18 research outputs found

    Age and sex differences in emergency department visits of nursing home residents: a systematic review

    No full text
    Abstract Background Nursing home residents (NHRs) are often transferred to emergency departments (EDs). A great proportion of ED visits is considered inappropriate. There is evidence that male NHRs are more often hospitalised, but this is less clear for ED visits. It is unclear, which influence age has on ED visits. We aimed to study the epidemiology of ED visits in NHRs focusing on age- and sex-specific differences. Methods A systematic review was carried out based on articles found in MEDLINE (via PubMed), CINAHL and Scopus. Articles published on or before Aug 31, 2017 were eligible. Two reviewers independently identified articles for inclusion. The quality of studies was assessed by the Joanna Briggs Institute critical appraisal tool for prevalence studies. Results Out of 1192 references, we found seven studies meeting our inclusion criteria. Six studies were conducted in the USA or Canada. Overall, 29–62% of NHRs had at least one ED visit over the course of 1 year. Most studies assessing the influence of sex found that male residents visited EDs more frequently. All but one of the five studies with multivariable analyses reported a statistically significant positive association (with odds or rate ratios of 1.05–1.38). All studies assessed the influence of age. There was no clear pattern with some studies showing no association between ED visits and age and other studies reporting decreasing ED visits with increasing age or increasing proportions followed by a decrease in the highest age group. Studies used 85+ or 86+ years as the highest age category. Hospital admission rate ranged from 36.4 to 48.7%. There was no study reporting stratified analyses by age and sex. Only one study reported main diagnoses leading to ED visits stratified by sex. Conclusion Male NHRs visit EDs more often than females, but there is no evidence on reasons. The association with age is unclear. Any future study on acute care of NHRs should assess the influence of age and sex. These studies should include large sample sizes to provide a more differentiated age categorisation. Trial registration PROSPERO CRD42017074845

    Utilisation of outpatient physiotherapy in patients following total knee arthroplasty – a systematic review

    Get PDF
    Abstract Objective Data on the utilisation of outpatient physiotherapy (PT) in patients following total knee arthroplasty (TKA) are scarce, and available studies have not been systematically synthesised. This study aims to summarise the existing literature on outpatient PT following TKA as well as to identify factors associated with its use. Methods A systematic literature search in MEDLINE (via PubMed), CINAHL, Scopus and PEDro was conducted in July 2020 without language restrictions. Two authors independently selected studies, extracted data and assessed study quality. The primary outcome was the proportion being treated with at least one session of outpatient PT (land- or water-based treatments supervised/provided by a qualified physiotherapist) during any defined period within 12 months following TKA. Furthermore, predictors for the use of PT were assessed. Studies including only revision surgeries or bilateral TKA were excluded. Results After screening 1934 titles/abstracts and 56 full text articles, 5 studies were included. Proportions of PT utilisation ranged from 16.7 to 84.5%. There were large variations in the time periods after hospital discharge (4 weeks to 12 months) and in the reporting of PT definitions. Female sex was associated with higher PT utilisation, and compared to patients after total hip arthroplasty, utilisation was higher among those following TKA. Conclusion Despite using a broad search strategy, we found only 5 studies assessing the utilisation of PT after hospital discharge in patients with TKA. These studies showed large heterogeneity in PT utilisation, assessed time periods and PT definitions. Clearly, more studies from different countries with uniform PT definitions are needed to address this relevant public health question

    A descriptive analysis of the characteristics and the peer review process of systematic review protocols published in an open peer review journal from 2012 to 2017

    No full text
    Abstract Background An a priori design is essential to reduce the risk of bias in systematic reviews (SRs). To this end, authors can register their SR with PROSPERO, and/or publish a SR protocol in an academic journal. The latter has the advantage that the manuscript for the SR protocol is usually peer-reviewed. However, since authors ought not to begin/continue the SR before their protocol has been accepted for publication, it is crucial that SR protocols are processed in a timely manner. Our main aim was to descriptively analyse the peer review process of SR protocols published in ‘BMC Systematic Reviews’ from 2012 to 2017. Methods We systematically searched MEDLINE via PubMed for all SR protocols published in ‘BMC Systematic Reviews’ between 2012 and 2017, except for protocols for overviews, scoping reviews or realist reviews. Data were extracted from the SR protocols and Open Peer Review reports. For each round of peer review, two researchers judged the extent of revision (minor/major) based on the reviewer reports. Their content was further investigated by two researchers in a random 10%-sample using PRISMA-P as a guideline. All data were analysed descriptively. Results We identified 544 eligible protocols published in ‘BMC Systematic Reviews’ between 2012 and 2017. Of those, 485 (89.2%) also registered the SR in PROSPERO, the majority (87.4%) before first submission of the manuscript for the SR protocol (median 49 days). The absolute number of published SR protocols increased from 2012 to 2017 (21 vs 145 protocols), as did the median processing time (61 vs 142 days from submission to acceptance) and the proportion of protocols requiring a major revision after first peer review (19.1% vs 52.4%). Reviewer comments most frequently addressed the PRISMA-P item ‘Eligibility criteria’. Overall, 76.0% of the reviewer comments suggested more transparency. Conclusions The number of published SR protocols increased over the years, but so did the processing time. In 2017, it took several months from submission to acceptance, which is critical from an author’s perspective. New models of peer review such as post publication peer review for SR protocols should be investigated. This could probably be realized with PROSPERO

    Restrictions and their reporting in systematic reviews of effectiveness: an observational study

    No full text
    BACKGROUND: Restrictions in systematic reviews (SRs) can lead to bias and may affect conclusions. Therefore, it is important to report whether and which restrictions were used. This study aims to examine the use of restrictions regarding language, publication period, and study type, as well as the transparency of reporting in SRs of effectiveness. METHODS: A retrospective observational study was conducted with a random sample of 535 SRs of effectiveness indexed in PubMed between 2000 and 2019. The use of restrictions and their reporting were analysed using descriptive statistics. RESULTS: Of the total 535 SRs included, four out of every ten (41.3%) lacked information on at least one of the three restrictions considered (language, publication period, or study type). Overall, 14.6% of SRs did not provide information on restrictions regarding publication period, 19.1% regarding study type, and 18.3% regarding language. Of all included SRs, language was restricted in 46.4%, and in more than half of the SRs with restricted language (130/248), it was unclear whether the restriction was applied during either the search or the screening process, or both. The restrictions were justified for publication period in 22.2% of the respective SRs (33/149), study type in 6.5% (28/433), and language in 3.2% (8/248). Differences in reporting were found between countries as well as between Cochrane and non-Cochrane reviews. CONCLUSIONS: This study suggests that there is a lack of transparency in reporting on restrictions in SRs. Authors as well as editors and reviewers should be encouraged to improve the reporting and justification of restrictions to increase the transparency of SRs

    Deletion of the Sm1 encoding motif in the lsm gene results in distinct changes in the transcriptome and enhanced swarming activity of Haloferax cells

    Get PDF
    Members of the Sm protein family are important for the cellular RNA metabolism in all three domains of life. The family includes archaeal and eukaryotic Lsm proteins, eukaryotic Sm proteins and archaeal and bacterial Hfq proteins. While several studies concerning the bacterial and eukaryotic family members have been published, little is known about the archaeal Lsm proteins. Although structures for several archaeal Lsm proteins have been solved already more than ten years ago, we still do not know much about their biological function, however one can confidently propose that the archaeal Lsm proteins will also be involved in RNA metabolism. Therefore, we investigated this protein in the halophilic archaeon Haloferax volcanii. The Haloferax genome encodes a single Lsm protein, the lsm gene overlaps and is co-transcribed with the gene for the ribosomal L37.eR protein. Here, we show that the reading frame of the lsm gene contains a promoter which regulates expression of the overlapping rpl37R gene. This rpl37R specific promoter ensures high expression of the rpl37R gene in exponential growth phase. To investigate the biological function of the Lsm protein we generated a lsm deletion mutant that had the coding sequence for the Sm1 motif removed but still contained the internal promoter for the downstream rpl37R gene. The transcriptome of this deletion mutant was compared to the wild type transcriptome, revealing that several genes are down-regulated and many genes are up-regulated in the deletion strain. Northern blot analyses confirmed down-regulation of two genes. In addition, the deletion strain showed a gain of function in swarming, in congruence with the up-regulation of transcripts encoding proteins required for motility

    Hospitalization of German and Dutch Nursing Home Residents Depend on Different Long-Term Care Structures:A Systematic Review on Periods of Increased Vulnerability

    No full text
    Objective: To investigate proportions of hospitalized nursing home residents during periods of increased vulnerability, ie, the first 6 months after institutionalization and the last 6 months before death, and comparing the figures between Germany and the Netherlands. Design: Systematic review, registered in PROSPERO (CRD42022312506). Setting and Participants: Newly admitted or deceased residents. Methods: We searched MEDLINE via PubMed, EMBASE, and CINAHL from inception through May 3, 2022. We included all observational studies that reported the proportions of all-cause hospitalizations among German or Dutch nursing home residents during these defined vulnerable periods. Study quality was assessed using the Joanna Briggs Institute's tool. We assessed study and resident characteristics and outcome information and descriptively reported them separately for both countries. Results: We screened 1856 records for eligibility and included 9 studies published in 14 articles (Germany: 8; Netherlands: 6). One study for each country investigated the first 6 months after institutionalization. A total of 10.2% of the Dutch and 42.0% of the German nursing home residents were hospitalized during this time. Overall, 7 studies reported on in-hospital deaths, with proportions ranging from 28.9% to 29.5% for Germany and from 1.0% to 16.3% for the Netherlands. Proportions for hospitalization in the last 30 days of life ranged from 8.0% to 15.7% (Netherlands: n = 2) and from 48.6% to 58.0% (Germany: n = 3). Only German studies assessed the differences by age and sex. Although hospitalizations were less common at older ages, they were more frequent in male residents. Conclusions and Implications: During the observed periods, the proportion of nursing homes residents being hospitalized differed greatly between Germany and the Netherlands. The higher figures for Germany can probably be explained by differences in the long-term care systems. There is a lack of research, especially for the first months after institutionalization, and future studies should examine the care processes of nursing home residents following acute events in more detail.</p
    corecore