scholarly journals P16: PHYSICAL THERAPIES FOR DVT PROPHYLAXIS IN SURGICAL PATIENTS: A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW AND EVIDENCE QUALITY APPRAISAL

2021 ◽  
Vol 108 (Supplement_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
JE Berner ◽  
L Geoghegan ◽  
I Kyriazidis ◽  
J Nanchahal ◽  
A Jain
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Venous Thromboembolism ◽  
High Risk ◽  
Risk Of Bias ◽  
Surgical Patients ◽  
Trauma Patients ◽  
Dvt Prophylaxis ◽  
Compression Bandages ◽  
Prophylactic Measures ◽  
Physical Therapies

Abstract Introduction Venous thromboembolism represents a significant clinical and socioeconomic burden. Surgical patients are an inherently high-risk cohort for VTE although traditional prophylactic pharmacological therapies are contraindicated in select cohorts. Novel physical therapies such as calf exercises and electrostimulation have been proposed for such patients. The aim of this systematic review is to appraise the clinical utility of novel physical therapies used for DVT prophylaxis in surgical and trauma patients. Method A systematic review of MEDLINE, EMBASE and CINAHL using a PRISMA-compliant methodology up to July 2019 was conducted. Abstract screening and data extraction were performed in duplicate. Risk of bias and quality assessments were performed for each study using the GRADE framework. Result A total of 272 articles were identified, of which 10 met inclusion criteria. Five studies evaluated the use of calf electrostimulation, the remaining studies evaluated active toe movement, bespoke compression bandages, blood flow restriction exercises, calf massage and a portable compression device. Four randomized controlled trials demonstrated a significant reduction in radiological DVT incidence with electrostimulation, post-operative massage and pneumatic compression versus controls. All included studies had a moderate to high risk of bias. Conclusion The role of physical therapies as prophylactic measures in VTE remain equivocal. No study demonstrated a significant reduction in clinically evident DVT. The physical therapies can be beneficial in patients who also received pharmacological therapy, whilst physical therapies alone may be of no benefit. Heterogenous study design and poor methodological quality limit comparison of study findings at present. Take-home message Physical therapies as prophylactic measures in venous thromboembolism may offer benefit when combined with pharmacotherapy. When used alone, physical therapies may offer no benefit.

scholarly journals Risk of Clinically Relevant Venous Thromboembolism in Critically Ill Patients With COVID-19: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

2021 ◽  
Vol 8 ◽  
Author(s):  
Johannes Gratz ◽  
Marion Wiegele ◽  
Mathias Maleczek ◽  
Harald Herkner ◽  
Herbert Schöchl ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Venous Thromboembolism ◽  
High Risk ◽  
Critically Ill ◽  
Critically Ill Patients ◽  
English Language ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Risk Of Bias ◽  
Individual Risk ◽  
Bleeding Events

Background: Early during the course of the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic, reports suggested alarmingly high incidences for thromboembolic events in critically ill patients with COVID-19. However, the clinical relevance of these events was not reported in several studies. Additionally, more recent research showed contradictory results and suggested substantially lower rates of venous thromboembolism. Thus, the aim of the present study was to summarize evidence on the incidence of clinically relevant venous thromboembolism (VTE)—defined as VTE excluding isolated subsegmental pulmonary embolism (PE) and distal deep vein thrombosis (DVT)—in adult critically ill patients with COVID-19.Methods: We performed a systematic review of studies reporting the incidence of clinically relevant PE and/or DVT in critically ill patients with COVID-19. Scientific reports published in the English language between January and October 2020 were included. We conducted a random-effects model meta-analysis to calculate incidence estimates of clinically relevant VTE and bleeding events. We also performed exploratory meta-regression and subgroup analyses of different diagnostic approaches and additional factors that possibly influenced the incidence of these outcomes.Results: Fifty-four articles (5,400 patients) fulfilled the predefined inclusion criteria, of which 41 had a high risk of bias. The majority of included patients were male, > 60 years, and overweight. Twenty-one studies reported the use of prophylactic doses of heparin. Pooled incidences for clinically relevant PE were estimated at 8% (95% CI, 4–11%), for proximal DVT at 14% (95% CI, 9–20%), and—after exclusion of studies with a high risk of bias—for the composite outcome of VTE at 18% (95% CI, 13–24%). Clinically relevant bleeding occurred at a rate of 6% (95% CI, 2–9%).Conclusions: We summarized currently available data on the rate of clinically relevant VTE in critically ill patients with COVID-19. Pooled incidence estimates were lower than those reported by previous review articles. In the absence of evidence-based anticoagulation guidelines for critically ill patients with COVID-19, the results of our study provide clinically important information for an individual risk-benefit assessment in this context.Registration: The study protocol was prospectively registered in PROSPERO on June 22, 2020 (CRD42020193353; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero).

Deep Vein Thrombosis Prophylaxis: Audit of Practice in General Surgical Patients in a Teaching Hospital

2000 ◽  
Vol 15 (2) ◽  
pp. 71-74 ◽  
Author(s):  
O. Agu ◽  
A. Handa ◽  
G Hamilton ◽  
D. M. Baker
Keyword(s):  
Deep Vein Thrombosis ◽  
High Risk ◽  
Teaching Hospital ◽  
Surgical Patients ◽  
Thrombosis Prophylaxis ◽  
High Risk Patients ◽  
Vein Thrombosis ◽  
Dvt Prophylaxis ◽  
Risk Patients ◽  
Deep Vein

Objective: To audit the prescription and implementation of deep vein thrombosis (DVT) prophylaxis in general surgical patients in a teaching hospital. Methods: All inpatients on three general surgical wards were audited for adequacy of prescription and implementation prophylaxis (audit A). A repeat audit 3 months later (audit B) closed the loop. The groups were compared using the chi-square test. Results: In audit A 50 patients participated. Prophylaxis was correctly prescribed in 36 (72%) and implemented in 30 (60%) patients. Eighteen patients at moderate or high risk (45%) received inadequate prophylaxis. Emergency admission, pre-operative stay and inadequate risk assignment were associated with poor implementation of protocol. In audit B 51 patients participated. Prescription was appropriate in 45 (88%) and implementation in 40 (78%) patients (p< 0.05). Eleven patients at moderate or high risk received inadequate prophylaxis. Seven of 11 high-risk patients in audit A (64%) received adequate prophylaxis, in contrast to all high-risk patients in audit B. The decision not to administer prophylaxis was deemed appropriate in 5 of 15 (30%) in audit A compared with 6 of 10 (60%) in audit B. Conclusion: Increased awareness, adequate risk assessment, updating of protocols and consistent reminders to staff and patients may improve implementation of DVT prophylaxis.

Associations between Otolaryngology Applicant Characteristics and Future Performance in Residency or Practice: A Systematic Review

2017 ◽  
Vol 156 (6) ◽  
pp. 1011-1017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sarah N. Bowe ◽  
Adrienne M. Laury ◽  
Stacey T. Gray
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
High Risk ◽  
Personnel Selection ◽  
Theoretical Background ◽  
Risk Of Bias ◽  
Future Performance ◽  
Or Practice ◽  
Retrospective Cohort Studies ◽  
Selection Research ◽  
Meta Analyses

Objective This systematic review aims to evaluate which applicant characteristics available to an otolaryngology selection committee are associated with future performance in residency or practice. Data Sources PubMed, Scopus, ERIC, Health Business, Psychology and Behavioral Sciences Collection, and SocINDEX. Review Methods Study eligibility was performed by 2 independent investigators in accordance with the PRISMA protocol (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses). Data obtained from each article included research questions, study design, predictors, outcomes, statistical analysis, and results/findings. Study bias was assessed with the Quality in Prognosis Studies tool. Results The initial search identified 439 abstracts. Six articles fulfilled all inclusion and exclusion criteria. All studies were retrospective cohort studies (level 4). Overall, the studies yielded relatively few criteria that correlated with residency success, with generally conflicting results. Most studies were found to have a high risk of bias. Conclusion Previous resident selection research has lacked a theoretical background, thus predisposing this work to inconsistent results and high risk of bias. The included studies provide historical insight into the predictors and criteria (eg, outcomes) previously deemed pertinent by the otolaryngology field. Additional research is needed, possibly integrating aspects of personnel selection, to engage in an evidence-based approach to identify highly qualified candidates who will succeed as future otolaryngologists.

scholarly journals Rapid diagnostic test for antenatal syphilis screening in low-income and middle-income countries: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BMJ Open ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 8 (2) ◽  
pp. e018132 ◽  
Author(s):  
Carmen Phang Romero Casas ◽  
Marrissa Martyn-St James ◽  
Jean Hamilton ◽  
Daniel S Marinho ◽  
Rodolfo Castro ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
High Risk ◽  
Diagnostic Accuracy ◽  
Pregnant Women ◽  
Sensitivity And Specificity ◽  
Methodological Quality ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Risk Of Bias ◽  
Antenatal Clinics

ObjectivesTo undertake a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the test performance including sensitivity and specificity of rapid immunochromatographic syphilis (ICS) point-of-care (POC) tests at antenatal clinics compared with reference standard tests (non-treponemal (TP) and TP tests) for active syphilis in pregnant women.MethodsFive electronic databases were searched (PubMed, EMBASE, CRD, Cochrane Library and LILACS) to March 2016 for diagnostic accuracy studies of ICS test and standard reference tests for syphilis in pregnant women. Methodological quality was assessed using QUADAS-2 (Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies). A bivariate meta-analysis was undertaken to generate pooled estimates of diagnostic parameters. Results were presented using a coupled forest plot of sensitivity and specificity and a scatter plot.ResultsThe methodological quality of the five included studies with regards to risk of bias and applicability concern judgements was either low or unclear. One study was judged as high risk of bias for patient selection due to exclusion of pregnant women with a previous history of syphilis, and one study was judged at high risk of bias for study flow and timing as not all patients were included in the analysis. Five studies contributed to the meta-analysis, providing a pooled sensitivity and specificity for ICS of 0.85 (95% CrI: 0.73 to 0.92) and 0.98 (95% CrI: 0.95 to 0.99), respectively.ConclusionsThis review and meta-analysis observed that rapid ICS POC tests have a high sensitivity and specificity when performed in pregnant women at antenatal clinics. However, the methodological quality of the existing evidence base should be taken into consideration when interpreting these results.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42016036335.

scholarly journals Accuracy of Anti-GBM Antibodies in Diagnosing Anti-Glomerular Basement Membrane Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-8
Author(s):  
Akihiro Shiroshita ◽  
Yasuhiro Oda ◽  
Seiji Takenouchi ◽  
Noboru Hagino ◽  
Yuki Kataoka
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
High Risk ◽  
Basement Membrane ◽  
Diagnostic Accuracy ◽  
Cohort Studies ◽  
Quality Assessment ◽  
Sensitivity And Specificity ◽  
Glomerular Basement Membrane ◽  
Case Control ◽  
Risk Of Bias

<b><i>Background:</i></b> The sensitivity and specificity of anti-glomerular basement membrane (GBM) antibodies have not been systematically analyzed. In this systematic review, we aimed to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of anti-GBM antibodies for anti-GBM disease. <b><i>Summary:</i></b> Potential studies were searched using MEDLINE, Embase, the Cochrane Library, and the International Clinical Trials Registry Platform based on the index test and target condition. The inclusion criteria were prospective or retrospective cohort studies or case-control studies assessing the sensitivity and specificity of anti-GBM antibodies, and the reference standard was clinical diagnosis including biopsy results. The exclusion criteria were review articles, case reports, animal studies, and in vitro studies. Quality assessment was conducted based on the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2. The pooled estimates of sensitivity and specificity were calculated using a bivariate random-effects model. The overall quality was evaluated using the Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation. Six studies (1,691 patients) and 11 index tests were included in our systematic review. A high risk of bias and concerns regarding the applicability of patient selection were noted because of the case-control design in 67% of the included studies. The pooled sensitivity and specificity were 93% (95% CI: 84–97%) and 97% (95% CI: 94–99%), respectively. The certainty of evidence was low because of the high risk of bias and indirectness. <b><i>Key Messages:</i></b> Anti-GBM antibodies may exhibit high sensitivity and specificity in the diagnosis of anti-GBM disease. Further cohort studies are needed to confirm their precise diagnostic accuracy and compare diagnostic accuracies among different immunoassays.

scholarly journals Tools for assessing risk of reporting biases in studies and syntheses of studies: a systematic review

BMJ Open ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 8 (3) ◽  
pp. e019703 ◽  
Author(s):  
Matthew J Page ◽  
Joanne E McKenzie ◽  
Julian P T Higgins
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
High Risk ◽  
Full Text ◽  
Relative Weight ◽  
Risk Of Bias ◽  
Reporting Bias ◽  
Measurement Properties ◽  
Rater Agreement ◽  
Funnel Plot ◽  
Ovid Medline

BackgroundSeveral scales, checklists and domain-based tools for assessing risk of reporting biases exist, but it is unclear how much they vary in content and guidance. We conducted a systematic review of the content and measurement properties of such tools.MethodsWe searched for potentially relevant articles in Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid Embase, Ovid PsycINFO and Google Scholar from inception to February 2017. One author screened all titles, abstracts and full text articles, and collected data on tool characteristics.ResultsWe identified 18 tools that include an assessment of the risk of reporting bias. Tools varied in regard to the type of reporting bias assessed (eg, bias due to selective publication, bias due to selective non-reporting), and the level of assessment (eg, for the study as a whole, a particular result within a study or a particular synthesis of studies). Various criteria are used across tools to designate a synthesis as being at ‘high’ risk of bias due to selective publication (eg, evidence of funnel plot asymmetry, use of non-comprehensive searches). However, the relative weight assigned to each criterion in the overall judgement is unclear for most of these tools. Tools for assessing risk of bias due to selective non-reporting guide users to assess a study, or an outcome within a study, as ‘high’ risk of bias if no results are reported for an outcome. However, assessing the corresponding risk of bias in a synthesis that is missing the non-reported outcomes is outside the scope of most of these tools. Inter-rater agreement estimates were available for five tools.ConclusionThere are several limitations of existing tools for assessing risk of reporting biases, in terms of their scope, guidance for reaching risk of bias judgements and measurement properties. Development and evaluation of a new, comprehensive tool could help overcome present limitations.

scholarly journals Central neurobiological effects of physical exercise in individuals with chronic musculoskeletal pain: a systematic review

BMJ Open ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (7) ◽  
pp. e036151
Author(s):  
Rutger M J de Zoete ◽  
Kenneth Chen ◽  
Michele Sterling
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Chronic Pain ◽  
High Risk ◽  
Physical Exercise ◽  
Clinical Outcomes ◽  
Musculoskeletal Pain ◽  
Exercise Intervention ◽  
Risk Of Bias ◽  
Chronic Musculoskeletal Pain ◽  
Brain Areas

ObjectivePrimary objectives: to investigate the central neurobiological effects (using MRI) of physical exercise in individuals with chronic pain. Secondary objectives: (1) to investigate the associations between central changes and clinical outcomes and (2) to investigate whether different types and dosages of physical exercise exert different central changes.DesignSystematic review searching four electronic databases up to September 2018: AMED, CINAHL, Embase and MEDLINE. Two reviewers independently assessed the methodological quality of included studies using the Cochrane Collaboration’s Risk of Bias in Non-Randomised Studies-I tool. A standardised extraction table was used for data extraction, which was performed by two reviewers.InterventionsStudies reporting any physical exercise intervention in any chronic musculoskeletal pain condition were included. Eligibility of 4011 records was screened independently by two reviewers, and four studies were included in the review.Primary and secondary outcome measuresPrimary outcome: any brain outcome assessed with any MR technique. Secondary outcomes: any self-reported clinical outcomes, and type and dosage of the exercise intervention.ResultsAll four studies had high risk of bias. There was heterogeneity between the brain areas studied and the types of exercise interventions delivered. All studies reported functional MRI changes in various brain areas following an exercise intervention. Insufficient data were available to conduct a meta-analysis or to answer the secondary aims.ConclusionsOnly a limited number of studies were available and all were at high risk of bias. None of the studies was randomised or included blinded assessment. Exercise may exert effects on brain neurobiology in people with chronic pain. Due to the high risk of bias, future studies should use a randomised study design. Investigation of morphological brain changes could be included.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42018108179.

scholarly journals Systematic review on the benefit of graduated compression stockings in the prevention of venous thromboembolism in low-risk surgical patients

2020 ◽  
pp. 026835552095859
Author(s):  
M Machin ◽  
HC Younan ◽  
S Smith ◽  
Safa Salim ◽  
AH Davies ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Venous Thromboembolism ◽  
Included Study ◽  
Low Risk ◽  
Surgical Patients ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
Compression Stockings ◽  
Vte Prophylaxis ◽  
Eligible Article ◽  
Graduated Compression Stockings

Objectives The aim of this systematic review is to assess the performance of graduated compression stockings (GCS) in comparison to no venous thromboembolism (VTE) prophylaxis in the prevention of hospital-acquired thrombosis in low-risk surgical patients undergoing short-stay procedures. Methods Aligning with PRISMA guidelines, online databases MEDLINE and EMBASE, Cochrane Library® and trial registries were searched. Eligible articles reported the VTE rate in low-risk surgical patients either receiving GCS or no VTE prophylaxis. Results Narrative synthesis was performed on a single eligible article. The included study arm consisted of participants undergoing knee arthroscopy with the use of GCS alone reporting a total of 29 VTE events (4.4%), 16 of which were asymptomatic DVTs (2.4%). Conclusion There is a complete lack of evidence to support the use of GCS in the prevention of HAT for low-risk surgical patients. An adequately powered trial is required to provide level-IA evidence to support this practice.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document