Evidence-based treatments for children with trauma-related psychopathology as a result of childhood maltreatment: a systematic review.

This is a systematic review of evidence-based treatments for children exposed to childhood maltreatment. Because exposure to childhood maltreatment has been associated with a broad range of trauma-related psychopathology (e.g., PTSD, anxiety, suicidal ideation, substance abuse) and with aggressive and violent behavior, this review describes psychotherapeutic treatments which focus on former broad range of psychopathological outcomes. A total of 26 randomized controlled clinical trials and seven non-randomized controlled clinical trials published between 2000 and 2012 satisfied the inclusionary criteria and were included. These studies dealt with various kinds of samples, from sexually abused and maltreated children in child psychiatric outpatient clinics or in foster care to traumatized incarcerated boys. A total of 27 studies evaluated psychotherapeutic treatments which used trauma-focused cognitive, behavioral or cognitive-behavioral techniques; only two studies evaluated trauma-specific treatments for children and adolescents with comorbid aggressive or violent behavior; and four studies evaluated psychotherapeutic treatments that predominantly focused on other mental health problems than PTSD and used non-trauma focused cognitive, behavioral or cognitive-behavioral techniques. The results of this review suggest that trauma-focused cognitive-behavioral therapy (TF-CBT) is the best-supported treatment for children following childhood maltreatment. However, in line with increased interest in the diagnosis of complex PTSD and given the likely relationship between childhood maltreatment and aggressive and violent behavior, the authors suggest that clinical practice should address a phase-oriented approach. This review concludes with a discussion of future research directions and limitations.

Systematic review: do patient expectations influence treatment outcomes in total knee and total hip arthroplasty?

OBJECTIVE: This systematic review aims to summarise all the available evidence related to the association between pre-operative patient expectations (outcome expectations, process expectations and self efficacy expectations) and 5 different treatment outcomes (overall improvement, pain, function, stiffness and satisfaction) in patients with total knee or total hip arthroplasty at three different follow-op periods (>6 weeks; >6 weeks- ≤6 months; >6 months). METHODS: English and Dutch language articles were identified through PubMed, EMBASE.com, PsycINFO, CINAHL and The Cochrane Library from inception to September 2012. Articles assessing the association between pre-operative patient expectations and treatment outcomes for TKA/THA in either adjusted or unadjusted analysis were included. Two reviewers, working independently, determined eligibility, rated methodological quality and extracted data on study design, population, expectation measurements, outcome measurements and strength of the associations. Methodological quality was rated by the same reviewers on a 19 item scale. The scores on the quality assessment were taken into account when drawing final conclusions. RESULTS: The search strategy generated 2252 unique references, 18 articles met inclusion criteria. Scores on the methodological quality assessment ranged between 6% and 79%. Great variety was seen in definitions and measurement methods of expectations. No significant associations were found between patient expectations and overall improvement, satisfaction and stiffness. Both significant positive and non-significant associations were found for the association between expectations and pain and function. CONCLUSIONS: There was no consistency in the association between patients' pre-operative expectations and treatment outcomes for TKA and THA indentified in this systematic review. There exists a need for a sound theoretical framework underlying the construct of 'patient expectations' and consistent use of valid measurement instruments to measure that construct in order to facilitate future research synthesis.

Laparoscopic versus open distal gastrectomy for gastric cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: Laparoscopic distal gastrectomy (LDG) with adequate lymph node dissection for gastric cancer is increasingly being applied worldwide. Several randomized trials have been conducted regarding this surgical approach. The aim of this meta-analysis is to present an updated overview comparing laparoscopic distal gastrectomy and open distal gastrectomy (ODG) with regard to short-term results, long-term follow-up, and oncological outcomes. METHODS: An extensive search was conducted using the Medline, Embase, and Cochrane databases, including randomized clinical trials comparing LDG and open distal gastrectomy. Studies were assessed regarding outcomes for operative results, postoperative recovery, complications, mortality, adequacy of resection, and long-term survival. RESULTS: In total, 2,347 articles were identified, and 22 randomized clinical trials were selected for analysis. Operative results showed significantly less blood loss and a longer operative time for LDG. Patients after LDG showed a faster recovery of bowel function, shorter hospitalization, and fewer complications, while mortality rates did not differ. Lymph node yield and resection margins were similar in both groups. Results regarding survival could not be analyzed due to a great diversity in follow-up duration. CONCLUSION: Laparoscopic distal gastrectomy shows favorable outcomes, such as less perioperative blood loss, faster patient recovery, and fewer complications. Moreover, LDG is oncologically adequate regarding lymph node yield, adequacy of resection, and survival.

Field triage in the ambulance versus referral via non-percutaneous coronary intervention centre in ST-elevation myocardial infarction patients undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention: A systematic review.

AIMS: The purpose of this study was to determine whether direct ambulance transport of ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) patients to a percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) hospital (field triage) leads to a lower 30-day mortality compared to transport via a referral non-PCI hospital (referral via a spoke centre) in STEMI patients. METHODS AND RESULTS: We performed a systematic review of interventions. An experienced librarian searched in PubMed, EMBASE.com and The Cochrane Library (via Wiley) from January 1980-February 2013. Studies that examined field triage and/or referral via a spoke centre in STEMI patients treated with primary or facilitated PCI were included. Two authors independently conducted the study selection and data extraction. Multivariable frequency weighted logistic regression analysis was performed to assess the effect of the type of transfer on the outcome measures. We identified 14 randomised clinical trials (RCTs), including 20 transfer groups and 4474 participants. Thirty-day mortality was lower in patients who underwent field triage (3.0%; 95% confidence interval (CI) 2.2-4.2) compared to patients who were referred via a spoke centre (4.7%; 95% CI 4.0-5.5). In multivariable frequency weighted logistic regression analysis, field triage was independently associated with a lower incidence of 30-day mortality (odds ratio (OR): 0.58; 95% CI 0.37-0.89). CONCLUSION: Field triage compared to referral via a spoke centre leads to a lower 30-day mortality in STEMI patients. Therefore, direct ambulance transport to a PCI hospital should become the transfer type for STEMI patients.