Interventions for smoking cessation with supporting of health staff in low - and middle-income countries: a systematic review and meta-analysis study

2021 ◽  
Vol 30 (9) ◽  
pp. 68-82
Author(s):  
Do Thi Thanh Toan ◽  
Chun Huang- Erick Wan ◽  
Nguyen Thu Anh ◽  
Pham Ngoc Yen ◽  
Luu Ngoc Minh ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Smoking Cessation ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Resource Limited Settings ◽  
Middle Income ◽  
Middle Income Countries ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Resource Limited

The level of smoking cessation support in hospitals are low, especially in resource limited settings. Current healthcare systems are not well organized to address the issue. This review aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of smoking cessation interventions initiated in health facilities in resource-limited settings. A systematic review using meta-analysis techniques was applied. Bibliographic databases included PubMed, Medline, LILACS, the United States Clinical Trials and the Cochrane Collaboration Library. Eligibility criteria included smoking cessation intervention studies were published in English or Vietnamese, from the year 1990 to 2018. Study designs were randomized controlled trials, quasi-randomized controlled trials, cohort studies and before and after studies. Populations were limited to those in low and middle-income countries. Interventions were limited smoking cessation programs conducted in health facilities. 17 studies had included for the reviewing. 12 studies had been assessed to the meta-analysis. The proportion of successful smoking cessation in 6 months follow-up were range from 11.7% to 62.2% for the intervention group. In 12 months, follow-up, the abstinence rate ranges from 13.6% to 73%. The popularly of medical staff support the intervention was the physicians (8/17, 47.1%) and doctor (5/17, 29.4%). The evidence from our study suggests that the abstinence rate can be affected by the supporting of medical staff follow the smoking cessation (SC) program.

scholarly journals Non-pharmacological interventions for the prevention of type 2 diabetes mellitus in low and middle-income countries: protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

2020 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Anupam Sarker ◽  
Rina Das ◽  
Saraban Ether ◽  
K. M. Saif-Ur-Rahman
Keyword(s):  
Diabetes Mellitus ◽  
Systematic Review ◽  
Type 2 Diabetes ◽  
Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Middle Income ◽  
Middle Income Countries ◽  
Randomized Controlled

Abstract Introduction The disease burden caused by type 2 diabetes mellitus is a prime public health concern. The prevalence and rate of deaths from diabetes mellitus in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) are higher than the high-income countries. Increased physical activity and a balanced diet are essential and successful measures to prevent the onset of diabetes mellitus. This systematic review aims to explore the available non-pharmacological approaches for the prevention of type 2 diabetes mellitus in LMICs. Methods and analysis Six online databases will be explored to get related randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published in English from inception to September 2020, and two coders will independently screen, identify studies, extract data, and assess the risk of bias in each article. The searched articles will be included by applying specific inclusion and exclusion criteria. Joanna Briggs Institute’s tool for RCTs will be used for appraising the trials critically. Narrative synthesis and pooled effect of the interventions will be demonstrated. A meta-analysis will be conducted using the random-effects model if assumptions are fulfilled. Discussion This review is an attempt to explore the available non-pharmacological approaches for the prevention of type 2 diabetes mellitus in LMICs. Findings from the review will highlight effective non-pharmacological measures for the prevention of type 2 diabetes mellitus to guide policy for future strategies. Systematic review registration The review protocol has been registered (CRD42020191507).

scholarly journals Probiotic Supplementation for Promotion of Growth in Children: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Nutrients ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 14 (1) ◽  
pp. 83
Author(s):  
Joseph Catania ◽  
Natasha G. Pandit ◽  
Julie M. Ehrlich ◽  
Muizz Zaman ◽  
Elizabeth Stone ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Healthy Children ◽  
Probiotic Supplementation ◽  
Middle Income ◽  
Middle Income Countries ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Growth Outcomes ◽  
Standardized Mean Difference

Probiotics are commonly prescribed to promote a healthy gut microbiome in children. Our objective was to investigate the effects of probiotic supplementation on growth outcomes in children 0–59 months of age. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis which included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that administered probiotics to children aged 0–59 months, with growth outcomes as a result. We completed a random-effects meta-analysis and calculated a pooled standardized mean difference (SMD) or relative risk (RR) and reported with a 95% confidence interval (CI). We included 79 RCTs, 54 from high-income countries (HIC), and 25 from low- and middle-income countries (LMIC). LMIC data showed that probiotics may have a small effect on weight (SMD: 0.26, 95% CI: 0.11–0.42, grade-certainty = low) and height (SMD 0.16, 95% CI: 0.06–0.25, grade-certainty = moderate). HIC data did not show any clinically meaningful effect on weight (SMD: 0.01, 95% CI: −0.04–0.05, grade-certainty = moderate), or height (SMD: −0.01, 95% CI: −0.06–0.04, grade-certainty = moderate). There was no evidence that probiotics affected the risk of adverse events. We conclude that in otherwise healthy children aged 0–59 months, probiotics may have a small but heterogenous effect on weight and height in LMIC but not in children from HIC.

Interventions to Reduce Alcohol Harms in Low and Middle Income Countries: a Systematic Review and Meta Analysis

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joao Ricardo Nickenig Vissoci
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Alcohol Use ◽  
Randomized Controlled Trials ◽  
Brain Stimulation ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
World Health ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Middle Income ◽  
Brief Motivational Intervention ◽  
Randomized Controlled

BackgroundHarmful alcohol use leads to a large burden of disease and disability which disportionately impacts LMICs. The World Health Organization and the Lancet have issued calls for this burden to be addressed, but issues remain, primarily due to gaps in information. While a variety of interventions have been shown to be effective at reducing alcohol use in HICs, their efficacy in LMICs have yet to be assessed. This systematic review describes the current published literature on alcohol interventions in LMICs and conducts a meta analysis of clinical trials evaluating interventions to reduce alcohol use and harms in LMICs.MethodsIn accordance with PRISMA guidelines we searched the electronic databases Pubmed, EMBASE, Scopus,Web of Science, Cochrane, and Psych Info. Articles were eligible if they evaluated an intervention targeting alcohol-related harm in LMICs. After a reference and citation analysis, we conducted a quality assessment per PRISMA protocol. A meta-analysis was performed on the 39 randomized controlled trials that evaluated an alcohol-related outcome.ResultsOf the 3,801 articles from the literature search, 87 articles from 25 LMICs fit the eligibility and inclusion criteria. Of these studies, 39 randomized controlled trials were included in the meta-analysis. Nine of these studies focused specifically on medication, while the others focused on brief motivational intervention, brain stimulation, AUDIT-based brief interventions, WHO ASSIST-based interventions, group based education, basic screening and interventions, brief psychological or counseling, dyadic relapse prevention, group counseling, CBT, motivational + PTSD based interview, and health promotion/awareness. Conclusion Issues in determining feasible options specific to LMICs arise from unstandardized interventions, unequal geographic distribution of intervention implementation, and uncertain effectiveness over time. Current research shows that brain stimulation, psychotherapy, and brief motivational interviews have the potential to be effective in LMIC settings, but further feasibility testing and efforts to standardize results are necessary to accurately assess their effectiveness.

scholarly journals 4066 In Teenagers Who Smoke Cigarettes Are Nicotine Patches as Compared to Placebo Effective to Decrease the Number of Cigarettes Smoked? – A Systematic Review

2020 ◽  
Vol 4 (s1) ◽  
pp. 138-138
Author(s):  
Obumneke A Amadi
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Smoking Cessation ◽  
Randomized Controlled Trials ◽  
Nicotine Patch ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Smoking Abstinence ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Nicotine Patches ◽  
Continuous Abstinence

OBJECTIVES/GOALS: The aim was to examine whether nicotine patch was more effective in encouraging abstinence from cigarettes smoking compared to placebo. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: Randomized controlled trials involving the general teenage age group smokers who were current smokers-“smoked less than 100 cigarettes over their lifetime and smoked at the time of the interview. Databases were searched for relevant studies reported in English that employed a randomized design published since 2000. Two authors extracted data and assessed quality. The primary outcomes and prioritization were continuous abstinence at 3, 6 and 12-month follow-up or more for the number of patients who responded to treatment, defined as a reduction/abstinence. Heterogeneity between studies did not preclude combined analyses of the data. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: 4 of 266 publications were included. Four studies reported positive effects on smoking cessation at end of treatment: (1) nicotine patches improved continuous abstinence at 6 weeks – 9 weeks months; (2) nicotine patch improved continuous abstinence at 3 to 6 months; (3) nicotine patches improved continuous abstinence 6 and 12 months; (4) nicotine patches improved continuous abstinence at 6 months – 12 and 24 months (5). All studies showed, continuous abstinence at follow up differed in percentage between groups both at 6 weeks through 24 months, with NRT (Nicotine patch) intervention groups achieving higher rates in most of the studies compared to placebo intervention group. Conclusions: NRT intervention methods seem to increase smoking abstinence in those treated for smoking cessation. Further and larger sample size studies are required to make stronger the base of evidence. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE OF IMPACT: Four randomized controlled trials investigating the effectiveness of smoking cessation interventions, for teenagers who smoke cigarettes were identified for inclusion in this review. Four of the studies reported significant effects on smoking cessation, providing evidence of effectiveness of NRT (nicotine patch), behavioral support and combinations of the two, although not all trials intervention treatments found an effect. The four studies reported important intervention effects at both the short and long follow-ups required: 6 weeks up to the 24 months, thereby, providing stronger evidence to support the effectiveness of NRT intervention on smoking cessation. All studies showed some evidence of improved smoking abstinence outcomes. The four studies had in common that the smoking cessation interventions provided a combination of intent to treat prevention, and of all the clinical trials none of them suggested a negative effect of smoking cessation treatment on substance use outcomes using NRT. However, the studies used reliable methods and reported their cases properly, but the small number of studies reviewed for the systematic review makes the conclusion about the effectiveness of these interventions uncertain. The papers visibly stated how the trials protected against bias, as indicated by the Yes (low risk). No (high risk) and U as “unclear risk.” All four studies conducted a random sequence generation of participants enrolled into the study sample.

scholarly journals The comparison between total hip arthroplasty and hemiarthroplasty in patients with femoral neck fractures: a systematic review and meta-analysis based on 25 randomized controlled trials

2020 ◽  
Vol 15 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Xiumei Tang ◽  
Duan Wang ◽  
Ying Liu ◽  
Jiali Chen ◽  
Zongke Zhou ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Systematic Review ◽  
Total Hip Arthroplasty ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Femoral Neck Fractures ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Acetabular Erosion

Abstract Background We performed an updated systematic review and meta-analysis which enrolled 25 prospective randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to compare the outcomes between total hip arthroplasty (THA) and hemiarthroplasty (HA) in patients with femoral neck fractures (FNFs). Methods We searched English databases which included PubMed, Embase (vis OvidSP), The Cochrane Library, and Web of Science, and Chinese databases Chinese National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), VIP, Wang Fang, and China Biology Medicine Disc (CBM) in July 2020. The quality of each study was assessed according to the Cochrane Collaboration’s Risk of Bias. Risk ratios (RRs) and weighted mean differences (WMDs) with 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs) were pooled with random-effects models. Data regarding baseline characteristics, hospital and surgery outcomes, clinical outcomes, patients’ quality of life, common complications, prothesis-related complications, mortality, and costs were reported. Results A total of 25 RCTs involving 3223 patients (1568 THA and 1655 HA) were included. THA had longer hospital length (WMD = 0.721, P < 0.0001) and surgery time (WMD = 20.044, P < 0.0001), and more blood loss compared with HA (WMD = 69.109, P < 0.0001). THA showed better ratings in the Harris Hip Score during follow-up periods between 1 and 5 years while no differences within 6 months and after 9 years. THA was associated with higher quality-of-life EuroQol-5 Dimension (EQ-5D) scores after 2 years of surgery but no difference within 1 year. There was no difference in common complications. THA had significant higher rate of dislocation (WMD = 1.897, P = 0.002) and lower acetabular erosion (WMD = 0.030, P = 0.001). For mortality, there was no difference during all the follow-up periods except for slightly higher 2-year mortality after surgery. Conclusion This meta-analysis demonstrates that THA has better medium-term functional results and quality of life and lower acetabular erosion rate, while HA shows better in reducing hospital stay, surgery time, and blood loss and also has lower dislocation rate.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document