scholarly journals Semi-Solid Nutrients for Prevention of Enteral Tube Feeding-Related Complications in Japanese Population: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Nutrients ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 12 (6) ◽  
pp. 1687
Author(s):  
Yoji Kokura ◽  
Chieko Suzuki ◽  
Hidetaka Wakabayashi ◽  
Keisuke Maeda ◽  
Kotomi Sakai ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Dwell Time ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Tube Feeding ◽  
Mean Difference ◽  
World Health ◽  
Cochrane Central Register ◽  
Enteral Tube Feeding ◽  
Crossover Trials ◽  
Semi Solid

The aim of this systematic review was to assess the best available evidence on semi-solid nutrients for prevention of complications associated with enteral tube feeding (ETF). PubMed (MEDLINE), EMBASE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trial, Ichushi-web, and World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform databases were searched for relevant articles. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs), cluster RCTs, and crossover trials comparing the effects of semi-solid nutrients with those of control interventions in patients on ETF were included in the review. The primary outcome was development of gastroesophageal reflux (GER). Eight RCTs and five crossover trials involving 889 study participants in total were examined via meta-analysis. The meta-analysis showed that semi-solid nutrients significantly decreased the risk of GER (risk ratio 0.39; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.21 to 0.73) and the GER index (mean difference −2.93; 95% CI −5.18 to −0.68). Dwell time in the stomach was significantly shortened (standardized mean difference (SMD) −0.50; 95% CI −0.99 to −0.02), as was care time defined as the time needed to prepare and administer the nutrient solution (SMD −8.02; 95% CI −10.94 to −5.10). Semi-solid nutrients significantly decrease the risk of GER and the dwell time in the stomach in adult patients.

scholarly journals Effect of interventions based on educational technologies on the prevention of sexually transmitted infections in incarcerated women: protocol of a systematic review and meta-analysis

BMJ Open ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (4) ◽  
pp. e043373
Author(s):  
Isaiane da Silva Carvalho ◽  
Ryanne Carolynne Marques Gomes Mendes ◽  
Priscila de Oliveira Cabral Melo ◽  
Caroline Ferraz Simões ◽  
Luciana Pedrosa Leal ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Health Education ◽  
Sexually Transmitted Infections ◽  
Fixed Effects ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Incarcerated Women ◽  
Mean Difference ◽  
World Health ◽  
Educational Technologies ◽  
Sexually Transmitted

IntroductionPrisons are places with high vulnerability and high risk for the development of sexually transmitted infections. World Health Agencies recommend establishing intervention measures, such as information and education, on the prevention of diseases. Thus, technologies as tools for health education have been used to reduce sexually transmitted infections. However, no systematic review has investigated the effectiveness of these interventions. Therefore, this review’s objective is to examine the effect of educational technologies used for preventing sexually transmitted infections in incarcerated women.Methods and analysisPreferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines will be strictly followed. The following electronic databases will be searched: Scopus; Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health, Education Resources Information Center, Embase, PsycINFO, PubMed/Medline, Web of Science and Google Scholar. Randomised clinical trials of interventions that used educational technologies to prevent sexually transmitted infections in incarcerated women will be searched in the databases from the beginning of 2020 until December by two researchers independently. A narrative synthesis will be constructed for all included studies, and if there are sufficient data, a meta-analysis will be performed using the Review Manager software (V.5.3). Continuous results will be presented as the weighted mean difference or the standardised mean difference with 95% CIs. Under the heterogeneity of the included studies, a random-effects or fixed-effects model will be used. The studies’ heterogeneity will be assessed by the I2 method. The sensitivity analysis will be carried out to examine the magnitude of each study’s influence on the general results. A significance level of p≤0.05 will be adopted.Ethics and disclosureEthical approval is not required because no primary data will be collected. The results will be published in journals reviewed by peers.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42020163820.

scholarly journals Tolerability of statin-based management of patients with a history of statin-associated muscle symptoms: protocol for a systematic review

BMJ Open ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (8) ◽  
pp. e052341
Author(s):  
Fanny Villoz ◽  
Christina Lyko ◽  
Cinzia Del Giovane ◽  
Nicolas Rodondi ◽  
Manuel R Blum
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Mean Difference ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Cochrane Central Register ◽  
Eligibility Criteria ◽  
Clinical Issue ◽  
Standard Data ◽  
Evaluation Approach ◽  
History Of

IntroductionStatin-associated muscle symptoms (SAMSs) are a major clinical issue in the primary and secondary prevention of cardiovascular events. Current guidelines advise various approaches mainly based on expert opinion. We will lead a systematic review and meta-analysis to explore the tolerability and acceptability and effectiveness of statin-based therapy management of patients with a history of SAMS. We aim to provide evidence on the tolerability and different strategies of statin-based management of patients with a history of SAMS.Methods and analysisWe will conduct a systematic review of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and non-randomised studies with a control group. We will search in Data sources MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Clinical Trials, Scopus, Clinicaltrials.gov and Proquest from inception until April 2021. Two independent reviewers will carry out the study selection based on eligibility criteria. We will extract data following a standard data collection form. The reviewers will use the Cochrane Collaboration’s tools and Newcastle-Ottawa Scale to appraise the study risk of bias. Our primary outcome will be tolerability and our secondary outcomes will be acceptability and effectiveness. We will conduct a qualitative analysis of all included studies. In addition, if sufficient and homogeneous data are available, we will conduct quantitative analysis. We will synthesise dichotomous data using OR with 95% CI and continuous outcomes by using mean difference or standardised mean difference (with 95% CI). We will determine heterogeneity visually with forest plots and quantitatively with I2 and Q-test. We will summarise the confidence in the quantitative estimate by using Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach.Ethics and disseminationAs a systematic review of literature without collection of new clinical data, there will be no requirement for ethical approval. We will disseminate findings through peer-reviewed publications.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42020202619.

scholarly journals The impact of inclusion, dose and duration of pyrazinamide (PZA) on efficacy and safety outcomes in tuberculosis: systematic review and meta-analysis protocol

2019 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
James D. Millard ◽  
Elizabeth A. Mackay ◽  
Laura J. Bonnett ◽  
Geraint R. Davies
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
World Health ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Cochrane Central Register ◽  
Efficacy And Safety ◽  
Safety Outcomes ◽  
Meta Regression ◽  
Indirect Comparisons

Abstract Background Pyrazinamide (PZA) is a key component of current and future regimens for tuberculosis (TB). Inclusion of PZA at higher doses and for longer durations may improve efficacy outcomes but must be balanced against the potential for worse safety outcomes. Methods We will search for randomised and quasi-randomised clinical trials in adult participants with and without the inclusion of PZA in TB treatment regimens in the Cochrane infectious diseases group’s trials register, Cochrane central register of controlled trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, EMBASE, LILACS, the metaRegister of Controlled Trials (mRCT) and the World Health Organization (WHO) international clinical trials registry platform. One author will screen abstracts and remove ineligible studies (10% of which will be double-screened by a second author). Two authors will review full texts for inclusion. Safety and efficacy data will be extracted to pre-piloted forms by one author (10% of which will be double-extracted by a second author). The Cochrane risk of bias tool will be used to assess study quality. The study has three objectives: the association of (1) inclusion, (2) dose and (3) duration of PZA with efficacy and safety outcomes. Risk ratios as relative measures of effect for direct comparisons within trials (all objectives) and proportions as absolute measures of effect for indirect comparisons across trials (for objectives 2 and 3) will be calculated. If there is insufficient data for direct comparisons within trials for objective 1, indirect comparisons between trials will be performed. Measures of effect will be pooled, with corresponding 95% confidence intervals and p values. Meta-analysis will be performed using the generalised inverse variance method for fixed effects models (FEM) or the DerSimonian-Laird method for random effects models (REM). For indirect comparisons, meta-regression for absolute measures against dose and duration data will be performed. Heterogeneity will be quantified through the I2-statistic for direct comparisons and the τ2 statistic for indirect comparisons using meta-regression. Discussion The current use of PZA for TB is based on over 60 years of clinical trial data, but this has never been synthesised to guide rationale use in future regimens and clinical trials. Systematic review registration: International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO) CRD42019138735

Mirror therapy simultaneously combined with electrical stimulation for upper limb motor function recovery after stroke: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

2020 ◽  
pp. 026921552095193
Author(s):  
Alberto Saavedra-García ◽  
Jose A Moral-Munoz ◽  
David Lucena-Anton
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Electrical Stimulation ◽  
Motor Function ◽  
Upper Limb ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Mean Difference ◽  
Current Evidence ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Cochrane Central Register ◽  
Mirror Therapy

Objective: To evaluate the current evidence on the effectiveness of simultaneous combination of mirror therapy and electrical stimulation in the recovery of upper limb motor function after stroke, compared with conventional therapy, mirror therapy or electrical stimulation isolated. Data sources: Articles published in PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, Physiotherapy Evidence Database (PEDro), Cochrane Central register of controlled trials and ScienceDirect up to July 2020. Review methods: The PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines were followed. Methodological quality was assessed using the PEDro tool. The RevMan 5.4 statistical software was used to obtain the meta-analysis, through the standardized mean difference and 95% confidence intervals (CI), and to evaluate the risk of bias. The GRADE approach was employed to assess the certainty of evidence. Results: Eight articles were included in this systematic review, seven were included in the meta-analysis. A total of 314 participants were analyzed. The overall quality of the articles included in this review was good. There was no overall significant mean difference on upper limb motor function after stroke using the Upper-Extremity Fugl-Meyer Assessment by 1.56 (95% CI = –2.08, 5.20; P = 0.40; moderate-certainty evidence) and the Box and Block Test results by 1.39 (95% CI = –2.14, 4.92; P = 0.44; high-certainty evidence). There was overall significant difference in the Action Research Arm Test by 3.54 (95% CI = 0.18, 6.90; P = 0.04; high-certainty evidence). Conclusion: Direct scientific evidence about the effectiveness of the combined therapy of mirror therapy and electrical stimulation simultaneously for the improvement of the upper limb motor function after stroke is lacking. Further high-quality and well-designed research is needed.

scholarly journals Updated Evaluation of Laparoscopic vs. Open Appendicectomy During Pregnancy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

2021 ◽  
Vol 8 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jia Zhang ◽  
Miye Wang ◽  
Zechang Xin ◽  
Ping Li ◽  
Qingbo Feng
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Weighted Mean Difference ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Fetal Loss ◽  
Mean Difference ◽  
Perioperative Outcomes ◽  
Cochrane Central Register ◽  
Open Appendicectomy ◽  
Advantages And Disadvantages ◽  
Dichotomous Variables

To explore the updated evaluation about the obstetrical and perioperative outcomes of laparoscopic appendicectomy (LA) for pregnancy appendicitis compared with open appendicectomy (OA). Two reviewers independently searched the PubMed, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, EMBASE, and Web of Science databases to screen eligible studies up to December 2020. Only clinical researches, no < 10 cases for LA and OA group were included. Twenty retrospective studies with 7,248 pregnant women, evaluating LA and OA in surgical and obstetrical outcomes, were included. The weighted mean difference (WMD) with 95% CI and odds ratio (OR) was used to compare continuous and dichotomous variables. It seems LA was connected with significantly shorter hospital time and lower wound infection [mean difference (MD), −0.57 days; 95% CI, −0.96 to −0.18; p = 0.004 and OR, 0.34; 95% CI, 0.18 to 0.62; p = 0.0005, respectively]. The incidence of fetal loss after LA was higher than OA (OR,1.93; 95% CI, 1.39–2.69; p < 0.0001). It was almost similar in the rate of preterm delivery (OR, 0.80; 95% CI, 0.48 to 1.34; p = 0.40) and other perioperative and obstetrical complications (p > 0.05). Our results indicated that the occurrence of fetal loss after LA should not be ignored. Caution, skillful operation, and thoroughly informed consent about the advantages and disadvantages of laparoscopy are necessary.Systematic Review Registration:https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/#recordDetails, identifier: CRD42021233150.

scholarly journals Effectiveness of orthodontic temporary anchorage devices in canine retraction and anchorage preservation during the two-step technique: A systematic review and meta-analysis

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Haonan Tian ◽  
Congman Xie ◽  
Min Lin ◽  
Hongmei Yang ◽  
Aishu Ren
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Risk Of Bias ◽  
Mean Difference ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Cochrane Central Register ◽  
Canine Retraction ◽  
Temporary Anchorage Devices ◽  
The Mean ◽  
Implant Anchorage

Abstract Background: Temporary anchorage devices have been used for decades in orthodontic practice for many applications. The aim of this systematic review was to assess the effectiveness of orthodontic temporary anchorage devices in canine retraction during the two-step technique. Methods: A search was systematically performed for articles published prior to June 30, 2019 in five electronic databases (PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Web of Science, Scopus). The risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane risk of bias tool for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and the risk of bias in nonrandomized studies of interventions (ROBINS-I) tool for controlled clinical trials (CCTs) . The Grading of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach was used for the quality assessment. Data concerning the mean difference in mesial molar movement and extent of canine retraction were extracted for statistical analysis. The mean difference s and 95% confidence intervals were analyzed for continuous data. A meta-analysis with a random-effects model for comparable outcomes was carried out. Results: Three RCTs and five CCTs were finally included. Meta-analysis showed a significant increase not only in anchorage preservation in the implant anchorage group in both the maxilla (1. 56 mm , 95% CI: 1.14 to 1.98, P <0.00001 ) and the mandible (1.62 mm , 95% CI: 1.24 to 2.01, P <0.00001 ) but also in canine retraction in the implant anchorage group in both the maxilla (0.43 mm , 95% CI: 0.16 to 0.69, P =0.001 ) and the mandible (0.26 mm , 95% CI: 0.02 to 0.49, P =0.03 ). Conclusions: There is very low-quality evidence showing that implant anchorage is more efficient than conventional anchorage during canine retraction. Additional high-quality studies are needed. Keywords: Orthodontic implants; Canine retraction; Systematic review; Meta-analysis

scholarly journals Probiotics for preventing and treating gastro-oesophageal reflux/gastro-oesophageal reflux disease in infants: A systematic review and meta-analysis

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jann Foster ◽  
Hannah Dahlen ◽  
Sabina Fijan ◽  
Nadia Badawi ◽  
Viginia Schmied ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Placebo Group ◽  
Reflux Disease ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Mean Difference ◽  
Oesophageal Reflux ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Cochrane Central Register ◽  
Probiotic Group ◽  
Oesophageal Reflux Disease

Abstract Background Gastro-oesophageal reflux (GOR) and Gastro-oesophageal reflux disease (GORD) are common during infancy and can cause substantial discomfort in infants, parental distress and financial burden on parents and the health care system. Effective treatment regimens, however, remain elusive. Probiotics given to women during pregnancy and lactation, and babies may have therapeutic effects when it comes to GOR/GORD. The objective of this systematic review and meta-analysis is to evaluate the efficacy of probiotic supplementation for the prevention and treatment of GOR/GORD in infants.Methods Literature searches were conducted using MEDLINE, EMBASE and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled trials. Only randomised controlled trials (RCTs) were included. A meta-analysis of included trials was performed using the Cochrane Collaboration methodology where possible. Results Six RCTs examined the prevention or treatment with probiotics on GOR. There were no studies examining probiotics for GORD. A meta-analysis of 3 studies showed a statistically significant reduction in regurgitation episodes for the probiotic group compared to the placebo group [mean difference -1.44 episodes/day; 95% CI -1.71 to -1.17] but there was high heterogeneity (96%). Meta-analysis of two studies found a statistically significant increased number of stools per day in the probiotic group compared to the placebo group [mean difference 1.26, 95% CI 1.12 to 1.41]. However, there was moderate heterogeneity (69%). Individual studies reported: a decrease in crying time, increased gastric emptying rate, infant length and head circumference, visits to an emergency department or health professional, and loss of parent working days were significantly less with infants receiving probiotic compared to a placebo but more research is needed. Meta-analysis of two studies showed no difference in body weight between the two groups (minimal heterogeneity 23%). None of the studies reported any adverse effects for the women or infants. Conclusions Probiotic therapy appears promising with some evidence of benefit but most studies are small and there was high heterogeneity between the studies. The use of probiotics could potentially be a non-invasive, cost effective and preventative positive health strategy for both women and their babies. Further well controlled RCTs examining the effect of probiotics for GOR /GORD are warranted.

scholarly journals Effects of respiratory rehabilitation on patients with novel coronavirus (COVID-19) pneumonia in the rehabilitation phase: protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis

BMJ Open ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (7) ◽  
pp. e039771 ◽  
Author(s):  
Feilong Zhu ◽  
Ming Zhang ◽  
Min Gao ◽  
Cheng Zeng ◽  
Dan Wang ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Grey Literature ◽  
Mean Difference ◽  
Biomedical Literature ◽  
Cochrane Central Register ◽  
Continuous Variables ◽  
China National Knowledge Infrastructure ◽  
Novel Coronavirus ◽  
Respiratory Rehabilitation

IntroductionThe recent viral pneumonia caused by the COVID-19 has gained the attention of the people all over the world. We aim to investigate the effects of respiratory rehabilitation therapy on patients infected with the novel coronavirus by conducting a systematic review and meta-analysis.Methods and analysisThis systematic review and meta-analysis have been registered in the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO). The PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Chinese Biomedical Literature Database, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, Wanfang Data and Viper information databases will be searched from inception time to date without restricting research types to find relevant studies. We will also look into reference lists of relevant trials and reviews, and manually search grey literature, such as trial registries. Two reviewers will independently extract data and perform quality assessment of included studies. Review Manager V.5.3 (Cochrane Collaboration) and Stata V.16.0 software will be used to conduct this meta-analysis. The mean difference or standardised mean difference with 95% CIs is used in the computation of continuous variables to synthesise data.Ethics and disseminationEthical approval is not required due to the nature of this meta-analysis, which is based on published papers. The results of this systematic review and meta-analysis will be published in a peer-reviewed journal once we finish this study.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42020180214.

Comparison between bovine carotid artery graft and polytetrafluoroethylene graft for haemodialysis vascular access: A systematic review and meta-analysis

2020 ◽  
pp. 112972982092608
Author(s):  
Ioannis D Kostakis ◽  
Ioannis Loukopoulos
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Carotid Artery ◽  
Vascular Access ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Graft Infection ◽  
Mean Difference ◽  
Cochrane Central Register ◽  
Pseudoaneurysm Formation ◽  
Significant Difference

Background: There is a renewed interest in using bovine carotid artery grafts for haemodialysis vascular access after recent advances in conduit manufacturing and endovascular management of access-related complications. Our aim was to summarize the results of the recent studies comparing bovine carotid artery grafts with polytetrafluoroethylene grafts as vascular access for haemodialysis. Methods: A systematic review was conducted for original articles comparing bovine carotid artery with polytetrafluoroethylene grafts for haemodialysis vascular access published between January 2000 and December 2019 searching the databases of Medline, Scopus, Google Scholar, ClinicalTrials.gov and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. Results: Four studies were included (one prospective randomized controlled trial and three retrospective studies) with 676 patients in total (bovine carotid artery: 395, polytetrafluoroethylene: 281). There was lower graft infection rate per patient-year in bovine carotid artery grafts (mean difference: −0.03, p < 0.0001). Bovine carotid artery grafts required fewer interventions per patient-year to maintain or restore patency (mean difference: −0.81, p = 0.002). No significant difference was detected regarding pseudoaneurysm formation (p = 0.24), steal syndrome (p = 0.11) or patency rates (primary: 1 year: p = 0.15, 2 years: p = 0.69; primary assisted: 1 year: p = 0.18, 2 years: p = 0.54; secondary: 1 year: p = 0.22, 2 years: p = 0.17). Conclusion: Bovine carotid artery and polytetrafluoroethylene grafts have similar short-term and long-term outcomes, with a possible advantage of bovine carotid artery grafts concerning graft infections and number of required interventions. Thus, bovine carotid artery grafts can be a useful alternative modality for haemodialysis vascular access.

scholarly journals Efficacy of miltefosine compared with glucantime for the treatment of cutaneous leishmaniasis: a systematic review and meta-analysis

2019 ◽  
Vol 41 ◽  
pp. e2019011 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sohrab Iranpour ◽  
Ali Hosseinzadeh ◽  
Abbas Alipour
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Cutaneous Leishmaniasis ◽  
Publication Bias ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
World Health ◽  
Cochrane Central Register ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Meta Regression ◽  
Trim And Fill

Cutaneous leishmaniasis (CL) is most common form of leishmaniasis and is characterized by ulcerative skin lesions. The objective of this study was to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis of clinical trials that compared the efficacy of miltefosine and glucantime for the treatment of CL. We searched the following databases: Cochrane, PubMed, Embase, Scopus, Web of Science, ProQuest, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, International Clinical Trials Registry Platform search portal of World Health Organization, Sid, Irandoc, Magiran, and clinicaltrials.gov. We used keywords including “miltefosine,” “glucantime,” and “Leishmania.” The quality of studies was assessed using the Cochrane risk of bias tool. A random-effects model was employed for the analysis. We assessed heterogeneity by the chi-square test and the I2 index statistic. When heterogeneity was present, meta-regression analyses were performed. The Egger method was used to assess publication bias; when it was significant, the trim-and-fill method was used to test and adjust for publication bias. A total of 1,570 reports were identified, of which 10 studies were included in the meta-analysis. In the meta-analysis, there was no significant difference between the efficacy of miltefosine and glucantime; however, subgroup analysis showed that, regarding parasite species other than Leishmania braziliensis, miltefosine was significantly superior to glucantime (intention to treat; relative risk, 1.15; 95% confidence interval, 1.01 to 1.32). In the meta-regression, only the glucantime injection type was significant at the p=0.1 level. The Egger test found statistically significant publication bias; however, including the 3 missing studies in the trim-and-fill analysis did not change the results. This meta-analysis found that miltefosine seems to be more effective than glucantime, at least in species other than L. braziliensis, for treating CL.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document