Search

Background Self-management (SM) interventions are supportive interventions systematically provided by healthcare professionals, peers, or laypersons to increase the skills and confidence of patients in their ability to manage chronic diseases. We had two objectives: (1) to summarise the preferences and experiences of patients and their caregivers (informal caregivers and healthcare professionals) with SM in four chronic diseases and (2) to identify and describe the relevant outcomes for SM interventions from these perspectives. Methods We conducted a mixed-methods scoping review of reviews. We searched three databases until December 2020 for quantitative, qualitative, or mixed-methods reviews exploring patients’ and caregivers’ preferences or experiences with SM in type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM), obesity, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), and heart failure (HF). Quantitative data were narratively synthesised, and qualitative data followed a three-step descriptive thematic synthesis. Identified themes were categorised into outcomes or modifiable factors of SM interventions. Results We included 148 reviews covering T2DM (n = 53 [35.8%]), obesity (n = 20 [13.5%]), COPD (n = 32 [21.6%]), HF (n = 38 [25.7%]), and those with more than one disease (n = 5 [3.4%]). We identified 12 main themes. Eight described the process of SM (disease progression, SM behaviours, social support, interaction with healthcare professionals, access to healthcare, costs for patients, culturally defined roles and perceptions, and health knowledge), and four described their experiences with SM interventions (the perceived benefit of the intervention, individualised care, sense of community with peers, and usability of equipment). Most themes and subthemes were categorised as outcomes of SM interventions. Conclusion The process of SM shaped the perspectives of patients and their caregivers on SM interventions. Their perspectives were influenced by the perceived benefit of the intervention, the sense of community with peers, the intervention’s usability, and the level of individualised care. Our findings can inform the selection of patient-important outcomes, decision-making processes, including the formulation of recommendations, and the design and implementation of SM interventions.

Background Although cannabis and cannabinoids are widely used with therapeutic purposes, their claimed efficacy is highly controversial. For this reason, medical cannabis use is a broad field of research that is rapidly expanding. Our objectives are to identify, characterize, appraise, and organize the current available evidence surrounding therapeutic use of cannabis and cannabinoids, using evidence maps. Methods We searched PubMed, EMBASE, The Cochrane Library and CINAHL, to identify systematic reviews (SRs) published from their inception up to December 2017. Two authors assessed eligibility and extracted data independently. We assessed methodological quality of the included SRs using the AMSTAR tool. To illustrate the extent of use of medical cannabis, we organized the results according to identified PICO questions using bubble plots corresponding to different clinical scenarios. Results A total of 44 SRs published between 2001 and 2017 were included in this evidence mapping with data from 158 individual studies. We extracted 96 PICO questions in the following medical conditions: multiple sclerosis, movement disorders (e.g. Tourette Syndrome, Parkinson Disease), psychiatry conditions, Alzheimer disease, epilepsy, acute and chronic pain, cancer, neuropathic pain, symptoms related to cancer (e.g. emesis and anorexia related with chemotherapy), rheumatic disorders, HIV-related symptoms, glaucoma, and COPD. The evidence about these conditions is heterogeneous regarding the conclusions and the quality of the individual primary studies. The quality of the SRs was moderate to high according to AMSTAR scores. Conclusions Evidence on medical uses of cannabis is broad. However, due to methodological limitations, conclusions were weak in most of the assessed comparisons. Evidence mapping methodology is useful to perform an overview of available research, since it is possible to systematically describe the extent and distribution of evidence, and to organize scattered data.

The objective of this study was to provide evidence-based recommendations for endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) versus open surgical repair (OSR) for patients with a nonruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA). We followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis statement and adhered to the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) framework. Both low- and high surgical risk patients treated with EVAR showed decreased 30-day mortality, but the low-risk group had no differences in 4-year mortality. Compared with friendly anatomy, patients with hostile anatomy had an increased risk of type I endoleak. Young patients may prefer OSR. Endovascular aneurysm repair was not cost-effective in Europe. Four conditional recommendations were formulated: (1) OSR for low-risk patients up to 80 years old, (2) EVAR for low-risk patients older than 80 years, (3) EVAR for high-risk patients as long as is anatomically feasible, and (4) OSR in patients in whom it is not anatomically feasible to perform EVAR. Based on GRADE criteria, either OSR or EVAR can be suggested to patients with nonruptured AAA taking into account their surgical risk, hostile anatomy, and age. Given the weakness of the recommendations, personal preferences are determinant.

Objective To compare the effects of treatments for coronavirus disease 2019 (covid-19). Design Living systematic review and network meta-analysis. Data sources WHO covid-19 database, a comprehensive multilingual source of global covid-19 literature, up to 1 March 2021 and six additional Chinese databases up to 20 February 2021. Studies identified as of 12 February 2021 were included in the analysis. Study selection Randomised clinical trials in which people with suspected, probable, or confirmed covid-19 were randomised to drug treatment or to standard care or placebo. Pairs of reviewers independently screened potentially eligible articles. Methods After duplicate data abstraction, a bayesian network meta-analysis was conducted. Risk of bias of the included studies was assessed using a modification of the Cochrane risk of bias 2.0 tool, and the certainty of the evidence using the grading of recommendations assessment, development, and evaluation (GRADE) approach. For each outcome, interventions were classified in groups from the most to the least beneficial or harmful following GRADE guidance. Results 196 trials enrolling 76 767 patients were included; 111 (56.6%) trials and 35 098 (45.72%) patients are new from the previous iteration; 113 (57.7%) trials evaluating treatments with at least 100 patients or 20 events met the threshold for inclusion in the analyses. Compared with standard care, corticosteroids probably reduce death (risk difference 20 fewer per 1000 patients, 95% credible interval 36 fewer to 3 fewer, moderate certainty), mechanical ventilation (25 fewer per 1000, 44 fewer to 1 fewer, moderate certainty), and increase the number of days free from mechanical ventilation (2.6 more, 0.3 more to 5.0 more, moderate certainty). Interleukin-6 inhibitors probably reduce mechanical ventilation (30 fewer per 1000, 46 fewer to 10 fewer, moderate certainty) and may reduce length of hospital stay (4.3 days fewer, 8.1 fewer to 0.5 fewer, low certainty), but whether or not they reduce mortality is uncertain (15 fewer per 1000, 30 fewer to 6 more, low certainty). Janus kinase inhibitors may reduce mortality (50 fewer per 1000, 84 fewer to no difference, low certainty), mechanical ventilation (46 fewer per 1000, 74 fewer to 5 fewer, low certainty), and duration of mechanical ventilation (3.8 days fewer, 7.5 fewer to 0.1 fewer, moderate certainty). The impact of remdesivir on mortality and most other outcomes is uncertain. The effects of ivermectin were rated as very low certainty for all critical outcomes, including mortality. In patients with non-severe disease, colchicine may reduce mortality (78 fewer per 1000, 110 fewer to 9 fewer, low certainty) and mechanical ventilation (57 fewer per 1000, 90 fewer to 3 more, low certainty). Azithromycin, hydroxychloroquine, lopinavir-ritonavir, and interferon-beta do not appear to reduce risk of death or have an effect on any other patient-important outcome. The certainty in effects for all other interventions was low or very low. Conclusion Corticosteroids and interleukin-6 inhibitors probably confer important benefits in patients with severe covid-19. Janus kinase inhibitors appear to have promising benefits, but certainty is low. Azithromycin, hydroxychloroquine, lopinavir-ritonavir, and interferon-beta do not appear to have any important benefits. Whether or not remdesivir, ivermectin, and other drugs confer any patient-important benefit remains uncertain. Systematic review registration This review was not registered. The protocol is publicly available in the supplementary material. Readers’ note This article is a living systematic review that will be updated to reflect emerging evidence. Updates may occur for up to two years from the date of original publication. This is the fourth version of the original article published on 30 July 2020 ( BMJ 2020;370:m2980), and previous versions can be found as data supplements. When citing this paper please consider adding the version number and date of access for clarity.

Dental caries have been traditionally managed with the non-selective removal of carious tissue (total removal). However, the adverse effects and fear that this technique produces in patients has promoted the use of more conservative caries removal techniques such as chemo-mechanical removal, but there is still controversy regarding its effectiveness and safety.We searched in Epistemonikos, the largest database of systematic reviews in health, which is maintained by screening multiple information sources, including MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane, among others. We extracted data from the systematic reviews, reanalyzed data of primary studies, conducted a meta-analysis and generated a summary of findings tables using the GRADE approach.We identified seven systematic reviews including 34 studies overall, of which 30 correspond to randomized trials. We concluded that chemo-mechanical caries removal probably reduces the need for anesthesia. Additionally, chemo-mechanical caries removal may decrease the pain experienced by the patient, decrease the risk of restoration failure and increase the time of the procedure for the removal of deep caries, but the certainty of the evidence is low. We are uncertain whether chemo-mechanical caries removal reduces the risk of pulp exposure as the certainty of the evidence has been assessed as very low.La caries dental tradicionalmente es manejada con la remoción no selectiva del tejido carioso (remoción total). Sin embargo, los efectos adversos y el temor que produce esta técnica en los pacientes ha promovido la utilización de técnicas de remoción de caries más conservadoras como la remoción químico-mecánica, pero aún existe controversia respecto a su efectividad y seguridad.Para responder esta pregunta utilizamos Epistemonikos, la mayor base de datos de revisiones sistemáticas en salud, la cual es mantenida mediante búsquedas en múltiples fuentes de información, incluyendo MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, entre otras. Extrajimos los datos desde las revisiones identificadas, analizamos los datos de los estudios primarios, realizamos un metaanálisis y preparamos tablas de resumen de los resultados utilizando el método GRADE.Identificamos siete revisiones sistemáticas que en conjunto incluyeron 34 estudios primarios, de los cuales 30 corresponden a ensayos aleatorizados. Concluimos que la remoción químico-mecánica de caries probablemente disminuye la necesidad de anestesia. Además, podría disminuir el dolor que experimenta el paciente, disminuir el riesgo del fracaso de la restauración y aumentar el tiempo del procedimiento, pero la certeza de la evidencia es baja. No es posible establecer con claridad si la remoción químico- mecánica disminuye el riesgo de exposición pulpar debido a que la certeza de la evidencia existente ha sido evaluada como muy baja.

Dental caries is the most prevalent oral disease in Ecuador. In our country, there are no studies that have included the population of the Galapagos Islands. Fluoride application to incipient lesions of dental caries has shown to be effective in avoiding the use of invasive restorative procedures.The objective of the EESO-Gal study is to determine the prevalence and incidence of dental caries and to evaluate the effect of supervised dental brushing, accompanied by periodic applications of fluoride varnish on incipient precarious lesions of schoolchildren in the Galapagos Islands. This article presents the protocol of the EESO-Gal study.A cohort is planned with Galapagos Islands schoolchildren to determine the prevalence and incidence of dental caries, with assessments every six months, during twenty-four months.We expect to determine the prevalence and incidence of caries every six months, for twenty-four months, in schoolchildren between three and ten years of age, and obtain data to show the state of the caries conditions in Galapagos schoolchildren, with the inclusion of daily brushing at school, supervised by the teacher, and with the application of fluoride varnish every six months.The prevalence of dental caries and incidence after the program will demonstrate the importance of implementing oral health prevention and promotion actions to create hygiene and health habits from an early age.La caries dental es la enfermedad bucal más prevalente en Ecuador. En nuestro país no existen estudios que hayan considerado a la población de las Islas Galápagos. La aplicación de flúor sobre lesiones incipientes de caries dental ha demostrado efectividad para evitar ejecutar procedimientos invasivos restauradores.El objetivo del Estudio de Salud Oral Galápagos, EESO-Gal, es determinar la prevalencia e incidencia de caries dental y evaluar el efecto de la acción del cepillado dental supervisado, acompañado de aplicaciones periódicas de flúor en barniz sobre lesiones cariosas incipientes en escolares de las Islas Galápagos. Con este informe se busca reportar el protocolo del Estudio de Salud Oral Galápagos.Se plantea realizar una cohorte con los escolares de las Islas Galápagos para determinar la prevalencia e incidencia de caries con evaluaciones cada seis meses durante veinticuatro meses.Se espera determinar la prevalencia e incidencia de caries cada seis meses durante veinticuatro meses en escolares de tres a diez años y obtener datos que permitan evidenciar el estado de las condiciones de caries en los escolares de Galápagos con la inclusión del cepillado diario en la escuela, supervisado por el docente, y con la aplicación semestral del barniz de flúor.La prevalencia de caries dental e incidencia después de las acciones tomadas demostrará la importancia de aplicar acciones de prevención y promoción de la salud oral, para crear hábitos de higiene y salud desde edades tempranas.

Cochrane is an international collaboration whose mission is to promote evidence-based decision-making on health. This is done by conducting high-quality, relevant and accessible systematic reviews, as well as through other forms of summarized scientific evidence. Knowledge translation promotes the real use of scientific knowledge and Cochrane has been developing various projects within this theme. One of those projects includes a collaboration with Wikipedia to improve the quality of information provided in the medical articles published in this digital encyclopaedia. This article summarizes the main characteristics of these initiatives.Cochrane es una colaboración internacional cuya misión es promover la toma de decisiones sobre salud basada en la evidencia, mediante la realización de revisiones sistemáticas de alta calidad, relevantes y accesibles; así como a través de otros formatos en los cuales se resumen las evidencias científicas que se generan a partir de la ejecución de las revisiones sistemáticas Cochrane. La transferencia del conocimiento (Knowledge translation) promueve el uso real del conocimiento científico y Cochrane ha impulsado diversos proyectos con esta temática. Uno de ellos consiste en un convenio con Wikipedia para la mejora de la calidad de los artículos relacionados con la salud que se encuentran en esta enciclopedia digital. En este artículo se resumen las características principales de estas iniciativas.

Dental caries have been conventionally managed by non-selective removal of carious tissue (total complete removal); however, the adverse effects of this procedure have promoted the use of conservative caries removal techniques (selective removal), but there is still controversy regarding its effectiveness.We searched in Epistemonikos, the largest database of systematic reviews in health, which is maintained by screening multiple information sources, including MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane, among others. We extracted data from the systematic reviews, reanalyzed data of primary studies, conducted a meta-analysis and generated a summary of findings table using the GRADE approach.We identified seven systematic reviews including seven studies overall, of which all were randomized trials. We concluded that selective caries removal may decrease the need for root canal treatment and the risk of pulp exposure in teeth with deep caries, but the certainty of the evidence is low. It is not clear whether the selective removal of caries reduces the risk of appearance of signs and symptoms of pulp disease and the risk of restorations failure, as the certainty of the evidence is very low.La caries dental ha sido convencionalmente manejada mediante la remoción no selectiva del tejido carioso (remoción total), sin embargo, los efectos adversos de este procedimiento han promovido la utilización de técnicas de remoción de caries conservadoras (remoción selectiva), pero aún existe controversia respecto a su efectividad.Para responder esta pregunta utilizamos Epistemonikos, la mayor base de datos de revisiones sistemáticas en salud, la cual es mantenida mediante búsquedas en múltiples fuentes de información, incluyendo MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane, entre otras. Extrajimos los datos desde las revisiones identificadas, reanalizamos los datos de los estudios primarios, realizamos un metaanálisis, preparamos tablas de resumen de los resultados utilizando el método GRADE.Identificamos siete revisiones sistemáticas que en conjunto incluyeron siete estudios primarios, todos ellos correspondientes a ensayos aleatorizados. Concluimos que la remoción selectiva de caries podría disminuir la necesidad de tratamiento de endodoncia y el riesgo de exposición pulpar en dientes con caries profundas, pero la certeza de la evidencia es baja. No existe claridad de que la remoción selectiva de caries disminuya el riesgo de aparición de signos y síntomas de patología pulpar y el riesgo de fracaso de las restauraciones ya que la certeza de la evidencia es muy baja.

This study aims to determine the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic, specifically considering the mandatory social isolation measures implemented, on the perceived stress of a sample of dentists and dental students from Latin America and the Caribbean, as well as the associated sociodemographic and pandemic-related variables. A cross-sectional survey was conducted with a sample of 2036 dentists and dental students (1433 women). For the main outcome, the 14-item Perceived Stress Scale (PSS-14) was used. The survey also questioned sociodemographic aspects, questions on the COVID-19 pandemic, health variables, and habits. Descriptive, bivariate, and multivariate analyses (linear regression) were applied to observe the factors associated with perceived stress. The PSS-14 mean score was 24.76 (±11.76). Hierarchical regression models showed significant variables associated with the PSS-14 scores: income level during mandatory social isolation, having older adults under care during mandatory social isolation, self-perceived level of concern regarding COVID-19, self-perceived health, Coffee consumption during mandatory social isolation. In general terms, the pandemic has influenced the personal, social, labor, and everyday life of dental staff and affected the mental health of this population specifically when perceived stress is considered. Public policies, strategies, and mental health surveillance systems are required for this population.

Objective To determine and compare the effects of drug prophylaxis on SARS-CoV-2 infection and covid-19. Design Living systematic review and network meta-analysis. Data sources World Health Organization covid-19 database, a comprehensive multilingual source of global covid-19 literature to 25 March 2021, and six additional Chinese databases to 20 February 2021. Study selection Randomised trials of people at risk of covid-19 who were assigned to receive prophylaxis or no prophylaxis (standard care or placebo). Pairs of reviewers independently screened potentially eligible articles. Methods Random effects bayesian network meta-analysis was performed after duplicate data abstraction. Included studies were assessed for risk of bias using a modification of the Cochrane risk of bias 2.0 tool, and certainty of evidence was assessed using the grading of recommendations assessment, development, and evaluation (GRADE) approach. Results The first iteration of this living network meta-analysis includes nine randomised trials—six of hydroxychloroquine (n=6059 participants), one of ivermectin combined with iota-carrageenan (n=234), and two of ivermectin alone (n=540), all compared with standard care or placebo. Two trials (one of ramipril and one of bromhexine hydrochloride) did not meet the sample size requirements for network meta-analysis. Hydroxychloroquine has trivial to no effect on admission to hospital (risk difference 1 fewer per 1000 participants, 95% credible interval 3 fewer to 4 more; high certainty evidence) or mortality (1 fewer per 1000, 2 fewer to 3 more; high certainty). Hydroxychloroquine probably does not reduce the risk of laboratory confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection (2 more per 1000, 18 fewer to 28 more; moderate certainty), probably increases adverse effects leading to drug discontinuation (19 more per 1000, 1 fewer to 70 more; moderate certainty), and may have trivial to no effect on suspected, probable, or laboratory confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection (15 fewer per 1000, 64 fewer to 41 more; low certainty). Owing to serious risk of bias and very serious imprecision, and thus very low certainty of evidence, the effects of ivermectin combined with iota-carrageenan on laboratory confirmed covid-19 (52 fewer per 1000, 58 fewer to 37 fewer), ivermectin alone on laboratory confirmed infection (50 fewer per 1000, 59 fewer to 16 fewer) and suspected, probable, or laboratory confirmed infection (159 fewer per 1000, 165 fewer to 144 fewer) remain very uncertain. Conclusions Hydroxychloroquine prophylaxis has trivial to no effect on hospital admission and mortality, probably increases adverse effects, and probably does not reduce the risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection. Because of serious risk of bias and very serious imprecision, it is highly uncertain whether ivermectin combined with iota-carrageenan and ivermectin alone reduce the risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection. Systematic review registration This review was not registered. The protocol established a priori is included as a supplement. Readers’ note This article is a living systematic review that will be updated to reflect emerging evidence. Updates may occur for up to two years from the date of original publication.