Effect of earplugs and eye masks on the sleep quality of intensive care unit patients: A systematic review and meta‐analysis

IntroductionBoth physical and mental disorders may be exacerbated in patients with COVID-19 due to the experience of receiving intensive care; undergoing prolonged mechanical ventilation, sedation, proning and paralysis. Pulmonary rehabilitation is aimed to improve dyspnoea, relieve anxiety and depression, reduce the incidence of related complications, as well as prevent and improve dysfunction. However, the impact of respiratory rehabilitation on discharged patients with COVID-19 is currently unclear, especially on patients who have been mechanically ventilated over 24 hours. Therefore, we aim to investigate the efficacy of respiratory rehabilitation programmes, initiated after discharge from the intensive care unit, on the physical and mental health and health-related quality of life in critical patients with COVID-19.Methods and analysisWe have registered the protocol on PROSPERO and in the process of drafting it, we strictly followed the checklist of Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Potocols. We will search the PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, WanFang, VIP information databases and Chinese Biomedical Literature Database. Additionally, ongoing trials in the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, ClinicalTrials.gov and ISRCTN registry will be searched as well. Studies in English or Chinese and from any country will be accepted regardless of study design. Two review authors will independently extract data and assess the quality of included studies. Continuous data are described as standard mean differences (SMDs) with 95% CIs. Dichotomous data from randomised controlled trials are described as risk ratio(RR) with 95% CIs; otherwise, it is described as odds ratio(OR) with 95% CIs. I2 and the Cochrane’s Q statistic will be used to conduct heterogeneity assessment. The quality of evidence of main outcomes will be evaluated according to the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation(GRADE) criteria. When included studies are sufficient, we will conduct subgroup analysis and sensitivity analysis; the publication bias will be statistically analysed using a funnel plot analysis and Egger’s test.Ethics and disseminationOur review, planning to include published studies, does not need the request to the ethical committee. The final results of this review will be published in a peer-reviewed journal after completion.Patient and public involvementNo patient involved.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42020186791.

Download Full-text

The impact of intensive care unit diaries on patients’ and relatives’ outcomes: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Critical Care ◽

10.1186/s13054-019-2678-0 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 23 (1) ◽

Cited By ~ 6

Author(s):

Bruna Brandao Barreto ◽

Mariana Luz ◽

Marcos Nogueira de Oliveira Rios ◽

Antonio Alberto Lopes ◽

Dimitri Gusmao-Flores

Keyword(s):

Quality Of Life ◽

Systematic Review ◽

Intensive Care Unit ◽

Intensive Care ◽

Psychiatric Disorders ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Risk Of Bias ◽

The Impact ◽

Icu Diary

Abstract Background Memory gaps in intensive care unit (ICU) survivors are associated with psychiatric disorders. The ICU diaries improve the patient’s factual memory of the ICU, but it is not clear if they reduce the incidence of psychiatric disorders in patients and relatives after hospital discharge. The aim of this study is to evaluate the literature on the effect of ICU diaries for patients admitted in ICU and their relatives. Methods Two authors independently searched the online databases PubMed, OVID, Embase, EBSCO host, and PsycINFO from inception to July 2019. Studies were included if the intervention group (ICU diary) was compared with a group with no diaries and the sample was comprised patients ≥ 18 years old admitted in the ICU for more than 24 h and their relatives. Randomized clinical trials, observational studies, letter with original data, and abstracts were included, irrespective of the language. The search was not limited by any specific outcome. Review articles, commentaries, editorials, and studies without a control group were excluded. Structured tools were used to assess the methodological quality (“Risk Of Bias In Non-randomized Studies of Interventions (ROBINS-I)” for cohort studies and the “Cochrane Risk of Bias tool” for included RCTs and before/after studies). A random-effects model was employed considering the anticipated variability between the studies. Results Seven hundred eighty-five titles were identified for screening. Two additional studies were selected after a reference search, and after a full-text review, a total of 12 studies were included. When pooling the results, ICU diary was associated with lower risk of depression (RR 0.41, 95% CI 0.23–0.75) and better quality of life (10.3 points higher in SF-36 general health score, 95% CI 0.79–19.8), without a decrease in anxiety or post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). For the relatives receiving an ICU diary, there was no difference in the incidence of PTSD, anxiety, or depression. Conclusion and relevance This systematic review and meta-analysis supports the use of ICU diaries to reduce the risk of depression and preserve the quality of life of patients after ICU admission. ICU diaries do not seem to have any beneficial effect on the relatives of the patients. Trial registration PROSPERO, CRD42019136639

Download Full-text

The Outcome of Hydroxychloroquine in Patients Treated for COVID-19: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Canadian Respiratory Journal ◽

10.1155/2020/4312519 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 2020 ◽

pp. 1-16

Author(s):

Teshale Ayele Mega ◽

Temesgen Mulugeta Feyissa ◽

Dula Dessalegn Bosho ◽

Kabaye Kumela Goro ◽

Getandale Zeleke Negera

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Intensive Care Unit ◽

Intensive Care ◽

Adverse Effects ◽

Disease Progression ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Control Group ◽

Qtc Prolongation ◽

Absolute Increase

Background. The pandemic of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19) caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) resulted in an unprecedented public health challenge worldwide. Despite urgent and extensive global efforts, the existing evidence is inconclusive regarding the medications used for the treatment of COVID-19. Purpose. To generate an up-to-date evidence for the clinical safety and efficacy of hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) with or without azithromycin (AZ) among patients treated for COVID-19. Data Source. PubMed, Cochrane CENTRAL, LITCOVID, Web of Science, SCOPUS, BioRxiv, Embase, MedRxiv, and Wiley online library were searched from 2019/12/30 to 2020/05/23. Study Selection. Three investigators assessed the quality of the studies. Data Extraction. Data about study characteristics, effect estimates, and the quality of the studies were extracted by two independent reviewers and cross-checked by the third reviewer. Data Synthesis. The data of 6,782 (HCQ group, 3623; HCQ + AZ group, 1,020; control group, 2139) participants were included. HCQ was compared with standard care for virologic efficacy, disease progression, mortality, and adverse effects. HCQ was also compared with HCQ + AZ for QTc prolongation, admission to the intensive care unit, and mortality. The study found HCQ did not alter the rate of virologic cure (OR = 0.78; 95% CI: 0.39–1.56) and the risk of mortality (OR = 1.26; 95% CI: 0.66–2.39). The pooled prevalence for mortality was 5.8% (95% CI: 0.9%–10.8%). Moreover, HCQ did not impact disease progression (OR = 0.9; 95% CI: 0.36–2.29) but resulted in a higher risk of adverse effects (OR = 2.35; 95% CI: 1.15–4.8). HCQ was also compared against HCQ + AZ, and no difference was observed in QTc prolongation above 500 ms (OR = 1.11; 95% CI: 0.54–2.28), admission to the intensive care unit (OR = 0.92; 95% CI: 0.52–1.63), and mortality (OR = 0.88; 95% CI: 0.55–1.43). However, in the analysis of single-arm studies, about 11.2% (95% CI: 7.0%–15.5%) of patients have developed an absolute increase of QTc greater than 500 ms, and 4.1% (95% CI: 1.1%–7.1%) of patients discontinued their medication. Conclusion. This meta-analysis and systematic review, which included a limited number of poorly designed studies of patients with COVID-19, revealed HCQ is intolerable, unsafe, and not efficacious. Similarly, HCQ + AZ combination was not different from HCQ alone in curbing mortality and ICU admission.

Download Full-text

Faculty Opinions recommendation of The confusion assessment method for the intensive care unit (CAM-ICU) and intensive care delirium screening checklist (ICDSC) for the diagnosis of delirium: a systematic review and meta-analysis of clinical studies.

Faculty Opinions – Post-Publication Peer Review of the Biomedical Literature ◽

10.3410/f.717953729.793459343 ◽

2012 ◽

Author(s):

Mark Wainwright

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Intensive Care Unit ◽

Intensive Care ◽

Clinical Studies ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Confusion Assessment Method ◽

Assessment Method ◽

Confusion Assessment

Download Full-text

Faculty Opinions recommendation of Safety of Patient Mobilization and Rehabilitation in the Intensive Care Unit. Systematic Review with Meta-Analysis.

Faculty Opinions – Post-Publication Peer Review of the Biomedical Literature ◽

10.3410/f.727337857.793558842 ◽

2019 ◽

Author(s):

Nicola Latronico

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Intensive Care Unit ◽

Intensive Care ◽

Meta Analysis

Download Full-text

Faculty Opinions recommendation of Risk factors for intensive care unit-acquired weakness: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Faculty Opinions – Post-Publication Peer Review of the Biomedical Literature ◽

10.3410/f.733323784.793558835 ◽

2019 ◽

Author(s):

Nicola Latronico

Keyword(s):

Risk Factors ◽

Systematic Review ◽

Intensive Care Unit ◽

Intensive Care ◽

Meta Analysis

Download Full-text

Safety and efficacy of routine diagnostic test reduction interventions in patients admitted to the intensive care unit: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Anaesthesia and Intensive Care ◽

10.1177/0310057x20962113 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 49 (1) ◽

pp. 23-34

Author(s):

Katherine P Hooper ◽

Matthew H Anstey ◽

Edward Litton

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Intensive Care Unit ◽

Intensive Care ◽

Hospital Mortality ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Diagnostic Testing ◽

Intervention Group ◽

Cochrane Central Register ◽

Safety And Efficacy ◽

Significant Difference

Reducing unnecessary routine diagnostic testing has been identified as a strategy to curb wasteful healthcare. However, the safety and efficacy of targeted diagnostic testing strategies are uncertain. The aim of this study was to systematically review interventions designed to reduce pathology and chest radiograph testing in patients admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU). A predetermined protocol and search strategy included OVID MEDLINE, OVID EMBASE and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials from inception until 20 November 2019. Eligible publications included interventional studies of patients admitted to an ICU. There were no language restrictions. The primary outcomes were in-hospital mortality and test reduction. Key secondary outcomes included ICU mortality, length of stay, costs and adverse events. This systematic review analysed 26 studies (with more than 44,00 patients) reporting an intervention to reduce one or more diagnostic tests. No studies were at low risk of bias. In-hospital mortality, reported in seven studies, was not significantly different in the post-implementation group (829 of 9815 patients, 8.4%) compared with the pre-intervention group (1007 of 9848 patients, 10.2%), (relative risk 0.89, 95% confidence intervals 0.79 to 1.01, P = 0.06, I2 39%). Of the 18 studies reporting a difference in testing rates, all reported a decrease associated with targeted testing (range 6%–72%), with 14 (82%) studies reporting >20% reduction in one or more tests. Studies of ICU targeted test interventions are generally of low quality. The majority report substantial decreases in testing without evidence of a significant difference in hospital mortality.

Download Full-text