Procalcitonin, C-reactive protein, and presepsin for the diagnosis of sepsis in adults and children

CITATION: Onyenekwu, C. P., Okwundu, C. I. & Ochodo, E. A. 2017. Procalcitonin, C-reactive protein, and presepsin for the diagnosis of sepsis in adults and children. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, 4:1-15, Art. CD012627, doi:10.1002/14651858.CD012627.The original publication is available at https://www.cochranelibrary.comThis is a protocol for a Cochrane Review (Diagnostic test accuracy). The objectives are as follows: The objectives of this review are: - To assess the diagnostic accuracy of PCT, CRP and presepsin for sepsis in adults and children. - To investigate sources of heterogeneity in the estimates of diagnostic accuracy. - To compare the performance of the above tests.https://www.cochranelibrary.com/cdsr/doi/10.1002/14651858.CD012627/fullPublisher's versio

Protocol for a qualitative synthesis of barriers and facilitators in implementing guidelines for diagnosis of tuberculosis

CITATION: Ochodo, E., Kredo, T., Young, T. & Wiysonge, C. S. 2017. Protocol for a qualitative synthesis of barriers and facilitators in implementing guidelines for diagnosis of tuberculosis. BMJ Open, 7(6):e013717. doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2016-013717.The original publication is available at https://bmjopen.bmj.com/Introduction Despite the introduction of new tests and guidelines for diagnosis of tuberculosis (TB), worldwide case detection rate of TB is still suboptimal. This could be in part explained by the poor implementation of TB diagnostic guidelines. We aim to identify, appraise and synthesise qualitative evidence exploring the barriers and facilitators to implementing TB diagnostic guidelines. Methods and analysis A systematic review of qualitative studies will be conducted. Relevant electronic databases will be searched and studies included based on predefined inclusion criteria. We will also search reference lists, grey literature, conduct forward citation searches and contact relevant content experts. An adaptation of the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme tool will be used to assess the methodological quality of included studies. Two authors will review the search output, extract data and assess methodological quality independently, resolving any disagreements by consensus. We will use the thematic framework analysis approach based on the Supporting the Use of Research Evidence thematic framework to analyse and synthesise our data. We will apply the Confidence in the Evidence from Reviews of Qualitative research approach to transparently assess our confidence in the findings of the systematic review.publishers versio

The efficacy and safety of complete pericardial drainage by means of intrapericardial fibrinolysis for the prevention of complications of pericardial effusion : a systematic review protocol

CITATION: Kakia, A., et al. 2016. The efficacy and safety of complete pericardial drainage by means of intrapericardial fibrinolysis for the prevention of complications of pericardial effusion : a systematic review protocol. BMJ Open, 6:e007842, doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2015-007842.The original publication is available at http://bmjopen.bmj.comENGLISH SUMMARY : Introduction: Intrapericardial fibrinolysis has been proposed as a means of preventing complications of pericardial effusion such as cardiac tamponade, persistent and recurrent pericardial effusion, and pericardial constriction. There is a need to understand the efficacy and safety of this procedure because it shows promise. Methods and analysis: We aim to assess the effects of intrapericardial fibrinolysis in the treatment of pericardial effusion. We will search PubMed, the Cochrane Library, African Journals online, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, Trip database, Clinical trials.gov and the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform for studies that evaluate the efficacy and/or safety of complete pericardial fluid drainage by intrapericardial fibrinolysis irrespective of study design, geographical location, language, age of participants, aetiology of pericarditis or types of fibrinolytics. Two authors will do the search independently, screen the search outputs for potentially eligible studies and assess whether the studies meet the inclusion criteria. Discrepancies between the two authors will be resolved through discussion and arbitration by a third author. Data from the selected studies shall be extracted using a standardised data collection form which will be piloted before use. The methodological quality of studies will be assessed using the Cochrane Collaboration’s tools for assessing risk of bias for experimental studies and non-randomised studies, respectively. The primary meta- analysis will use random effects models due to expected interstudy heterogeneity. Dichotomous data will be analysed using relative risk and continuous with data mean differences, both with 95% CIs.http://bmjopen.bmj.com/content/6/1/e007842Publisher's versio