scholarly journals The presence of fungal and parasitic infections in substances of human origin and their transmission via transfusions and transplantations: A protocol of two systematic reviews (Preprint)

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Petros C. Dinas ◽  
Dragoslav Domanovic ◽  
Yiannis Koutedakis ◽  
Christos Hadjichristodoulou ◽  
Ioannis Stefanidis ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Reviews ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Scientific Evidence ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
Parasitic Infections ◽  
Parasitic Diseases ◽  
Human Origin ◽  
Data Synthesis ◽  
Review Team ◽  
Scientific Organisation

BACKGROUND The European Union Directives stipulate mandatory tests for the presence of some infections in donors or donations of substances of human origin (SoHO). In some circumstances, other pathogens including fungi and parasites may also pose a threat to the microbial safety of SoHO. OBJECTIVE The aim of the two systematic reviews is to identify, collect and evaluate scientific evidence for the presence of a) fungal and b) parasitic infections in donors and donations of SoHO, and their transmission via transfusion and transplantation. METHODS One algorithmic searching for fungal and one for parasitic diseases were applied in six scientific databases [PubMed; EMBASE; Web of Science; Scopus; Cochrane library (trials); CINAHL]. In addition, manual and algorithmic searches employed in 15 grey literature databases and 22 scientific organisation websites. Selection criteria for eligibility includes peer-reviewed publications and/or peer reviewed abstract publications from conference proceedings, which have examined prevalence/incidence, odds/risk ratios, risk difference of the presence of a) fungal and b) parasitic infections transmission in SoHO donor or donation and their transmission to recipients. Only studies that scrutinised donors and donated human blood, blood components, tissues, cells and organs, were considered as eligible. Data extraction from the eligible publications will be performed independently by two review team members. Data synthesis will include a qualitative description for the studies that will not provide evidence suitable for a meta-analysis and a random or fixed-effect meta-analysis model for quantitative data synthesis. RESULTS This is an ongoing study and presents a protocol of two systematic reviews to identify, collect and evaluate scientific evidence for the presence of a) fungal and b) parasitic infections in donors and donations of SoHO, and their transmission via transfusion and transplantation. CONCLUSIONS These systematic reviews will provide a basis for the development of a risk assessment of fungal and parasitic diseases transmission via SoHO. CLINICALTRIAL The systematic reviews have been prospectively registered with the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO): CRD42020160090; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=160090 CRD42020160110; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=160110

scholarly journals A systematic review of pharmacist-led audit and feedback interventions to influence prescribing behaviour in general practice settings

2021 ◽  
Vol 29 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. i34-i35
Author(s):  
M Carter ◽  
N Abutheraa ◽  
N Ivers ◽  
J Grimshaw ◽  
S Chapman ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
General Practice ◽  
Systematic Reviews ◽  
Health Professionals ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Cochrane Review ◽  
Audit And Feedback ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
Randomised Trials ◽  
Prescribing Behaviour ◽  
Meta Analyses

Abstract Introduction Audit and Feedback (A&F) involves measuring data about practice, comparing it with clinical guidelines, professional standards or peer performance, and then feeding back the data to individuals/groups of health professionals to encourage change in practice (if required). A 2012 Cochrane review (1) found A&F was effective in changing health professionals’ behaviour and suggested that the person who delivers the A&F intervention influences its effect. Increasingly, pharmacists work in general practice and often have responsibility for medication review and repeat prescriptions. The effectiveness of pharmacist-led A&F in influencing prescribing behaviour is uncertain. Aim This secondary analysis from an ongoing update of the original Cochrane review aims to identify and describe pharmacist-led A&F interventions and evaluate their impact on prescribing behaviour in general practice compared with no intervention. Methods This sub-review is registered with PROSPERO: CRD42020194355 and complies with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines (2). For the updated Cochrane review, the Cochrane Effective Practice and Organization of Care Group searched MEDLINE (1946 to present), EMBASE, CINAHL and Cochrane Library (March 2019) to identify randomised trials featuring A&F interventions. For this sub-review, authors screened titles and abstracts (May 2020) to identify trials involving pharmacist-led A&F interventions in primary care, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias (RoB) in eligible studies. Review results are summarised descriptively. Heterogeneity will be assessed and a random-effects meta-analysis is planned. Publication bias for selected outcomes and the certainty of the body of evidence will be evaluated and presented. Sub-group analyses will be conducted. Results Titles and abstracts of 295 studies identified for inclusion in the Cochrane A&F review update were screened. Eleven studies (all cluster-randomised trials) conducted in 9 countries (Denmark, Italy, Netherlands, Norway, Republic of Ireland, UK, Australia, Malaysia, USA) were identified for inclusion (Figure 1). Six studies had low RoB, two had high risk due to dissimilarities between trial arms at baseline and/or insufficient detail about randomisation, and three studies had unclear RoB. Studies examined the effect of A&F on prescribing for specific conditions (e.g. hypertension), medications (e.g. antibiotics), populations (e.g. patients >70), and prescribing errors (e.g. inappropriate dose). The pharmacist delivering A&F was a colleague of intervention participants in five studies. Pharmacists’ levels of skill and experience varied; seven studies reported details of pharmacist training undertaken for trial purposes. A&F interventions in nine studies demonstrated changes in prescribing, including reductions in errors or inappropriate prescribing according to the study aims and smaller increases in unwanted prescribing compared with the control group. Data analyses are ongoing (results will be available for the conference). Conclusion The preliminary results demonstrate the effectiveness of pharmacist-led A&F interventions in different countries and health systems with influencing prescribing practice to align more closely with guidance. Studies measured different prescribing behaviours; meta-analysis is unlikely to include all 11 studies. Further detailed analysis including feedback format/content/frequency and pharmacist skill level/experience, work-base (external/internal to recipients), will examine the impact of specific features on intervention effectiveness. References 1. Ivers N, Jamtvedt G, Flottorp S, Young JM, Odgaard-Jensen J, French SD, et al. Audit and feedback: effects on professional practice and healthcare outcomes. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2012(6):CD000259. 2. Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman DG, Group P. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. PLoS Med. 2009;6(7):e1000097.

scholarly journals Intestinal parasitic infections and associated factors among pregnant women in Ethiopia: a systematic review and meta-analysis

2021 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Zelalem Animaw ◽  
Addisu Melese ◽  
Habtamu Demelash ◽  
Girma Seyoum ◽  
Abiy Abebe
Keyword(s):  
Pregnant Women ◽  
Associated Factors ◽  
Intestinal Parasites ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Morbidity And Mortality ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
Stool Examination ◽  
Parasitic Infections ◽  
Intestinal Parasitic Infections ◽  
Pooled Prevalence

Abstract Background Intestinal parasitic infections (IPIs) are public health problems widely distributed in the world and cause significant morbidity and mortality; many of which occur among women of reproductive age. IPIs caused by helminthes and protozoan parasites are common among pregnant women. Data on the national pooled prevalence of intestinal parasites and associated factors during pregnancy is not documented well in Ethiopia. This review aims at summarizing evidences on the burden of IPIs and associated factors among pregnant women in Ethiopia. Methods Published and unpublished studies were thoroughly searched at MEDLINE/PubMed, EMBASE, Google Scholar, CINAHL, Cochrane library and Science Direct. In addition, repositories of Addis Ababa, Gondar and Jimma Universities were searched. Eligible studies were selected following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) guideline. The pooled prevalence of intestinal parasites and summary odds ratios (ORs) were determined with 95 % confidence intervals (CI). Sub-groups analyses were done based on study region, types of parasites, methods of stool examination and study setting. The statistical analyses were performed using STATA version 14.0 software. Results Among 168 retrieved studies, 31 studies with a total population of 12,118 pregnant women were included. The estimated pooled prevalence of IPIs among pregnant women in Ethiopia was 27.32 % (95 % CI: 20.61, 33.87 %). In the subgroup analysis, Oromia and Amhara regions had the highest prevalence with a 29.78 % (95 % CI: 15.97, 43.60) and 29.63 % (95 % CI: 15.37, 43.89); respectively. In addition, studies conducted in the community showed higher prevalence than institution based studies (49.93 % Vs 24.84 %; respectively). The most prevalent type of intestinal parasite identified were Hookworm followed by Ascaris lumbricoides with a pooled prevalence of 11.2 and 10.34 %, respectively. In our analysis; residence, being bare footed, lack of hand washing habit and eating uncooked/raw vegetables were significantly associated with IPIs among pregnant women in Ethiopia. Conclusions Prevalence of IPIs during pregnancy is relatively high in Ethiopia. Poor hygienic practices were identified as risk factors. Based on our finding, targeted preventive measures shall be considered so as to prevent morbidity and mortality due to IPIs.

scholarly journals Methodological review to develop a list of bias items used to assess reviews incorporating network meta-analysis: protocol and rationale

BMJ Open ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (6) ◽  
pp. e045987
Author(s):  
Carole Lunny ◽  
Andrea C Tricco ◽  
Areti-Angeliki Veroniki ◽  
Sofia Dias ◽  
Brian Hutton ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Reviews ◽  
Methodological Quality ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Healthcare Providers ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
Methodological Review ◽  
Multiple Treatment ◽  
Full Study ◽  
Multiple Treatments ◽  
Treatment Comparisons

IntroductionSystematic reviews with network meta-analysis (NMA; ie, multiple treatment comparisons, indirect comparisons) have gained popularity and grown in number due to their ability to provide comparative effectiveness of multiple treatments for the same condition. The methodological review aims to develop a list of items relating to biases in reviews with NMA. Such a list will inform a new tool to assess the risk of bias in NMAs, and potentially other reporting or quality checklists for NMAs which are being updated.Methods and analysisWe will include articles that present items related to bias, reporting or methodological quality, articles assessing the methodological quality of reviews with NMA, or papers presenting methods for NMAs. We will search Ovid MEDLINE, the Cochrane library and difficult to locate/unpublished literature. Once all items have been extracted, we will combine conceptually similar items, classifying them as referring to bias or to other aspects of quality (eg, reporting). When relevant, reporting items will be reworded into items related to bias in NMA review conclusions, and then reworded as signalling questions.Ethics and disseminationNo ethics approval was required. We plan to publish the full study open access in a peer-reviewed journal, and disseminate the findings via social media (Twitter, Facebook and author affiliated websites). Patients, healthcare providers and policy-makers need the highest quality evidence to make decisions about which treatments should be used in healthcare practice. Being able to critically appraise the findings of systematic reviews that include NMA is central to informed decision-making in patient care.

scholarly journals Coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic: an overview of systematic reviews

2021 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Israel Júnior Borges do Nascimento ◽  
Dónal P. O’Mathúna ◽  
Thilo Caspar von Groote ◽  
Hebatullah Mohamed Abdulazeem ◽  
Ishanka Weerasekara ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Reviews ◽  
Troponin I ◽  
Clinical Symptoms ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Severe Disease ◽  
Ground Glass Opacity ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
Reactive Protein ◽  
Overview Of Systematic Reviews ◽  
The Impact

Abstract Background Navigating the rapidly growing body of scientific literature on the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic is challenging, and ongoing critical appraisal of this output is essential. We aimed to summarize and critically appraise systematic reviews of coronavirus disease (COVID-19) in humans that were available at the beginning of the pandemic. Methods Nine databases (Medline, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, CINAHL, Web of Sciences, PDQ-Evidence, WHO’s Global Research, LILACS, and Epistemonikos) were searched from December 1, 2019, to March 24, 2020. Systematic reviews analyzing primary studies of COVID-19 were included. Two authors independently undertook screening, selection, extraction (data on clinical symptoms, prevalence, pharmacological and non-pharmacological interventions, diagnostic test assessment, laboratory, and radiological findings), and quality assessment (AMSTAR 2). A meta-analysis was performed of the prevalence of clinical outcomes. Results Eighteen systematic reviews were included; one was empty (did not identify any relevant study). Using AMSTAR 2, confidence in the results of all 18 reviews was rated as “critically low”. Identified symptoms of COVID-19 were (range values of point estimates): fever (82–95%), cough with or without sputum (58–72%), dyspnea (26–59%), myalgia or muscle fatigue (29–51%), sore throat (10–13%), headache (8–12%) and gastrointestinal complaints (5–9%). Severe symptoms were more common in men. Elevated C-reactive protein and lactate dehydrogenase, and slightly elevated aspartate and alanine aminotransferase, were commonly described. Thrombocytopenia and elevated levels of procalcitonin and cardiac troponin I were associated with severe disease. A frequent finding on chest imaging was uni- or bilateral multilobar ground-glass opacity. A single review investigated the impact of medication (chloroquine) but found no verifiable clinical data. All-cause mortality ranged from 0.3 to 13.9%. Conclusions In this overview of systematic reviews, we analyzed evidence from the first 18 systematic reviews that were published after the emergence of COVID-19. However, confidence in the results of all reviews was “critically low”. Thus, systematic reviews that were published early on in the pandemic were of questionable usefulness. Even during public health emergencies, studies and systematic reviews should adhere to established methodological standards.

scholarly journals Generic Patient-Reported Outcomes and Outcome Measures: A Systematic Review Study Protocol

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yuki Seidler ◽  
Erika Mosor ◽  
Margaret R Andrews ◽  
Carolina Watson ◽  
Nick Bott ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Outcome Measures ◽  
Systematic Reviews ◽  
Patient Reported Outcomes ◽  
Outcome Measurement ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Patient Reported Outcome ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
Screening Process ◽  
Patient Reported

Background: Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) are an essential part of health outcome measurement and vital to patient-centricity and valued-based care. Several international consortia have developed core outcome sets and many of them include PROs. PROs are measured by patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs). PROs and PROMs can be generic or specific to certain diseases or conditions. While the characteristics of generic PROs and PROMs are well recognised as widely relevant and applicable across different domains, diseases and conditions, there is a lack of knowledge on the types of PROs measured by generic PROMs. We also do not know in which disease areas generic PROs and PROMs are commonly used. To date, there has been no systematic review solely focusing on generic PROMs, what they measure and their areas of application. Objectives: This systematic review will identify core PROs measured by generic PROMs used in adult populations and the areas in which they are applied. Methods: We will conduct a systematic review of reviews. The screening process and the reporting will comply with the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis) 2020 Statement. We will use four databases, Medline [PubMed], CINHAL [Ebsco], Cochrane [Cochrane Library], and PsycINFO [Ovid], and reports from international consortia. Inclusion criteria are systematic reviews, meta-analysis or patient-reported outcome sets developed by international consortia reporting on generic PROMs in adult populations. Articles primarily focusing on patient-reported experience measures (PREMs), children or adolescents, or those not written in English will be excluded. Risk of bias will be assessed by checking if the included articles comply with established guidelines for systematic reviews such as the PRISMA statement. We will extract generic PROMs and PROs measured by these PROMs, and the areas applied from the selected articles and reports. Extracted data and information will be quantitatively and qualitatively synthesised without statistical interference. The quality of the synthesised evidences will be assessed by clarifying the strengths, limitations and possible biases in our review.

scholarly journals Tissue inhibitor of metalloproteinase-1 (TIMP-1) as a prognostic biomarker in gastrointestinal cancer: a meta-analysis

PeerJ ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 9 ◽  
pp. e10859
Author(s):  
Lili Qin ◽  
Yueqi Wang ◽  
Na Yang ◽  
Yangyu Zhang ◽  
Tianye Zhao ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Reviews ◽  
Gastrointestinal Cancer ◽  
Fixed Effects ◽  
Prognostic Value ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Tissue Inhibitor Of Metalloproteinase ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
Fixed Effects Model ◽  
Tissue Inhibitor ◽  
Pretreatment Serum

Background Tissue inhibitor of metalloproteinase 1 (TIMP-1) has recently been shown to be dependent on or independent of Matrix metalloproteinases (MMPs) in its roles in tumorigenesis and progression. This appreciation has prompted various studies assessing the prognostic value of TIMP-1 in patients with gastrointestinal cancer, however, the conclusions were still inconsistent. The aim of this study was to assess the prognostic value of TIMP-1-immunohistochemistry (IHC) staining and pretreatment serum/plasma TIMP-1 level in gastrointestinal cancer survival as well as the association between TIMP-1 and clinicopathologic features. Methods The meta-analysis was registered in the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO; Registration NO. CRD42020185407) and followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) statement. A highly sensitive literature search was performed in electronic databases including PubMed, EMBASE and the Cochrane Library. Heterogeneity analysis was conducted using both chi-square-based Q statistics and the I2 test. The pooled hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated to assess the prognostic value of TIMP-1 using the fixed-effects model. Odds ratios (ORs) with 95% CIs were calculated to evaluate the associations between TIMP-1 and clinicopathological characteristics. The meta-analysis was conducted using STATA 12.0 software. Results A total of 3,958 patients from twenty-two studies were included in the meta-analysis. Elevated TIMP-1 levels were significantly associated with poor survival in gastrointestinal cancer (TIMP-1-IHC staining: HR = 2.04, 95% CI [1.59–2.61], I2 = 35.7%, PQ = 0.156; pretreatment serum/plasma TIMP-1 levels: HR = 2.02, 95% CI [1.80–2.28], I2 = 0%, PQ = 0.630). Moreover, clinicopathological parameter data analysis showed that elevated TIMP-1 levels were significantly associated with lymph node metastasis (N1/N2/N3 vs N0: OR = 2.92, 95% CI [1.95–4.38]) and higher TNM stages (III/IV vs I/II: OR = 2.73, 95% CI [1.23–6.04]). Conclusion Both TIMP-1-positive IHC staining and high serum/plasma TIMP-1 levels are poor prognostic factors for the survival of gastrointestinal cancer. In addition, TIMP-1 overexpression was correlated with more advanced clinicopathological features.

scholarly journals Laparoscopy versus mini-laparotomy peritoneal catheter insertion of ventriculoperitoneal shunts: a systematic review and meta-analysis

2016 ◽  
Vol 41 (3) ◽  
pp. E7 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mingliang He ◽  
Leping Ouyang ◽  
Shengwen Wang ◽  
Meiguang Zheng ◽  
Anmin Liu
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Reviews ◽  
Operative Time ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Catheter Insertion ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
Number Needed To Treat ◽  
Shunt Failure ◽  
Peritoneal Catheter ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Mini Laparotomy

OBJECTIVE Ventriculoperitoneal (VP) shunt treatment is the main treatment method for hydrocephalus. The traditional operative approach for peritoneal catheter insertion is mini-laparotomy. In recent years, laparoscopy-assisted insertion has become increasingly popular. It seems likely that use of an endoscope could lower the incidence of shunt malfunction. However, there is no consensus about the benefits of laparoscopy-assisted peritoneal catheter insertion. METHODS A systematic search was performed using the PubMed, Embase, ScienceDirect, and Cochrane Library databases. A manual search for reference lists was conducted. The protocol was prepared according to the interventional systematic reviews of the Cochrane Handbook, and the article was written on the basis of the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis) guidelines. RESULTS Eleven observational trials and 2 randomized controlled trials were included. Seven operation-related outcome measures were analyzed, and 3 of these showed no difference between operative techniques. The results of the meta-analysis are as follows: in the laparoscopy group, the rate of distal shunt failure was lower (OR 0.41, 95% CI 0.25–0.67; p = 0.0003), the absolute effect is 7.11% for distal shunt failure, the number needed to treat is 14 (95% CI 8–23), operative time was shorter (mean difference [MD], −12.84; 95% CI −20.68 to −5.00; p = 0.001), and blood loss was less (MD −9.93, 95% CI −17.56 to −2.31; p = 0.01). In addition, a borderline statistically significant difference tending to laparoscopic technique was observed in terms of hospital stay (MD −1.77, 95% CI −3.67 to 0.13; p = 0.07). CONCLUSIONS To some extent, a laparoscopic insertion technique could yield a better prognosis, mainly because it is associated with a lower distal failure rate and shorter operative time, which would be clinically relevant.

Outcomes of digital biomarker-based interventions: protocol for a systematic review of systematic reviews (Preprint)

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hossein Motahari-Nezhad ◽  
Márta Péntek ◽  
László Gulácsi ◽  
Zsombor Zrubka
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Outcomes ◽  
Systematic Reviews ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
Level Of Evidence ◽  
Clinical Benefits ◽  
The Cochrane Library ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Digital Biomarkers

BACKGROUND Digital biomarkers are defined as objective, quantifiable physiological and behavioral data that are collected and measured by means of digital devices such as portables, wearables, implantables or digestibles. For their widespread adoption in publicly financed healthcare systems, it is important to understand how their benefits translate into improved patient outcomes, which is essential for demonstrating their value. OBJECTIVE To assess the quality and strength of evidence of the impact of digital biomarkers on clinical outcomes compared to interventions without digital biomarkers, reported in systematic reviews. METHODS A comprehensive search for 2019-2020 will be conducted in the PubMed and the Cochrane Library using keywords related to digital biomarkers and a filter for systematic reviews. Original full-text English publications of systematic reviews comparing clinical outcomes of interventions with and without digital biomarkers via meta-analysis will be included. The AMSTAR-2 tool will be used to assess the methodological quality of reviews. To assess the quality of evidence, we will evaluate systematic reviews using the GRADE tool. To detect the possible presence of reporting bias, we will record whether the protocol of the systematic reviews was published before the start of the study. A qualitative summary of results by digital biomarker technology and outcome will be provided. RESULTS This protocol was submitted before data collection. The next steps in this review will be initiated after the protocol is accepted for publication. CONCLUSIONS Our study will provide a comprehensive summary of the highest level of evidence available on digital biomarker interventions. Our results will help identify clinical areas where the use of digital biomarkers leads to favorable clinical outcomes. In addition, our findings will highlight areas of evidence gaps where the clinical benefits of digital biomarkers have not yet been demonstrated.

Effectiveness of Physiotherapy to Promote Motor Recovery in Individuals with Stroke: A Systematic Review Protocol

2022 ◽  
Author(s):  
Shehong Zhang ◽  
Hongyu Xie ◽  
Chuanjie Wang ◽  
Fengfeng Wu ◽  
Xin Wang
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Motor Function ◽  
Systematic Reviews ◽  
Evaluation System ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Primary Data ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
Systematic Review Protocol ◽  
Qualitative Synthesis ◽  
Review Protocol

Abstract Introduction: Motor function is essential in our daily lives, one of the most common impairments caused by stroke is loss of functional movement. Over 70% of stroke survivors have motor or other neurological functional disabilities. However, rehabilitation of motor function suffered from a stroke can be rather difficult due to the complexity of organs and systems related to motor function, as well as the neural system that supported motor function. In particularly, previous evidence for the effectiveness of physiotherapy, a commonly prescribed intervention method for people with stroke, that recover motor function in people following a stroke is varied and limited in the chronic rehabilitation phase and therefore has never been reviewed systematically. With the progress of study in neurology and the development of novel tools for rehabilitation, results from more and more clinical trials are now available, thus here justifying conducting a systematic review. Methods and analysis: This systematic review protocol is developed in accordance with the methodology recommended by the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Protocols, as well as the Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions. Relevant studies will be identified by searching the databases. We will perform searches for relevant studies in databases, including PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, and Web of Science, Physiotherapy Evidence Database and Cochrane Library databases. The reference lists of included articles and reviews will be searched manually. The date range parameters used in searching all databases will be restricted between January 2001 and January 2021. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published will be included. The language used in the articles included was restricted to English. The GRADE (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation system from the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions) approach will be used to systematically appraise the quality of methodology. We will assess the risk of bias of the RCTs included using the Cochrane Collaboration’s tool and provide a qualitative synthesis. After that, we will consider conducting a meta-analysis if the final data across outcomes shows sufficient homogeneity. Ethics and dissemination: No ethical approval is needed as the proposed study does not involve the collection of primary data, and the results of this review will be disseminated via peer-reviewed publications and conference presentations. Trial registration number: CRD42021267069.

scholarly journals Clinical Considerations for Return to Driving a Car following a Total Knee or Hip Arthroplasty: A Systematic Review

2020 ◽  
Vol 2020 ◽  
pp. 1-10
Author(s):  
Annalisa Na ◽  
Kacy Richburg ◽  
Zbigniew Gugala
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Reviews ◽  
Hip Arthroplasty ◽  
Response Times ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Patient Characteristics ◽  
Postoperative Management ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
Clinical Factors ◽  
Study Results ◽  
Meta Analyses

Aim. The purpose of this study is to systematically review patient characteristics and clinical determinants that may influence return to driving status and time frames following a primary TKA or THA and provide an update of the current literature. Methods. This review was completed per the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Final electronic database searches were completed in October 2019 in Medline/PubMed, Medline/OVID, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), and Cochrane Library using preselected search terms. Manuscripts of prospective and nonrandomized studies that examined the return to driving a car after a primary knee or hip arthroplasty patients were included. The Methodological Index for Non-Randomized Studies was used to measure study quality. Two authors selected studies and assessed their qualities. All disagreements were resolved through discussion and, as needed, a third reviewer. Data on study title, author(s), country, year, study design, sample size, inclusion and exclusion criteria, age, BMI, gender, statistical analyses, driving measure, follow-up time, surgical approach, laterality, and postoperative management were extracted from each study. Results. A total of 23 studies were eligible, including 12 TKA studies (n=654) with mean ages between 43 and 82 years, 9 THA studies (n=922) with mean ages between 34 and 85 years, and 2 combined TKA and THA (TKA, n=815; THA, n=685), yielded MINORS scores between 6 and 12. Most patients achieved or exceeded preoperative response times between 1 and 8 weeks following a TKA and 2 days to 8 weeks following a THA, and/or self-reported return to driving between 1 week and 6 months. Influences on return to driving time included laterality and pain, but gender was mixed. Discussion/Conclusions. Study results were consistent with previous systematic reviews in that return to driving a car after a primary TKA or THA is highly variable, and most commonly occurs around 4 weeks, but can range between 2 and 8 weeks. While various patient and clinical factors can influence return to driving for a TKA or THA, the most common contributing facts were pain and laterality. The heterogeneous nature of the studies prevented a meta-analysis for determining contributions of return to driving following a primary TKA or THA. Regardless, this study updates previous systematic reviews and presents insight on patient and clinical factors beyond generalized timeframes for return to driving a car. This information and results from future studies are essential to guide clinical recommendations and patient and clinician expectations for return to driving a car after a primary TKA or THA.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document