-
Indian Journal of Pediatrics Jul 2022To estimate the burden of group A streptococcal pharyngitis (GAS) pharyngitis, rheumatic fever (RF), and rheumatic heart disease (RHD) in India using existing data... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVE
To estimate the burden of group A streptococcal pharyngitis (GAS) pharyngitis, rheumatic fever (RF), and rheumatic heart disease (RHD) in India using existing data sources, as well as to recognize the most serious gaps in GAS disease burden data.
METHODS
Four electronic databases-PubMed, Scopus, Embase, and Web of Science were searched using a comprehensive search strategy. Data were identified primarily from observational studies including school surveys, community-based and hospital-based studies. The standard methodological procedures as per Cochrane guidelines were used. Eligible studies were pooled for estimating prevalence, incidence, and case fatality rate using R software version 3.3.3. The protocol was registered with PROSPERO; registration number CRD42018075742.
RESULTS
The pooled prevalence of GAS pharyngitis among asymptomatic children and pharyngitis cases aged 5 to 15 y was estimated as 2.79 percent [95% Confidence interval (CI): 1.58-4.89] and 13 percent (95% CI: 3.18-41.97), respectively. The prevalence rate of rheumatic fever was found to be 0.04% (95% CI: 0.01-0.17). The pooled prevalence rate of RHD among children aged 5-15 y using clinical auscultation and echocardiography was estimated as 0.36 percent (95% CI: 0.02-7.52) and 0.28 percent (95% CI: 0.08-1.03), respectively.
CONCLUSION
The study emphasizes the importance of developing a population-based surveillance framework to track patterns, management strategies, and outcomes in order to develop informed recommendations for launching contextual measures to regulate RF and RHD.
Topics: Adolescent; Child; Child, Preschool; Cost of Illness; Humans; Incidence; India; Pharyngitis; Population Surveillance; Rheumatic Fever; Rheumatic Heart Disease; Streptococcal Infections; Streptococcus pyogenes
PubMed: 34379301
DOI: 10.1007/s12098-021-03845-y -
European Journal of Pediatrics Jan 2022With the progressive elimination of mercury column devices for blood pressure (BP) measurement in children and adolescents, valid alternatives are needed. Oscillometric... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Blood pressure measurement in pediatric population: comparison between automated oscillometric devices and mercury sphygmomanometers-a systematic review and meta-analysis.
With the progressive elimination of mercury column devices for blood pressure (BP) measurement in children and adolescents, valid alternatives are needed. Oscillometric devices provide a replacement without mercury, are fully automated, and have excellent reliability among evaluators. Here, the goal was to test the accuracy of automatic blood pressure monitor devices compared to the mercury sphygmomanometer for BP measurement in children and adolescents. Electronic databases are EMBASE, MEDLINE (PubMed), SCOPUS, and Web of Science. We selected 8974 potentially eligible articles and two authors independently. We separately reviewed 370 full papers. Potentially eligible articles were selected according to the following criteria: (a) articles published in Portuguese, English, and Spanish; (b) screening of titles; (c) screening of abstracts; and (d) retrieval and screening of the full article to determine whether it met the inclusion criteria. We included 45 articles for analysis, 28 of which were selected for meta-analysis. The systolic BP measured by automatic blood pressure monitors presents 1.17 mmHg on average (95% CI 0.85; 1.48); for diastolic BP, it produced -0.08 mmHg (95% CI -0.69; 0.54) compared with a mercury sphygmomanometer. There is high heterogeneity between studies (> 90%) in the meta-analysis, partly explained by the device model, study environment, and observer training. Only articles that reported BP measurement by both methods were included.Conclusion: Automatic blood pressure monitors have strong measurement validity when compared with the mercury column. Thus, these can be safely used in blood pressure measurements of children and adolescents in clinical and epidemiological studies. What is Known: •The "gold standard" for indirect BP measurement is the mercury sphygmomanometer. •The accuracy of the automatic device is critical to any blood pressure measurement method. What is New: •Oscillometric or automatic devices can be a suitable alternative to auscultation for initial screening, consistent with current pediatric guidelines. •The automatic devices compared to the mercury column have a good validity of measurements, which can be used in blood pressure measurements of children and adolescents in clinical and epidemiological settings, provided that international protocols are followed.
Topics: Adolescent; Blood Pressure; Blood Pressure Determination; Blood Pressure Monitors; Child; Humans; Hypertension; Mercury; Reproducibility of Results; Sphygmomanometers
PubMed: 34272985
DOI: 10.1007/s00431-021-04171-3 -
CMAJ : Canadian Medical Association... Apr 2021Cesarean delivery is the most common surgical procedure worldwide. Intrapartum fetal surveillance is routinely offered to improve neonatal outcomes, but the effects of... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Cesarean delivery is the most common surgical procedure worldwide. Intrapartum fetal surveillance is routinely offered to improve neonatal outcomes, but the effects of different methods on the risk of emergency cesarean deliveries remains uncertain. We conducted a systematic review and network meta-analysis to evaluate the effectiveness of different types of fetal surveillance.
METHODS
We searched MEDLINE, Embase and CENTRAL until June 1, 2020, for randomized trials evaluating any intrapartum fetal surveillance method. We performed a network meta-analysis within a frequentist framework. We assessed the quality and network inconsistency of trials. We reported primarily on intrapartum emergency cesarean deliveries and other secondary maternal and neonatal outcomes using risk ratios (RRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs).
RESULTS
We included 33 trials (118 863 patients) evaluating intermittent auscultation with Pinard stethoscope/handheld Doppler (IA), cardiotocography (CTG), computerized cardiotocography (cCTG), CTG with fetal scalp lactate (CTG-lactate), CTG with fetal scalp pH analysis (CTG-FBS), CTG with fetal pulse oximetry (FPO-CTG), CTG with fetal heart electrocardiogram (CTG-STAN) and their combinations. Intermittent auscultation reduced the risk of emergency cesarean deliveries compared with other types of surveillance (IA v. CTG: RR 0.83, 95% CI 0.72-0.97; IA v. CTG-FBS: RR 0.71, 95% CI 0.63-0.80; IA v.CTG-lactate: RR 0.77, 95% CI 0.64-0.92; IA v. FPO-CTG: RR 0.75, 95% CI 0.65-0.87; IA v.FPO-CTG-FBS: RR 0.81, 95% CI 0.67-0.99; cCTG-FBS v. IA: RR 1.21, 95% CI 1.04-1.42), except STAN-CTG-FBS (RR 1.17, 95% CI 0.98-1.40). There was a similar reduction observed for emergency cesarean deliveries for fetal distress. None of the evaluated methods was associated with a reduced risk of neonatal acidemia, neonatal unit admissions, Apgar scores or perinatal death.
INTERPRETATION
Compared with other types of fetal surveillance, intermittent auscultation seems to reduce emergency cesarean deliveries in labour without increasing adverse neonatal and maternal outcomes.
Topics: Cesarean Section; Female; Fetal Monitoring; Humans; Pregnancy; Pregnancy Outcome; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 33824144
DOI: 10.1503/cmaj.202538 -
Nurse Education Today Jun 2021Simulation-based learning is widely used in nurse education, including virtual reality (VR) methods which have experienced a major growth lately. Virtual reality offers... (Review)
Review
OBJECTIVES
Simulation-based learning is widely used in nurse education, including virtual reality (VR) methods which have experienced a major growth lately. Virtual reality offers risk free and contactless learning. Currently, little is known about what topics of nursing are adopted for VR simulations and how their design meets various educational goals. This review aims to scope existing articles on educational VR nursing simulations, and to analyse approaches from didactic and technical perspectives.
METHOD
A systematic mapping review following the PRISMA-ScR guideline and PICo search strategy was conducted. Peer reviewed articles in English and German were searched across Scopus, CINAHL, PsycINFO, PSYNDEX, PsycARTICLES, PubMed, ERIC and The Cochrane Library. Studies had to include at least one immersive head-mounted display VR simulation in the field of nursing education. Data extraction and analysis was performed in a narrative, graphical and tabular way.
RESULTS
Twenty-two articles were identified. There is a large variety in the use and definition of VR simulation for educational purposes. Simulations were classified into four main educational objectives: procedural skills training to improve technical knowledge and proficiency; emergency response training that focusses on confidence; soft skills training that teaches empathy; and finally, psychomotor skills training. Various approaches and simulation designs were implemented to achieve these educational outcomes. A few of them were highly innovative in providing an immersive experience to learn complex tasks, e.g. auscultation, or foster empathy by mimicking life with dementia.
CONCLUSIONS
Despite an increase in the use of state-of-the-art VR nursing simulations, there is still a paucity of studies on immersive HMD based VR scenarios. Researchers designing educational VR packages need to be clear on terminology. In order to make full use of VR, designers should consider including haptic devices to practise psychomotor skills and include social interaction to teach soft skills.
Topics: Clinical Competence; Education, Nursing; Educational Status; Humans; Learning; Virtual Reality
PubMed: 33798987
DOI: 10.1016/j.nedt.2021.104868 -
Journal of Physiotherapy Jan 2021In mechanically ventilated adults in intensive care, what is the accuracy of lung ultrasound (LUS) for the diagnosis of pleural effusion, lung consolidation and lung... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Lung ultrasound has greater accuracy than conventional respiratory assessment tools for the diagnosis of pleural effusion, lung consolidation and collapse: a systematic review.
QUESTION
In mechanically ventilated adults in intensive care, what is the accuracy of lung ultrasound (LUS) for the diagnosis of pleural effusion, lung consolidation and lung collapse when compared with chest radiograph (CXR) and lung auscultation, with computed tomography (CT) as the reference standard?
DESIGN
Systematic review with meta-analysis of prospective cohort studies.
PARTICIPANTS
Adult patients admitted to intensive care, with diagnostic uncertainty at enrolment regarding pleural effusion, lung consolidation and/or collapse/atelectasis.
INDEX TEST
The diagnostic accuracy of LUS as the index test was estimated against CXR and/or lung auscultation as comparators, with thoracic CT scan as the reference standard.
OUTCOME MEASURES
Measures of diagnostic accuracy.
RESULTS
Seven eligible studies were identified, five of which (with 253 participants) were included in the meta-analysis. It was found that LUS had a pooled sensitivity of 92% and 91% in the diagnosis of consolidation and pleural effusion, respectively, and pooled specificity of 92% for both pathologies. CXR had a pooled sensitivity of 53% and 42% and a pooled specificity of 78% and 81% in the diagnosis of consolidation and pleural effusion, respectively. A meta-analysis for lung auscultation was not possible, although a single study reported a sensitivity and specificity of 8% and 100%, respectively, for diagnosing consolidation, and a sensitivity and specificity of 42% and 90%, respectively, for diagnosing pleural effusion.
CONCLUSION
This systematic review with meta-analysis demonstrated high sensitivity of LUS compared with CXR, with similar specificities when diagnosing pleural effusion and lung consolidation/collapse.
REGISTRATION
PROSPERO CRD42018095555.
Topics: Adult; Humans; Lung; Lung Diseases; Pleural Effusion; Prospective Studies; Sensitivity and Specificity; Ultrasonography
PubMed: 33353830
DOI: 10.1016/j.jphys.2020.12.002 -
American Journal of Infection Control Feb 2021Evaluate the presence of bacteria and resistance profile in stethoscopes used by health care professionals and its consequences within the hospital environment. (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Evaluate the presence of bacteria and resistance profile in stethoscopes used by health care professionals and its consequences within the hospital environment.
METHODS
It is a systematic review, in which articles indexed in the BVS, CAPES-Periódicos, Cochrane Library, PubMed, Scientific Electronic Library Online, and ScienceDirect databases were searched.
RESULTS
Twenty-two articles were selected for this study. The significant majority of professionals does not perform hygiene of the stethoscope, either due to the lack of instructions or the lack of knowledge about the contamination's risks. In addition, over these 22 articles evaluated, only 10 demonstrated that more than 50% of the analyzed samples were contaminated with some type of bacteria. Coagulase-negative Staphylococcus spp., Staphylococcus aureus, Acinetobacter spp., Pseudomonas spp., and Klebsiella pneumoniae were the most recurrent pathogens. Besides that, multiresistant strains were also isolated, highlighting resistance to Ampicillin and Clindamycin.
CONCLUSIONS
Indeed, the stethoscope is a potential disseminator of bacterial infections. The contamination is explained by the possible cross reactions that make the transmission of infectious agents possible. Cleaning before and after each auscultate is an efficient alternative to minimize these pathogens.
Topics: Bacteria; Cross Infection; Health Personnel; Humans; Staphylococcal Infections; Staphylococcus aureus; Stethoscopes
PubMed: 32653560
DOI: 10.1016/j.ajic.2020.07.007 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Jul 2020Some people with SARS-CoV-2 infection remain asymptomatic, whilst in others the infection can cause mild to moderate COVID-19 disease and COVID-19 pneumonia, leading...
BACKGROUND
Some people with SARS-CoV-2 infection remain asymptomatic, whilst in others the infection can cause mild to moderate COVID-19 disease and COVID-19 pneumonia, leading some patients to require intensive care support and, in some cases, to death, especially in older adults. Symptoms such as fever or cough, and signs such as oxygen saturation or lung auscultation findings, are the first and most readily available diagnostic information. Such information could be used to either rule out COVID-19 disease, or select patients for further diagnostic testing.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the diagnostic accuracy of signs and symptoms to determine if a person presenting in primary care or to hospital outpatient settings, such as the emergency department or dedicated COVID-19 clinics, has COVID-19 disease or COVID-19 pneumonia.
SEARCH METHODS
On 27 April 2020, we undertook electronic searches in the Cochrane COVID-19 Study Register and the University of Bern living search database, which is updated daily with published articles from PubMed and Embase and with preprints from medRxiv and bioRxiv. In addition, we checked repositories of COVID-19 publications. We did not apply any language restrictions.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Studies were eligible if they included patients with suspected COVID-19 disease, or if they recruited known cases with COVID-19 disease and controls without COVID-19. Studies were eligible when they recruited patients presenting to primary care or hospital outpatient settings. Studies including patients who contracted SARS-CoV-2 infection while admitted to hospital were not eligible. The minimum eligible sample size of studies was 10 participants. All signs and symptoms were eligible for this review, including individual signs and symptoms or combinations. We accepted a range of reference standards including reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR), clinical expertise, imaging, serology tests and World Health Organization (WHO) or other definitions of COVID-19.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Pairs of review authors independently selected all studies, at both title and abstract stage and full-text stage. They resolved any disagreements by discussion with a third review author. Two review authors independently extracted data and resolved disagreements by discussion with a third review author. Two review authors independently assessed risk of bias using the QUADAS-2 checklist. Analyses were descriptive, presenting sensitivity and specificity in paired forest plots, in ROC (receiver operating characteristic) space and in dumbbell plots. We did not attempt meta-analysis due to the small number of studies, heterogeneity across studies and the high risk of bias.
MAIN RESULTS
We identified 16 studies including 7706 participants in total. Prevalence of COVID-19 disease varied from 5% to 38% with a median of 17%. There were no studies from primary care settings, although we did find seven studies in outpatient clinics (2172 participants), and four studies in the emergency department (1401 participants). We found data on 27 signs and symptoms, which fall into four different categories: systemic, respiratory, gastrointestinal and cardiovascular. No studies assessed combinations of different signs and symptoms and results were highly variable across studies. Most had very low sensitivity and high specificity; only six symptoms had a sensitivity of at least 50% in at least one study: cough, sore throat, fever, myalgia or arthralgia, fatigue, and headache. Of these, fever, myalgia or arthralgia, fatigue, and headache could be considered red flags (defined as having a positive likelihood ratio of at least 5) for COVID-19 as their specificity was above 90%, meaning that they substantially increase the likelihood of COVID-19 disease when present. Seven studies carried a high risk of bias for selection of participants because inclusion in the studies depended on the applicable testing and referral protocols, which included many of the signs and symptoms under study in this review. Five studies only included participants with pneumonia on imaging, suggesting that this is a highly selected population. In an additional four studies, we were unable to assess the risk for selection bias. These factors make it very difficult to determine the diagnostic properties of these signs and symptoms from the included studies. We also had concerns about the applicability of these results, since most studies included participants who were already admitted to hospital or presenting to hospital settings. This makes these findings less applicable to people presenting to primary care, who may have less severe illness and a lower prevalence of COVID-19 disease. None of the studies included any data on children, and only one focused specifically on older adults. We hope that future updates of this review will be able to provide more information about the diagnostic properties of signs and symptoms in different settings and age groups.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
The individual signs and symptoms included in this review appear to have very poor diagnostic properties, although this should be interpreted in the context of selection bias and heterogeneity between studies. Based on currently available data, neither absence nor presence of signs or symptoms are accurate enough to rule in or rule out disease. Prospective studies in an unselected population presenting to primary care or hospital outpatient settings, examining combinations of signs and symptoms to evaluate the syndromic presentation of COVID-19 disease, are urgently needed. Results from such studies could inform subsequent management decisions such as self-isolation or selecting patients for further diagnostic testing. We also need data on potentially more specific symptoms such as loss of sense of smell. Studies in older adults are especially important.
Topics: Ambulatory Care; Arthralgia; Betacoronavirus; COVID-19; Coronavirus Infections; Fatigue; Fever; Headache; Humans; Myalgia; Outpatient Clinics, Hospital; Pandemics; Physical Examination; Pneumonia, Viral; Primary Health Care; SARS-CoV-2; Selection Bias; Symptom Assessment
PubMed: 32633856
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD013665 -
The American Journal of Gastroenterology May 2020The objective was to evaluate diagnostic performance of multiple methods used to assess gastric tube placement verification in neonates, infants, and children. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
INTRODUCTION
The objective was to evaluate diagnostic performance of multiple methods used to assess gastric tube placement verification in neonates, infants, and children.
METHODS
A systematic review using the methods outlined in the Cochrane Handbook for Reviews of Diagnostic Test Accuracy was conducted. Eight databases were searched. Studies on neonates, infants, and children in which researchers compared different methods for gastric tube placement verification with x-ray reference standard were eligible in the review.
RESULTS
Eight studies involving 911 participants that evaluated 9 index tests for gastric tube placement verification were included. Most studies were of moderate methodological quality, and most index tests were assessed in small individual studies. pH testing with cutoff values ≤ 6 for gastric tube position confirmation was the only index test subjected to meta-analysis, with the summary sensitivity and specificity being 0.77 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.56-0.90) and 0.42 (95% CI 0.16-0.73). Other tests for gastric tube placement verification showed great variations in sensitivities and specificities.
DISCUSSION
pH ≤ 6 is not sufficiently accurate to be recommended for gastric tube placement verification in neonates, infants, and children. Diagnostic performance of pH ≤ 4 or 5 and other methods cannot be determined because of the paucity of data and methodological variations in studies. Clinical practice related to the diagnostic tests used will continue to be dictated by local preferences and cost factors, until stronger evidence becomes available.
Topics: Auscultation; Capnography; Child, Preschool; Humans; Hydrogen-Ion Concentration; Infant; Infant, Newborn; Intubation, Gastrointestinal; Radiography; Stomach; Ultrasonography
PubMed: 31464742
DOI: 10.14309/ajg.0000000000000358 -
Annals of Global Health Jul 2019Handheld echocardiography is being proposed as the fifth pillar of bedside physical cardiovascular examination (PE) and is referred to as insonation. Although there is... (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study
BACKGROUND
Handheld echocardiography is being proposed as the fifth pillar of bedside physical cardiovascular examination (PE) and is referred to as insonation. Although there is emerging consensus that insonation is superior to PE for diagnosis of various cardiac conditions, superiority has not been consistently demonstrated for various valvular heart disease (VHD) lesions. The objective of this review is to systematically review the accuracy of insonation and auscultation in published literature for detection of common VHD.
METHODS
An extensive literature search across three commonly used public databases allowed comparison of diagnostic characteristics of insonation and auscultation for common VHD including aortic stenosis, mitral regurgitation, aortic regurgitation, tricuspid regurgitation. Sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of insonation and auscultation for the detection of these VHD lesions were extracted for further analysis. The quality of evidence was assessed according to Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology.
RESULTS
Eight hundred eighty studies were screened, and seven observational studies were selected for full analysis. Due to heterogeneity of data, this study was not amenable to meta-analysis. Insonation was superior to auscultation for the detection of all regurgitant lesions, but there was no significant difference in diagnostic ability of the two strategies for detection of aortic stenosis.
CONCLUSIONS
Compared to auscultation, insonation, in its currently available form, is a superior diagnostic tool for regurgitant lesions. However, insonation fails to improve upon auscultation for recognition of aortic stenosis. This limitation is likely due to absence of spectral Doppler and inability of HE to assess transvalvular velocity and gradient.
Topics: Aortic Valve Stenosis; Echocardiography; Heart Auscultation; Heart Valve Diseases; Humans; Point-of-Care Systems; Reproducibility of Results
PubMed: 31298821
DOI: 10.5334/aogh.2489 -
Clinical Otolaryngology : Official... Nov 2019Cervical auscultation (i.e. listening to swallowing sounds) is the most commonly used technique in adjuvant to the clinical feeding examination by speech-language...
BACKGROUND
Cervical auscultation (i.e. listening to swallowing sounds) is the most commonly used technique in adjuvant to the clinical feeding examination by speech-language pathologists worldwide to assess for oropharyngeal aspiration risk in children. Despite its relative popularity in clinical practice, little is known on the clinical utility of cervical auscultation within a paediatric population.
OBJECTIVE
To determine the diagnostic test accuracy of the clinical feeding examination with cervical auscultation in the detection of aspiration in children.
TYPE OF REVIEW
Narrative review. Prospero Registration: CRD42017081467 Search strategy: Medline/Pub Med, Embase, CINAHL, AustHealth, Cochrane and UQ (Scopus) were searched up until October 2017. Specifically, the search terms used were: (((oropharyngeal OR respiratory) aspiration) AND (child* OR pediatr* OR paediatr*) and (cervical auscultation OR swallow sounds OR swallowing sounds OR accelerometry OR swallowing acoustics)). The search strategy also included scanning reference lists and citations of retrieved studies.
EVALUATION METHOD
Extracted studies were reviewed by two independent reviewers. Methodological quality of studies was assessed using the QUADAS-2 tool.
RESULTS
Only one study met inclusion criteria for this review, which had a bias for flow and timing. Use of cervical auscultation in conjunction with the clinical feeding examination to predict aspiration had a positive predictor value (PPV) of only 0.49 (0.31-0.66), indicating potential over-prediction of aspiration when cervical auscultation is used. In contrast a high NPV of 0.92 (0.78-0.98) was reported indicating that cervical auscultation is useful at ruling out aspiration in children.
CONCLUSION
This review highlights the paucity of research studies assessing the accuracy of cervical auscultation as an adjuvant to the clinical feeding examination in aspiration detection within the paediatric population.
Topics: Adolescent; Auscultation; Child; Child, Preschool; Deglutition Disorders; Humans; Infant; Infant, Newborn; Neck; Oropharynx; Respiratory Aspiration
PubMed: 31298795
DOI: 10.1111/coa.13402