<p>A systematic review and meta-analysis of the impact of collaborative practice between community pharmacist and general practitioner on asthma management</p>

IntroductionThere is a growing concern about the misuse of over the counter (OTC) and prescription only medication (POM) because of the impact on physical and mental health, drug interactions, overdoses and drug-related deaths. These medicines include opioid analgesics, anxiolytics such as pregabalin and diazepam and antidepressants. This protocol outlines how a systematic review will be undertaken (during June 2021), which aims to examine the literature on the pattern of OTC and POM misuse among adults who are accessing substance misuse treatment services. It will include the types of medication being taken, prevalence and demographic characteristics of people who access treatment services.Methods and analysisAn electronic search will be conducted on the Cochrane, OVID Medline, Pubmed, Scopus and Web of Science databases as well as grey literature. Two independent reviewers will conduct the initial title and abstract screenings, using predetermined criteria for inclusion and exclusion. If selected for inclusion, full-text data extraction will be conducted using a pilot-tested data extraction form. A third reviewer will resolve disagreements if consensus cannot be reached. Quality and risk of bias assessment will be conducted for all included studies. A qualitative synthesis and summary of the data will be provided. If possible, a meta-analysis with heterogeneity calculation will be conducted; otherwise, Synthesis Without Meta-analysis will be undertaken for quantitative data. The reporting of this protocol follows the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses.Ethics and disseminationEthical approval is not required. Findings will be peer reviewed, published and shared verbally, electronically and in print, with interested clinicians and policymakers.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42020135216.

Download Full-text

P20-8 The impact of valproic acid on overall survival in patients with glioblastoma: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Annals of Oncology ◽

10.1016/j.annonc.2021.05.711 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 32 ◽

pp. S340

Author(s):

Charlotte A. Jonatan ◽

Elizabeth Marcella ◽

Jeannette Tandiono ◽

Sharon Chen ◽

Felix Wijovi ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Valproic Acid ◽

Overall Survival ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

The Impact

Download Full-text

Apnoea–hypopnoea indices determined via continuous positive airway pressure (AHI-CPAPflow) versus those determined by polysomnography (AHI-PSGgold): a protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis

BMJ Open ◽

10.1136/bmjopen-2020-044499 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 11 (5) ◽

pp. e044499

Author(s):

Fanny Bertelli ◽

Carey Meredith Suehs ◽

Jean Pierre Mallet ◽

Marie Caroline Rotty ◽

Jean Louis Pepin ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Continuous Positive Airway Pressure ◽

Airway Pressure ◽

Sleep Disordered Breathing ◽

Positive Airway Pressure ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Sleep Apnoea ◽

Obstructive Sleep ◽

The Impact ◽

Disordered Breathing

Introduction To date, continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) remains the cornerstone of obstructive sleep apnoea treatment. CPAP data describing residual sleep-disordered breathing events (ie, the CPAP-measured apnoea–hypopnoea indices (AHI-CPAPflow)) is difficult to interpret because it is an entirely different metric than the polysomnography (PSG) measured AHI gold standard (AHI-PSGgold). Moreover, manufacturer definitions for apnoea and hypopnoea are not only different from those recommended for PSG scoring, but also different between manufacturers. In the context of CPAP initiation and widespread telemedicine at home to facilitate sleep apnoea care, there is a need for concrete evidence that AHI-CPAPflow can be used as a surrogate for AHI-PSGgold. Methods and analysis No published systematic review and meta-analysis (SRMA) has compared the accuracy of AHI-CPAPflow against AHI-PSGgold and the primary objective of this study is therefore to do so using published data. The secondary objectives are to similarly evaluate other sleep disordered breathing indices and to perform subgroup analyses focusing on the inclusion/exclusion of central apnoea patients, body mass index levels, CPAP device brands, pressure titration modes, use of a predetermined and fixed pressure level or not, and the impact of a 4% PSG desaturation criteria versus 3% PSG on accuracy. The Preferred Reporting Items for SRMA protocols statement guided study design. Randomised controlled trials and observational studies of adult patients (≥18 years old) treated by a CPAP device will be included. The CPAP intervention and PSG comparator must be performed synchronously. PSGs must be scored manually and follow the American Academy of Sleep Medicine guidelines (2007 AASM criteria or more recent). To assess the risk of bias in each study, the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies 2 tool will be used. Ethics and dissemination This protocol received ethics committee approval on 16 July 2020 (IRB_MTP_2020_07_2020000404) and results will be disseminated via peer-reviewed publications. PROSPERO/Trial registration numbers CRD42020159914/NCT04526366; Pre-results

Download Full-text