Coinfection with Strongyloides and SARS-CoV-2: A Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: Treatments for COVID-19, including steroids, might exacerbate Strongyloides disease in patients with coinfection. We aimed to systematically review clinical and laboratory features of SARS-CoV-2 and Strongyloides coinfection, investigate possible interventions, assess outcomes, and identify research gaps requiring further attention. METHODS: We searched two electronic databases, LitCOVID and WHO, up to August 2022, including SARS-CoV-2 and Strongyloides coinfection studies. We adapted the World Health Organization-Uppsala Monitoring Centre (WHO-UMC) system for standardized case causality assessment to evaluate if using corticosteroids or other immunosuppressive drugs in COVID-19 patients determined acute manifestations of strongyloidiasis. RESULTS: We included 16 studies reporting 25 cases of Strongyloides and SARS-CoV-2 coinfection: 4 with hyperinfection syndrome; 2 with disseminated strongyloidiasis; 3 with cutaneous reactivation of strongyloidiasis; 3 with isolated digestive symptoms; and 2 with solely eosinophilia, without clinical manifestations. Eleven patients were asymptomatic regarding strongyloidiasis. Eosinopenia or normal eosinophil count was reported in 58.3% of patients with Strongyloides reactivation. Steroids were given to 18/21 (85.7%) cases. A total of 4 patients (19.1%) received tocilizumab and/or Anakirna in addition to steroids. Moreover, 2 patients (9.5%) did not receive any COVID-19 treatment. The causal relationship between Strongyloides reactivation and COVID-19 treatments was considered certain (4% of cases), probable (20% of patients), and possible (20% of patients). For 8% of cases, it was considered unlikely that COVID-19 treatment was associated with strongyloidiasis reactivations; the relationship between the Strongyloides infection and administration of COVID-19 treatment was unassessable/unclassifiable in 48% of cases. Of 13 assessable cases, 11 (84.6%) were considered to be causally associated with Strongyloides, ranging from certain to possible. CONCLUSIONS: Further research is needed to assess the frequency and risk of Strongyloides reactivation in SARS-CoV-2 infection. Our limited data using causality assessment supports recommendations that clinicians should screen and treat for Strongyloides infection in patients with coinfection who receive immunosuppressive COVID-19 therapies. In addition, the male gender and older age (over 50 years) may be predisposing factors for Strongyloides reactivation. Standardized guidelines should be developed for reporting future research.

[Temporary percutaneous ventricular assist devices for cardiogenic shock and high-risk percutaneous coronary intervention: a systematic literature review]. / Sistemi percutanei di assistenza ventricolare temporanea per lo shock cardiogeno e la rivascolarizzazione coronarica percutanea ad alto rischio: revisione sistematica della letteratura.

BACKGROUND: Percutaneous ventricular assist devices (pVADs) are frequently used for the treatment of patients with cardiogenic shock (CS) due to acute myocardial infarction (AMI) and as a support in percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for high-risk patients. CS is a clinical condition characterized by inadequate tissue perfusion due to cardiac dysfunction and for 80% of cases it is caused by AMI with left ventricular insufficiency. CS is responsible for about 50% of deaths in patients with myocardial infarction. Usually, PCIs do not require hemodynamic support, which could be however necessary in patients undergoing high-risk PCI. Presently, available pVADs in Europe are Impella 2.5, Impella CP, HeartMate PHP, TandemHeart, PulseCath iVAC2L. The aim of this review is to evaluate the efficacy and safety of pVADs in patients with refractory CS complicating AMI or undergoing high-risk PCI. METHODS: We systematically searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and controlled observational studies in PubMed, Embase and PubMed CENTRAL databases until September 2018. We included studies comparing pVADs with intra-aortic balloon pumps (IABP) or medical therapy in patients with CS complicating AMI or undergoing high-risk PCI. Researchers independently assessed records' eligibility, inclusion and methodological quality of included studies. If possible, data of included studies was combined in a meta-analysis. Risk ratio (RR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) were calculated using a random effects model. RESULTS: Overall, 8 studies were included. Five studies (3 RCTs and 2 observational studies) evaluated pVADs in patients with SC complicating AMI. Meta-analyses showed that 30-day mortality did not differ between patients treated with pVADs and the control group (RR 1.05, 95% CI 0.84-1.31). However, risk of major bleeding was 2 times higher in patients treated with pVADs compared to controls. Three studies evaluated pVADs in patients undergoing high-risk PCI. Due to the lack of data, it was not possible to combine study results in a meta-analysis. One RCT reported no difference in 30- and 90-day mortality between patients randomized to Impella or IABP. Two non-randomized controlled studies reported no difference in terms of in-hospital all-cause mortality between the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: Our meta-analysis suggests similar results in terms of efficacy and safety between pVADs and control (IABP and medical therapy) for the treatment of patients with CS complicating AMI or undergoing high-risk PCI.

Comparison of cryoballoon and radiofrequency ablation techniques for atrial fibrillation: a meta-analysis.

AIMS: To perform an updated meta-analysis to assess efficacy, safety and technical performance of pulmonary vein isolation using cryoballoon or radiofrequency catheter ablation in patients with paroxysmal or persistent atrial fibrillation. METHODS: In June 2017, databases and websites were systematically searched for systematic reviews, randomized controlled trials and observational studies reporting data on efficacy, safety and technical performance outcomes at follow-up at least 12 months. Researchers independently assessed records' eligibility, inclusion and methodological quality of included studies. RESULTS: Six randomized controlled trials and 25 observational studies - 11 853 patients were included. Studies on paroxysmal atrial fibrillation were 29 and included 11 635 patients. Meta-analysis results showed no difference between cryoballoon and radiofrequency in terms of recurrent atrial fibrillation [risk ratio 1.04, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.98-1.10] or atrial tachyarrhythmias (risk ratio 1.04, 95% CI 1-1.08) and fluoroscopy time (mean difference -1.92 min, 95% CI -4.89 to 1.05). Cryoballoon ablation was associated with fewer reablations (risk ratio 0.79, 95% CI 0.64-0.98), lower incidence of pericardial effusion (risk ratio 0.52, 95% CI 0.31-0.89) and cardiac tamponade (risk ratio 0.33, 95% CI 0.18-0.62) and shorter total procedural time (mean difference -23.48 min, 95% CI -37.97; -9.02) but with higher incidence of phrenic nerve palsy (risk ratio 5.43, 95% CI 2.67-11.04). Prespecified subgroup analysis confirmed overall results as for freedom from atrial fibrillation and atrial tachyarrhythmias. Only two observational studies included patients with persistent atrial fibrillation, thus hindering any conclusion in this population. CONCLUSION: In patients with paroxysmal atrial fibrillation, cryoballoon and radiofrequency ablation produce similar results in terms of freedom from recurrent atrial fibrillation or atrial tachyarrhythmias but with a different safety profile, being cryoballoon ablation less associated with cardiac complications but more likely to cause phrenic nerve palsy.

Short-term and long-term effects of tibolone in postmenopausal women.

BACKGROUND: Tibolone is a synthetic steroid used for the treatment of menopausal symptoms, on the basis of short-term data suggesting its efficacy. We considered the balance between the benefits and risks of tibolone. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the effectiveness and safety of tibolone for treatment of postmenopausal and perimenopausal women. SEARCH METHODS: In October 2015, we searched the Gynaecology and Fertility Group (CGF) Specialised Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, Embase and PsycINFO (from inception), the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL) and clinicaltrials.gov. We checked the reference lists in articles retrieved. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing tibolone versus placebo, oestrogens and/or combined hormone therapy (HT) in postmenopausal and perimenopausal women. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used standard methodological procedures of The Cochrane Collaboration. Primary outcomes were vasomotor symptoms, unscheduled vaginal bleeding and long-term adverse events. We evaluated safety outcomes and bleeding in studies including women either with or without menopausal symptoms. MAIN RESULTS: We included 46 RCTs (19,976 women). Most RCTs evaluated tibolone for treating menopausal vasomotor symptoms. Some had other objectives, such as assessment of bleeding patterns, endometrial safety, bone health, sexuality and safety in women with a history of breast cancer. Two included women with uterine leiomyoma or lupus erythematosus. Tibolone versus placebo Vasomotor symptomsTibolone was more effective than placebo (standard mean difference (SMD) -0.99, 95% confidence interval (CI) -1.10 to -0.89; seven RCTs; 1657 women; moderate-quality evidence), but removing trials at high risk of attrition bias attenuated this effect (SMD -0.61, 95% CI -0.73 to -0.49; odds ratio (OR) 0.33, 85% CI 0.27 to 0.41). This suggests that if 67% of women taking placebo experience vasomotor symptoms, between 35% and 45% of women taking tibolone will do so. Unscheduled bleedingTibolone was associated with greater likelihood of bleeding (OR 2.79, 95% CI 2.10 to 3.70; nine RCTs; 7814 women; I2 = 43%; moderate-quality evidence). This suggests that if 18% of women taking placebo experience unscheduled bleeding, between 31% and 44% of women taking tibolone will do so. Long-term adverse eventsMost of the studies reporting these outcomes provided follow-up of two to three years (range three months to three years). Breast cancerWe found no evidence of differences between groups among women with no history of breast cancer (OR 0.52, 95% CI 0.21 to 1.25; four RCTs; 5500 women; I2= 17%; very low-quality evidence). Among women with a history of breast cancer, tibolone was associated with increased risk (OR 1.5, 95% CI 1.21 to 1.85; two RCTs; 3165 women; moderate-quality evidence). Cerebrovascular eventsWe found no conclusive evidence of differences between groups in cerebrovascular events (OR 1.74, 95% CI 0.99 to 3.04; four RCTs; 7930 women; I2 = 0%; very low-quality evidence). We obtained most data from a single RCT (n = 4506) of osteoporotic women aged 60 to 85 years, which was stopped prematurely for increased risk of stroke. Other outcomesEvidence on other outcomes was of low or very low quality, with no clear evidence of any differences between the groups. Effect estimates were as follows:• Endometrial cancer: OR 2.04, 95% CI 0.79 to 5.24; nine RCTs; 8504 women; I2 = 0%.• Cardiovascular events: OR 1.38, 95% CI 0.84 to 2.27; four RCTs; 8401 women; I2 = 0%.• Venous thromboembolic events: OR 0.85, 95% CI 0.37 to 1.97; 9176 women; I2 = 0%.• Mortality from any cause: OR 1.06, 95% CI 0.79 to 1.41; four RCTs; 8242 women; I2 = 0%. Tibolone versus combined HT Vasomotor symptomsCombined HT was more effective than tibolone (SMD 0.17, 95% CI 0.06 to 0.28; OR 1.36, 95% CI 1.11 to 1.66; nine studies; 1336 women; moderate-quality evidence). This result was robust to a sensitivity analysis that excluded trials with high risk of attrition bias, suggesting a slightly greater disadvantage of tibolone (SMD 0.25, 95% CI 0.09 to 0.41; OR 1.57, 95% CI 1.18 to 2.10). This suggests that if 7% of women taking combined HT experience vasomotor symptoms, between 8% and 14% of women taking tibolone will do so. Unscheduled bleedingTibolone was associated with a lower rate of bleeding (OR 0.32, 95% CI 0.24 to 0.41; 16 RCTs; 6438 women; I2 = 72%; moderate-quality evidence). This suggests that if 47% of women taking combined HT experience unscheduled bleeding, between 18% and 27% of women taking tibolone will do so. Long-term adverse eventsMost studies reporting these outcomes provided follow-up of two to three years (range three months to three years). Evidence was of very low quality, with no clear evidence of any differences between the groups. Effect estimates were as follows:• Endometrial cancer: OR 1.47, 95% CI 0.23 to 9.33; five RCTs; 3689 women; I2 = 0%.• Breast cancer: OR 1.69, 95% CI 0.78 to 3.67; five RCTs; 4835 women; I2 = 0%.• Venous thromboembolic events: OR 0.44, 95% CI 0.09 to 2.14; four RCTs; 4529 women; I2 = 0%.• Cardiovascular events: OR 0.63, 95% CI 0.24 to 1.66; two RCTs; 3794 women; I2 = 0%.• Cerebrovascular events: OR 0.76, 95% CI 0.16 to 3.66; four RCTs; 4562 women; I2 = 0%.• Mortality from any cause: only one event reported (two RCTs; 970 women). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Moderate-quality evidence suggests that tibolone is more effective than placebo but less effective than HT in reducing menopausal vasomotor symptoms, and that tibolone is associated with a higher rate of unscheduled bleeding than placebo but with a lower rate than HT.Compared with placebo, tibolone increases recurrent breast cancer rates in women with a history of breast cancer, and may increase stroke rates in women over 60 years of age. No evidence indicates that tibolone increases the risk of other long-term adverse events, or that it differs from HT with respect to long-term safety.Much of the evidence was of low or very low quality. Limitations included high risk of bias and imprecision. Most studies were financed by drug manufacturers or failed to disclose their funding source.

Interventions to reduce waiting times for elective procedures.

BACKGROUND: Long waiting times for elective healthcare procedures may cause distress among patients, may have adverse health consequences and may be perceived as inappropriate delivery and planning of health care. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effectiveness of interventions aimed at reducing waiting times for elective care, both diagnostic and therapeutic. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the following electronic databases: Cochrane Effective Practice and Organisation of Care (EPOC) Group Specialised Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE (1946-), EMBASE (1947-), the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), ABI Inform, the Canadian Research Index, the Science, Social Sciences and Humanities Citation Indexes, a series of databases via Proquest: Dissertations & Theses (including UK & Ireland), EconLit, PAIS (Public Affairs International), Political Science Collection, Nursing Collection, Sociological Abstracts, Social Services Abstracts and Worldwide Political Science Abstracts. We sought related reviews by searching the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews and the Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effectiveness (DARE). We searched trial registries, as well as grey literature sites and reference lists of relevant articles. SELECTION CRITERIA: We considered randomised controlled trials (RCTs), controlled before-after studies (CBAs) and interrupted time series (ITS) designs that met EPOC minimum criteria and evaluated the effectiveness of any intervention aimed at reducing waiting times for any type of elective procedure. We considered studies reporting one or more of the following outcomes: number or proportion of participants whose waiting times were above or below a specific time threshold, or participants' mean or median waiting times. Comparators could include any type of active intervention or standard practice. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently extracted data from, and assessed risk of bias of, each included study, using a standardised form and the EPOC 'Risk of bias' tool. They classified interventions as follows: interventions aimed at (1) rationing and/or prioritising demand, (2) expanding capacity, or (3) restructuring the intake assessment/referral process.For RCTs when available, we reported preintervention and postintervention values of outcome for intervention and control groups, and we calculated the absolute change from baseline or the effect size with 95% confidence interval (CI). We reanalysed ITS studies that had been inappropriately analysed using segmented time-series regression, and obtained estimates for regression coefficients corresponding to two standardised effect sizes: change in level and change in slope. MAIN RESULTS: Eight studies met our inclusion criteria: three RCTs and five ITS studies involving a total of 135 general practices/primary care clinics, seven hospitals and one outpatient clinic. The studies were heterogeneous in terms of types of interventions, elective procedures and clinical conditions; this made meta-analysis unfeasible.One ITS study evaluating prioritisation of demand through a system for streamlining elective surgery services reduced the number of semi-urgent participants waiting longer than the recommended time (< 90 days) by 28 participants/mo, while no effects were found for urgent (< 30 days) versus non-urgent participants (< 365 days).Interventions aimed at restructuring the intake assessment/referral process were evaluated in seven studies. Four studies (two RCTs and two ITSs) evaluated open access, or direct booking/referral: One RCT, which showed that open access to laparoscopic sterilisation reduced waiting times, had very high attrition (87%); the other RCT showed that open access to investigative services reduced waiting times (30%) for participants with lower urinary tract syndrome (LUTS) but had no effect on waiting times for participants with microscopic haematuria. In one ITS study, same-day scheduling for paediatric health clinic appointments reduced waiting times (direct reduction of 25.2 days, and thereafter a decrease of 3.03 days per month), while another ITS study showed no effect of a direct booking system on proportions of participants receiving a colposcopy appointment within the recommended time. One RCT and one ITS showed no effect of distant consultancy (instant photography for dermatological conditions and telemedicine for ear nose throat (ENT) conditions) on waiting times; another ITS study showed no effect of a pooled waiting list on the number of participants waiting for uncomplicated spinal surgery.Overall quality of the evidence for all outcomes, assessed using the GRADE (Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation) tool, ranged from low to very low.We found no studies evaluating interventions to increase capacity or to ration demand. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: As only a handful of low-quality studies are presently available, we cannot draw any firm conclusions about the effectiveness of the evaluated interventions in reducing waiting times. However, interventions involving the provision of more accessible services (open access or direct booking/referral) show some promise.

A qualitative systematic review of studies using the normalization process theory to research implementation processes.

BACKGROUND: There is a well-recognized need for greater use of theory to address research translational gaps. Normalization Process Theory (NPT) provides a set of sociological tools to understand and explain the social processes through which new or modified practices of thinking, enacting, and organizing work are implemented, embedded, and integrated in healthcare and other organizational settings. This review of NPT offers readers the opportunity to observe how, and in what areas, a particular theoretical approach to implementation is being used. In this article we review the literature on NPT in order to understand what interventions NPT is being used to analyze, how NPT is being operationalized, and the reported benefits, if any, of using NPT. METHODS: Using a framework analysis approach, we conducted a qualitative systematic review of peer-reviewed literature using NPT. We searched 12 electronic databases and all citations linked to six key NPT development papers. Grey literature/unpublished studies were not sought. Limitations of English language, healthcare setting and year of publication 2006 to June 2012 were set. RESULTS: Twenty-nine articles met the inclusion criteria; in the main, NPT is being applied to qualitatively analyze a diverse range of complex interventions, many beyond its original field of e-health and telehealth. The NPT constructs have high stability across settings and, notwithstanding challenges in applying NPT in terms of managing overlaps between constructs, there is evidence that it is a beneficial heuristic device to explain and guide implementation processes. CONCLUSIONS: NPT offers a generalizable framework that can be applied across contexts with opportunities for incremental knowledge gain over time and an explicit framework for analysis, which can explain and potentially shape implementation processes. This is the first review of NPT in use and it generates an impetus for further and extended use of NPT. We recommend that in future NPT research, authors should explicate their rationale for choosing NPT as their theoretical framework and, where possible, involve multiple stakeholders including service users to enable analysis of implementation from a range of perspectives.

Short and long term effects of tibolone in postmenopausal women.

BACKGROUND: Tibolone is an option available for the treatment of menopausal symptoms, based on short-term data on its efficacy. However, there is a need to consider the balance between the benefits and risks of tibolone as there are concerns about breast and endometrial cancer as well as stroke. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the effectiveness and safety of tibolone in treating postmenopausal women. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Menstrual Disorders and Subfertility Group (MDSG) Specialised Register (19 April 2011), Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library 2011, 2nd Quarter), MEDLINE (from inception to 19 April 2011), EMBASE (1980 to week 3 April 2011), PsycINFO (1806 to week 3 April 2011), Clinical Trials.gov (30 April 2011). Individual researchers and the current manufacturer of tibolone were contacted to identify unpublished and ongoing trials. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that compared tibolone versus placebo, estrogens or combined hormone replacement therapy (HT) by assessing the percentage of women with menopausal symptoms, the severity of those symptoms and the occurrence of safety outcomes in postmenopausal women. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Four review authors independently extracted information from the articles, resolving discrepancies by consensus. All outcomes studied were dichotomous. Odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated using the random-effects model. Heterogeneity of studies was taken into account before deciding to combine the data. MAIN RESULTS: When compared to placebo, tibolone was more effective in relieving the frequency of vasomotor symptoms (two RCTs, n = 847; OR 0.42, 95% CI 0.25 to 0.69), although only the 2.5 mg/day dose of tibolone was significantly better than placebo; but with increased vaginal bleeding (seven RCTs, n = 7462; OR 2.75, 95% CI 1.99 to 3.80). When compared to equipotent doses of combined HT, tibolone reduced vaginal bleeding (15 RCTs, n = 6342; OR 0.32, 95% CI 0.24 to 0.42) but was less effective in relieving the frequency of vasomotor symptoms (two RCTs, n = 545; OR 4.16, 95% CI 1.50 to 11.58).As for long term safety, two major RCTs of tibolone versus placebo provided the most relevant data. An RCT of 3098 women with breast cancer and menopausal symptoms was halted after 3.1 years because of increased tumour recurrence (OR 1.50; 95% CI 1.21 to 1.85). However, in another RCT that selected osteoporotic women with negative mammograms (n = 4506) tibolone was associated with a reduction in breast cancer compared to placebo after 2.8 years (OR 0.32, 95% CI 0.13 to 0.79) although the trial was not specifically designed to assess that outcome and the number of overall events was low. In the same RCT, an excess risk of stroke was observed (OR 2.18, 95% CI 1.12 to 4.21). There was no clear evidence of a tibolone effect on endometrial cancer compared with placebo given the low number of events (seven RCTs, n = 8152; OR 1.98, 95% CI 0.73 to 5.32).There was no evidence of a difference in long term safety between tibolone and combined HT. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Tibolone, used at the daily dose of 2.5 mg, may be less effective than combined HT in alleviating menopausal symptoms although it reduced the incidence of vaginal bleeding. There was evidence that treatment with combined HT was more effective in managing menopausal symptoms than was tibolone. Available data on the long term safety of tibolone is concerning given the increase in the risk of breast cancer in women who had already suffered from breast cancer in the past and in a separate trial the increase in the risk of stroke in women whose mean age was over 60 years. Similar concerns may exist for estroprogestins but their overall benefit-risk profile is better known and is more directly related to women with menopausal symptoms.

[Antibiotic-prophylaxis in the minimally invasive pain surgical procedures]. / Antibioticoprofilassi nelle procedure antalgiche mini-invasive.

The minimally invasive pain surgical procedures are more and more frequently used in the treatment and management of the chronic pain. The patients will often have recourse to a higher infection's risk during the proceedings for acquired general conditions (like enterotomy, skin ulcers, bladder catheter).The analysis literature doesn't produce specific treatment guidelines about antibiotic prophylaxis in pain therapy. This document, drawn up with multidisciplinary approach, correspond to rational, efficacy and functional guide about the choice and management of the antibiotic prophylaxis during the minimally invasive pain surgical procedures.

Randomised controlled trials for evaluating the prescribing impact of information meetings led by pharmacists and of new information formats, in General Practice in Italy.

BACKGROUND: Suboptimal translation of valid and relevant information in clinical practice is a problem for all health systems. Lack of information independent from commercial influences, limited efforts to actively implement evidence-based information and its limited comprehensibility are important determinants of this gap and may influence an excessive variability in physicians' prescriptions. This is quite noticeable in Italy, where the philosophy and methods of Evidence-Based Medicine still enjoy limited diffusion among practitioners. Academic detailing and pharmacist outreach visits are interventions of proven efficacy to make independent and evidence-based information available to physicians; this approach and its feasibility have not yet been tested on a large scale and, moreover, they have never been formally tested in Italy. METHODS/DESIGN: Two RCTs are planned:1) a two-arm cluster RCT, carried out in Emilia-Romagna and Friuli Venezia Giulia, will evaluate the effectiveness of small group meetings, randomising about 150 Primary Care Groups (corresponding to about 2000 GPs) to pharmacist outreach visits on two different topics. Physicians' prescriptions (expressed as DDD per 1000 inhabitants/day), knowledge and attitudes (evaluated through the answers to a specific questionnaire) will be compared for target drugs in the two groups (receiving/not receiving each topic).2) A three-arm RCT, carried out in Sardinia, will evaluate both the effectiveness of one-to-one meetings (one pharmacist visiting one physician per time) and of a 'new' information format (compared to information already available) on changing physicians' prescription of specific drugs. About 900 single GPs will be randomised into three groups: physicians receiving a visit supported by "traditional" information material, those receiving a visit with "new" information material on the same topic and those not receiving any visit/material. DISCUSSION: The two proposed RCTs aim to evaluate the organisational feasibility and barriers to the implementation of independent information programs led by NHS pharmacists. The objective to assess a 10 or 15% decreases in the prescription of the targeted drugs is quite ambitious in such 'natural' settings, which will be minimally altered by the interventions themselves; this in spite of the quite large sample sizes used comparing to other studies of these kind. Complex interventions like these are not easy to evaluate, given the many different variables into play. Anyway, the pragmatic nature of the two RCTs appears to be also one of their major strengths, helping to provide a deeper insight on what is possible to achieve - in terms of independent information - in a National Health System, with special reference to Italy. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN05866587 (cluster RCT) and ISRCTN28525676 (single GPs RCT).

Factors influencing the length of hospitalisation in intensive care units: a prospective observational study.

INTRODUCTION: The length of stay (LOS) in patients admitted to intensive care units (ICUs) is influenced by the clinical history of the patient, so the main factors affecting clinical outcome are logical candidates to be predictors of LOS. Since there is still limited information about which factors can influence LOS in these patients, we undertook this observational study in Italian hospitals. MATERIALS AND METHODS: From 1 August to 31 October 2001 we enrolled a maximum of 10 consecutive patients admitted to ICUs in 16 Italian hospitals. The following information was recorded from each patient: date of admission; APACHE II score on admission; active sepsis and/or septic shock on admission; sepsis and/or septic shock developed during the stay in ICU; Glasgow coma scale on the third day; date and clinical outcome upon discharge from the hospital (alive or dead). RESULTS: In the study 131 patients were enrolled; 31 (23.7%) had active sepsis upon admission to ICU and 10 (7.6%) had septic shock; 12 (9.2%) developed sepsis during hospitalization and 12 (9.2%) developed septic shock. At the end of the study, 101 patients were alive and 30 had died. The overall mean LOS was 12 days. The mean LOS was 18.3 days for the subgroup with sepsis and 8.3 days in the subgroup without sepsis. Sepsis was the only factor that significantly influenced the LOS (P = 0.016). CONCLUSIONS: Our study was aimed to analyse the factors that influence the LOS in ICU patients and found that among the variables that affected LOS, sepsis had the greatest impact. Other studies had evaluated the impact of some variables on LOS and identified sepsis and infection as a determinant prolonging LOS.

Survival of patients with recurrent malignant glioma treated with temozolomide: a retrospective observational study.

OBJECTIVE: To assess whether the survival of patients with recurrent malignant glioma receiving temozolomide in everyday practice is comparable to that reported in previous studies. STUDY DESIGN: We conducted a retrospective observational study that included patients with recurrent malignant glioma who where treated with temozolomide. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The study was based on prospective clinical databases managed by the Italian Local Health Units; the databases are required by Italian Law 648/96 for patients treated with temozolomide before drug approval by the reimbursement agency of the Italian Ministry of Health. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES AND RESULTS: 201 patients who had received temozolomide during the qualifying period of Law 648/96 for this drug (from 11 March 1998 to 30 September 2000) were included in our study. The clinical indications for temozolomide were glioblastoma multiforme (n = 123), anaplastic astrocytoma (n = 49) or other indications (n = 28). One patient did not have an indication reported. The median survival for patients with glioblastoma multi-forme and anaplastic astrocytoma was 13 and 20.3 months, respectively (with survival rates at 6 months of 81% and 78%, respectively). In our group of 49 patients with anaplastic astrocytoma, the survival plateau observed between 22 and 37 months (with no fatalities over this long time interval) suggested a favourable outcome, although restricted to a small subgroup. The 123 patients with glioblastoma multiforme showed a slightly better survival than that reported previously, but all patients died before 32 months. CONCLUSIONS: This observational study extends the previous information regarding the efficacy of temozolomide and provides survival data from patients treated in everyday practice.