scholarly journals Ketamine for Adults with Severe Asthma Exacerbation: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

2022 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
pp. 91-97
Author(s):  
Fatimah AlShehri ◽  
Heetaf Aloqaily ◽  
Joud Enabi ◽  
Sharafaldeen Bin Nafisah

BACKGROUND: Severe asthma mandates careful attention and timely management, and the benefit of ketamine in severe asthma exacerbations in adult patients require further exploration. METHODS: We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of the use of ketamine in cases of acute asthma exacerbation in adults. We searched PubMed, Google Scholar, Cochrane databases, and gray literature (ClinicalTrials.gov and World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform); we also searched the reference lists of included articles and any systematic reviews and meta-analyses identified therein. Our search covered the period from 1963 to August 20, 2021. Search terms were “ketamine” AND “asthma”. RESULTS: Of 25 540 articles, two studies were included in the analysis. The total number of patients included in the studies was 136 (68 in the ketamine groups and 68 in the placebo group). The pooled effect size was 0.30 (95% CI: -0.04, 0.63) favouring ketamine over placebo, p=0.08, (I2=0%, p=0.39). A paired t-test revealed that ketamine improved the mean peak expiratory flow rate (PEFR) from 242.4 (SD=146.23) to 286.95 (SD=182.22), p=0.33, representing an 18.38% improvement. CONCLUSION: Ketamine can induce a 30% improvement in PEFR, representing a small positive effect in the treatment of acute severe asthma exacerbation in the emergency department (ED). The improvement was not statistically significant; nonetheless, since the improvement could be as great as 63% versus only a 4% possibility of no benefit/harm, the benefit appears to considerably outweigh any harm.

PLoS Medicine ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 18 (4) ◽  
pp. e1003566
Author(s):  
Claire J. Calderwood ◽  
James P. Wilson ◽  
Katherine L. Fielding ◽  
Rebecca C. Harris ◽  
Aaron S. Karat ◽  
...  

Background Two weeks’ isolation is widely recommended for people commencing treatment for pulmonary tuberculosis (TB). The evidence that this corresponds to clearance of potentially infectious tuberculous mycobacteria in sputum is not well established. This World Health Organization–commissioned review investigated sputum sterilisation dynamics during TB treatment. Methods and findings For the main analysis, 2 systematic literature searches of OvidSP MEDLINE, Embase, and Global Health, and EBSCO CINAHL Plus were conducted to identify studies with data on TB infectiousness (all studies to search date, 1 December 2017) and all randomised controlled trials (RCTs) for drug-susceptible TB (from 1 January 1990 to search date, 20 February 2018). Included articles reported on patients receiving effective treatment for culture-confirmed drug-susceptible pulmonary TB. The outcome of interest was sputum bacteriological conversion: the proportion of patients having converted by a defined time point or a summary measure of time to conversion, assessed by smear or culture. Any study design where more than 10 participants were included was considered. Record sifting and data extraction were performed in duplicate. Random effects meta-analyses were performed. A narrative summary additionally describes the results of a systematic search for data evaluating infectiousness from humans to experimental animals (PubMed, all studies to 27 March 2018). Other evidence on duration of infectiousness—including studies reporting on cough dynamics, human tuberculin skin test conversion, or early bactericidal activity of TB treatments—was outside the scope of this review. The literature search was repeated on 22 November 2020, at the request of the editors, to identify studies published after the previous censor date. Four small studies reporting 3 different outcome measures were identified, which included no data that would alter the findings of the review; they are not included in the meta-analyses. Of 5,290 identified records, 44 were included. Twenty-seven (61%) were RCTs and 17 (39%) were cohort studies. Thirteen studies (30%) reported data from Africa, 12 (27%) from Asia, 6 (14%) from South America, 5 (11%) from North America, and 4 (9%) from Europe. Four studies reported data from multiple continents. Summary estimates suggested smear conversion in 9% of patients at 2 weeks (95% CI 3%–24%, 1 single study [N = 1]), and 82% of patients at 2 months of treatment (95% CI 78%–86%, N = 10). Among baseline smear-positive patients, solid culture conversion occurred by 2 weeks in 5% (95% CI 0%–14%, N = 2), increasing to 88% at 2 months (95% CI 84%–92%, N = 20). At equivalent time points, liquid culture conversion was achieved in 3% (95% CI 1%–16%, N = 1) and 59% (95% CI 47%–70%, N = 8). Significant heterogeneity was observed. Further interrogation of the data to explain this heterogeneity was limited by the lack of disaggregation of results, including by factors such as HIV status, baseline smear status, and the presence or absence of lung cavitation. Conclusions This systematic review found that most patients remained culture positive at 2 weeks of TB treatment, challenging the view that individuals are not infectious after this interval. Culture positivity is, however, only 1 component of infectiousness, with reduced cough frequency and aerosol generation after TB treatment initiation likely to also be important. Studies that integrate our findings with data on cough dynamics could provide a more complete perspective on potential transmission of Mycobacterium tuberculosis by individuals on treatment. Trial registration Systematic review registration: PROSPERO 85226.


BMJ ◽  
2021 ◽  
pp. n526
Author(s):  
François Lamontagne ◽  
Thomas Agoritsas ◽  
Reed Siemieniuk ◽  
Bram Rochwerg ◽  
Jessica Bartoszko ◽  
...  

Abstract Clinical question What is the role of drugs in preventing covid-19? Why does this matter? There is widespread interest in whether drug interventions can be used for the prevention of covid-19, but there is uncertainty about which drugs, if any, are effective. The first version of this living guideline focuses on the evidence for hydroxychloroquine. Subsequent updates will cover other drugs being investigated for their role in the prevention of covid-19. Recommendation The guideline development panel made a strong recommendation against the use of hydroxychloroquine for individuals who do not have covid-19 (high certainty). How this guideline was created This living guideline is from the World Health Organization (WHO) and provides up to date covid-19 guidance to inform policy and practice worldwide. Magic Evidence Ecosystem Foundation (MAGIC) provided methodological support. A living systematic review with network analysis informed the recommendations. An international guideline development panel of content experts, clinicians, patients, an ethicist and methodologists produced recommendations following standards for trustworthy guideline development using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach. Understanding the new recommendation The linked systematic review and network meta-analysis (6 trials and 6059 participants) found that hydroxychloroquine had a small or no effect on mortality and admission to hospital (high certainty evidence). There was a small or no effect on laboratory confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection (moderate certainty evidence) but probably increased adverse events leading to discontinuation (moderate certainty evidence). The panel judged that almost all people would not consider this drug worthwhile. In addition, the panel decided that contextual factors such as resources, feasibility, acceptability, and equity for countries and healthcare systems were unlikely to alter the recommendation. The panel considers that this drug is no longer a research priority and that resources should rather be oriented to evaluate other more promising drugs to prevent covid-19. Updates This is a living guideline. New recommendations will be published in this article and signposted by update notices to this guideline. Readers note This is the first version of the living guideline for drugs to prevent covid-19. It complements the WHO living guideline on drugs to treat covid-19. When citing this article, please consider adding the update number and date of access for clarity.


Author(s):  
Afsaneh Noormandi ◽  
Mohammad Fathalipour ◽  
Reza Daryabeygi-Khotbehsara ◽  
Soheil Hassanipour

Background and objective: COVID-19 has since been declared a global pandemic by the World Health Organization (WHO), infecting millions worldwide. The use of Interferon (INF) subtypes previously examined in the treatment of SARS and MERS is also being initiated in some clinical trials. Although different clinical trials were evaluated IFNs in the treatment of COVID-19, their efficacy and safety remain unknown. Therefore, this study aims to systematically assess IFNs efficacy and safety in treating patients with COVID-19. Methods: The protocol has been registered in the PROSPERO International Prospective Register (CRD42020200643) on 24 July 2020. This protocol has been arranged according to the PRISMA-P (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Protocols) 2015 checklist. Discussion: Due to lack of approved medication for the covid-19 treatment and also various mutations of this virus, evaluated the efficacy and safety of medications by various studies could help for finding treatments with high effectiveness. IFNs are one of the medications that have been administered in covid-19 infection.  Moreover, the best time of administration and dose of this medication was unknown. Although meta-analysis is a potent source for assessing the accuracy of subjects, heterogeneity of articles is a potent limitation of our work.


2019 ◽  
Vol 54 (3) ◽  
pp. 1900655 ◽  
Author(s):  
Adam Cohen ◽  
Victor Dahl Mathiasen ◽  
Thomas Schön ◽  
Christian Wejse

In 1999, the World Health Organization (WHO) estimated that one-third of the world's population had latent tuberculosis infection (LTBI), which was recently updated to one-fourth. However, this is still based on controversial assumptions in combination with tuberculin skin test (TST) surveys. Interferon-γ release assays (IGRAs) with a higher specificity than TST have since been widely implemented, but never used to estimate the global LTBI prevalence.We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of LTBI estimates based on both IGRA and TST results published between 2005 and 2018. Regional and global estimates of LTBI prevalence were calculated. Stratification was performed for low, intermediate and high TB incidence countries and a pooled estimate for each area was calculated using a random effects model.Among 3280 studies screened, we included 88 studies from 36 countries with 41 IGRA (n=67 167) and 67 TST estimates (n=284 644). The global prevalence of LTBI was 24.8% (95% CI 19.7–30.0%) and 21.2% (95% CI 17.9–24.4%), based on IGRA and a 10-mm TST cut-off, respectively. The prevalence estimates correlated well to WHO incidence rates (Rs=0.70, p<0.001).In the first study of the global prevalence of LTBI derived from both IGRA and TST surveys, we found that one-fourth of the world's population is infected. This is of relevance, as both tests, although imperfect, are used to identify individuals eligible for preventive therapy. Enhanced efforts are needed targeting the large pool of latently infected individuals, as this constitutes an enormous source of potential active tuberculosis.


2019 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Brice Batomen ◽  
Lynne Moore ◽  
Mabel Carabali ◽  
Pier-Alexandre Tardif ◽  
Howard Champion ◽  
...  

Abstract Background The implementation of trauma systems in many high-income countries over the last 50 years has led to important reductions in injury mortality and disability in many healthcare jurisdictions. Injury organizations including the American College of Surgeons and the Trauma Association of Canada as well as the World Health Organization provide consensus-based recommendations on resources and processes for optimal injury care. Many hospitals treating trauma patients seek verification to demonstrate that they meet these recommendations. This process may be labeled differently across jurisdictions. In Canada for example, it is called accreditation, but it has the same objective and very similar modalities. The objective of the study described in this protocol is to systematically review evidence on the effectiveness of trauma center verification for improving clinical processes and patient outcomes in injury care. Methods We will perform a systematic review of studies evaluating the association between trauma center verification and hospital mortality (primary outcome), as well as morbidity, resource utilization, and processes of care (secondary outcomes). We will search CINAHL, EMBASE, HealthStar, MEDLINE, and ProQuest databases, as well as key injury organization websites for gray literature. We will assess the methodological quality of studies using the Risk Of Bias In Non-randomized Studies – of Interventions (ROBINS-I) assessment tool. We are planning to conduct a meta-analysis if feasible based on the number of included studies and their heterogeneity. We will evaluate the quality of cumulative evidence and strength of recommendations using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) working group methodology. Discussion This review will provide a synthesis of the body of evidence on trauma center verification effectiveness. Results could reinforce current verification modalities and may suggest ways to optimize them. Results will be published in a peer-reviewed journal and presented at an international clinical conference. Systematic review registration PROSPERO CRD42018107083.


PLoS ONE ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 16 (2) ◽  
pp. e0247204
Author(s):  
Eyasu Alem Lake ◽  
Birhanu Wondimeneh Demissie ◽  
Natneal Atnafu Gebeyehu ◽  
Addisu Yeshambel Wassie ◽  
Kelemu Abebe Gelaw ◽  
...  

Background The World Health Organization (WHO) declared coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) a global pandemic on 11th March, 2020. In Ethiopia, more than 90,490 and 1,300 confirmed cases and deaths were reported by the Federal Ministry of Health at the time of writing up this project. As health care providers are frontline workers managing the COVID-19 pandemic, this systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to assess the pooled level of knowledge, attitude, and practice towards COVID-19 among health professionals in Ethiopia. Methods PubMed, Google Scholar, Excerpta Medica database (EMBASE), Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and African Journal of Online (AJOL) were searched. The data were extracted using Microsoft Excel and analyzed using STATA version 14. Publication bias was checked by funnel plot and more objectively through Egger’s regression test, with P < 0.05 considered to indicate potential publication bias. The heterogeneity of studies was checked using I2 statistics. Pooled analysis was conducted using a weighted inverse variance random-effects model. Subgroup analysis was done related to geographic region and time. A leave-one-out sensitivity analysis was also employed. Result A total of 11 studies with 3,843 study participants for knowledge, eight studies with 2,842 study participants for attitude and 10 studies with 3, 435 study participants for practice were used to estimate the pooled level of good knowledge, positive attitude and poor practice among health professionals. The overall estimated good level of knowledge, positive attitude and poor practice towards COVID-19 was found to be 79.4% (95% CI: 73.5%-85.2%; I2 = 96%), 73.7% (95%CI: 63.09%-84.4%; I2 = 98.3%) and 40.3% (95%CI: 31.1%-49.6%; I2 = 97.1%) respectively. Conclusion Study findings showed that there were significant gaps in COVID-19 related knowledge, attitude and practice with respect to World Health Organization recommendations on COVID-19 management and personal protection practices. This study therefore recommends that institutions provide with immediate effect accurate and up-to-date information on COVID-19 and training that encourages improved knowledge, attitude and practice to mitigate this pandemic.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document