Association Between Vitamin D and Influenza: Meta-Analysis and Systematic Review of Randomized Controlled Trials

Background: Vitamin D supplementation improves the immune function of human body and can be a convenient way to prevent influenza. However, evidence on the protective effect of vitamin D supplementation on influenza from Randomized Controlled Trials (RCTs) is inconclusive.Methods: RCTs regarding the association between vitamin D supplementation and influenza were identified by searching PubMed, Cochrane library, Embase and Chinese Biomedical Database (CBM) from inception until present (last updated on 10 November 2021). Studies that reported dosages and durations of vitamin D supplementation and number of influenza infections could be included. Heterogeneity was assessed using Cochran's Q test and I2 statistics, the meta-analysis was conducted by using a random-effects model, the pooled effects were expressed with risk ratio (RR) with 95% confidence interval (95% CI).Results: 10 trials including 4859 individuals were ultimately eligible after scanning. There was no evidence of a significant heterogeneity among studies (I2 = 27%, P = 0.150). Meta-regression analysis finding indicated that country, latitude, average age, economic level, follow-up period and average daily vitamin D intake did not cause the statistical heterogeneity. The study finding indicates that substitution with vitamin D significantly reduces the risk of influenza infections (RR = 0.78, 95% CI:0.64–0.95). No evidence of publication bias was observed. Omission of any single trial had little impact on the pooled risk estimates.Conclusions: The meta-analysis produced a corroboration that vitamin D supplement has a preventive effect on influenza. Strategies for preventing influenza can be optimized by vitamin D supplementation.

Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Dysphagia and Associated Pneumonia in Patients With Stroke From India: A Call to Arms

Objectives: This study aimed to determine the prevalence of reported dysphagia and associated pneumonia risk among patients with stroke in India. Method: We carried out a systematic review following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. The primary outcome of interest was dysphagia and pneumonia among patients with stroke in India. Two review authors independently assessed the quality of studies using the Newcastle–Ottawa Scale and extracted related data. Meta-analysis was performed for frequency of dysphagia, associated pneumonia, and its relative risk using a random-effects model. Statistical heterogeneity was computed using the I 2 index. Results: A total of 3,644 titles were screened, and only eight studies met our inclusion criteria. Based on data from these studies, we calculated the pooled prevalence of dysphagia (47.71%; 95% confidence interval [CI] [20.49%, 70.92%], p < .001) and pneumonia (20.43%; 95% CI [10.73%, 30.14%], p < .001) for patients with stroke in India. We found that the relative risks of pneumonia in patients with stroke and dysphagia versus those patients with stroke and no dysphagia was 9.41 (95% CI [5.60, 15.80], p < .001). Data on length of hospital stay and rates of mortality secondary to pneumonia are also presented. Conclusions: Despite the high incidence of dysphagia and associated pneumonia, the methodological quality of studies is fair and there is little research focused on epidemiological data. We call to arms to those SLPs working with patients with stroke in India to become proactive in both clinical practice and research domains. Supplemental Material https://doi.org/10.23641/asha.17701022

Risks of infection, hospital and ICU admission, and death from COVID-19 in people with asthma: systematic review and meta-analyses

ObjectivesTo determine if and to what degree asthma may predispose to worse COVID-19 outcomes in order to inform treatment and prevention decisions, including shielding and vaccine prioritisation.DesignSystematic review and meta-analysis.SettingElectronic databases were searched (October 2020) for clinical studies reporting at least one of the following stratified by asthma status: risk of infection with SARS-CoV-2; hospitalisation, intensive care unit (ICU) admission or mortality with COVID-19.ParticipantsAdults and children who tested positive for or were suspected to have COVID-19.Main outcome measuresMain outcome measures were the following stratified by asthma status: risk of infection with SARS-CoV-2; hospitalisation, ICU admission or mortality with COVID-19. We pooled odds ratios (ORs) and presented these with 95% confidence intervals (CI). Certainty was assessed using GRADE (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations).Results30 (n=112 420) studies were included (12 judged high quality, 15 medium, 3 low). Few provided indication of asthma severity. Point estimates indicated reduced risks in people with asthma for all outcomes, but in all cases the evidence was judged to be of very low certainty and 95% CIs all included no difference and the possibility of increased risk (death: OR 0.90, 95% CI 0.72 to 1.13, I2=58%; hospitalisation: OR 0.95, 95% CI 0.71 to 1.26; ICU admission: OR 0.96, 95% CI 0.75 to 1.24). Findings on hospitalisation are also limited by substantial unexplained statistical heterogeneity. Within people with asthma, allergic asthma was associated with less COVID-19 risk and concurrent chronic obstructive pulmonary disease was associated with increased risk. In some studies, corticosteroids were associated with increased risk, but this may reflect increased risk in people with more severe asthma.ConclusionsThough absence of evidence of a clear association between asthma and worse outcomes from COVID-19 should not be interpreted as evidence of absence, the data reviewed indicate that risks from COVID-19 in people with asthma, as a whole, may be less than originally anticipated.

Metronidazole-induced Metallic Taste: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Aims: This study aimed to estimate the incidence rate of metallic taste side effects in a patient who received metronidazole versus tinidazole and link it to the safety profile for metronidazole. Study Design: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Place and Duration of Study: This study where written and revised in the pharmaceutical care department at general network for healthcare providers Hospital, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia. between Mar 2021 and Dec 2021. Methodology: Literature searches were conducted in the following databases: PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. Statistical analysis was performed using Review Manager (RevMan) Version 5.4 software. Results: Our meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials studies confirm that there is a slight increase in the rate of metallic taste adverse effects. Around one-fifth of patients who were treated with tinidazole had developed an incidence rate (5.1%) higher than the patient who treated with metronidazole. Our data shows that the incidence rate of metallic taste adverse effects in patients who received metronidazole was 15.5% (58/373) while the incidence rate in patients who received tinidazole was 20.6% (104/505). But the overall rate of metallic taste adverse effects was not statistically significantly different (RR, 1.07; 95% CI, 0.45 to 2.55; P = 0.87). also, there was statistical heterogeneity in the included studies (I2 = 75%). Conclusion: In our meta-analysis, the incidence rate of metronidazole-associated metallic taste adverse effects was slightly lower than the incidence rate of tinidazole-associated metallic taste adverse effects. It is not statistically significant as the result shows but still shifting the patient to metronidazole instead of tinidazole may decrease the incidence rate of metallic taste by (5.1%) and give good coverage for the microbial than tinidazole.

Efficacy and Adverse Effects of Atropine for Myopia Control in Children: A Meta-Analysis of Randomised Controlled Trials

Objectives. To explore the rebound effects and safety of atropine on accommodation amplitude in slowing myopia progression. Methods. We conducted a meta-analysis to testify proper dosage of atropine in children with myopia. We searched in PubMed, EMBASE, Ovid, and the Cochrane Library up to March 30, 2021. We selected randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that evaluated the efficacy of atropine for controlling myopia progression in children. We performed the inverse variance random-effects model to pool the data using mean difference (MD) for continuous variables. Statistical heterogeneity was assessed using the I2 test. Additionally, we conducted subgroup analyses and sensitivity analyses. Results. Seventeen RCTs involving 2955 participants were included. Myopia progression was significantly less in the atropine group than that of the control group, with MD = 0.38 D per year (95% confidence interval, 0.20 to 0.56). Less axial elongation was shown with MD = −0.19 mm per year (95% CI, −0.25 to −0.12). There was a statistically difference among various doses ( p = 0.00001 ). In addition, 1.0% atropine showed the rebound effect with MD = −0.54 D per year (95% CI, −0.81 to −0.26) and was more effective in the latter six months than in the former one. Less accommodation amplitude was shown in 0.01% atropine. Conclusion. The efficacy of atropine is dose dependent, and 0.01% atropine may be the optimal dose in slowing myopia progression in children with no accommodation dysfunction. A rebound effect is more prominent in high-dose atropine in the former cessation after discontinuation.

Prevalence, types and severity of medication errors associated with the use of automated medication use systems in ambulatory and institutionalized care settings: A systematic review protocol

The use of automated systems within the medication use process has significantly reduce the occurrence of medication errors and the associated clinical and financial burden. However, automated systems lull into a false sense of security and increase the risk of medication errors that are often associated with socio-technical interactions, automation bias, workarounds and overrides. The objective of the systematic review is to determine the prevalence, types and severity of medication errors that are associated the use of automated systems in ambulatory and institutionalized care settings. The search strategy will be guided by PRISMA framework. Selected databases and relevant gray literature were searched and screening was done independently by two researchers between 01 April and 29 June 2021. These covered all relevant articles published from the inception of the use of automation in the medication use process (2000) until 2020. De-duplication and screening of all studies were done independently by two researchers with a clear inclusion / exclusion criteria. Data extraction and synthesis are currently on going (started on 06 July 2021) and being conducted independently but the validity and completeness of the processes will be confirmed by the third researcher. The Cochrane Risk of Bias tool and the Hoy et al’s quality assessment checklist will be used for the assessment of methodological bias while the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) system will be used for the quality of evidence assessment. Detailed qualitative synthesis of key findings will be done with thematic and descriptive analyses. If the number and types of included studies permit, fixed or random effect model meta-analysis will be conducted based on the degree of homogeneity in the sampling frame used in the included studies. Heterogeneity will be assessed with I2 statistics and I2 > 50% will be considered a high statistical heterogeneity. The systematic review may provide new perspective especially from developing settings about the prevalence, types and severity of medication errors associated with the use of automated systems at all the stages of medication use process, and in all categories of patients. This may add to global knowledge in the research area. Systematic review registration: The systematic review was registered and published by PROSPERO (CRD42020212900).

Breech presentation and moxibustion: should it be offered to improve maternal outcomes?

Background It is known that moxibustion promotes cephalic version, thereby increasing the likelihood of vaginal birth, reducing the chances of a caesarean section and augmentation in labour. This study aimed to review and critically appraise research articles on the benefits of moxibustion use for low-risk women with breech presentation. Methods This study reviewed research articles published in English between July 2010 and July 2020. A computerised search using Maternity and Infant Care, CINAHL Complete, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews and Medline databases was undertaken, using a combination of terms such as ‘moxibustion’, ‘childbirth’, ‘birth’, ‘labour’ and ‘labor’. One article was chosen after reading the references of the articles selected. Overall five research articles were analysed using specific critique guidelines. Results The studies confirmed the use of moxibustion to turn a breech fetus, and found that in combination with acupuncture, moxibustion decreases the rate of caesarean section syntocinon use before and during labour for women who had a vaginal birth, as well as slightly decreasing instrumental use at birth. Moxibustion was safe and well accepted by women. However, studies need to be interpreted with caution because of clinical and statistical heterogeneity, and further quality evidence is required. Conclusions Moxibustion use for women with uncomplicated pregnancies may reduce the number of breech presentations at birth, caesarean section rates, syntocinon use and instrumental births.

A likelihood ratio test for the homogeneity of between-study variance in network meta-analysis

Background Network meta-analysis (NMA) is a statistical method used to combine results from several clinical trials and simultaneously compare multiple treatments using direct and indirect evidence. Statistical heterogeneity is a characteristic describing the variability in the intervention effects being evaluated in the different studies in network meta-analysis. One approach to dealing with statistical heterogeneity is to perform a random effects network meta-analysis that incorporates a between-study variance into the statistical model. A common assumption in the random effects model for network meta-analysis is the homogeneity of between-study variance across all interventions. However, there are applications of NMA where the single between-study assumption is potentially incorrect and instead the model should incorporate more than one between-study variances. Methods In this paper, we develop an approach to testing the homogeneity of between-study variance assumption based on a likelihood ratio test. A simulation study was conducted to assess the type I error and power of the proposed test. This method is then applied to a network meta-analysis of antibiotic treatments for Bovine respiratory disease (BRD). Results The type I error rate was well controlled in the Monte Carlo simulation. We found statistical evidence (p value = 0.052) against the homogeneous between-study variance assumption in the network meta-analysis BRD. The point estimate and confidence interval of relative effect sizes are strongly influenced by this assumption. Conclusions Since homogeneous between-study variance assumption is a strong assumption, it is crucial to test the validity of this assumption before conducting a network meta-analysis. Here we propose and validate a method for testing this single between-study variance assumption which is widely used for many NMA.

Effects of Pediatric Traumatic Brain Injury on Verbal IQ: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Objectives: To examine the effects of pediatric traumatic brain injury (TBI) on verbal IQ by severity and over time. Methods: A systematic review and subsequent meta-analysis of verbal IQ by TBI severity were conducted using a random effects model. Subgroup analysis included two epochs of time (e.g., <12 months postinjury and ≥12 months postinjury). Results: Nineteen articles met inclusion criteria after an extensive literature search in MEDLINE, PsycInfo, Embase, and CINAHL. Meta-analysis revealed negative effects of injury across severities for verbal IQ and at both time epochs except for mild TBI < 12 months postinjury. Statistical heterogeneity (i.e., between-study variability) stemmed from studies with inconsistent classification of mild TBI, small sample sizes, and in studies of mixed TBI severities, although not significant. Risk of bias on estimated effects was generally low (k = 15) except for studies with confounding bias (e.g., lack of group matching by socio-demographics; k = 2) and measurement bias (e.g., outdated measure at time of original study, translated measure; k = 2). Conclusions: Children with TBI demonstrate long-term impairment in verbal IQ, regardless of severity. Future studies are encouraged to include scores from subtests within verbal IQ (e.g., vocabulary, similarities, comprehension) in addition to functional language measures (e.g., narrative discourse, reading comprehension, verbal reasoning) to elucidate higher-level language difficulties experienced in this population.