16 research outputs found

    Pharmacogenomic associations of adverse drug reactions in asthma:systematic review and research prioritisation

    Get PDF
    We would like to thank the NIHR Collaboration for Leadership in Applied Health Research and Care North West Coast (CLAHRC) for funding Amanda McKenna’s internship, and Charlotte Kings MPhil, and the members of the PiCA consortia for their help in completing the survey. U. Potočnik, K. Repnik and V. Berce were supported by SysPharmPedia grant, co-financed by Ministry of Education, Science and Sport of the Republic of Slovenia Author information These authors contributed equally: Charlotte King, Amanda McKenna These authors jointly supervised this work: Ian Sinha, Daniel B. HawcuttPeer reviewedPublisher PD

    Pharmacogenomic associations of adverse drug reactions in asthma: systematic review and research prioritisation

    Get PDF
    A systematic review of pharmacogenomic studies capturing adverse drug reactions (ADRs) related to asthma medications was undertaken, and a survey of Pharmacogenomics in Childhood Asthma (PiCA) consortia members was conducted. Studies were eligible if genetic polymorphisms were compared with suspected ADR(s) in a patient with asthma, as either a primary or secondary outcome. Five studies met the inclusion criteria. The ADRs and polymorphisms identified were change in lung function tests (rs1042713), adrenal suppression (rs591118), and decreased bone mineral density (rs6461639) and accretion (rs9896933, rs2074439). Two of these polymorphisms were replicated within the paper, but none had external replication. Priorities from PiCA consortia members (representing 15 institution in eight countries) for future studies were tachycardia (SABA/LABA), adrenal suppression/crisis and growth suppression (corticosteroids), sleep/behaviour disturbances (leukotriene receptor antagonists), and nausea and vomiting (theophylline). Future pharmacogenomic studies in asthma should collect relevant ADR data as well as markers of efficacy

    Reducing the environmental impact of surgery on a global scale: systematic review and co-prioritization with healthcare workers in 132 countries

    Get PDF
    Abstract Background Healthcare cannot achieve net-zero carbon without addressing operating theatres. The aim of this study was to prioritize feasible interventions to reduce the environmental impact of operating theatres. Methods This study adopted a four-phase Delphi consensus co-prioritization methodology. In phase 1, a systematic review of published interventions and global consultation of perioperative healthcare professionals were used to longlist interventions. In phase 2, iterative thematic analysis consolidated comparable interventions into a shortlist. In phase 3, the shortlist was co-prioritized based on patient and clinician views on acceptability, feasibility, and safety. In phase 4, ranked lists of interventions were presented by their relevance to high-income countries and low–middle-income countries. Results In phase 1, 43 interventions were identified, which had low uptake in practice according to 3042 professionals globally. In phase 2, a shortlist of 15 intervention domains was generated. In phase 3, interventions were deemed acceptable for more than 90 per cent of patients except for reducing general anaesthesia (84 per cent) and re-sterilization of ‘single-use’ consumables (86 per cent). In phase 4, the top three shortlisted interventions for high-income countries were: introducing recycling; reducing use of anaesthetic gases; and appropriate clinical waste processing. In phase 4, the top three shortlisted interventions for low–middle-income countries were: introducing reusable surgical devices; reducing use of consumables; and reducing the use of general anaesthesia. Conclusion This is a step toward environmentally sustainable operating environments with actionable interventions applicable to both high– and low–middle–income countries
    corecore