Cochrane acute respiratory infections group's stakeholder engagement project identified systematic review priority areas

Objective: Cochrane acute respiratory infections (ARIs) group conducts systematic reviews of the evidence for treatment and prevention of ARIs. We report the results of a prioritization project, aiming to identify highest priority systematic review topics. Study Design/Setting: The project consisted of two phases. Phase 1 analyzed the gap between existing randomized controlled trials and Cochrane systematic reviews (reported previously). Phase 2 (reported here) consisted of a two-round survey. In round 1, respondents prioritized 68 topics and suggested up to 10 additional topics; in round 2, respondents prioritized top 25 topics from round 1. Results: Respondents included clinicians, researchers, systematic reviewers, allied health, patients, and carers, from 33 different countries. In round 1, 154 respondents identified 20 priority topics, most commonly selecting topics in nonspecific ARIs, influenza, and common cold. Fifty respondents also collectively suggested 134 additional topics. In round 2, 78 respondents prioritized top 25 topics, most commonly in the areas of nonspecific ARIs, pneumonia, and influenza. Conclusion: We generated a list of priority systematic review topics to guide the Cochrane ARI group's systematic review work for the next 24 months. Stakeholder involvement enhanced the transparency of the process and will increase the usability and relevance of the group's work to stakeholders

Antibiotics for sore throat

Background: Sore throat is a common reason for people to present for medical care. Although it remits spontaneously, primary care doctors commonly prescribe antibiotics for it. Objectives: To assess the benefits of antibiotics for sore throat for patients in primary care settings. Search methods: We searched CENTRAL 2013, Issue 6, MEDLINE (January 1966 to July week 1, 2013) and EMBASE (January 1990 to July 2013). Selection criteria: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) or quasi‐RCTs of antibiotics versus control assessing typical sore throat symptoms or complications. Data collection and analysis: Two review authors independently screened studies for inclusion and extracted data. We resolved differences in opinion by discussion. We contacted trial authors from three studies for additional information. Main results: We included 27 trials with 12,835 cases of sore throat. We did not identify any new trials in this 2013 update. 1. Symptoms - Throat soreness and fever were reduced by about half by using antibiotics. The greatest difference was seen at day three. The number needed to treat to benefit (NNTB) to prevent one sore throat at day three was less than six; at week one it was 21. 2. Non‐suppurative complications - The trend was antibiotics protecting against acute glomerulonephritis but there were too few cases to be sure. Several studies found antibiotics reduced acute rheumatic fever by more than two‐thirds within one month (risk ratio (RR) 0.27; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.12 to 0.60). 3. Suppurative complications - Antibiotics reduced the incidence of acute otitis media within 14 days (RR 0.30; 95% CI 0.15 to 0.58); acute sinusitis within 14 days (RR 0.48; 95% CI 0.08 to 2.76); and quinsy within two months (RR 0.15; 95% CI 0.05 to 0.47) compared to those taking placebo. 4. Subgroup analyses of symptom reduction - Antibiotics were more effective against symptoms at day three (RR 0.58; 95% CI 0.48 to 0.71) if throat swabs were positive for Streptococcus, compared to RR 0.78; 95% CI 0.63 to 0.97 if negative. Similarly at week one the RR was 0.29 (95% CI 0.12 to 0.70) for positive and 0.73 (95% CI 0.50 to 1.07) for negative Streptococcus swabs. Authors' conclusions: Antibiotics confer relative benefits in the treatment of sore throat. However, the absolute benefits are modest. Protecting sore throat sufferers against suppurative and non‐suppurative complications in high‐income countries requires treating many with antibiotics for one to benefit. This NNTB may be lower in low‐income countries. Antibiotics shorten the duration of symptoms by about 16 hours overall.Griffith Health, School of MedicineFull Tex

A study of the etiology of referred Otalgia

Introduction: Otalgia is one of the complaints which may occur at any age. The etiology of the pain may be in the ear, structures around the ear or other head and neck structures. This is caused by the complex nervous connections in the head and neck areas, the ear, the pharynx and the nose. Since understanding the etiologies of referred otalgia can help in the assessment and treatment of the disease, this research was conducted to identify the etiologies of referred otalgia in patients visiting the ENT Clinic in Gorgan, Iran. Materials and Methods: This prospective research was conducted on patients who visited the ENT Clinic with an earache, but in initial assessments the ear was normal. Patients' data consisting of sex, age, complaint, the inflicted side, physical findings in the ear, the nose, the throat and head and neck were recorded in a questionnaire. These data were then analyzed with SPSS software. Results: Of 770 patients with otalgia, 94 patients (12.2%) had referred otalgia. Of these patients 27.7% were men and 72.3% were women. The most common etiology of referred otalgia was dental problems (62.8%), and one patient who was being treated for pharyngitis had carcinoma of the base of the tongue. In 47.8% of cases the pain was in the left ear, in 43.4% in the right ear, and in 8.7% it was bilateral. Conclusion: In view of the fact that a significant proportion of the patients who complained of otalgia had no pathologies in the ear, thorough physical examination in adjacent structures especially teeth should be performed and malignancies should be considered as a possible etiology of otalgia

EPSTEIN-BARR-VIRUS ASSOCIATED SYNDROMES IN IMMUNOSUPPRESSED LIVER-TRANSPLANT RECIPIENTS - CLINICAL PROFILE AND RECOGNITION ON ROUTINE ALLOGRAFT BIOPSY

The clinical profile and histopathologic changes in needle biopsies of the liver were studied in 10 cases of acute Epstein-Barr virus infection occurring in liver transplant recipients. The systemic viral syndrome in four cases resembled that seen in infectious mononucleosis, whereas in six others it was characterized by atypical signs and symptoms in the form of jaw pain, arthralgias, joint space effusions, diarrhea, encephalitis, pneumonitis, mediastinal lymphodenopathy, and ascites. Laboratory investigation showed marked elevations in hepatocellular enzymes and circulating atypical lymphocytes in the peripheral blood. Pancytopenia was noted in eight cases. A range of histopathologic changes was noted in the allografts ranging from alterations typically observed in infectious mononucleosis to a distinctive constellation characterized by (a) mixed mononuclear portal and sinusoidal infiltrates containing atypical large noncleaved cells and immunoblasts; (b) associated lobular activity indicative of a hepatitic process, and (c) relatively mild duct damage not in proportion to the severity of the inflammatory infiltrates. The patients responded to reduced immunosuppression, but recurrent viral syndromes occurred in four instances and one patient died of systemic lymphoproliferative disease

How rare is isolated rheumatic tricuspid valve disease?

The incidence of rheumatic fever (RF) has markedly decreased in Europe since the beginning of the 20th century due to improved living conditions, early antibiotic therapy in streptococcal pharyngitis, and changes in serotypes of circulating streptococci. Isolated outbreaks of RF are still found in various parts of the world and the disease has changed its presentation with milder joint symptoms and subclinical carditis that make the correct diagnosis more difficult. Patients can present many years later with severe valve disease and significant disability. This article presents a case of isolated rheumatic tricuspid valve disease that presented with signs and symptoms of right heart failure and severe valve damage. Isolated involvement of the tricuspid valve is rarely found in rheumatic fever and a thorough differential diagnosis is needed

Delayed antibiotic prescriptions for respiratory infections

Background: Concerns exist regarding antibiotic prescribing for respiratory tract infections (RTIs) owing to adverse reactions, cost, and antibacterial resistance. One proposed strategy to reduce antibiotic prescribing is to provide prescriptions, but to advise delay in antibiotic use with the expectation that symptoms will resolve first. This is an update of a Cochrane Review originally published in 2007, and updated in 2010 and 2013. Objectives: To evaluate the effects on clinical outcomes, antibiotic use, antibiotic resistance, and patient satisfaction of advising a delayed prescription of antibiotics in respiratory tract infections. Search methods: For this 2017 update we searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (the Cochrane Library, Issue 4, 2017), which includes the Cochrane Acute Respiratory Infection Group's Specialised Register; Ovid MEDLINE (2013 to 25 May 2017); Ovid Embase (2013 to 2017 Week 21); EBSCO CINAHL Plus (1984 to 25 May 2017); Web of Science (2013 to 25 May 2017); WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (1 September 2017); and ClinicalTrials.gov (1 September 2017). Selection criteria: Randomised controlled trials involving participants of all ages defined as having an RTI, where delayed antibiotics were compared to immediate antibiotics or no antibiotics. We defined a delayed antibiotic as advice to delay the filling of an antibiotic prescription by at least 48 hours. We considered all RTIs regardless of whether antibiotics were recommended or not. Data collection and analysis: We used standard Cochrane methodological procedures. Three review authors independently extracted and collated data. We assessed the risk of bias of all included trials. We contacted trial authors to obtain missing information. Main results: For this 2017 update we added one new trial involving 405 participants with uncomplicated acute respiratory infection. Overall, this review included 11 studies with a total of 3555 participants. These 11 studies involved acute respiratory infections including acute otitis media (three studies), streptococcal pharyngitis (three studies), cough (two studies), sore throat (one study), common cold (one study), and a variety of RTIs (one study). Five studies involved only children, two only adults, and four included both adults and children. Six studies were conducted in a primary care setting, three in paediatric clinics, and two in emergency departments. Studies were well reported, and appeared to be of moderate quality. Randomisation was not adequately described in two trials. Four trials blinded the outcomes assessor, and three included blinding of participants and doctors. We conducted meta-analysis for antibiotic use and patient satisfaction. We found no differences among delayed, immediate, and no prescribed antibiotics for clinical outcomes in the three studies that recruited participants with cough. For the outcome of fever with sore throat, three of the five studies favoured immediate antibiotics, and two found no difference. For the outcome of pain related to sore throat, two studies favoured immediate antibiotics, and three found no difference. One study compared delayed antibiotics with no antibiotic for sore throat, and found no difference in clinical outcomes. Three studies included participants with acute otitis media. Of the two studies with an immediate antibiotic arm, one study found no difference for fever, and the other study favoured immediate antibiotics for pain and malaise severity on Day 3. One study including participants with acute otitis media compared delayed antibiotics with no antibiotics and found no difference for pain and fever on Day 3. Two studies recruited participants with common cold. Neither study found differences for clinical outcomes between delayed and immediate antibiotic groups. One study favoured delayed antibiotics over no antibiotics for pain, fever, and cough duration (moderate quality evidence for all clinical outcomes - GRADE assessment). There were either no differences for adverse effects or results favoured delayed antibiotics over immediate antibiotics (low quality evidence - to GRADE assessment) with no significant differences in complication rates. Delayed antibiotics resulted in a significant reduction in antibiotic use compared to immediate antibiotics prescription (odds ratio (OR) 0.04, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.03 to 0.05). However, a delayed antibiotic was more likely to result in reported antibiotic use than no antibiotics (OR 2.55, 95% CI 1.59 to 4.08) (moderate quality evidence - GRADE assessment). Patient satisfaction favoured delayed over no antibiotics (OR 1.49, 95% CI 1.08 to 2.06). There was no significant difference in patient satisfaction between delayed antibiotics and immediate antibiotics (OR 0.65, 95% CI 0.39 to 1.10) (moderate quality evidence - GRADE assessment). None of the included studies evaluated antibiotic resistance. Authors' conclusions: For many clinical outcomes, there were no differences between prescribing strategies. Symptoms for acute otitis media and sore throat were modestly improved by immediate antibiotics compared with delayed antibiotics. There were no differences in complication rates. Delaying prescribing did not result in significantly different levels of patient satisfaction compared with immediate provision of antibiotics (86% versus 91%) (moderate quality evidence). However, delay was favoured over no antibiotics (87% versus 82%). Delayed antibiotics achieved lower rates of antibiotic use compared to immediate antibiotics (31% versus 93%) (moderate quality evidence). The strategy of no antibiotics further reduced antibiotic use compared to delaying prescription for antibiotics (14% versus 28%). Delayed antibiotics for people with acute respiratory infection reduced antibiotic use compared to immediate antibiotics, but was not shown to be different to no antibiotics in terms of symptom control and disease complications. Where clinicians feel it is safe not to prescribe antibiotics immediately for people with respiratory infections, no antibiotics with advice to return if symptoms do not resolve is likely to result in the least antibiotic use while maintaining similar patient satisfaction and clinical outcomes to delaying prescription of antibiotics. Where clinicians are not confident in using a no antibiotic strategy, a delayed antibiotics strategy may be an acceptable compromise in place of immediate prescribing to significantly reduce unnecessary antibiotic use for RTIs, and thereby reduce antibiotic resistance, while maintaining patient safety and satisfaction levels. Editorial note: As a living systematic review, this review is continually updated, incorporating relevant new evidence as it becomes available. Please refer to the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews for the current status of this review

Extrahepatic complications of liver transplantation.

The massive surgical assault associated with hepatic transplantation makes a high frequency of complications almost inevitable. In this review of 225 patient records, selected at random from cases of liver transplantation in Pittsburgh over a 2 1/2 year period ending in January 1985, 87.2% of patients experienced at least one significant complication that threatened their survival or that of the graft and that often prolonged their hospitalization. Familiarity with the complications may facilitate earlier recognition, with consequently early and more effective management in future cases

ACTIVITIES OF NURSE PRACTITIONERS AS IDENTIFIED BY MEDICAL DIRECTORS OF UNIVERSITY STUDENT HEALTH SERVICES

University health services play a very important role in the general health, performance, and well-being of the students, the university itself, and the community. As stated by the American College Health Association, the goal of a university health service is to promote and maintain those conditions which will permit and encourage each individual to realize optimum physical, emotional, intellectual, and social well-being. University students have special health care needs such as drug and alcohol abuses, emotional problems, and gynecological, sexual, and contraceptive problems. It is the goal of the health professionals involved with students to meet those needs. Because of these special health care needs, the increasing number of university students, and the present problems associated with medical care and medical distribution, nurse practitioners have become involved in some university percent of these nurse practitioners are in college health services.3 It was believed by the investigators of this study that nurse practitioners could play a special role in this area of health care. As student health medical directors are key persons in defining nurse practitioner activities, the purpose of this study was to determine the activities the directors identified as appropriate for nurse practitioners to perform in a university health care setting. The type of activities identified by them may be crucial in the decision to utilize nurse practitioners in the university student health setting

Which doctor? Combining vignettes and item response to measure doctor quality

The authors develop a method in which vignettes-a battery of questions for hypothetical cases-are evaluated with item response theory to create a metric for doctor quality. The method allows a simultaneous estimation of quality and validation of the test instrument that can be used for further refinements. The authors apply the method to a sample of medical practitioners in Delhi, India. The method gives plausible results, rationalizes different perceptions of quality in the public and private sectors, and pinpoints several serious problems with health care delivery in urban India. The findings confirm, for instance, that the quality of private providers located in poorer areas of the city is significantly lower than those in richer neighborhoods. Surprisingly, similar results hold for providers in the public sector, with important implications for inequities in the availability of health care.Health Monitoring&Evaluation,Disease Control&Prevention,Health Systems Development&Reform,Public Health Promotion,Educational Sciences,Health Monitoring&Evaluation,Educational Sciences,Information and Records Management,Health Systems Development&Reform,Health Economics&Finance