ICF components of outcome measures for mallet finger: A systematic review

Objective: To determine the current applications of 3-dimensional (3D) printing in the care of patients with cleft lip and palate. We also reviewed 3D printing limitations, financial analysis, and future implications. Design: Retrospective systematic review. Methods: Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses guidelines were used by 3 independent reviewers. Articles were identified from Cochrane library, Ovid Medline, and Embase. Search terms included 3D printing, 3 dimensional printing, additive manufacturing, rapid prototyping, cleft lip, and cleft palate. Exclusion criteria included articles not in English, animal studies, reviews without original data, oral presentations, abstracts, opinion pieces, and articles without relevance to 3D printing or cleft lip and palate. Main Outcome Measures: Primary outcome measure was the purpose of 3D printing in the care of patients with cleft lip and palate. Secondary outcome measures were cost analysis and clinical outcomes. Results: Eight-four articles were identified, and 39 met inclusion/exclusion criteria. Eleven studies used 3D printing models for nasoalveolar molding. Patient-specific implants were developed via 3D printing in 6 articles. Surgical planning was conducted via 3D printing in 8 studies. Eight articles utilized 3D printing for anatomic models/educational purposes. 3-Dimensional printed models were used for surgical simulation/training in 6 articles. Bioprinting was utilized in 4 studies. Secondary outcome of cost was addressed in 8 articles. Conclusion: 3-Dimensional printing for the care of patients with cleft lip and palate has several applications. Potential advantages of utilizing this technology are demonstrated; however, literature is largely descriptive in nature with few clinical outcome measures. Future direction should be aimed at standardized reporting to include clinical outcomes, cost, material, printing method, and results.

Download Full-text

Effect of routinely assessing and addressing depression and diabetes distress using patient-reported outcome measures in improving outcomes among adults with type 2 diabetes: a systematic review protocol

BMJ Open ◽

10.1136/bmjopen-2020-044888 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 11 (3) ◽

pp. e044888

Author(s):

Rita McMorrow ◽

Barbara Hunter ◽

Christel Hendrieckx ◽

Dominika Kwasnicka ◽

Leanne Cussen ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Type 2 Diabetes ◽

Outcome Measures ◽

Study Design ◽

Patient Reported Outcome Measures ◽

Patient Reported Outcome ◽

Diabetes Distress ◽

Controlled Trials ◽

Patient Reported

IntroductionType 2 diabetes is a global health priority. People with diabetes are more likely to experience mental health problems relative to people without diabetes. Diabetes guidelines recommend assessment of depression and diabetes distress during diabetes care. This systematic review will examine the effect of routinely assessing and addressing depression and diabetes distress using patient-reported outcome measures in improving outcomes among adults with type 2 diabetes.Methods and analysisMEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL Complete, PsycInfo, The Cochrane Library and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials will be searched using a prespecified strategy using a prespecified Population, Intervention, Comparator, Outcomes, Setting and study design strategy. The date range of the search of all databases will be from inception to 3 August 2020. Randomised controlled trials, interrupted time-series studies, prospective and retrospective cohort studies, case–control studies and analytical cross-sectional studies published in peer-reviewed journals in the English language will be included. Two review authors will independently screen abstracts and full texts with disagreements resolved by a third reviewer, if required, using Covidence software. Two reviewers will undertake risk of bias assessment using checklists appropriate to study design. Data will be extracted using prespecified template. A narrative synthesis will be conducted, with a meta-analysis, if appropriate.Ethics and disseminationEthics approval is not required for this review of published studies. Presentation of results will follow the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses guidance. Findings will be disseminated via peer-reviewed publication and conference presentations.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42020200246.

Download Full-text

SARS-CoV-2 genome and antibodies in breastmilk: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Archives of Disease in Childhood - Fetal and Neonatal Edition ◽

10.1136/archdischild-2020-321074 ◽

2021 ◽

pp. fetalneonatal-2020-321074

Author(s):

Faith Zhu ◽

Carlos Zozaya ◽

Qi Zhou ◽

Charmaine De Castro ◽

Prakesh S Shah

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Outcome Measures ◽

Study Design ◽

Web Of Science ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Respiratory Support ◽

Common Finding ◽

Rt Pcr

ObjectiveTo systematically review and meta-analyse the rate of SARS-CoV-2 genome identification and the presence of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies in breastmilk of mothers with COVID-19.DesignA systematic review of studies published between January 2019 and October 2020 without study design or language restrictions.SettingData sourced from Ovid Embase Classic+Embase, PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, relevant bibliographies and the John Hopkins University COVID-19 database.PatientsMothers with confirmed COVID-19 and breastmilk tested for SARS-CoV-2 by RT-PCR or for anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies.Main outcome measuresPresence of SARS-CoV-2 genome and antibodies in breastmilk.ResultsWe included 50 articles. Twelve out of 183 women from 48 studies were positive for SARS-CoV-2 genome in their breastmilk (pooled proportion 5% (95% CI 2% to 15%; I2=48%)). Six infants (50%) of these 12 mothers tested positive for SARS-CoV-2, with one requiring respiratory support. Sixty-one out of 89 women from 10 studies had anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibody in their breastmilk (pooled proportion 83% (95% CI 32% to 98%; I2=88%)). The predominant antibody detected was IgA.ConclusionsSARS-CoV-2 genome presence in breastmilk is uncommon and is associated with mild symptoms in infants. Anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies may be a more common finding. Considering the low proportion of SARS-CoV-2 genome detected in breastmilk and its lower virulence, mothers with COVID-19 should be supported to breastfeed.

Download Full-text