Historical land degradation strongly influences soil geography : a case in Ethiopia’s mountains

C

Does therapeutic writing help people with long-term conditions? Systematic review, realist synthesis and economic considerations

Background Writing therapy to improve physical or mental health can take many forms. The most researched model of therapeutic writing (TW) is unfacilitated, individual expressive writing (written emotional disclosure). Facilitated writing activities are less widely researched. Data sources Databases including: MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsychINFO, Linguistics and Language Behavior Abstracts, AMED, and CINHAL were searched from inception to March 2013. Review methods Four TW practitioners provided expert advice. Study procedures were conducted by one reviewer and checked by a second. Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and non-randomised comparative studies were included. Quality was appraised using the Cochrane risk of bias tool. Unfacilitated and facilitated TW studies were analysed separately under ICD-10 chapter headings. Meta-analyses were performed where possible using Revman 5.2. Costs were estimated from an NHS perspective and three cost-consequence case studies were prepared. Realist synthesis followed RAMESES guidelines. Objectives To review the clinical and cost-effectiveness of TW for people with long-term health conditions (LTCs) compared to no writing, or other controls, reporting any relevant clinical outcomes. To conduct a realist synthesis to understand how TW might work, and for whom. Results From 14,658 unique citations, 284 full text papers were reviewed and 64 studies (58 RCTs) were included in the final effectiveness reviews. Five studies examined facilitated TW, these were extremely heterogeneous with unclear or high risk of bias, but suggested that facilitated TW interventions may be beneficial in individual LTCs. Unfacilitated expressive writing was examined in 59 studies of variable, or unreported, quality. Overall there was very little or no evidence of any benefit reported in the following conditions (number of studies): HIV (six); breast cancer (eight); gynaecological and genitourinary cancers (five); mental health (five); asthma (four); psoriasis (three); chronic pain (four). In inflammatory arthropathies (six) there was a reduction in disease severity (n= 191, standardised mean difference (SMD) - 0.61 [95% confidence intervals (95% CI) -0.96, -0.26]) in the short term on meta-analysis of four studies. For all other LTCs there was either no, or sparse, data with no, or inconsistent, evidence of benefit. Meta-analyses conducted across all the LTCs provided no evidence that unfacilitated EW had any effect on depression at short term (n= 1,563, SMD -0.06, 95% CI -0.29 to 0.17, substantial heterogeneity), or long term (n= 778, SMD-0.04 95% CI -0.18 to 0.10, little heterogeneity) follow up, or on anxiety, physiological or biomarker-based outcomes. One study reported costs, none reported cost-effectiveness, twelve reported resource use; meta-analysis suggested reduced medication use but no impact on health centre visits. Estimated costs of intervention were low, but there was insufficient evidence to judge cost-effectiveness. Realist review findings suggested that facilitated TW is a complex intervention and group interaction contributes to the perception of benefit. It was unclear from the available data who might benefit most from facilitated TW. Limitations Difficulties with developing realist review programme theory meant that mechanisms operating during TW remain obscure. Conclusions Overall there is little evidence to support the effectiveness or cost-effectiveness of unfacilitated expressive writing interventions in people with LTCs. Further research focussed on facilitated TW in people with LTCs could be informative.The National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment programme

Antibiotic resistance prevalence and trends in patients infected with helicobacter pylori in the period 2013–2020: Results of the european registry on h. pylori management (hp-eureg)

Background: Bacterial antibiotic resistance changes over time depending on multiple factors; therefore, it is essential to monitor the susceptibility trends to reduce the resistance impact on the effectiveness of various treatments. Objective: To conduct a time-trend analysis of Helicobacter pylori resistance to antibiotics in Europe. Methods: The international prospective European Registry on Heli-cobacter pylori Management (Hp-EuReg) collected data on all infected adult patients diagnosed with culture and antimicrobial susceptibility testing positive results that were registered at AEG-REDCap e-CRF until December 2020. Results: Overall, 41,562 patients were included in the Hp-EuReg. Culture and antimicrobial susceptibility testing were performed on gastric biopsies of 3974 (9.5%) patients, of whom 2852 (7%) were naive cases included for analysis. The number of positive cultures decreased by 35% from the period 2013–2016 to 2017–2020. Concerning naïve patients, no antibiotic resistance was found in 48% of the cases. The most frequent resistances were reported against metronidazole (30%), clarithromycin (25%), and levofloxacin (20%), whereas resistances to tetracycline and amoxicillin were below 1%. Dual and triple resistances were found in 13% and 6% of the cases, respectively. A decrease (p < 0.001) in the metronidazole resistance rate was observed between the 2013–2016 (33%) and 2017–2020 (24%) periods. Conclusion: Culture and antimicrobial susceptibility testing for Helicobacter pylori are scarcely performed (<10%) in Europe. In naïve patients, Helicobacter pylori resistance to clarithromycin remained above 15% throughout the period 2013–2020 and resistance to levofloxacin, as well as dual or triple resistances, were high. A progressive decrease in metronidazole resistance was observed

Conservation by trans-border cooperation: population genetic structure and diversity of geoffroy’s bat (Myotis emarginatus) at its north-western european range edge

In the European Union, all bat species are strictly protected and member states must ensure their conservation. However, if populations are genetically structured, conservation units that correspond to whole countries may be too large, putting small populations with specific conservation requirements at risk. Geoffroy’s bat (Myotis emarginatus) has undergone well-documented declines at its north-western European range edge between the 1960 and 1990s and is considered to be negatively affected by habitat fragmentation. Here we analysed the species’ genetic population structure and diversity to identify subpopulations with reduced genetic diversity and to scientifically inform conservation management. We generated 811 microsatellite-based genetic profiles obtained from 42 European nursery colonies and analysed a total of 932 sequences of the hypervariable region II of the mitochondrial control region sampled from across Europe. While two geographically widespread genetic populations were inferred to be present in north-western Europe, both nuclear and mitochondrial genetic diversity were lowest in the areas that had experienced a decline during the last century. A microsatellite-based analysis of demographic history did not permit, however, to unequivocally link that reduced genetic diversity to the population contraction event. Given the large geographic extent of the genetic populations, preserving the connectivity of mating sites requires concerted conservation efforts across multiple political jurisdictions. Genetic monitoring ought to be done on a regular basis to ensure that large-scale connectivity is maintained and further loss of genetic diversity is prevented

Analysis of Clinical Phenotypes through Machine Learning of First-Line H. pylori Treatment in Europe during the Period 2013–2022: Data from the European Registry on H. pylori Management (Hp-EuReg)

The segmentation of patients into homogeneous groups could help to improve eradication therapy effectiveness. Our aim was to determine the most important treatment strategies used in Europe, to evaluate first-line treatment effectiveness according to year and country. Data collection: All first-line empirical treatments registered at AEGREDCap in the European Registry on Helicobacter pylori management (Hp-EuReg) from June 2013 to November 2022. A Boruta method determined the “most important” variables related to treatment effectiveness. Data clustering was performed through multi-correspondence analysis of the resulting six most important variables for every year in the 2013–2022 period. Based on 35,852 patients, the average overall treatment effectiveness increased from 87% in 2013 to 93% in 2022. The lowest effectiveness (80%) was obtained in 2016 in cluster #3 encompassing Slovenia, Lithuania, Latvia, and Russia, treated with 7-day triple therapy with amoxicillin–clarithromycin (92% of cases). The highest effectiveness (95%) was achieved in 2022, mostly in Spain (81%), with the bismuth–quadruple therapy, including the single-capsule (64%) and the concomitant treatment with clarithromycin–amoxicillin–metronidazole/tinidazole (34%) with 10 (69%) and 14 (32%) days. Cluster analysis allowed for the identification of patients in homogeneous treatment groups assessing the effectiveness of different first-line treatments depending on therapy scheme, adherence, country, and prescription year

Role of proton pump inhibitors dosage and duration in Helicobacter pylori eradication treatment: Results from the European Registry on H. pylori management

Background: Management of Helicobacter pylori (H. pylori) infection requires co-treatment with proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) and the use of antibiotics to achieve successful eradication. Aim: To evaluate the role of dosage of PPIs and the duration of therapy in the effectiveness of H. pylori eradication treatments based on the ‘European Registry on Helicobacter pylori management’ (Hp-EuReg). Methods: Hp-EuReg is a multicentre, prospective, non-interventionist, international registry on the routine clinical practice of H. pylori management by European gastroenterologists. All infected adult patients were systematically registered from 2013 to 2022. Results: Overall, 36,579 patients from five countries with more than 1000 patients were analysed. Optimal (≥90%) first-line-modified intention-to-treat effectiveness was achieved with the following treatments: (1) 14-day therapies with clarithromycin-amoxicillin-bismuth and metronidazole-tetracycline-bismuth, both independently of the PPI dose prescribed; (2) All 10-day (except 10-day standard triple therapy) and 14-day therapies with high-dose PPIs; and (3) 10-day quadruple therapies with clarithromycin-amoxicillin-bismuth, metronidazole-tetracycline-bismuth, and clarithromycin-amoxicillin-metronidazole (sequential), all with standard-dose PPIs. In first-line treatment, optimal effectiveness was obtained with high-dose PPIs in all 14-day treatments, in 10- and 14-day bismuth quadruple therapies and in 10-day sequential with standard-dose PPIs. Optimal second-line effectiveness was achieved with (1) metronidazole-tetracycline-bismuth quadruple therapy for 14- and 10 days with standard and high-dose PPIs, respectively; and (2) levofloxacin-amoxicillin triple therapy for 14 days with high-dose PPIs. None of the 7-day therapies in both treatment lines achieved optimal effectiveness. Conclusions: We recommend, in first-line treatment, the use of high-dose PPIs in 14-day triple therapy and in 10-or 14-day quadruple concomitant therapy in first-line treatment, while standard-dose PPIs would be sufficient in 10-day bismuth quadruple therapies. On the other hand, in second-line treatment, high-dose PPIs would be more beneficial in 14-day triple therapy with levofloxacin and amoxicillin or in 10-day bismuth quadruple therapy either as a three-in-one single capsule or in the traditional scheme

Integration of robotic surgery into routine practice and impacts on communication, collaboration, and decision making: A realist process evaluation protocol

Background: Robotic surgery offers many potential benefits for patients. While an increasing number of healthcare providers are purchasing surgical robots, there are reports that the technology is failing to be introduced into routine practice. Additionally, in robotic surgery, the surgeon is physically separated from the patient and the rest of the team, with the potential to negatively impact teamwork in the operating theatre. The aim of this study is to ascertain: how and under what circumstances robotic surgery is effectively introduced into routine practice; and how and under what circumstances robotic surgery impacts teamwork, communication and decision making, and subsequent patient outcomes. Methods and design: We will undertake a process evaluation alongside a randomised controlled trial comparing laparoscopic and robotic surgery for the curative treatment of rectal cancer. Realist evaluation provides an overall framework for the study. The study will be in three phases. In Phase I, grey literature will be reviewed to identify stakeholders' theories concerning how robotic surgery becomes embedded into surgical practice and its impacts. These theories will be refined and added to through interviews conducted across English hospitals that are using robotic surgery for rectal cancer resection with staff at different levels of the organisation, along with a review of documentation associated with the introduction of robotic surgery. In Phase II, a multi-site case study will be conducted across four English hospitals to test and refine the candidate theories. Data will be collected using multiple methods: the structured observation tool OTAS (Observational Teamwork Assessment for Surgery); video recordings of operations; ethnographic observation; and interviews. In Phase III, interviews will be conducted at the four case sites with staff representing a range of surgical disciplines, to assess the extent to which the results of Phase II are generalisable and to refine the resulting theories to reflect the experience of a broader range of surgical disciplines. The study will provide (i) guidance to healthcare organisations on factors likely to facilitate successful implementation and integration of robotic surgery, and (ii) guidance on how to ensure effective communication and teamwork when undertaking robotic surgery