High versus standard dose caffeine for apnoea: a systematic review

2018 ◽  
Vol 103 (6) ◽  
pp. F523-F529 ◽  
Author(s):  
Roos Vliegenthart ◽  
Martijn Miedema ◽  
Gerard J Hutten ◽  
Anton H van Kaam ◽  
Wes Onland
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Standard Dose ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Neurodevelopmental Outcome ◽  
Optimal Dose ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Level Of Evidence ◽  
Assessment Development ◽  
Postmenstrual Age ◽  
Randomised Controlled

BackgroundPlacebo-controlled trials have shown that caffeine is highly effective in treating apnoea of prematurity and reduces the risk of bronchopulmonary dysplasia (BPD) and neurodevelopmental impairment (NDI).ObjectiveTo identify, appraise and summarise studies investigating the modulating effect of different caffeine dosages.MethodsA systematic review identified all randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing a high versus a standard caffeine treatment regimen in infants with a gestational age <32 weeks, by searching the main electronic databases and abstracts of the Pediatric Academic Societies. Studies comparing caffeine to placebo or theophylline only were excluded. Primary outcomes were BPD and mortality at 36 weeks postmenstrual age. Secondary key-outcome was neurodevelopmental outcome at 12 and 24 months corrected age. Meta-analysis was performed using RevMan 5.3.ResultsSix RCTs including 620 infants were identified. Meta-analysis showed a significant decrease in BPD, the combined outcome BPD or mortality, and failure to extubate in infants allocated to a higher caffeine dose. No differences were found in mortality alone and NDI. The quality of the outcome measures were deemed low to very low according to the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation guidelines.ConclusionsAlthough this review suggests that administering a higher dose of caffeine might enhance its beneficial effect on death or BPD, firm recommendations on the optimal caffeine dose cannot be given due to the low level of evidence. A large RCT is urgently needed to confirm or refute these findings and determine the optimal dose of caffeine.

scholarly journals Efficacy of moisturizers in paediatric atopic dermatitis: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials

2021 ◽  
Vol 0 ◽  
pp. 1-10
Author(s):  
Chawan Kritsanaviparkporn ◽  
Phoomphut Sangaphunchai ◽  
Arucha Treesirichod
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Atopic Dermatitis ◽  
Confidence Interval ◽  
Risk Ratio ◽  
Randomised Controlled Trials ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Young Patients ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Assessment Development ◽  
Randomised Controlled

Background: Topical moisturizer is recommended for atopic dermatitis. Aims: The aim of the study was to investigate the knowledge gap regarding the efficacy of moisturizer in young patients. Methods: A systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted on randomised controlled trials comparing participant’s ≤15 years with atopic dermatitis, receiving either topical moisturizer or no moisturizer treatment. Certainty of evidence was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) framework. Results: Six trials were included (intervention n= 436; control n= 312). Moisturizer use extended time to flare by 13.52 days (95% confidence interval 0.05–26.99, I2 88%). Greater reduction in risk of relapse was observed during the first month of latency (pooled risk ratio 0.47, 95% confidence interval 0.31–0.72, I2 28%) compared to the second and third months (pooled risk ratio 0.65, 95% confidence interval 0.47–0.91, I2 35% and pooled risk ratio 0.63, 95% confidence interval 0.47–0.83, I2 33%, respectively).Treated patients were 2.68 times more likely to experience a three–six months remission (95% confidence interval1.18–6.09, I2 56%). Moisturizer minimally improved disease severity and quality of life. Limitations: There is a dire need to conduct randomised controlled trialswith more robust and standardised designs. Conclusion: Moisturizer benefits young patients with atopic dermatitis. However, more research is needed to better estimate its efficacy.

scholarly journals 5-HT3 receptor antagonists for the prevention of perioperative shivering undergoing spinal anaesthesia: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials

BMJ Open ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (10) ◽  
pp. e038293
Author(s):  
Qi-Hong Shen ◽  
Hui-Fang Li ◽  
Xuyan Zhou ◽  
Yaping Lu ◽  
Xiao-Zong Yuan
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Spinal Anaesthesia ◽  
Randomised Controlled Trials ◽  
Primary Outcome ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Receptor Antagonists ◽  
Assessment Development ◽  
Different Types ◽  
Randomised Controlled

ObjectivePerioperative shivering (POS) is a common complication in patients undergoing spinal anaesthesia. The present study investigated the efficacy of 5-HT3 receptor antagonists in preventing POS following spinal anaesthesia.DesignSystematic review and meta-analysis.Data sourcesPubmed, Embase, the Web of Science and Cochrane Library were searched from database establishment on 31 July 2019.Eligibility criteriaRandomised controlled trials that reported the effects of 5-HT3 receptor antagonists in the prevention of POS in patients after spinal anaesthesia.Data extraction and synthesisTwo reviewers independently extracted data. The primary outcome of the present study was the incidence of POS. The risk of bias for the included studies was assessed according to the Cochrane Handbook. The quality of primary outcome was evaluated by Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation. Trial sequential analysis for the primary outcome was performed to reduce the type 1 error caused by repeated meta-analysis and the required information size was calculated.ResultsA total of 13 randomised controlled trials consisting of 1139 patients were included. The overall incidence of POS was significantly lower in the 5-HT3 receptor antagonists group (risk ratio 0.31; 95% CI 0.26 to 0.38; p<0.01; I2=0%). Subgroup analysis for different types of 5-HT3 receptor antagonists and timing of administration produced similar results. Also, patients had a lower incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting after administrating 5-HT3 receptor antagonists. No statistically significant differences in drug-related adverse effects were observed. Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation revealed a high level of evidence. The cumulative z-curve crossed the trial sequential monitoring boundary.ConclusionsThe present study revealed that prophylactic 5-HT3 receptor antagonists were an effective measure for reducing the incidence of POS in patients after spinal anaesthesia. However, further studies investigating the different types of surgeries are required.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42019148191.

Acupuncture in the Emergency Department: A Systematic Review of Randomised Controlled Trials

2018 ◽  
Vol 36 (3) ◽  
pp. 183-192 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kwan Leung Chia ◽  
Rex Pui Kin Lam ◽  
Chung Kwun Lam ◽  
Sik Hon Tsui
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Emergency Department ◽  
Randomised Controlled Trials ◽  
Sham Acupuncture ◽  
Risk Of Bias ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Level Of Evidence ◽  
Assessment Development ◽  
Bibliographic Search ◽  
Randomised Controlled

Introduction A comprehensive review of both English and Chinese language literature to inform acupuncture practice in emergency department (ED) settings is lacking. Accordingly, we aimed to conduct a systematic review of English and Chinese randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of acupuncture use in the ED. Methods Four English databases (Embase, PubMed, AMED and CENTRAL) and two Chinese databases (CNKI and Wanfang) were systematically searched using the keywords ‘acupuncture’ and ‘emergency department’, followed by a bibliographic search of references. The data were extracted and assessed by two independent authors. RCTs were selected based on pre-defined criteria. Data were extracted and a risk of bias assessment was performed using the Cochrane risk of bias tool. The quality of evidence was rated using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach. Results In total, 1461 articles were screened and six RCTs involving 651 patients were included. For various acute pain conditions, acupuncture was superior to sham acupuncture, more effective than intravenous morphine, comparable to conventional ED treatment, and superior to standard ED care alone when used on an adjuvant basis; however, the overall level of evidence was low. Studies that applied acupuncture in hypertension and cardiac arrest were deemed to be at high risk of bias, and the level of evidence for these outcomes was very low. No major adverse events were reported in the included studies. Conclusion There is a lack of high-quality evidence to support the use of acupuncture in the ED. Multicentre RCTs with rigorous designs are warranted.

Do sleep interventions change sleep duration in children aged 0-5 years? A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials

2021 ◽  
pp. 101498
Author(s):  
LouiseJ. Fangupo ◽  
Jillian J. Haszard ◽  
Andrew N. Reynolds ◽  
Albany W. Lucas ◽  
Deborah R. McIntosh ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Sleep Duration ◽  
Randomised Controlled Trials ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Randomised Controlled

scholarly journals Comparative efficacy and safety of interventions for treating head lice: a protocol for systematic review and network meta-analysis

2021 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. e001129
Author(s):  
Bill Stevenson ◽  
Wubshet Tesfaye ◽  
Julia Christenson ◽  
Cynthia Mathew ◽  
Solomon Abrha ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Randomised Controlled Trials ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Grey Literature ◽  
Risk Of Bias ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Head Lice ◽  
Efficacy And Safety ◽  
Randomised Controlled ◽  
Meta Analyses

BackgroundHead lice infestation is a major public health problem around the globe. Its treatment is challenging due to product failures resulting from rapidly emerging resistance to existing treatments, incorrect treatment applications and misdiagnosis. Various head lice treatments with different mechanism of action have been developed and explored over the years, with limited report on systematic assessments of their efficacy and safety. This work aims to present a robust evidence summarising the interventions used in head lice.MethodThis is a systematic review and network meta-analysis which will be reported in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses statement for network meta-analyses. Selected databases, including PubMed, Embase, MEDLINE, Web of Science, CINAHL and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials will be systematically searched for randomised controlled trials exploring head lice treatments. Searches will be limited to trials published in English from database inception till 2021. Grey literature will be identified through Open Grey, AHRQ, Grey Literature Report, Grey Matters, ClinicalTrials.gov, WHO International Clinical Trials Registry and International Standard Randomised Controlled Trials Number registry. Additional studies will be sought from reference lists of included studies. Study screening, selection, data extraction and assessment of methodological quality will be undertaken by two independent reviewers, with disagreements resolved via a third reviewer. The primary outcome measure is the relative risk of cure at 7 and 14 days postinitial treatment. Secondary outcome measures may include adverse drug events, ovicidal activity, treatment compliance and acceptability, and reinfestation. Information from direct and indirect evidence will be used to generate the effect sizes (relative risk) to compare the efficacy and safety of individual head lice treatments against a common comparator (placebo and/or permethrin). Risk of bias assessment will be undertaken by two independent reviewers using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool and the certainty of evidence assessed using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations guideline for network meta-analysis. All quantitative analyses will be conducted using STATA V.16.DiscussionThe evidence generated from this systematic review and meta-analysis is intended for use in evidence-driven treatment of head lice infestations and will be instrumental in informing health professionals, public health practitioners and policy-makers.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42017073375.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document