Computer-generated reminders delivered on paper to healthcare professionals: effects on professional practice and healthcare outcomes.

Clinical practice does not always reflect best practice and evidence, partly because of unconscious acts of omission, information overload, or inaccessible information. Reminders may help clinicians overcome these problems by prompting them to recall information that they already know or would be expected to know and by providing information or guidance in a more accessible and relevant format, at a particularly appropriate time. This is an update of a previously published review. To evaluate the effects of reminders automatically generated through a computerized system (computer-generated) and delivered on paper to healthcare professionals on quality of care (outcomes related to healthcare professionals' practice) and patient outcomes (outcomes related to patients' health condition). We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, six other databases and two trials registers up to 21 September 2016 together with reference checking, citation searching and contact with study authors to identify additional studies. We included individual- or cluster-randomized and non-randomized trials that evaluated the impact of computer-generated reminders delivered on paper to healthcare professionals, alone (single-component intervention) or in addition to one or more co-interventions (multi-component intervention), compared with usual care or the co-intervention(s) without the reminder component. Review authors working in pairs independently screened studies for eligibility and abstracted data. For each study, we extracted the primary outcome when it was defined or calculated the median effect size across all reported outcomes. We then calculated the median improvement and interquartile range (IQR) across included studies using the primary outcome or median outcome as representative outcome. We assessed the certainty of the evidence according to the GRADE approach. We identified 35 studies (30 randomized trials and five non-randomized trials) and analyzed 34 studies (40 comparisons). Twenty-nine studies took place in the USA and six studies took place in Canada, France, Israel, and Kenya. All studies except two took place in outpatient care. Reminders were aimed at enhancing compliance with preventive guidelines (e.g. cancer screening tests, vaccination) in half the studies and at enhancing compliance with disease management guidelines for acute or chronic conditions (e.g. annual follow-ups, laboratory tests, medication adjustment, counseling) in the other half.Computer-generated reminders delivered on paper to healthcare professionals, alone or in addition to co-intervention(s), probably improves quality of care slightly compared with usual care or the co-intervention(s) without the reminder component (median improvement 6.8% (IQR: 3.8% to 17.5%); 34 studies (40 comparisons); moderate-certainty evidence).Computer-generated reminders delivered on paper to healthcare professionals alone (single-component intervention) probably improves quality of care compared with usual care (median improvement 11.0% (IQR 5.4% to 20.0%); 27 studies (27 comparisons); moderate-certainty evidence). Adding computer-generated reminders delivered on paper to healthcare professionals to one or more co-interventions (multi-component intervention) probably improves quality of care slightly compared with the co-intervention(s) without the reminder component (median improvement 4.0% (IQR 3.0% to 6.0%); 11 studies (13 comparisons); moderate-certainty evidence).We are uncertain whether reminders, alone or in addition to co-intervention(s), improve patient outcomes as the certainty of the evidence is very low (n = 6 studies (seven comparisons)). None of the included studies reported outcomes related to harms or adverse effects of the intervention. There is moderate-certainty evidence that computer-generated reminders delivered on paper to healthcare professionals probably slightly improves quality of care, in terms of compliance with preventive guidelines and compliance with disease management guidelines. It is uncertain whether reminders improve patient outcomes because the certainty of the evidence is very low. The heterogeneity of the reminder interventions included in this review also suggests that reminders can probably improve quality of care in various settings under various conditions

Fluoride supplements (tablets, drops, lozenges or chewing gums) for preventing dental caries in children.

BACKGROUND: Dietary fluoride supplements were first introduced to provide systemic fluoride in areas where water fluoridation is not available. Since 1990, the use of fluoride supplements in caries prevention has been re-evaluated in several countries. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the efficacy of fluoride supplements for preventing dental caries in children. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Oral Health Group's Trials Register (to 12 October 2011), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library 2011, Issue 3), MEDLINE via OVID (1950 to 12 October 2011), EMBASE via OVID (1980 to 12 October 2011), WHOLIS/PAHO/MEDCARIB/LILACS/BBO via BIREME (1982 to 12 October 2011), and Current Controlled Trials (to 12 October 2011). We handsearched reference lists of articles and contacted selected authors. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised or quasi-randomised controlled trials comparing, with minimum follow-up of 2 years, fluoride supplements (tablets, drops, lozenges) with no fluoride supplement or with other preventive measures such as topical fluorides in children less than 16 years of age at the start. The main outcome was caries increment measured by the change in decayed, missing and filled tooth surfaces (DMFS). DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors, independently and in duplicate, assessed the eligibility of studies for inclusion, and carried out risk of bias assessment and data extraction. In the event of disagreement, we sought consensus and consulted a third review author. We contacted trial authors for missing information. We used the prevented fraction (PF) as a metric for evaluating the efficacy of the intervention. The PF is defined as the mean caries increment in controls minus mean caries increment in the treated group divided by mean caries increment in controls. We conducted random-effects meta-analyses when data could be pooled. We assessed heterogeneity in the results of the studies by examining forest plots and by using formal tests for homogeneity. We recorded adverse effects (fluorosis) when the studies provided relevant data. MAIN RESULTS: We included 11 studies in the review involving 7196 children.In permanent teeth, when fluoride supplements were compared with no fluoride supplement (three studies), the use of fluoride supplements was associated with a 24% (95% confidence interval (CI) 16 to 33%) reduction in decayed, missing and filled surfaces (D(M)FS). The effect of fluoride supplements was unclear on deciduous or primary teeth. In one study, no caries-inhibiting effect was observed on deciduous teeth while in another study, the use of fluoride supplements was associated with a substantial reduction in caries increment.When fluoride supplements were compared with topical fluorides or with other preventive measures, there was no differential effect on permanent or deciduous teeth.The review found limited information on the adverse effects associated with the use of fluoride supplements. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: This review suggests that the use of fluoride supplements is associated with a reduction in caries increment when compared with no fluoride supplement in permanent teeth. The effect of fluoride supplements was unclear on deciduous teeth. When compared with the administration of topical fluorides, no differential effect was observed. We rated 10 trials as being at unclear risk of bias and one at high risk of bias, and therefore the trials provide weak evidence about the efficacy of fluoride supplements

Les interventions de soutien direct auprès des aidants naturels réduisent leur détresse psychologique: revue Cochrane pour le praticien.

Cet article présente les résultats de la revue systématique: Candy B, Jones L, Drake R, Leurent B, King M. Interventions for supporting informal caregivers of patients in the terminal phase of a disease. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2011 Jun 15;(6):CD007617. PMID: 21678368. Contexte : Les aidants naturels sont des personnes bénévoles qui dispensent des soins physiques et, ou un soutien émotionnel à l'un(e) de leur proche ou ami(e). Ceci peut générer un stress intense tant physique que psychique. Des interventions visant principalement à augmenter la qualité de vie et à soutenir la vie affective des aidants naturels ont été développées. Cette revue systématique évalue l'effet de ces interventions sur la santé physique et psychique des aidants naturels de patients en phase terminale. [Auteurs]]]> Caregivers/psychology ; Social Support ; Stress, Psychological/prevention &amp; control ; Terminal Care/psychology fre https://serval.unil.ch/resource/serval:BIB_8A4BC94FB044.P001/REF.pdf http://nbn-resolving.org/urn/resolver.pl?urn=urn:nbn:ch:serval-BIB_8A4BC94FB0442 info:eu-repo/semantics/altIdentifier/urn/urn:nbn:ch:serval-BIB_8A4BC94FB0442 info:eu-repo/semantics/submittedVersion info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess Copying allowed only for non-profit organizations https://serval.unil.ch/disclaimer application/pdf oai:serval.unil.ch:BIB_8A3E6DD23C0F 2022-02-19T02:25:50Z openaire documents urnserval <oai_dc:dc xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:xs="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xmlns:oai_dc="http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/oai_dc/" xsi:schemaLocation="http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/oai_dc/ http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/oai_dc.xsd"> https://serval.unil.ch/notice/serval:BIB_8A3E6DD23C0F Transcatheter aortic valve implantation in failed bioprosthetic surgical valves. info:doi:10.1001/jama.2014.7246 info:eu-repo/semantics/altIdentifier/doi/10.1001/jama.2014.7246 info:eu-repo/semantics/altIdentifier/pmid/25005653 Dvir, D. Webb, J.G. Bleiziffer, S. Pasic, M. Waksman, R. Kodali, S. Barbanti, M. Latib, A. Schaefer, U. Rodés-Cabau, J. Treede, H. Piazza, N. Hildick-Smith, D. Himbert, D. Walther, T. Hengstenberg, C. Nissen, H. Bekeredjian, R. Presbitero, P. Ferrari, E. Segev, A. de Weger, A. Windecker, S. Moat, N.E. Napodano, M. Wilbring, M. Cerillo, A.G. Brecker, S. Tchetche, D. Lefèvre, T. De Marco, F. Fiorina, C. Petronio, A.S. Teles, R.C. Testa, L. Laborde, J.C. Leon, M.B. Kornowski, R. Valve-in-Valve International Data Registry Investigators info:eu-repo/semantics/article article 2014 Jama : the Journal of the American Medical Association, vol. 312, no. 2, pp. 162-170 info:eu-repo/semantics/altIdentifier/eissn/1538-3598 urn:issn:0098-7484 <![CDATA[IMPORTANCE: Owing to a considerable shift toward bioprosthesis implantation rather than mechanical valves, it is expected that patients will increasingly present with degenerated bioprostheses in the next few years. Transcatheter aortic valve-in-valve implantation is a less invasive approach for patients with structural valve deterioration; however, a comprehensive evaluation of survival after the procedure has not yet been performed. OBJECTIVE: To determine the survival of patients after transcatheter valve-in-valve implantation inside failed surgical bioprosthetic valves. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Correlates for survival were evaluated using a multinational valve-in-valve registry that included 459 patients with degenerated bioprosthetic valves undergoing valve-in-valve implantation between 2007 and May 2013 in 55 centers (mean age, 77.6 [SD, 9.8] years; 56% men; median Society of Thoracic Surgeons mortality prediction score, 9.8% [interquartile range, 7.7%-16%]). Surgical valves were classified as small (≤21 mm; 29.7%), intermediate (&gt;21 and &lt;25 mm; 39.3%), and large (≥25 mm; 31%). Implanted devices included both balloon- and self-expandable valves. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Survival, stroke, and New York Heart Association functional class. RESULTS: Modes of bioprosthesis failure were stenosis (n = 181 [39.4%]), regurgitation (n = 139 [30.3%]), and combined (n = 139 [30.3%]). The stenosis group had a higher percentage of small valves (37% vs 20.9% and 26.6% in the regurgitation and combined groups, respectively; P = .005). Within 1 month following valve-in-valve implantation, 35 (7.6%) patients died, 8 (1.7%) had major stroke, and 313 (92.6%) of surviving patients had good functional status (New York Heart Association class I/II). The overall 1-year Kaplan-Meier survival rate was 83.2% (95% CI, 80.8%-84.7%; 62 death events; 228 survivors). Patients in the stenosis group had worse 1-year survival (76.6%; 95% CI, 68.9%-83.1%; 34 deaths; 86 survivors) in comparison with the regurgitation group (91.2%; 95% CI, 85.7%-96.7%; 10 deaths; 76 survivors) and the combined group (83.9%; 95% CI, 76.8%-91%; 18 deaths; 66 survivors) (P = .01). Similarly, patients with small valves had worse 1-year survival (74.8% [95% CI, 66.2%-83.4%]; 27 deaths; 57 survivors) vs with intermediate-sized valves (81.8%; 95% CI, 75.3%-88.3%; 26 deaths; 92 survivors) and with large valves (93.3%; 95% CI, 85.7%-96.7%; 7 deaths; 73 survivors) (P = .001). Factors associated with mortality within 1 year included having small surgical bioprosthesis (≤21 mm; hazard ratio, 2.04; 95% CI, 1.14-3.67; P = .02) and baseline stenosis (vs regurgitation; hazard ratio, 3.07; 95% CI, 1.33-7.08; P = .008). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: In this registry of patients who underwent transcatheter valve-in-valve implantation for degenerated bioprosthetic aortic valves, overall 1-year survival was 83.2%. Survival was lower among patients with small bioprostheses and those with predominant surgical valve stenosis

Fluoride supplements (tablets, drops, lozenges or chewing gums) for preventing dental caries in children.

BACKGROUND: Dietary fluoride supplements were first introduced to provide systemic fluoride in areas where water fluoridation is not available. Since 1990, the use of fluoride supplements in caries prevention has been re-evaluated in several countries. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the efficacy of fluoride supplements for preventing dental caries in children. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Oral Health Group's Trials Register (to 12 October 2011), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library 2011, Issue 3), MEDLINE via OVID (1950 to 12 October 2011), EMBASE via OVID (1980 to 12 October 2011), WHOLIS/PAHO/MEDCARIB/LILACS/BBO via BIREME (1982 to 12 October 2011), and Current Controlled Trials (to 12 October 2011). We handsearched reference lists of articles and contacted selected authors. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised or quasi-randomised controlled trials comparing, with minimum follow-up of 2 years, fluoride supplements (tablets, drops, lozenges) with no fluoride supplement or with other preventive measures such as topical fluorides in children less than 16 years of age at the start. The main outcome was caries increment measured by the change in decayed, missing and filled tooth surfaces (DMFS). DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors, independently and in duplicate, assessed the eligibility of studies for inclusion, and carried out risk of bias assessment and data extraction. In the event of disagreement, we sought consensus and consulted a third review author. We contacted trial authors for missing information. We used the prevented fraction (PF) as a metric for evaluating the efficacy of the intervention. The PF is defined as the mean caries increment in controls minus mean caries increment in the treated group divided by mean caries increment in controls. We conducted random-effects meta-analyses when data could be pooled. We assessed heterogeneity in the results of the studies by examining forest plots and by using formal tests for homogeneity. We recorded adverse effects (fluorosis) when the studies provided relevant data. MAIN RESULTS: We included 11 studies in the review involving 7196 children.In permanent teeth, when fluoride supplements were compared with no fluoride supplement (three studies), the use of fluoride supplements was associated with a 24% (95% confidence interval (CI) 16 to 33%) reduction in decayed, missing and filled surfaces (D(M)FS). The effect of fluoride supplements was unclear on deciduous or primary teeth. In one study, no caries-inhibiting effect was observed on deciduous teeth while in another study, the use of fluoride supplements was associated with a substantial reduction in caries increment.When fluoride supplements were compared with topical fluorides or with other preventive measures, there was no differential effect on permanent or deciduous teeth.The review found limited information on the adverse effects associated with the use of fluoride supplements. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: This review suggests that the use of fluoride supplements is associated with a reduction in caries increment when compared with no fluoride supplement in permanent teeth. The effect of fluoride supplements was unclear on deciduous teeth. When compared with the administration of topical fluorides, no differential effect was observed. We rated 10 trials as being at unclear risk of bias and one at high risk of bias, and therefore the trials provide weak evidence about the efficacy of fluoride supplements