What is the effect of a formalised trauma tertiary survey procedure on missed injury rates in multi-trauma patients? Study protocol for a randomised controlled trial

Background: Missed injury is commonly used as a quality indicator in trauma care. The trauma tertiary survey (TTS) has been proposed to reduce missed injuries. However a systematic review assessing the effect of the TTS on missed injury rates in trauma patients found only observational studies, only suggesting a possible increase in early detection and reduction in missed injuries, with significant potential biases. Therefore, more robust methods are necessary to test whether implementation of a formal TTS will increase early in-hospital injury detection, decrease delayed diagnosis and decrease missed injuries after hospital discharge. Methods/Design: We propose a cluster-randomised, controlled trial to evaluate trauma care enhanced with a formalised TTS procedure. Currently, 20 to 25% of trauma patients routinely have a TTS performed. We expect this to increase to at least 75%. The design is for 6,380 multi-trauma patients in approximately 16 hospitals recruited over 24 months. In the first 12 months, patients will be randomised (by hospital) and allocated 1:1 to receive either the intervention (Group 1) or usual care (Group 2). The recruitment for the second 12 months will entail Group 1 hospitals continuing the TTS, and the Group 2 hospitals beginning it to enable estimates of the persistence of the intervention. The intervention is complex: implementation of formal TTS form, small group education, and executive directive to mandate both. Outcome data will be prospectively collected from (electronic) medical records and patient (telephone follow-up) questionnaires. Missed injuries will be adjudicated by a blinded expert panel. The primary outcome is missed injuries after hospital discharge; secondary outcomes are maintenance of the intervention effect, in-hospital missed injuries, tertiary survey performance rate, hospital and ICU bed days, interventions required for missed injuries, advanced diagnostic imaging requirements, readmissions to hospital, days of work and quality of life (EQ-5D-5 L) and mortality. Discussion: The findings of this study may alter the delivery of international trauma care. If formal TTS is (cost-) effective this intervention should be implemented widely. If not, where already partly implemented, it should be abandoned. Study findings will be disseminated widely to relevant clinicians and health funders.Griffith Health, School of MedicineFull Tex

Interventions to facilitate shared decision making to address antibiotic use for acute respiratory infections in primary care

Background: Shared decision making is an important component of patient-centred care. It is a set of communication and evidence-based practice skills that elicits patients' expectations, clarifies any misperceptions and discusses the best available evidence for benefits and harms of treatment. Acute respiratory infections (ARIs) are one of the most common reasons for consulting in primary care and obtaining prescriptions for antibiotics. However, antibiotics offer few benefits for ARIs, and their excessive use contributes to antibiotic resistance - an evolving public health crisis. Greater explicit consideration of the benefit-harm trade-off within shared decision making may reduce antibiotic prescribing for ARIs in primary care. Objectives: To assess whether interventions that aim to facilitate shared decision making increase or reduce antibiotic prescribing for ARIs in primary care. Search methods: We searched CENTRAL (2014, Issue 11), MEDLINE (1946 to November week 3, 2014), EMBASE (2010 to December 2014) and Web of Science (1985 to December 2014). We searched for other published, unpublished or ongoing trials by searching bibliographies of published articles, personal communication with key trial authors and content experts, and by searching trial registries at the National Institutes of Health and the World Health Organization. Selection criteria: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) (individual level or cluster-randomised), which evaluated the effectiveness of interventions that promote shared decision making (as the focus or a component of the intervention) about antibiotic prescribing for ARIs in primary care. Data collection and analysis: Two review authors independently extracted and collected data. Antibiotic prescribing was the primary outcome, and secondary outcomes included clinically important adverse endpoints (e.g. re-consultations, hospital admissions, mortality) and process measures (e.g. patient satisfaction). We assessed the risk of bias of all included trials and the quality of evidence. We contacted trial authors to obtain missing information where available. Main results: We identified 10 published reports of nine original RCTs (one report was a long-term follow-up of the original trial) in over 1100 primary care doctors and around 492,000 patients. The main risk of bias came from participants in most studies knowing whether they had received the intervention or not, and we downgraded the rating of the quality of evidence because of this. We meta-analysed data using a random-effects model on the primary and key secondary outcomes and formally assessed heterogeneity. Remaining outcomes are presented narratively. There is moderate quality evidence that interventions that aim to facilitate shared decision making reduce antibiotic use for ARIs in primary care (immediately after or within six weeks of the consultation), compared with usual care, from 47% to 29%: risk ratio (RR) 0.61, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.55 to 0.68. Reduction in antibiotic prescribing occurred without an increase in patient-initiated re-consultations (RR 0.87, 95% CI 0.74 to 1.03, moderate quality evidence) or a decrease in patient satisfaction with the consultation (OR 0.86, 95% CI 0.57 to 1.30, low quality evidence). There were insufficient data to assess the effects of the intervention on sustained reduction in antibiotic prescribing, adverse clinical outcomes (such as hospital admission, incidence of pneumonia and mortality), or measures of patient and caregiver involvement in shared decision making (such as satisfaction with the consultation; regret or conflict with the decision made; or treatment compliance following the decision). No studies assessed antibiotic resistance in colonising or infective organisms. Authors' conclusions: Interventions that aim to facilitate shared decision making reduce antibiotic prescribing in primary care in the short term. Effects on longer-term rates of prescribing are uncertain and more evidence is needed to determine how any sustained reduction in antibiotic prescribing affects hospital admission, pneumonia and death

Exercise versus no exercise for the occurrence, severity and duration of acute respiratory infections

Background: Acute respiratory infections (ARIs) last for less than 30 days and are the most common acute diseases affecting people worldwide. Exercise has been shown to improve health generally and may be effective in reducing the occurrence, severity and duration of acute respiratory infections. Objectives: To evaluate the effectiveness of exercise for altering the occurrence, severity or duration of acute respiratory infections. Search methods: We searched CENTRAL (2014, Issue 6), MEDLINE (1948 to July week 1, 2014), EMBASE (2010 to July 2014), CINAHL (1981 to July 2014), LILACS (1982 to July 2014), SPORTDiscus (1985 to July 2014), PEDro (searched on 11 July 2014), OTseeker (searched on 11 July 2014), the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) and ClinicalTrials.gov (searched on 11 July 2014). Selection criteria: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs of exercise for ARIs in the general population. Data collection and analysis: Two review authors independently extracted data from the included trials using a standard form. We contacted trial authors to request missing data. One review author entered data and a second review author checked this. There were sufficient differences in the populations trialled and in the nature of the interventions to use the random-effects model (which makes fewer assumptions than the fixed-effect model) in the analysis. Main results: We included 11 trials involving 904 adults, published between 1990 and 2014. Eight studies were conducted in the USA, and one each in Canada, Spain and Turkey. Sample sizes ranged from 20 to 154 participants aged between 18 and 85 years old. The proportion of female participants varied between 52% and 100%. The duration of follow-up in the studies varied from seven days to 12 months. The exercise type most prescribed for the intervention was aerobic (walking in 70% of the studies, or bicycle riding or treadmill) at least five times a week. Duration was 30 to 45 minutes at moderate intensity. Participants were supervised in 90% of the studies. For four of the primary outcomes the results did not differ significantly and all were low-quality evidence (number of ARI episodes per person per year, rate ratio 0.91 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.59 to 1.42); proportion of participants who experienced at least one ARI over the study period, risk ratio 0.76 (95% CI 0.57 to 1.01); severity of ARI symptoms, mean difference (MD) -110 (95% CI -324 to 104); and number of symptom days in the follow-up period, MD -2.1 days (95% CI -4.4 to 0.3)). However, one primary outcome, the number of symptom days per episode of illness, was reduced in those participants who exercised (MD -1.1 day, 95% CI -1.7 to -0.5, moderate-quality evidence). We found no significant differences for the secondary outcomes (laboratory parameters (blood lymphocytes, salivary secretory immunoglobulin and neutrophils); quality of life outcomes; cost-effectiveness and exercise-related injuries). There was good adherence to the intervention with no difference between the exercise and non-exercise groups. We rated the quality of evidence for the primary outcomes as low for most outcomes using the GRADE criteria: allocation concealment was not reported and there was a lack of blinding; in addition, there was imprecision (the CI is very wide because of a small number of participants) and inconsistency, which may be due to differences in study design. Authors' conclusions: We cannot determine whether exercise is effective at altering the occurrence, severity or duration of acute respiratory infections. One analysis of four trials suggests that the number of days of illness per episode of infection might be reduced by exercise. The small size of the studies, risk of bias and heterogeneous populations trialled all contribute to the uncertainty. Larger studies, with less risk of bias from patient selection, blinding of outcomes assessors, reporting of all outcomes measured and with registration of study protocols, are required to settle the question

Population-level impact and herd effects following the introduction of human papillomavirus vaccination programmes: updated systematic review and meta-analysis

Background More than 10 years have elapsed since human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination was implemented. We did a systematic review and meta-analysis of the population-level impact of vaccinating girls and women against human papillomavirus on HPV infections, anogenital wart diagnoses, and cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2+ (CIN2+)to summarise the most recent evidence about the effectiveness of HPV vaccines in real-world settings and to quantify the impact of multiple age-cohort vaccination.Methods In this updated systematic review and meta-analysis, we used the same search strategy as in our previous paper. We searched MEDLINE and Embase for studies published between Feb 1, 2014, and Oct 11, 2018. Studies were eligible if they compared the frequency (prevalence or incidence) of at least one HPV-related endpoint (genital HPV infections, anogenital wart diagnoses, or histologically confirmed CIN2+) between pre-vaccination and post-vaccination periods among the general population and if they used the same population sources and recruitment methods before and after vaccination. Our primary assessment was the relative risk (RR) comparing the frequency (prevalence or incidence) of HPV-related endpoints between the pre-vaccination and post-vaccination periods. We stratified all analyses by sex, age, and years since introduction of HPV vaccination. We used random-effects models to estimate pooled relative risks.Findings We identified 1702 potentially eligible articles for this systematic review and meta-analysis, and included 65 articles in 14 high-income countries: 23 for HPV infection, 29 for anogenital warts, and 13 for CIN2+.After 5\u20138 years of vaccination, the prevalence of HPV 16 and 18 decreased significantly by 83% (RR 0\ub717, 95% CI 0\ub711\u20130\ub725) among girls aged 13\u201319 years, and decreased significantly by 66% (RR 0\ub734, 95% CI 0\ub723\u20130\ub749) among women aged 20\u201324 years. The prevalence of HPV 31, 33, and 45 decreased significantly by 54% (RR 0\ub746, 95% CI 0\ub733\u20130\ub766) among girls aged 13\u201319 years. Anogenital wart diagnoses decreased significantly by 67% (RR 0\ub733, 95% CI 0\ub724\u20130\ub746) among girls aged 15\u201319 years, decreased significantly by 54% (RR 0\ub746, 95% CI 0.36\u20130.60) among women aged 20\u201324 years, and decreased significantly by 31% (RR 0\ub769, 95% CI 0\ub753\u20130\ub789) among women aged 25\u201329 years. Among boys aged 15\u201319 years anogenital wart diagnoses decreased significantly by 48% (RR 0\ub752, 95% CI 0\ub737\u20130\ub775) and among men aged 20\u201324 years they decreased significantly by 32% (RR 0\ub768, 95% CI 0\ub747\u20130\ub798). After 5\u20139 years of vaccination, CIN2+ decreased significantly by 51% (RR 0\ub749, 95% CI 0\ub742\u20130\ub758) among screened girls aged 15\u201319 years and decreased significantly by 31% (RR 0\ub769, 95% CI 0\ub757\u20130\ub784) among women aged 20\u201324 years.Interpretation This updated systematic review and meta-analysis includes data from 60 million individuals and up to 8 years of post-vaccination follow-up. Our results show compelling evidence of the substantial impact of HPV vaccination programmes on HPV infections and CIN2+ among girls and women, and on anogenital warts diagnoses among girls, women, boys, and men. Additionally, programmes with multi-cohort vaccination and high vaccination coverage had a greater direct impact and herd effects