Omega-3 polyunsaturated fatty acid supplementation for improving peripheral nerve health: Protocol for a systematic review

Introduction Damage to peripheral nerves occurs in a variety of health conditions. Preserving nerve integrity, to prevent progressive nerve damage, remains a clinical challenge. Omega-3 polyunsaturated fatty acids (PUFAs) are implicated in the development and maintenance of healthy nerves and may be beneficial for promoting peripheral nerve health. The aim of this systematic review is to assess the effects of oral omega-3 PUFA supplementation on peripheral nerve integrity, including both subjective and objective measures of peripheral nerve structure and/or function. Methods and analysis A systematic review of randomised controlled trials that have evaluated the effects of omega-3 PUFA supplementation on peripheral nerve assessments will be conducted. Comprehensive electronic database searches will be performed in Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), US National Institutes of Health Clinical Trials Registry and the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform. The title, abstract and keywords of identified articles will be assessed for eligibility by two reviewers. Full-text articles will be obtained for all studies judged as eligible or potentially eligible; these studies will be independently assessed by two reviewers to determine eligibility. Disagreements will be resolved by consensus. Risk of bias assessment will be performed using the Cochrane Collaboration risk of bias tool to appraise the quality of included studies. If clinically meaningful, and there are a sufficient number of eligible studies, a meta-analysis will be conducted and a summary of findings table will be provided. Ethics and dissemination This is a systematic review that will involve the analysis of previously published data, and therefore ethics approval is not required. A manuscript reporting the results of this systematic review will be published in a peer-reviewed journal and may also be presented at relevant scientific conferences

Analysis of a Systematic Review About Blue Light-Filtering Intraocular Lenses for Retinal Protection: Understanding the Limitations of the Evidence.

IMPORTANCE: Cataract surgery, with intraocular lens (IOL) implantation, is the most common ocular surgical procedure worldwide. It has been suggested that IOLs that selectively attenuate short wavelength visible light (blue light-filtering IOLs) may be beneficial for macular health. Whether blue light-filtering IOLs impart retinal photoprotection is of public health relevance, particularly in the context of aging demographics and the increasing global prevalence of age-related macular degeneration. This review analyzes and interprets the key findings, including consideration of the implications for practice and future research, of a 2018 Cochrane systematic review that evaluated the efficacy and safety of blue light-filtering IOLs for providing protection to macular health and function. OBSERVATIONS: The Cochrane systematic review included 51 randomized controlled trials that were performed in 17 countries. The trials involved adults undergoing cataract surgery in which a blue light-filtering IOL was compared with an equivalent non-blue light-filtering IOL. Study follow-up periods ranged from 1 month to 5 years. Together, these studies considered clinical outcomes in more than 5000 eyes. There was limited ability to combine data across trials (to draw overall conclusions) because of the use of different measurement techniques for outcomes, incomplete reporting of data, and/or varied follow-up periods. We identified substantial shortcomings in the internal validity of many of the included studies, particularly regarding trial design, conduct, and reporting. We propose several avenues for improving the rigor of potential future research in the field, including developing a core set of outcome measures, the inclusion of sample size calculations, the masking of trial participants and outcome assessors, and prospective clinical trial registration. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Using blue light-filtering IOLs to impart benefits to the macula is currently not supported by the best available clinical research evidence, and it is important that clinicians are mindful of this evidence limitation when adopting these devices in clinical practice

TFOS lifestyle: Impact of the digital environment on the ocular surface

Eye strain when performing tasks reliant on a digital environment can cause discomfort, affecting productivity and quality of life. Digital eye strain (the preferred terminology) was defined as “the development or exacerbation of recurrent ocular symptoms and/or signs related specifically to digital device screen viewing”. Digital eye strain prevalence of up to 97% has been reported, due to no previously agreed definition/diagnostic criteria and limitations of current questionnaires which fail to differentiate such symptoms from those arising from non-digital tasks. Objective signs such as blink rate or critical flicker frequency changes are not ‘diagnostic’ of digital eye strain nor validated as sensitive. The mechanisms attributed to ocular surface disease exacerbation are mainly reduced blink rate and completeness, partial/uncorrected refractive error and/or underlying binocular vision anomalies, together with the cognitive demand of the task and differences in position, size, brightness and glare compared to an equivalent non-digital task. In general, interventions are not well established; patients experiencing digital eye strain should be provided with a full refractive correction for the appropriate working distances. Improving blinking, optimizing the work environment and encouraging regular breaks may help. Based on current, best evidence, blue-light blocking interventions do not appear to be an effective management strategy. More and larger clinical trials are needed to assess artificial tear effectiveness for relieving digital eye strain, particularly comparing different constituents; a systematic review within the report identified use of secretagogues and warm compress/humidity goggles/ambient humidifiers as promising strategies, along with nutritional supplementation (such as omega-3 fatty acid supplementation and berry extracts)

Red flags for the early detection of spinal infection in back pain patients

© 2019 The Author(s). Background: Red flags are signs and symptoms that are possible indicators of serious spinal pathology. There is limited evidence or guidance on how red flags should be used in practice. Due to the lack of robust evidence for many red flags their use has been questioned. The aim was to conduct a systematic review specifically reporting on studies that evaluated the diagnostic accuracy of red flags for Spinal Infection in patients with low back pain. Methods: Searches were carried out to identify the literature from inception to March 2019. The databases searched were Medline, CINHAL Plus, Web of Science, Embase, Cochrane, Pedro, OpenGrey and Grey Literature Report. Two reviewers screened article texts, one reviewer extracted data and details of each study, a second reviewer independently checked a random sample of the data extracted. Results: Forty papers met the eligibility criteria. A total of 2224 cases of spinal infection were identified, of which 1385 (62%) were men and 773 (38%) were women mean age of 55 (± 8) years. In total there were 46 items, 23 determinants and 23 clinical features. Spinal pain (72%) and fever (55%) were the most common clinical features, Diabetes (18%) and IV drug use (9%) were the most occurring determinants. MRI was the most used radiological test and Staphylococcus aureus (27%), Mycobacterium tuberculosis (12%) were the most common microorganisms detected in cases. Conclusion: The current evidence surrounding red flags for spinal infection remains small, it was not possible to assess the diagnostic accuracy of red flags for spinal infection, as such, a descriptive review reporting the characteristics of those presenting with spinal infection was carried out. In our review, spinal infection was common in those who had conditions associated with immunosuppression. Additionally, the most frequently reported clinical feature was the classic triad of spinal pain, fever and neurological dysfunction. This is an Open Access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/

Specific and individuated death reflection fosters identity integration

Identity integration is the process wherein a person assimilates multiple or conflicting identities (e.g., beliefs, values, needs) into a coherent, unified self-concept. Three experiments examined whether contemplating mortality in a specific and individuated manner (i.e., via the death reflection manipulation) facilitated outcomes indicative of identity integration. Participants in the death reflection condition (vs. control conditions) considered positive and negative life experiences as equally important in shaping their current identity (Experiment 1), regarded self-serving values and other-serving values as equally important life principles (Experiment 2), and were equally motivated to pursue growth-oriented and security-oriented needs (Experiment 3). Death reflection motivates individuals to integrate conflicting aspects of their identity into a coherent self-concept. Given that identity integration is associated with higher well-being, the findings have implications for understanding the psychological benefits of existential contemplation

A united statement of the global chiropractic research community against the pseudoscientific claim that chiropractic care boosts immunity.

BACKGROUND: In the midst of the coronavirus pandemic, the International Chiropractors Association (ICA) posted reports claiming that chiropractic care can impact the immune system. These claims clash with recommendations from the World Health Organization and World Federation of Chiropractic. We discuss the scientific validity of the claims made in these ICA reports. MAIN BODY: We reviewed the two reports posted by the ICA on their website on March 20 and March 28, 2020. We explored the method used to develop the claim that chiropractic adjustments impact the immune system and discuss the scientific merit of that claim. We provide a response to the ICA reports and explain why this claim lacks scientific credibility and is dangerous to the public. More than 150 researchers from 11 countries reviewed and endorsed our response. CONCLUSION: In their reports, the ICA provided no valid clinical scientific evidence that chiropractic care can impact the immune system. We call on regulatory authorities and professional leaders to take robust political and regulatory action against those claiming that chiropractic adjustments have a clinical impact on the immune system

Symptom-based stratification of patients with primary Sjögren's syndrome: multi-dimensional characterisation of international observational cohorts and reanalyses of randomised clinical trials

Background Heterogeneity is a major obstacle to developing effective treatments for patients with primary Sjögren's syndrome. We aimed to develop a robust method for stratification, exploiting heterogeneity in patient-reported symptoms, and to relate these differences to pathobiology and therapeutic response. Methods We did hierarchical cluster analysis using five common symptoms associated with primary Sjögren's syndrome (pain, fatigue, dryness, anxiety, and depression), followed by multinomial logistic regression to identify subgroups in the UK Primary Sjögren's Syndrome Registry (UKPSSR). We assessed clinical and biological differences between these subgroups, including transcriptional differences in peripheral blood. Patients from two independent validation cohorts in Norway and France were used to confirm patient stratification. Data from two phase 3 clinical trials were similarly stratified to assess the differences between subgroups in treatment response to hydroxychloroquine and rituximab. Findings In the UKPSSR cohort (n=608), we identified four subgroups: Low symptom burden (LSB), high symptom burden (HSB), dryness dominant with fatigue (DDF), and pain dominant with fatigue (PDF). Significant differences in peripheral blood lymphocyte counts, anti-SSA and anti-SSB antibody positivity, as well as serum IgG, κ-free light chain, β2-microglobulin, and CXCL13 concentrations were observed between these subgroups, along with differentially expressed transcriptomic modules in peripheral blood. Similar findings were observed in the independent validation cohorts (n=396). Reanalysis of trial data stratifying patients into these subgroups suggested a treatment effect with hydroxychloroquine in the HSB subgroup and with rituximab in the DDF subgroup compared with placebo. Interpretation Stratification on the basis of patient-reported symptoms of patients with primary Sjögren's syndrome revealed distinct pathobiological endotypes with distinct responses to immunomodulatory treatments. Our data have important implications for clinical management, trial design, and therapeutic development. Similar stratification approaches might be useful for patients with other chronic immune-mediated diseases. Funding UK Medical Research Council, British Sjogren's Syndrome Association, French Ministry of Health, Arthritis Research UK, Foundation for Research in Rheumatology

Impact of COVID-19 on cardiovascular testing in the United States versus the rest of the world

Objectives: This study sought to quantify and compare the decline in volumes of cardiovascular procedures between the United States and non-US institutions during the early phase of the coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. Background: The COVID-19 pandemic has disrupted the care of many non-COVID-19 illnesses. Reductions in diagnostic cardiovascular testing around the world have led to concerns over the implications of reduced testing for cardiovascular disease (CVD) morbidity and mortality. Methods: Data were submitted to the INCAPS-COVID (International Atomic Energy Agency Non-Invasive Cardiology Protocols Study of COVID-19), a multinational registry comprising 909 institutions in 108 countries (including 155 facilities in 40 U.S. states), assessing the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on volumes of diagnostic cardiovascular procedures. Data were obtained for April 2020 and compared with volumes of baseline procedures from March 2019. We compared laboratory characteristics, practices, and procedure volumes between U.S. and non-U.S. facilities and between U.S. geographic regions and identified factors associated with volume reduction in the United States. Results: Reductions in the volumes of procedures in the United States were similar to those in non-U.S. facilities (68% vs. 63%, respectively; p = 0.237), although U.S. facilities reported greater reductions in invasive coronary angiography (69% vs. 53%, respectively; p < 0.001). Significantly more U.S. facilities reported increased use of telehealth and patient screening measures than non-U.S. facilities, such as temperature checks, symptom screenings, and COVID-19 testing. Reductions in volumes of procedures differed between U.S. regions, with larger declines observed in the Northeast (76%) and Midwest (74%) than in the South (62%) and West (44%). Prevalence of COVID-19, staff redeployments, outpatient centers, and urban centers were associated with greater reductions in volume in U.S. facilities in a multivariable analysis. Conclusions: We observed marked reductions in U.S. cardiovascular testing in the early phase of the pandemic and significant variability between U.S. regions. The association between reductions of volumes and COVID-19 prevalence in the United States highlighted the need for proactive efforts to maintain access to cardiovascular testing in areas most affected by outbreaks of COVID-19 infection