Risultati per: Infezione da Helicobacter pylori: review

Background
Comorbid depression is prevalent in people with multiple sclerosis (MS). Depression is commonly untreated or undertreated, thus, there is a need for effective and safe interventions and current guidelines recommend psychological and pharmaceutical interventions for people with MS. However, research suggests that other interventions, such as exercise, could also be effective. The comparative efficacy and safety of intervention modalities have not been quantified.
We plan to conduct a systematic review and network meta-analysis to compare efficacy and safety of psychological, pharmaceutical, physical and magnetic stimulation interventions for depression in people with MS.

Methods and analysis
We will search EMBASE, Medline, Cochrane CENTRAL, APA PsycINFO, Web of Science, CINAHL and PEDro from inception to 31 December 2021. Search terms will stem from three concepts: MS, depression and randomised controlled trials. Included studies will be randomised controlled trials, where participants are people with MS randomised to receive one of the aforementioned intervention types, and depression or depressive symptoms is the primary outcome, only outcome or secondary outcome with an a priori power calculation. Screening, data extraction and risk of bias assessment (using the Risk of Bias 2 tool) will be conducted independently by two reviewers. If possible, we will synthesise the evidence by fitting a frequentist network meta-analysis model with multivariate random effects, or a pairwise random-effects meta-analysis model. For each model, efficacy will be measured using a standardised mean difference, and safety using an OR. We plan to provide summary measures including forest plots, a geometry of the network, surface under the cumulative ranking curve, and a league table, and perform subgroup analyses. Otherwise, a narrative review will be provided.

Ethics and dissemination
Ethics is not required for a systematic review and network meta-analysis. Results will be published in a peer reviewed journal.

PROSPERO registration number
CRD42020209803.

Objective
Payers, providers and policymakers in the USA are interested in developing interventions that reduce preventable or modifiable healthcare use among high-need, high-cost (HNHC) patients. This study seeks to describe how and why complex interventions for HNHC patients lead to more appropriate use of healthcare services.

Design
A realist review which develops programme theories from causal explanations generated and articulated through the creation of context–mechanism–outcome configurations.

Methods
Electronic databases (including PubMed and Embase) and gray literature from January 2000 to March 2021 were searched. All study designs were included if the article provided data to develop our programme theories. Included studies were conducted in the USA and focused on interventions for adult, HNHC patients.

Results
Data were synthesised from 48 studies. Identifying HNHC patients for inclusion in interventions requires capturing a combination of characteristics including their prior use of healthcare services, complexity of chronic disease(s) profile, clinician judgment and willingness to participate. Once enrolled, engaging HNHC patients in interventions requires intervention care providers and patients to build a trusting relationship. Tailored, individualised assistance for medical and non-medical needs, emotional support and self-management education empowers patients to increase their participation in managing their own care. Engagement of care providers in interventions to expand support of HNHC patients is facilitated by targeted outreach, adequate staffing support with shared values and regular and open communication.

Conclusions
Building relationships with HNHC patients and gaining their trust is a key component for interventions to successfully change HNHC patients’ behaviors. Identifying HNHC patients for an intervention can be best achieved through a multipronged strategy that accounts for their clinical and psychosocial complexity and prior experiences with the healthcare system. Successful interventions recognise that relationships with HNHC patients require the sustained engagement of care providers. To succeed, providers need ongoing emotional, financial, logistical and practical resources.

PROSPERO registration number
CRD42020161179.

Objectives
The COVID-19 pandemic has brought significant changes to family life, society and essential health and other services. A rapid review of evidence was conducted to examine emerging evidence on the effects of the pandemic on three components of nurturing care, including responsive caregiving, early learning, and safety and security.

Design
Two academic databases, organisational websites and reference lists were searched for original studies published between 1 January and 25 October 2020. A single reviewer completed the study selection and data extraction with verification by a second reviewer.

Interventions
We included studies with a complete methodology and reporting on quantitative or qualitative evidence related to nurturing care during the pandemic.

Primary and secondary outcome measures
Studies reporting on outcomes related to responsive caregiving, early learning, and safety and security were included.

Results
The search yielded 4410 citations in total, and 112 studies from over 30 countries met our eligibility criteria. The early evidence base is weighted towards studies in high-income countries, studies related to caregiver mental health and those using quantitative survey designs. Studies reveal issues of concern related to increases in parent and caregiver stress and mental health difficulties during the pandemic, which was linked to harsher and less warm or responsive parenting in some studies. A relatively large number of studies examined child safety and security and indicate a reduction in maltreatment referrals. Lastly, studies suggest that fathers’ engagement in caregiving increased during the early phase of the pandemic, children’s outdoor play and physical activity decreased (while screen time increased), and emergency room visits for child injuries decreased.

Conclusion
The results highlight key evidence gaps (ie, breastfeeding support and opportunities for early learning) and suggest the need for increased support and evidence-based interventions to ensure young children and other caregivers are supported and protected during the pandemic.

Objective
To examine the current knowledge and possibly identify gaps in the knowledge base for cost–benefit analysis and safety concerning community paramedicine in rural areas.

Design
Scoping review.

Data sources
MEDLINE via PubMed, CINAHL, Cochrane and Embase up to December 2020.

Study selection
All English studies involving community paramedicine in rural areas, which include cost–benefit analysis or safety evaluation.

Data extraction
This scoping review follows the methodology developed by Arksey and O’Malley and the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews. We systematically searched for all types of studies in the databases and the reference lists of key studies to identify studies for inclusion. The selection process was in two steps. First, two reviewers independently screened 2309 identified articles for title and abstracts and second performed a full-text review of 24 eligible studies for inclusion.

Results
Three articles met the inclusion criteria concerning cost–benefit analysis, two from Canada and one from USA. No articles met the inclusion criteria for safety evaluation.

Conclusion
There are knowledge gaps concerning safety evaluation of community paramedicine in rural areas. Three articles were included in this scoping review concerning cost–benefit analysis, two of them showing positive cost-effectiveness with community paramedicine in rural areas.

Objectives
To systematically review interventions that include an element of menstrual education delivered to young adolescent girls.

Design
This was a systematic review and meta-analysis. Selected articles were quality assessed using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool quality appraisal checklist. A meta-analysis was conducted on a subset of articles, and the effect size of the intervention was calculated using Cohen’s d. A logic model was constructed to frame the effect of menstrual education interventions on menstrual health.

Setting
Papers reporting on interventions in high-income and low-income and middle-income countries were sought.

Information sources
Seven electronic databases were searched for English-language entries that were published between January 2014 and May 2020.

Participants
The interventions were aimed at younger adolescent girls aged 10–14 years old.

Interventions
The interventions were designed to improve the menstrual health of the recipients, by addressing one or more elements of menstrual knowledge, attitude or practices (KAP).

Eligibility criteria
Interventions that had not been evaluated were excluded.

Primary and secondary outcomes
The most common type of output was a difference in knowledge or skill score ascertained from a pre and post test. Some studies measured additional outcomes, such as attitude or confidence.

Results
Twenty-four eligible studies were identified. The number of participants varied from 1 to 2564. All studies reported improvements in menstrual KAP. The meta-analysis indicates that larger effect sizes were attained by those that encouraged discussion than those that distributed pamphlets.

Conclusions
Education interventions are effective in increasing the menstrual knowledge of young adolescent girls and skills training improves competency to manage menstruation more hygienically and comfortably. Interactive interventions are more motivating than didactic or written. Sharing concerns gives girls confidence and helps them to gain agency on the path to menstrual health.

Trial registration number
For this review, a protocol was not prepared or registered.

Objectives
To support workforce deficits and rising demand for medicines, independent prescribing (IP) by nurses, pharmacists and allied health professionals is a key component of workforce transformation in UK healthcare. This systematic review of qualitative research studies used a thematic synthesis approach to explore stakeholders’ views on IP in primary care and identify barriers and facilitators influencing implementation.

Setting
UK primary/community care.

Participants
Inclusion criteria were UK qualitative studies of any design, published in the English language. Six electronic databases were searched between January 2010 and September 2021, supplemented by reference list searching. Papers were screened, selected and quality-appraised using the Quality Assessment Tool for Studies with Diverse Designs. Study data were extracted to a bespoke table and two reviewers used NVivo software to code study findings. An inductive thematic synthesis was undertaken to identify descriptive themes and interpret these into higher order analytical themes. The Diffusion of Innovations and Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research were guiding theoretical anchors.

Primary and secondary outcome measures
N/A.

Results
Twenty-three articles addressing nurse, pharmacist and physiotherapist IP were included. Synthesis identified barriers and facilitators in four key stages of implementation: (1) ‘Preparation’, (2) ‘Training’, (3) ‘Transition’ and 4) ‘Sustainment’. Enhancement, substitution and role-specific implementation models reflected three main ways that the IP role was used in primary care.

Conclusions
In order to address global deficits, there is increasing need to optimise use of IP capability. Although the number of independent prescribers continues to grow, numerous barriers to implementation persist. A more coordinated and targeted approach is key to overcoming barriers identified in the four stages of implementation and would help ensure that IP is recognised as an effective approach to help alleviate workforce shortfalls in the UK, and around the world.

PROSPERO registration number
CRD42019124400.

Introduction
Most overweight/obese women with polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS) have infertility issues which are difficult to treat. Non-pharmacological interventions used for the management of infertility include lifestyle interventions, acupuncture therapies and nutritional supplements. These interventions have been reported to be beneficial in alleviating infertility among overweight women with PCOS. However, effect and safety of these non-pharmacological interventions vary, and there is no standard method of clinical application. Therefore, it is necessary to conduct a systematic review and network meta-analysis (NMA) to rank these non-pharmacological interventions in terms of effect and determine which one is more effective for clinical application.

Methods and analysis
We will retrieve eight databases including Cochrane Library, Medline, Embase, PsycINFO, Chinese National Knowledge Infrastructure, WanFang Data, the Chongqing VIP Database and China Biology Medicine disc from their inceptions onwards. In addition, four clinical trial registries and the related references will be manually retrieved. The primary outcome will be clinical pregnancy. Live birth, ovulation, pregnancy loss, multiple pregnancy and adverse events related to interventions will be considered as the secondary outcomes. STATA software V.15.0 and Aggregate Data Drug Information System V.1.16.8 will be used to conduct pairwise meta-analysis and NMA. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation system will be adopted to evaluate the certainty of evidence.

Ethics and dissemination
Ethical approval will not be required because the study will not include the original information of participants. The results will be published in a peer-reviewed journal or disseminated in relevant conferences.

PROSPERO registration number
CRD42021283110.

Introduction
In New Zealand, significant inequities exist between Māori and Pacific peoples compared with non-Māori, non-Pacific peoples in cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk factors, hospitalisations and management rates. This review will quantify and qualify already-reported gaps in CVD risk assessment and management in primary care for Māori and Pacific peoples compared with non-Māori/non-Pacific peoples in New Zealand.

Methods and analysis
We will conduct a systematic search of the following electronic databases and websites from 1 January 2000 to 31 December 2021: MEDLINE (OVID), EMBASE, Scopus, CINAHL Plus, NZresearch.org, National Library Catalogue (Te Puna), Index New Zealand (INNZ), Australia/New Zealand Reference Centre. In addition, we will search relevant websites such as the Ministry of Health and research organisations. Data sources will include published peer reviewed articles, reports and theses employing qualitative, quantitative and mixed methods.
Two reviewers will independently screen the titles and abstracts of the citations and grade each as eligible, not eligible or might be eligible. Two reviewers will read each full report, with one medically qualified reviewer reading all reports and two other reviewers reading half each. The final list of included citations will be compiled from the results of the full report reading and agreed on by three reviewers. Data abstracted will include authors, title, year, study characteristics and participant characteristics. Data analysis and interpretation will involve critical inquiry and a strength-based approach that is inclusive of Māori and Pacific values. This means that critical appraisal includes an assessment of quality from an Indigenous perspective.

Ethics and dissemination
Ethical approval is not required. The findings will be published in a peer-reviewed journal and shared with stakeholders. This review contributes to a larger project which creates a Quality-Improvement Equity Roadmap to reduce barriers to Māori and Pacific peoples accessing evidence-based CVD care.

Introduction
Health literacy is ‘The skills and resources of a person to access, understand and use information to make decisions, and take action on their own health and healthcare’. Literature investigating cardiovascular disease (CVD) prevention and health literacy often exist in silos, only exploring one element of prevention. This protocol aims to establish a scoping method of articles investigating health literacy and CVD preventive practices or knowledge in lay populations.

Methods and analysis
A scoping review was deemed the most appropriate study design. The topic was conceptualised, with preliminary searching informing subsequent development of search strings. A search of the following databases will be conducted on 31 January 2022: MEDLINE, Global Health, PubMed, Embase, PsycINFO and CINAHL. Studies included will be published in English, of appropriate design, measuring health literacy and some aspect of primary CVD prevention in lay-populations. These criteria will be tested against 25 ‘pilot’ articles from the results, undergoing necessary review before screening commences. A secondary author will screen 10% of abstracts, with a third subject-matter expert reviewing conflicts.

Ethics and dissemination
This review will be disseminated through peer-reviewed scholarly networks, most likely including journal publication and conference presentation.

Article summary
CVD is the leading cause of death around the world. This paper proposes an exploration of health literacy’s relationship with CVD prevention as a whole, contrasting with the more segmented reviews currently published.

Objective
Diabetes poses serious health threats and economic burdens to patients, especially in low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs). This systematic review searches for non-pharmacological interventions for the prevention of type-2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) among patients who are non-diabetic and pre-diabetic from LMICs.

Settings
LMICs.

Participants
Adult population aged over 18 years without having diabetes.

Primary and secondary outcomes
Primary outcome is to measure the change in the incidence of T2DM. The secondary outcome is to measure changes in glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) level, weight/body mass index (BMI), fasting glucose level and 2-hour glucose from baseline of the included randomised controlled trials.

Methods
This review has been conducted following the standard systematic review guidelines. A total of six electronic databases including MEDLINE, Embase, the Cochrane Library, Web of Science, ClinicalTrials.gov and International Clinical Trials Registry Platform were searched in February 2021 using a comprehensive search strategy.
Two sets of independent reviewers performed screening, risk of bias (ROB) assessment using the Cochrane ROB tool and data extraction. Narrative coalescence of selected articles was demonstrated using tables. No meta-analysis was performed due to the lack of homogenous intervention strategies and study settings.

Result
A total of five studies were included for the review with a combined population of 1734 from three countries. Three of the studies showed a significant reduction in T2DM incidence after the intervention of physical training and dietary modifications. Four of the studies also demonstrated a significant reduction of different secondary outcomes like weight, BMI, fasting and 2-hour plasma glucose and HbA1c. All the studies demonstrated a low ROB in most of the bias assessment domains with some unclear results in allocation concealments.

Conclusions
Emphasising non-pharmacological interventions for T2DM prevention can improve health outcomes and lessen the economic burdens, which will be of paramount importance in LMICs.

Systematic review registration number
CRD42020191507

Introduction
Low back pain can lead to substantial decline in physical functioning. For disabling pain not responsive to conservative management, surgical intervention can enhance physical functioning. Measurements of physical functioning include patient-reported outcome measures and physical outcome measures using evaluations of impairments, performance on a standardised task or activity in a natural environment. Selecting outcome measures with adequate measurement properties is fundamental to evaluating effectiveness of interventions. The purpose of this systematic review is to identify outcome measures (patient reported and physical) used to evaluate physical functioning (stage 1) and assess the measurement properties of physical outcome measures of physical functioning (stage 2) in the lumbar spinal surgery population.

Methods and analysis
This protocol aligns with the COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) guidelines and Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Protocols. Using a two-staged approach, searches will be performed in MEDLINE, EMBASE, Health and Psychosocial Instruments, CINAHL, Web of Science, Scopus, PEDro and the grey literature from inception until 15 December 2021. Stage 1 will identify studies evaluating physical functioning with patient-reported or physical outcome measures in the lumbar spinal surgery population. Stage 2 will search for studies evaluating measurement properties (validity, reliability, responsiveness) of the physical outcome measures identified in stage 1 in the lumbar spinal surgery population. Two independent reviewers will evaluate studies for inclusion, extract data, assess risk of bias (COSMIN risk of bias tool and checklist) and quality of evidence (modified Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach). Results for each measurement property per physical outcome measure will be quantitatively pooled if there is adequate clinical and methodological homogeneity or qualitatively synthesised if there is high heterogeneity in studies.

Ethics and dissemination
Ethics approval is not required. Results will be disseminated through peer-reviewed journal publication and conference presentation.

PROSPERO registration number
CRD42021293880.

Introduction
Mobile health (mHealth)/electronic health (eHealth) have the effect of facilitating weight loss in overweight and obese populations. However, studies have shown varied results and relatively high heterogeneity in the efficacy of mHealth/eHealth interventions. The aim of the paper was to systematically summarise published studies about the weight loss efficacy of mHealth/eHealth.

Methods and analysis
A comprehensive review of PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library databases published from inception to 21 March 2021 will be conducted. The selected articles are meta-analyses that integrated the studies, which evaluated efficacy of mHealth/eHealth. Two people will select eligible articles and extract data independently. Any disputes will be resolved by discussion or the arbitration of a third person. The methodological quality of the included meta-analyses will be assessed with AMSTAR V.2 and the quality of evidence will be obtained with Grade of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE). The study selection process will be presented using a flowchart. We will reanalyse each outcome with random effect methods. If possible, we will use funnel plot and Egger’s test to evaluate if publication bias existed.

Ethics and dissemination
Ethical approval is not required for the study, as we collected data only from available published materials. This umbrella review will also be submitted to a peer-reviewed journal for publication after completion.

PROSPERO registration number
CRD42021247006.

Objectives
The COVID-19 pandemic has stimulated growing research on treatment options. We aim to provide an overview of the characteristics of studies evaluating COVID-19 treatment.

Design
Rapid scoping review

Data sources
Medline, Embase and biorxiv/medrxiv from inception to 15 May 2021.

Setting
Hospital and community care.

Participants
COVID-19 patients of all ages.

Interventions
COVID-19 treatment.

Results
The literature search identified 616 relevant primary studies of which 188 were randomised controlled trials and 299 relevant evidence syntheses. The studies and evidence syntheses were conducted in 51 and 39 countries, respectively.
Most studies enrolled patients admitted to acute care hospitals (84%), included on average 169 participants, with an average age of 60 years, study duration of 28 days, number of effect outcomes of four and number of harm outcomes of one. The most common primary outcome was death (32%).
The included studies evaluated 214 treatment options. The most common treatments were tocilizumab (11%), hydroxychloroquine (9%) and convalescent plasma (7%). The most common therapeutic categories were non-steroidal immunosuppressants (18%), steroids (15%) and antivirals (14%). The most common therapeutic categories involving multiple drugs were antimalarials/antibiotics (16%), steroids/non-steroidal immunosuppressants (9%) and antimalarials/antivirals/antivirals (7%). The most common treatments evaluated in systematic reviews were hydroxychloroquine (11%), remdesivir (8%), tocilizumab (7%) and steroids (7%).
The evaluated treatment was in favour 50% and 36% of the evaluations, according to the conclusion of the authors of primary studies and evidence syntheses, respectively.

Conclusions
This rapid scoping review characterised a growing body of comparative-effectiveness primary studies and evidence syntheses. The results suggest future studies should focus on children, elderly ≥65 years of age, patients with mild symptoms, outpatient treatment, multimechanism therapies, harms and active comparators. The results also suggest that future living evidence synthesis and network meta-analysis would provide additional information for decision-makers on managing COVID-19.

Background
Since 1997, several tools based on the experiences of users and survivors of psychiatry have been developed with the goal of promoting self-determination in recovery, empowerment and well-being.

Objectives
The aims of this study were to identify these tools and their distinctive features, and to know how they were created, implemented and evaluated.

Method
This work was conducted in accordance with a published Scoping Review protocol, following the Arksey and O’Malley approach and the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for scoping reviews. Five search strategies were used, including contact with user and survivor networks, academic database searching (Cochrane, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, PsycINFO, PsycARTICLES, SCOPUS, PubMed and Web of Science), grey literature searching, Google Scholar searching and reference harvesting. We focused on tools, elaborated by users and survivors, and studies reporting the main applications of them. The searches were performed between 21 July and 22 September 2022. Two approaches were used to display the data: descriptive analysis and thematic analysis.

Results
Six tools and 35 studies were identified, most of them originating in the USA and UK. Thematic analysis identified six goals of the tools: improving wellness, navigating crisis, promoting recovery, promoting empowerment, facilitating mutual support and coping with oppression. Of the 35 studies identified, 34 corresponded to applications of the Wellness Recovery Action Plan (WRAP). All of them, but one, evaluated group workshops implementations. The most common objective was to evaluate symptom improvement. Only eight studies included users and survivors as part of the research team.

Conclusions
Only the WRAP has been widely disseminated and investigated. Despite the tools were designed to be implemented by peers, it seems they have been usually implemented without them as trainers. Even when these tools are not aimed to promote clinical recovery, in practice the most disseminated recovery tool is being used in this way.

Objectives
Aim of the study is to present an overview of collaboration structures and processes between general practitioners and social workers, the target groups addressed as well the quality of available scientific literature.

Design
A scoping review following the guidelines of the PRISMA-ScR (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews).

Included sources and articles
According to a pre-published protocol, three databases (PubMed, Web of Science, DZI SoLit) were searched using the participant-concept-context framework. The searches were performed on 21 January 2021 and on 10 August 2021. Literature written in English and German since the year 2000 was included. Two independent researchers screened all abstracts for collaboration between general practitioners and social workers. Articles selected were analysed regarding structures, processes, outcomes, effectiveness and patient target groups.

Results
A total of 72 articles from 17 countries were identified. Collaborative structures and their routine differ markedly between healthcare systems: 36 publications present collaboration structures and 33 articles allow an insight into the processual routines. For all quantitative studies, a level of evidence was assigned. Various measurements are used to determine the effectiveness of collaborations, for example, hospital admissions and professionals’ job satisfaction. Case management as person-centred care for defined patient groups is a central aspect of all identified collaborations between general practitioners and social workers.

Conclusion
This scoping review showed evidence for benefits on behalf of patients, professionals and healthcare systems by collaborations between general practitioners and social workers, yet more rigorous research is needed to better understand the impact of these collaborations.

Trial registration number
www.osf.io/w673q.

Introduction
Rotator cuff-related shoulder pain is the most common diagnosis of shoulder pain, which ranks as the third most common musculoskeletal disorder. The first-line treatment for patients with rotator cuff-related shoulder pain is physiotherapy, and joint mobilisation is widely used in conjunction with other modalities. The type and dosage of joint mobilisations could influence treatment outcomes for patients with rotator cuff-related shoulder pain, although research evidence is inconclusive.

Objectives
To (1) systematically search, identify and map the reported type and dosage of joint mobilisations used in previous studies for the management of patients with rotator cuff-related shoulder pain; and (2) summarise the rationale for adopting a specific joint mobilisation dosage.

Methods and analysis
We will follow the methodological framework outlined by Arksey and O’Malley and report the results as per the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Extension for Scoping Reviews guideline. Two authors will independently screen and extract data from the six databases: PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, CINAHL, Cochrane Library and SPORTDiscus, with publication date from their inceptions to 25 August 2021. A third author will be consulted if the two authors disagree about the inclusion of any study in the review. We will summarise the results using descriptive statistics and qualitative thematic analysis.

Ethics and dissemination
Ethical approval is not required for this protocol. Mapping and summarising the reported type and dosage of joint mobilisations for patients with rotator cuff-related shoulder pain from previous studies will provide a foundation for further optimal selection of type and dosage of joint mobilisations for treating patients with rotator cuff-related shoulder pain. The review is part of an ongoing research that focuses on joint mobilisation for patients with rotator cuff-related shoulder pain. The results will be disseminated through presentations at academic conferences and a peer-reviewed publication.