652 research outputs found
Optimal oxygen saturations in preterm infants: a moving target.
Purpose of review New evidence is emerging to address the continued uncertainty regarding the optimal range to target oxygen saturation levels in preterm infants. Recent findings A recently published systematic review summarized the existing evidence for currently used oxygen saturation targets in preterm infants and highlighted the paucity of randomized trials addressing this topic. It appears that higher oxygen saturation levels increase the risk of severe retinopathy of prematurity and pulmonary morbidities. However, data regarding the effects of various target ranges on early mortality and long-term neurodevelopmental outcomes is lacking. A collaborative group of investigators from five independent randomized trials was established to answer this question definitively. Although the final analysis will not be available until 2014, interim results from four of these trials revealed an increase in early mortality when the lower oxygen saturation range is targeted. At present it may be prudent not to target oxygen saturation levels below 90%. Whatever the optimal range, consistently maintaining the newborn’s oxygen saturation levels within target proves an additional challenge for providers. Both technological advancements and optimized patient-caregiver ratios may be useful in achieving targeted oxygen saturation goals. Summary Defining and maintaining optimal oxygen saturations in preterm infants remains a challenge for clinicians caring for preterm infants. However, ongoing investigative collaborations may soon provide guidance
A randomised controlled trial of oxygen therapy on growth and development of preterm infants
Background: Physiological studies have shown that many preterm infants and infants with chronic lung disease may suffer chronic hypoxaemia, which possibly leads to poor growth and development. Anecdotal reports indicate that there is a drive to increase the oxygen saturation target range to a higher level in these infants due primarily to perceived benefits derived from clinical experience and from uncontrolled observational studies of babies discharged on home oxygen. Objective The BOOST (Benefits Of Oxygen Saturation Targeting) trial is the first randomised trial to assess the long-term benefits and harms of two different oxygen saturation target ranges. Methods: BOOST was a multicentre, double blinded, randomised controlled trial that enrolled 358 infants born at less than 30 weeks� gestation who remained oxygen-dependent at 32 weeks postmenstrual age. They were randomly assigned to target either a functional oxygen saturation range of 91-94% (standard or control group) or 95-98% (higher or treatment group). The primary outcomes were growth and neurodevelopmental measures at 12 months corrected age. Secondary outcomes included length of hospital stay, retinopathy of prematurity, health service utilisation, parental stress, and infant temperament. Results: Prognostic baseline characteristics did not differ between the two groups. Mean birth weight and gestational age of enrolled infants was 917g and 26.5 weeks respectively. The rate of antenatal corticosteroid use was 83%
Collaboration: protocol for a systematic review with individual participant data meta-analysis of behavioural interventions for the prevention of early childhood obesity.
Introduction Behavioural interventions in early life appear
to show some effect in reducing childhood overweight
and obesity. However, uncertainty remains regarding
their overall effectiveness, and whether effectiveness
differs among key subgroups. These evidence gaps have
prompted an increase in very early childhood obesity
prevention trials worldwide. Combining the individual
participant data (IPD) from these trials will enhance
statistical power to determine overall effectiveness and
enable examination of individual and trial-level subgroups.
We present a protocol for a systematic review with IPD
meta- analysis to evaluate the effectiveness of obesity
prevention interventions commencing antenatally or in
the first year after birth, and to explore whether there are
differential effects among key subgroups.
Methods and analysis Systematic searches of Medline,
Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials,
Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature
(CINAHL), PsycInfo and trial registries for all ongoing
and completed randomised controlled trials evaluating
behavioural interventions for the prevention of early
childhood obesity have been completed up to March
2021 and will be updated annually to include additional
trials. Eligible trialists will be asked to share their IPD;
if unavailable, aggregate data will be used where
possible. An IPD meta-analysis and a nested prospective
meta- analysis will be performed using methodologies
recommended by the Cochrane Collaboration. The
primary outcome will be body mass index z-score at age
24±6 months using WHO Growth Standards, and effect
differences will be explored among prespecified individual
and trial-level subgroups. Secondary outcomes include
other child weight-related measures, infant feeding,
dietary intake, physical activity, sedentary behaviours,
sleep, parenting measures and adverse events.
73)
and Flinders University Social and Behavioural Research
Ethics Committee (HREC CIA2133- 1). Results will be
Department. eminated via publications, presentations and
media releases
Nutrient-enriched formula versus standard formula for preterm infants
BACKGROUND: Preterm infants may accumulate nutrient deficits leading to extrauterine growth restriction. Feeding preterm infants with nutrient-enriched rather than standard formula might increase nutrient accretion and growth rates and might improve neurodevelopmental outcomes. OBJECTIVES: To compare the effects of feeding with nutrient-enriched formula versus standard formula on growth and development of preterm infants. SEARCH METHODS: We used the Cochrane Neonatal standard search strategy. This included electronic searches of the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; 2018, Issue 11), MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (until November 2018), as well as conference proceedings, previous reviews, and clinical trials databases. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised and quasi-randomised controlled trials that compared feeding preterm infants with nutrient-enriched formula (protein and energy plus minerals, vitamins, or other nutrients) versus standard formula. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We extracted data using the Cochrane Neonatal standard methods. Two review authors separately evaluated trial quality and extracted and synthesised data using risk ratios (RRs), risk differences, and mean differences (MDs). We assessed certainty of evidence at the outcome level using Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) methods. MAIN RESULTS: We identified seven trials in which a total of 590 preterm infants participated. Most participants were clinically stable preterm infants of birth weight less than 1850 g. Few participants were extremely preterm, extremely low birth weight, or growth restricted at birth. Trials were conducted more than 30 years ago, were formula industry funded, and were small with methodological weaknesses (including lack of masking) that might bias effect estimates. Meta-analyses of in-hospital growth parameters were limited by statistical heterogeneity. There is no evidence of an effect on time to regain birth weight (MD -1.48 days, 95% confidence interval (CI) -4.73 to 1.77) and low-certainty evidence suggests that feeding with nutrient-enriched formula increases in-hospital rates of weight gain (MD 2.43 g/kg/d, 95% CI 1.60 to 3.26) and head circumference growth (MD 1.04 mm/week, 95% CI 0.18 to 1.89). Meta-analysis did not show an effect on the average rate of length gain (MD 0.22 mm/week, 95% CI -0.70 to 1.13). Fewer data are available for growth and developmental outcomes assessed beyond infancy, and these do not show consistent effects of nutrient-enriched formula feeding. Data from two trials did not show an effect on Bayley Mental Development Index scores at 18 months post term (MD 2.87, 95% CI -1.38 to 7.12; moderate-certainty evidence). Infants who received nutrient-enriched formula had higher Bayley Psychomotor Development Index scores at 18 months post term (MD 6.56. 95% CI 2.87 to 10.26; low-certainty evidence), but no evidence suggested an effect on cerebral palsy (typical RR 0.79, 95% CI 0.30 to 2.07; 2 studies, 377 infants). Available data did not indicate any other benefits or harms and provided low-certainty evidence about the effect of nutrient-enriched formula feeding on the risk of necrotising enterocolitis in preterm infants (typical RR 0.72, 95% CI 0.41 to 1.25; 3 studies, 489 infants). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Available trial data show that feeding preterm infants nutrient-enriched (compared with standard) formulas has only modest effects on growth rates during their initial hospital admission. No evidence suggests effects on long-term growth or development. The GRADE assessment indicates that the certainty of this evidence is low, and that these findings should be interpreted and applied with caution. Further randomised trials would be needed to resolve this uncertainty
How systematic reviews and meta-analyses based on individual participant data can inform trial design and conduct
Improving Resulted Hemoglobin A1c Rates: A Feasibility Study for Point-of-Care Hemoglobin A1c Testing at an Urban Family Medicine Office
Study Aims: Our practice’s goal is to increase the number of up to date hemoglobin A1c for diabetic patients seen at JFMA in order to help improve glycemic control The aim of this study is to see if point of care (POC) hemoglobin A1C is a feasible way to increase the number of up to date hemoglobin A1C. We looked at various factors including timing, training, and flow.https://jdc.jefferson.edu/patientsafetyposters/1037/thumbnail.jp
Effects of targeting lower versus higher arterial oxygen saturations on death or disability in preterm infants
Do systematic reviews on pediatric topics need special methodological considerations?
Abstract
Background
Systematic reviews are key tools to enable decision making by healthcare providers and policymakers. Despite the availability of the evidence based Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA-2009 and PRISMA-P 2015) statements that were developed to improve the transparency and quality of reporting of systematic reviews, uncertainty on how to deal with pediatric-specific methodological challenges of systematic reviews impairs decision-making in child health. In this paper, we identify methodological challenges specific to the design, conduct and reporting of pediatric systematic reviews, and propose a process to address these challenges.
Discussion
One fundamental decision at the outset of a systematic review is whether to focus on a pediatric population only, or to include both adult and pediatric populations. Both from the policy and patient care point of view, the appropriateness of interventions and comparators administered to pre-defined pediatric age subgroup is critical. Decisions need to be based on the biological plausibility of differences in treatment effects across the developmental trajectory in children. Synthesis of evidence from different trials is often impaired by the use of outcomes and measurement instruments that differ between trials and are neither relevant nor validated in the pediatric population. Other issues specific to pediatric systematic reviews include lack of pediatric-sensitive search strategies and inconsistent choices of pediatric age subgroups in meta-analyses. In addition to these methodological issues generic to all pediatric systematic reviews, special considerations are required for reviews of health care interventions’ safety and efficacy in neonatology, global health, comparative effectiveness interventions and individual participant data meta-analyses. To date, there is no standard approach available to overcome this problem. We propose to develop a consensus-based checklist of essential items which researchers should consider when they are planning (PRISMA-PC-Protocol for Children) or reporting (PRISMA-C-reporting for Children) a pediatric systematic review.
Summary
Available guidelines including PRISMA do not cover the complexity associated with the conduct and reporting of systematic reviews in the pediatric population; they require additional and modified standards for reporting items. Such guidance will facilitate the translation of knowledge from the literature to bedside care and policy, thereby enhancing delivery of care and improving child health outcomes
Recruitment strategies in randomised controlled trials of men aged 50 years and older: a systematic review
Objectives: To identify and review evaluations of strategies to recruit men aged 50 years and over to randomised controlled trials (RCTs). Design: Systematic review and narrative synthesis. Data Sources: MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL and ORRCA databases were searched to 1 December 2017. Eligibility Criteria: Studies using quantitative methods to evaluate recruitment strategies to RCTs of men aged 50 years and older. Data Extraction and Synthesis: A single reviewer extracted data (for each strategy, number of participants approached, screened and randomised, and cost). Study quality was assessed using National Heart, Lung and Blood Institute Quality Assessment Tools and considered study design, description of interventions, description and measurement of outcomes, completeness of outcome reporting, performance of statistical testing and consideration of confounders. Recruitment strategies were categorised by the recruitment stage they addressed. Results: Sixteen studies (n >14 000) were included: one good quality, ten fair quality and five poor quality. Studies evaluated strategies to identify prospective participants, and to improve the processes for assessing participant eligibility, providing participant information and seeking consent. In good and fair quality studies, the most effective strategies for identifying participants were referral from an affiliated health service provider (two studies), mass mailing (five studies) and media coverage (two studies). Community outreach activities such as displaying posters and attending local community events were not effective (two studies). Trial-specific training of site recruitment staff, developed using qualitative analysis of recruitment visits (two studies), and provision of study information to prospective participants at a multidisciplinary, group information session (one study) both improved recruitment. Conclusion: Improved engagement of men aged 50 years and older in RCTs is needed. A gender-sensitised approach to RCT recruitment may help to address this need. We have identified several promising recruitment strategies that merit further evaluation.Karen Bracken, Lisa Askie, Anthony C Keech, Wendy Hague, Gary Witter
- …