scholarly journals Valproate in dementia: time to move on?

2019 ◽  
Vol 25 (3) ◽  
pp. 145-149
Author(s):  
Amreek Dhindsa

SUMMARYBaillonet al’s Cochrane review included 430 participants with agitation in dementia from five randomised controlled trials. Overall, the reviewers found that valproate was no better than placebo for the treatment of agitation in people with dementia; however, the quality of the studies included was very variable. Adverse effects and events were higher in the treatment group compared with the controls, although these finding were largely based on low-quality data with incomplete reporting; thus, valproate's safety profile is of concern. This review demonstrates that there is insufficient evidence to change current treatment guidelines.DECLARATION OF INTERESTNone.

BJPsych Open ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 7 (S1) ◽  
pp. S276-S276
Author(s):  
Syed Nabeel Javaid

AimsThe aim of this systematic literature review was to determine the evidence-based effectiveness of animal assisted interventions and to look at the factors that limit implementation of this intervention.BackgroundDementia is a major health issue worldwide impacting not only on the people diagnosed with dementia, but also on their families and caregivers, and the healthcare professionals. The symptoms of dementia include cognitive impairment that can range from mild to severe, and behavioural and psychological symptoms which have debilitating effects on functional capacity and quality of life. A number of non-pharmacological interventions are being developed to help people with dementia. Animal assisted therapy is one of those interventions that has demonstrated positive effects on various aspects of dementia (Filan and Llewellyn-Jones, 2006). However, there are limitations to its use and feasibility of animal assisted therapy programmes is unclear.MethodOnly randomised-controlled trials (RCTs) were to be included to evaluate high quality evidence. A systematic literature search was carried out to find using the PubMed and Cochrane databases and a search of the NICE website. Literature was screened according to inclusion and exclusion criteria. Eight randomised-controlled trials were selected to be used in this systematic review to assess the effectiveness of animal-assisted therapy.ResultThe results regarding the effectiveness of animal assisted therapy were variable. There was some improvement demonstrated in symptoms of depression, agitation, behaviour and cognitive impairment. Quality of life and activities of daily living also demonstrated positive outcomes. There was a reduction in the risk of falls in people with dementia. However, the studies conducted demonstrated limited methodologies. The factors limiting the use of animal assisted therapy were found to be concerns around adverse events to animals, issues of animal welfare and economic feasibility of animal assisted therapy programmes.ConclusionFurther research needs to be done using properly conducted randomised controlled trials with larger sample sizes to formally assess people's perceptions regarding therapy animals and develop clear guidelines and protocols for integrating these interventions in healthcare.


2009 ◽  
Vol 14 (1) ◽  
pp. 156-165 ◽  
Author(s):  
Valerie Bridoux ◽  
Grégoire Moutel ◽  
Benoit Lefebure ◽  
Michel Scotte ◽  
Francis Michot ◽  
...  

2018 ◽  
Vol 82 (1) ◽  
pp. 5-14 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ginny Humphreys ◽  
Tanya King ◽  
Jo Jex ◽  
Morwenna Rogers ◽  
Sharon Blake ◽  
...  

Introduction Sleep positioning systems are often prescribed as part of a 24-hour postural management programme for children and adults with neurodisabilities. In a search for evidence of effectiveness for children with cerebral palsy a recent Cochrane review found two randomised controlled trials. This review aims to appraise a broader set of studies including any neurological diagnosis and users of all ages to inform therapists about the quality of the evidence underlying practice. Method A comprehensive search for all peer-reviewed studies that evaluated the use of sleep positioning systems was conducted in MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, Cochrane Library databases, BNI, HMIC, PEDro, OTSeeker and clinical trials registries. Disability organisations, manufacturers and colleagues worldwide were also contacted. Titles were screened for relevance by two reviewers. Data were extracted into bespoke quantitative or qualitative forms by one reviewer and checked by a second. Findings were analysed into simple themes. Results A total of 14 studies were eligible for inclusion; all were small and most were of low quality. Inferences of benefits cannot be made from the literature but also no harm was found. Conclusions The body of evidence supporting practice remains small and mostly of low quality. Therapists should remain cautious when presenting the benefits to families.


2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (3) ◽  
pp. 1-17
Author(s):  
Laura D Wainwright ◽  
Gillian Haddock ◽  
Charlotte Dunster-Page ◽  
Katherine Berry

Background/Aims Inpatient wards provide an opportunity to intervene with medical, psychological and social care to contain distress and prevent future relapse. However, they have been criticised for an over-reliance on medication and risk management with limited psychosocial interventions. The aim of this study was to investigate clinical trials of psychosocial interventions for inpatients to identify interventions that are effective at improving quality of life, symptoms or patient functioning. Methods An electronic search of six databases was conducted for papers published from 1806 up until February 2017. A total of 18 randomised controlled trials was identified in which outcomes for symptoms, quality of life or functioning were reported. Results Overall, 15 trials showed a statistically significant result for at least one outcome. Seven categories were identified from the 18 studies, at least one in each category was found to be effective for symptoms, quality of life or functioning. The majority were effective (15 out of 18). Conclusions Given that the methodological quality was generally low and number of randomised controlled trials were small, it is difficult to draw definitive conclusions. Recommendations include more and repeated trials using rigorous methods of testing and reporting.


2021 ◽  
pp. archdischild-2020-321197
Author(s):  
Taco Jan Prins ◽  
Corine Rollema ◽  
Eric van Roon ◽  
Tjalling de Vries

ObjectiveEvaluating the reporting of safety data of medication in paediatric randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in 2017–2018 compared with our earlier study.DesignLiterature search with a systemic appraisal of adverse drug event reporting.Main outcome measuresQuality of reporting of safety data using Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) and Ioannidis scores in paediatric drug RCTs. The CONSORT score consists of nine recommendations of the CONSORT Group issued to improve the quality of reporting adverse events. The Ioannidis score is based on these advices. We considered a CONSORT score of at least 6 and an Ioannidis score of at least 3 as sufficient.ResultsWe reviewed 100 RCTs published in 2017 and 2018. Ninety-four (94%) articles mentioned adverse events compared with 78% in the earlier study. Fifty-seven per cent used a standardised method for reporting adverse events compared with 34% in our earlier study. In 26 of the articles, the expected adverse events were defined, and 27 articles had a preset standardised scale for adverse events. Of these, 62 articles (62%) had a CONSORT score of 6 or higher compared with 18% in 2010. In the present study, 67% had an Ioannidis score of 3 or higher, whereas in the earlier study this was 29%. Both differences are statistically significant (p<0.05).ConclusionsReporting safety data in paediatric RCTs has improved over the past 10 years. However, there is still room for improvement and for further improvement. Authors and editors should give more attention to methods for collecting, reporting and presenting safety data of RCTs in studies and manuscripts.


BMJ ◽  
2019 ◽  
pp. l4179 ◽  
Author(s):  
Qi Feng ◽  
Aoshuang Zhou ◽  
Huachun Zou ◽  
Suzanne Ingle ◽  
Margaret T May ◽  
...  

AbstractObjectiveTo evaluate the effects of four drug (quadruple) versus three drug (triple) combination antiretroviral therapies in treatment naive people with HIV, and explore the implications of existing trials for clinical practice and research.DesignSystematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials.Data sourcesPubMed, EMBASE, CENTRAL, Web of Science, and the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature from March 2001 to December 2016 (updated search in PubMed and EMBASE up to June 2018); and reference lists of eligible studies and related reviews.Study selectionRandomised controlled trials comparing quadruple with triple combination antiretroviral therapies in treatment naive people with HIV and evaluating at least one effectiveness or safety outcome.Review methodsOutcomes of interest included undetectable HIV-1 RNA, CD4 T cell count, virological failure, new AIDS defining events, death, and severe adverse effects. Random effects meta-analyses were conducted.ResultsTwelve trials (including 4251 people with HIV) were eligible. Quadruple and triple combination antiretroviral therapies had similar effects on all relevant effectiveness and safety outcomes, with no point estimates favouring quadruple therapy. With the triple therapy as the reference group, the risk ratio was 0.99 (95% confidence interval 0.93 to 1.05) for undetectable HIV-1 RNA, 1.00 (0.90 to 1.11) for virological failure, 1.17 (0.84 to 1.63) for new AIDS defining events, 1.23 (0.74 to 2.05) for death, and 1.09 (0.89 to 1.33) for severe adverse effects. The mean difference in CD4 T cell count increase between the two groups was −19.55 cells/μL (−43.02 to 3.92). In general, the results were similar, regardless of the specific regimens of combination antiretroviral therapies, and were robust in all subgroup and sensitivity analyses.ConclusionIn this study, effects of quadruple combination antiretroviral therapy were not better than triple combination antiretroviral therapy in treatment naive people with HIV. This finding lends support to current guidelines recommending the triple regimen as first line treatment. Further trials on this topic should be conducted only when new research is justified by adequate systematic reviews of the existing evidence. However, this study cannot exclude the possibility that quadruple cART would be better than triple cART when new classes of antiretroviral drugs are made available.


2016 ◽  
Vol 34 (5) ◽  
pp. 342-348 ◽  
Author(s):  
Min Deng ◽  
Xu-Feng Wang

Objective Mild cognitive impairment (MCI) is a pre-dementia state; 5–10% of cases per year will evolve into dementia. MCI can be amnestic (AMCI) or non-amnestic. AMCI is associated with a higher risk of progression. In recent years, interest in acupuncture as a potential treatment for AMCI has grown. The aim of this meta-analysis was to estimate the clinical effectiveness and safety of acupuncture for AMCI. Methods Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of acupuncture versus medical treatment for AMCI were identified using the following databases from inception to July 2015: PubMed; Medline; CENTRAL; Chinese Scientific Journal Database; The Chinese Acupuncture Trials Register; China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI); and Wanfang database. Data were extracted from RCTs meeting the inclusive criteria according to Cochrane methods. Meta-analyses were conducted using Rev Man V.5.3 software. Results Five trials involving 568 subjects were included. Meta-analysis showed that participants receiving acupuncture had better outcomes than those receiving nimodipine with greater clinical efficacy rates (odds ratio (OR) 1.78, 95% CI 1.19 to 2.65; p<0.01), mini-mental state examination (MMSE) scores (mean difference (MD) 0.99, 95% CI 0.71 to 1.28; p<0.01), and picture recognition score (MD 2.12, 95% CI 1.48 to 2.75; p<0.01). Meta-analysis also showed acupuncture in conjunction with nimodipine significantly improved MMSE scores (MD 1.09, 95% CI 0.29 to 1.89; p<0.01) compared to nimodipine alone. Three trials reported adverse events. Methodological quality of the included studies was judged to be generally poor. Conclusions Acupuncture appears effective for AMCI when used as an alternative or adjunctive treatment; however, caution must be exercised given the low methodological quality of included trials. Further, more rigorously designed studies are needed.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document