safety effectiveness
Recently Published Documents


TOTAL DOCUMENTS

243
(FIVE YEARS 79)

H-INDEX

22
(FIVE YEARS 4)

2022 ◽  
pp. bmjsrh-2021-201389
Author(s):  
Bianca Maria Stifani ◽  
Roopan Gill ◽  
Caron Rahn Kim

BackgroundGlobally, access to safe abortion is limited. We aimed to assess the safety, effectiveness and acceptability of harm reduction counselling for abortion, which we define as the provision of information about safe abortion methods to pregnant persons seeking abortion.MethodsWe searched PubMed, EMBASE, ClinicalTrials.gov, Cochrane, Global Index Medicus and the grey literature up to October 2021. We included studies in which healthcare providers gave pregnant persons information on safe use of abortifacient medications without providing the actual medications. We conducted a descriptive summary of results and a risk of bias assessment using the ROBINS-I tool. Our primary outcome was the proportion of pregnant persons who used misoprostol to induce abortion rather than other methods among those who received harm reduction counselling.ResultsWe included four observational studies with a total of 4002 participants. Most pregnant persons who received harm reduction counselling induced abortion using misoprostol (79%–100%). Serious complication rates were low (0%–1%). Uterine aspiration rates were not always reported but were in the range of 6%–22%. Patient satisfaction with the harm reduction intervention was high (85%–98%) where reported. We rated the risk of bias for all studies as high due to a lack of comparison groups and high lost to follow-up rates.DiscussionBased on a synthesis of four studies with serious methodological limitations, most recipients of harm reduction counselling use misoprostol for abortion, have low complication rates, and are satisfied with the intervention. More research is needed to determine abortion success outcomes from the harm reduction approach.FundingThis work did not receive any funding.PROSPERO registration numberWe registered the review in the PROSPERO database of systematic reviews (ID number: CRD42020200849).


2021 ◽  
Vol 37 (S1) ◽  
pp. 29-29
Author(s):  
Beatriz León-Salas ◽  
Renata Linertová ◽  
Javier García-García ◽  
Pilar Pérez-Ros ◽  
Francisco Rivas-Ruiz ◽  
...  

IntroductionDelirium is a prevalent syndrome in the hospital setting and the elderly are the most affected. The objective was to assess the safety, clinical effectiveness, and cost effectiveness of interventions for preventing delirium among people aged 65 years or older at hospital admission.MethodsA systematic review of available scientific literature (randomized controlled trials) on the safety, effectiveness, and cost effectiveness of the interventions was conducted. The overall effect size for each type of intervention was estimated through a meta-analysis. A cost-effectiveness study in the context of the Spanish National Healthcare System was performed.ResultsForty-nine studies were included for the effectiveness and safety assessment (25 on pharmacological interventions, 12 on perioperative interventions, 2 on non-pharmacological interventions, and 10 on multicomponent interventions). The following interventions reduced delirium incidence relative to usual care or placebo: hypnotics and sedatives (13 studies; risk ratio [RR] 0.54: 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.36–0.80); perioperative interventions aimed at limiting opioid use (two studies; RR 0.50, 95% CI: 0.29–0.86); controlling the intensity of general anesthesia (three studies; RR 0.77, 95% CI: 0.59–0.99); and multicomponent interventions (10 studies; RR 0.62, 95% CI: 0.54–0.72). In addition, multicomponent interventions reduced the duration (mean difference −1.18, 95% CI: −1.95 - −0.40) and severity of delirium (standardized mean difference −0.98, 95% CI: −1.46 - −0.49), while dexmedetomidine reduced the duration of delirium (mean difference −0.70, 95% CI: −1.03 - −0.37).The economic analysis of a multicomponent preventive intervention estimated an average cost of EUR7,282 per patient, which was EUR140 per patient more expensive than usual care. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was EUR21,391 per quality-adjusted life-year, which is below the acceptability threshold used in Spain. The literature review yielded two economic evaluations that estimated the cost effectiveness of a multicomponent intervention in the United Kingdom and found that the multicomponent intervention was a dominant strategy.ConclusionsThis meta-analysis suggests that multicomponent interventions and dexmedetomidine are effective in reducing the incidence of delirium in hospitalized patients and that multicomponent interventions could be a cost-effective strategy in Spain.


Bioanalysis ◽  
2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hongran Li ◽  
Tong Jiao ◽  
Peirong Wang ◽  
Juanjuan An ◽  
Gang Deng ◽  
...  

In response to the outbreak of COVID-19, in accordance with the principles of ‘unified command, early involvement, prompt review and scientific approval’ as well as the requirements of ensuring product safety, effectiveness and controllable quality, the Center for Medical Device Evaluation (CMDE) has issued Key Points of Technical Review for the Registration of SARS-CoV-2 Nucleic Acid Tests ( Key Points) to provide the requirements of tests. Because of the sustainability of the pandemic, more efforts and attempts are needed for SARS-CoV-2 detection and control. This article interprets the Key Points issued by the CMDE and provides certain refinements to wider audiences.


Blood ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 138 (Supplement 1) ◽  
pp. 4242-4242
Author(s):  
Lynn M Malec ◽  
Nikki Hirsh ◽  
Carrie O'Neill ◽  
Crystal Watson ◽  
Michael Recht

Abstract Background: Clinical researchers affiliated with the American Thrombosis and Hemostasis Network (ATHN) conduct multi-institutional, observational cohort studies assessing the safety and effectiveness of various interventions for people affected by bleeding and clotting disorders. In parallel with the growth of ATHN's clinical studies, the number of new therapies for all congenital and acquired hematologic conditions, not just those for bleeding and clotting disorders, is increasing. Some of the recently FDA-approved therapies for congenital and acquired hematologic conditions have yet to demonstrate long-term safety and effectiveness. In addition, results from well-controlled, pivotal studies often cannot be replicated once a therapy has been approved for general use. With this explosion of potential new therapies on the horizon, it is imperative that clinicians and clinical researchers in the field of non-neoplastic hematology have a uniform, secure, unbiased, and enduring method to collect long-term safety and efficacy data. The overarching objective of ATHN Transcends (NCT04398628) is to characterize the safety, effectiveness, and practice of treatments for all people with congenital and acquired hematologic disorders in the United States. Study Design and Methods: ATHN Transcends is a longitudinal, natural history, observational cohort study being conducted at approximately 150 ATHN-affiliated sites (ATHN Affiliate Network). Participants will be followed for a minimum of 15 years. Specific data will be collected for participants enrolled in cohort-specific arms. Each participant will be assigned in a single cohort: Hemophilia, Von Willebrand Disease, Congenital Platelet Disorder, Rare Bleeding Disorders, Bleeding Not Otherwise Specified, Thrombosis/Thrombophilia, or Non-Neoplastic Hematologic Conditions (see Figure 1). Inclusion criteria include: any age, any congenital or acquired non-neoplastic hematologic disorder, having a bleeding phenotype with an unknown diagnosis, or having a connective tissue disorder with a bleeding tendency. Exclusion criteria include not qualifying for a cohort and the unwillingness or inability to give informed consent or assent. Data will be collected at baseline, every three months, annually and at study exit (Figure 2). Participant biologic samples will be collected at enrollment and yearly thereafter. Safety endpoints mirror those collected by the European Haemophilia Safety Surveillance and include allergic and other acute events, treatment-emergent side effects of therapy, transfusion-transmitted infections, inhibitor development, thrombosis and cardiovascular events, malignancies, neurologic events, and deaths. Adverse events of special interest including thrombotic microangiopathies, anti-drug antibodies, unanticipated bleeding, and hospitalizations will be collected. A panel of patient-reported outcomes (Table 1) will be collected at baseline and annually. Descriptive statistics will be calculated to analyze the primary and secondary outcomes. If there are questions involving multiple cohorts, given there is adequate power to make comparisons between cohorts, for a discrete outcome, we will report estimated difference in percentage between cohorts as well as the 95% confidence interval (CI) of such a difference. If the outcome measurement is a continuous variable, we will report the mean difference and its associated 95% CI. Discussion: The key advantages of an independent study conducted by the ATHN Affiliate Network include the ability to observe participants on a variety of treatment regimens regardless of regimen dosing, frequency, or time of initiation; the ability to observe participants on recently FDA-approved therapies as well as continued monitoring of well-established therapies; the ability to enrich the ATHNdataset; and the ability to be the initial cohort study involving potentially all ATHN-affiliated sites to provide the infrastructure for all congenital and acquired hematologic disorders-related sub-studies in cooperation with other funders, including federal, foundation, academic and industry sources. ATHN Transcends received central institutional review board approval in April 2020. The protocol is currently being rolled out throughout the ATHN Affiliate Network. Figure 1 Figure 1. Disclosures Malec: HEMA Biologics: Consultancy; Genentech: Consultancy; Sanofi: Consultancy, Research Funding; Pfizer: Consultancy; CSL Behring: Consultancy; Takeda: Consultancy. Recht: uniQure: Consultancy; Takeda: Consultancy; Sanofi: Consultancy; Pfizer: Consultancy; Octapharma: Consultancy; Novo Nordisk: Consultancy; Kedrion: Consultancy; Hema Biologics: Consultancy; Genentech: Consultancy; CSL Behring: Consultancy; Catalyst Biosciences: Consultancy; Foundation for Women and Girls with Blood Disorders, Partners in Bleeding Disorders: Speakers Bureau; American Thrombosis and Hemostasis Network: Current Employment; Oregon Health & Science University: Current Employment.


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sorin Giusca ◽  
Michael Lichtenberg ◽  
Melanie Schueler ◽  
Ulrike Heinrich ◽  
Christoph Eisenbach ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  

Vaccines ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 9 (10) ◽  
pp. 1138
Author(s):  
Rachael Piltch-Loeb ◽  
Nigel Walsh Harriman ◽  
Julia Healey ◽  
Marco Bonetti ◽  
Veronica Toffolutti ◽  
...  

Despite the effectiveness of the COVID-19 vaccine, global vaccination distribution efforts have thus far had varying levels of success. Vaccine hesitancy remains a threat to vaccine uptake. This study has four objectives: (1) describe and compare vaccine hesitancy proportions by country; (2) categorize vaccine-related concerns; (3) rank vaccine-related concerns; and (4) compare vaccine-related concerns by country and hesitancy status in four countries—the United States, Canada, Sweden, and Italy. Using the Pollfish survey platform, we sampled 1000 respondents in Canada, Sweden, and Italy and 750 respondents in the United States between 21–28 May 2021. Results showed vaccine-related concerns varied across three topical areas—vaccine safety and government control, vaccine effectiveness and population control, and freedom. For each thematic area, the top concern was statistically significantly different in each country and among the hesitant and non-hesitant subsamples within each county. Concerns related to freedom were the most universal. Understanding the specific concerns among individuals when it comes to the COVID-19 vaccine can help to inform public communications and identify which, if any, salient narratives are global.


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rachael Piltch-Loeb ◽  
Nigel Harriman ◽  
Julia Healey ◽  
Marco Bonetti ◽  
Veronica Toffolutti ◽  
...  

AbstractDespite the effectiveness of the COVID-19 vaccine, global vaccination distribution efforts have thus far had varying levels of success. Vaccine hesitancy remains a threat to vaccine uptake. This study has four objectives: 1) describe and compare vaccine hesitancy proportions by country; 2) categorize vaccine-related concerns; 3) rank vaccine-related concerns; and 4) compare vaccine-related concerns by country and hesitancy status in four countries- the United States, Canada, Sweden, and Italy. Using the Pollfish survey platform, we sampled 1000 respondents in Canada, Sweden, and Italy and 750 respondents in the United States between May 21-28, 2021. Results showed vaccine related concerns varied across three topical areas- vaccine safety and government control, vaccine effectiveness and population control, and freedom. For each thematic area, the top concern was statistically significantly different in each country and among the hesitant and non-hesitant subsamples within each county. Understanding the specific concerns among individuals when it comes to the COVID-19 vaccine can help to inform public communications and identify which, if any, salient narratives, are global.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document