-
Hypertension (Dallas, Tex. : 1979) Jul 2024Increased arterial stiffness and pulse wave velocity (PWV) of the aorta and large arteries impose adverse hemodynamic effects on the heart and other organs.... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Comparative Study
BACKGROUND
Increased arterial stiffness and pulse wave velocity (PWV) of the aorta and large arteries impose adverse hemodynamic effects on the heart and other organs. Antihypertensive treatment reduces PWV, but it is unknown whether this results from an unloading of stiffer elements in the arterial wall or is due to an alternate functional or structural change that might differ according to class of antihypertensive drug.
METHODS
We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of the effects of different antihypertensive drug classes and duration of treatment on PWV with and without adjustment for change in mean arterial blood pressure (BP; study 1) and compared this to the change in PWV after an acute change in transmural pressure, simulating an acute change in BP (study 2).
RESULTS
A total of 83 studies involving 6200 subjects were identified. For all drug classes combined, the reduction of PWV was 0.65 (95% CI, 0.46-0.83) m/s per 10 mm Hg reduction in mean arterial BP, a change similar to that induced by an acute change in transmural pressure in a group of hypertensive subjects. When adjusted for change in mean arterial BP, the reduction in PWV after treatment with beta-blockers or diuretics was less than that after treatment with angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors/angiotensin receptor antagonists or calcium channel antagonists.
CONCLUSIONS
Reduction in PWV after antihypertensive treatment is largely explained by the reduction in BP, but there are some BP-independent effects. These might increase over time and contribute to better outcomes over the long term, but this remains to be demonstrated in long-term clinical trials.
Topics: Humans; Pulse Wave Analysis; Hypertension; Antihypertensive Agents; Vascular Stiffness; Blood Pressure
PubMed: 38721709
DOI: 10.1161/HYPERTENSIONAHA.123.22436 -
Systematic Reviews May 2024Psychosocial approaches are the first-line treatments for cocaine dependence, although they still present high dropout and relapse rates. Thus, there is a pressing need...
BACKGROUND
Psychosocial approaches are the first-line treatments for cocaine dependence, although they still present high dropout and relapse rates. Thus, there is a pressing need to understand which variables influence treatment outcomes to improve current treatments and prevent dropout and relapse rates. The aim of this study is to explore predictors of treatment retention and abstinence in CUD.
METHODS
This systematic review was performed according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA). We searched three databases-PubMed, PsychINFO and Web of Science-for randomized clinical trials (RCTs) published in English and Spanish from database inception through April 1, 2023. We selected all studies that met the inclusion criteria (adults aged ≥ 18, outpatient treatment, CUD as main addiction, and no severe mental illness) to obtain data for the narrative synthesis addressing cocaine abstinence and treatment retention as main outcome variables. After data extraction was completed, risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool for randomized trials (RoB-2).
RESULTS
A total of 566 studies were screened, and, of those, 32 RCTs were included in the synthesis. Younger age, more years of cocaine use, and craving levels were significant predictors of relapse and treatment dropout. Fewer withdrawal symptoms, greater baseline abstinence, greater treatment engagement, and more self-efficacy were all predictors of longer duration of abstinence. The role of impulsivity as a predictor of CUD is unclear due to conflicting data, although the evidence generally suggests that higher impulsivity scores can predict more severe addiction and withdrawal symptoms, and earlier discontinuation of treatment.
CONCLUSION
Current evidence indicates which variables have a direct influence on treatment outcomes, including well-studied cocaine use-related variables. However, additional variables, such as genetic markers, appear to have a high impact on treatment outcomes and need further study.
SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION
This systematic review is registered at PROSPERO (ID: CRD42021271847). This study was funded by the Spanish Ministry of Science, Innovation and Universities, Instituto Carlos III (ISCIII) (FIS PI20/00929) and FEDER funds and Fundació Privada Hospital de la Santa Creu i Sant Pau (Pla d'acció social 2020).
Topics: Humans; Cocaine-Related Disorders; Treatment Outcome; Recurrence; Craving; Self Efficacy; Patient Dropouts; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Age Factors; Substance Withdrawal Syndrome
PubMed: 38720357
DOI: 10.1186/s13643-024-02550-z -
Thrombosis Research Jun 2024Thromboembolic events are common complications of COVID-19. Clinical study results on safety and efficacy of anticoagulation in COVID-19 are controversial. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Thromboembolic events are common complications of COVID-19. Clinical study results on safety and efficacy of anticoagulation in COVID-19 are controversial.
MATERIAL AND METHODS
This report is the second update of our systematic review with meta-analysis on randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing standard thromboprophylaxis, intermediate or therapeutic dose anticoagulation or no anticoagulation in COVID-19 in- and outpatients. We searched eligible studies up to 5 October 2023. Certainty of evidence was assessed using GRADE.
RESULTS
For this update we included fourteen new RCTs and a total of 27 RCTs with 16,789 patients. Certainty of evidence ranged from very low to high depending on outcome and comparison. Standard thromboprophylaxis with low dose anticoagulation may have little or no effect for COVID-19 outpatients compared to no anticoagulation. In inpatients with moderate or severe COVID-19, intermediate dose anticoagulation may decrease any thrombotic events or death, but may increase major bleeding compared to standard thromboprophylaxis. Therapeutic dose anticoagulation decreases thrombotic events or deaths in inpatients with moderate COVID-19, but probably has little or no effect in patients with severe COVID-19 compared to standard thromboprophylaxis with low or intermediate dose anticoagulation. With therapeutic dose anticoagulation, the risk of major bleeding probably increases regardless of COVID-19 severity. We are uncertain on the effect of thromboprophylaxis with low dose anticoagulation compared to no anticoagulation in the post-discharge setting.
CONCLUSIONS
Hospitalized, moderately-ill COVID-19 patients may benefit from intermediate or therapeutic dose anticoagulation, while critically ill patients may not. Risk of major bleeding must be considered.
Topics: Humans; Anticoagulants; COVID-19; SARS-CoV-2; Hemorrhage; COVID-19 Drug Treatment; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Thromboembolism
PubMed: 38718472
DOI: 10.1016/j.thromres.2024.04.007 -
MedRxiv : the Preprint Server For... Apr 2024The absence of systematic screening for psychosis within general psychiatric services contribute to substantial treatment delays and poor long-term outcomes. We...
BACKGROUND
The absence of systematic screening for psychosis within general psychiatric services contribute to substantial treatment delays and poor long-term outcomes. We conducted a meta-analysis to estimate rates of psychotic experiences, clinical high-risk for psychosis syndrome (CHR-P), and psychotic disorders identified by screening treatment-seeking individuals to inform implementation recommendations for routine psychosis screening in general psychiatric settings.
METHODS
PubMed and Web of Science databases were searched to identify empirical studies that contained information on the point prevalence of psychotic experiences, CHR-P, or psychotic disorders identified by screening inpatient and outpatient samples aged 12-64 receiving general psychiatric care. Psychotic experiences were identified by meeting threshold scores on validated self-reported questionnaires, and psychotic disorders and CHR-P by gold-standard structured interview assessments. A meta-analysis of each outcome was conducted using the Restricted Maximum Likelihood Estimator method of estimating effect sizes in a random effects model.
RESULTS
41 independent samples (k=36 outpatient) involving n=25,751 patients (58% female, mean age: 24.1 years) were included. Among a general psychiatric population, prevalence of psychotic experiences was 44.3% (95% CI: 35.8-52.8%; 28 samples, n=21,957); CHR-P was 26.4% (95% CI: 20.0-32.7%; 28 samples, n=14,395); and psychotic disorders was 6.6% (95% CI: 3.3-9.8%; 32 samples, n=20,371).
CONCLUSIONS
High rates of psychotic spectrum illness in general psychiatric settings underscore need for secondary prevention with psychosis screening. These base rates can be used to plan training and resources required to conduct assessments for early detection, as well as build capacity in interventions for CHR-P and early psychosis in non-specialty mental health settings.
PubMed: 38699350
DOI: 10.1101/2024.04.14.24305796 -
Frontiers in Neurology 2024Currently, the incidence of cerebral palsy is high in newborns. However, the current methods for diagnosing and treating patients with cerebral palsy are complex and...
BACKGROUND
Currently, the incidence of cerebral palsy is high in newborns. However, the current methods for diagnosing and treating patients with cerebral palsy are complex and poorly targeted. Moreover, these studies lack the support of bibliometric analysis results.
OBJECTIVE
Our study focused on a bibliometric analysis of published papers on the diagnosis and treatment of patients with cerebral palsy. This study identified the primary authors, institutions, and countries involved in analyzing the status and trends of research on the diagnosis and treatment of patients with cerebral palsy. Additionally, the study also involved screening pathways related to cerebral palsy.
METHODS
The PubMed database was searched for publications on the diagnosis and treatment of patients with cerebral palsy between 1990 and 2023. R v4.2.2 and VOSviewer v1.6.18 software tools were utilized to perform bibliometric analysis and visualization.
RESULTS
There were 1,965 publications on cerebral palsy diagnosis and 5,418 articles on the qualified treatment strategies, and the annual number of publications also increased. The United States dominated in this field of research. Gregory Y.H. Lip and Patrizio Lancellotti published the most number of papers. The Cleveland Clinic published the most number of papers in the field. According to the analysis of the co-occurrence of keywords, we found that the main research directions were age, sex, disease diagnosis, and treatment. Newly emerging research has focused mainly on heart failure, which is related to valvular heart disease.
CONCLUSION
The findings presented in this study offer valuable insights into ongoing research and potential future directions pertaining to cerebral palsy. These insights can assist researchers in identifying suitable collaborators and enhancing their investigations aimed at identifying the underlying molecular mechanisms associated with cerebral palsy, encompassing its etiology, preventive measures, and therapeutic interventions.
PubMed: 38694779
DOI: 10.3389/fneur.2024.1354311 -
Heliyon May 2024Favipiravir has been used in the therapy of COVID-19, including patients with mild to moderate symptoms in certain countries. The aim of our systematic review and...
PURPOSE
Favipiravir has been used in the therapy of COVID-19, including patients with mild to moderate symptoms in certain countries. The aim of our systematic review and meta-analysis was to investigate its efficacy and safety in mild-to-moderate COVID-19 infections.
METHODS
The PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane databases were systematically reviewed for articles reporting the results of randomized controlled trials published until January 6, 2023, resulting in the identification of 20 eligible studies.
RESULTS
There were no significant differences in viral clearance time (HR = 1.20, p = 0.09) compared to those without favipiravir therapy. However, in the subgroup analyses, favipiravir treatment significantly increased viral clearance by 59 % (HR = 1.59, p < 0.01) and 42 % (HR = 1.42, p < 0.01], I = 20 %) compared to the comparator group in patients with moderate severity of COVID-19 and in the inpatient care setting, respectively. Favipiravir had no beneficial effects in the case of patients with mild symptoms and treated in ambulatory care.
CONCLUSIONS
The use of favipiravir is questionable in the treatment of outpatients with COVID-19 with mild symptoms. Moderate beneficial effects in the case of patients with moderate symptoms and inpatients should be treated with care due to the limitations of the analysed trials.
PubMed: 38694066
DOI: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e29808 -
American Journal of TherapeuticsNirmatrelvir/ritonavir (NMV/r) is an oral antiviral drug used to treat mild-to-moderate coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in patients aged 12 years or older at high...
BACKGROUND
Nirmatrelvir/ritonavir (NMV/r) is an oral antiviral drug used to treat mild-to-moderate coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in patients aged 12 years or older at high risk of progression to severe disease (eg, hospitalization and death). Despite being the preferred option for outpatient treatment in the majority of countries worldwide, NMV/r is currently underutilized in real-world clinical practice.
AREAS OF UNCERTAINTY
As numerous real-world studies have described patient outcomes following treatment with NMV/r, this systematic literature review provides a comprehensive summary of evidence on NMV/r effectiveness against hospitalization and mortality further organized by clinically meaningful categories, such as acute versus longer-term follow-up, age, underlying health conditions, and vaccination status, to help inform health care decision making.
DATA SOURCES
We searched Embase and PubMed (December 22, 2021-March 31, 2023) and congress abstracts (December 1, 2021-December 31, 2022) for reports describing NMV/r effectiveness.
THERAPEUTIC ADVANCES
In total, 18 real-world studies met final selection criteria. The evidence showed that NMV/r significantly reduced postinfection risk of all-cause and COVID-19-related hospitalization and mortality in both acute (≤30 days) (21%-92%) and longer-term (>30 days) (1%-61%) follow-up. The reduction in postinfection risk was higher when treatment was received within 5 days of symptom onset. Real-world effectiveness of NMV/r treatment was observed regardless of age, underlying high-risk conditions, and vaccination status.
CONCLUSION
The systematic literature review findings demonstrated the effectiveness of NMV/r against hospitalization and mortality during the Omicron period among individuals at high risk of progression to severe COVID-19 disease.
Topics: Humans; Antiviral Agents; COVID-19; COVID-19 Drug Treatment; Drug Combinations; Hospitalization; Ritonavir; SARS-CoV-2; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 38691664
DOI: 10.1097/MJT.0000000000001744 -
Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) Apr 2024(1) : The COVID-19 pandemic influenced the management of patients with immune-mediated rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases (imRMDs) in various ways. The goal of our... (Review)
Review
Influence of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Medical Management and on Healthcare Delivery of Immune-Mediated Rheumatic and Musculoskeletal Diseases during the First Pandemic Period February to July 2020: A Systematic Review.
(1) : The COVID-19 pandemic influenced the management of patients with immune-mediated rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases (imRMDs) in various ways. The goal of our systematic review was to determine the influence of the first period of the COVID-19 pandemic (February 2020 to July 2020) on the management of imRMDs regarding the availability of drugs, adherence to therapy and therapy changes and on healthcare delivery. (2) : We conducted a systematic literature search of PubMed, Cochrane and Embase databases (carried out 20-26 October 2021), including studies with adult patients, on the influence of the COVID-19 pandemic on the management of imRMDs. There were no restrictions regarding to study design except for systematic reviews and case reports that were excluded as well as articles on the disease outcomes in case of SARS-CoV-2 infection. Two reviewers screened the studies for inclusion, and in case of disagreement, a consensus was reached after discussion. (3) : A total of 5969 potentially relevant studies were found, and after title, abstract and full-text screening, 34 studies were included with data from 182,746 patients and 2018 rheumatologists. The non-availability of drugs (the impossibility or increased difficulty to obtain a drug), e.g., hydroxychloroquine and tocilizumab, was frequent (in 16-69% of patients). Further, medication non-adherence was reported among patients with different imRMDs and between different drugs in 4-46% of patients. Changes to preexisting medication were reported in up to 33% of patients (e.g., reducing the dose of steroids or the cessation of biological disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs). Physical in-office consultations and laboratory testing decreased, and therefore, newly implemented remote consultations (particularly telemedicine) increased greatly, with an increase of up to 80%. (4) : The COVID-19 pandemic influenced the management of imRMDs, especially at the beginning. The influences were wide-ranging, affecting the availability of pharmacies, adherence to medication or medication changes, avoidance of doctor visits and laboratory testing. Remote and telehealth consultations were newly implemented. These new forms of healthcare delivery should be spread and implemented worldwide to routine clinical practice to be ready for future pandemics. Every healthcare service provider treating patients with imRMDs should check with his IT provider how these new forms of visits can be used and how they are offered in daily clinical practice. Therefore, this is not only a digitalization topic but also an organization theme for hospitals or outpatient clinics.
Topics: Humans; Antirheumatic Agents; COVID-19; Delivery of Health Care; Hydroxychloroquine; Medication Adherence; Musculoskeletal Diseases; Pandemics; Rheumatic Diseases; SARS-CoV-2; Telemedicine
PubMed: 38674242
DOI: 10.3390/medicina60040596 -
Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) Mar 2024Antimicrobial resistance (AMR) is a growing public health problem in the One Health dimension. Artificial intelligence (AI) is emerging in healthcare, since it is... (Review)
Review
Antimicrobial resistance (AMR) is a growing public health problem in the One Health dimension. Artificial intelligence (AI) is emerging in healthcare, since it is helpful to deal with large amounts of data and as a prediction tool. This systematic review explores the use of AI in antimicrobial stewardship programs (ASPs) and summarizes the predictive performance of machine learning (ML) algorithms, compared with clinical decisions, in inpatients and outpatients who need antimicrobial prescriptions. This review includes eighteen observational studies from PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science. The exclusion criteria comprised studies conducted only in vitro, not addressing infectious diseases, or not referencing the use of AI models as predictors. Data such as study type, year of publication, number of patients, study objective, ML algorithms used, features, and predictors were extracted from the included publications. All studies concluded that ML algorithms were useful to assist antimicrobial stewardship teams in multiple tasks such as identifying inappropriate prescribing practices, choosing the appropriate antibiotic therapy, or predicting AMR. The most extracted performance metric was AUC, which ranged from 0.64 to 0.992. Despite the risks and ethical concerns that AI raises, it can play a positive and promising role in ASP.
PubMed: 38666983
DOI: 10.3390/antibiotics13040307 -
The Australian and New Zealand Journal... Jul 2024Community treatment orders have been introduced in many jurisdictions with increasing use over time. We conducted a rapid umbrella review to synthesise the quantitative... (Review)
Review Meta-Analysis
AIMS
Community treatment orders have been introduced in many jurisdictions with increasing use over time. We conducted a rapid umbrella review to synthesise the quantitative and qualitative evidence from systematic reviews and/or meta-analyses of their potential harms and benefits.
METHODS
A systematic search of Medline, PubMed, Embase and PsycINFO for relevant systematic reviews and/or meta-analyses. Where available, participants on community treatment orders were compared with controls receiving voluntary psychiatric treatment. This review is registered with PROSPERO (CRD42023398767) and the Open Science Framework (https://osf.io/zeq35).
RESULTS
In all, 17 publications from 14 studies met the inclusion criteria. Quantitative synthesis of data from different systematic reviews was not possible. There were mixed findings on the effects of community treatment orders on health service use, and clinical, psychosocial or forensic outcomes. Whereas uncontrolled evidence suggested benefits, results were more equivocal from controlled studies and randomised controlled trials showed no effect. Any changes in health service use took several years to become apparent. There was evidence that better targeting of community treatment order use led to improved outcomes. Although there were other benefits, such as in mortality, findings were mostly rated as suggestive using predetermined and standardised criteria. Qualitative findings suggested that family members and clinicians were generally positive about the effect of community treatment orders but those subjected to them were more ambivalent. Any possible harms were under-researched, particularly in quantitative designs.
CONCLUSIONS
The evidence for the benefits of community treatment orders remains inconclusive. At the very least, use should be better targeted to people most likely to benefit. More quantitative research on harms is indicated.
Topics: Humans; Mental Disorders; Community Mental Health Services; Systematic Reviews as Topic
PubMed: 38650311
DOI: 10.1177/00048674241246436