-
The Lancet. Global Health Jun 2014Data for the causes of maternal deaths are needed to inform policies to improve maternal health. We developed and analysed global, regional, and subregional estimates of... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Data for the causes of maternal deaths are needed to inform policies to improve maternal health. We developed and analysed global, regional, and subregional estimates of the causes of maternal death during 2003-09, with a novel method, updating the previous WHO systematic review.
METHODS
We searched specialised and general bibliographic databases for articles published between between Jan 1, 2003, and Dec 31, 2012, for research data, with no language restrictions, and the WHO mortality database for vital registration data. On the basis of prespecified inclusion criteria, we analysed causes of maternal death from datasets. We aggregated country level estimates to report estimates of causes of death by Millennium Development Goal regions and worldwide, for main and subcauses of death categories with a Bayesian hierarchical model.
FINDINGS
We identified 23 eligible studies (published 2003-12). We included 417 datasets from 115 countries comprising 60 799 deaths in the analysis. About 73% (1 771 000 of 2 443 000) of all maternal deaths between 2003 and 2009 were due to direct obstetric causes and deaths due to indirect causes accounted for 27·5% (672 000, 95% UI 19·7-37·5) of all deaths. Haemorrhage accounted for 27·1% (661 000, 19·9-36·2), hypertensive disorders 14·0% (343 000, 11·1-17·4), and sepsis 10·7% (261 000, 5·9-18·6) of maternal deaths. The rest of deaths were due to abortion (7·9% [193 000], 4·7-13·2), embolism (3·2% [78 000], 1·8-5·5), and all other direct causes of death (9·6% [235 000], 6·5-14·3). Regional estimates varied substantially.
INTERPRETATION
Between 2003 and 2009, haemorrhage, hypertensive disorders, and sepsis were responsible for more than half of maternal deaths worldwide. More than a quarter of deaths were attributable to indirect causes. These analyses should inform the prioritisation of health policies, programmes, and funding to reduce maternal deaths at regional and global levels. Further efforts are needed to improve the availability and quality of data related to maternal mortality.
Topics: Cause of Death; Female; Global Health; Humans; Maternal Mortality; Pregnancy; Pregnancy Complications; World Health Organization
PubMed: 25103301
DOI: 10.1016/S2214-109X(14)70227-X -
BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders Nov 2019Hip fracture is an important and prevalent medical condition associated with adverse outcomes. The aim of this article is to systematically review and summarise the...
BACKGROUND
Hip fracture is an important and prevalent medical condition associated with adverse outcomes. The aim of this article is to systematically review and summarise the predictors of poor functional outcomes and mortality for patients with hip fractures.
METHODS
We conducted a systemic literature search using PubMed, EMBASE and Cochrane Library. We included English peer-reviewed cohort studies that examined predictors of poor functional outcomes (such as independence in Activities of Daily Living) and mortality for patients with hip fracture published in the past 15 years (from 1 Jan 2004 up to 30 May 2019). Two independent researchers evaluated the articles for eligibility. Consensus on the eligibility was sought and a third researcher was involved if there was disagreement. A standardised form was used to extract relevant data. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) was used to assess the quality of the included studies.
RESULTS
We retrieved 4339 and included 81 articles. We identified two emerging predictors of poor functional outcomes and mortality for patients with hip fractures: low hand grip strength and frailty in line with an emerging concept of "physical performance". The predictors identified in this systematic review can be grouped into 1) medical factors, such as presence of co-morbidities, high American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) grade, sarcopenia, 2) surgical factors including delay in operation (e.g. > 48 h), type of fracture s, 3) socio-economic factors which include age, gender, ethnicity, and 4) system factors including lower case-volume centers.
CONCLUSIONS
This systematic review identified multiple significant predictors of poor functional outcomes and mortality, with the hand grip strength and frailty being important emerging predictors in the most recent literature. These predictors would further inform healthcare providers of their patients' health status and allow for early intervention for modifiable predictors.
Topics: Activities of Daily Living; Hand Strength; Hip Fractures; Humans; Mortality; Predictive Value of Tests; Recovery of Function; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 31775693
DOI: 10.1186/s12891-019-2950-0 -
Chest Mar 2018Several studies were published to validate the quick Sepsis-related Organ Failure Assessment (qSOFA), namely in comparison with the systemic inflammatory response... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
A Comparison of the Quick-SOFA and Systemic Inflammatory Response Syndrome Criteria for the Diagnosis of Sepsis and Prediction of Mortality: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
BACKGROUND
Several studies were published to validate the quick Sepsis-related Organ Failure Assessment (qSOFA), namely in comparison with the systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS) criteria. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis with the aim of comparing the qSOFA and SIRS in patients outside the ICU.
METHODS
We searched MEDLINE, CINAHL, and the Web of Science database from February 23, 2016 until June 30, 2017 to identify full-text English-language studies published after the Sepsis-3 publication comparing the qSOFA and SIRS and their sensitivity or specificity in diagnosing sepsis, as well as hospital and ICU length of stay and hospital mortality. Data extraction from the selected studies followed the recommendations of the Meta-analyses of Observational Studies in Epidemiology group and the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses statement.
RESULTS
From 4,022 citations, 10 studies met the inclusion criteria. Pooling all the studies, a total of 229,480 patients were evaluated. The meta-analysis of sensitivity for the diagnosis of sepsis comparing the qSOFA and SIRS was in favor of SIRS (risk ratio [RR], 1.32; 95% CI, 0.40-2.24; P < .0001; I = 100%). One study described the specificity for the diagnosis of infection comparing SIRS (84.4%; 95% CI, 76.2-90.6) with the qSOFA (97.3%; 95% CI < 92.1-99.4); the qSOFA demonstrated better specificity. The meta-analysis of the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of six studies comparing the qSOFA and SIRS favored the qSOFA (RR, 0.03; 95% CI, 0.01-0.05; P = .002; I = 48%) as a predictor of inhospital mortality.
CONCLUSIONS
The SIRS was significantly superior to the qSOFA for sepsis diagnosis, and the qSOFA was slightly better than the SIRS in predicting hospital mortality. The association of both criteria could provide a better model to initiate or escalate therapy in patients with sepsis.
SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION
PROSPERO CRD42017067645.
Topics: Hospital Mortality; Humans; Organ Dysfunction Scores; Predictive Value of Tests; Sepsis; Systemic Inflammatory Response Syndrome
PubMed: 29289687
DOI: 10.1016/j.chest.2017.12.015 -
Midwifery Jul 2018The comparative safety of different birth settings is widely debated. Comparing research across high-income countries is complex, given differences in maternity service... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
The comparative safety of different birth settings is widely debated. Comparing research across high-income countries is complex, given differences in maternity service provision, data discrepancies, and varying research techniques and quality. Studies of births planned at home or in birth centres have reported both better and poorer outcomes than planned hospital births. Previous systematic reviews have focused on outcomes from either birth centres or home births, with inconsistent attention to quality appraisal. Few have attempted to synthesise findings.
OBJECTIVE
To compare maternal and perinatal outcomes from different places of birth via a systematic review of high-quality research, and meta-analysis of appropriate data (Prospero registration CRD42016042291).
DESIGN
Reviewers searched CINAHL, Embase, Maternity and Infant Care, Medline and PsycINFO databases to identify studies comparing selected outcomes by place of birth among women with low-risk pregnancies in high-income countries. They critically appraised identified studies using an instrument specific to birth place research and then combined outcome data via meta-analysis, using RevMan software.
FINDINGS
Twenty-eight articles met inclusion criteria, yielding comparative data on perinatal mortality, mode of birth, maternal morbidity and/or NICU admissions. Meta-analysis indicated that women planning hospital births had statistically significantly lower odds of normal vaginal birth than in other planned settings. Women experienced severe perineal trauma or haemorrhage at a lower rate in planned home births than in obstetric units. There were no statistically significant differences in infant mortality by planned place of birth, although most studies had limited statistical power to detect differences for rare outcomes. Differences in location, context, quality and design of identified studies render results subject to variation.
CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE
High-quality evidence about low-risk pregnancies indicates that place of birth had no statistically significant impact on infant mortality. The lower odds of maternal morbidity and obstetric intervention support the expansion of birth centre and home birth options for women with low-risk pregnancies.
Topics: Adult; Birthing Centers; Developed Countries; Developing Countries; Female; Geographic Mapping; Humans; Infant; Infant Mortality; Labor, Obstetric; Maternal Mortality; Outcome Assessment, Health Care; Pregnancy; Residence Characteristics
PubMed: 29727829
DOI: 10.1016/j.midw.2018.03.024 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... May 2020Diabetes mellitus, a metabolic disorder characterised by hyperglycaemia and associated with a heavy burden of microvascular and macrovascular complications, frequently...
BACKGROUND
Diabetes mellitus, a metabolic disorder characterised by hyperglycaemia and associated with a heavy burden of microvascular and macrovascular complications, frequently remains undiagnosed. Screening of apparently healthy individuals may lead to early detection and treatment of type 2 diabetes mellitus and may prevent or delay the development of related complications.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the effects of screening for type 2 diabetes mellitus.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, LILACS, the WHO ICTRP, and ClinicalTrials.gov from inception. The date of the last search was May 2019 for all databases. We applied no language restrictions.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomised controlled trials involving adults and children without known diabetes mellitus, conducted over at least three months, that assessed the effect of diabetes screening (mass, targeted, or opportunistic) compared to no diabetes screening.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently screened titles and abstracts for potential relevance and reviewed the full-texts of potentially relevant studies, extracted data, and carried out 'Risk of bias' assessment using the Cochrane 'Risk of bias' tool. We assessed the overall certainty of the evidence using the GRADE approach.
MAIN RESULTS
We screened 4651 titles and abstracts identified by the search and assessed 92 full-texts/records for inclusion. We included one cluster-randomised trial, the ADDITION-Cambridge study, which involved 20,184 participants from 33 general practices in Eastern England and assessed the effects of inviting versus not inviting high-risk individuals to screening for diabetes. The diabetes risk score was used to identify high-risk individuals; it comprised variables relating to age, sex, body mass index, and the use of prescribed steroid and anti-hypertensive medication. Twenty-seven practices were randomised to the screening group (11,737 participants actually attending screening) and 5 practices to the no-screening group (4137 participants). In both groups, 36% of participants were women; the average age of participants was 58.2 years in the screening group and 57.9 years in the no-screening group. Almost half of participants in both groups were on antihypertensive medication. The findings from the first phase of this study indicate that screening compared to no screening for type 2 diabetes did not show a clear difference in all-cause mortality (hazard ratio (HR) 1.06, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.90 to 1.25, low-certainty evidence). Screening compared to no screening for type 2 diabetes mellitus showed an HR of 1.26, 95% CI 0.75 to 2.12 (low-certainty evidence) for diabetes-related mortality (based on whether diabetes was reported as a cause of death on the death certificate). Diabetes-related morbidity and health-related quality of life were only reported in a subsample and did not show a substantial difference between the screening intervention and control. The included study did not report on adverse events, incidence of type 2 diabetes, glycosylated haemoglobin A1c (HbA1c), and socioeconomic effects.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
We are uncertain about the effects of screening for type 2 diabetes on all-cause mortality and diabetes-related mortality. Evidence was available from one study only. We are therefore unable to draw any firm conclusions relating to the health outcomes of early type 2 diabetes mellitus screening. Furthermore, the included study did not assess all of the outcomes prespecified in the review (diabetes-related morbidity, incidence of type 2 diabetes, health-related quality of life, adverse events, socioeconomic effects).
Topics: Cause of Death; Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2; Female; Humans; Male; Middle Aged
PubMed: 32470201
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD005266.pub2 -
Health & Social Care in the Community Nov 2022Experiencing homelessness is associated with poor health, high levels of chronic disease and high premature mortality. Experiencing homelessness is known to be socially... (Review)
Review
Experiencing homelessness is associated with poor health, high levels of chronic disease and high premature mortality. Experiencing homelessness is known to be socially stigmatised and stigma has been suggested as a cause of health inequalities. No previous review has synthesised the evidence about stigma related to homelessness and the impact on the health of people experiencing homelessness. The present mixed-methods review systematically searched four databases and retrieved 21 original articles with relevant data around stigma, homelessness and health. Across all studies, there was broad agreement that some people experiencing homelessness experience significant stigma from providers when accessing health care and this impacts on general health and service access. There is also evidence that perceived stigma related to homelessness correlates with poorer mental and physical health.
Topics: Humans; Ill-Housed Persons; Social Problems; Social Stigma; Delivery of Health Care; Mortality, Premature
PubMed: 35762196
DOI: 10.1111/hsc.13884 -
World Journal of Gastroenterology Jan 2020Acute liver failure (ALF) and acute-on-chronic liver (ACLF) carry high short-term mortality rate, and may result from a wide variety of causes. Plasma exchange has been...
BACKGROUND
Acute liver failure (ALF) and acute-on-chronic liver (ACLF) carry high short-term mortality rate, and may result from a wide variety of causes. Plasma exchange has been shown in a randomized control trial to improve survival in ALF especially in patients who did not receive a liver transplant. Other cohort studies demonstrated potential improvement in survival in patients with ACLF.
AIM
To assess utility of plasma exchange in liver failure and its effect on mortality in patients who do not undergo liver transplantation.
METHODS
Databases MEDLINE PubMed, and EMBASE were searched and relevant publications up to 30 March, 2019 were assessed. Studies were included if they involved human participants diagnosed with liver failure who underwent plasma exchange, with or without another alternative non-bioartificial liver assist device.
RESULTS
Three hundred twenty four records were reviewed, of which 62 studies were found to be duplicates. Of the 262 records screened, 211 studies were excluded. Fifty-one articles were assessed for eligibility, for which 7 were excluded. Twenty-nine studies were included for ALF only, and 9 studies for ACLF only. Six studies included both ALF and ACLF patients. A total of 44 publications were included. Of the included publications, 2 were randomized controlled trials, 14 cohort studies, 12 case series, 16 case reports. All of three ALF studies which looked at survival rate or survival days reported improvement in outcome with plasma exchange. In two out of four studies where plasma exchange-based liver support systems were compared to standard medical treatment (SMT) for ACLF, a biochemical improvement was seen. Survival in the non-transplanted patients was improved in all four studies in patients with ACLF comparing plasma exchange SMT. Using the aforementioned studies, plasma exchange based therapy in ACLF compared to SMT improved survival in non-transplanted patients at 30 and 90-d with a pooled OR of 0.60 (95%CI 0.46-0.77, < 0.01).
CONCLUSION
The level of evidence for use of high volume plasma exchange in selected ALF cases is high. Plasma exchange in ACLF improves survival at 30-and 90-d in non-transplanted patients. Further well-designed randomized control trials will need to be carried out to ascertain the optimal duration and amount of plasma exchange required and assess if the use of high volume plasma exchange can be extrapolated to patients with ACLF.
Topics: Acute-On-Chronic Liver Failure; Hospital Mortality; Humans; Liver Failure, Acute; Plasma Exchange; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Survival Rate; Time Factors; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 31988586
DOI: 10.3748/wjg.v26.i2.219 -
The Lancet. Respiratory Medicine Feb 2019Use of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) in adults with severe acute respiratory distress syndrome has increased in the past 10 years. However, the efficacy of... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Use of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) in adults with severe acute respiratory distress syndrome has increased in the past 10 years. However, the efficacy of venovenous ECMO in people with acute respiratory distress syndrome is uncertain according to the most recent data. We aimed to estimate the effect of venovenous ECMO on mortality from acute respiratory distress syndrome.
METHODS
In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we searched MEDLINE (including MEDLINE In-Process and Epub Ahead of Print), Embase and the Wiley search platform in the Cochrane database for randomised controlled trials and observational studies with matching of conventional mechanical ventilation with and without venovenous ECMO in adults with acute respiratory distress syndrome. Titles, abstracts, and full-text articles were screened in duplicate by two investigators. Data for study design, patient characteristics, interventions, and study outcomes were abstracted independently and in duplicate. Studies were weighted with the inverse variance method and data were pooled via random-effects modelling. We calculated risk ratios (RRs) and 95% CIs to summarise results. The primary outcome was 60-day mortality across randomised controlled trials. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) guidelines were used to rate the quality of evidence FINDINGS: We included five studies, two randomised controlled trials and three observational studies with matching techniques (total N=773 patients). In the primary analysis, which included two randomised controlled trials with a total population of 429 patients, 60-day mortality was significantly lower in the venovenous ECMO group than in the control group (73 [34%] of 214 vs 101 [47%] of 215; RR 0·73 [95% CI 0·58-0·92]; p=0·008; I 0%). The GRADE level of evidence for this outcome was moderate. Three studies included data for the incidence of major haemorrhage in the ECMO group. 48 (19%) of the 251 patients in these three studies had major haemorrhages.
INTERPRETATION
Compared with conventional mechanical ventilation, use of venovenous ECMO in adults with severe acute respiratory distress syndrome was associated with reduced 60-day mortality. However, venovenous ECMO was also associated with a moderate risk of major bleeding. These findings have important implications surrounding decision making for management of severe acute respiratory distress syndrome at centres providing venovenous ECMO.
FUNDING
None.
Topics: Adult; Cause of Death; Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation; Female; Hospital Mortality; Humans; Male; Middle Aged; Observational Studies as Topic; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Reference Values; Respiration, Artificial; Respiratory Distress Syndrome; Risk Assessment; Severity of Illness Index; Survival Analysis; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 30642776
DOI: 10.1016/S2213-2600(18)30452-1 -
Cardiology Journal 2016There is growing controversy regarding the association between digoxin and mortality in atrial fibrillation (AF). The aim of this analysis was to systematically review... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
There is growing controversy regarding the association between digoxin and mortality in atrial fibrillation (AF). The aim of this analysis was to systematically review digoxin use and risk of mortality in patients with AF.
METHODS
MEDLINE, EMBASE, GoogleScholar, CINAHL, meeting abstracts, presentations, and Cochrane central databases were searched from inception through December 2014, without language restrictions. For a study to be selected, it had to report the risk of mortality associated with digoxin use in AF patients as an outcome measure. Data were extracted by 2 independent authors. Evidence tables were created.
RESULTS
A total of 16 studies (6 post hoc analyses of randomized controlled trials) with 111,978 digoxin users and 389,643 non-digoxin users were included. In a random effects model, patients treated with digoxin had a 27% increased risk of all-cause mortality (pooled HR 1.27; 95% CI 1.19-1.36) and 21% increased risk of cardiovascular mortality (pooled HR 1.21; 95% CI 1.12-1.30) compared with those who did not use digoxin. In a random effects model, the association of digoxin with all-cause mortality was stronger for AF patients without heart failure (pooled HR 1.47; 95% CI 1.25-1.73) than AF patients with heart failure (pooled HR 1.21; 95% CI 1.07-1.36, interaction p = 0.06).
CONCLUSIONS
Digoxin use in AF is associated with increased risk of all-cause and cardiovascular mortalities. The effect size was larger for AF patients without heart failure than AF patients with heart failure. The study suggests further directed analyses to study the effect that is suggested by this meta-analysis, especially in AF without heart failure.
Topics: Anti-Arrhythmia Agents; Atrial Fibrillation; Digoxin; Global Health; Humans; Survival Rate
PubMed: 27064796
DOI: 10.5603/CJ.a2016.0016 -
Environment International Jan 2016A number of studies have associated natural outdoor environments with reduced mortality but there is no systematic review synthesizing the evidence. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
A number of studies have associated natural outdoor environments with reduced mortality but there is no systematic review synthesizing the evidence.
OBJECTIVES
We aimed to systematically review the available evidence on the association between long-term exposure to residential green and blue spaces and mortality in adults, and make recommendations for further research. As a secondary aim, we also conducted meta-analyses to explore the magnitude of and heterogeneity in the risk estimates.
METHODS
Following the PRISMA statement guidelines for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analysis, two independent reviewers searched studies using keywords related to natural outdoor environments and mortality.
DISCUSSION
Our review identified twelve eligible studies conducted in North America, Europe, and Oceania with study populations ranging from 1645 up to more than 43 million individuals. These studies are heterogeneous in design, study population, green space assessment and covariate data.We found that the majority of studies show a reduction of the risk of cardiovascular disease (CVD) mortality in areas with higher residential greenness. Evidence of a reduction of all-cause mortality is more limited, and no benefits of residential greenness on lung cancer mortality are observed. There were no studies on blue spaces.
CONCLUSIONS
This review supports the hypothesis that living in areas with higher amounts of green spaces reduces mortality, mainly CVD. Further studies such as cohort studies with more and better covariate data, improved green space assessment and accounting well for socioeconomic status are needed to provide further and more complete evidence, as well as studies evaluating the benefits of blue spaces.
Topics: Adult; Cardiovascular Diseases; Cohort Studies; Environmental Monitoring; Europe; Female; Humans; Lung Neoplasms; Male; Mortality; North America; Oceania; Plant Dispersal; Social Class; Urbanization
PubMed: 26540085
DOI: 10.1016/j.envint.2015.10.013