Corrigendum to “Adverse events associated with the use of cervical spine manipulation or mobilization and patient characteristics: A systematic review”

2018 ◽  
Vol 36 ◽  
pp. 96
Author(s):  
H.A. Kranenburg ◽  
M.A. Schmitt ◽  
E.J. Puentedura ◽  
G.J. Luijckx ◽  
C.P. van der Schans
2012 ◽  
Vol 20 (2) ◽  
pp. 66-74 ◽  
Author(s):  
Emilio J Puentedura ◽  
Jessica March ◽  
Joe Anders ◽  
Amber Perez ◽  
Merrill R Landers ◽  
...  

Critical Care ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 25 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Victoria S. Owen ◽  
Brianna K. Rosgen ◽  
Stephana J. Cherak ◽  
Andre Ferland ◽  
Henry T. Stelfox ◽  
...  

Abstract Background It is unclear whether vasopressors can be safely administered through a peripheral intravenous (PIV). Systematic review and meta-analysis methodology was used to examine the incidence of local anatomic adverse events associated with PIV vasopressor administration in patients of any age cared for in any acute care environment. Methods MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, the Cochrane Central Register of controlled trials, and the Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects were searched without restriction from inception to October 2019. References of included studies and related reviews, as well as relevant conference proceedings were also searched. Studies were included if they were: (1) cohort, quasi-experimental, or randomized controlled trial study design; (2) conducted in humans of any age or clinical setting; and (3) reported on local anatomic adverse events associated with PIV vasopressor administration. Risk of bias was assessed using the Revised Cochrane risk-of-bias tool for randomized trials or the Joanna Briggs Institute checklist for prevalence studies where appropriate. Incidence estimates were pooled using random effects meta-analysis. Subgroup analyses were used to explore sources of heterogeneity. Results Twenty-three studies were included in the systematic review, of which 16 and 7 described adults and children, respectively. Meta-analysis from 11 adult studies including 16,055 patients demonstrated a pooled incidence proportion of adverse events associated with PIV vasopressor administration as 1.8% (95% CI 0.1–4.8%, I2 = 93.7%). In children, meta-analysis from four studies and 388 patients demonstrated a pooled incidence proportion of adverse events as 3.3% (95% CI 0.0–10.1%, I2 = 82.4%). Subgroup analyses did not detect any statistically significant effects associated with stratification based on differences in clinical location, risk of bias or design between studies, PIV location and size, or vasopressor type or duration. Most studies had high or some concern for risk of bias. Conclusion The incidence of adverse events associated with PIV vasopressor administration is low. Additional research is required to examine the effects of PIV location and size, vasopressor type and dose, and patient characteristics on the safety of PIV vasopressor administration.


2016 ◽  
Vol 25 ◽  
pp. e125-e126 ◽  
Author(s):  
R. Kranenburg ◽  
M. Schmitt ◽  
L. Puentedura ◽  
G.J. Luijckx ◽  
C. Van der Schans

Author(s):  
Da-Ae Yu ◽  
Ye Eun Kim ◽  
Ohsang Kwon ◽  
Hyunsun Park

Background: Tofacitinib and ruxolitinib have been used off-label to treat alopecia areata. Although a number of case reports and small studies have been published, there are no comprehensive reviews examining the outcomes of using tofacitinib and ruxolitinib for the treatment of alopecia areata. Aims: The aim of the study was to examine the outcome of patients with alopecia areata treated with oral tofacitinib or ruxolitinib in previously published studies. Methods: A search of MEDLINE, Embase and Cochrane library was conducted. A systematic review and meta-analysis were performed focusing on the Severity of Alopecia Tool 50 achievement rate, the frequency of adverse events and recurrence after discontinuation of treatment. Results: A total of 1244 studies were identified of which only 12 studies met the inclusion criteria. Of the 346 patients in these 12 studies, 288 had received oral tofacitinib and 58 had received oral ruxolitinib. The overall Severity of Alopecia Tool50 achievement rate was 66% (95% confidence interval, 54%–76%). Subgroup analysis revealed that drug choice, mean age, sex ratio and alopecia areata subtype ratio did not significantly affect the treatment response. Infections and laboratory abnormalities were the most common adverse events (98 and 65 cases of 319 patients, respectively). Patients treated for more than six months had a greater frequency of laboratory abnormalities as compared to those treated for shorter durations (24% vs. 7%; P = 0.04). Recurrence of alopecia areata was observed within three months after discontinuation of treatment in the majority (74%) of patients. Limitations: This analysis was limited by the small number of observational studies available for review, the heterogeneity of patient characteristics and the lack of long-term data. Conclusion: Both oral tofacitinib and ruxolitinib are effective and well tolerated in the treatment of alopecia areata. Clinicians should be aware of the expected efficacy, adverse events and high recurrence rate of oral JAK inhibitors for alopecia areata to effectively counsel these patients before starting therapy.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document