Risultati per: Infezione da Helicobacter pylori: review

Introduction
Greater engagement in sedentary behaviours has been related to poorer cognitive functions in epidemiological research. However, the effects of reducing sedentary behaviour duration on cognitive function, brain function, and structure remain poorly understood. This systematic review aims to synthesise the evidence on the effects of reducing sedentary behaviour duration by increasing time spent in physical activity on cognitive function, brain structure and function in apparently healthy children, adolescents and adults.

Methods and analysis
The protocol follows Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses. The literature search will be conducted (search dates: August–September 2022) across six databases: PubMed, Scopus, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (via EBSCO Host), PsycINFO (via ProQuest), SPORTDiscus and Web of Science (Science and Social Science Citation Index). The inclusion criteria are as follows: randomised and non-randomised experimental studies as defined by the Cochrane Handbook, published in English, in peer-reviewed journals, and as theses or dissertations. References of included papers will be screened for additional studies. Acute and chronic interventions targeting children (≥ 4 years), adolescents, younger adults (≥ 18–40 years), middle-aged (40–64 years) and older adults (65+ years) will be eligible. Methodological quality will be assessed with the Effective Public Health Practice Project quality assessment tool for quantitative studies. Qualitative synthesis will be stratified by intervention type (acute vs chronic), intervention content (reducing sedentary time or interrupting prolonged sitting) and outcome (cognitive, brain structure and function).

Ethics and dissemination
No primary data collection will be conducted as part of this systematic review. Study findings will be disseminated through peer-reviewed publications, conference presentations and social media.

PROSPERO registration number
CRD42020200998.

Introduction
Allergic rhinitis (AR) is a kind of widespread but unrecognised inflammatory disorder of nasal mucosa, characterised by itching, sneezing, runny nose and nasal congestion. The efficacy of mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) in the treatment of AR remains controversial. This protocol describes a systematic review and meta-analysis approach to assess the efficacy and safety of MSCs in the treatment of AR.

Methods and analysis
Eight databases (PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, Chinese Biomedical Literature Database, VIP and Wanfang) will be searched from the database inception to 1 December 2023. All randomised controlled trials related to MSCs for AR will be included. The primary outcomes will be therapeutic effect, serum IgE index and Visual Analogue Scale score for nasal symptoms. Risk of bias will be assessed using the Cochrane Collaboration’s tool for assessing risk of bias. Article selection, data extraction and risk of bias assessment will be performed in duplicate by two independent reviewers.

Ethics and dissemination
Ethics approval is not required because individual patient data are not included. This protocol was registered in the international Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews on 22 January 2022. The systematic review and meta-analysis will be submitted for publication in a peer-reviewed journal. The findings will also be disseminated through conference presentations.

PROSPERO registration number
CRD42022303146.

Objectives
To investigate whether adding lactate to the quick Sequential (sepsis-related) Organ Failure Assessment (qSOFA) improves the prediction of mortality in adult hospital patients, compared with qSOFA alone.

Design
Systematic review in accordance with Preferred Reporting Items for a Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Diagnostic Test Accuracy Studies guidelines.

Data sources
Embase, Medline, PubMed, SCOPUS, Web of Science, CINAHL and Open Grey databases were searched in November 2020.

Eligibility criteria
Original research studies published after 2016 comparing qSOFA in combination with lactate (LqSOFA) with qSOFA alone in adult patients with sepsis in hospital. The language was restricted to English.

Data extraction and synthesis
Title and abstract screening, full-text screening, data extraction and quality assessment (using Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2) were conducted independently by two reviewers. Extracted data were collected into tables and diagnostic test accuracy was compared between the two tests.

Results
We identified 1621 studies, of which 11 met our inclusion criteria. Overall, there was a low risk of bias across all studies. The area under the receiver operating characteristic (AUROC) curve for qSOFA was improved by the addition of lactate in 9 of the 10 studies reporting it. Sensitivity was increased in three of seven studies that reported it. Specificity was increased in four of seven studies that reported it. Of the six studies set exclusively within the emergency department, five published AUROCs, all of which reported an increase following the addition of lactate. Sensitivity and specificity results varied throughout the included studies. Due to insufficient data and heterogeneity of studies, a meta-analysis was not performed.

Conclusions
LqSOFA is an effective tool for identifying mortality risk both in adult inpatients with sepsis and those in the emergency department. LqSOFA increases AUROC over qSOFA alone, particularly within the emergency department. However, further original research is required to provide a stronger base of evidence in lactate measurement timing, as well as prospective trials to strengthen evidence and reduce bias.

PROSPERO registration number
CRD42020207648.

Objectives
Comprehensive geriatric assessment (CGA) is a complex intervention applied to older people with evidence of benefit in medical populations. The aim of this systematic review was to describe how CGA is applied to surgical populations in randomised controlled trials. This will provide a basis for design of future studies focused on optimising CGA as a complex intervention.

Setting
A systematic review of randomised controlled trials.

Participants
A systematic search was performed for studies of CGA in the perioperative period across Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid EMBASE, CINAHL and Cochrane CENTRAL, from inception to March 2021.

Interventions
Any randomised controlled trials of perioperative CGA versus ‘standard care’ were included.

Outcome measures
Qualitative description of CGA.

Results
12 121 titles and abstracts were screened, 68 full-text articles were assessed for eligibility and 22 articles included, reporting on 13 trials. 10 trials focused on inpatients with hip fracture, with 7 of these delivering CGA on a geriatric medicine ward, 3 on a surgical ward. The remaining three trials were in elective general surgery all delivering CGA on a surgical ward. CGA components, duration of intervention and personnel delivering the intervention were highly variable across the different studies. Trials favoured postoperative delivery of CGA (11/13). Only four trials reported data on adherence to the CGA intervention.

Conclusions
CGA as an intervention is variably described and delivered in randomised controlled trials in the perioperative setting. The reporting of both the intervention and standard care is often poor with little focus on adherence. Future research should focus on clearly defining and standardising the intervention as well as measuring adherence within trials.

PROSPERO registration number
CRD42020221797.

Objectives
The Choice and Partnership Approach (CAPA) was developed to create an accessible, child-centred and family-centred model of child and adolescent mental health service delivery that is adaptable to different settings. We sought to describe the state of evidence regarding the extent, outcomes and contextual considerations of CAPA implementation in community mental health services.

Design
Scoping review.

Data sources
Published and grey literature were searched using MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO, Scopus and Google to 13 and 20 July 2022, respectively.

Eligibility criteria
We included reports focused on the implementation, outcomes (clinical, programme or system) or a discussion of contextual factors that may impact CAPA implementation in either child and adolescent or adult mental health services.

Data extraction and synthesis
Data were extracted using a codebook that reflected the five domains of the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) and reviewed for agreement and accuracy. Data were synthesised according to the five CFIR domains.

Results
Forty-eight reports describing 36 unique evaluations were included. Evaluations were observational in nature; 10 employed pre–post designs. CAPA implementation, regardless of setting, was largely motivated by long wait times. Characteristics of individuals (eg, staff buy-in or skills) were not reported. Processes of implementation included facilitative leadership, data-informed planning and monitoring and CAPA training. Fidelity to CAPA was infrequently measured (n=9/36) despite available tools. Health system outcomes were most frequently reported (n=28/36); few evaluations (n=7/36) reported clinical outcomes, with only three reporting pre/post CAPA changes.

Conclusions
Gaps in evidence preclude a systematic review and meta-analysis of CAPA implementation. Measurement of clinical outcomes represents an area for significant improvement in evaluation. Consistent measurement of model fidelity is essential for ensuring the accuracy of outcomes attributed to its implementation. An understanding of the change processes necessary to support implementation would be strengthened by more comprehensive consideration of contextual factors.

Introduction
Frailty is characterised by vulnerability to adverse health outcomes and increases with age. Many frailty risk scores have been developed. One important example is the Hospital Frailty Risk Score (HFRS) which has the potential to be widely used and automatically calculated which will provide accurate assessment of frailty in a time/cost-effective manner. This systematic review, therefore, seeks to describe the HFRS use since its publication in 2018.

Methods and analysis
The proposed systematic review will follow the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. We will include published original peer-reviewed articles, preprints, conference proceedings and letters to the editor reporting primary data where there is an English language abstract available from 1 January 2018 to 30 June 2022. Databases to be searched are MEDLINE, EMBASE and Web of Science. Additional studies from, for example, the reference of the included studies will be identified and assessed for potential inclusion. Two independent reviewers will perform and assess the following: (1) eligibility of the included studies, (2) critical appraisal using the Cochrane Risk of Bias in Non-randomized Studies of Interventions tool, and (3) data extraction using a predefined form. Disagreements will be resolved through discussions or by involvement of a third reviewer. It may be possible to undertake a meta-analysis if there are sufficient studies reporting effect measures in homogenous populations and/or settings. Effect sizes will be calculated using meta-analysis methods and expressed as risk ratios or ORs with 95% CIs.

Ethics and dissemination
No ethical approval is required for this systematic review as it will use secondary data only. The results of the systematic review will be submitted for publication in recognised peer-reviewed journals related to frailty and geriatric care and will be widely disseminated through conferences, congresses, seminars, symposia and scientific meetings.

Objectives
Heart rate (HR) is one of the physiological variables in the early assessment of trauma-related haemorrhagic shock, according to Advanced Trauma Life Support (ATLS). However, its efficiency as predictor of mortality is contradicted by several studies. Furthermore, the linear association between HR and the severity of shock and blood loss presented by ATLS is doubtful. This systematic review aims to update current knowledge on the role of HR in the initial haemodynamic assessment of patients who had a trauma.

Design
This study is a systematic review and meta-regression that follows the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses recommendations.

Data sources
EMBASE, MEDLINE, CENTRAL and Web of Science databases were systematically searched through on 1 September 2020.

Eligibility criteria
Papers providing early HR and mortality data on bleeding patients who had a trauma were included. Patient cohorts were considered haemorrhagic if the inclusion criteria of the studies contained transfusion and/or positive focused assessment with sonography for trauma and/or postinjury haemodynamical instability and/or abdominal gunshot injury. Studies on burns, traumatic spinal or brain injuries were excluded. Papers published before January 2010 were not considered.

Data extraction and synthesis
Data extraction and risk of bias were assessed by two independent investigators. The association between HR and mortality of patients who had a trauma was assessed using meta-regression analysis. As subgroup analysis, meta-regression was performed on patients who received blood products.

Results
From a total of 2017 papers, 19 studies met our eligibility criteria. Our primary meta-regression did not find a significant relation (p=0.847) between HR and mortality in patients who had a trauma with haemorrhage. Our subgroup analysis included 10 studies, and it could not reveal a linear association between HR and mortality rate.

Conclusions
In accordance with the literature demonstrating the multiphasic response of HR to bleeding, our study presents the lack of linear association between postinjury HR and mortality. Modifying the pattern of HR derangements in the ATLS shock classification may result in a more precise teaching tool for young clinicians.

Objectives
To establish the evidence base for the effects on health outcomes and costs of social prescribing link workers (non-health or social care professionals who connect people to community resources) for people in community settings focusing on people experiencing multimorbidity and social deprivation.

Design
Systematic review and narrative synthesis using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach.

Data sources
Cochrane Database, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, ClinicalTrials.gov, EU Clinical Trials Register, CINAHL, Embase, Global Health, PubMed/MEDLINE, PsycInfo, LILACS, Web of Science and grey literature were searched up to 31 July 2021. A forward citation search was completed on 9 June 2022.

Eligibility criteria
Controlled trials meeting the Cochrane Effectiveness of Practice and Organisation of Care (EPOC) guidance on eligible study designs assessing the effect of social prescribing link workers for adults in community settings on any outcomes. No language restrictions were applied.

Data extraction and synthesis
Two independent reviewers extracted data, evaluated study quality using the Cochrane EPOC risk of bias tool and judged certainty of the evidence. Results were synthesised narratively.

Results
Eight studies (n=6500 participants), with five randomised controlled trials at low risk of bias and three controlled before–after studies at high risk of bias, were included. Four included participants experiencing multimorbidity and social deprivation. Four (n=2186) reported no impact on health-related quality of life (HRQoL). Four (n=1924) reported mental health outcomes with three reporting no impact. Two US studies found improved ratings of high-quality care and reduced hospitalisations for people with multimorbidity experiencing deprivation. No cost-effectiveness analyses were identified. The certainty of the evidence was low or very low.

Conclusions
There is an absence of evidence for social prescribing link workers. Policymakers should note this and support evaluation of current programmes before mainstreaming.

PROSPERO registration number
CRD42019134737.

Introduction
Coercion is inevitably linked to psychiatric and mental healthcare. Though many forms of coercion exist, perceived coercion appears to be a less studied form despite its marked prevalence and negative consequences. In the literature, several factors have been studied for their association with perceived coercion, but few literature reviews have focused on this precise subject. Gaining knowledge of the association between these factors and the degree of perceived coercion is essential to guide future research and develop informed interventions. The purpose of this review will be to identify, in the literature, factors associated with perceived coercion by adults receiving psychiatric care.

Methods and analysis
A scoping review will be conducted by following the Joanna Briggs Institute methodology. A search with descriptors and keywords will be performed in the following databases: CINAHL, MEDLINE, PUBMED, EMBASE and PsycINFO. Then, a search for grey literature will be conducted, psychiatric and mental health journals will be searched, and reference lists will be examined to identify further pertinent literature. All literature on factors (human, health related, organisational, etc) and their association to perceived coercion by adults (18 and older) in inpatient, outpatient and community-based psychiatry will be included. A quality assessment of the literature included will be performed. The extracted data will be analysed with a method of content analysis. An exploratory search was conducted in September 2021 and will be updated in September 2022 once the evidence selection process is planned to begin.

Ethics and dissemination
No ethics approval is required for this review. The results of this scoping review will be submitted to a scientific journal for publication, presented in conferences and shared with clinicians working in psychiatric and mental healthcare.

Introduction
Docosahexaenoic acid (DHA) supplementation in the neonatal period has been proposed to prevent bronchopulmonary dysplasia (BPD) in very preterm infants. We aim to determine the effects of an enteral supplementation with high doses of DHA on the risk for BPD at 36 weeks’ postmenstrual age (PMA) in very preterm infants born less than 29 weeks’ gestation compared with a control.

Methods and analysis
We will conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) searching PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Web of Science, MedRxiv, ClinicalTrials.gov (up to 1 November 2021) as well as reference lists and citations of included articles and previous reviews. RCTs targeting infants born less than 29 weeks’ gestation and evaluating the effect of high doses of DHA enteral supplementation in the neonatal period compared with a control will be eligible. Primary outcome will be BPD defined as the need for oxygen and/or ventilation at 36 weeks’ PMA. Two authors will independently screen for inclusion, extract data and assess data quality using the Cochrane instrument (risk-of-bias tool 2.0). We will perform meta-analysis using random effects models. Prespecified subgroup analyses are planned for the infant gestational age and sex, the marine source of DHA, mode of administration and duration of exposure. Sensitivity analysis will be performed according to the accuracy of the BPD definition (ie, physiological definition) and according to the risk of bias of the RCTs.

Ethics and dissemination
This protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis does not require ethics approval, as no primary data are collected. This study will assess the effectiveness of high doses of enteral DHA supplementation on BPD and provide evidence to clinicians and families for decision-making. Findings will be disseminated through conferences, media interviews and publications to peer review journals.

PROSPERO registration number
CRD42021286705.

Objectives
To assess the cardiovascular and renal efficacy and safety of sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 (SGLT2) inhibitors in patients without diabetes.

Methods
We searched PubMed, MEDLINE, Embase and Cochrane Library for publications up to 17 August 2022. Certainty of evidence was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach. Random-effects meta-analyses were performed to pool effect measures across studies. Risk ratios (RRs) with 95% CIs are expressed for composite cardiovascular outcome of cardiovascular death or hospitalisation for heart failure, cardiovascular death, hospitalisation for heart failure, all-cause mortality and composite renal outcome of ≥50% reduction in estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR), end-stage kidney disease or renal death. Annual rate of change in eGFR is expressed as the mean difference with 95% CI.

Results
We identified four trials with 8927 patients with heart failure or chronic kidney disease (CKD). Compared with placebo, SGLT2 inhibitors showed favourable effects on the composite cardiovascular outcome (RR: 0.79, 95% CI: 0.71 to 0.87; moderate certainty), cardiovascular death (0.85, 0.74 to 0.99; moderate certainty), hospitalisation for heart failure (0.72, 0.62 to 0.82; moderate certainty), the composite renal outcome (0.64, 0.48 to 0.85; low certainty) and the annual rate of change in eGFR (mean difference: 0.99, 0.59 to 1.39 mL/min/1.73 m2/year; moderate certainty), while there was no significant difference in all-cause mortality (0.88, 0.77 to 1.01; very low certainty). Moderate certainty evidence indicated that SGLT2 inhibitors reduced the risk of serious adverse events and acute renal failure. Low certainty evidence suggested that SGLT2 inhibitors increased the risk of urinary tract infection and genital infection, while there were no differences in discontinuation due to adverse events, amputation, fracture, hypoglycaemia, ketoacidosis or volume depletion.

Conclusions
Evidence of low to moderate certainty suggests that SGLT2 inhibitors provide cardiorenal benefits but have increased risk for urinary tract infection and genital infection in patients without diabetes and with heart failure or CKD.

PROSPERO registration number
CRD42021239807.

Introduction
Misuse of psychoactive medicines, especially prescription opioids, but also benzodiazepines, hypnotics and sedatives, has become a significant public health issue in some countries, especially in the USA, where it has been extensively documented, as well as in Canada and Australia. However, in the European Union (EU) published literature on the topic is scarce and heterogeneous regarding definitions, sources of data, tools and methods of analysis.
The aim of this scoping review is to map the key concepts on psychoactive medicines’ misuse and examine the existing body of evidence on this topic in the EU. Data on the possible consequences of medicines’ misuse—adverse drug reactions, poisonings, hospitalisations and deaths—will also be analysed.

Methods and analysis
The scoping review will follow the framework of Arksey and O’Malley, further developed by Levac et al and the Joanna Briggs Institute. The search strategy, developed by the authors, includes querying three electronic databases—PubMed, Web of Science and Scopus—using keywords and the Medical Subject Headings, for evidence published in English, French, Spanish or Portuguese between 2011 and 2020. Additionally, articles from PubMed alerts and other sources will also be considered. The results of the scoping review will describe the currently available evidence regarding misuse of medicines at EU level.

Ethics and dissemination
Since the scoping review methodology focuses on published data, this study does not require ethical approval. We will publish our findings in a peer-reviewed journal and plan to disseminate our work in conferences and scientific meetings.

Registration details
This scoping review protocol is registered in the Open Science Framework (OSF; see https://osf.io/fzr9u) and has also been shared as a preprint in this free and open-source project management repository. It is available at https://doi.org/10.31219/osf.io/y3s4q.

Introduction
International students make significant contributions to their host institutions and countries. Yet research shows that not all international students have the financial means to fend for themselves and meet their financial obligations for the entire study programme. Such students are at significant risk of food insecurity. The objective of this scoping review is to synthesise available information on the factors related to food insecurity among international students studying at postsecondary educational institutions and identify the types of food insecurity interventions that have been implemented to address this issue.

Methods and analysis
The Joanna Briggs Institute scoping review methodology will be used to guide this scoping review, and we will search the following databases: MEDLINE (through Ovid), CINAHL (EBSCO), PubMed, ERIC (via Ovid), PROSPERO and ProQuest. The titles, abstracts, and subsequently full texts of the selected papers will then be screened against the inclusion criteria. Data from articles included in the review will be extracted using a data charting form and will be summarised in a tabular form. Thematic analysis will be used to identify common themes that thread through the selected studies and will be guided by the steps developed by Terry et al.

Ethics and dissemination
Since this project entails a review of available literature, ethical approval is not required. The findings will be presented at academic conferences and published in a peer-reviewed journal. To make the findings more accessible, they will also be distributed via digital communication platforms.

Introduction
An impoverished medical workforce is a global phenomenon, which can impact patient care significantly. Greater flexibility in working patterns is one approach policy-makers adopt to address this issue, and the expansion of less than full-time (LTFT) working forms part of this. Studies suggest that LTFT working has the potential to improve recruitment and retention by aligning with how doctors increasingly want to balance their careers with other commitments and interests. What is less well understood are the influencing factors and outcomes related to LTFT working among doctors. This protocol outlines the methodology for a systematic review that will evaluate existing knowledge on LTFT working in the medical profession.

Methods and analysis
The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta Analyses guidelines will be followed. Embase, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, Health Management Information Consortium, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, Healthcare Administration, and Applied Social Sciences Index and Abstracts will be searched for studies published up to March 2022. Unpublished literature from EThos and ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global will also be searched. Bibliographic searching, citation searching and handsearching will be used to retrieve additional papers. Authors will be contacted for data or publications if necessary. Two independent reviewers will undertake study screening, data extraction and quality assessment, with disagreements resolved by consensus or by a third reviewer if necessary. Data synthesis will be by narrative synthesis and meta-analysis if possible.

Ethics and dissemination
The proposed study does not require ethical approval; however, it forms part of a larger body of research on the impact of LTFT working on the medical workforce for which ethics approval has been granted by the Research Ethics Committee at University College London. Findings will be published in a peer-reviewed journal and will be presented at national and international conferences.

PROSPERO registration number
CRD42022307174.

Objective
To identify nurse staffing and patient care outcome literature in published systematic reviews and map out the evidence gaps for low/middle-income countries (LMICs).

Methods
We included quantitative systematic reviews on nurse staffing levels and patient care outcomes in regular ward settings published in English. We excluded qualitative reviews or reviews on nursing skill mix. We searched the Cochrane Register of Systematic Reviews, the Joanna Briggs Institute Database of Systematic Reviews and Implementation Reports, Medline, Embase and Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature from inception until July 2021. We used the A Measurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews -2 (AMSTAR-2) criteria for risk of bias assessment and conducted a narrative synthesis.

Results
From 843 papers, we included 14 in our final synthesis. There were overlaps in primary studies summarised across reviews, but overall, the reviews summarised 136 unique primary articles. Only 4 out of 14 reviews had data on LMIC publications and only 9 (6.6%) of 136 unique primary articles were conducted in LMICs. Only 8 of 23 patient care outcomes were reported from LMICs. Less research was conducted in contexts with staffing levels that are typical of many LMIC contexts.

Discussion
Our umbrella review identified very limited data for nurse staffing and patient care outcomes in LMICs. We also identified data from high-income countries might not be good proxies for LMICs as staffing levels where this research was conducted had comparatively better staffing levels than the few LMIC studies. This highlights a critical need for the conduct of nurse staffing research in LMIC contexts.

Limitations
We included data on systematic reviews that scored low on our risk of bias assessment because we sought to provide a broad description of the research area. We only considered systematic reviews published in English and did not include any qualitative reviews in our synthesis.

PROSPERO registration number
CRD42021286908.

Objectives
This study aimed to estimate the prevalence of atrial fibrillation (AF) in adults with heart failure (HF) and summarise the all-cause mortality ratio among adult patients with coexisting HF and AF in sub-Saharan Africa (SSA).

Setting
This was a systematic review and meta-analysis of cross-sectional and cohort studies with primary data on the prevalence and incidence of AF among patients with HF and the all-cause mortality ratio among patients with HF and AF in SSA. We combined text words and MeSH terms to search MEDLINE, PubMed and Global Health Library through Ovid SP, African Journals Online and African Index Medicus from database inception to 10 November 2021. Random-effects meta-analysis was used to estimate pooled prevalence.

Primary outcome measures
The prevalence and incidence of AF among patients with HF, and the all-cause mortality ratio among patients with HF and AF.

Results
Twenty-seven of the 1902 records retrieved from database searches were included in the review, totalling 9987 patients with HF. The pooled prevalence of AF among patients with HF was 15.6% (95% CI 12.0% to 19.6%). At six months, the all-cause mortality was 18.4% (95% CI 13.1% to 23.6%) in a multinational registry and 67.7% (95% CI 51.1% to 74.3%) in one study in Tanzania. The one-year mortality was 48.6% (95% CI 32.5% to 64.7%) in a study in the Democratic Republic of Congo. We did not find any study reporting the incidence of AF in HF.

Conclusion
AF is common among patients with HF in SSA, and patients with AF and HF have poor survival. There is an urgent need for large-scale population-based prospective data to reliably estimate the prevalence, incidence and risk of mortality of AF among HF patients in SSA to better understand the burden of AF in patients with HF in the region.

PROSPERO registration number
CRD42018087564.