Exercise therapy in adults with serious mental illness: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background: Individuals with serious mental illness are at a higher risk of physical ill health. Mortality rates are at least twice those of the general population with higher levels of cardiovascular disease, metabolic disease, diabetes, and respiratory illness. Although genetics may have a role in the physical health problems of these patients, lifestyle and environmental factors such as levels of smoking, obesity, poor diet, and low levels of physical activity also play a prominent part.<p></p> Objective: To conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials comparing the effect of exercise interventions on individuals with serious mental illness.<p></p> Methods: Searches were made in Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO, Biological Abstracts on Ovid, and The Cochrane Library (January 2009, repeated January 2013) through to February 2013.<p></p> Results: Eight RCTs were identified in the systematic search. Six compared exercise versus usual care. One study assessed the effect of a cycling programme versus muscle strengthening and toning exercises. The final study compared the effect of adding specific exercise advice and motivational skills to a simple walking programme. Exercise programmes were noted by their heterogeneity in terms of the type of exercise intervention, setting, and outcome measures. The review found that exercise improved levels of exercise activity (n=13, standard mean difference [SMD] 1.81, CI 0.44 to 3.18, p = 0.01). No beneficial effect was found on negative (n = 84, SMD = -0.54, CI -1.79 to 0.71, p = 0.40) or positive symptoms of schizophrenia (n = 84, SMD = -1.66, CI -3.78 to 0.45, p = 0.12). No change was found on body mass index compared with usual care (n= 151, SMD = -0.24, CI -0.56 to 0.08, p = 0.14), or body weight (n = 77, SMD = 0.13, CI -0.32 to 0.58, p = 0.57). No beneficial effect was found on anxiety and depressive symptoms (n = 94, SMD = -0.26, CI -0.91 to 0.39, p = 0.43), or quality of life in respect of physical and mental domains. One RCT measured the effect of exercise on exercise intensity, attendance, and persistence at a programme. No significant effect was found on these measures.<p></p> Conclusions: This systematic review showed that exercise therapies can lead to a modest increase in levels of exercise activity but overall there was no noticeable change for symptoms of mental health, body mass index, and body weight.<p></p&gt

Psychosocial interventions for pain management in older adults with dementia: A systematic review of randomized controlled trials

Aim: To assess the effectiveness of psychosocial interventions on pain in older adults living with dementia. Design: A systematic review with meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Data sources: Scopus, ProQuest, EBSCO (CINAHL and MEDLINE), PubMed, OVID (PsycINFO), Web of Science, and Cochrane Library were searched from their inception up to 2 May 2018. Review Methods: Risk of bias assessment and meta-analysis were conducted according to the Cochrane methods using RevMan 5.3 and findings were generated using the GRADE profiler software. Results: Eight studies met the inclusion criteria, but the quality of the current evidence was low to moderate. Results showed that psychosocial interventions significantly reduced the observational pain score and pain medication. Subgroup analyses indicated that sensory stimulation and individual interventions showed a reduction in observational pain in people with dementia. Conclusion: Findings suggest that psychosocial interventions may be potentially effective alternatives for pain management in people with dementia. However, caution is needed in interpreting these results due to limited studies, risk of bias and heterogeneity across studies. Furthermore, well-designed research is needed on psychosocial interventions to strengthen quality of pain management in people with dementia. Impact: This review synthesized current evidence using psychosocial interventions to manage pain in people with dementia. Findings suggest that psychosocial interventions may lead to a potential reduction in pain and pain medication in people with dementia. Healthcare providers may wish to integrate psychosocial interventions as part of the multimodal approach to the management of pain in people living with dementia.No Full Tex

The impact of mass media interventions on tuberculosis awareness, health-seeking behaviour and health service utilisation : a systematic review protocol

Introduction: Tuberculosis (TB) is a serious public health problem in many parts of the world. Strategies to curb the spread of TB must match the multifaceted nature of the epidemic. The use of mass media is one of the important strategies in communicating behavioural change in relation to TB prevention and the treatment. However, the benefits of this intervention are unclear. We, therefore, plan to conduct a systematic review on the effects of mass media interventions on TB awareness, health-seeking behaviour and health service utilisation. Methods and analysis: We will preferably include randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in this systematic review. However, non-randomised studies will be included if there is an inadequate number of RCTs. We will perform electronic searches in PubMed, Scopus and other databases, along with manual searches. Articles written (or translated) in English and French and published between 1 January 1980 and 31 October 2013 will be eligible for inclusion in this review. The primary outcomes will be TB knowledge, attitudes and awareness, healthcare-seeking behaviour and service utilisation. The secondary outcomes will include stigma and discrimination against people with TB and the costs of the interventions. We will investigate clinical and statistical heterogeneity and pool studies judged to be clinically and statistically homogeneous. Relative risks will be calculated for dichotomous outcomes and mean differences for continuous outcomes, both with their corresponding 95% CIs. Ethics and dissemination: The systematic review will use data that is not linked to individuals. The review findings may have implications for clinical practice and future research, and will be disseminated electronically and in print through peer-reviewed publications

B-type natriuretic peptide-guided treatment for heart failure

Background Heart failure is a condition in which the heart does not pump enough blood to meet all the needs of the body. Symptoms of heart failure include breathlessness, fatigue and fluid retention. Outcomes for patients with heart failure are highly variable; however on average, these patients have a poor prognosis. Prognosis can be improved with early diagnosis and appropriate use of medical treatment, use of devices and transplantation. Patients with heart failure are high users of healthcare resources, not only due to drug and device treatments, but due to high costs of hospitalisation care. B‐type natriuretic peptide levels are already used as biomarkers for diagnosis and prognosis of heart failure, but could offer to clinicians a possible tool to guide drug treatment. This could optimise drug management in heart failure patients whilst allaying concerns over potential side effects due to drug intolerance. Objectives To assess whether treatment guided by serial BNP or NT‐proBNP (collectively referred to as NP) monitoring improves outcomes compared with treatment guided by clinical assessment alone. Search methods Searches were conducted up to 15 March 2016 in the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) in the Cochrane Library; MEDLINE (OVID), Embase (OVID), the Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects (DARE) and the NHS Economic Evaluation Database in the Cochrane Library. Searches were also conducted in the Science Citation Index Expanded, the Conference Proceedings Citation Index on Web of Science (Thomson Reuters), World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry and ClinicalTrials.gov. We applied no date or language restrictions. Selection criteria We included randomised controlled trials of NP‐guided treatment of heart failure versus treatment guided by clinical assessment alone with no restriction on follow‐up. Adults treated for heart failure, in both in‐hospital and out‐of‐hospital settings, and trials reporting a clinical outcome were included. Data collection and analysis Two review authors independently selected studies for inclusion, extracted data and evaluated risk of bias. Risk ratios (RR) were calculated for dichotomous data, and pooled mean differences (MD) (with 95% confidence intervals (CI)) were calculated for continuous data. We contacted trial authors to obtain missing data. Using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach, we assessed the quality of the evidence and GRADE profiler (GRADEPRO) was used to import data from Review Manager to create a 'Summary of findings' table. Main results We included 18 randomised controlled trials with 3660 participants (range of mean age: 57 to 80 years) comparing NP‐guided treatment with clinical assessment alone. The evidence for all‐cause mortality using NP‐guided treatment showed uncertainty (RR 0.87, 95% CI 0.76 to 1.01; patients = 3169; studies = 15; low quality of the evidence), and for heart failure mortality (RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.54 to 1.30; patients = 853; studies = 6; low quality of evidence). The evidence suggested heart failure admission was reduced by NP‐guided treatment (38% versus 26%, RR 0.70, 95% CI 0.61 to 0.80; patients = 1928; studies = 10; low quality of evidence), but the evidence showed uncertainty for all‐cause admission (57% versus 53%, RR 0.93, 95% CI 0.84 to 1.03; patients = 1142; studies = 6; low quality of evidence). Six studies reported on adverse events, however the results could not be pooled (patients = 1144; low quality of evidence). Only four studies provided cost of treatment results, three of these studies reported a lower cost for NP‐guided treatment, whilst one reported a higher cost (results were not pooled; patients = 931, low quality of evidence). The evidence showed uncertainty for quality of life data (MD ‐0.03, 95% CI ‐1.18 to 1.13; patients = 1812; studies = 8; very low quality of evidence). We completed a 'Risk of bias' assessment for all studies. The impact of risk of bias from lack of blinding of outcome assessment and high attrition levels was examined by restricting analyses to only low 'Risk of bias' studies. Authors' conclusions In patients with heart failure low‐quality evidence showed a reduction in heart failure admission with NP‐guided treatment while low‐quality evidence showed uncertainty in the effect of NP‐guided treatment for all‐cause mortality, heart failure mortality, and all‐cause admission. Uncertainty in the effect was further shown by very low‐quality evidence for patient's quality of life. The evidence for adverse events and cost of treatment was low quality and we were unable to pool results.</p

Nasal decongestants in monotherapy for the common cold

Background : Many treatments for the common cold exist and are sold over-the-counter. Nevertheless, evidence on the effectiveness and safety of nasal decongestants is limited. Objectives : To assess the efficacy, and short-and long-termsafety, of nasal decongestants used inmonotherapy to alleviate symptoms of the common cold in adults and children. Search methods : We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL, Issue 6, June 2016), which contains the Cochrane Acute Respiratory Infections (ARI) Specialised Register, MEDLINE (1946 to July 2016), Embase (2010 to 15 July 2016), CINAHL (1981 to 15 July 2016), LILACS (1982 to July 2016), Web of Science (1955 to July 2016) and clinical trials registers. Selection criteria : Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and cluster-RCTs investigating the effectiveness and adverse effects of nasal decongestants compared with placebo for treating the common cold in adults and children. We excluded quasi-RCTs. Data collection and analysis : Three review authors independently extracted and summarised data on subjective measures of nasal congestion, overall patient wellbeing score, objective measures of nasal airway resistance, adverse effects and general recovery. One review author acted as arbiter in cases of disagreement. We categorised trials as single and multi-dose and analysed data both separately and together. We also analysed studies using an oral or topical nasal decongestant separately and together. Main results : We included 15 trials with 1838 participants. Fourteen studies included adult participants only (aged 18 years and over). In six studies the intervention was a single dose and in nine studies multiple doses were used. Nine studies used pseudoephedrine and three studies used oxymetazoline. Other decongestants included phenylpropanolamine, norephedrine and xylometazoline. Phenylpropanolamine (or norephedrine) is no longer available on the market therefore we did not include the results of these studies in the meta-analyses. Eleven studies used oral decongestants; four studies used topical decongestants. Participants were included after contracting the common cold. The duration of symptoms differed among studies; in 10 studies participants had symptoms for less than three days, in three studies symptoms were present for less than five days, one study counted the number of colds over one year, and one study experimentally induced the common cold. In the single-dose studies, the effectiveness of a nasal decongestant was measured on the same day, whereas the follow-up in multi-dose studies ranged between one and 10 days. Most studies were conducted in university settings (N = eight), six at a specific university common cold centre. Three studies were conducted at a university in collaboration with a hospital and two in a hospital only setting. In two studies the setting was unclear. There were large differences in the reporting of outcomes and the reporting of methods in most studies was limited. Therefore, we judged most studies to be at low or unclear risk of bias. Pooling was possible for a limited number of studies only; measures of effect are expressed as standardised mean differences (SMDs). A positive SMD represents an improvement in congestion. There is no defined minimal clinically important difference for measures of subjective improvement in nasal congestion, therefore we used the SMDs as a guide to assess whether an effect was small (0.2 to 0.49), moderate (0.5 to 0.79) or large (>= 0.8). Single-dose decongestant versus placebo: 10 studies compared a single dose of nasal decongestant with placebo and their effectiveness was tested between 15 minutes and 10 hours after dosing. Seven of 10 studies reported subjective symptom scores for nasal congestion; none reported overall patient well-being. However, pooling was not possible due to the large diversity in the measurement and reporting of symptoms of congestion. Two studies recorded adverse events. Both studies used an oral decongestant and each of them showed that there was no statistical difference between the number of adverse events in the treatment group versus the placebo group. Multi-dose decongestant versus placebo: nine studies compared multiple doses of nasal decongestants with placebo, but only five reported on the primary outcome, subjective symptom scores for nasal congestion. Only one study used a topical decongestant; none reported overall patient well-being. Subjective measures of congestion were significantly better for the treatment group compared with placebo approximately three hours after the last dose (SMD 0.49, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.07 to 0.92; P = 0.02; GRADE: low-quality evidence). However, the SMD of 0.49 only indicates a small clinical effect. Pooling was based on two studies, one oral and one topical, therefore we were unable to assess the effects of oral and topical decongestants separately. Seven studies reported adverse events (six oral and one topical decongestant); meta-analysis showed that there was no statistical difference between the number of adverse events in the treatment group (125 per 1000) compared to the placebo group (126 per 1000). The odds ratio (OR) for adverse events in the treatment group was 0.98 (95% CI 0.68 to 1.40; P = 0.90; GRADE: low-quality evidence). The results remained the same when we only considered studies using an oral decongestant (OR 0.95, 95% CI 0.65 to 1.39; P = 0.80; GRADE: low-quality evidence). Authors' conclusions : We were unable to draw conclusions on the effectiveness of single-dose nasal decongestants due to the limited evidence available. For multiple doses of nasal decongestants, the current evidence suggests that these may have a small positive effect on subjective measures of nasal congestion in adults with the common cold. However, the clinical relevance of this small effect is unknown and there is insufficient good-quality evidence to draw any firm conclusions. Due to the small number of studies that used a topical nasal decongestant, we were also unable to draw conclusions on the effectiveness of oral versus topical decongestants. Nasal decongestants do not seem to increase the risk of adverse events in adults in the short term. The effectiveness and safety of nasal decongestants in children and the clinical relevance of their small effect in adults is yet to be determined

Group-Based Parent Training Interventions for Parents of Children with Autism Spectrum Disorders: a Literature Review

© 2018, Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature. Parents of children with autism spectrum disorders should have access to interventions to help them understand and support their child. This literature review examines the existing evidence for group-based parent training interventions that support parents of children with autism. From the literature, core intervention processes and outcomes are identified and include parenting and parent behaviour, parent health, child behaviour and peer and social support. Results show a positive trend for intervention effectiveness, but findings are limited by low-quality studies and heterogeneity of intervention content, outcomes and outcome measurement. Future research should focus on specifying effective intervention ingredients and modes of delivery, consistent and reliable outcome measurement, and improving methodological rigour to build a more robust evidence base

Telehealthcare for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

BACKGROUND: Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is a disease of irreversible airways obstruction in which patients often suffer exacerbations. Sometimes these exacerbations need hospital care: telehealthcare has the potential to reduce admission to hospital when used to administer care to the pateint from within their own home. OBJECTIVES: To review the effectiveness of telehealthcare for COPD compared with usual face‐to‐face care. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Airways Group Specialised Register, which is derived from systematic searches of the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, AMED, and PsycINFO; last searched January 2010. SELECTION CRITERIA: We selected randomised controlled trials which assessed telehealthcare, defined as follows: healthcare at a distance, involving the communication of data from the patient to the health carer, usually a doctor or nurse, who then processes the information and responds with feedback regarding the management of the illness. The primary outcomes considered were: number of exacerbations, quality of life as recorded by the St George's Respiratory Questionnaire, hospitalisations, emergency department visits and deaths. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two authors independently selected trials for inclusion and extracted data. We combined data into forest plots using fixed‐effects modelling as heterogeneity was low (I(2) < 40%). MAIN RESULTS: Ten trials met the inclusion criteria. Telehealthcare was assessed as part of a complex intervention, including nurse case management and other interventions. Telehealthcare was associated with a clinically significant increase in quality of life in two trials with 253 participants (mean difference ‐6.57 (95% confidence interval (CI) ‐13.62 to 0.48); minimum clinically significant difference is a change of ‐4.0), but the confidence interval was wide. Telehealthcare showed a significant reduction in the number of patients with one or more emergency department attendances over 12 months; odds ratio (OR) 0.27 (95% CI 0.11 to 0.66) in three trials with 449 participants, and the OR of having one or more admissions to hospital over 12 months was 0.46 (95% CI 0.33 to 0.65) in six trials with 604 participants. There was no significant difference in the OR for deaths over 12 months for the telehealthcare group as compared to the usual care group in three trials with 503 participants; OR 1.05 (95% CI 0.63 to 1.75). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Telehealthcare in COPD appears to have a possible impact on the quality of life of patients and the number of times patients attend the emergency department and the hospital. However, further research is needed to clarify precisely its role since the trials included telehealthcare as part of more complex packages

Effectiveness and Content Analysis of Interventions to Enhance Oral Antidiabetic Drug Adherence in Adults with Type 2 Diabetes : Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

We thank Frederic Bergeron, information scientist, for assistance in search strategies. We thank American Journal Experts for editing the text. Source of financial support: This study was funded by the Laval University Chair on Adherence to Treatments. This Chair is supported by nonrestricted grants from AstraZeneca Canada, Merck Canada, Sanofi Canada, and Pfizer Canada and from the Prends soin de toi program (a Quebec provincial program for the improvement of public health).Peer reviewedPostprin