence).Compared to aripiprazole, olanzapine was better at reducing agitation (1 RCT, n = 80, RR 0.77, 95% CI 0.60 to 0.99, low-quality evidence) and had a more favourable effect on global state change scores (1 RCT, n = 80, MD 0.58, 95% CI 0.01 to 1.15, low-quality evidence), both at two hours. No differences were found in terms of experiencing at least one adverse effect during the 24 hours after treatment (1 RCT, n = 80, RR 0.75, 95% CI 0.45 to 1.24, very low-quality evidence). However, participants allocated to aripiprazole experienced less somnolence (1 RCT, n = 80, RR 0.25, 95% CI 0.08 to 0.82, low-quality evidence).
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
The available evidence is of poor quality but there is some evidence aripiprazole is effective compared to placebo and haloperidol, but not when compared to olanzapine. However, considering that evidence comes from only three studies, caution is required in generalising these results to real-world practice. This review firmly highlights the need for more high-quality trials on intramuscular aripiprazole in the management of people with acute aggression or agitation.
Topics: Aggression; Antipsychotic Agents; Aripiprazole; Benzodiazepines; Haloperidol; Humans; Injections, Intramuscular; Olanzapine; Psychomotor Agitation; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Tranquilizing Agents
PubMed: 29308601
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD008074.pub2 -
Frontiers in Neurology 2022To investigate the available evidence on early supported discharge (ESD) and transitional care (TC) delivery service in patients with cerebrovascular disease.
OBJECTIVE
To investigate the available evidence on early supported discharge (ESD) and transitional care (TC) delivery service in patients with cerebrovascular disease.
METHODS
A systematic literature search was conducted to collect all available evidence on the use of ESD and TC services. We included cluster-randomized pragmatic trials or randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that recruited patients with stroke or transient ischemic attack to receive either conventional care or any care service intervention that included rehabilitation or support provided by professional medical personnel with the aim of accelerating and supporting home discharge. Relevant data were electronically searched through international databases (Cochrane Library, EMBASE, and PubMed) and incorporated into a summary grid to investigate research outcomes and provide a narrative synthesis. Furthermore, we compared the outcomes in terms of length of hospital stay, patient and caregiver outcomes, and mortality through meta-analysis.
RESULTS
We identified and included a total of 20 publications of various original randomized studies. There were 18 studies conducted in western countries and 2 in eastern countries. The meta-analysis revealed a tendency that ESD or TC could decrease the length of hospital stay more than the usual care [standardized mean difference (SMD) -0.13; 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.31 to 0.04 days; = 0.14]. Moreover, there was a tendency that ESD resulted in better activities of daily living (ADL) than usual care (SMD 0.29; 95% CI -0.04 to 0.61; = 0.08). Patient outcome based on modified Rankin scale (mRS) score (SMD -0.11; 95% CI -0.38 to 0.17; = 0.45] and mortality (odds ratio 0.80; 95% CI 0.56-1.17; = 0.25) did not reveal any significant difference. The Caregiver Strain Index revealed no difference.
CONCLUSION
We did not find a large effect size for the use of TC and ESD. When implementing the TC and ESD model from western to Asian countries, services should be prepared and implemented in accordance with national medical rehabilitation pathways for cerebrovascular disease.
PubMed: 35370909
DOI: 10.3389/fneur.2022.755316