Risultati per: Colite ulcerosa negli adulti: review

Objectives
The comparative clinical effectiveness of common surgical techniques to address long head of biceps (LHB) pathology is unclear. We synthesised the evidence to compare the clinical effectiveness of tenotomy versus tenodesis.

Design
A systematic review and meta-analysis using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach.

Data sources
EMBASE, Medline, PsycINFO and the Cochrane Library of randomised controlled trials were searched through 31 October 2021.

Eligibility criteria
We included randomised controlled trials, reporting patient reported outcome measures, comparing LHB tenotomy with tenodesis for LHB pathology, with or without concomitant rotator cuff pathology. Studies including patients treated for superior labral anterior–posterior tears were excluded. No language limits were employed. All publications from database inception to 31 October 2021 were included.

Data extraction and synthesis
Screening was performed by two authors independently. A third author reviewed the article, where consensus for inclusion was required. Data were extracted by two authors. Data were synthesised using RevMan. Inverse variance statistics and a random effects model were used.

Results
860 patients from 11 RCTs (426 tenotomy vs 434 tenodesis) were included. Pooled analysis of patient-reported functional outcome measures data demonstrated comparable outcomes (n=10 studies; 403 tenotomy vs 416 tenodesis; standardised mean difference (SMD): 0.14, 95% CI –0.04 to 0.32, p=0.13). There was no significant difference for pain (Visual Analogue Scale) (n=8 studies; 345 tenotomy vs 350 tenodesis; MD: –0.11, 95% CI –0.28 to 0.06, p=0.21). Tenodesis resulted in a lower rate of Popeye deformity (n=10 studies; 401 tenotomy vs 410 tenodesis; OR: 0.29, 95% CI 0.19 to 0.45, p

Objectives
To systematically review existing literature on hospital-based quality improvement studies in sub-Saharan Africa that aim to improve surgical and anaesthesia care, capturing clinical, process and implementation outcomes in order to evaluate the impact of the intervention and implementation learning.

Design
We conducted a systematic literature review and narrative synthesis.

Setting
Literature on hospital-based quality improvement studies in sub-Saharan Africa reviewed until 31 December 2021.

Participants
MEDLINE, EMBASE, Global Health, CINAHL, Web of Science databases and grey literature were searched.

Intervention
We extracted data on intervention characteristics and how the intervention was delivered and evaluated.

Primary and secondary outcome measures
Importantly, we assessed whether clinical, process and implementation outcomes were collected and separately categorised the outcomes under the Institute of Medicine quality domains. Risk of bias was not assessed.

Results
Of 1573 articles identified, 49 were included from 17/48 sub-Saharan African countries, 16 of which were low-income or lower middle-income countries. Almost two-thirds of the studies took place in East Africa (31/49, 63.2%). The most common intervention focus was reduction of surgical site infection (12/49, 24.5%) and use of a surgical safety checklist (14/49, 28.6%). Use of implementation and quality improvement science methods were rare. Over half the studies measured clinical outcomes (29/49, 59.2%), with the most commonly reported ones being perioperative mortality (13/29, 44.8%) and surgical site infection rate (14/29, 48.3%). Process and implementation outcomes were reported in over two thirds of the studies (34/49, 69.4% and 35, 71.4%, respectively). The most studied quality domain was safety (44/49, 89.8%), with efficiency (4/49, 8.2%) and equitability (2/49, 4.1%) the least studied domains.

Conclusions
There are few hospital-based studies that focus on improving the quality of surgical and anaesthesia care in sub-Saharan Africa. Use of implementation and quality improvement methodologies remain low, and some quality domains are neglected.

PROSPERO registration number
CRD42019125570

Introduction
Overdiagnosis is the diagnosis of a disease that would never have caused any symptom or problem. It is a harmful side effect of screening and may lead to unnecessary treatment, costs and emotional drawbacks. Doctors and other healthcare professionals (HCPs) have the opportunity to mitigate these consequences, not only by informing their patients or the public but also by adjusting screening methods or even by refraining from screening. However, it is unclear to what extent HCPs are fully aware of overdiagnosis and whether it affects their screening decisions. With this systematic review, we aim to synthesise all available research about what HCPs know and think about overdiagnosis, how it affects their position on screening policy and whether they think patients and the public should be informed about it.

Methods and analysis
We will systematically search several databases (MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, Scopus, CINAHL and PsycArticles) for studies that directly examine HCPs’ knowledge and subjective perceptions of overdiagnosis due to health screening, both qualitatively and quantitatively. We will optimise our search by scanning reference and citation lists, contacting experts in the field and hand searching abstracts from the annual conference on ‘Preventing Overdiagnosis’. After selection and quality appraisal, we will analyse qualitative and quantitative findings separately in a segregated design for mixed-method reviews. The data will be examined and presented descriptively. If the retrieved studies allow it, we will review them from a constructivist perspective through a critical interpretive synthesis.

Ethics and dissemination
For this type of research, no ethical approval is required. Findings from this systematic review will be published in a peer-reviewed journal and presented at the annual congress of ‘Preventing Overdiagnosis’. In addition, the results will serve as guidance for further research on this topic.

PROSPERO registration number
CRD42021244513.

Introduction
The COVID-19 pandemic is exacerbating a wide range of symptoms of poor mental health among emergency medical service (EMS) ambulance populations. Evidence suggests that using organisational support can improve employee outcomes and in turn, patient outcomes. Understanding why EMS staff do and do not use support services is therefore critical to improving uptake, ensuring equitable access, and potentially influencing workforce well-being, organisational sustainability and patient care delivery. This systematic review aims to identify what support is available and any perceived barriers and facilitators to accessing and utilising organisational support.

Methods and analysis
Searches performed between 18 February 2022 and 23 February 2022 will be used to identify studies that report barriers and facilitators to EMS employee support among all government/state commissioned EMS ambulance systems. Electronic databases, AMED, CINAHL, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, EMBASE, EMCARE, HMIC, Medline and PsycINFO will be searched. All relevant English-language studies of adult employees of government/state commissioned EMS ambulance organisations published since December 2004 will be screened and relevant data extracted by two independent reviewers. A third reviewer will resolve any disagreements.
The primary outcome is the identification of perceived barriers or facilitators to EMS staff using organisational support for mental health. The secondary outcome is the identification of supportive interventions offered through or by ambulance trusts. Study selection will follow Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines, and the methodological quality of included studies will be appraised by administering rating checklists. A narrative synthesis will be conducted to report qualitative and quantitative data and will include population characteristics, methodological approach and information about barriers and facilitators.

Ethics and dissemination
Ethical approval is not required because only available published data will be analysed. Findings will be disseminated through peer-reviewed publication and conference presentation.

PROSPERO registration number
CRD42022299650.

Objectives
To identify the evidence gaps that exist regarding the efficacy or effectiveness of hand surgery.

Setting
A scoping review. We systematically searched MEDLINE, Embase and CENTRAL databases to identify all hand surgical randomised controlled trials from inception to 7 November 2020.

Results
Of the 220 identified randomised controlled trials, none were fundamental efficacy trials, that is, compared surgery with placebo surgery. 172 (78%) trials compared the outcomes of different surgical techniques, and 143 (65%) trials were trauma related. We identified only 47 (21%) trials comparing surgery with non-operative care or injection.

Conclusion
The evidence supporting use of surgery especially for chronic hand conditions is scarce. To determine optimal care for people with hand conditions, more resources should be aimed at placebo-controlled trials and pragmatic effectiveness trials comparing hand surgery with non-operative care.

PROSPERO registration number
CRD42019122710.

Objective
The improvement of patient experience (PE) is related to the experience of staff caring for them. Yet there is little evidence as to which interactions matter the most for both patients and staff, or how they are perceived by them. We aimed to summarise the interactions and the perceptions between patients and staff from studies by using both patient and staff experience data in healthcare institutions.

Design
Scoping review.

Methods
We conducted a scoping review, including studies dealing with PE and staff experience. Two authors independently reviewed each title/abstract and the selected full-text articles. A list of variables (objective, study design, data sources, tools used, results, interactions, perceptions and actions) was charted and summarised using a narrative approach including both qualitative and quantitative data. Studies were grouped according to their objective and the key interactions summarised according to this stratification. The perceptions of patients and staff were identified in the results of selected studies and were classified into four categories: commonalities and disagreements of perceptions, patients’ perceptions not perceived by professionals and professional’s perceptions not perceived by patients.

Results
A total of 42 studies were included. The stratification of studies by type of objective resulted in six groups that allowed to classify the key interactions (n=154) identified in the results of the selected studies. A total of 128 perceptions related to interaction between patient and staff were reported with the following distribution: commonalities (n=35), disagreements (n=18), patients’ perceptions not perceived by professionals (n=47) and professional’s perceptions not perceived by patients (n=28). We separated positive and negative perceptions, which resulted in seven scenarios, each with actions that can be carried out for one or both populations to overcome barriers.

Conclusion
The study of both patient and staff experience allowed the identification of actions that can be taken to change the perceptions of patients and staff.

Introduction
Healthcare workers (HCWs) constitute a high-risk group for developing occupational hand eczema (HE). The present systematic review and meta-analysis will compile and appraise evidence regarding prevalence and incidence of HE in HCWs.

Methods and analysis
Systematic searches will be performed in three electronic literature databases (PubMed/Medline, Web of Science-Core Collection and Embase). Further references will be retrieved by a manual search of included studies’ reference lists using snowballing techniques. We will include experimental studies, observational studies, survey-based studies and clinical studies (publications in English, French and German from 2000 onwards) reporting on certified and apprentice HCWs, who actively work in the job. We will look at the following outcomes: Prevalence and incidence of clinically assessed as well as self-reported HE in the style of the Nordic Occupational Skin Questionnaire-2002; HE severity (measured by eg, Hand Eczema Severity Index, Osnabrück Hand Eczema Severity Index, Physician Global Assessment or other validated instruments as well as self-reported or by using undefined categories such as ‘mild’, ‘moderate’ or ‘severe’); clinically assessed (eg, clinical diagnosis, UK Working Party’s diagnostic criteria, Hanifin and Rajka diagnostic criteria for atopic dermatitis (AD)) and self-reported AD. We will assess the risk of bias within studies using detailed criteria according to the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. As we expect heterogeneity in methods and outcomes, we will conduct sensitivity analyses. A narrative synthesis of results instead of a meta-analysis will be done in case that quantitative pooling is not feasible.

Ethics and dissemination
Ethical approval and patient consent are not required as this work is based on published studies. The results will be published in an international, peer-reviewed journal.

PROSPERO registration number
CRD42022303044.

Introduction
The Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) standardises reporting of prostate MRI for the detection of clinically significant prostate cancer. We provide the protocol of a planned living systematic review and meta-analysis for (1) diagnostic accuracy (sensitivity and specificity), (2) cancer detection rates of assessment categories and (3) inter-reader agreement.

Methods and analysis
Retrospective and prospective studies reporting on at least one of the outcomes of interest are included. Each step that requires literature evaluation and data extraction is performed by two independent reviewers. Since PI-RADS is intended as a living document itself, a 12-month update cycle of the systematic review and meta-analysis is planned.
This protocol is in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses—Protocols statement. The search strategies including databases, study eligibility criteria, index and reference test definitions, outcome definitions and data analysis processes are detailed. A full list of extracted data items is provided.
Summary estimates of sensitivity and specificity (for PI-RADS ≥3 and PI-RADS ≥4 considered positive) are derived with bivariate binomial models. Summary estimates of cancer detection rates are calculated with random intercept logistic regression models for single proportions. Summary estimates of inter-reader agreement are derived with random effects models.

Ethics and dissemination
No original patient data are collected, ethical review board approval, therefore, is not necessary. Results are published in peer-reviewed, open-access scientific journals. We make the collected data accessible as supplemental material to guarantee transparency of results.

PROSPERO registration number
CRD42022343931.

Introduction
Whether bisphosphonates and RANKL inhibitors play a novel role in delaying cardiovascular calcification is unknown. Their action on regulatory enzymes in the mevalonic acid pathway, which is implicated in both bone and lipid metabolism, may be a novel therapeutic target to manage coronary artery disease (CAD). Such therapies may particularly be relevant in those for whom traditional cardiovascular therapies are no longer sufficient to control disease progression.

Methods and analysis
We will perform a systematic review which aims to synthesise evidence regarding whether use of bisphosphonates or use of the RANKL inhibitor denosumab delays coronary artery calcium (CAC) progression. Eligible studies will include longitudinal studies investigating CAC progression in patients aged >18 years taking either a bisphosphonate or denosumab compared with those who do not. Embase, MEDLINE and Cochrane will be searched using prespecified search terms. Studies will be screened by title and abstract independently and then in full to determine suitability for inclusion in the review. Extracted data will include that relating to study and participant characteristics. The primary outcome will be the CAC score. Secondary outcomes will include aortic and carotid artery calcification. Meta-analysis will be performed if sufficient data are available.

Ethics and dissemination
This study does not require ethics as it is a systematic review of the literature. The results of the review described within this protocol will be distributed via presentations at relevant conferences and publication within a peer-reviewed journal.

PROSPERO registration number
The systematic review pertaining to this protocol is registered with PROSPERO (Registration ID: CRD42022312377).

Introduction
There is an increasing need for evaluating postintensive care syndrome in adults concerning their long-term physical, psychological, cognitive and/or social outcomes, yet there is no consensus regarding the choice of instruments to measure these. This scoping review aims to identify and examine instruments used to measure postintensive care syndrome in adults.

Methods and analysis
This scoping review will be conducted following the Arksey and O’Malley and its extended framework, and the Joanna Briggs Institute guideline. It will be reported according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses extension for Scoping Review checklists. Medline via EBSCO, CINAHL complete, EMBASE, Web of Science, AME and APA PsycINFO databases and grey literature will be searched from 2010 to the present. Reference lists of included studies will be manually checked to identify additional sources. The quality of included studies will be appraised using the Crowe Critical Appraisal Tool. All review steps will involve at least two reviewers. Data charting will be performed narratively, comprising study characteristics and findings, and instrument properties. This review will also aim to identify research gaps.

Ethics and dissemination
There is no ethics disclosure for this review protocol. This scoping review will identify instruments used to measure postintensive care syndrome in adults. The findings will be disseminated through professional bodies, conferences and research papers.

Background
Elevated body mass index (BMI) in breast cancer survivors (BCS) is associated with cancer recurrence and poorer treatment response. Guidelines recommend 5%–10% weight loss for overweight or obese BCS.

Objectives
To assess effectiveness of lifestyle interventions for female BCS on weight loss, BMI, body composition, health-related quality of life (HRQoL), physical functioning, psychosocial measures, biomarkers.

Design
Systematic review of reviews and meta-analyses.

Setting
All clinical settings.

Participants
Adult female BCS (active treatment or post-treatment).

Methods
Medline, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO, Cochrane Library (including Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects) were searched for systematic reviews published in English between 1990 and 2022, with weight, BMI or body fat as primary outcome. Narrative reviews, editorials, letters, conference abstracts were excluded. Review quality was assessed using the Joanna Briggs Institute quality assessment tool.

Results
17 reviews were included. Twelve reported significant reductions in one or more anthropometric outcomes: weight –1.36 kg (95% CI:–2.51 to –0.21) to –3.8 kg (95% CI: –5.6 to –1.9); BMI –0.89 kg/m2 (95% CI: –0.15 to –0.28) to –3.59 kg/m2 (95% CI: –6.29 to 0.89) or body fat –1.6% (95% CI: –2.31 to –0.88) to –2.6% (95% CI not reported). Significant reductions in two or more anthropometric outcomes were reported in 7/12 reviews, with effective interventions comprising aerobic exercise/aerobic exercise plus resistance training (n=5), or diet and exercise with or without counselling (n=2). Significant improvements were also reported for HRQoL (8/11 reviews), mental health (4/7) and physical functioning (2/3). Group interventions comprising aerobic exercise or aerobic exercise plus resistance training were most likely to improve outcomes.

Conclusions
Lifestyle interventions can significantly improve outcomes for BCS. Multimodal interventions are likely to have the greatest impact in reducing weight, BMI and body fat. Further research must define the optimal combination, intensity and duration of effective interventions.

PROSPERO registration number
CRD42021283481.

Introduction
Paediatric anxiety disorders (AD) are prevalent and persistent mental health conditions worldwide affecting between 10% and 20% of children and adolescents. Despite the high prevalence of paediatric AD, there is limited understanding of which treatments work best. Outcome heterogeneity across paediatric mental health trials has been a significant factor in hindering the ability to compare results and assess the efficacy of such trials. This scoping review will help to identify and synthesise the outcomes reported in paediatric AD trials to date.

Methods and analysis
Following the Joanna Briggs Institute scoping review methodology, a comprehensive electronic bibliographic database search (MEDLINE, APA PsycINFO, Embase, CINAHL) strategy will be applied to identify articles examining interventions for children diagnosed with an AD. Articles will be eligible for inclusion if they assess at least one AD intervention (eg, psychological), in children 4–18 years of age inclusive. Initial title and abstract screening will be completed by two trained reviewers independently and in duplicate. Full-text screening of each included article will be completed independently and in duplicate by two of three trained reviewers. Identified outcomes will be mapped to a standard outcome taxonomy developed for core outcome sets. Trial and outcome characteristics will be synthesised using quantitative metrics (counts and frequencies).

Ethics and dissemination
As this is a scoping review of the literature and patient information or records were not accessed, institutional ethics approval was not required. Results of this scoping review will be disseminated to clinicians, researchers inclusive of trialists and other stakeholders invested in outcome selection, measurement and reporting in paediatric AD trials. In addition, scoping review results will inform the development of a Core Outcome Set for paediatric AD trials—a minimum set of outcomes that should be measured across trials in an area of health, without precluding the inclusion of other outcomes.

Introduction
Children and young people have the right to participate in research on matters that affect them, and their contribution improves research quality and insights from findings. Discrete participatory approaches are used across different disciplines. This review will provide a synthesis of existing literature from different disciplines by working with young people and adults experienced in participatory research to develop a broad definition of child and youth led research and to identify best practice.

Methods and analysis
Comprehensive searches will be conducted in eight electronic databases (PsycINFO, Medline, CINAHL, Embase, SocINDEX, ASSIA: Applied Social Sciences Index and Abstracts (Proquest), Social Care Online and SCOPUS). Grey literature reports will also be sourced using Google searching. Eligible studies will be English-language primary studies and reviews on collaborative research with children and young people (aged 5–25 years) published from 2000 onwards. Qualitative and quantitative data will be integrated in a single qualitative synthesis following the JBI convergent integrated approach. Study quality will be assessed by developed checklists based on existing participation tools cocreated with the project steering group and co-creation activities with young people.

Ethics and dissemination
Ethical approval is not required as no primary data will be collected. The review will develop guidance on best practice for collaborative research with children and young people, synthesising learnings from a wide variety of disciplines. Dissemination will be via peer-reviewed publications, presentations at academic conferences and lay summaries for various stakeholders. Opportunities for cocreation of outputs will be sought with the young researchers and the project steering committee.

PROSPERO registration number
CRD42021246378.

Introduction
A substantial proportion of patients who undergo surgery for drug resistant focal epilepsy do not become seizure free. While some factors, such as the detection of hippocampal sclerosis or a resectable lesion on MRI and electroencephalogram-MRI concordance, can predict favourable outcomes in epilepsy surgery, the prognostic value of the detection of focal hypometabolism with 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose positive emission tomography (18F-FDG-PET) hypometabolism is uncertain. We propose a protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis to examine whether localisation with 18F-FDG-PET hypometabolism predicts favourable outcomes in epilepsy surgery.

Methods and analysis
A systematic literature search of Medline, Embase and Web of Science will be undertaken. Publications which include evaluation with 18F-FDG-PET prior to surgery for drug resistant focal epilepsy, and which report ≥12 months of postoperative surgical outcome data will be included. Non-human, non-English language publications, publications with fewer than 10 participants and unpublished data will be excluded. Screening and full-text review of publications for inclusion will be undertaken by two independent investigators, with discrepancies resolved by consensus or a third investigator. Data will be extracted and pooled using random effects meta-analysis, with heterogeneity quantified using the I2 analysis.

Ethics and dissemination
Ethics approval is not required. Once complete, the systematic review will be published in a peer-reviewed journal.

PROSPERO registration number
CRD42022324823.

Introduction
Hiccup is a common disease that not only occurred on adults but also on infants, which can severely do harm to patients’ physical and psychological health. Metoclopramide has been reported to have effects on intractable hiccup. However, there is a limited evidence that describes the efficacy and safety of metoclopramide in the treatment of intractable hiccup. The aim of this article is to obtain evidence on the effectiveness and safety of metoclopramide in treating patients with intractable hiccup.

Methods and analysis
We will search the following databases, including PubMed, Cochrane Library, Embase, Web of Science, CBM, Wan-fang, VIP database, CNKI and MEDLINE from their inception to 11 November 2021. All the randomised controlled trials associated with metoclopramide in treating intractable hiccup will be included. Articles screened, selected and extracted will be performed by two researchers independently. The risk of bias will be assessed by using the Cochrane Collaboration. We will carry out the meta-analysis by using RevMan V.5.4 software.

PROSPERO registration number
CRD42021293000.

Objectives
To determine the pooled effectiveness and feasibility of telerehabilitation in patients with COVID-19.

Design
Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials (RCTs).

Data sources
PubMed, CINAHL, Science Direct, PEDro, Google Scholar and Cochrane Library databases were systematically searched to the end of March 2022.

Eligibility criteria and outcomes
RCTs investigating the effects of telerehabilitation in the management of patients with COVID-19 were included. The outcomes of interest were functional capacity, cardiopulmonary exercise tests, quality of life and other variables where data are available.

Data extraction and synthesis
Two reviewers screened, extracted data and performed methodological quality assessment independently. The revised Cochrane Risk of Bias tool was used to assess the risk of bias. Review Manager V.5.4 and Stata V.14.0 software were used for statistical analysis. Mean difference (MD) with 95% CI and the corresponding p value were used to determine the treatment effect between groups. A fixed-effect model was used for all variables as no significant heterogeneity was observed.

Results
Four studies with 334 patients with COVID-19 were included. The pooled result of telerehabilitation showed statistically significant improvement on 6-minute walking test (MD 75.50; 95% CI 54.69 to 96.30; p=0.48), 30-second sit-to-stand test (MD 1.76; 95% CI 1.47 to 2.04; p=0.30), Borg Scale (MD 2.49; 95% CI 2.16 to 2.83; p=0.28) and level of dyspnoea (MD 6.26; 95% CI 5.42 to 7.10; p=0.66). The overall treatment completion rate was 88.46%, and the most common reason for withdrawal after randomisation was lost to follow-up or uncooperativeness.

Conclusions
The findings showed that telerehabilitation interventions could improve functional capacity and exercise perception among patients affected by COVID-19 and can be implemented with a high completion rate and minimal adverse events. However, more studies are required to investigate the effects on cardiopulmonary function, quality of life, anxiety, depression and other variables.

PROSPERO registration number
CRD42021287975.