-
Journal of Athletic Training Dec 2017Reference/Citation: Harmon KG, Zigman M, Drezner JA. The effectiveness of screening history, physical exam, and ECG to detect potentially lethal cardiac disorders in... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
UNLABELLED
Reference/Citation: Harmon KG, Zigman M, Drezner JA. The effectiveness of screening history, physical exam, and ECG to detect potentially lethal cardiac disorders in athletes: a systematic review/meta-analysis. J Electrocardiol. 2015;48(3):329-338.
CLINICAL QUESTION
Which screening method should be considered best practice to detect potentially lethal cardiac disorders during the preparticipation physical examination (PE) of athletes?
DATA SOURCES
The authors completed a comprehensive literature search of MEDLINE, CINAHL, Cochrane Library, Embase, Physiotherapy Evidence Database (PEDro), and SPORTDiscus from January 1996 to November 2014. The following key words were used individually and in combination: ECG, athlete, screening, pre-participation, history, and physical. A manual review of reference lists and key journals was performed to identify additional studies. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines were followed for this review.
STUDY SELECTION
Studies selected for this analysis involved (1) outcomes of cardiovascular screening in athletes using the history, PE, and electrocardiogram (ECG); (2) history questions and PE based on the American Heart Association recommendations and guidelines; and (3) ECGs interpreted following modern standards. The exclusion criteria were (1) articles not in English, (2) conference abstracts, and (3) clinical commentary articles. Study quality was assessed on a 7-point scale for risk of bias; a score of 7 indicated the highest quality. Articles with potential bias were excluded.
DATA EXTRACTION
Data included number and sex of participants, number of true- and false-positives and negatives, type of ECG criteria used, number of cardiac abnormalities, and specific cardiac conditions. The sensitivity, specificity, false-positive rate, and positive predictive value of each screening tool were calculated and summarized using a bivariate random-effects meta-analysis model.
MAIN RESULTS
Fifteen articles reporting on 47 137 athletes were fully reviewed. The overall quality of the 15 articles ranged from 5 to 7 on the 7-item assessment scale (ie, participant selection criteria, representative sample, prospective data with at least 1 positive finding, modern ECG criteria used for screening, cardiovascular screening history and PE per American Heart Association guidelines, individual test outcomes reported, and abnormal screening findings evaluated by appropriate diagnostic testing). The athletes (66% males and 34% females) were ethnically and racially diverse, were from several countries, and ranged in age from 5 to 39 years. The sensitivity and specificity of the screening methods were, respectively, ECG, 94% and 93%; history, 20% and 94%; and PE, 9% and 97%. The overall false-positive rate for ECG (6%) was less than that for history (8%) or PE (10%). The positive likelihood ratios of each screening method were 14.8 for ECG, 3.22 for history, and 2.93 for PE. The negative likelihood ratios were 0.055 for ECG, 0.85 for history, and 0.93 for PE. A total of 160 potentially lethal cardiovascular conditions were detected, for a rate of 0.3%, or 1 in 294 patients. The most common conditions were Wolff-Parkinson-White syndrome (n = 67, 42%), long QT syndrome (n = 18, 11%), hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (n = 18, 11%), dilated cardiomyopathy (n = 11, 7%), coronary artery disease or myocardial ischemia (n = 9, 6%), and arrhythmogenic right ventricular cardiomyopathy (n = 4, 3%).
CONCLUSIONS
The most effective strategy to screen athletes for cardiovascular disease was ECG. This test was 5 times more sensitive than history and 10 times more sensitive than PE, and it had a higher positive likelihood ratio, lower negative likelihood ratio, and lower false-positive rate than history or PE. The 12-lead ECG interpreted using modern criteria should be considered the best practice in screening athletes for cardiovascular disease, and the use of history and PE alone as screening tools should be reevaluated.
Topics: Athletes; Electrocardiography; Heart Diseases; Humans; Mass Screening; Physical Examination; Prospective Studies; Reproducibility of Results
PubMed: 29154691
DOI: 10.4085/1062-6050-52.11.24 -
CoDAS 2014To perform a systematic review of screening instruments for dysphagia available in the literature. (Review)
Review
PURPOSE
To perform a systematic review of screening instruments for dysphagia available in the literature.
METHODS
For the selection of studies, the following descriptors were used: "questionários", "questionnaires", "transtornos de deglutição", "deglutition disorders", "programas de rastreamento", and "mass screening". The online databases used for the research were Virtual Health Library (LILACS, IBECS, MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, SciELO) and PubMed. The research was performed from April to June 2013. Selection criteria articles in English, Portuguese, and Spanish, regardless of the year of publication, whose title, abstract, or text had any relation to the purpose of the research. After reading the articles in their entirety, identification data and method of the articles were extracted for later analysis.
RESULTS
The research carried out from the proposed descriptors produced 1,012 articles. After reviewing the titles, summaries, and fully reading the articles, 20 studies were chosen. The publications on instruments for the identification of dysphagic patients started in 1999, and 50% of the analyzed studies were carried out in the USA. The methods used on the instruments were questionnaires, observation of patient's clinical signals and symptoms, the request for execution of some orofacial movements, and swallowing test with water or food.
CONCLUSION
Screening instruments in dysphagia are fairly heterogeneous and have been developed for different audiences with the main objective of identifying patients with swallowing disorders.
Topics: Deglutition Disorders; Humans; Mass Screening; Sensitivity and Specificity; Surveys and Questionnaires
PubMed: 25388065
DOI: 10.1590/2317-1782/20142014057 -
The Lancet. Infectious Diseases May 2017Tuberculosis is over-represented in hard-to-reach (underserved) populations in high-income countries of low tuberculosis incidence. The mainstay of tuberculosis care is... (Review)
Review
Effectiveness of interventions for diagnosis and treatment of tuberculosis in hard-to-reach populations in countries of low and medium tuberculosis incidence: a systematic review.
Tuberculosis is over-represented in hard-to-reach (underserved) populations in high-income countries of low tuberculosis incidence. The mainstay of tuberculosis care is early detection of active tuberculosis (case finding), contact tracing, and treatment completion. We did a systematic review with a scoping component of relevant studies published between 1990 and 2015 to update and extend previous National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) reviews on the effectiveness of interventions for identifying and managing tuberculosis in hard-to-reach populations. The analyses showed that tuberculosis screening by (mobile) chest radiography improved screening coverage and tuberculosis identification, reduced diagnostic delay, and was cost-effective among several hard-to-reach populations. Sputum culture for pre-migration screening and active referral to a tuberculosis clinic improved identification. Furthermore, monetary incentives improved tuberculosis identification and management among drug users and homeless people. Enhanced case management, good cooperation between services, and directly observed therapy improved treatment outcome and compliance. Strong conclusions cannot be drawn because of the heterogeneity of evidence with regard to study population, methodology, and quality.
Topics: Cost-Benefit Analysis; Drug Users; Global Health; Ill-Housed Persons; Humans; Mass Screening; Motivation; Transients and Migrants; Tuberculosis
PubMed: 28291722
DOI: 10.1016/S1473-3099(16)30532-1 -
Journal of Vascular Surgery Dec 2016This report was produced for the Canadian Task Force on Preventive Health Care to provide guidelines on screening for abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) with ultrasound... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
This report was produced for the Canadian Task Force on Preventive Health Care to provide guidelines on screening for abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) with ultrasound scan.
PURPOSE
The aim of this systematic review is to examine the evidence on benefits and harms of AAA screening.
SEARCH STRATEGY
This systematic review considered studies from the most recent United States Preventive Services Task Force review on AAA screening and passed through the screening process with citations identified in our search up to April 2015 (PROSPERO Registration #CRD42015019047).
RESULTS
For benefits of one-time AAA screening in men compared with controls, pooled analyses from four randomized controlled trials with moderate quality evidence showed significant reductions in AAA-related mortality and AAA rupture rate up to 13 to 15 years of follow-up with 42% reduction (risk ratio [RR], 0.58; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.39-0.88; number needed to screen = 212) and 38% reduction (RR, 0.62; 95% CI, 0.45-0.86; number needed to screen = 200), respectively. The effect of on all-cause mortality was marginally significant for longer follow-up. The Chichester trial examined the benefits of one-time AAA screening in women and found no significant differences between screening and control arms for up to 10 years of follow-up (RR, 0.88; 95% CI, 0.72-1.07). For consequences of one-time AAA screening in men compared with controls, there was a significant increase in the total number of AAA-related procedures over a follow-up of 13 to 15 years (2.16 times more likely) compared with controls. For harms of one-time AAA screening, no significant differences were observed in 30-day postoperative mortality for elective and emergency operations with compared control groups. Evidence from the Multicenter Aneurysm Screening Study trial using 13-year follow-up data showed that one-time AAA screening with ultrasound scan was potentially associated with an overdiagnosis of 45% (95% CI, 42%-47%) among screen-detected men.
CONCLUSIONS
Population-based screening for AAA with ultrasound scan in asymptomatic men aged 65 years and older showed statistically significant reductions in AAA-related mortality and rupture and, hence, avoids unnecessary AAA-related deaths. The current evidence showed no benefit of one-time AAA screening in woman. Limited evidence is available on the benefits of repeat AAA screening and targeted screening approaches based on risk factors for AAA. Future research should explore the differential benefits of AAA screening based on risk factors that increase risk for developing AAA.
Topics: Age Factors; Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Aortic Aneurysm, Abdominal; Asymptomatic Diseases; Evidence-Based Medicine; Female; Humans; Male; Mass Screening; Middle Aged; Odds Ratio; Patient Selection; Predictive Value of Tests; Prognosis; Risk Factors; Sex Factors; Time Factors; Ultrasonography; Unnecessary Procedures
PubMed: 27871502
DOI: 10.1016/j.jvs.2016.05.101 -
European Journal of Human Genetics :... Jun 2017Researchers and clinicians refer to outcomes of genomic testing that extend beyond clinical utility as 'personal utility'. No systematic delineation of personal utility... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Researchers and clinicians refer to outcomes of genomic testing that extend beyond clinical utility as 'personal utility'. No systematic delineation of personal utility exists, making it challenging to appreciate its scope. Identifying empirical elements of personal utility reported in the literature offers an inventory that can be subsequently ranked for its relative value by those who have undergone genomic testing. A systematic review was conducted of the peer-reviewed literature reporting non-health-related outcomes of genomic testing from 1 January 2003 to 5 August 2016. Inclusion criteria specified English language, date of publication, and presence of empirical evidence. Identified outcomes were iteratively coded into unique domains. The search returned 551 abstracts from which 31 studies met the inclusion criteria. Study populations and type of genomic testing varied. Coding resulted in 15 distinct elements of personal utility, organized into three domains related to personal outcomes: affective, cognitive, and behavioral; and one domain related to social outcomes. The domains of personal utility may inform pre-test counseling by helping patients anticipate potential value of test results beyond clinical utility. Identified elements may also inform investigations into the prevalence and importance of personal utility to future test users.
Topics: Attitude; Cognition; Emotions; Genetic Counseling; Genetic Testing; Humans; Social Behavior
PubMed: 28295040
DOI: 10.1038/ejhg.2017.10 -
BMJ Open Apr 2022Housing is a social determinant of health that impacts the health and well-being of children and families. Screening and referral to address social determinants of...
OBJECTIVES
Housing is a social determinant of health that impacts the health and well-being of children and families. Screening and referral to address social determinants of health in clinical and social service settings has been proposed to support families with housing problems. This study aims to identify housing screening questions asked of families in healthcare and social services, determine validated screening tools and extract information about recommendations for action after screening for housing issues.
METHODS
The electronic databases MEDLINE, PsycINFO, EMBASE, Ovid Emcare, Scopus and CINAHL were searched from 2009 to 2021. Inclusion criteria were peer-reviewed literature that included questions about housing being asked of children or young people aged 0-18 years and their families accessing any healthcare or social service. We extracted data on the housing questions asked, source of housing questions, validity and descriptions of actions to address housing issues.
RESULTS
Forty-nine peer-reviewed papers met the inclusion criteria. The housing questions in social screening tools vary widely. There are no standard housing-related questions that clinical and social service providers ask families. Fourteen screening tools were validated. An action was embedded as part of social screening activities in 27 of 42 studies. Actions for identified housing problems included provision of a community-based or clinic-based resource guide, and social prescribing included referral to a social worker, care coordinator or care navigation service, community health worker, social service agency, referral to a housing and child welfare demonstration project or provided intensive case management and wraparound services.
CONCLUSION
This review provides a catalogue of housing questions that can be asked of families in the clinical and/or social service setting, and potential subsequent actions.
Topics: Adolescent; Child; Delivery of Health Care; Housing; Humans; Mass Screening; Social Welfare; Social Work
PubMed: 35487725
DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2021-054338 -
Scientific Reports Mar 2017Methotrexate (MTX) is widely used and considered a first-line disease modifying anti-rheumatic drug (DMARD) for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Many of the... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Methotrexate (MTX) is widely used and considered a first-line disease modifying anti-rheumatic drug (DMARD) for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Many of the relevant genes have been investigated to estimate the association between gene polymorphisms and MTX effectiveness in RA patients, although inconsistent results have been reported. A systematic review and meta-analysis were performed to identify genetic variants associated with MTX efficacy. A total of 30 publications that included 34 genes and 125 SNPs associated with the transporters, enzymes, and metabolites of MTX or the progression of RA were included in the systematic review (SR), and 21 studies were included in 9 meta-analyses. Associations between MTX response in RA patients in MTHFR 1298A > C (rs1801131), ATIC 347C > G (rs2372536), RFC-1 80G > A (rs1051266), SLC19A1 A > G (rs2838956) and SLC19A1 G > A (rs7499) genetic polymorphisms were found, but not observed between the MTHFR 677C > T (rs1801133), TYMS 28 bp VNTR (rs34743033), MTRR 66A > G (rs1801394), and ABCB1 3435C > T (rs1045642). However, for the polymorphisms not being associated following meta-analysis could still be associated if larger cohorts were used, and studies of other polymorphisms are necessary in large cohorts and a rigorous way, which may provide more accurate results for the effect of the gene polymorphisms on the MTX response.
Topics: Antirheumatic Agents; Arthritis, Rheumatoid; Humans; Methotrexate; Pharmacogenomic Testing; Polymorphism, Single Nucleotide; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 28266606
DOI: 10.1038/srep44015 -
BMC Cancer Aug 2023Breast cancer susceptibility gene (BRCA) mutation carriers are at an increased risk for breast, ovarian, prostate and pancreatic cancers. However, the role of BRCA is... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Breast cancer susceptibility gene (BRCA) mutation carriers are at an increased risk for breast, ovarian, prostate and pancreatic cancers. However, the role of BRCA is unclear in colorectal cancer; the results regarding the association between BRCA gene mutations and colorectal cancer risk are inconsistent and even controversial. This study aimed to investigate whether BRCA1 and BRCA2 gene mutations are associated with colorectal cancer risk.
METHODS
In this systematic review, we searched PubMed/MEDLINE, Embase and Cochrane Library databases, adhering to PRISMA guidelines. Study quality was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS). Unadjusted odds ratios (ORs) were used to estimate the probability of Breast Cancer Type 1 Susceptibility gene (BRCA1) and Breast Cancer Type 2 Susceptibility gene (BRCA2) mutations in colorectal cancer patients. The associations were evaluated using fixed effect models.
RESULTS
Fourteen studies were included in the systematic review. Twelve studies, including seven case-control and five cohort studies, were included in the meta-analysis. A significant increase in the frequency of BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations was observed in patients with colorectal cancer [OR = 1.34, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.02-1.76, P = 0.04]. In subgroup analysis, colorectal cancer patients had an increased odds of BRCA1 (OR = 1.48, 95% CI = 1.10-2.01, P = 0.01) and BRCA2 (OR = 1.56, 95% CI = 1.06-2.30, P = 0.02) mutations.
CONCLUSIONS
BRCA genes are one of the genes that may increase the risk of developing colorectal cancer. Thus, BRCA genes could be potential candidates that may be included in the colorectal cancer genetic testing panel.
Topics: Male; Humans; Genes, Tumor Suppressor; Genetic Testing; Mutation; Colorectal Neoplasms; Breast Neoplasms
PubMed: 37644384
DOI: 10.1186/s12885-023-11328-w -
Academic Emergency Medicine : Official... Jan 2022Emergency departments (ED) interface with large numbers of patients that are often missed by conventional HIV testing approaches. ED-based HIV self-testing (HIVST) is an... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Emergency departments (ED) interface with large numbers of patients that are often missed by conventional HIV testing approaches. ED-based HIV self-testing (HIVST) is an innovative engagement approach which has potential for testing gains among populations that have failed to be reached. This systematic review and meta-analysis evaluated acceptability and uptake of HIVST, as compared to standard provider-delivered testing approaches, among patients seeking care in ED settings.
METHODS
Six electronic databases were systematically searched (Dates: January 1990-May 2021). Reports with data on HIVST acceptability and/or testing uptake in ED settings were included. Two reviewers identified eligible records (κ= 0.84); quality was assessed using formalized criteria. Acceptability and testing uptake metrics were summarized, and pooled estimates were calculated using random-effects models with assessments of heterogeneity.
RESULTS
Of 5773 records identified, seven met inclusion criteria. The cumulative sample was 1942 subjects, drawn from three randomized control trials (RCTs) and four cross-sectional studies. Four reports assessed HIVST acceptability. Pooled acceptability of self-testing was 92.6% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 88.0%-97.1%). Data from two RCTs demonstrated that HIVST significantly increased testing uptake as compared to standard programs (risk ratio [RR] = 4.41, 95% CI: 1.95-10.10, I = 25.8%). Overall, the quality of evidence was low (42.9%) or very low (42.9%), with one report of moderate quality (14.2%).
CONCLUSIONS
Available data indicate that HIVST may be acceptable and may increase testing among patients seeking emergency care, suggesting that expanding ED-based HIVST programs could enhance HIV diagnosis. However, given the limitations of the reports, additional research is needed to better inform the evidence base.
Topics: Emergency Medical Services; Emergency Treatment; HIV Infections; HIV Testing; Humans; Mass Screening; Self-Testing
PubMed: 34133822
DOI: 10.1111/acem.14323 -
Pediatrics Dec 2017An estimated 15 million neonates are born preterm annually. However, in low- and middle-income countries, the dating of pregnancy is frequently unreliable or unknown. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
CONTEXT
An estimated 15 million neonates are born preterm annually. However, in low- and middle-income countries, the dating of pregnancy is frequently unreliable or unknown.
OBJECTIVE
To conduct a systematic literature review and meta-analysis to determine the diagnostic accuracy of neonatal assessments to estimate gestational age (GA).
DATA SOURCES
PubMed, Embase, Cochrane, Web of Science, POPLINE, and World Health Organization library databases.
STUDY SELECTION
Studies of live-born infants in which researchers compared neonatal signs or assessments for GA estimation with a reference standard.
DATA EXTRACTION
Two independent reviewers extracted data on study population, design, bias, reference standard, test methods, accuracy, agreement, validity, correlation, and interrater reliability.
RESULTS
Four thousand nine hundred and fifty-six studies were screened and 78 included. We identified 18 newborn assessments for GA estimation (ranging 4 to 23 signs). Compared with ultrasound, the Dubowitz score dated 95% of pregnancies within ±2.6 weeks ( = 7 studies), while the Ballard score overestimated GA (0.4 weeks) and dated pregnancies within ±3.8 weeks ( = 9). Compared with last menstrual period, the Dubowitz score dated 95% of pregnancies within ± 2.9 weeks ( = 6 studies) and the Ballard score, ±4.2 weeks ( = 5). Assessments with fewer signs tended to be less accurate. A few studies showed a tendency for newborn assessments to overestimate GA in preterm infants and underestimate GA in growth-restricted infants.
LIMITATIONS
Poor study quality and few studies with early ultrasound-based reference.
CONCLUSIONS
Efforts in low- and middle-income countries should focus on improving dating in pregnancy through ultrasound and improving validity in growth-restricted populations. Where ultrasound is not possible, increased efforts are needed to develop simpler yet specific approaches for newborn assessment through new combinations of existing parameters, new signs, or technology.
Topics: Female; Gestational Age; Humans; Infant, Newborn; Neonatal Screening; Pregnancy; Prenatal Diagnosis; Quality Assurance, Health Care; Socioeconomic Factors
PubMed: 29150458
DOI: 10.1542/peds.2017-1423