scholarly journals Quality of anticholinergic burden scales and their impact on clinical outcomes: a systematic review

Author(s):  
Angela Lisibach ◽  
Valérie Benelli ◽  
Marco Giacomo Ceppi ◽  
Karin Waldner-Knogler ◽  
Chantal Csajka ◽  
...  

Abstract Purpose Older people are at risk of anticholinergic side effects due to changes affecting drug elimination and higher sensitivity to drug’s side effects. Anticholinergic burden scales (ABS) were developed to quantify the anticholinergic drug burden (ADB). We aim to identify all published ABS, to compare them systematically and to evaluate their associations with clinical outcomes. Methods We conducted a literature search in MEDLINE and EMBASE to identify all published ABS and a Web of Science citation (WoS) analysis to track validation studies implying clinical outcomes. Quality of the ABS was assessed using an adapted AGREE II tool. For the validation studies, we used the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale and the Cochrane tool Rob2.0. The validation studies were categorized into six evidence levels based on the propositions of the Oxford Center for Evidence-Based Medicine with respect to their quality. At least two researchers independently performed screening and quality assessments. Results Out of 1297 records, we identified 19 ABS and 104 validations studies. Despite differences in quality, all ABS were recommended for use. The anticholinergic cognitive burden (ACB) scale and the German anticholinergic burden scale (GABS) achieved the highest percentage in quality. Most ABS are validated, yet validation studies for newer scales are lacking. Only two studies compared eight ABS simultaneously. The four most investigated clinical outcomes delirium, cognition, mortality and falls showed contradicting results. Conclusion There is need for good quality validation studies comparing multiple scales to define the best scale and to conduct a meta-analysis for the assessment of their clinical impact.

Author(s):  
Yukari Ogawa ◽  
Toshinori Hirai ◽  
Kiyoshi Mihara

Abstract Background Anticholinergic burden potentially increases the risk of fracture. Although there are various anticholinergic burden scales, little is known about the inter-scale compatibility regarding the relationship of anticholinergic burden with fracture risk. We performed meta-analysis to examine the association of fracture risk with anticholinergic burden measured using various scales. Methods Primary literature was retrieved from PubMed (1966 to March, 2021), the Cochrane Library (1974 to March, 2021), Scopus (1970 to March, 2021), and Ichushi-web (1983 to March, 2021). Cohort and case-control studies that evaluated the association between any fracture and anticholinergic drugs were included. Additionally, we included studies in which patients were administered anticholinergic drugs included on the anticholinergic risk scale (ARS), anticholinergic cognitive burden (ACB), anticholinergic drug scale, or drug burden index-anticholinergic component. Random effects models were used to calculate pooled relative risk (RR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) due to heterogeneity among the studies. Publication bias was examined by funnel plots and the Begg’s test. Results A total of 49 datasets from 10 studies were included in the meta-analysis. Six of the 10 studies included only patients aged over 65 years, who accounted for 93% of the total study population (453,186/487,247). Meta-analysis indicated a positive relationship between use of anticholinergic drugs and fracture risk, regardless of the anticholinergic burden scale used. However, the relationship between anticholinergic burden and fracture risk varied depending on the scale used. Fracture risk increased linearly with increasing anticholinergic burden measured using ARS. ARS 1 point was associated with 28% increase in fracture risk, ARS 1–2 point(s) with 39%, ARS 2 points with 54%, ARS 3 points with 66%, and ARS ≥ 4 points with 77%. On the other hand, ACB 1 point and ACB 2 points were associated with similar fracture risk (pooled RR [95% CI]: overall; 1.28 [1.18–1.39], 1 point; 1.12 [1.06–1.18], 2 points; 1.15 [1.08–1.23]). Conclusions This result suggests that the relationship between anticholinergic drug burden and fracture risk may differ depending on the anticholinergic burden scale used.


2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (4) ◽  
pp. 773
Author(s):  
Wei-Ting Wu ◽  
Tsung-Min Lee ◽  
Der-Sheng Han ◽  
Ke-Vin Chang

The association of sarcopenia with poor clinical outcomes has been identified in various medical conditions, although there is a lack of quantitative analysis to validate the influence of sarcopenia on patients with lumbar degenerative spine disease (LDSD) from the available literature. Therefore, this systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to summarize the prevalence of sarcopenia in patients with LDSD and examine its impact on clinical outcomes. The electronic databases (PubMed and Embase) were systematically searched from inception through December 2020 for clinical studies investigating the association of sarcopenia with clinical outcomes in patients with LDSD. A random-effects model meta-analysis was carried out for data synthesis. This meta-analysis included 14 studies, comprising 1953 participants. The overall prevalence of sarcopenia among patients with LDSD was 24.8% (95% confidence interval [CI], 17.3%–34.3%). The relative risk of sarcopenia was not significantly increased in patients with LDSD compared with controls (risk ratio, 1.605; 95% CI, 0.321–8.022). The patients with sarcopenia did not experience an increase in low back and leg pain. However, lower quality of life (SMD, −0.627; 95% CI, −0.844–−0.410) were identified postoperatively. Sarcopenia did not lead to an elevated rate of complications after lumbar surgeries. Sarcopenia accounts for approximately one-quarter of the population with LDSD. The clinical manifestations are less influenced by sarcopenia, whereas sarcopenia is associated with poorer quality of life after lumbar surgeries. The current evidence is still insufficient to support sarcopenia as a predictor of postoperative complications.


Author(s):  
Adel Alizadeh ◽  
Reza Negarandeh ◽  
Fahimehe Bagheri Amiri ◽  
Zahra Yazdani

Abstract Objectives This systematic and meta-analysis review was conducted to determine the status of Iranian children and adolescents’ physical activity. Content All the related articles which were published in the major databases, including Pubmed, Scopus, Web of Science, Embase, Magiran, SID from the beginning of 2010 to the end of 2019, were reviewed by researchers. The Newcastle-Ottawa scale was also used to evaluate the quality of articles. Moreover, I 2 index and chi-square were used to assess the heterogeneity between the results. Summary 490 articles were found as a result of the search in the selected international and local databases, where finally, 10 articles were included into the meta-analysis after the elimination of the duplicated articles and applying inclusion and exclusion criteria. The results indicated that 29.5% of the girls were considered active according to WHO criteria (16.1–42.8: 95% CI) and also 20.5% of the boys (7.3–33.7: 95% CI). Outlook Overall, this study’s findings showed that a large percentage of Iranian children and adolescents do not achieve the level of physical activity recommended by the World Health Organization. This can lead to undesirable consequences for this group of population that is considered as the human capital of any country; consequently, it seems necessary to take basic measures at the micro and macro levels in order to reduce such problems in the society.


2021 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Ali Baradaran ◽  
Hojat Dehghanbanadaki ◽  
Sara Naderpour ◽  
Leila Mohammadi Pirkashani ◽  
Abdolhalim Rajabi ◽  
...  

Abstract Introduction The relationship between H. pylori infection and obesity development has remained controversial among various studies. The aim of this study was to clarify the pooled effect of H. pylori infection on the development of obesity and vice versa. Methods We searched international databases including Medline (PubMed), Web of sciences, Scopus, EMBASE, Cochrane, Ovid, and CINHAL to retrieve all case–control studies reporting the effect of H. pylori on obesity and vice versa, which had been published in English between January 1990 and June 2019. The quality of included studies was assessed by the Modified Newcastle–Ottawa Scale for Case–Control studies. The logarithm of the odds ratio (OR) and its standard error was used for the meta-analysis. Results Eight case–control studies with 25,519 participants were included for qualitative and quantitative analyses. The pooled analysis showed that obese participants had a higher risk of H. pylori infection than lean participants with an odds ratio of 1.46 (95%CI: 1.26, 1.68). Also, the pooled analysis revealed that participants infected by H. pylori had a higher risk of obesity than non-infected participants with an odds ratio of 1.01 (95%CI: 1.01, 1.02). Conclusion The results of this meta-analysis showed that there was a positive correlation between the risk of H. pylori infection and the prevalence of obesity development. Thus, H. pylori positive patients were more likely to be obese, and obese individuals had higher risks of H. pylori infection.


2021 ◽  
Vol 18 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Yanli Liu ◽  
Yilong Pan ◽  
Yuyao Yin ◽  
Wenhao Chen ◽  
Xiaodong Li

Abstract Background The numbers of confirmed cases of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and COVID-19 related deaths are still increasing, so it is very important to determine the risk factors of COVID-19. Dyslipidemia is a common complication in patients with COVID-19, but the association of dyslipidemia with the severity and mortality of COVID-19 is still unclear. The aim of this study is to analyze the potential association of dyslipidemia with the severity and mortality of COVID-19. Methods We searched the PubMed, Embase, MEDLINE, and Cochrane Library databases for all relevant studies up to August 24, 2020. All the articles published were retrieved without language restriction. All analysis was performed using Stata 13.1 software and Mantel–Haenszel formula with fixed effects models was used to compare the differences between studies. The Newcastle Ottawa scale was used to assess the quality of the included studies. Results Twenty-eight studies involving 12,995 COVID-19 patients were included in the meta-analysis, which was consisted of 26 cohort studies and 2 case–control studies. Dyslipidemia was associated with the severity of COVID-19 (odds ratio [OR] = 1.27, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.11–1.44, P = 0.038, I2 = 39.8%). Further, patients with dyslipidemia had a 2.13-fold increased risk of death compared to patients without dyslipidemia (95% CI 1.84–2.47, P = 0.001, I2 = 66.4%). Conclusions The results proved that dyslipidemia is associated with increased severity and mortality of COVID-19. Therefore, we should monitor blood lipids and administer active treatments in COVID-19 patients with dyslipidemia to reduce the severity and mortality.


BMJ Open ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 7 (9) ◽  
pp. e017567
Author(s):  
Shimels Hussien Mohammed ◽  
Mulugeta Molla Birhanu ◽  
Tesfamichael Awoke Sissay ◽  
Tesfa Dejenie Habtewold ◽  
Balewgizie Sileshi Tegegn ◽  
...  

IntroductionIndividuals living in poor neighbourhoods are at a higher risk of overweight/obesity. There is no systematic review and meta-analysis study on the association of neighbourhood socioeconomic status (NSES) with overweight/obesity. We aimed to systematically review and meta-analyse the existing evidence on the association of NSES with overweight/obesity.Methods and analysisCross-sectional, case–control and cohort studies published in English from inception to 15 May 2017 will be systematically searched using the following databases: PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Sciences and Google Scholar. Selection, screening, reviewing and data extraction will be done by two reviewers, independently and in duplicate. The Newcastle–Ottawa Scale (NOS) will be used to assess the quality of evidence. Publication bias will be checked by visual inspection of funnel plots and Egger’s regression test. Heterogeneity will be checked by Higgins’s method (I2statistics). Meta-analysis will be done to estimate the pooled OR. Narrative synthesis will be performed if meta-analysis is not feasible due to high heterogeneity of studies.Ethics and disseminationEthical clearance is not required as we will be using data from published articles. Findings will be communicated through a publication in a peer-reviewed journal and presentations at professional conferences.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42017063889.


2015 ◽  
Vol 26 (3) ◽  
pp. 415-425 ◽  
Author(s):  
Morten Schrøder ◽  
Kirsten A. Boisen ◽  
Jesper Reimers ◽  
Grete Teilmann ◽  
Jesper Brok

AbstractPurposeWe performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies assessing quality of life in adolescents and young adults born with CHD compared with age-matched controls.MethodsWe carried out a systematic search of the literature published in Medline, Embase, PsychINFO, and the Cochrane Library’s Database (1990–2013); two authors independently extracted data from the included studies. We used the Newcastle–Ottawa scale for quality assessment of studies. A random effects meta-analysis model was used. Heterogeneity was assessed using the I2-test.ResultsWe included 18 studies with 1786 patients. The studies were of acceptable-to-good quality. The meta-analysis of six studies on quality of life showed no significant difference – mean difference: −1.31; 95% confidence intervals: −6.51 to +3.89, I2=90.9% – between adolescents and young adults with CHD and controls. Similar results were found in 10 studies not eligible for the meta-analysis. In subdomains, it seems that patients had reduced physical quality of life; however, social functioning was comparable or better compared with controls.ConclusionFor the first time in a meta-analysis, we have shown that quality of life in adolescents and young adults with CHD is not reduced when compared with age-matched controls.


2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. e18600-e18600
Author(s):  
Maryam Alasfour ◽  
Salman Alawadi ◽  
Malak AlMojel ◽  
Philippos Apolinario Costa ◽  
Priscila Barreto Coelho ◽  
...  

e18600 Background: Patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and cancer have worse clinical outcomes compared to those without cancer. Primary studies have examined this population, but most had small sample sizes and conflicting results. Prior meta-analyses exclude most US and European data or only examine mortality. The present meta-analysis evaluates the prevalence of several clinical outcomes in cancer patients with COVID-19, including new emerging data from Europe and the US. Methods: A systematic search of PubMED, medRxiv, JMIR and Embase by two independent investigators included peer-reviewed papers and preprints up to July 8, 2020. The primary outcome was mortality. Other outcomes were ICU and non-ICU admission, mild, moderate and severe complications, ARDS, invasive ventilation, stable, and clinically improved rates. Study quality was assessed through the Newcastle–Ottawa scale. Random effects model was used to derive prevalence rates, their 95% confidence intervals (CI) and 95% prediction intervals (PI). Results: Thirty-four studies (N = 4,371) were included in the analysis. The mortality prevalence rate was 25.2% (95% CI: 21.1–29.7; 95% PI: 9.8-51.1; I 2 = 85.4), with 11.9% ICU admissions (95% CI: 9.2-15.4; 95% PI: 4.3-28.9; I 2= 77.8) and 25.2% clinically stable (95% CI: 21.1-29.7; 95% PI: 9.8-51.1; I 2 = 85.4). Furthermore, 42.5% developed severe complications (95% CI: 30.4-55.7; 95% PI: 8.2-85.9; I 2 = 94.3), with 22.7% developing ARDS (95% CI: 15.4-32.2; 95% PI: 5.8-58.6; I 2 = 82.4), and 11.3% needing invasive ventilation (95% CI: 6.7-18.4; 95% PI: 2.3-41.1; I 2 = 79.8). Post-follow up, 49% clinically improved (95% CI: 35.6-62.6; 95% PI: 9.8-89.4; I 2 = 92.5). All outcomes had large I 2 , suggesting high levels of heterogeneity among studies, and wide PIs indicating high variability within outcomes. Despite this variability, the mortality rate in cancer patients with COVID-19, even at the lower end of the PI (9.8%), is higher than the 2% mortality rate of the non-cancer with COVID-19 population, but not as high as what other meta-analyses conclude, which is around 25%. Conclusions: Patients with cancer who develop COVID-19 have a higher probability of mortality compared to the general population with COVID-19, but possibly not as high as previous studies have shown. A large proportion of them developed severe complications, but a larger proportion recovered. Prevalence of mortality and other outcomes published in prior meta-analyses did not report prediction intervals, which compromises the clinical utilization of such results.


PLoS ONE ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 16 (8) ◽  
pp. e0255716
Author(s):  
Náthali Felícia Mineiro dos Santos Garrett ◽  
Ana Cristina Carvalho da Costa ◽  
Elaine Barros Ferreira ◽  
Giovanni Damiani ◽  
Paula Elaine Diniz dos Reis ◽  
...  

Background Checkpoint inhibitors have revolutionized advanced melanoma care; however, their cutaneous side effects have not been definitively elucidated. Objective To identify the prevalence of cutaneous toxicity in patients with melanoma treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors as monotherapy and/or in combination with chemotherapy and/or radiotherapy. Materials and methods We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis, which encompassed both clinical trials and observational studies describing the dermatological toxicities in patients treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors. The protocol was registered in the International Prospective Register of Systematic Review under the number CRD42018091915. The searches were performed using the CINAHL, Cochrane CENTRAL, LILACS, LIVIVO, PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science databases. The methodological quality of the studies was evaluated with the JBI Critical Appraisal Checklist for Studies Reporting Prevalence Data Results A total of 9,802 articles were identified in the databases. The final sample comprised 39 studies. The evaluated drugs were ipilimumab, tremelimumab, pembrolizumab, and nivolumab. The results suggest that the most prevalent side effect was grade 1 and 2 pruritus (24%), followed by grade 1 and 2 rash (21%) and grade 1 and 2 vitiligo (10%). Conclusion The most prevalent side effects in patients treated with checkpoint inhibitors are pruritus, rash, and vitiligo, and they are rated mostly as grades 1 and 2 adverse events. Remarkably, vitiligo is most commonly found in patients treated with PD-1 inhibitors.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document