Effect of China's long-term care insurance on health outcomes of older disabled people: role of institutional care.

Since the public long-term care insurance (LTCI) system was piloted in Chengdu, China, in October 2017, there has been considerable growth of LTC institutions in China. This study aimed to evaluate the health value effect of LTCI in older patients with severe disabilities in an LTC institution. This prospective study was based on data from 985 severe disability patients with or without LTCI from October 2017 to May 2021 in the Eighth People's Hospital, Chengdu, China. The Cox proportional hazard model estimated LTCI's health value, including survival probability and risk of pneumonia/pressure ulcers. Subgroup analysis was performed for sex, age, Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI), and the number of drugs. In the analysis, 519 and 466 patients in LTCI and non-LTCI groups were included, respectively. In adjusted Cox analyses, the LTCI group had a significantly elevated survival rate compared with the non-LTCI groups at 12 months (P < .001, hazard ratio (HR) = 1.758, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.300-2.376). At 40 months, the adjusted survival rate was 62.6% in the LTCI group, which was significantly higher (53.7%; P = .003, HR = 1.438, 95% CI 1.131-1.831). The subgroups of patients aged 60 to 79 years (interaction P = .007) and with CCI ≥ 3 (interaction P = .026) were more significantly associated with survival improvement than those aged >80 years and with CCI< 3. The LTCI group was also at lower risk for hospital-acquired pneumonia (P = .016, HR 0.622, 95% CI 0.422-0.917) and pressure ulcers (P = .008, HR 0.695, 95% CI 0.376-0.862). The improved survival of LTCI remained stable in sensitivity analyses. For older patients with severe disabilities, in a LTC institution, LTCI significantly improved their health profile and longevity after a year, suggesting the large role and development potentiality of institution care in the LTCI system of China.

Probiotics for preventing acute upper respiratory tract infections.

BACKGROUND: Probiotics are live micro-organisms that may give a beneficial physiological effect when administered in adequate amounts. Some trials show that probiotic strains can prevent respiratory infections. Even though our previously published review showed the benefits of probiotics for acute upper respiratory tract infections (URTIs), several new studies have been published. This is an update of a review first published in 2011 and updated in 2015. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effectiveness and safety of probiotics (any specified strain or dose), compared with placebo or no treatment, in the prevention of acute URTIs in people of all ages, at risk of acute URTIs. SEARCH METHODS: We searched CENTRAL (2022, Issue 6), MEDLINE (1950 to May week 2, 2022), Embase (1974 to 10 May 2022), Web of Science (1900 to 10 May 2022), the Chinese Biomedical Literature Database, which includes the China Biological Medicine Database (from 1978 to 10 May 2022), the Chinese Medicine Popular Science Literature Database (from 2000 to 10 May 2022), and the Master's Degree Dissertation of Beijing Union Medical College Database (from 1981 to 10 May 2022). We searched the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform and ClinicalTrials.gov for completed and ongoing trials on 10 May 2022. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included individual randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and cluster-RCTs comparing probiotics with placebo or no treatment to prevent acute URTIs. The participants were children, adults, or the elderly in the community, care facilities, schools, or hospitals. Our main outcomes were the number of participants diagnosed with URTIs (at least one event and at least three events), the incidence rate (number of cases/person year) of acute URTIs, and the mean duration of an episode of URTIs. Our secondary outcomes were the number of participants who were absent from childcare centre, school, or work due to acute URTIs; the number of participants who used prescribed antibiotics for acute URTIs; and the number of participants who experienced at least one adverse event from probiotics. We excluded studies if they did not specify acute respiratory infections as 'upper'; studies with more than 50% of participants vaccinated against influenza or other acute URTIs within the last 12 months; and studies with significantly different proportions of vaccinated participants between the probiotics arm and the placebo or no treatment arm. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently assessed the eligibility of trials and extracted data using standard Cochrane methodological procedures. We analysed both intention-to-treat and per-protocol data and used a random-effects model. We expressed results as risk ratios (RRs) for dichotomous outcomes and mean differences (MDs) for continuous outcomes, both with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). We assessed the certainty of the evidence using the GRADE approach. MAIN RESULTS: We included 23 individual RCTs and one cluster-RCT. As one of the individual RCTs did not report outcomes in a usable way, we could only meta-analyse data from 23 trials, involving a total of 6950 participants including children (aged from one month to 11 years old), adults (mean age 37.3), and older people (mean age 84.6 years). One trial reported 22.5% flu-vaccine participants within the last 12 months, and 25.4% flu-vaccine participants during the intervention. Probiotics were more likely to be given with milk-based food in children; administered in powder form in adults; and given with milk-based food or in capsules in the elderly. Most of the studies used one or two strains (e.g. Lactobacillus plantarum HEAL9, Lactobacillus paracasei (8700:2 or N1115)) and 109 or 1011 colony-forming units (CFU)/day of probiotics for more than three months. We found that probiotics may reduce the number of participants diagnosed with URTIs (at least one event) (RR 0.76, 95% CI 0.67 to 0.87; P < 0.001; 16 studies, 4798 participants; low-certainty evidence); likely reduce the number of participants diagnosed with URTIs (at least three events) (RR 0.59, 95% CI 0.38 to 0.91; P = 0.02; 4 studies, 763 participants; moderate-certainty evidence); may reduce the incidence rate (number of cases/person year) of URTIs (rate ratio 0.82, 95% CI 0.73 to 0.92, P = 0.001; 12 studies, 4364 participants; low-certainty evidence); may reduce the mean duration of an episode of acute URTIs (MD -1.22 days, 95% CI -2.12 to -0.33; P = 0.007; 6 studies, 2406 participants; low-certainty evidence); likely reduce the number of participants who used prescribed antibiotics for acute URTIs (RR 0.58, 95% CI 0.42 to 0.81; P = 0.001; 6 studies, 1548 participants; moderate-certainty evidence); and may not increase the number of participants who experienced at least one adverse event (RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.90 to 1.15; P = 0.79; 8 studies, 2456 participants; low-certainty evidence). Evidence showing a decrease in the number of people absent from childcare centre, school, or work due to acute URTIs with probiotics is very uncertain (RR 0.14, 95% CI 0.03 to 0.59; 1 study, 80 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Adverse events from probiotics were minor, and most commonly gastrointestinal symptoms, such as vomiting, flatulence, diarrhoea, and bowel pain.  AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Overall, we found that probiotics were better than placebo or no treatment in preventing acute URTIs.

Association of sleep duration with sarcopenic obesity in multi-ethnic older adults: findings from the WCHAT Study.

OBJECTIVE: Sarcopenic obesity is a prevalent geriatric syndrome, characterized by concurrence of sarcopenia and obesity. Sleep duration is linked to both obesity and sarcopenia. However, little was known regarding the association of sleep duration with sarcopenic obesity. In this study, we aimed to examine the association of sleep duration with sarcopenic obesity in multi-ethnic community-dwelling older adults. METHODS: Sarcopenia was defined according to the criteria established by Asian Working Group for Sarcopenia (AWGS) 2019. Obesity was defined as body fat percentage above the 60th percentile specified by sex. Sarcopenic obesity was defined as concurrence of obesity and sarcopenia. Sleep duration was collected by a self-reported questionnaire and was further divided into 5 groups: "<6 h", "6-7 h", "7-8 h", "8-9 h" (reference group) and "≥9 h" (long sleep). Logistic regressions were adopted to examine the association. RESULTS: 2256 multi-ethnic adults aged 60 and over from the West China Health and Aging Trend (WCHAT) study were involved for present study. Overall, 6.25% of the participants were classified as sarcopenic obesity. In the fully adjusted model, long sleep duration (≥ 9 h) was significantly associated with sarcopenic obesity compared with reference group (OR = 1.81, 95%CI = 1.10-2.98, P = 0.019). However, in subgroup analysis, this association can only be observed in male (OR 1.98, 95% CI = 1.02-3.87, P = 0.043) not in female (OR = 1.83, 95%CI = 0.85-3.94, P = 0.118). Regarding ethnic difference, Han older adults with long sleep duration (≥ 9 h) presented increased risk of sarcopenic obesity while ethnic minorities did not. CONCLUSION: This study disclosed that long sleep duration significantly increased the risk of sarcopenic obesity among older adults. And our findings highlight the critical role of assessing sleep duration to identify individuals at risk of sarcopenic obesity.

Thrombolytic therapy for pulmonary embolism.

BACKGROUND: Thrombolytic therapy is usually reserved for people with clinically serious or massive pulmonary embolism (PE). Evidence suggests that thrombolytic agents may dissolve blood clots more rapidly than heparin and may reduce the death rate associated with PE. However, there are still concerns about the possible risk of adverse effects of thrombolytic therapy, such as major or minor haemorrhage. This is the fourth update of the Cochrane review first published in 2006. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of thrombolytic therapy for acute pulmonary embolism. SEARCH METHODS: The Cochrane Vascular Information Specialist searched the Cochrane Vascular Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, and CINAHL databases and the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform and ClinicalTrials.gov trials registers to 17 August 2020. We undertook reference checking to identify additional studies. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that compared thrombolytic therapy followed by heparin versus heparin alone, heparin plus placebo, or surgical intervention for people with acute PE (massive/submassive). We did not include trials comparing two different thrombolytic agents or different doses of the same thrombolytic drug. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors (ZZ, QH) assessed the eligibility and risk of bias of trials and extracted data. We calculated effect estimates using the odds ratio (OR) with a 95% confidence interval (CI) or the mean difference (MD) with a 95% CI. The primary outcomes of interest were death, recurrence of PE and haemorrhagic events. We assessed the certainty of the evidence using GRADE criteria. MAIN RESULTS: We identified three new studies for inclusion in this update. We included 21 trials in the review, with a total of 2401 participants. No studies compared thrombolytics versus surgical intervention. We were not able to include one study in the meta-analysis because it provided no extractable data. Most studies carried a high or unclear risk of bias related to randomisation and blinding. Meta-analysis showed that, compared to control (heparin alone or heparin plus placebo), thrombolytics plus heparin probably reduce both the odds of death (OR 0.58, 95% CI 0.38 to 0.88; 19 studies, 2319 participants; low-certainty evidence), and recurrence of PE (OR 0.54, 95% CI 0.32 to 0.91; 12 studies, 2050 participants; low-certainty evidence). Effects on mortality weakened when six studies at high risk of bias were excluded from analysis (OR 0.71, 95% CI 0.45 to 1.13; 13 studies, 2046 participants) and in the analysis of submassive PE participants (OR 0.61, 95% CI 0.37 to 1.02; 1993 participants). Effects on recurrence of PE also weakened after removing one study at high risk of bias for sensitivity analysis (OR 0.60, 95% CI 0.35 to 1.04; 11 studies, 1949 participants). We downgraded the certainty of evidence to low because of 'Risk of bias' concerns. Major haemorrhagic events were probably more common in the thrombolytics group than in the control group (OR 2.84, 95% CI 1.92 to 4.20; 15 studies, 2101 participants; moderate-certainty evidence), as were minor haemorrhagic events (OR 2.97, 95% CI 1.66 to 5.30; 13 studies,1757 participants; low-certainty evidence). We downgraded the certainty of the evidence to moderate or low because of 'Risk of bias' concerns and inconsistency. Haemorrhagic stroke may occur more often in the thrombolytics group than in the control group (OR 7.59, 95% CI 1.38 to 41.72; 2 studies, 1091 participants). Limited data indicated that thrombolytics may benefit haemodynamic outcomes, perfusion lung scanning, pulmonary angiogram assessment, echocardiograms, pulmonary hypertension, coagulation parameters, composite clinical outcomes, need for escalation and survival time to a greater extent than heparin alone. However, the heterogeneity of the studies and the small number of participants involved warrant caution when interpreting results. The length of hospital stay was shorter in the thrombolytics group than in the control group (mean difference (MD) -1.40 days, 95% CI -2.69 to -0.11; 5 studies, 368 participants). Haemodynamic decompensation may occur less in the thrombolytics group than in the control group (OR 0.36, 95% CI 0.20 to 0.66; 3 studies, 1157 participants). Quality of life was similar between the two treatment groups. None of the included studies provided data on post-thrombotic syndrome or on cost comparison. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Low-certainty evidence suggests that thrombolytics may reduce death following acute pulmonary embolism compared with heparin (the effectiveness was mainly driven by one trial with massive PE). Thrombolytic therapy may be helpful in reducing the recurrence of pulmonary emboli but may cause more major and minor haemorrhagic events, including haemorrhagic stroke. More studies of high methodological quality are needed to assess safety and cost effectiveness of thrombolytic therapy for people with pulmonary embolism.

[Prevalence of Sarcopenia and Associated Factors in Community-dwelling Elderly Populations in Chengdu China].

OBJECTIVE: To determine the prevalence of sarcopenia in community-dwelling elderly populations in Chengdu and its associated risk factors. METHODS: A total of 947 community dwelling residents aged ≥60 yr. in Chengdu participated in this study. Their appendicular skeletal muscle mass was measured through bioelectrical impedance analyses. Sarcopenia was defined using the diagnostic algorithm recommended by the Asia Working Group (AWGS) for Sarcopenia. Data in relation to the demographic characteristics, chronic diseases and life style of the participants were obtained through a questionnaire survey, which included the 15-item geriatric depression scale (GDS-15) and the mini nutritional assessment (MNA). RESULTS: Overall, 10.5% of the elderly participants were identified with sarcopenia: 8.4% in men and 12.5% in women. The prevalence of sarcopenia increased with age: 2.3% in the 60-64 yr., 5.6% in the 65-74 yr., 19.7% in the ≥75 yr.. Age [odds ratio (OR)=1.109, 95% confldence interval (CI):1.054-1.168], smoking (OR=3.482, 95%CI:1.356-8.938) and Malnorishment (OR=5.598, 95%CI:2.677-11.709) are significant predictors of sarcopenia after adjustment for potential confounders. CONCLUSION: Approximately 10% community-dwelling elderly in Chengdu have sarcopenis. Age, smoking, malnutrition are risk factors of sarcopenia.

Thrombolytic therapy for pulmonary embolism.

BACKGROUND: Thrombolytic therapy is usually reserved for patients with clinically serious or massive pulmonary embolism (PE). Evidence suggests that thrombolytic agents may dissolve blood clots more rapidly than heparin and may reduce the death rate associated with PE. However, there are still concerns about the possible risk of adverse effects of thrombolytic therapy, such as major or minor haemorrhage. This is the third update of the Cochrane review first published in 2006. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of thrombolytic therapy for acute pulmonary embolism. SEARCH METHODS: The Cochrane Vascular Information Specialist searched the Cochrane Vascular Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, and CINAHL databases and the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform and ClinicalTrials.gov trials registers to 16 April 2018. We undertook reference checking to identify additional studies. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that compared thrombolytic therapy followed by heparin versus heparin alone, heparin plus placebo, or surgical intervention for patients with acute PE. We did not include trials comparing two different thrombolytic agents or different doses of the same thrombolytic drug. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors (JY, QH) assessed the eligibility and quality of trials and extracted data. We calculated effect estimates using the odds ratio (OR) with 95% confidence interval (CI) or the mean difference (MD) with 95% CI. We assessed the quality of the evidence using GRADE criteria. MAIN RESULTS: We identified no new studies for inclusion in this 2018 update. We included in the review 18 trials with a total of 2197 participants. We were not able to include one study in the meta-analysis because it provided no data that we could extract. Most of the studies carried a high risk of bias because of high or unclear risk related to randomisation and blinding. Meta-analysis showed that, compared with heparin alone, or heparin plus placebo, thrombolytics plus heparin can reduce the odds of death (OR 0.57, 95% CI 0.37 to 0.87, 2167 participants, P = 0.01, low-quality evidence) and recurrence of PE (OR 0.51, 95% CI 0.29 to 0.89, 1898 participants, P = 0.02, low-quality evidence). Effects on mortality weakened when we excluded from analysis four studies at high risk of bias (OR 0.66, 95% CI 0.42 to 1.06, 2054 participants, P = 0.08). The incidence of major and minor haemorrhagic events was higher in the thrombolytics group than in the control group (OR 2.90, 95% CI 1.95 to 4.31, 1897 participants, P < 0.001, low-quality evidence; OR 3.09, 95% CI 1.58 to 6.06, 1553 participants, P = 0.001, very low-quality evidence, respectively). We downgraded the quality of the evidence to low or very low because of design limitations, potential influence of pharmaceutical companies, and small sample sizes. Length of hospital stay (mean difference (MD) -0.89, 95% CI -3.13 to 1.34) and quality of life were similar between the two treatment groups. Limited information from a small number of trials indicated that thrombolytics may improve haemodynamic outcomes, perfusion lung scanning, pulmonary angiogram assessment, echocardiograms, pulmonary hypertension, coagulation parameters, clinical outcomes, and survival time to a greater extent than heparin alone. However, the heterogeneity of the studies and the small number of participants involved warrant caution when results are interpreted. Similarily, fewer participants from the thrombolytics group required escalation of treatment. None of the included studies reported on post-thrombotic syndrome or compared the costs of different treatments. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Low-quality evidence suggests that thrombolytics reduce death following acute pulmonary embolism compared with heparin. The included studies used a variety of thrombolytic drugs. Thrombolytic therapy may be helpful in reducing the recurrence of pulmonary emboli but may cause major and minor haemorrhagic events and stroke. More high-quality, blinded randomised controlled trials assessing safety and cost-effectiveness of therapies for pulmonary embolism are required.

Linezolid versus vancomycin for skin and soft tissue infections.

BACKGROUND: The morbidity and treatment costs associated with skin and soft tissue infections (SSTIs) are high. Linezolid and vancomycin are antibiotics that are commonly used in treating skin and soft-tissue infections, specifically those infections due to methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA). OBJECTIVES: To compare the effects and safety of linezolid and vancomycin for treating people with SSTIs. SEARCH METHODS: For this first update of this review we conducted searches of the following databases: Cochrane Wounds Group Specialised Register (searched 24 March 2015; The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library); Ovid MEDLINE; Ovid MEDLINE (In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations); Ovid EMBASE; and EBSCO CINAHL. We also contacted manufacturers for details of unpublished and ongoing trials. We scrutinised citations within all obtained trials and major review articles to identify any additional trials. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included all randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing linezolid with vancomycin in the treatment of SSTIs. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently selected trials, assessed risk of bias and extracted data. The primary outcomes were clinical cure, microbiological cure, and SSTI-related and treatment-related mortality. We performed subgroup analyses according to age, and whether the infection was due to MRSA. MAIN RESULTS: No new trials were identified for this first update. We included nine RCTs (3144 participants). Linezolid was associated with a significantly better clinical (RR 1.09, 95% CI 1.03 to 1.16) and microbiological cure rate in adults (RR 1.08, 95% CI 1.01 to 1.16). For those infections due to MRSA, linezolid was significantly more effective than vancomycin in clinical (RR 1.09, 95% CI 1.03 to 1.17) and microbiological cure rates (RR 1.17, 95% CI 1.04 to 1.32). No RCT reported SSTI-related and treatment-related mortality. There was no significant difference in all-cause mortality between linezolid and vancomycin (RR 1.44, 95% CI 0.75 to 2.80). There were fewer incidents of red man syndrome (RR 0.04, 95% CI 0.01 to 0.29), pruritus (RR 0.36, 95% CI 0.17 to 0.75) and rash (RR 0.27, 95% CI 0.12 to 0.58) in the linezolid group compared with vancomycin, however, more people reported thrombocytopenia (RR 13.06, 95% CI 1.72 to 99.22), and nausea (RR 2.45, 95% CI 1.52 to 3.94) when treated with linezolid. It seems, from the available data, that length of stay in hospital was shorter for those in the linezolid group than the vancomycin group. The daily cost of outpatient therapy was less with oral linezolid than with intravenous vancomycin. Although inpatient treatment with linezolid cost more than inpatient treatment with vancomycin per day, the median length of hospital stay was three days shorter with linezolid. Thus, total hospital charges per patient were less with linezolid treatment than with vancomycin treatment. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Linezolid seems to be more effective than vancomycin for treating people with SSTIs, including SSTIs caused by MRSA. The available evidence is at high risk of bias and is based on studies that were supported by the pharmaceutical company that makes linezolid. Further well-designed, independently-funded, RCTs are needed to confirm the available evidence.

Estimation of prevalence of sarcopenia by using a new bioelectrical impedance analysis in Chinese community-dwelling elderly people.

BACKGROUND: The aim of the present study was to validate the usefulness of the new octapolar multifrequency bioelectrical impedance analysis (BIA) for assessment of appendicular skeletal muscle mass (ASM) by comparing it with that of dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) and to investigate the prevalence of sarcopenia in Chinese community-dwelling elderly according to Asian Working Group for Sarcopenia (AWGS) definition. METHODS: A cross-sectional study was conducted in communities of Chengdu, China. A total of 944 community-dwelling elderly adults aged ≥60 years were included. ASM was measured by using DXA as a criterion method to validate a standing eight-electrode multifrequency BIA (InBody 720), followed by a further estimation of the prevalence of sarcopenia according the AWGS definition. RESULTS: In the Bland-Altman analysis, no significant difference was found between DXA and BIA based on the ASM measurements. The prevalence of AWGS-defined sarcopenia was 12.5% in the elderly women and 8.2% in the elderly men. CONCLUSIONS: BIA is suitable for body composition monitoring (ASM) in elderly Chinese as a fast, noninvasive, and convenient method; therefore, it may be a better choice in large epidemiological studies in the Chinese population. The prevalence of AWGS-defined sarcopenia was approximately 10.4% and increased with age in the Chinese community-dwelling elderly in this study.

Cholinesterase inhibitors for rarer dementias associated with neurological conditions.

BACKGROUND: Rarer dementias include Huntington's disease (HD), cerebral autosomal dominant arteriopathy with subcortical infarcts and leukoencephalopathy (CADASIL), frontotemporal dementia (FTD), dementia in multiple sclerosis (MS) and progressive supranuclear palsy (PSP). Cholinesterase inhibitors, including donepezil, galantamine and rivastigmine, are considered to be the first-line medicines for Alzheimer's disease and some other dementias, such as dementia in Parkinson's disease. Cholinesterase inhibitors are hypothesised to work by inhibiting the enzyme acetylcholinesterase (AChE) which breaks down the neurotransmitter acetylcholine. Cholinesterase inhibitors may also lead to clinical improvement for rarer dementias associated with neurological conditions. OBJECTIVES: To assess the efficacy and safety of cholinesterase inhibitors for cognitive impairment or dementia associated with neurological conditions. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Dementia and Cognitive Improvement Group's Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, CINAHL, LILACS, several trial registries and grey literature sources in August 2013. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised, double-blind, controlled trials assessing the efficacy of treatment of rarer dementias associated with neurological conditions with currently marketed cholinesterase inhibitors. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently assessed eligibility and quality of trials, and extracted data. We used the standard methodological procedures of the Cochrane Collaboration. MAIN RESULTS: We included eight RCTs involving 567 participants. Six studies used a simple parallel-group design; the other two consisted of an open-label treatment period followed by a randomised phase. All trials were well concealed for allocation and double-blind, however the sample sizes of most trials were small. All trials used placebo as control. We performed meta-analyses for some outcomes in patients with MS. For all other conditions, results are presented narratively.Two trials included patients with HD; one found that cholinesterase inhibitor use in the short-term had no statistically significant impact on the cognitive portion of the Alzheimer Disease Assessment Scale (ADAS-Cog; 1 study, WMD 1.00, 95% CI -1.66 to 3.66, P = 0.46; low quality evidence), Unified Huntington's Disease Rating Scale (UHDRS) Verbal Fluency Test (1 study, WMD -1.20, 95% CI -7.97 to 5.57, P = 0.73; low quality evidence), UHDRS Symbol Digit Modalities Test (SDMT; 1 study, WMD 2.70, 95% CI -0.95 to 6.35, P = 0.15; low quality evidence) and other psychometric tests. The other study found that cholinesterase inhibitor use in the medium-term improved the results of the verbal fluency test (1 study, WMD 6.43, 95% CI 0.66 to 12.20, P = 0.03; moderate quality evidence) and California Verbal Learning Test - Second Edition (CVLT-II) Recognition Task (1 study, WMD 2.42, 95% CI 0.17 to 4.67, P = 0.04; moderate quality evidence). There was no statistically significant difference between groups on the SDMT (1 study, WMD -0.31, 95% CI -7.77 to 7.15, P = 0.94; moderate quality evidence), CVLT-II trials 1-5 (1 study, WMD -2.09, 95% CI -11.65 to 7.47, P = 0.67; moderate quality evidence), short-delay recall (1 study, WMD 0.35, 95% CI -2.87 to 3.57, P = 0.83; moderate quality evidence), or long-delay recall (1 study, WMD -0.14, 95% CI -3.08 to 2.80, P = 0.93; moderate quality evidence), and other psychometric tests.Four trials included patients with MS; one found no differences between the cholinesterase inhibitors (short-term) and placebo groups on the Wechsler Memory Scales general memory score (1 study, WMD 0.90, 95% CI -0.52 to 2.32, P = 0.22; low quality evidence). The three other trials found that, in the medium-term - cholinesterase inhibitors improved the clinician's impression of cognitive change (2 studies, OR 1.96, 95% CI 1.06 to 3.62, P = 0.03; high quality evidence). However, the treatment effect on other aspects of cognitive change were unclear, measured by the Selective Reminding Test (3 studies, WMD 1.47, 95% CI -0.39 to 3.32, P = 0.12; high quality evidence), patient's self-reported impression of memory change (2 studies, OR 1.67, 95% CI 0.93 to 3.00, P = 0.08; high quality evidence) and cognitive change (1 study, OR 0.95, 95% CI 0.45 to 1.98, P = 0.89; high quality evidence), clinician's impression of memory change (1 study, OR 1.50, 95% CI 0.59 to 3.84, P = 0.39; moderate quality evidence), other psychometric tests, and activities of daily living - patient reported impact of multiple sclerosis activities (1 study, WMD -1.18, 95% CI -3.02 to 0.66, P = 0.21; low quality evidence).One study on patients with CADASIL found a beneficial effect of cholinesterase inhibitors on the Executive interview, and Trail Making Test parts A and B. The impact of cholinesterase inhibitors on the Vascular ADAS-Cog score (1 study, WMD 0.04, 95% CI -1.57 to 1.65, P = 0.96; high quality evidence), the Clinical Dementia Rating Scale Sum of Boxes (1 study, WMD -0.09, 95% CI -0.48 to 0.03, P = 0.65; high quality evidence) Disability Assessment for Dementia scale (1 study, WMD 0.58, 95% CI -2.72 to 3.88, P = 0.73; moderate quality evidence), and other measures was unclearOne study included patients with FTD. This trial consisted of an open-label treatment period followed by a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase. No data of primary outcomes were reported in this study.In the included studies, the most common side effect was gastrointestinal symptoms. For all conditions, compared to the treatment group, the placebo group experienced significantly less nausea (6 studies, 44/257 vs. 22/246, OR 2.10, 95% CI 1.22 to 3.62, P = 0.007; high quality evidence), diarrhoea (6 studies, 40/257 vs. 13/246, OR 3.26, 95% CI 1.72 to 6.19, P = 0.0003; moderate quality evidence) and vomiting (3 studies, 17/192 vs. 3/182, OR 5.76, 95% CI 1.67 to 19.87, P = 0.006; moderate quality evidence). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: The sample sizes of most included trials were small, and some of the results were extracted from only one study. There were no poolable data for HD, CADASIL and FTD patients and there were no results for patients with PSP. Current evidence shows that the efficacy on cognitive function and activities of daily living of cholinesterase inhibitors in people with HD, CADASIL, MS, PSP or FTD is unclear, although cholinesterase inhibitors are associated with more gastrointestinal side effects compared with placebo.

Probiotics for preventing acute upper respiratory tract infections.

BACKGROUND: Probiotics may improve a person's health by regulating their immune function. Some trials have shown that probiotic strains can prevent respiratory infections. Even though the previous version of our review showed benefits of probiotics for acute upper respiratory tract infections (URTIs), several new studies have been published. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effectiveness and safety of probiotics (any specified strain or dose), compared with placebo, in the prevention of acute URTIs in people of all ages, at risk of acute URTIs. SEARCH METHODS: We searched CENTRAL (2014, Issue 6), MEDLINE (1950 to July week 3, 2014), EMBASE (1974 to July 2014), Web of Science (1900 to July 2014), the Chinese Biomedical Literature Database, which includes the China Biological Medicine Database (from 1978 to July 2014), the Chinese Medicine Popular Science Literature Database (from 2000 to July 2014) and the Masters Degree Dissertation of Beijing Union Medical College Database (from 1981 to July 2014). We also searched the World Health Organization (WHO) International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) and ClinicalTrials.gov for completed and ongoing trials on 31 July 2014. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing probiotics with placebo to prevent acute URTIs. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently assessed the eligibility and quality of trials, and extracted data using the standard methodological procedures expected by The Cochrane Collaboration. MAIN RESULTS: We included 13 RCTs, although we could only extract data to meta-analyse 12 trials, which involved 3720 participants including children, adults (aged around 40 years) and older people. We found that probiotics were better than placebo when measuring the number of participants experiencing episodes of acute URTI (at least one episode: odds ratio (OR) 0.53; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.37 to 0.76, P value < 0.001, low quality evidence; at least three episodes: OR 0.53; 95% CI 0.36 to 0.80, P value = 0.002, low quality evidence); the mean duration of an episode of acute URTI (mean difference (MD) -1.89; 95% CI -2.03 to -1.75, P value < 0.001, low quality evidence); reduced antibiotic prescription rates for acute URTIs (OR 0.65; 95% CI 0.45 to 0.94, moderate quality evidence) and cold-related school absence (OR 0.10; 95% CI 0.02 to 0.47, very low quality evidence). Probiotics and placebo were similar when measuring the rate ratio of episodes of acute URTI (rate ratio 0.83; 95% CI 0.66 to 1.05, P value = 0.12, very low quality evidence) and adverse events (OR 0.88; 95% CI 0.65 to 1.19, P value = 0.40, low quality evidence). Side effects of probiotics were minor and gastrointestinal symptoms were the most common. We found that some subgroups had a high level of heterogeneity when we conducted pooled analyses and the evidence level was low or very low quality. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Probiotics were better than placebo in reducing the number of participants experiencing episodes of acute URTI, the mean duration of an episode of acute URTI, antibiotic use and cold-related school absence. This indicates that probiotics may be more beneficial than placebo for preventing acute URTIs. However, the quality of the evidence was low or very low.

Thrombolytic therapy for pulmonary embolism.

BACKGROUND: Thrombolytic therapy (powerful anticoagulation drugs) is usually reserved for patients with clinically serious or massive pulmonary embolism (PE). Evidence suggests that thrombolytic agents may dissolve blood clots more rapidly than heparin and reduce the death rate associated with PE. However, there are still concerns about the possible risk of adverse effects of thrombolytic therapy, such as major or minor haemorrhages. This is the second update of the Cochrane review first published in 2006. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of thrombolytic therapy in patients with acute pulmonary embolism. SEARCH METHODS: For this update the Cochrane Vascular Group searched their Specialised Register (last searched September 2014) and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) in the Cochrane Library (last searched Issue 8, 2014). We also searched individual trial collections and private databases, along with bibliographies of relevant articles. We handsearched relevant medical journals. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that compared thrombolytic therapy followed by heparin versus heparin alone, heparin plus placebo or surgical intervention in patients with acute PE. We did not include trials comparing two different thrombolytic agents or different doses of the same thrombolytic drug. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two authors (BD and QH) assessed the eligibility and quality of trials and extracted data. MAIN RESULTS: We identified 18 trials with a total of 2197 participants for inclusion in the review. We were not able to include one study in the meta-analysis because it had no data to extract. Most of the studies carried a high risk of bias because of high or unclear risk relating to randomisation and blinding. Meta-analysis showed that, compared with heparin alone, or heparin plus placebo, thrombolytics plus heparin can reduce the odds of death (odds ratio (OR) 0.57, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.37 to 0.87, P = 0.02, low quality evidence) and recurrence of PE (OR 0.51; 95% CI 0.29 to 0.89, P = 0.02, low quality evidence). The effects of death weakened when we excluded four studies at high risk of bias from analysis: OR 0.66, 95% CI 0.42 to 1.06, P = 0.08. The incidence of major and minor haemorrhagic events was higher in the thrombolytics group than in the control group, and this difference was statistically significant (OR 2.90, 95% CI 1.95 to 4.31, P < 0.001, low quality evidence; OR 3.09, 95% CI 1.58 to 6.06, P = 0.001, very low quality evidence, respectively). Length of hospital stay (mean difference (MD) -1.35, 95% CI -4.27 to 1.58) and quality of life were similar between the two treatment groups. Stroke was reported in one study and occurred more often in the thrombolytics group than in the control group, although the confidence interval was wide (OR 12.10, 95% CI 1.57 to 93.39). Limited information from a small number of trials indicated that thrombolytics may improve haemodynamic outcomes, perfusion lung scanning, pulmonary angiogram assessment, echocardiograms, pulmonary hypertension, coagulation parameters, clinical outcomes and survival time to a greater extent than heparin alone. However, the heterogeneity of the studies and small number of participants involved warrant caution when interpreting results. Similarily, fewer patients from the thrombolytics group required escalation of treatment. None of the included studies reported on post-thrombotic syndrome or compared the cost of the different treatments. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There is low quality evidence that thrombolytics reduce death following acute pulmonary embolism compared with heparin. Furthermore, thrombolytic therapies included in the review were heterogeneous. Thrombolytic therapy may be helpful in reducing the recurrence of pulmonary emboli but may cause more major and minor haemorrhagic events and stroke. More high quality double blind RCTs assessing safety and cost-effectiveness are required.

Macrolides for diffuse panbronchiolitis.

BACKGROUND: Diffuse panbronchiolitis (DPB) is a chronic airways disease predominantly affecting East Asians. Macrolides, a class of antibiotics, have been used as the main treatment for DPB, based on evidence from retrospective and non-randomised studies. OBJECTIVES: To assess the efficacy and safety of macrolides for DPB. SEARCH METHODS: We searched CENTRAL (2014, Issue 6), MEDLINE (1966 to July week 1, 2014), EMBASE (1974 to July 2014), Chinese Biomedical Literature Database (CBM) (1978 to July 2014), China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI) (1974 to July 2014), KoreaMed (1997 to July 2014) and Database of Japana Centra Revuo Medicina (1983 to July 2014). SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) or quasi-RCTs assessing the effect of macrolides for DPB. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently assessed study quality and subsequent risk of bias according to The Cochrane Collaboration's tool for assessing risk of bias. The primary outcomes were five-year survival rate, lung function and clinical response. We used risk ratios (RR) for individual trial results in the data analysis and measured all outcomes with 95% confidence intervals (CI). MAIN RESULTS: Only one RCT (19 participants) with significant methodological limitations was included in this review. It found that the computerised tomography images of all participants treated with a long-term, low-dose macrolide (erythromycin) improved from baseline, while the images of 71.4% of participants in the control group (with no treatment) worsened and 28.6% remained unchanged. Adverse effects were not reported. This review was previously published in 2010 and 2013. For this 2014 update, we identified no new trials for inclusion or exclusion. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There is little evidence for macrolides in the treatment of DPB. We are therefore unable to make any new recommendations. It may be reasonable to use low-dose macrolides soon after diagnosis is made and to continue this treatment for at least six months, according to current guidelines.

Oral adsorbents for preventing or delaying the progression of chronic kidney disease.

BACKGROUND: Chronic kidney disease (CKD) is a worldwide public health problem which is at high increased risk of cardiovascular disease (CVD) and renal failure. Deterioration of kidney function causes an increase in circulating toxins, which, in turn promotes the progression of CKD. Oral adsorbents with capacity to adsorb and remove substances including uraemic toxins from the intestine could be effective in minimising kidney injury. OBJECTIVES: To investigate the benefits and harms of oral adsorbents for preventing or delaying the progression of CKD. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Renal Group's Specialised Register (to 22 September 2014) through contact with the Trials' Search Co-ordinator using search terms relevant to this review. The following four Chinese medical databases were also searched: China Biological Medicine Database (1979 to May 2012); Chinese Science and Technique Journals Database (to May 2012); China National Infrastructure (to May 2012); Wan Fang database (to May 2012). SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs comparing any oral adsorbents for preventing or delaying the progression of CKD. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two authors independently assessed and extracted information. Information was collected on methods, participants, interventions and outcomes (incidence of end-stage kidney disease (ESKD), mortality, quality of life and adverse events). Results were expressed as risk ratios (RR) for dichotomous outcomes or as mean differences (MD) for continuous data with 95% confidence intervals (CI). Adverse events were expressed as risk differences (RD). MAIN RESULTS: Fifteen studies (1590 patients) conducted in Japan, China, and the USA were identified. The risk of bias of the included studies was moderate or high and the sample sizes were small.Three studies compared oral AST-120 plus routine treatment with placebo plus routine treatment; however data on our outcome measures of interest were not reported in two studies. These studies did not assess or did not provide data for our primary outcomes of interest (incidence of ESKD; time to ESKD; all-cause mortality). There was no significant difference in the changes of serum creatinine (SCr), slope of 1/SCr over time and creatinine clearance (CrCl) between AST-120 and placebo for patients with CKD.Eight studies compared oral AST-120 plus routine treatment with routine treatment alone; data on our outcome measures of interest were not reported in one study. There was no significant difference in incidence of ESKD, all-cause mortality and the change in health-related quality of life between AST-120 and routine treatment for patients with CKD. AST-120 showed beneficial effects on delaying the decline of kidney function measured by using the slope of change in estimated CrCl (SMD 0.39, 95% CI 0.21 to 0.5) and the mean changes of glomerular filtration rate (GFR) (MD -0.76 mL/min/mo, 95% CI -0.82 to -0.70) for patients with CKD; AST-120 was not superior to routine treatment in retarding the decline of kidney function measured by using the 1/SCr slope over time, occurrence of increase in SCr concentration, doubling of SCr concentration, changes in GFR from baseline (mL/min/1.73 m²) and slope of the eGFR curve (mL/min/mo) for patients with CKD.Three studies compared oral Ai Xi Te plus routine treatment with routine treatment alone. These studies did not assess our primary outcomes of interest. Compared with routine treatment, Ai Xi Te had positive effects on reducing SCr (MD -113.40 (µmol/L), 95% CI -188.69 to -38.10) and retarding the decline of CrCl (MD 9.74 (mL/min), 95% CI 4.28 to 15.21) for patients with CKD.One study compared oral Niaoduqing granules plus routine treatment with routine treatment alone, but did not assess our primary outcomes of interest. Compared with routine treatment, Niaoduqing granules had positive effects on reducing SCr (MD -135.60 (µmol/L), 95% CI -198.03 to -73.17) and CrCl (MD 13.30 (mL/min), 95% CI 5.69 to 20.91).The most commonly reported adverse events associated with AST-120 and Ai Xi Te were gastrointestinal symptoms however no serious adverse events were reported. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Few studies reported our primary outcomes of interest. For our secondary outcomes, there is evidence of limited quality that AST-120, Ai Xi Te and Niaoduqing granules may have positive effects on delaying the decline of kidney function. There were no serious adverse events for any of the interventions in patients with CKD. Given the lack of information for our primary outcomes, the low methodological quality of most studies, and the small sample sizes, there is no strong evidence on the effectiveness of these oral adsorbents.

Deep learning model for the prediction of all-cause mortality among long term care people in China: a prospective cohort study.

This study aimed to develop a deep learning model to predict the risk stratification of all-cause death for older people with disability, providing guidance for long-term care plans. Based on the government-led long-term care insurance program in a pilot city of China from 2017 and followed up to 2021, the study included 42,353 disabled adults aged over 65, with 25,071 assigned to the training set and 17,282 to the validation set. The administrative data (including baseline characteristics, underlying medical conditions, and all-cause mortality) were collected to develop a deep learning model by least absolute shrinkage and selection operator. After a median follow-up time of 14 months, 17,565 (41.5%) deaths were recorded. Thirty predictors were identified and included in the final models for disability-related deaths. Physical disability (mobility, incontinence, feeding), adverse events (pressure ulcers and falls from bed), and cancer were related to poor prognosis. A total of 10,127, 25,140 and 7086 individuals were classified into low-, medium-, and high-risk groups, with actual risk probabilities of death of 9.5%, 45.8%, and 85.5%, respectively. This deep learning model could facilitate the prevention of risk factors and provide guidance for long-term care model planning based on risk stratification.

Macrolides for diffuse panbronchiolitis.

BACKGROUND: Diffuse panbronchiolitis (DPB) is a chronic airways disease predominantly affecting East Asians. Macrolides, a class of antibiotics, have been used as the main treatment for DPB, based on evidence from retrospective and non-randomised studies. OBJECTIVES: To assess the efficacy and safety of macrolides for DPB. SEARCH METHODS: We searched CENTRAL 2012, Issue 7, MEDLINE (1966 to July week 2, 2012), EMBASE (1974 to July 2012), Chinese Biomedical Literature Database (CBM) (1978 to July 2012), China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI) (1974 to July 2012), KoreaMed (1997 to July 2012) and Database of Japana Centra Revuo Medicina (1983 to July 2012). SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) or quasi-RCTs assessing the effect of macrolides for DPB. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently assessed study quality and subsequent risk of bias according to the Cochrane Collaboration's tool for assessing risk of bias. The primary outcomes were five-year survival rate, lung function and clinical response. We used risk ratios (RR) for individual trial results in the data analysis and measured all outcomes with 95% confidence intervals (CI). MAIN RESULTS: Only one RCT (19 participants) with significant methodological limitations was included in this review. It found that the computerised tomography images of all participants treated with a long-term, low-dose macrolide (erythromycin) improved from baseline, while the images of 71.4% of participants in the control group (with no treatment) worsened and 28.6% remained unchanged. Adverse effects were not reported. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There is little evidence for macrolides in the treatment of DPB. We are therefore unable to make any new recommendations. It may be reasonable to use low-dose macrolides soon after diagnosis is made and to continue this treatment for at least six months, according to current guidelines.

Linezolid versus vancomycin for skin and soft tissue infections.

BACKGROUND: The morbidity and treatment costs associated with skin and soft tissue infections (SSTIs) are high. Linezolid and vancomycin are antibiotics that are commonly used in treating skin and soft-tissue infections, specifically those infections due to methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA). OBJECTIVES: To compare the effects and safety of linezolid and vancomycin for treating people with SSTIs. SEARCH METHODS: In May 2013 we conducted searches of the following databases: Cochrane Wounds Group Specialised Register; The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library); Ovid MEDLINE; Ovid MEDLINE (In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations); Ovid EMBASE; and EBSCO CINAHL. We also contacted manufacturers for details of unpublished and ongoing trials. We scrutinised citations within all obtained trials and major review articles to identify any additional trials. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included all randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing linezolid with vancomycin in the treatment of SSTIs. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently selected trials, assessed risk of bias and extracted data. The primary outcomes were clinical cure, microbiological cure, and SSTI-related and treatment-related mortality. We performed subgroup analyses according to age, and whether the infection was due to MRSA. MAIN RESULTS: We included nine RCTs (3144 participants). Linezolid was associated with a significantly better clinical (RR 1.09, 95% CI 1.03 to 1.16) and microbiological cure rate in adults (RR 1.08, 95% CI 1.01 to 1.16). For those infections due to MRSA, linezolid was significantly more effective than vancomycin in clinical (RR 1.09, 95% CI 1.03 to 1.17) and microbiological cure rates (RR 1.17, 95% CI 1.04 to 1.32). No RCT reported SSTI-related and treatment-related mortality. There was no significant difference in all-cause mortality between linezolid and vancomycin (RR 1.44, 95% CI 0.75 to 2.80). There were fewer incidents of red man syndrome (RR 0.04, 95% CI 0.01 to 0.29), pruritus (RR 0.36, 95% CI 0.17 to 0.75) and rash (RR 0.27, 95% CI 0.12 to 0.58) in the linezolid group compared with vancomycin, however, more people reported thrombocytopenia (RR 13.06, 95% CI 1.72 to 99.22), and nausea (RR 2.45, 95% CI 1.52 to 3.94) when treated with linezolid. It seems, from the available data, that length of stay in hospital was shorter for those in the linezolid group than the vancomycin group. The daily cost of outpatient therapy was less with oral linezolid than with intravenous vancomycin. Although inpatient treatment with linezolid cost more than inpatient treatment with vancomycin per day, the median length of hospital stay was three days shorter with linezolid. Thus, total hospital charges per patient were less with linezolid treatment than with vancomycin treatment. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Linezolid seems to be more effective than vancomycin for treating people with SSTIs, including SSTIs caused by MRSA. The available evidence is at high risk of bias and is based on studies that were supported by the pharmaceutical company that makes linezolid. Further well-designed, independently-funded, RCTs are needed to confirm the available evidence.

Acetaminophen (paracetamol) for the common cold in adults.

BACKGROUND: Acetaminophen is frequently prescribed for treating patients with the common cold, but there is little evidence as to whether it is effective. OBJECTIVES: To determine the efficacy and safety of acetaminophen in the treatment of the common cold in adults. SEARCH METHODS: We searched CENTRAL 2013, Issue 1, Ovid MEDLINE (1950 to January week 5, 2013), EMBASE (1980 to February 2013), CINAHL (1982 to February 2013) and LILACS (1985 to February 2013). SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing acetaminophen to placebo or no treatment in adults with the common cold. Studies were included if the trials used acetaminophen as one ingredient of a combination therapy. We excluded studies in which the participants had complications. Primary outcomes included subjective symptom score and duration of common cold symptoms. Secondary outcomes were overall well being, adverse events and financial costs. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently screened studies for inclusion, assessed risk of bias and extracted data. We performed standard statistical analyses. MAIN RESULTS: We included four RCTs involving 758 participants. We did not pool data because of heterogeneity in study designs, outcomes and time points. The studies provided sparse information about effects longer than a few hours, as three of four included studies were short trials of only four to six hours. Participants treated with acetaminophen had significant improvements in nasal obstruction in two of the four studies. One study showed that acetaminophen was superior to placebo in decreasing rhinorrhoea severity, but was not superior for treating sneezing and coughing. Acetaminophen did not improve sore throat or malaise in two of the four studies. Results were inconsistent for some symptoms. Two studies showed that headache and achiness improved more in the acetaminophen group than in the placebo group, while one study showed no difference between the acetaminophen and placebo group. None of the included studies reported the duration of common cold symptoms. Minor side effects (including gastrointestinal adverse events, dizziness, dry mouth, somnolence and increased sweating) in the acetaminophen group were reported in two of the four studies. One of them used a combination of pseudoephedrine and acetaminophen. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Acetaminophen may help relieve nasal obstruction and rhinorrhoea but does not appear to improve some other cold symptoms (including sore throat, malaise, sneezing and cough). However, two of the four included studies in this review were small and allocation concealment was unclear in all four studies. The data in this review do not provide sufficient evidence to inform practice regarding the use of acetaminophen for the common cold in adults. Further large-scale, well-designed trials are needed to determine whether this intervention is beneficial in the treatment of adults with the common cold.

Chest physiotherapy for pneumonia in adults.

BACKGROUND: Despite conflicting evidence, chest physiotherapy has been widely used as an adjunctive treatment for adults with pneumonia. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effectiveness and safety of chest physiotherapy for pneumonia in adults. SEARCH METHODS: We searched CENTRAL 2012, Issue 11, MEDLINE (1966 to November week 2, 2012), EMBASE (1974 to November 2012), Physiotherapy Evidence Database (PEDro) (1929 to November 2012), CINAHL (2009 to November 2012) and CBM (1978 to November 2012). SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) assessing the efficacy of chest physiotherapy for treating pneumonia in adults. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two authors independently assessed trial eligibility, extracted data and appraised trial quality. Primary outcomes were mortality and cure rate. We used risk ratios (RR) and mean difference (MD) for individual trial results in the data analysis. We performed meta-analysis and measured all outcomes with 95% confidence intervals (CI). MAIN RESULTS: Six RCTs (434 participants) appraised four types of chest physiotherapy (conventional chest physiotherapy; osteopathic manipulative treatment (which includes paraspinal inhibition, rib raising and myofascial release); active cycle of breathing techniques (which include active breathing control, thoracic expansion exercises and forced expiration techniques); and positive expiratory pressure).None of the physiotherapies (versus no physiotherapy or placebo) improved mortality rates of adults with pneumonia.Conventional chest physiotherapy (versus no physiotherapy), active cycle of breathing techniques (versus no physiotherapy) and osteopathic manipulative treatment (versus placebo) did not increase the cure rate or chest X-ray improvement rate.Osteopathic manipulative treatment (versus placebo) and positive expiratory pressure (versus no physiotherapy) reduced the mean duration of hospital stay by 2.0 days (mean difference (MD) -2.0 days, 95% CI -3.5 to -0.6) and 1.4 days (MD -1.4 days, 95% CI -2.8 to -0.0), respectively. Conventional chest physiotherapy and active cycle of breathing techniques did not.Positive expiratory pressure (versus no physiotherapy) reduced fever duration (MD -0.7 day, 95% CI -1.4 to -0.0). Osteopathic manipulative treatment did not.Osteopathic manipulative treatment (versus placebo) reduced the duration of intravenous (MD -2.1 days, 95% CI -3.4 to -0.9) and total antibiotic treatment (MD -1.9 days, 95% CI -3.1 to -0.7).Limitations of this review are that the studies addressing osteopathic manipulative treatment were small, and that six published studies which appear to meet the inclusion criteria are awaiting classification. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Based on current limited evidence, chest physiotherapy might not be recommended as routine additional treatment for pneumonia in adults.

Monosodium glutamate avoidance for chronic asthma in adults and children.

BACKGROUND: Monosodium glutamate (MSG) is the sodium salt of the non-essential amino acid, glutamic acid, and is used as a flavour enhancer. It has been implicated in causing adverse reactions, which have been referred to as "Chinese restaurant syndrome". Over the last two decades there have been a number of studies investigating whether MSG ingestion induces an asthmatic response, and several reviews have been published (ILSI 1991; Stevenson 2000; Woods 2001), but no meta-analysis or Cochrane systematic review has been performed. OBJECTIVES: The objectives of this review are to: 1) identify randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of MSG ingestion and asthma response in adults and children older than two years of age with asthma; 2) assess the methodological quality of these trials; and 3) determine the effect of MSG ingestion on asthma outcomes. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Airways group's Specialised Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), and bibliographies of existing trials. Searches were current up to May 2012. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included RCTs that investigated the effect of MSG on chronic asthma in adults and children. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two authors independently extracted, entered and analysed data from included studies. We contacted study authors for additional information. MAIN RESULTS: Only two cross-over studies involving 24 adults met the eligibility criteria; the challenge dosages of MSG were 1 g, 5 g and 25 mg/kg. They reported the number of subjects who had a maximum fall in forced expiratory volume in the first second (FEV(1)) greater than 15% or 200 mL after MSG or the control challenge. The pooled data found no statistically significant difference between MSG and placebo. One trial reported the mean change at four hours and maximum fall in FEV(1) over four hours after MSG or the placebo challenge, but found no statistically significant difference between interventions. There were no differences in symptom scores, non-specific bronchial hyper-responsiveness (BHR), eosinophil cationic protein (ECP) or tryptase levels in peripheral blood between MSG and control, although we were unable to perform meta-analyses. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: The limited evidence available (n = 24) found no significant difference between MSG or the control challenge for the number of subjects who had a maximum fall in FEV(1) greater than 15% or 200 mL. There is no evidence to support the avoidance of MSG in adults with chronic asthma, but as data were limited, this review cannot provide a reliable evidence base for determining whether MSG avoidance is a worthwhile strategy. We could not find any studies conducted on the effect of MSG in children with chronic asthma. There is therefore, a need for further RCTs to investigate any relationship between MSG and asthma, especially in children.

Huperzine A for mild cognitive impairment.

BACKGROUND: Mild cognitive impairment (MCI) has been proposed as a condition of intermediate symptomatology between the cognitive changes of ageing and fully developed symptoms of dementia. Treatment in the stages of MCI may delay the deterioration of cognitive impairment and delay the progression to dementia. Currently, the treatments for Alzheimer's disease have been focused on increasing acetylcholine levels in the brain. However, these drugs have not been proven to be effective for MCI and have numerous side effects. Huperzine A may have some beneficial effects in MCI. OBJECTIVES: To assess the clinical efficacy and safety of huperzine A for the treatment of patients with MCI. SEARCH METHODS: We searched ALOIS: the Cochrane Dementia and Cognitive Improvement Group's Specialized Register on 23 May 2011 using the terms: huperzine, ayapin, scoparon. ALOIS contains records of clinical trials identified from monthly searches of a number of major healthcare databases, numerous trial registries and grey literature sources. Additional searches were also performed separately in MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, LILACS, clinicalTrials.gov, the ICTRP (WHO portal), CENTRAL (The Cochrane Library) and Web of Science with Conference Proceedings.The following Chinese databases were searched: The Chinese Biomedical Database, VIP Chinese Science and Technique Journals Database, China National Knowledge Infrastructure and The Chinese Clinical Trials Register. In addition, we handsearched 20 Chinese traditional medicine journals from between 1970 and 1989. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised, parallel-group, placebo-controlled trials comparing huperzine A with placebo in patients with MCI were eligible for inclusion. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently assessed studies for their eligibility for inclusion. MAIN RESULTS: No eligible trials were identified. In the absence of any suitable randomised placebo-controlled trials in this area, we were unable to perform a meta-analysis. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: The currently available evidence is insufficient to assess the potential for huperzine A in the treatment of MCI. Randomised double-blind placebo-controlled trials are needed.