Surgical treatments for women with stress urinary incontinence : a systematic review of economic evidence

Acknowledgements We would like to acknowledge all those involved in the wider study exploring the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of surgical treatments for women with stress urinary incontinence. Funding This research was commissioned by the NIHR HTA Programme as project number 15/09/06. The views expressed are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the NHS, the NIHR or the Department of Health and Social Care, UK. The funders were not actively involved in the research process at any stage. The study design, collection, analysis and interpretation of data, the writing of the manuscript and the decision to submit it for publication were all performed independent of the funders.Peer reviewedPublisher PD

Guidelines for the management of postmenopausal osteoporosis for GPs

Copyright © 2004 Royal Australian College of General Practitioners Copyright to Australian Family Physician. Reproduced with permission. Permission to reproduce must be sought from the publisher, The Royal Australian College of General Practitioners.Background: Since the last series of guidelines on the management of osteoporosis from Osteoporosis Australia was published in Australian Family Physician (October 2002), there have been further advances in our understanding of the treatment involved in both the prevention of bone loss and the management of established osteoporosis. Objective: This article provides updated guidelines for the management of postmenopausal osteoporosis to assist general practitioners identify those women at risk, and reviews current treatment strategies. DISCUSSION: Osteoporosis and its associated problems are major health concerns in Australia, especially with an aging population. While important principles of management are still considered to be maximising peak bone mass and preventing postmenopausal bone loss, new clinical trial data about drugs such as the bisphosphonates, raloxifene and oestrogen have recently become available and the relative role of various agents is gradually becoming clearer. The use of long term hormone therapy has mixed risks and benefits that requires individual patient counselling.O'Neill S; MacLennan A; Bass S; Diamond T; Ebeling P; Findlay D; Flicker L; Markwell A; Nowson C; Pocock N; Sambrook P; Singh M

Guidelines for the management of postmenopausal osteoporosis for GPs

BACKGROUND : Since the last series of guidelines on the management of osteoporosis from Osteoporosis Australia was published in Australian Family Physician (October 2002), there have been further advances in our understanding of the treatment involved in both the prevention of bone loss and the management of established osteoporosis.OBJECTIVE : This article provides updated guidelines for the management of postmenopausal osteoporosis to assist general practitioners identify those women at risk, and reviews current treatment strategies.DISCUSSION : Osteoporosis and its associated problems are major health concerns in Australia, especially with an aging population. While important principles of management are still considered to be maximising peak bone mass and preventing postmenopausal bone loss, new clinical trial data about drugs such as the bisphosphonatesr raloxifene and oestrogen have recently become available and the relative role of various agents is gradually becoming clearer. The use of long term hormone therapy has mixed risks and benefits that requires individual patient counselling.<br /

Surgical treatments for women with stress urinary incontinence : the ESTER systematic review and economic evaluation

Funded by The National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment programme.Peer reviewedPublisher PD

Surgical interventions for women with stress urinary incontinence : systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials

Funding: This project was funded by the NIHR HTA programme (project No 15/09/06). The views expressed are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the National Health Service, the NIHR, or the Department of Health and Social Care, UK. The funders were not actively involved in the research process at any stage. The study design; collection, analysis, and interpretation of data; writing of the manuscript; and decision to submit it for publication were performed independent of the funders.Peer reviewedPublisher PD

Self-care and adherence to medication: a survey in the hypertension outpatient clinic

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Self-care practices for patients with hypertension include adherence to medication, use of blood pressure self-monitoring and use of complementary and alternative therapies (CAM) The prevalence of CAM use and blood pressure self-monitoring have not been described in a UK secondary care population of patients with hypertension and their impact on adherence to medication has not been described. Adherence to medication is important for blood pressure control, but poor adherence is common. The study aimed to determine the prevalence of self-care behaviours in patients attending a secondary care hypertension clinic.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Cross-sectional questionnaire survey. 196 patients attending a secondary care hypertension clinic in a teaching hospital serving a multiethnic population, Birmingham, UK. Main outcome measures: Prevalence of use of CAM, home monitors, adherence to anti-hypertensive medication.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>CAM use in previous 12 months was reported by 66 (43.1%) respondents. CAM users did not differ statistically from non-CAM users by age, gender, marital status or education. Vitamins, prayer a dietary supplements were the most commonly used CAM. Nine (12.7%) women reported using herbal CAM compared to one man (1.2%), (p = 0.006). Ten (6.7%) respondents reported ever being asked by a doctor about CAM use. Perfect adherence to anti-hypertensive medication was reported by 26 (44.8%) CAM-users and 46 (60.5%) non-CAM users (p = 0.07). Being female and a CAM user was significantly associated with imperfect adherence to anti-hypertensive medication. Older and white British respondents were significantly more likely to report perfect adherence. Blood pressure monitors were used by 67 (43.8%) respondents, which was not associated with gender, CAM use or adherence to medication.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Hypertensive patients use a variety of self-care methods, including CAM, home blood pressure monitors, and adherence to prescribed medication. This study found the prevalence of CAM use in hypertensive patients was higher than in the UK population. It is important to acknowledge the self-care behaviour of hypertensive patients, in order to assess potential harm, and encourage effective methods of self-care.</p

Effects of antiplatelet therapy on stroke risk by brain imaging features of intracerebral haemorrhage and cerebral small vessel diseases: subgroup analyses of the RESTART randomised, open-label trial

Background Findings from the RESTART trial suggest that starting antiplatelet therapy might reduce the risk of recurrent symptomatic intracerebral haemorrhage compared with avoiding antiplatelet therapy. Brain imaging features of intracerebral haemorrhage and cerebral small vessel diseases (such as cerebral microbleeds) are associated with greater risks of recurrent intracerebral haemorrhage. We did subgroup analyses of the RESTART trial to explore whether these brain imaging features modify the effects of antiplatelet therapy

Effect of Hydrocortisone on Mortality and Organ Support in Patients With Severe COVID-19: The REMAP-CAP COVID-19 Corticosteroid Domain Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Evidence regarding corticosteroid use for severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is limited. Objective: To determine whether hydrocortisone improves outcome for patients with severe COVID-19. Design, Setting, and Participants: An ongoing adaptive platform trial testing multiple interventions within multiple therapeutic domains, for example, antiviral agents, corticosteroids, or immunoglobulin. Between March 9 and June 17, 2020, 614 adult patients with suspected or confirmed COVID-19 were enrolled and randomized within at least 1 domain following admission to an intensive care unit (ICU) for respiratory or cardiovascular organ support at 121 sites in 8 countries. Of these, 403 were randomized to open-label interventions within the corticosteroid domain. The domain was halted after results from another trial were released. Follow-up ended August 12, 2020. Interventions: The corticosteroid domain randomized participants to a fixed 7-day course of intravenous hydrocortisone (50 mg or 100 mg every 6 hours) (n = 143), a shock-dependent course (50 mg every 6 hours when shock was clinically evident) (n = 152), or no hydrocortisone (n = 108). Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary end point was organ support-free days (days alive and free of ICU-based respiratory or cardiovascular support) within 21 days, where patients who died were assigned -1 day. The primary analysis was a bayesian cumulative logistic model that included all patients enrolled with severe COVID-19, adjusting for age, sex, site, region, time, assignment to interventions within other domains, and domain and intervention eligibility. Superiority was defined as the posterior probability of an odds ratio greater than 1 (threshold for trial conclusion of superiority >99%). Results: After excluding 19 participants who withdrew consent, there were 384 patients (mean age, 60 years; 29% female) randomized to the fixed-dose (n = 137), shock-dependent (n = 146), and no (n = 101) hydrocortisone groups; 379 (99%) completed the study and were included in the analysis. The mean age for the 3 groups ranged between 59.5 and 60.4 years; most patients were male (range, 70.6%-71.5%); mean body mass index ranged between 29.7 and 30.9; and patients receiving mechanical ventilation ranged between 50.0% and 63.5%. For the fixed-dose, shock-dependent, and no hydrocortisone groups, respectively, the median organ support-free days were 0 (IQR, -1 to 15), 0 (IQR, -1 to 13), and 0 (-1 to 11) days (composed of 30%, 26%, and 33% mortality rates and 11.5, 9.5, and 6 median organ support-free days among survivors). The median adjusted odds ratio and bayesian probability of superiority were 1.43 (95% credible interval, 0.91-2.27) and 93% for fixed-dose hydrocortisone, respectively, and were 1.22 (95% credible interval, 0.76-1.94) and 80% for shock-dependent hydrocortisone compared with no hydrocortisone. Serious adverse events were reported in 4 (3%), 5 (3%), and 1 (1%) patients in the fixed-dose, shock-dependent, and no hydrocortisone groups, respectively. Conclusions and Relevance: Among patients with severe COVID-19, treatment with a 7-day fixed-dose course of hydrocortisone or shock-dependent dosing of hydrocortisone, compared with no hydrocortisone, resulted in 93% and 80% probabilities of superiority with regard to the odds of improvement in organ support-free days within 21 days. However, the trial was stopped early and no treatment strategy met prespecified criteria for statistical superiority, precluding definitive conclusions. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02735707

The impact of immediate breast reconstruction on the time to delivery of adjuvant therapy: the iBRA-2 study

Background: Immediate breast reconstruction (IBR) is routinely offered to improve quality-of-life for women requiring mastectomy, but there are concerns that more complex surgery may delay adjuvant oncological treatments and compromise long-term outcomes. High-quality evidence is lacking. The iBRA-2 study aimed to investigate the impact of IBR on time to adjuvant therapy. Methods: Consecutive women undergoing mastectomy ± IBR for breast cancer July–December, 2016 were included. Patient demographics, operative, oncological and complication data were collected. Time from last definitive cancer surgery to first adjuvant treatment for patients undergoing mastectomy ± IBR were compared and risk factors associated with delays explored. Results: A total of 2540 patients were recruited from 76 centres; 1008 (39.7%) underwent IBR (implant-only [n = 675, 26.6%]; pedicled flaps [n = 105,4.1%] and free-flaps [n = 228, 8.9%]). Complications requiring re-admission or re-operation were significantly more common in patients undergoing IBR than those receiving mastectomy. Adjuvant chemotherapy or radiotherapy was required by 1235 (48.6%) patients. No clinically significant differences were seen in time to adjuvant therapy between patient groups but major complications irrespective of surgery received were significantly associated with treatment delays. Conclusions: IBR does not result in clinically significant delays to adjuvant therapy, but post-operative complications are associated with treatment delays. Strategies to minimise complications, including careful patient selection, are required to improve outcomes for patients