Measuring frailty in younger populations: a rapid review of evidence

ObjectivesFrailty is typically assessed in older populations. Identifying frailty in adults aged under 60 years may also have value, if it supports the delivery of timely care. We sought to identify how frailty is measured in younger populations, including evidence of the impact on patient outcomes and care.DesignA rapid review of primary studies was conducted.Data sourcesFour databases, three sources of grey literature and reference lists of systematic reviews were searched in March 2020.Eligibility criteriaEligible studies measured frailty in populations aged under 60 years using experimental or observational designs, published after 2000 in English.Data extraction and synthesisRecords were screened against review criteria. Study data were extracted with 20% of records checked for accuracy by a second researcher. Data were synthesised using a narrative approach.ResultsWe identified 268 studies that measured frailty in samples that included people aged under 60 years. Of these, 85 studies reported evidence about measure validity. No measures were identified that were designed and validated to identify frailty exclusively in younger groups. However, in populations that included people aged over and under 60 years, cumulative deficit frailty indices, phenotype measures, the FRAIL Scale, the Liver Frailty Index and the Short Physical Performance Battery all demonstrated predictive validity for mortality and/or hospital admission. Evidence of criterion validity was rare. The extent to which measures possess validity across the younger adult age (18–59 years) spectrum was unclear. There was no evidence about the impact of measuring frailty in younger populations on patient outcomes and care.ConclusionsLimited evidence suggests that frailty measures have predictive validity in younger populations. Further research is needed to clarify the validity of measures across the adult age spectrum, and explore the utility of measuring frailty in younger groups.

Download Full-text

Identifying enablers and barriers to referral, uptake and completion of lifestyle modification programmes: a rapid literature review

BMJ Open ◽

10.1136/bmjopen-2020-045094 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 11 (3) ◽

pp. e045094

Author(s):

Yvonne Zurynski ◽

Carolynn Smith ◽

Joyce Siette ◽

Bróna Nic Giolla Easpaig ◽

Mary Simons ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Chronic Disease ◽

Lifestyle Modification ◽

Data Extraction ◽

Empirical Studies ◽

Grey Literature ◽

International Health ◽

Rapid Review ◽

Eligibility Criteria ◽

Relevant Evidence ◽

Literature Reviews

ObjectiveTo identify current, policy-relevant evidence about barriers and enablers associated with referral, uptake and completion of lifestyle modification programmes (LMPs) for secondary prevention of chronic disease in adults.DesignA rapid review, co-designed with policymakers, of peer-reviewed and grey literature using a modified Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses framework.Data sourcesMedline, Embase, Scopus, PsycINFO and CINAHL were searched for relevant studies and literature reviews. Grey literature was identified through Advanced Google searching and targeted searching of international health departments’ and non-government organisations’ websites.Eligibility criteria for selecting studiesDocuments published 2010–2020, from high-income countries, reporting on programmes that included referral of adults with chronic disease to an LMP by a health professional (HP).Data extraction and synthesisData from grey and peer-reviewed literature were extracted by two different reviewers. Extracted data were inductively coded around emergent themes. Regular meetings of the review group ensured consistency of study selection and synthesis.ResultsTwenty-nine documents were included: 14 grey literature, 11 empirical studies and four literature reviews. Key barriers to HPs referring patients included inadequate HP knowledge about LMPs, perceptions of poor effectiveness of LMPs and perceptions that referral to LMPs was not part of their role. Patient barriers to uptake and completion included poor accessibility and lack of support to engage with the LMPs. Enablers to HP referral included training/education, effective interdisciplinary communication and influential programme advocates. Support to engage with LMPs after HP referral, educational resources for family members and easy accessibility were key enablers to patient engagement with LMPs.ConclusionsFactors related to HPs’ ability and willingness to make referrals are important for the implementation of LMPs, and need to be coupled with support for patients to engage with programmes after referral. These factors should be addressed when implementing LMPs to maximise their impact.

Download Full-text

Oxymetazoline for the treatment of rosacea-associated persistent facial erythema. Systematic review and meta-analysis protocol

10.1101/2020.05.25.20111344 ◽

2020 ◽

Author(s):

Geovanna Cárdenas ◽

Francisco Novillo ◽

Shuheng Lai ◽

Héctor Fuenzalida ◽

Francisca Verdugo ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Data Extraction ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Grey Literature ◽

Controlled Trials ◽

Cochrane Central Register ◽

Eligibility Criteria ◽

Facial Erythema ◽

Central Register ◽

The Impact

ABSTRACTObjectiveThe objective of this systematic review is to assess the impact of oxymetazoline in patients with moderate to severe rosacea.Data SourcesWe will conduct a comprehensive search in PubMed/Medline, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), Lilacs, the International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP), ClinicalTrials.gov, US National Institutes of Health (NIH) and grey literature, to identify all relevant randomized controlled trials regardless of language or publication status (published, unpublished, in press and in progress).Eligibility criteria for selecting studies and methodsWe will include randomized trials evaluating the effect of oxymetazoline in patients with moderate to severe rosacea. Two reviewers will independently screen each study for eligibility, data extraction, and assess the risk of bias. We will pool the results using meta-analysis and will apply the GRADE [1] system to assess the certainty of the evidence for each outcome.Ethics and DisseminationNo ethics approval is considered necessary. The results of this review will be widely disseminated via peer-reviewed publications, social networks and traditional media.Protocol and RegistrationThis protocol was adapted to the specificities of the question assessed in this review and registered to PROSPERO with the ID CRD42020150262.

Download Full-text

Deprescribing fall-risk increasing drugs (FRIDs) for the prevention of falls and fall-related complications: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BMJ Open ◽

10.1136/bmjopen-2019-035978 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 11 (2) ◽

pp. e035978

Author(s):

Justin Lee ◽

Ahmed Negm ◽

Ryan Peters ◽

Eric K C Wong ◽

Anne Holbrook

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Fall Risk ◽

Data Extraction ◽

Financial Burden ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Grey Literature ◽

Controlled Trials ◽

Cochrane Central Register ◽

Eligibility Criteria ◽

The Impact

ObjectivesPrevention of falls and fall-related injuries is a priority due to the substantial health and financial burden of falls on patients and healthcare systems. Deprescribing medications known as ‘fall-risk increasing drugs’ (FRIDs) is a common strategy to prevent falls. We conducted a systematic review to determine its efficacy for the prevention of falls and fall-related complications.DesignSystematic review and meta-analysis.Data sourcesMEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, CINAHL and grey literature from inception to 1 August 2020.Eligibility criteria for selecting studiesRandomised controlled trials of FRID withdrawal compared with usual care evaluating the rate of falls, incidence of falls, fall-related injuries, fall-related fractures, fall-related hospitalisations or adverse effects related to the intervention in adults aged ≥65 years.Data extraction and synthesisTwo reviewers independently performed citation screening, data abstraction, risk of bias assessment and certainty of evidence grading. Random-effects models were used for meta-analyses.ResultsFive trials involving 1305 participants met eligibility criteria. Deprescribing FRIDs did not change the rate of falls (rate ratio (RaR) 0.98, 95% CI 0.63 to 1.51), the incidence of falls (risk difference 0.01, 95% CI −0.06 to 0.09; relative risk 1.04, 95% CI 0.86 to 1.26) or rate of fall-related injuries (RaR 0.89, 95% CI 0.57 to 1.39) over a follow-up period of 6–12 months. No trials evaluated the impact of deprescribing FRIDs on fall-related fractures or hospitalisations.ConclusionThere is a paucity of robust high-quality evidence to support or refute that a FRID deprescribing strategy alone is effective at preventing falls or fall-related injury in older adults. Although there may be other reasons to deprescribe FRIDs, our systematic review found that it may result in little to no difference in the rate or risk of falls as a sole falls reduction strategy.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42016040203.

Download Full-text

Misuse of medication in adult substance misuse services: a systematic review protocol

BMJ Open ◽

10.1136/bmjopen-2020-047283 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 11 (6) ◽

pp. e047283

Author(s):

Rosalind Gittins ◽

Louise Missen ◽

Ian Maidment

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Substance Misuse ◽

Data Extraction ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Grey Literature ◽

Opioid Analgesics ◽

Physical And Mental Health ◽

Qualitative Synthesis ◽

Treatment Services ◽

The Impact

IntroductionThere is a growing concern about the misuse of over the counter (OTC) and prescription only medication (POM) because of the impact on physical and mental health, drug interactions, overdoses and drug-related deaths. These medicines include opioid analgesics, anxiolytics such as pregabalin and diazepam and antidepressants. This protocol outlines how a systematic review will be undertaken (during June 2021), which aims to examine the literature on the pattern of OTC and POM misuse among adults who are accessing substance misuse treatment services. It will include the types of medication being taken, prevalence and demographic characteristics of people who access treatment services.Methods and analysisAn electronic search will be conducted on the Cochrane, OVID Medline, Pubmed, Scopus and Web of Science databases as well as grey literature. Two independent reviewers will conduct the initial title and abstract screenings, using predetermined criteria for inclusion and exclusion. If selected for inclusion, full-text data extraction will be conducted using a pilot-tested data extraction form. A third reviewer will resolve disagreements if consensus cannot be reached. Quality and risk of bias assessment will be conducted for all included studies. A qualitative synthesis and summary of the data will be provided. If possible, a meta-analysis with heterogeneity calculation will be conducted; otherwise, Synthesis Without Meta-analysis will be undertaken for quantitative data. The reporting of this protocol follows the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses.Ethics and disseminationEthical approval is not required. Findings will be peer reviewed, published and shared verbally, electronically and in print, with interested clinicians and policymakers.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42020135216.

Download Full-text

Sleep quality in the chronic stage of concussion is associated with poorer recovery: A systematic review

Journal of Concussion ◽

10.1177/20597002211020881 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 5 ◽

pp. 205970022110208

Author(s):

Rebecca Ludwig ◽

Eryen Nelson ◽

Prasanna Vaduvathiriyan ◽

Michael A Rippee ◽

Catherine Siengsukon

Keyword(s):

Physical Activity ◽

Sleep Quality ◽

Sleep Disturbances ◽

Data Extraction ◽

Grey Literature ◽

Chronic Phase ◽

Emotional Symptoms ◽

Eligibility Criteria ◽

Chronic Stage ◽

Prior Review

Background Recovery from a concussion varies based on a multitude of factors. One such factor is sleep disturbances. In our prior review, it was observed that in the acute phase, sleep disturbances are predictive of poor outcomes following a concussion. The literature gap remains on how sleep in the chronic phase of recovery affects outcomes. Objective To examine the association between sleep quality during the chronic stage of concussion and post-concussion outcomes. Literature Survey: Literature searches were performed during 1 July to 1 August 2019 in selected databases along with searching grey literature. Out of the 733 results, 702 references were reviewed after duplicate removal. Methods Three reviewers independently reviewed and consented on abstracts meeting eligibility criteria ( n = 35). The full-text articles were assessed independently by two reviewers. Consensus was achieved, leaving four articles. Relevant data from each study was extracted using a standard data-extraction table. Quality appraisal was conducted to assess potential bias and the quality of articles. Results One study included children (18–60 months) and three studies included adolescents and/or adults (ranging 12–35 years). The association between sleep and cognition (two studies), physical activity (one study), and emotion symptoms (one study) was examined. Sleep quality was associated with decreased cognition and emotional symptoms, but not with meeting physical activity guidelines six months post-concussion injury. Conclusions The heterogeneity in age of participants and outcomes across studies and limited number of included studies made interpretations difficult. Future studies may consider if addressing sleep quality following concussion will improve outcomes.

Download Full-text

Managing overlap of primary study results across systematic reviews: practical considerations for authors of overviews of reviews

BMC Medical Research Methodology ◽

10.1186/s12874-021-01269-y ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 21 (1) ◽

Author(s):

Carole Lunny ◽

Dawid Pieper ◽

Pierre Thabet ◽

Salmaan Kanji

Keyword(s):

Case Studies ◽

Systematic Reviews ◽

Data Extraction ◽

Methodological Approach ◽

Study Data ◽

Primary Study ◽

Eligibility Criteria ◽

Overlapping Data ◽

Study Results ◽

Yield Trends

Abstract Background Overviews often identify and synthesise a large number of systematic reviews on the same topic, which is likely to lead to overlap (i.e. duplication) in primary studies across the reviews. Using a primary study result multiple times in the same analysis overstates its sample size and number of events, falsely leading to greater precision in the analysis. This paper aims to: (a) describe types of overlapping data that arise from the same primary studies reported across multiple reviews, (b) describe methods to identify and explain overlap of primary study data, and (c) present six case studies illustrating different approaches to manage overlap. Methods We first updated the search in PubMed for methods from the MOoR framework relating to overlap of primary studies. One author screened the studies titles and abstracts, and any full-text articles retrieved, extracted methods data relating to overlap of primary studies and mapped it to the overlap methods from the MOoR framework. We also describe six case studies as examples of overviews that use specific overlap methods across the steps in the conduct of an overview. For each case study, we discuss potential methodological implications in terms of limitations, efficiency, usability, and resource use. Results Nine methods studies were found and mapped to the methods identified by the MOoR framework to address overlap. Overlap methods were mapped across four steps in the conduct of an overview – the eligibility criteria step, the data extraction step, the assessment of risk of bias step, and the synthesis step. Our overview case studies used multiple methods to reduce overlap at different steps in the conduct of an overview. Conclusions Our study underlines that there is currently no standard methodological approach to deal with overlap in primary studies across reviews. The level of complexity when dealing with overlap can vary depending on the yield, trends and patterns of the included literature and the scope of the overview question. Choosing a method might be dependent on the number of included reviews and their primary studies. Gaps in evaluation of methods to address overlap were found and further investigation in this area is needed.

Download Full-text

P070: Mixed effectiveness of emergency department diversion strategies: a systematic review

CJEM ◽

10.1017/cem.2017.272 ◽

2017 ◽

Vol 19 (S1) ◽

pp. S102

Author(s):

S.W. Kirkland ◽

A. Soleimani ◽

B.H. Rowe ◽

A.S. Newton

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Health Care ◽

Emergency Department ◽

Health Care Services ◽

Grey Literature ◽

Study Data ◽

Care Utilization ◽

Alternative Source ◽

Increased Risk ◽

The Impact

Introduction: Diverting patients away from the emergency department (ED) has been proposed as a solution for reducing ED overcrowding. The objective of this systematic review is to examine the effectiveness of diversion strategies designed to either direct patients seeking care at an ED to an alternative source of care. Methods: Seven electronic databases and grey literature were searched. Randomized/controlled clinical trials and cohort studies assessing the effectiveness of pre-hospital and ED-based diversion interventions with a comparator were eligible for inclusion. Two reviewers independently screened the studies for relevance, inclusion, and risk of bias. Intervention effects are reported as proportions (%) or relative risks (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI). Methodological and clinical heterogeneity prohibited pooling of study data. Results: From 7,306 citations, ten studies were included. Seven studies evaluated a pre-hospital diversion strategy and three studies evaluated an ED-based diversion strategy. The impact of diversion on subsequent health services was mixed. One study of paramedic practitioners reported increased ED attendance within 7 days (11.9% vs. 9.5%; p=0.049) but no differences in return visits for similar conditions (75.2% vs. 72.1%; p=0.64). The use of paramedic practitioners was associated with an increased risk of subsequent contact with health care services (RR=1.21, 95% CI 1.06, 1.38), while the use of deferred care was associated with no increase in risk of subsequently seeking physician care (RR=1.09, 95% CI 0.23, 5.26). While two studies reported that diverted patients were at significantly reduced risk for hospitalization, two other studies reported no significant differences between diverted or standard care patients. Conclusion: The evidence regarding the impact of pre-hospital and ED-based diversion on ED utilization and subsequent health care utilization is mixed. Additional high-quality comparative effectiveness studies of diversion strategies are required prior to widespread implementation.

Download Full-text

Scoping review of mental health in prisons through the COVID-19 pandemic

BMJ Open ◽

10.1136/bmjopen-2020-046547 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 11 (5) ◽

pp. e046547

Author(s):

Luke Johnson ◽

Kerry Gutridge ◽

Julie Parkes ◽

Anjana Roy ◽

Emma Plugge

Keyword(s):

Mental Health ◽

Scoping Review ◽

Grey Literature ◽

Well Being ◽

Health Impact ◽

Poor Quality ◽

Eligibility Criteria ◽

Prison Staff ◽

The Impact

ObjectiveTo examine the extent, nature and quality of literature on the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the mental health of imprisoned people and prison staff.DesignScoping review.Data sourcesPubMed, Embase, CINAHL, Global Health, Cochrane, PsycINFO, PsychExtra, Web of Science and Scopus were searched for any paper from 2019 onwards that focused on the mental health impact of COVID-19 on imprisoned people and prison staff. A grey literature search focused on international and government sources and professional bodies representing healthcare, public health and prison staff was also performed. We also performed hand searching of the reference lists of included studies.Eligibility criteria for selection of studiesAll papers, regardless of study design, were included if they examined the mental health of imprisoned people or prison staff specifically during the COVID-19 pandemic. Imprisoned people could be of any age and from any countries. All languages were included. Two independent reviewers quality assessed appropriate papers.ResultsOf 647 articles found, 83 were eligible for inclusion, the majority (58%) of which were opinion pieces. The articles focused on the challenges to prisoner mental health. Fear of COVID-19, the impact of isolation, discontinuation of prison visits and reduced mental health services were all likely to have an adverse effect on the mental well-being of imprisoned people. The limited research and poor quality of articles included mean that the findings are not conclusive. However, they suggest a significant adverse impact on the mental health and well-being of those who live and work in prisons.ConclusionsIt is key to address the mental health impacts of the pandemic on people who live and work in prisons. These findings are discussed in terms of implications for getting the balance between infection control imperatives and the fundamental human rights of prison populations.

Download Full-text

Measuring gender-based violence risk mitigation in humanitarian settings: results from a comprehensive desk review and systematic mapping

BMJ Open ◽

10.1136/bmjopen-2021-050887 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 11 (9) ◽

pp. e050887

Author(s):

Jocelyn TD Kelly ◽

Emily Ausubel ◽

Emma Kenny ◽

Meredith Blake ◽

Christine Heckman ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Risk Mitigation ◽

Grey Literature ◽

Monitoring And Evaluation ◽

Sufficient Information ◽

Gender Based Violence ◽

Systematic Mapping ◽

Eligibility Criteria ◽

Humanitarian Response ◽

Gender Based ◽

The Impact

ObjectivesTo systematically document measurement approaches used in the monitoring and evaluation of gender-based violence (GBV) risk mitigation activities, categorise the types of available literature produced by sector, identify existing tools and measures and identify knowledge gaps within the humanitarian sector.DesignSystematic mapping and in-depth review.Data sources: Pubmed, Global Health, PsychInfo, ReliefWeb, OpenGrey (grey literature), Google Scholar, Web of Science (Social Science Index)Eligibility criteria: a structured search strategy was systematically applied to 17 databases as well as registers, websites and other resources to identify materials published between 1 January 2005 and 15 May 2019.Data extraction and synthesis: Those resources that met the inclusion criteria underwent a comprehensive full-text review. A detailed matrix was developed and key data from each resource were extracted to allow for the assessment of patterns in thematic areas.ResultsA total of 2108 documents were screened. Overall, 145 documents and 112 tools were reviewed, representing 10 different humanitarian sectors. While numerous resources exist, many lack sufficient information on how to monitor outputs or outcomes of GBV risk mitigation activities. There is also limited guidance on how to integrate the measurement of GBV risk mitigation into existing monitoring and evaluation frameworks. Those reports that aimed to measure GBV risk mitigation activities mostly employed qualitative methods and few measured the impact of a GBV risk mitigation with robust research designs.ConclusionsRecent efforts to adapt humanitarian response to COVID-19 have highlighted new and existing challenges for GBV risk mitigation. There is a significant gap in the evidence base around the effectiveness of GBV risk mitigation across all sectors. Understanding and strengthening measurement approaches in GBV risk mitigation remains a critical task for humanitarian response.

Download Full-text

Safety and Effectiveness of Favipiravir for Novel Coronavirus (COVID-19): A Rapid Review of Available Evidence

Health Technology Assessment in Action ◽

10.18502/htaa.v4i1.5862 ◽

2021 ◽

Author(s):

Mohammadreza Mobinizadeh ◽

Morteza Arab-Zozani

Keyword(s):

Clinical Trial ◽

Clinical Trials ◽

Therapeutic Potential ◽

Data Extraction ◽

Rapid Review ◽

Eligibility Criteria ◽

Clinical Trial Registration ◽

Registration System ◽

Novel Coronavirus ◽

First Time

Context: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) appeared for the first time in December 2019 in Wuhan, China. Due to the lack of unified and integrated evidence for Favipiravir, this study was conducted to rapidly review the existing evidence to help evidence-based decision-making on the therapeutic potential of this drug in the treatment of COVID-19 patients. Evidence Acquisition: This study is a rapid Health Technology Assessment (HTA). By searching pertinent databases, the research team collected relevant articles and tried to create a policy guide through a thematic approach. This rapid review was done in four steps: (1) Searching for evidence through databases; (2) screening the evidence considering eligibility criteria; (3) data extraction; and (4) analyzing the data through thematic analysis. Results: After applying the inclusion criteria, four studies were finally found, including three review studies and a clinical trial that was temporarily removed by its publisher from the journal’s website. After searching the sources mentioned in the articles, two ongoing clinical trials were found in China. Also, by searching the clinical trial website, www.clinicaltrials.gov, five clinical trials were found in the search. The result of the search in the clinical trial registration system in Iran showed a study that is in the process of patient recruitment. A limited number of other articles were found, mostly in the form of reflections from physicians or researchers and letters to editors who have predicted the drug’s performance on SARS-CoV-2, which needs further clinical study to be approved. Conclusions: With the available evidence, it is not possible to make a definite conclusion about the safety and efficacy of Favipiravir in the treatment of patients with COVID-19.

Download Full-text