Acute interventions for aggression and agitation in psychosis: study protocol for a systematic review and network meta-analysis

Introduction: Individuals with psychosis may access emergency services due to aggression and agitation. When the de-escalation technique fails to achieve tranquillisation, several pharmacological options are available. However, evidence on which intervention to prefer in terms of efficacy and tolerability to achieve resolution of the acute episode (ie, rapid tranquillisation) of aggression and agitation is currently fragmentary.Methods and analysis: We will include all randomised controlled trials comparing drugs or drug combinations or placebo for aggression or agitation episodes in adult individuals with psychosis. We will include individuals with psychosis (eg, schizophrenia and related disorders, bipolar disorder with psychotic symptoms, psychotic depression) but not substance or medication-induced psychosis or psychosis due to another medical condition. Our primary outcomes are the change in aggression or agitation scores within few hours since the administration of the intervention (efficacy outcome) and the proportion of participants who dropped out due to adverse effects (tolerability outcome). We will retrieve relevant studies from the register of studies of the Cochrane Schizophrenia Group. Also, we will run additional searches on CENTRAL, Embase and PubMed to retrieve potentially eligible studies focusing on other psychiatric diagnoses than those in the schizophrenia spectrum. We will conduct a random-effects network meta-analysis (NMA) for primary and secondary outcomes. In case of rare events of dichotomous outcomes, a common-effect Mantel-Haenszel NMA will be used instead. We will use the surface under the cumulative ranking curve and the mean ranks to rank all available treatments. Local and global methods of evaluation of inconsistency will be employed. Quality of evidence contributing to network estimates of the main outcomes will also be assessed with Confidence in Network Meta-Analysis.Ethics and dissemination: This study does not require ethical approval. We will disseminate our findings by publishing results in a peer-reviewed journal.PROSPERO registration number CRD42019137945

Comparative efficacy and tolerability of medications for attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder in children, adolescents, and adults: a systematic review and network meta-analysis

Background: The benefits and safety of medications for attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) remain controversial, and guidelines are inconsistent on which medications are preferred across different age groups. We aimed to estimate the comparative efficacy and tolerability of oral medications for ADHD in children, adolescents, and adults. Methods: We did a literature search for published and unpublished double-blind randomised controlled trials comparing amphetamines (including lisdexamfetamine), atomoxetine, bupropion, clonidine, guanfacine, methylphenidate, and modafinil with each other or placebo. We systematically contacted study authors and drug manufacturers for additional information. Primary outcomes were efficacy (change in severity of ADHD core symptoms based on teachers' and clinicians' ratings) and tolerability (proportion of patients who dropped out of studies because of side-effects) at timepoints closest to 12 weeks, 26 weeks, and 52 weeks. We estimated summary odds ratios (ORs) and standardised mean differences (SMDs) using pairwise and network meta-analysis with random effects. We assessed the risk of bias of individual studies with the Cochrane risk of bias tool and confidence of estimates with the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation approach for network meta-analyses. This study is registered with PROSPERO, number CRD42014008976. Findings: 133 double-blind randomised controlled trials (81 in children and adolescents, 51 in adults, and one in both) were included. The analysis of efficacy closest to 12 weeks was based on 10 068 children and adolescents and 8131 adults; the analysis of tolerability was based on 11 018 children and adolescents and 5362 adults. The confidence of estimates varied from high or moderate (for some comparisons) to low or very low (for most indirect comparisons). For ADHD core symptoms rated by clinicians in children and adolescents closest to 12 weeks, all included drugs were superior to placebo (eg, SMD −1·02, 95% CI −1·19 to −0·85 for amphetamines, −0·78, −0·93 to −0·62 for methylphenidate, −0·56, −0·66 to −0·45 for atomoxetine). By contrast, for available comparisons based on teachers' ratings, only methylphenidate (SMD −0·82, 95% CI −1·16 to −0·48) and modafinil (−0·76, −1·15 to −0·37) were more efficacious than placebo. In adults (clinicians' ratings), amphetamines (SMD −0·79, 95% CI −0·99 to −0·58), methylphenidate (−0·49, −0·64 to −0·35), bupropion (−0·46, −0·85 to −0·07), and atomoxetine (−0·45, −0·58 to −0·32), but not modafinil (0·16, −0·28 to 0·59), were better than placebo. With respect to tolerability, amphetamines were inferior to placebo in both children and adolescents (odds ratio [OR] 2·30, 95% CI 1·36–3·89) and adults (3·26, 1·54–6·92); guanfacine was inferior to placebo in children and adolescents only (2·64, 1·20–5·81); and atomoxetine (2·33, 1·28–4·25), methylphenidate (2·39, 1·40–4·08), and modafinil (4·01, 1·42–11·33) were less well tolerated than placebo in adults only. In head-to-head comparisons, only differences in efficacy (clinicians' ratings) were found, favouring amphetamines over modafinil, atomoxetine, and methylphenidate in both children and adolescents (SMDs −0·46 to −0·24) and adults (−0·94 to −0·29). We did not find sufficient data for the 26-week and 52-week timepoints. Interpretation: Our findings represent the most comprehensive available evidence base to inform patients, families, clinicians, guideline developers, and policymakers on the choice of ADHD medications across age groups. Taking into account both efficacy and safety, evidence from this meta-analysis supports methylphenidate in children and adolescents, and amphetamines in adults, as preferred first-choice medications for the short-term treatment of ADHD. New research should be funded urgently to assess long-term effects of these drugs. Funding: Stichting Eunethydis (European Network for Hyperkinetic Disorders), and the UK National Institute for Health Research Oxford Health Biomedical Research Centre

Comparative efficacy and tolerability of pharmacological interventions for attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder in children, adolescents and adults: protocol for a systematic review and network meta-analysis

Introduction Attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is a major public health issue. Pharmacological treatments play an important role in the multimodal treatment of ADHD. Currently, there is a lack of up-to-date and comprehensive evidence on how available ADHD drugs compare and rank in terms of efficacy and tolerability, in children or adolescents as well as in adults. We will conduct a network meta-analysis (NMA), integrating direct and indirect comparisons from randomised controlled trials (RCTs), to rank pharmacological treatments for ADHD according to their efficacy and tolerability profiles. Methods and analysis We will search a broad range of electronic databases, including PubMed, MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, ERIC and Web of Science, with no date or language restrictions. We will also search for unpublished studies using international clinical trial registries and contacting relevant drug companies. We will identify and include available parallel-group, cross-over and cluster randomised trials that compare methylphenidate, dexmethylphenidate, amphetamine derivatives (including lisdexamfetamine), atomoxetine, clonidine, guanfacine, bupropion or modafinil (as oral therapy) either with each other or to placebo, in children, adolescents or adults with ADHD. Primary outcomes will be efficacy (indicated by reduction in severity of ADHD core symptoms measured on a standardised scale) and tolerability (the proportion of patients who left a study early due to side effects). Secondary outcomes will be global functioning, acceptability (proportion of patients who left the study early by any cause) and changes in blood pressure and body weight. NMA will be conducted in STATA within a frequentist framework. The quality of RCTs will be evaluated using the Cochrane risk of bias tool, and the quality of the evidence will be assessed using the GRADE approach. Subgroup and sensitivity analyses will be conducted to assess the robustness of the findings. Ethics and dissemination No ethical issues are foreseen. Results from this study will be published in a peer-reviewed journal and possibly presented at relevant national and international conferences

Potential diagnostic and prognostic value of serum and cerebrospinal fluid biomarkers in traumatic spinal cord injury: A systematic review

It remains unclear whether biomarkers in the serum or CSF can be used for diagnosis or prognosis of spinal cord injuries (SCI). Therefore, a systematic review was undertaken to evaluate the prognostic or diagnostic value of serum and CSF biomarkers in assessing the severity of SCI and the outcome of patients. Two independent reviewers summarized the human studies retrieved from the electronic databases of Medline, Embase, Scopus and ISI Web of Science until April 2018. Seventeen studies were included (1065 patients aged 16�94 years old). Although the findings of the included studies suggest that inflammatory and structural proteins may be useful in assessing the severity of SCI and prediction of neurological outcome, the level of evidence is generally low. Given limitations to the available evidence, further investigation in this field is required using large prospective data sets with rigorous analysis of sensitivity, specificity and prediction. (Figure presented.). © 2018 International Society for Neurochemistr

Comparative efficacy and tolerability of pharmacological interventions for attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder in children, adolescents and adults: Protocol for a systematic review and network meta-analysis

Introduction Attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is a major public health issue. Pharmacological treatments play an important role in the multimodal treatment of ADHD. Currently, there is a lack of up-to-date and comprehensive evidence on how available ADHD drugs compare and rank in terms of efficacy and tolerability, in children or adolescents as well as in adults. We will conduct a network meta-analysis (NMA), integrating direct and indirect comparisons from randomised controlled trials (RCTs), to rank pharmacological treatments for ADHD according to their efficacy and tolerability profiles. Methods and analysis We will search a broad range of electronic databases, including PubMed, MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, ERIC and Web of Science, with no date or language restrictions. We will also search for unpublished studies using international clinical trial registries and contacting relevant drug companies. We will identify and include available parallel-group, cross-over and cluster randomised trials that compare methylphenidate, dexmethylphenidate, amphetamine derivatives (including lisdexamfetamine), atomoxetine, clonidine, guanfacine, bupropion or modafinil (as oral therapy) either with each other or to placebo, in children, adolescents or adults with ADHD. Primary outcomes will be efficacy (indicated by reduction in severity of ADHD core symptoms measured on a standardised scale) and tolerability (the proportion of patients who left a study early due to side effects). Secondary outcomes will be global functioning, acceptability (proportion of patients who left the study early by any cause) and changes in blood pressure and body weight. NMA will be conducted in STATA within a frequentist framework. The quality of RCTs will be evaluated using the Cochrane risk of bias tool, and the quality of the evidence will be assessed using the GRADE approach. Subgroup and sensitivity analyses will be conducted to assess the robustness of the findings. Ethics and dissemination No ethical issues are foreseen. Results from this study will be published in a peer-reviewed journal and possibly presented at relevant national and international conferences

Automated Non-Sterile Pharmacy Compounding: A Multi-Site Study in European Hospital and Community Pharmacies with Pediatric Immediate Release Propranolol Hydrochloride Tablets.

Pharmacy compounding, the art and science of preparing customized medications to meet individual patient needs, is on the verge of transformation. Traditional methods of compounding often involve manual and time-consuming processes, presenting challenges in terms of consistency, dosage accuracy, quality control, contamination, and scalability. However, the emergence of cutting-edge technologies has paved a way for a new era for pharmacy compounding, promising to redefine the way medications are prepared and delivered as pharmacy-tailored personalized medicines. In this multi-site study, more than 30 hospitals and community pharmacies from eight countries in Europe utilized a novel automated dosing approach inspired by 3D printing for the compounding of non-sterile propranolol hydrochloride tablets. CuraBlend <sup>®</sup> excipient base, a GMP-manufactured excipient base (pharma-ink) intended for automated compounding applications, was used. A standardized study protocol to test the automated dosing of tablets with variable weights was performed in all participating pharmacies in four different iterative phases. Integrated quality control was performed with an in-process scale and NIR spectroscopy supported by HPLC content uniformity measurements. In total, 6088 propranolol tablets were produced at different locations during this study. It was shown that the dosing accuracy of the process increased from about 90% to 100% from Phase 1 to Phase 4 by making improvements to the formulation and the hardware solutions. The results indicate that through this automated and quality controlled compounding approach, extemporaneous pharmacy manufacturing can take a giant leap forward towards automation and digital manufacture of dosage forms in hospital pharmacies and compounding pharmacies

National and sub-national trend and burden of injuries in Iran, 1990-2013: A study protocol

Background: Worldwide, injuries are a major public health concern and make a considerable contribution to the disease burden. The present study is a component of the National and Subnational Burden of Diseases, Injuries, and Risk Factors from 1990 to 2013 (NASBOD) study in Iran, which was designed to investigate the burden of most important injuries (road traffic injuries, falls, burns, poisonings and drownings) at the national and sub-national levels in Iran. In this paper we explain definitions, organization, injuries selection process, data sources, data gathering methods, and data analyses of the national and sub-national burden of injuries study in Iran. Methods: The burden of most important injuries in current metric of DALYs at the national and sub-national levels in Iran over 1990-2013 will be estimated through comprehensive reviews of either published or national data sources. Statistical modeling will be used to impute the missing data on the burden of selected important injuries for each district-year. Conclusion: The results of present study can help health policy makers to plan more comprehensive and cost-effective strategies at national and sub-national level for prevention and control of burden caused by injuries

Indicators of Quality of Care in Individuals With Traumatic Spinal Cord Injury: A Scoping Review

Study Design: Scoping review. Objectives: To identify a practical and reproducible approach to organize Quality of Care Indicators (QoCI) in individuals with traumatic spinal cord injury (TSCI). Methods: A comprehensive literature review was conducted in the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (Date: May 2018), MEDLINE (1946 to May 2018), and EMBASE (1974 to May 2018). Two independent reviewers screened 6092 records and included 262 full texts, among which 60 studies were included for qualitative analysis. We included studies, with no language restriction, containing at least 1 quality of care indicator for individuals with traumatic spinal cord injury. Each potential indicator was evaluated in an online, focused group discussion to define its categorization (healthcare system structure, medical process, and individuals with Traumatic Spinal Cord Injury related outcomes), definition, survey options, and scale. Results: A total of 87 indicators were identified from 60 studies screened using our eligibility criteria. We defined each indicator. Out of 87 indicators, 37 appraised the healthcare system structure, 30 evaluated medical processes, and 20 included individuals with TSCI related outcomes. The healthcare system structure included the impact of the cost of hospitalization and rehabilitation, as well as staff and patient perception of treatment. The medical processes included targeting physical activities for improvement of health-related outcomes and complications. Changes in motor score, functional independence, and readmission rates were reported as individuals with TSCI-related outcomes indicators. Conclusion: Indicators of quality of care in the management of individuals with TSCI are important for health policy strategists to standardize healthcare assessment, for clinicians to improve care, and for data collection efforts including registries. © The Author(s) 2021

The burden of mental disorders, substance use disorders and self-harm among young people in Europe, 1990–2019: Findings from the Global Burden of Disease Study 2019

BACKGROUND: Mental health is a public health issue for European young people, with great heterogeneity in resource allocation. Representative population-based studies are needed. The Global Burden of Disease (GBD) Study 2019 provides internationally comparable information on trends in the health status of populations and changes in the leading causes of disease burden over time. METHODS: Prevalence, incidence, Years Lived with Disability (YLDs) and Years of Life Lost (YLLs) from mental disorders (MDs), substance use disorders (SUDs) and self-harm were estimated for young people aged 10-24 years in 31 European countries. Rates per 100,000 population, percentage changes in 1990-2019, 95% Uncertainty Intervals (UIs), and correlations with Sociodemographic Index (SDI), were estimated. FINDINGS: In 2019, rates per 100,000 population were 16,983 (95% UI 12,823 – 21,630) for MDs, 3,891 (3,020 - 4,905) for SUDs, and 89·1 (63·8 - 123·1) for self-harm. In terms of disability, anxiety contributed to 647·3 (432–912·3) YLDs, while in terms of premature death, self-harm contributed to 319·6 (248·9–412·8) YLLs, per 100,000 population. Over the 30 years studied, YLDs increased in eating disorders (14·9%;9·4-20·1) and drug use disorders (16·9%;8·9-26·3), and decreased in idiopathic developmental intellectual disability (–29·1%;23·8-38·5). YLLs decreased in self-harm (–27·9%;38·3-18·7). Variations were found by sex, age-group and country. The burden of SUDs and self-harm was higher in countries with lower SDI, MDs were associated with SUDs. INTERPRETATION: Mental health conditions represent an important burden among young people living in Europe. National policies should strengthen mental health, with a specific focus on young people. FUNDING: The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundatio

The burden of mental disorders, substance use disorders and self-harm among young people in Europe, 1990-2019 : Findings from the Global Burden of Disease Study 2019

Background Mental health is a public health issue for European young people, with great heterogeneity in resource allocation. Representative population-based studies are needed. The Global Burden of Disease (GBD) Study 2019 provides internationally comparable information on trends in the health status of populations and changes in the leading causes of disease burden over time. Methods Prevalence, incidence, Years Lived with Disability (YLDs) and Years of Life Lost (YLLs) from mental disorders (MDs), substance use disorders (SUDs) and self-harm were estimated for young people aged 10-24 years in 31 European countries. Rates per 100,000 population, percentage changes in 1990-2019, 95% Uncertainty Intervals (UIs), and correlations with Sociodemographic Index (SDI), were estimated. Findings In 2019, rates per 100,000 population were 16,983 (95% UI 12,823 - 21,630) for MDs, 3,891 (3,020 4,905) for SUDs, and 89.1 (63.8 - 123.1) for self-harm. In terms of disability, anxiety contributed to 647.3 (432 -912.3) YLDs, while in terms of premature death, self-harm contributed to 319.6 (248.9-412.8) YLLs, per 100,000 population. Over the 30 years studied, YLDs increased in eating disorders (14.9%;9.4-20.1) and drug use disorders (16.9%;8.9-26.3), and decreased in idiopathic developmental intellectual disability (-29.1%;23.8-38.5). YLLs decreased in self-harm (-27.9%;38.3-18.7). Variations were found by sex, age-group and country. The burden of SUDs and self-harm was higher in countries with lower SDI, MDs were associated with SUDs. Interpretation Mental health conditions represent an important burden among young people living in Europe. National policies should strengthen mental health, with a specific focus on young people. Funding The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation Copyright (C) 2022 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/)Peer reviewe