Risultati per: Studio REDUCE-IT e appropriatezza prescrittiva degli acidi grassi omega-3

New England Journal of Medicine, Volume 387, Issue 16, October 2022.

This Medical News feature discusses the challenges of predicting how severe flu season might be.

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.

Stroke, Ahead of Print. Background:It has been reported that the S1P (sphingosine 1-phosphate) receptor modulator fingolimod reduces infarction in rodent models of stroke. Recent studies have suggested that circadian rhythms affect stroke and neuroprotection. Therefore, this study revisited the use of fingolimod in mouse focal cerebral ischemia to test the hypothesis that efficacy might depend on whether experiments were performed during the inactive sleep or active wake phases of the circadian cycle.Methods:Two different stroke models were implemented in male C57Bl/6 mice—transient middle cerebral artery occlusion and permanent distal middle cerebral artery occlusion. Occlusion occurred either during inactive or active circadian phases. Mice were treated with 1 mg/kg fingolimod at 30- or 60-minute postocclusion and 1 day later for permanent and transient middle cerebral artery occlusion, respectively. Infarct volume, brain swelling, hemorrhagic transformation, and behavioral outcome were assessed at 2 or 3 days poststroke. Three independent experiments were performed in 2 different laboratories.Results:Fingolimod decreased peripheral lymphocyte number in naive mice, as expected. However, it did not significantly affect infarct volume, brain swelling, hemorrhagic transformation, or behavioral outcome at 2 or 3 days after transient or permanent focal cerebral ischemia during inactive or active circadian phases of stroke onset.Conclusions:Outcomes were not improved by fingolimod in either transient or permanent focal cerebral ischemia during both active and inactive circadian phases. These negative findings suggest that further testing of fingolimod in clinical trials may not be warranted unless translational studies can identify factors associated with fingolimod’s efficacy or lack thereof.

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.

Researchers present a case series in Native Americans.

Introduction
Radical abdominal surgery is part of the standard treatment for women with advanced gynaecological carcinoma. The surgery often leads to intraoperative blood loss frequently exceeding 1000 mL. Approximately 50% of women undergoing radical surgery require blood transfusions. Perioperative blood transfusions have been shown to increase the risk of postoperative complications, delayed wound healing, increased length of stay, increased postoperative morbidity and mortality. Previous studies have demonstrated an association between perioperative anaemia and surgical morbidity and mortality. By reducing transfusions and improving recovery from surgery, preoperative diagnostic and management of perioperative anaemia is a great opportunity to optimise postoperative patient outcome.

Methods and analysis
This is a single-blind, monocentre, randomised trial with four parallel groups (three therapeutic groups and one control group without treatment according to current standards of care) conducted in women undergoing radical gynaecological surgery. The primary study objective is to determine the effect of perioperative treatment with either intravenous iron, tranexamic acid or with a combination of both medicines on the reduction of intraoperative and postoperative red blood cell transfusions in gynaecological carcinoma patients. A total of N=126 women with gynaecological carcinoma will be recruited at the University Hospital Basel, Department of Gynaecology. Blood parameters will be measured at the recruitment, prior to surgery, 2 days after surgery and on the 21st–28th day after surgery. Recruitment started in August 2021.

Ethics and dissemination
The study will be performed according to the guidelines of the Declaration of Helsinki and is approved by the Ethics Committee for Northwest and Central Switzerland in Basel (EKNZ Protocol ID 2020-01194). The results of this study will be published and presented in various scientific forums.

Trial registration number
NCT03792464.

Stroke, Ahead of Print.

Objectives
To explore community pharmacists and key stakeholders’ perspectives and reflections on the community pharmacy workforce’s preparedness for, and response to, COVID-19, including lessons for future public health crises.

Design, setting and participants
Qualitative study using semistructured interviews (via telephone or online videoconferencing platform), with community pharmacists and a range of key stakeholders (representing other health professions, professional/governing organisations concerned with community pharmacy and patient advocacy groups) from across Northern Ireland. Data were analysed using thematic analysis and constant comparison.

Results
Thirty interviews were conducted with community pharmacists (n=15) and key stakeholders (n=15). Four themes were identified: (1) adaptation and adjustment (reflecting how community responded quickly to the need to maintain services and adjusted and adapted services accordingly); (2) the primary point of contact (the continuing accessibility of community pharmacy when other services were not available and role as a communication hub, particularly in relation to information for patients and maintaining contact with other healthcare professionals); (3) lessons learnt (the flexibility of community pharmacy, the lack of infrastructure, especially in relation to information technology, and the need to build on the pandemic experience to develop practice); and (4) planning for the future (better infrastructure which reinforced concerns about poor technology, coordination of primary care services and preparing for the next public health crisis). There was a general view that community pharmacy needed to build on what had been learnt to advance the role of the profession.

Conclusions
The strengths of community pharmacy and its contribution to healthcare services in the COVID-19 pandemic were noted by community pharmacists and acknowledged by key stakeholders. The findings from this study should inform the policy debate on community pharmacy and its contribution to the public health agenda.

Introduction
Breast cancer is the most common malignant tumour in women, with more than 2 million new cases annually worldwide. One of the most frequent and well-known surgical and post-actinic sequelae is post-mastectomy lymphoedema. The axillary web syndrome is another sequela that limits the functionality of the patient and delays the protocol time of administering cancer treatments; and in many cases, this sequela is misdiagnosed. This surgical sequela usually disappears spontaneously after the third month of appearance, but this implies a long period of discomfort and limitations for the patient, at the same time, it may delay the application of radiotherapy within the indicated protocol deadline (due to a need for body posture).

Methods and analysis
With the present quasi-experimental study, we intend to show the application of physiotherapy and stretching from the beginning of the appearance of the axillary cord, in a controlled and scheduled way by the physiotherapist. It is possible to reduce the time in which the lymphatic thrombus is present and, therefore, recover functionality and mobility, reduce pain and be able to apply treatments within the established deadline. We intend to apply this therapy into the intervention group and compare thrombus evolution time with the control group.

Ethics and dissemination
This trial has the approval of the Andalucía Ethics Committee (PEIBA code 1909-N1-21, reg. number 171.21).

Trial registration number
ClinicalTrials.gov Registry (NCT05115799).

Introduction
Opioid-involved overdose deaths continue to surge in many communities, despite numerous evidence-based practices (EBPs) that exist to prevent them. The HEALing Communities Study (HCS) was launched to develop and test an intervention (ie, Communities That HEAL (CTH)) that supports communities in expanding uptake of EBPs to reduce opioid-involved overdose deaths. This paper describes a protocol for a process foundational to the CTH intervention through which community coalitions select strategies to implement EBPs locally.

Methods and analysis
The CTH is being implemented in 67 communities (randomised to receive the intervention) in four states in partnership with coalitions (one per community). Coalitions must select at least five strategies, including one to implement each of the following EBPs: (a) overdose education and naloxone distribution; expanded (b) access to medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD), (c) linkage to MOUD, (d) retention in MOUD and (e) safer opioid prescribing/dispensing. Facilitated by decision aid tools, the community action planning process includes (1) data-driven goal setting, (2) discussion and prioritisation of EBP strategies, (3) selection of EBP strategies and (4) identification of next steps. Following review of epidemiologic data and information on existing local services, coalitions set goals and discuss, score and/or rank EBP strategies based on feasibility, appropriateness within the community context and potential impact on reducing opioid-involved overdose deaths with a focus on three key sectors (healthcare, behavioural health and criminal justice) and high-risk/vulnerable populations. Coalitions then select EBP strategies through consensus or majority vote and, subsequently, suggest or choose agencies with which to partner for implementation.

Ethics and dissemination
The HCS protocol was approved by a central Institutional Review Board (Advarra). Results of the action planning process will be disseminated in academic conferences and peer-reviewed journals, online and print media, and in meetings with community stakeholders.

Trial registration number
NCT04111939.

Objectives
General practitioners (GPs) and their staff have been at the frontline of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic in Australia. However, their experiences of responding to and managing the risks of viral transmission within their facilities are poorly described. The aim of this study was to describe the experiences, and infection prevention and control (IPC) strategies adopted by general practices, including enablers of and challenges to implementation, to contribute to our understanding of the pandemic response in this critical sector.

Design
Semistructured interviews were conducted in person, by telephone or online video conferencing software, between November 2020 and August 2021.

Participants
Twenty general practice personnel working in New South Wales, Australia, including nine GPs, one general practice registrar, four registered nurses, one nurse practitioner, two practice managers and two receptionists.

Results
Participants described implementing wide-ranging repertoires of IPC strategies—including telehealth, screening of patients and staff, altered clinic layouts and portable outdoor shelters, in addition to appropriate use of personal protective equipment (PPE)—to manage the demands of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. Strategies were proactive, influenced by the varied contexts of different practices and the needs and preferences of individual GPs as well as responsive to local, state and national requirements, which changed frequently as the pandemic evolved.

Conclusions
Using the ‘hierarchy of controls’ as a framework for analysis, we found that the different strategies adopted in general practice often functioned in concert with one another. Most strategies, particularly administrative and PPE controls, were subjected to human variability and so were less reliable from a human factors perspective. However, our findings highlight the creativity, resilience and resourcefulness of general practice staff in developing, implementing and adapting their IPC strategies amidst constantly changing pandemic conditions.

Introduction
Surgical patients are commonly prescribed more opioids at discharge than needed to manage their postoperative pain. These excess opioids increase the risks of new persistent opioid use, opioid-induced ventilatory impairment and opioid diversion. This study tests the effectiveness of two behavioural nudges, one based on peer behaviour and one based on best practice guidelines, in reducing excessive postoperative opioid prescriptions.

Methods and analysis
The study will be conducted at 19 hospitals within a large healthcare delivery system in northern California, USA. Three surgical specialties (general surgery, orthopaedic surgery and obstetric/gynaecological surgery) at each hospital will be randomised either to a control group or to one of two active intervention arms. One intervention is grounded in the theory of injunctive norms, and provides feedback to surgeons on their postoperative opioid prescribing relative to prescribing guidelines endorsed by their institution. The other intervention draws from the theory of descriptive norms, and provides feedback similar to the first intervention but using peers’ behaviour rather than guidelines as the benchmark for the surgeon’s prescribing behaviour. The interventions will be delivered by a monthly email. Both interventions will be active for twelve months. The effects of each intervention relative to the control group and to each other will be tested using a four-level hierarchical model adjusted for multiple hypothesis testing.

Ethics and dissemination
Using behavioural nudges rather than rigid policy changes allows us to target excessive prescribing without preventing clinicians from using their clinical judgement to address patient pain. All study activities have been approved by the RAND Human Subjects Protection Committee (ID 2018-0988). Findings will be disseminated through conference presentations, peer-reviewed publications and social media accounts.

Trial registration number
NCT05070338.

Objectives
C-reactive protein point-of-care testing (CRP POCT) is a promising diagnostic tool to guide antibiotic prescribing for lower respiratory tract infections (LRTI) in nursing home residents. This study aimed to evaluate cost-effectiveness and return-on-investment (ROI) of CRP POCT compared with usual care for nursing home residents with suspected LRTI from a healthcare perspective.

Design
Economic evaluation alongside a cluster randomised, controlled trial.

Setting
11 Dutch nursing homes.

Participants
241 nursing home residents with a newly suspected LRTI.

Intervention
Nursing home access to CRP POCT (POCT-guided care) was compared with usual care without CRP POCT (usual care).

Main outcome measures
The primary outcome measure for the cost-effectiveness analysis was antibiotic prescribing at initial consultation, and the secondary outcome was full recovery at 3 weeks. ROI analyses included intervention costs, and benefits related to antibiotic prescribing. Three ROI metrics were calculated: Net Benefits, Benefit-Cost-Ratio and Return-On-Investment.

Results
In POCT-guided care, total costs were on average 32 higher per patient, the proportion of avoided antibiotic prescribing was higher (0.47 vs 0.18; 0.30, 95% CI 0.17 to 0.42) and the proportion of fully recovered patients statistically non-significantly lower (0.86 vs 0.91; –0.05, 95% CI –0.14 to 0.05) compared with usual care. On average, an avoided antibiotic prescription was associated with an investment of 137 in POCT-guided care compared with usual care. Sensitivity analyses showed that results were relatively robust. Taking the ROI metrics together, the probability of financial return was 0.65.

Conclusion
POCT-guided care effectively reduces antibiotic prescribing compared with usual care without significant effects on recovery rates, but requires an investment. Future studies should take into account potential beneficial effects of POCT-guided care on costs and health outcomes related to antibiotic resistance.

Trial registration number
NL5054.

Introduction
Atrial fibrillation (AF) is a common arrhythmia associated with 30% of strokes, as well as other cardiovascular disease, dementia and death. AF meets many criteria for screening, but there is limited evidence that AF screening reduces stroke. Consequently, no countries recommend national screening programmes for AF. The Screening for Atrial Fibrillation with ECG to Reduce stroke (SAFER) trial aims to determine whether screening for AF is effective at reducing risk of stroke. The aim of the pilot study is to assess feasibility of the main trial and inform implementation of screening and trial procedures.

Methods and analysis
SAFER is planned to be a pragmatic randomised controlled trial (RCT) of over 100 000 participants aged 70 years and over, not on long-term anticoagulation therapy at baseline, with an average follow-up of 5 years. Participants are asked to record four traces every day for 3 weeks on a hand-held single-lead ECG device. Cardiologists remotely confirm episodes of AF identified by the device algorithm, and general practitioners follow-up with anticoagulation as appropriate. The pilot study is a cluster RCT in 36 UK general practices, randomised 2:1 control to intervention, recruiting approximately 12 600 participants. Pilot study outcomes include AF detection rate, anticoagulation uptake and other parameters to incorporate into sample size calculations for the main trial. Questionnaires sent to a sample of participants will assess impact of screening on psychological health. Process evaluation and qualitative studies will underpin implementation of screening during the main trial. An economic evaluation using the pilot data will confirm whether it is plausible that screening might be cost-effective.

Ethics and dissemination
The London—Central Research Ethics Committee (19/LO/1597) and Confidentiality Advisory Group (19/CAG/0226) provided ethical approval. Dissemination will be via publications, patient-friendly summaries, reports and engagement with the UK National Screening Committee.

Trial registration number
ISRCTN72104369.