Comparative efficacy of 22 drug interventions as medical expulsive therapy for ureteral stones: a systematic review and network meta-analysis

Urolithiasis ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 48 (5) ◽  
pp. 447-457 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hailang Liu ◽  
Shaogang Wang ◽  
Wei Zhu ◽  
Jinjin Lu ◽  
Xinguang Wang ◽  
...  
PLoS ONE ◽  
2015 ◽  
Vol 10 (8) ◽  
pp. e0134589 ◽  
Author(s):  
Chenli Liu ◽  
Guohua Zeng ◽  
Ran Kang ◽  
Wenqi Wu ◽  
Jiasheng Li ◽  
...  

BMJ ◽  
2021 ◽  
pp. n532
Author(s):  
Jennifer A Watt ◽  
Zahra Goodarzi ◽  
Areti Angeliki Veroniki ◽  
Vera Nincic ◽  
Paul A Khan ◽  
...  

Abstract Objective To describe the comparative efficacy of drug and non-drug interventions for reducing symptoms of depression in people with dementia who experience depression as a neuropsychiatric symptom of dementia or have a diagnosis of a major depressive disorder. Design Systematic review and meta-analysis. Data sources Medline, Embase, the Cochrane Library, CINAHL, PsycINFO, and grey literature between inception and 15 October 2020. Eligibility criteria for study selection Randomised trials comparing drug or non-drug interventions with usual care or any other intervention targeting symptoms of depression in people with dementia. Main outcome measures Pairs of reviewers screened studies, abstracted aggregate level data, and appraised risk of bias with the Cochrane risk of bias tool, which facilitated the derivation of standardised mean differences and back transformed mean differences (on the Cornell scale for depression in dementia) from bayesian random effects network meta-analyses and pairwise meta-analyses. Results Of 22 138 citations screened, 256 studies (28 483 people with dementia) were included. Missing data posed the greatest risk to review findings. In the network meta-analysis of studies including people with dementia without a diagnosis of a major depressive disorder who were experiencing symptoms of depression (213 studies; 25 177 people with dementia; between study variance 0.23), seven interventions were associated with a greater reduction in symptoms of depression compared with usual care: cognitive stimulation (mean difference −2.93, 95% credible interval −4.35 to −1.52), cognitive stimulation combined with a cholinesterase inhibitor (−11.39, −18.38 to −3.93), massage and touch therapy (−9.03, −12.28 to −5.88), multidisciplinary care (−1.98, −3.80 to −0.16), occupational therapy (−2.59, −4.70 to −0.40), exercise combined with social interaction and cognitive stimulation (−12.37, −19.01 to −5.36), and reminiscence therapy (−2.30, −3.68 to −0.93). Except for massage and touch therapy, cognitive stimulation combined with a cholinesterase inhibitor, and cognitive stimulation combined with exercise and social interaction, which were more efficacious than some drug interventions, no statistically significant difference was found in the comparative efficacy of drug and non-drug interventions for reducing symptoms of depression in people with dementia without a diagnosis of a major depressive disorder. Clinical and methodological heterogeneity precluded network meta-analysis of studies comparing the efficacy of interventions specifically for reducing symptoms of depression in people with dementia and a major depressive disorder (22 studies; 1829 patients). Conclusions In this systematic review, non-drug interventions were found to be more efficacious than drug interventions for reducing symptoms of depression in people with dementia without a major depressive disorder. Systematic review registration PROSPERO CRD42017050130.


BMJ ◽  
2021 ◽  
pp. n526
Author(s):  
François Lamontagne ◽  
Thomas Agoritsas ◽  
Reed Siemieniuk ◽  
Bram Rochwerg ◽  
Jessica Bartoszko ◽  
...  

Abstract Clinical question What is the role of drugs in preventing covid-19? Why does this matter? There is widespread interest in whether drug interventions can be used for the prevention of covid-19, but there is uncertainty about which drugs, if any, are effective. The first version of this living guideline focuses on the evidence for hydroxychloroquine. Subsequent updates will cover other drugs being investigated for their role in the prevention of covid-19. Recommendation The guideline development panel made a strong recommendation against the use of hydroxychloroquine for individuals who do not have covid-19 (high certainty). How this guideline was created This living guideline is from the World Health Organization (WHO) and provides up to date covid-19 guidance to inform policy and practice worldwide. Magic Evidence Ecosystem Foundation (MAGIC) provided methodological support. A living systematic review with network analysis informed the recommendations. An international guideline development panel of content experts, clinicians, patients, an ethicist and methodologists produced recommendations following standards for trustworthy guideline development using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach. Understanding the new recommendation The linked systematic review and network meta-analysis (6 trials and 6059 participants) found that hydroxychloroquine had a small or no effect on mortality and admission to hospital (high certainty evidence). There was a small or no effect on laboratory confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection (moderate certainty evidence) but probably increased adverse events leading to discontinuation (moderate certainty evidence). The panel judged that almost all people would not consider this drug worthwhile. In addition, the panel decided that contextual factors such as resources, feasibility, acceptability, and equity for countries and healthcare systems were unlikely to alter the recommendation. The panel considers that this drug is no longer a research priority and that resources should rather be oriented to evaluate other more promising drugs to prevent covid-19. Updates This is a living guideline. New recommendations will be published in this article and signposted by update notices to this guideline. Readers note This is the first version of the living guideline for drugs to prevent covid-19. It complements the WHO living guideline on drugs to treat covid-19. When citing this article, please consider adding the update number and date of access for clarity.


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Minoru Hayashi ◽  
Kenichi Kano ◽  
Naoto Kuroda ◽  
Norio Yamamoto ◽  
Akihiro Shiroshita ◽  
...  

The objectives are as follows: To review systematically comparative efficacy of sedation or analgesia methods for reduction of anterior shoulder dislocation.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document