Search

Background Subclinical hypothyroidism is a thyroid disorder diagnosed from the laboratory blood test results of otherwise asymptomatic patients. It has been associated with poor cardiovascular outcomes, mortality and progression to overt thyroid hormone deficiency. Current guidelines on the management of subclinical hypothyroidism differ because of conflicting evidence on long-term treatment benefits. Even though there are several existing systematic reviews on its clinical outcomes, no definitive conclusion has been reached yet. As such, a new synthesis could help provide more insight and consensus on this topic. To this purpose, this umbrella review will evaluate and synthesise current evidence on the long-term clinical outcomes of the different management strategies for subclinical hypothyroidism. Methods This is a protocol for an umbrella review on the management strategies for subclinical hypothyroidism. We will conduct literature searches in multiple electronic databases (from inception onwards), namely MEDLINE, EMBASE, Scopus, Web of Science, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, JBI Evidence Synthesis, Epistemonikos database, PDQ Evidence and the PROSPERO register. There will be no restriction on the date or language of publication. Additional material will be identified through grey literature searches and citation chaining. Review inclusion criteria will be patients with subclinical hypothyroidism, receiving treatment or monitoring, no restrictions on the comparators used and with cardiovascular events, frailty fractures, quality of life and all-cause mortality as primary outcomes of interest. Two reviewers will independently screen all citations, full-text articles and abstract data on a pre-piloted form in duplicate. Methodological quality (or bias) of included studies will be appraised using AMSTAR-2. Any conflicts that arise will be resolved through discussion or involving a third reviewer. A narrative synthesis will be provided with information presented in the main text and tables to summarise and explain the characteristics and findings of the included reviews. Even so, it is not expected that a meta-analysis will be performed due to review variability. Study limitations and methodological quality assessments will also be reported to provide context for the overall summary of evidence. Discussion This review will provide a comprehensive summary of the effects of the pharmacological and non-pharmacological management of subclinical hypothyroidism on specific long-term clinical outcomes. It is anticipated that the findings of this umbrella review will aid in the development of consensus-based clinical recommendations for subclinical hypothyroidism, as well as highlight areas for future research. Review findings will be disseminated primarily through peer-reviewed publications. Systematic review registration PROSPERO CRD42021235172

Funding: BREATHE - The Health Data Research Hub for Respiratory Health, which is funded through the UK Research and Innovation Industrial Strategy Challenge Fund and delivered through Health Data Research UK (MC_PC_19004); CSO Rapid Research in Covid-19 Programme (COV/SAN/20/06); HDR UK Measuring and Understanding Multi-morbidity using Routine Data in the UK (MurMuRUK) (HDR-9006-9006; CFC0110); Medical Research Council (MR/R008345/1). Objectives We investigated the association between multimorbidity among patients hospitalised with COVID-19 and their subsequent risk of mortality. We also explored the interaction between the presence of multimorbidity and the requirement for an individual to shield due to the presence of specific conditions and its association with mortality. Design We created a cohort of patients hospitalised in Scotland due to COVID-19 during the first wave (between 28 February 2020 and 22 September 2020) of the pandemic. We identified the level of multimorbidity for the patient on admission and used logistic regression to analyse the association between multimorbidity and risk of mortality among patients hospitalised with COVID-19. Setting Scotland, UK. Participants Patients hospitalised due to COVID-19. Main outcome measures Mortality as recorded on National Records of Scotland death certificate and being coded for COVID-19 on the death certificate or death within 28 days of a positive COVID-19 test. Results Almost 58% of patients admitted to the hospital due to COVID-19 had multimorbidity. Adjusting for confounding factors of age, sex, social class and presence in the shielding group, multimorbidity was significantly associated with mortality (adjusted odds ratio 1.48, 95%CI 1.26–1.75). The presence of multimorbidity and presence in the shielding patients list were independently associated with mortality but there was no multiplicative effect of having both (adjusted odds ratio 0.91, 95%CI 0.64–1.29). Conclusions Multimorbidity is an independent risk factor of mortality among individuals who were hospitalised due to COVID-19. Individuals with multimorbidity could be prioritised when making preventive policies, for example, by expanding shielding advice to this group and prioritising them for vaccination. Publisher PDF

This work was supported by Health Data Research UK (HDR-9006; CFC0110) and the Medical Research Council (MR/S027750/1). Health Data Research UK is funded by: UK Medical Research Council; Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council; Economic and Social Research Council; National Institute for Health Research (England); Chief Scientist Office of the Scottish Government Health and Social Care Directorates; Health and Social Care Research and Development Division (Welsh Government); Public Health Agency (Northern Ireland); British Heart Foundation and Wellcome Trust. Introduction Multimorbidity is widely recognised as the presence of two or more concurrent long-term conditions, yet remains a poorly understood global issue despite increasing in prevalence. We have created the Wales Multimorbidity e-Cohort (WMC) to provide an accessible research ready data asset to further the understanding of multimorbidity. Our objectives are to create a platform to support research which would help to understand prevalence, trajectories and determinants in multimorbidity, characterise clusters that lead to highest burden on individuals and healthcare services, and evaluate and provide new multimorbidity phenotypes and algorithms to the National Health Service and research communities to support prevention, healthcare planning and the management of individuals with multimorbidity. Methods and analysis The WMC has been created and derived from multisourced demographic, administrative and electronic health record data relating to the Welsh population in the Secure Anonymised Information Linkage (SAIL) Databank. The WMC consists of 2.9 million people alive and living in Wales on the 1 January 2000 with follow-up until 31 December 2019, Welsh residency break or death. Published comorbidity indices and phenotype code lists will be used to measure and conceptualise multimorbidity. Study outcomes will include: (1) a description of multimorbidity using published data phenotype algorithms/ontologies, (2) investigation of the associations between baseline demographic factors and multimorbidity, (3) identification of temporal trajectories of clusters of conditions and multimorbidity and (4) investigation of multimorbidity clusters with poor outcomes such as mortality and high healthcare service utilisation. Ethics and dissemination The SAIL Databank independent Information Governance Review Panel has approved this study (SAIL Project: 0911). Study findings will be presented to policy groups, public meetings, national and international conferences, and published in peer-reviewed journals. Publisher PDF

IntroductionIncreasingly more pregnant women are living with pre-existing multimorbidity (≥two long-term physical or mental health conditions). This may adversely affect maternal and offspring outcomes. This study aims to develop a core outcome set (COS) for maternal and offspring outcomes in pregnant women with pre-existing multimorbidity. It is intended for use in observational and interventional studies in all pregnancy settings.Methods and analysisWe propose a four stage study design: (1) systematic literature search, (2) focus groups, (3) Delphi surveys and (4) consensus group meeting. The study will be conducted from June 2021 to August 2022. First, an initial list of outcomes will be identified through a systematic literature search of reported outcomes in studies of pregnant women with multimorbidity. We will search the Cochrane library, Medline, EMBASE and CINAHL. This will be supplemented with relevant outcomes from published COS for pregnancies and childbirth in general, and multimorbidity. Second, focus groups will be conducted among (1) women with lived experience of managing pre-existing multimorbidity in pregnancy (and/or their partners) and (2) their healthcare/social care professionals to identify outcomes important to them. Third, these initial lists of outcomes will be prioritised through a three-round online Delphi survey using predefined score criteria for consensus. Participants will be invited to suggest additional outcomes that were not included in the initial list. Finally, a consensus meeting using the nominal group technique will be held to agree on the final COS. The stakeholders will include (1) women (and/or their partners) with lived experience of managing multimorbidity in pregnancy, (2) healthcare/social care professionals involved in their care and (3) researchers in this field.Ethics and disseminationThis study has been approved by the University of Birmingham’s ethical review committee. The final COS will be disseminated through peer-reviewed publication and conferences and to all stakeholders.

The trial was financed by Ministerio de Sanidad y Consumo Español through their call for independent clinical research, Orden Ministerial SAS/2377, 2010 (EC10-115, EC10-116, EC10-117, EC10-119, EC10-122); CAIBER—Spanish Clinical Research Network, Instituto de Salud Carlos III (ISCIII) (CAI08/010044); and Gerencia Asistencial de Atención Primaria de Madrid. This study is also supported by the Spanish Clinical Research Network (SCReN), funded by ISCIII-Subdirección General de Evaluación y Fomento de la Investigación, project number PT13/0002/0007, within the National Research Program I+D+I 2013-2016 and co-funded with European Union ERDF funds (European Regional Development Fund). This project received a grant for the translation and publication of this article from the Foundation for Biomedical Research and Innovation in Primary Care (FIIBAP) Call 2017 for grants to promote research programs. Objectives To compare the effectiveness of oral versus intramuscular (IM) vitamin B12 (VB12) in patients aged ≥65 years with VB12 deficiency. Design Pragmatic, randomised, non-inferiority, multicentre trial in 22 primary healthcare centres in Madrid (Spain). Participants 283 patients ≥65 years with VB12 deficiency were randomly assigned to oral (n=140) or IM (n=143) treatment arm. Interventions The IM arm received 1 mg VB12 on alternate days in weeks 1–2, 1 mg/week in weeks 3–8 and 1 mg/month in weeks 9–52. The oral arm received 1 mg/day in weeks 1–8 and 1 mg/week in weeks 9–52. Main outcomes Serum VB12 concentration normalisation (≥211 pg/mL) at 8, 26 and 52 weeks. Non-inferiority would be declared if the difference between arms is 10% or less. Secondary outcomes included symptoms, adverse events, adherence to treatment, quality of life, patient preferences and satisfaction. Results The follow-up period (52 weeks) was completed by 229 patients (80.9%). At week 8, the percentage of patients in each arm who achieved normal B12 levels was well above 90%; the differences in this percentage between the oral and IM arm were −0.7% (133 out of 135 vs 129 out of 130; 95% CI: −3.2 to 1.8; p>0.999) by per-protocol (PPT) analysis and 4.8% (133 out of 140 vs 129 out of 143; 95% CI: −1.3 to 10.9; p=0.124) by intention-to-treat (ITT) analysis. At week 52, the percentage of patients who achieved normal B12 levels was 73.6% in the oral arm and 80.4% in the IM arm; these differences were −6.3% (103 out of 112 vs 115 out of 117; 95% CI: −11.9 to −0.1; p=0.025) and −6.8% (103 out of 140 vs 115 out of 143; 95% CI: −16.6 to 2.9; p=0.171), respectively. Factors affecting the success rate at week 52 were age, OR=0.95 (95% CI: 0.91 to 0.99) and having reached VB12 levels ≥281 pg/mL at week 8, OR=8.1 (95% CI: 2.4 to 27.3). Under a Bayesian framework, non-inferiority probabilities (Δ>−10%) at week 52 were 0.036 (PPT) and 0.060 (ITT). Quality of life and adverse effects were comparable across groups. 83.4% of patients preferred the oral route. Conclusions Oral administration was no less effective than IM administration at 8 weeks. Although differences were found between administration routes at week 52, the probability that the differences were below the non-inferiority threshold was very low. Publisher PDF

IntroductionUrinary tract infections (UTIs) are the second most common type of infection worldwide, accounting for a large number of primary care consultations and antibiotic prescribing. Current diagnosis is based on an empirical approach, relying on symptoms and occasional use of urine dipsticks. The diagnostic reference standard is still urine culture, although it is not routinely recommended for uncomplicated UTIs in the community, due to time to diagnosis (48 hours). Faster point-of-care tests have been developed, but their diagnostic accuracy has not been compared. Our objective is to systematically review and meta-analyse the diagnostic accuracy of currently available point-of-care tests for UTIs.Methods and analysisStudies evaluating the diagnostic accuracy of point-of-care tests for UTIs will be included. PubMed, Web of Science, Embase and Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews were searched from inception to 1 June 2019. Data extraction and risk-of-bias assessment will be assessed using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies tool. Meta-analysis will be performed depending on data availability and heterogeneity.Ethics and disseminationThis is a systematic review protocol and therefore formal ethical approval is not required, as no primary, identifiable, personal data will be collected. Patients or the public were not involved in the design of our research. However, the findings from this review will be shared with key stakeholders, including patient groups, clinicians and guideline developers, and will also be presented and national and international conferences.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42018112019.

Background Multimorbidity is a global health challenge that is associated with polypharmacy, increasing the risk of potentially inappropriate prescribing (PIP). There are tools to improve prescription, such as implicit and explicit criteria. Objective To estimate the prevalence of PIP in a population aged 65 to 74 years with multimorbidity and polypharmacy, according to American Geriatrics Society Beers Criteria® (2015, 2019), the Screening Tool of Older Person’s Prescription -STOPP- criteria (2008, 2014), and the Medication Appropriateness Index -MAI- criteria in primary care. Methods This was an observational, descriptive, cross-sectional study. The sample included 593 community-dwelling elderly aged 65 to 74 years, with multimorbidity and polypharmacy, who participated in the MULTIPAP trial. Socio-demographic, clinical, professional, and pharmacological-treatment variables were recorded. Potentially inappropriate prescribing was detected by computerized prescription assistance system, and family doctors evaluated the MAI. The MAI-associated factors were analysed using a logistic regression model. Results A total of 4,386 prescriptions were evaluated. The mean number of drugs was 7.4 (2.4 SD). A total of 94.1% of the patients in the study had at least one criterion for drug inappropriateness according to the MAI. Potentially inappropriate prescribing was detected in 57.7%, 43.6%, 68.8% and 71% of 50 patients according to the explicit criteria STOPP 2014, STOPP 2008, Beers 2019 and Beers 2015 respectively. For every new drug taken by a patient, the MAI score increased by 2.41 (95% CI 1.46; 3.35) points. Diabetes, ischaemic heart disease and asthma were independently associated with lower summated MAI scores. Conclusions The prevalence of potentially inappropriate prescribing detected in the sample was high and in agreement with previous literature for populations with multimorbidity and polypharmacy. The MAI criteria detected greater inappropriateness than did the explicit criteria, but their application was more complex and difficult to automate. Publisher PDF

ObjectiveTo estimate the prevalence of nonadherence to treatment and its relationship with social support and social context in patients with multimorbidity and polypharmacy followed-up in primary care.MethodsThis was an observational, descriptive, cross-sectional, multicenter study with an analytical approach. A total of 593 patients between 65-74 years of age with multimorbidity (≥3 diseases) and polypharmacy (≥5 drugs) during the last three months and agreed to participate in the MULTIPAP Study. The main variable was adherence (Morisky-Green). The predictors were social support (structural support and functional support (DUFSS)); sociodemographic variables; indicators of urban objective vulnerability; health-related quality of life (EQ-5D-5L-VAS & QALY); and clinical variables. Descriptive, bivariate and multivariate analyses with logistic regression models and robust estimators were performed.ResultsFour out of ten patients were nonadherent, 47% had not completed primary education, 28.7% had an income ≤1050 €/month, 35% reported four or more IUVs, and the average perceived health-related quality of life (HRQOL) EQ-5D-5L-VAS was 65.5. The items that measure functional support, with significantly different means between nonadherent and adherent patients were receiving love and affection (-0.23; 95%CI: -0.40;-0.06), help when ill (-0.25; 95%CI: -0.42;-0.08), useful advice (-0.20; 95%CI: -0.37;-0.02), social invitations (-0.22; 95%CI:-0.44;-0.01), and recognition (-0.29; 95%CI:-0.50;-0.08). Factors associated with nonadherence were belonging to the medium vs. low tertile of functional support (0.62; 95%CI: 0.42;0.94), reporting less than four IUVs (0.69; 95%CI: 0.46;1.02) and higher HRQOL perception (0.98; 95%CI: 0.98;0.99).ConclusionsAmong patients 65-74 years of age with multimorbidity and polypharmacy, lower functional support was related to nonadherence to treatment. The nonadherence decreased in those patients with higher functional support, lower urban vulnerability and higher perceived health status according to the visual analog scale of health-related quality of life.

Background Although maternal death is rare in the UK, 90% (510 of 566 deaths) of women who died during or within a year after pregnancy in 2016–18 had multiple health and social problems (MBRRACE-UK). This study aims to estimate the prevalence of pre-existing multimorbidity in pregnant women in the UK. Methods Pregnant women aged 15–49 years with a conception date between Jan 1 and Dec 31, 2018, were included in this cross-sectional study, using routine health-care datasets: Clinical Practice Research Datalink (CPRD) GOLD (UK, n=37 641), Secure Anonymised Information Linkage (SAIL) databank (Wales, n=27 782), and Scottish Morbidity Records (SMR, secondary care) with linked community prescribing data (Tayside and Fife, n=6099). We defined pre-existing multimorbidity (two or more morbidities) preconception from 79 long-term physical and mental health conditions. This definition was identified from the literature and prioritised by the multidisciplinary research advisory group, including patient representatives. The association of women's characteristics preconception with multimorbidity was examined with logistic regression. The University of St Andrews School of Medicine Ethics Committee approved this project. Participant consent was not required as the data used are anonymised. Interpretation Prevalence of multimorbidity was 44·2% (95% CI 43·7–44·7) in CPRD, 46·2% (45·6–46·8) in SAIL, and 19·8% (18·8–20·8) in SMR. Mental health conditions were highly prevalent and involved 70% of multimorbidity (CPRD: prevalence of multimorbidity with one or more mental health conditions 31·3% [30·8–31·8]). Pregnant women with conditions that were leading causes of maternal deaths had a high prevalence of multimorbidity (CPRD: 745 [2·0%] of 37 641 women had cardiovascular disease, of whom 597 [80·1%] had multimorbidity). Higher maternal age (CPRD: adjusted odds ratio 1·81 [95% CI 1·04–3·17] for 45–49 years vs 15–19 years), gravidity (1·68 [1·50–1·89] for ≥5 vs 1), BMI (1·59 [1·44–1·76], for ≥30 vs 18·5–24·9) and smoking (1·61 [1·46–1·77] for smoker vs non-smoker) were significantly associated with multimorbidity. Ethnicity and deprivation were not significantly associated with multimorbidity. Interpretation A significant proportion of women enter pregnancy with pre-existing multimorbidity, especially mental health conditions. Pregnant women with multimorbidity were more likely to smoke and have a raised BMI and support may be required to address this. There may be health-care access inequalities for some health conditions, especially mental health conditions in pregnant women from deprived or ethnic minority groups. Secondary care and linked community prescription dataset captured severe conditions and might underestimate the prevalence of multimorbidity. Urgent research is needed to quantify the consequences of maternal multimorbidity for mother and child. Funding This work was supported by the joint UKRI-NIHR Strategic Priorities Fund consolidator grant (grant number MR/V005243/1). BT was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) West Midlands Applied Research Collaboration. AA and SIL were funded as NIHR Academic Clinical Fellows. The views expressed are those of the author and not necessarily those of the funders, the NIHR or the UK Department of Health and Social Care.

Background Community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) is a lung infection that can be acquired during day-to-day activities in the community (not while receiving care in a hospital). Community-acquired pneumonia poses a significant public health burden in terms of mortality, morbidity, and costs. Shorter antibiotic courses for CAP may limit treatment costs and adverse effects, but the optimal duration of antibiotic treatment is uncertain. Objectives To evaluate the efficacy and safety of short-course versus longer-course treatment with the same antibiotic at the same daily dosage for CAP in non-hospitalised adolescents and adults (outpatients). We planned to investigate non-inferiority of short-course versus longer-term course treatment for efficacy outcomes, and superiority of short-course treatment for safety outcomes. Search methods We searched CENTRAL, which contains the Cochrane Acute Respiratory Infections Group Specialised Register, MEDLINE, Embase, five other databases, and three trials registers on 28 September 2017 together with conference proceedings, reference checking, and contact with experts and pharmaceutical companies. Selection criteria Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing short- and long-courses of the same antibiotic for CAP in adolescent and adult outpatients. Data collection and analysis We planned to use standard Cochrane methods. Main results Our searches identified 5260 records. We did not identify any RCTs that compared short- and longer-courses of the same antibiotic for the treatment of adolescents and adult outpatients with CAP.We excluded two RCTs that compared short courses (five compared to seven days) of the same antibiotic at the same daily dose because they evaluated antibiotics (gemifloxacin and telithromycin) not commonly used in practice for the treatment of CAP. In particular, gemifloxacin is no longer approved for the treatment of mild-to-moderate CAP due to its questionable risk-benefit balance, and reported adverse effects. Moreover, the safety profile of telithromycin is also cause for concern.We found one ongoing study that we will assess for inclusion in future updates of the review. Authors' conclusions We found no eligible RCTs that studied a short-course of antibiotic compared to a longer-course (with the same antibiotic at the same daily dosage) for CAP in adolescent and adult outpatients. The effects of antibiotic therapy duration for CAP in adolescent and adult outpatients remains unclear.

This study was funded by the Fondo de Investigaciones Sanitarias ISCIII (Grant Numbers PI15/00276, PI15/00572, PI15/00996), REDISSEC (Project Numbers RD12/0001/0012, RD16/0001/0005), and the European Regional Development Fund ("A way to build Europe"). Background: Multimorbidity is associated with negative effects both on people's health and on healthcare systems. A key problem linked to multimorbidity is polypharmacy, which in turn is associated with increased risk of partly preventable adverse effects, including mortality. The Ariadne principles describe a model of care based on a thorough assessment of diseases, treatments (and potential interactions), clinical status, context and preferences of patients with multimorbidity, with the aim of prioritizing and sharing realistic treatment goals that guide an individualized management. The aim of this study is to evaluate the effectiveness of a complex intervention that implements the Ariadne principles in a population of young-old patients with multimorbidity and polypharmacy. The intervention seeks to improve the appropriateness of prescribing in primary care (PC), as measured by the medication appropriateness index (MAI) score at 6 and 12months, as compared with usual care. Methods/Design: Design:pragmatic cluster randomized clinical trial. Unit of randomization: family physician (FP). Unit of analysis: patient. Scope: PC health centres in three autonomous communities: Aragon, Madrid, and Andalusia (Spain). Population: patients aged 65-74years with multimorbidity (≥3 chronic diseases) and polypharmacy (≥5 drugs prescribed in ≥3months). Sample size: n=400 (200 per study arm). Intervention: complex intervention based on the implementation of the Ariadne principles with two components: (1) FP training and (2) FP-patient interview. Outcomes: MAI score, health services use, quality of life (Euroqol 5D-5L), pharmacotherapy and adherence to treatment (Morisky-Green, Haynes-Sackett), and clinical and socio-demographic variables. Statistical analysis: primary outcome is the difference in MAI score between T0 and T1 and corresponding 95% confidence interval. Adjustment for confounding factors will be performed by multilevel analysis. All analyses will be carried out in accordance with the intention-to-treat principle. Discussion: It is essential to provide evidence concerning interventions on PC patients with polypharmacy and multimorbidity, conducted in the context of routine clinical practice, and involving young-old patients with significant potential for preventing negative health outcomes. Trial registration: Clinicaltrials.gov, NCT02866799 Publisher PDF

ObjetivoEvaluar el efecto de las intervenciones educativas grupales en pacientes diabéticos tipo 2. Analizar qué tipo de intervención grupal produce mayores efectos a largo plazo.DiseñoRevisión sistemática.Fuente de datosRevisión de bases electrónicas: CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL y PASCAL, así como de las citas bibliográficas de los estudios seleccionados. Contactos con expertos para localizar artículos no publicados.Selección de los estudiosEnsayos clínicos aleatorizados, controlados y estudios cuasiexperimentales que evalúen intervenciones educativas grupales dirigidas a pacientes diabéticos tipo 2, mayores de 18 años, de cualquier duración, realizada en cualquier ámbito, cuya meta sea mejorar la calidad de vida, el autocontrol o el control metabólico. El grupo de comparación incluye intervenciones educativas individuales y no intervenciones.Variables resultadoCalidad de vida, autocontrol y control diabético (HbA1c, colesterol, triglicéridos, presión arterial y consumo de tabaco).Métodos de revisiónSelección de los ensayos realizada por 3 grupos, con 3 investigadores cada uno, que de forma independiente revisan los títulos, abstracts y palabras clave de todos los ensayos identificados para decidir sobre su elegibilidad. La calidad de los ensayos se evalúa usando los criterios definidos por el Cochrane Metabolic and Endocrine Disorders Group. Los investigadores evalúan de forma independiente los artículos y las discrepancias se resuelven por discusión y consenso.ObjectivesTo evaluate the effect of group educational interventions in type-2 diabetes patients.To analyse what kind of group intervention has the best long-term effects.DesignSystematic review.Data sourcesReview of electronic data bases: CENTRAL,MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, and PASCAL, and of the bibliographic references of the studies selected. Contacts with experts to locate non-published articles.Selection of studiesRandomised clinical studies with controls and quasi-experimental studies that evaluate group education interventions aimed at type-2 diabetes patients over 18 years old. These interventions were of any length and in any context, and their target was to improve quality of life, selfcontrol, or metabolic control. The comparison group included individual educational interventions and non-interventions.Variables resultQuality of life, self-control, and diabetes control (HbA1c, cholesterol, triglycerides, blood pressure, and smoking).Review methodsTrial selection by 3 groups with 3 researchers in each, who independently reviewed headings, abstracts and key words of all the identified trials to decide on their eligibility. The quality of trials was evaluated by the criteria defined by the Cochrane Metabolic and Endocrine Disorders Group. Researchers assessed the articles independently; and discrepancies were resolved by discussion and consensus.

In the context of an European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control (ECDC) research project, our objective was to describe current recommendations regarding HIV testing and counselling targeting migrants and ethnic minorities in the European Union/European Economic Area/European Free Trade Association (EU/EEA/EFTA) Member States. An on-line survey was conducted among 31 EU/EEA/EFTA Member States. The survey inquired on the existence of specific HIV testing and counselling recommendations or policies for migrants and/or ethnic minorities and the year of their publication. Additionally, we performed a review of national recommendations, guidelines or any other policy documents retrieved from an Internet search through the different countries' competent bodies. Twenty-nine (94%) country representatives responded the survey, and 28 documents from 27 countries were identified. National guidelines on HIV testing are heterogeneous and tailored, according to the epidemiological situation. Twenty-two countries identify migrants and four countries identify ethnic minorities as particularly vulnerable to HIV. Sixteen countries explicitly recommend offering an HIV test to migrants/ethnic minorities. Guidelines especially target people originating from HIV endemic countries, and benefits of HIV early detection are highlighted. HIV testing is not mandatory in any country, but some countries overtly facilitate this practice. Benefits of HIV testing in migrants and ethnic minorities, at both individual and community levels are recognized by many countries. In spite of this, not all countries identify the need to test these groups. European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control, Spanish Network of HIV/AIDS Research [RIS- RD06/0006] and the Biomedical Research Centre Network for Epidemiology and Public Health [CIBER de Epidemiología y Salud Pública]. Sí

We assess the coverage of a Prevention of Mother-to-child Transmission (PMTCT) programme in Busia (Kenya) from 1 January 2006 to 31 December 2008 and estimate the risk of transmission of HIV. We also estimate the odds of HIV transmission according to pharmacological intervention received. Programme coverage was estimated as the proportion of mother-baby pairs receiving any antiretroviral (ARV) regimen among all HIV-positive women attending services. We estimated the mother-to-child transmission (MTCT) rate and their 95% confidence interval (95%CI) using the direct method of calculation (intermediate estimate). A case-control study was established among all children born to HIV-positive mothers with information on outcome (HIV status of the babies) and exposure (data on pharmacological intervention). Cases were all HIV-positive children and controls were the HIV-negative ones. Exposure was defined as: (1) complete protocol: ARV prescribed according World Health Organisation recommendations; (2) partial protocol: does not meet criteria for complete protocol; and (3) no intervention: ARVs were not prescribed to both mother and child. Babies were tested using DNA Polymerase Chain Reaction at six weeks of life and six weeks after breastfeeding ceased. In the study period, 22,566 women accepted testing, 1668 were HIV positive (7.4%; 95%CI 7.05-7.73); 1036 (62%) registered in the programme and 632 were lost. Programme coverage was 40.4% (95%CI 37.9-42.7). Out of the 767 newborns, 28 (3.6%) died, 148 (19.3%) defaulted, 282 (36.7%) were administratively censored and 309 (40.2%) babies completed the follow-up as per protocol; 49 were HIV positive and MTCT risk was 15.86% (95%CI 11.6-20.1). The odds of having an HIV-positive baby was 4.6 times higher among pairs receiving a partial protocol compared to those receiving a complete protocol and 43 times higher among those receiving no intervention. Our data show a good level of enrolment but low global coverage rate. It demonstrates that ARV regimens can be implemented in low resource rural settings with marked decreases of MTCT. Increasing the coverage of PMTCT programmes remains the main challenge.

This study was funded by the Fondo de Investigaciones Sanitarias FIS Grant Number PI11/0477 ISCIII.-REDISSEC Proyecto RD12/0001/0012 AND FEDER Funding. Background: Clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) have been developed with the aim of helping health professionals, patients, and caregivers make decisions about their health care, using the best available evidence. In many cases, incorporation of these recommendations into clinical practice also implies a need for changes in routine clinical practice. Using educational games as a strategy for implementing recommendations among health professionals has been demonstrated to be effective in some studies; however, evidence is still scarce. The primary objective of this study is to assess the effectiveness of a teaching strategy for the implementation of CPGs using educational games (e-learning EDUCAGUIA) to improve knowledge and skills related to clinical decision-making by residents in family medicine. The primary objective will be evaluated at 1 and 6months after the intervention. The secondary objectives are to identify barriers and facilitators for the use of guidelines by residents of family medicine and to describe the educational strategies used by Spanish teaching units of family and community medicine to encourage implementation of CPGs. Methods/design: We propose a multicenter clinical trial with randomized allocation by clusters of family and community medicine teaching units in Spain. The sample size will be 394 residents (197 in each group), with the teaching units as the randomization unit and the residents comprising the analysis unit. For the intervention, both groups will receive an initial 1-h session on clinical practice guideline use and the usual dissemination strategy by e-mail. The intervention group (e-learning EDUCAGUIA) strategy will consist of educational games with hypothetical clinical scenarios in a virtual environment. The primary outcome will be the score obtained by the residents on evaluation questionnaires for each clinical practice guideline. Other included variables will be the sociodemographic and training variables of the residents and the teaching unit characteristics. The statistical analysis will consist of a descriptive analysis of variables and a baseline comparison of both groups. For the primary outcome analysis, an average score comparison of hypothetical scenario questionnaires between the EDUCAGUIA intervention group and the control group will be performed at 1 and 6months post-intervention, using 95% confidence intervals. A linear multilevel regression will be used to adjust the model. Discussion: The identification of effective teaching strategies will facilitate the incorporation of available knowledge into clinical practice that could eventually improve patient outcomes. The inclusion of information technologies as teaching tools permits greater learning autonomy and allows deeper instructor participation in the monitoring and supervision of residents. The long-term impact of this strategy is unknown; however, because it is aimed at professionals undergoing training and it addresses prevalent health problems, a small effect can be of great relevance. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02210442. Publisher PDF

Background Medically unexplained symptoms are an important mental health problem in primary care and generate a high cost in health services. Cognitive behavioral therapy and psychodynamic therapy have proven effective in these patients. However, there are few studies on the effectiveness of psychosocial interventions by primary health care. The project aims to determine whether a cognitive-behavioral group intervention in patients with medically unexplained symptoms, is more effective than routine clinical practice to improve the quality of life measured by the SF-12 questionary at 12 month. Methods/design This study involves a community based cluster randomized trial in primary healthcare centres in Madrid (Spain). The number of patients required is 242 (121 in each arm), all between 18 and 65 of age with medically unexplained symptoms that had seeked medical attention in primary care at least 10 times during the previous year. The main outcome variable is the quality of life measured by the SF-12 questionnaire on Mental Healthcare. Secondary outcome variables include number of consultations, number of drug (prescriptions) and number of days of sick leave together with other prognosis and descriptive variables. Main effectiveness will be analyzed by comparing the percentage of patients that improve at least 4 points on the SF-12 questionnaire between intervention and control groups at 12 months. All statistical tests will be performed with intention to treat. Logistic regression with random effects will be used to adjust for prognostic factors. Confounding factors or factors that might alter the effect recorded will be taken into account in this analysis. Discussion This study aims to provide more insight to address medically unexplained symptoms, highly prevalent in primary care, from a quantitative methodology. It involves intervention group conducted by previously trained nursing staff to diminish the progression to the chronicity of the symptoms, improve quality of life, and reduce frequency of medical consultations. Trial registration The trial was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01484223 [http://ClinicalTrials.gov].