-
Archivos Argentinos de Pediatria Aug 2018The objective of this study was to determine the effects of corrective, therapeutic exercise techniques on subjects with adolescent idiopathic scoliosis. A systematic...
The objective of this study was to determine the effects of corrective, therapeutic exercise techniques on subjects with adolescent idiopathic scoliosis. A systematic review was conducted by searching the Cochrane Library Plus, Pubmed, PEDro, and SCOPUS databases. Studies in patients diagnosed with adolescent idiopathic scoliosis that considered corrective, therapeutic exercise as an independent outcome measure and symptoms, functional capacity, Cobb's angle and/or other angles or body asymmetries as dependent outcome measures were included. A total of 9 controlled clinical trials that carried out corrective, therapeutic exercise were included. Corrective, therapeutic exercise appears to have positive effects by reducing symptoms and improving function, as well as various angles and body asymmetries. However, further studies with better methodological quality are required to confirm these outcomes and determine the best therapeutic exercise intervention.
Topics: Adolescent; Exercise Therapy; Humans; Outcome Assessment, Health Care; Research Design; Scoliosis
PubMed: 30016036
DOI: 10.5546/aap.2018.eng.e582 -
BMJ (Clinical Research Ed.) Aug 2012To assess the effectiveness of physiotherapy compared with no intervention in patients with Parkinson's disease. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
OBJECTIVE
To assess the effectiveness of physiotherapy compared with no intervention in patients with Parkinson's disease.
DESIGN
Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials.
DATA SOURCES
Literature databases, trial registries, journals, abstract books, and conference proceedings, and reference lists, searched up to the end of January 2012.
REVIEW METHODS
Randomised controlled trials comparing physiotherapy with no intervention in patients with Parkinson's disease were eligible. Two authors independently abstracted data from each trial. Standard meta-analysis methods were used to assess the effectiveness of physiotherapy compared with no intervention. Tests for heterogeneity were used to assess for differences in treatment effect across different physiotherapy interventions used. Outcome measures were gait, functional mobility and balance, falls, clinician rated impairment and disability measures, patient rated quality of life, adverse events, compliance, and economic analysis outcomes.
RESULTS
39 trials of 1827 participants met the inclusion criteria, of which 29 trials provided data for the meta-analyses. Significant benefit from physiotherapy was reported for nine of 18 outcomes assessed. Outcomes which may be clinically significant were speed (0.04 m/s, 95% confidence interval 0.02 to 0.06, P<0.001), Berg balance scale (3.71 points, 2.30 to 5.11, P<0.001), and scores on the unified Parkinson's disease rating scale (total score -6.15 points, -8.57 to -3.73, P<0.001; activities of daily living subscore -1.36, -2.41 to -0.30, P=0.01; motor subscore -5.01, -6.30 to -3.72, P<0.001). Indirect comparisons of the different physiotherapy interventions found no evidence that the treatment effect differed across the interventions for any outcomes assessed, apart from motor subscores on the unified Parkinson's disease rating scale (in which one trial was found to be the cause of the heterogeneity).
CONCLUSIONS
Physiotherapy has short term benefits in Parkinson's disease. A wide range of physiotherapy techniques are currently used to treat Parkinson's disease, with little difference in treatment effects. Large, well designed, randomised controlled trials with improved methodology and reporting are needed to assess the efficacy and cost effectiveness of physiotherapy for treating Parkinson's disease in the longer term.
Topics: Activities of Daily Living; Disability Evaluation; Female; Gait; Humans; Male; Martial Arts; Outcome Assessment, Health Care; Parkinson Disease; Physical Therapy Modalities; Quality of Life; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 22867913
DOI: 10.1136/bmj.e5004 -
The Lancet. Neurology Jul 2017People with epilepsy who became seizure-free while taking antiepileptic drugs might consider discontinuing their medication, with the possibility of increased quality of... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Individualised prediction model of seizure recurrence and long-term outcomes after withdrawal of antiepileptic drugs in seizure-free patients: a systematic review and individual participant data meta-analysis.
BACKGROUND
People with epilepsy who became seizure-free while taking antiepileptic drugs might consider discontinuing their medication, with the possibility of increased quality of life because of the elimination of adverse events. The risk with this action, however, is seizure recurrence. The objectives of our study were to identify predictors of seizure recurrence and long-term seizure outcomes and to produce nomograms for estimation of individualised outcomes.
METHODS
We did a systematic review and meta-analysis, and identified eligible articles and candidate predictors, using PubMed and Embase databases with a last update on Nov 6, 2014. Eligible articles had to report on cohorts of patients with epilepsy who were seizure-free and had started withdrawal of antiepileptic drugs; articles also had to contain information regarding seizure recurrences during and after withdrawal. We excluded surgical cohorts, reports with fewer than 30 patients, and reports on acute symptomatic seizures because these topics were beyond the scope of our objective. Risk of bias was assessed using the Quality in Prognosis Studies system. Data analysis was based on individual participant data. Survival curves and proportional hazards were computed. The strongest predictors were selected with backward selection. Models were converted to nomograms and a web-based tool to determine individual risks.
FINDINGS
We identified 45 studies with 7082 patients; ten studies (22%) with 1769 patients (25%) were included in the meta-analysis. Median follow-up was 5·3 years (IQR 3·0-10·0, maximum 23 years). Prospective and retrospective studies and randomised controlled trials were included, covering non-selected and selected populations of both children and adults. Relapse occurred in 812 (46%) of 1769 patients; 136 (9%) of 1455 for whom data were available had seizures in their last year of follow-up, suggesting enduring seizure control was not regained by this timepoint. Independent predictors of seizure recurrence were epilepsy duration before remission, seizure-free interval before antiepileptic drug withdrawal, age at onset of epilepsy, history of febrile seizures, number of seizures before remission, absence of a self-limiting epilepsy syndrome, developmental delay, and epileptiform abnormality on electroencephalogram (EEG) before withdrawal. Independent predictors of seizures in the last year of follow-up were epilepsy duration before remission, seizure-free interval before antiepileptic drug withdrawal, number of antiepileptic drugs before withdrawal, female sex, family history of epilepsy, number of seizures before remission, focal seizures, and epileptiform abnormality on EEG before withdrawal. Adjusted concordance statistics were 0·65 (95% CI 0·65-0·66) for predicting seizure recurrence and 0·71 (0·70-0·71) for predicting long-term seizure freedom. Validation was stable across the individual study populations.
INTERPRETATION
We present evidence-based nomograms with robust performance across populations of children and adults. The nomograms facilitate prediction of outcomes following drug withdrawal for the individual patient, including both the risk of relapse and the chance of long-term freedom from seizures. The main limitations were the absence of a control group continuing antiepileptic drug treatment and a consistent definition of long-term seizure freedom.
FUNDING
Epilepsiefonds.
Topics: Adult; Anticonvulsants; Child; Humans; Outcome Assessment, Health Care; Recurrence; Remission Induction; Seizures
PubMed: 28483337
DOI: 10.1016/S1474-4422(17)30114-X -
JAMA Psychiatry Jul 2020It is not clear whether psychotherapies for depression have comparable effects across the life span. Finding out is important from a clinical and scientific perspective. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
IMPORTANCE
It is not clear whether psychotherapies for depression have comparable effects across the life span. Finding out is important from a clinical and scientific perspective.
OBJECTIVE
To compare the effects of psychotherapies for depression between different age groups.
DATA SOURCES
Four major bibliographic databases (PubMed, PsychINFO, Embase, and Cochrane) were searched for trials comparing psychotherapy with control conditions up to January 2019.
STUDY SELECTION
Randomized trials comparing psychotherapies for depression with control conditions in all age groups were included.
DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS
Effect sizes (Hedges g) were calculated for all comparisons and pooled with random-effects models. Differences in effects between age groups were examined with mixed-effects subgroup analyses and in meta-regression analyses.
MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES
Depressive symptoms were the primary outcome.
RESULTS
After removing duplicates, 16 756 records were screened and 2608 full-text articles were screened. Of these, 366 trials (36 702 patients) with 453 comparisons between a therapy and a control condition were included in the qualitative analysis, including 13 (3.6%) in children (13 years and younger), 24 (6.6%) in adolescents (≥13 to 18 years), 19 (5.2%) in young adults (≥18 to 24 years), 242 (66.1%) in middle-aged adults (≥24 to 55 years), 58 (15.8%) in older adults (≥55 to 75 years), and 10 (2.7%) in older old adults (75 years and older). The overall effect size of all comparisons across all age groups was g = 0.75 (95% CI, 0.67-0.82), with very high heterogeneity (I2 = 80%; 95% CI: 78-82). Mean effect sizes for depressive symptoms in children (g = 0.35; 95% CI, 0.15-0.55) and adolescents (g = 0.55; 95% CI, 0.34-0.75) were significantly lower than those in middle-aged adults (g = 0.77; 95% CI, 0.67-0.87). The effect sizes in young adults (g = 0.98; 95% CI, 0.79-1.16) were significantly larger than those in middle-aged adults. No significant difference was found between older adults (g = 0.66; 95% CI, 0.51-0.82) and those in older old adults (g = 0.97; 95% CI, 0.42-1.52). The outcomes should be considered with caution because of the suboptimal quality of most of the studies and the high levels of heterogeneity. However, most primary findings proved robust across sensitivity analyses, addressing risk of bias, target populations included, type of therapy, diagnosis of mood disorder, and method of data analysis.
CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE
Trials included in this meta-analysis reported effect sizes of psychotherapies that were smaller in children than in adults, probably also smaller in adolescents, that the effects may be somewhat larger in young adults, and without meaningful differences between middle-aged adults, older adults, and older old adults.
Topics: Adolescent; Adult; Aged; Child; Depression; Depressive Disorder; Humans; Middle Aged; Outcome Assessment, Health Care; Psychotherapy; Young Adult
PubMed: 32186668
DOI: 10.1001/jamapsychiatry.2020.0164 -
Psychological Bulletin Jan 2020In this comprehensive systematic review and meta-analysis of group design studies of nonpharmacological early interventions designed for young children with autism... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
In this comprehensive systematic review and meta-analysis of group design studies of nonpharmacological early interventions designed for young children with autism spectrum disorder (ASD), we report summary effects across 7 early intervention types (behavioral, developmental, naturalistic developmental behavioral intervention [NDBI], TEACCH, sensory-based, animal-assisted, and technology-based), and 15 outcome categories indexing core and related ASD symptoms. A total of 1,615 effect sizes were gathered from 130 independent participant samples. A total of 6,240 participants, who ranged in age from 0-8 years, are represented across the studies. We synthesized effects within intervention and outcome type using a robust variance estimation approach to account for the nesting of effect sizes within studies. We also tracked study quality indicators, and report an additional set of summary effect sizes that restrict included studies to those meeting prespecified quality indicators. Finally, we conducted moderator analyses to evaluate whether summary effects across intervention types were larger for proximal as compared with distal effects, and for context-bound as compared to generalized effects. We found that when study quality indicators were not taken into account, significant positive effects were found for behavioral, developmental, and NDBI intervention types. When effect size estimation was limited to studies with randomized controlled trial (RCT) designs, evidence of positive summary effects existed only for developmental and NDBI intervention types. This was also the case when outcomes measured by parent report were excluded. Finally, when effect estimation was limited to RCT designs and to outcomes for which there was no risk of detection bias, no intervention types showed significant effects on any outcome. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2019 APA, all rights reserved).
Topics: Autism Spectrum Disorder; Child; Child, Preschool; Early Medical Intervention; Female; Humans; Infant; Male; Outcome Assessment, Health Care
PubMed: 31763860
DOI: 10.1037/bul0000215 -
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 -
JAMA Network Open Nov 2021COVID-19 has disproportionately affected racial and ethnic minority groups, and race and ethnicity have been associated with disease severity. However, the association... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
IMPORTANCE
COVID-19 has disproportionately affected racial and ethnic minority groups, and race and ethnicity have been associated with disease severity. However, the association of socioeconomic determinants with racial disparities in COVID-19 outcomes remains unclear.
OBJECTIVE
To evaluate the association of race and ethnicity with COVID-19 outcomes and to examine the association between race, ethnicity, COVID-19 outcomes, and socioeconomic determinants.
DATA SOURCES
A systematic search of PubMed, medRxiv, bioRxiv, Embase, and the World Health Organization COVID-19 databases was performed for studies published from January 1, 2020, to January 6, 2021.
STUDY SELECTION
Studies that reported data on associations between race and ethnicity and COVID-19 positivity, disease severity, and socioeconomic status were included and screened by 2 independent reviewers. Studies that did not have a satisfactory quality score were excluded. Overall, less than 1% (0.47%) of initially identified studies met selection criteria.
DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS
Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines were followed. Associations were assessed using adjusted and unadjusted risk ratios (RRs) and odds ratios (ORs), combined prevalence, and metaregression. Data were pooled using a random-effects model.
MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES
The main measures were RRs, ORs, and combined prevalence values.
RESULTS
A total of 4 318 929 patients from 68 studies were included in this meta-analysis. Overall, 370 933 patients (8.6%) were African American, 9082 (0.2%) were American Indian or Alaska Native, 101 793 (2.4%) were Asian American, 851 392 identified as Hispanic/Latino (19.7%), 7417 (0.2%) were Pacific Islander, 1 037 996 (24.0%) were White, and 269 040 (6.2%) identified as multiracial and another race or ethnicity. In age- and sex-adjusted analyses, African American individuals (RR, 3.54; 95% CI, 1.38-9.07; P = .008) and Hispanic individuals (RR, 4.68; 95% CI, 1.28-17.20; P = .02) were the most likely to test positive for COVID-19. Asian American individuals had the highest risk of intensive care unit admission (RR, 1.93; 95% CI, 1.60-2.34, P < .001). The area deprivation index was positively correlated with mortality rates in Asian American and Hispanic individuals (P < .001). Decreased access to clinical care was positively correlated with COVID-19 positivity in Hispanic individuals (P < .001) and African American individuals (P < .001).
CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE
In this study, members of racial and ethnic minority groups had higher risks of COVID-19 positivity and disease severity. Furthermore, socioeconomic determinants were strongly associated with COVID-19 outcomes in racial and ethnic minority populations.
Topics: COVID-19; Humans; Outcome Assessment, Health Care; Prevalence; Racial Groups; Social Class; United States
PubMed: 34762110
DOI: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2021.34147 -
PloS One 2020Patients often have difficulty comprehending or recalling information given to them by their healthcare providers. Use of 'teach-back' has been shown to improve...
Patients often have difficulty comprehending or recalling information given to them by their healthcare providers. Use of 'teach-back' has been shown to improve patients' knowledge and self-care abilities, however there is little guidance for healthcare services seeking to embed teach-back in their setting. This review aims to synthesize evidence about the translation of teach-back into practice including mode of delivery, use of implementation strategies and effectiveness. We searched Ovid Medline, CINAHL, Embase and The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials for studies reporting the use of teach-back as an educational intervention, published up to July 2019. Two reviewers independently extracted study data and assessed methodologic quality. Implementation strategies were extracted into distinct categories established in the Implementation Expert Recommendations for Implementing Change (ERIC) project. Overall, 20 studies of moderate quality were included in this review (four rated high, nine rated moderate, seven rated weak). Studies were heterogeneous in terms of setting, population and outcomes. In most studies (n = 15), teach-back was delivered as part of a simple and structured educational approach. Implementation strategies were infrequently reported (n = 10 studies). The most used implementation strategies were training and education of stakeholders (n = 8), support for clinicians (n = 6) and use of audits and provider feedback (n = 4). Use of teach-back proved effective in 19 of the 20 studies, ranging from learning-related outcomes (e.g. knowledge recall and retention) to objective health-related outcomes (e.g. hospital re-admissions, quality of life). Teach-back was found to be effective across a wide range of settings, populations and outcome measures. While its mode of delivery is well-defined, strategies to support its translation into practice are not often described. Use of implementation strategies such as training and education of stakeholders and supporting clinicians during implementation may improve the uptake and sustainability of teach-back and achieve positive outcomes.
Topics: Databases, Factual; Health Personnel; Health Services; Health Services Administration; Humans; Outcome Assessment, Health Care
PubMed: 32287296
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0231350 -
PloS One 2015Despite a growing body of epidemiological evidence in recent years documenting the health impacts of racism, the cumulative evidence base has yet to be synthesized in a... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Despite a growing body of epidemiological evidence in recent years documenting the health impacts of racism, the cumulative evidence base has yet to be synthesized in a comprehensive meta-analysis focused specifically on racism as a determinant of health. This meta-analysis reviewed the literature focusing on the relationship between reported racism and mental and physical health outcomes. Data from 293 studies reported in 333 articles published between 1983 and 2013, and conducted predominately in the U.S., were analysed using random effects models and mean weighted effect sizes. Racism was associated with poorer mental health (negative mental health: r = -.23, 95% CI [-.24,-.21], k = 227; positive mental health: r = -.13, 95% CI [-.16,-.10], k = 113), including depression, anxiety, psychological stress and various other outcomes. Racism was also associated with poorer general health (r = -.13 (95% CI [-.18,-.09], k = 30), and poorer physical health (r = -.09, 95% CI [-.12,-.06], k = 50). Moderation effects were found for some outcomes with regard to study and exposure characteristics. Effect sizes of racism on mental health were stronger in cross-sectional compared with longitudinal data and in non-representative samples compared with representative samples. Age, sex, birthplace and education level did not moderate the effects of racism on health. Ethnicity significantly moderated the effect of racism on negative mental health and physical health: the association between racism and negative mental health was significantly stronger for Asian American and Latino(a) American participants compared with African American participants, and the association between racism and physical health was significantly stronger for Latino(a) American participants compared with African American participants. Protocol PROSPERO registration number: CRD42013005464.
Topics: Adolescent; Adult; Child; Female; Health; Humans; Male; Mental Health; Outcome Assessment, Health Care; Racism
PubMed: 26398658
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0138511 -
Journal of Clinical Psychology Mar 2018Rational emotive behavior therapy (REBT), introduced by Albert Ellis in the late 1950s, is one of the main pillars of cognitive-behavioral therapy. Existing reviews on... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVE
Rational emotive behavior therapy (REBT), introduced by Albert Ellis in the late 1950s, is one of the main pillars of cognitive-behavioral therapy. Existing reviews on REBT are overdue by 10 years or more. We aimed to summarize the effectiveness and efficacy of REBT since its beginnings and investigate the alleged mechanisms of change.
METHOD
Systematic search identified 84 articles, out of which 68 provided data for between-group analyses and 39 for within-group analyses.
RESULTS
We found a medium effect size of REBT compared to other interventions on outcomes (d = 0.58) and on irrational beliefs (d = 0.70), at posttest. For the within-group analyses, we obtained medium effects for both outcomes (d = 0.56) and irrational beliefs (d = 0.61). Several significant moderators emerged.
CONCLUSION
REBT is a sound psychological intervention. Directions for future studies are outlined, stemming from the limitations of existing ones.
Topics: Cognitive Behavioral Therapy; Emotions; History, 20th Century; History, 21st Century; Humans; Outcome Assessment, Health Care
PubMed: 28898411
DOI: 10.1002/jclp.22514