Systematic review of the efficacy, effectiveness and safety of recombinant haemagglutinin seasonal influenza vaccines for the prevention of laboratory-confirmed influenza in individuals ≥18 years of age.

The most effective means of preventing seasonal influenza is through vaccination. In this systematic review, we investigated the efficacy, effectiveness and safety of recombinant haemagglutinin (HA) seasonal influenza vaccines to prevent laboratory-confirmed influenza. A systematic literature search was conducted in electronic databases and grey literature sources up to 7 February 2020. Randomised controlled trials and non-randomised studies of interventions were eligible for inclusion. The search returned 28,846 records, of which 10 studies on recombinant HA influenza vaccine met our inclusion criteria. One study found that the quadrivalent recombinant HA influenza vaccine had higher relative vaccine efficacy (rVE) in preventing laboratory-confirmed influenza during the 2014-15 season compared with traditional quadrivalent vaccination in adults aged ≥50 years (rVE = 30%, 95% CI 10%-47%, moderate-certainty evidence). In a subgroup analysis, higher rVE was reported for influenza A (rVE = 36%, 95% CI 14% to 53%), but not for B (non-significant). Another study reported higher efficacy for the trivalent recombinant HA vaccine compared with placebo (VE = 45%, 95% CI 19-63, 1 RCT, low-certainty evidence) in adults aged 18-55 years. With the exception of a higher rate of chills (RR = 1.33, 95% CI 1.03-1.72), the safety profile of recombinant HA vaccines was comparable to that of traditional influenza vaccines. The evidence base for the efficacy and effectiveness of recombinant HA influenza vaccines is limited at present, although one study found that the quadrivalent recombinant HA influenza vaccine had higher rVE compared with traditional quadrivalent vaccination in adults aged ≥50 years.

Systematic review of the efficacy, effectiveness and safety of high-dose seasonal influenza vaccines for the prevention of laboratory-confirmed influenza in individuals ≥18 years of age.

This review sought to assess the efficacy, effectiveness and safety of high-dose inactivated influenza vaccines (HD-IIV) for the prevention of laboratory-confirmed influenza in individuals aged 18 years or older. A systematic literature search was conducted in electronic databases and grey literature sources up to 7 February 2020. Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and non-randomised studies of interventions (NRSIs) were included. The search returned 28,846 records, of which 36 studies were included. HD-IIV was shown to have higher relative vaccine efficacy in preventing influenza compared with standard-dose influenza vaccines (SD-IIV3) in older adults (Vaccine effectiveness (VE) = 24%, 95% CI 10-37, one RCT). One NRSI demonstrated significant effect for HD-IIV3 against influenza B (VE = 89%, 95% CI 47-100), but not for influenza A(H3N2) (VE = 22%, 95% CI -82 to 66) when compared with no vaccination in older adults. HD-IIV3 showed significant relative effect compared with SD-IIV3 for influenza-related hospitalisation (VE = 11.8%, 95% CI 6.4-17.0, two NRSIs), influenza- or pneumonia-related hospitalisation (VE = 13.7%, 95% CI 9.5-17.7, three NRSIs), influenza-related hospital encounters (VE = 13.1%, 95% CI 8.4-17.7, five NRSIs), and influenza-related office visits (VE = 3.5%, 95% CI 1.5-5.5, two NRSIs). For safety, HD-IIV were associated with significantly higher rates of local and systemic adverse events compared with SD-IIV (combined local reactions, pain at injection site, swelling, induration, headache, chills and malaise). From limited data, compared with SD-IIV, HD-IIV were found to be more effective in the prevention of laboratory-confirmed influenza, for a range of proxy outcome measures, and associated with more adverse events.

Systematic review of the efficacy, effectiveness and safety of cell-based seasonal influenza vaccines for the prevention of laboratory-confirmed influenza in individuals ≥18 years of age.

The most effective means of preventing seasonal influenza is through strain-specific vaccination. In this study, we investigated the efficacy, effectiveness and safety of cell-based trivalent and quadrivalent influenza vaccines. A systematic literature search was conducted in electronic databases and grey literature sources up to 7 February 2020. Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and non-randomised studies of interventions (NRSIs) were eligible for inclusion. Two reviewers independently screened, extracted data and assessed the risk of bias of included studies. Certainty of evidence for key outcomes was assessed using the GRADE methodology. The search returned 28,846 records, of which 868 full-text articles were assessed for relevance. Of these, 19 studies met the inclusion criteria. No relative efficacy data were identified for the direct comparison of cell-based vaccines compared with traditional vaccines (egg-based). Efficacy data were available comparing cell-based trivalent influenza vaccines with placebo in adults (aged 18-49 years). Overall vaccine efficacy was 70% against any influenza subtype (95% CI 61%-77%, two RCTS), 82% against influenza A(H1N1) (95% CI 71%-89%, 2 RCTs), 72% against influenza A(H3N2) (95% CI 39%-87%, 2 RCTs) and 52% against influenza B (95% CI 30%-68%, 2 RCTs). Limited and heterogeneous data were presented for effectiveness when compared with no vaccination. One NRSI compared cell-based trivalent and quadrivalent vaccination with traditional trivalent and quadrivalent vaccination, finding a small but significant difference in favour of cell-based vaccines for influenza-related hospitalisation, hospital encounters and physician office visits. The safety profile of cell-based trivalent vaccines was comparable to traditional trivalent influenza vaccines. Compared with placebo, cell-based trivalent influenza vaccines have demonstrated greater efficacy in adults aged 18-49 years. Overall cell-based vaccines are well-tolerated in adults, however, evidence regarding the effectiveness of these vaccines compared with traditional seasonal influenza vaccines is limited.

Systematic review of the efficacy, effectiveness and safety of MF59® adjuvanted seasonal influenza vaccines for the prevention of laboratory-confirmed influenza in individuals ≥18 years of age.

The most effective means of preventing seasonal influenza is through vaccination. In this systematic review, we investigated the efficacy, effectiveness and safety of MF59® adjuvanted trivalent and quadrivalent influenza vaccines to prevent laboratory-confirmed influenza. A systematic literature search was conducted in electronic databases and grey literature sources up to 7 February 2020. Randomised controlled trials and non-randomised studies of interventions (NRSIs) were eligible for inclusion. The search returned 28,846 records, of which 48 studies on MF59® adjuvanted vaccines met our inclusion criteria. No efficacy trials were identified. In terms of vaccine effectiveness (VE), MF59® adjuvanted trivalent influenza vaccines were effective in preventing laboratory-confirmed influenza in older adults (aged ≥65 years) compared with no vaccination (VE = 45%, 95% confidence interval (CI) 23%-61%, 5 NRSIs across 3 influenza seasons). By subtype, significant effect was found for influenza A(H1N1) (VE = 61%, 95% CI 44%-73%) and B (VE = 29%, 95% CI 5%-46%), but not for A(H3N2). In terms of relative VE, there was no significant difference comparing MF59® adjuvanted trivalent vaccines with either non-adjuvanted trivalent or quadrivalent vaccines. Compared with traditional trivalent influenza vaccines, MF59® adjuvanted trivalent influenza vaccines were associated with a greater number of local adverse events (RR = 1.90, 95% CI 1.50-2.39) and systemic reactions (RR = 1.18, 95% CI 1.02-1.38). In conclusion, MF59® adjuvanted trivalent influenza vaccines were found to be more effective than 'no vaccination'. Based on limited data, there was no significant difference comparing the effectiveness of MF59® adjuvanted vaccines with their non-adjuvanted counterparts.

Challenges encountered during the systematic review of newer and enhanced influenza vaccines and recommendations for the future.

There are a variety of challenges in the conduct of systematic reviews of influenza vaccines. We describe our experience of completing four systematic reviews of newer and enhanced inactivated seasonal influenza vaccines. The reporting of the included studies created significant challenges for study identification, data extraction and analysis. Those challenges have implications for the resources required to conduct reviews and, more significantly, for the accuracy of the estimated treatment effect. There is a substantial burden of morbidity and mortality associated with seasonal influenza, and the evidence used to support vaccination strategies requires regular review. An improved review process will facilitate robust decision-making both nationally and internationally. We recommend the development of reporting guidelines, increased engagement between researchers and decision makers, a database of identified trials, and research into search optimisation.

Fall definitions, faller classifications and outcomes used in falls research among people with multiple sclerosis: a systematic review.

PURPOSE: To identify the definitions of a fall, faller classifications and outcomes used in prospectively-recorded falls research among people with Multiple Sclerosis (MS). METHODS: A systematic review of peer-reviewed journal articles was conducted using electronic databases. Relevant data were extracted by one reviewer and verified by a second independent reviewer. RESULTS: Twenty-six papers met the inclusion criteria. A relative degree of heterogeneity existed amongst studies for the outcomes of interest to this review. Thirteen different fall definitions were identified. Fourteen different falls outcomes were used across the included studies, with six of these reported by only one study each. Data regarding injurious falls were presented by only eight papers. The majority (n = 17) of papers classified individuals as a faller if they fell at least once. CONCLUSIONS: This review highlights the large variation in fall definitions, faller classifications and outcomes used in this research field. This hinders cross-comparison and pooling of data, thereby preventing researchers and clinicians from drawing conclusive findings from existing literature. The creation of an international standard for the definition of a fall, faller classification and falls outcomes would allow for transparent and coordinated falls research for people with MS, facilitating progression in this research field.Implications for rehabilitationFalls are a common occurrence among people with Multiple Sclerosis (MS) resulting in numerous negative consequences.There is large heterogeneity in the definitions, methods and outcomes used in falls research for people with MS.This lack of standardisation prevents the accurate cross-comparison and pooling of data, impeding the identification of falls risk factors and effective falls prevention interventions for people with MS.Consequently, clinicians should interpret the outcomes of falls research for people with MS with caution, particularly when comparing studies regarding falls risk assessments and falls prevention interventions for use in clinical practice.

Development of the Better Balance Program for People with Multiple Sclerosis: A Complex Fall-Prevention Intervention.

BACKGROUND: Approximately 56% of people with multiple sclerosis (MS) will fall in any 3-month period, with the potential for physical, psychological, and social consequences. Fall-prevention research for people with MS is in its infancy, with a timely need to develop theory-based interventions that reflect the complexity of falls. The clear articulation of the development of any complex intervention is paramount to its future evaluation, usability, and effectiveness. Our aim was to describe how the development of Better Balance, a complex multicomponent fall-prevention intervention for people with MS, was guided by the Medical Research Council framework for the development of complex interventions. METHODS: Sources of information included existing literature, original research, clinician interviews, and views of people with MS. These sources were synthesized and refined through an iterative process of intervention development involving researchers, clinicians, and people with MS. RESULTS: The resulting intervention is outlined through a variety of key tasks supplementing the original Medical Research Council framework. Use of this framework resulted in a theoretically based and user-informed complex intervention designed to address the physiological, personal, and behavioral risk factors associated with falls in people with MS. CONCLUSIONS: The articulation of the systematic process used to develop Better Balance will inform the future evaluation and usability of the intervention.

The feasibility of an exercise intervention to improve sleep (time, quality and disturbance) in people with rheumatoid arthritis: a pilot RCT.

Current rheumatology guidelines recommend exercise as a key component in the management of people with RA, however, what is lacking is evidence on its impact on sleep. Objective is to assess the feasibility of a walking-based intervention on TST, sleep quality, and sleep disturbance and to generate potential effect size estimates for a main trial. Participants were recruited at weekly rheumatology clinics and through social media. Patients with RA were randomized to a walking-based intervention consisting of 28 sessions, spread over 8 weeks (2-5 times/week), with 1 per week being supervised by a physiotherapist, or to a control group who received verbal and written advice on the benefits of exercise. Primary outcomes were recruitment, retention, protocol adherence and participant experience. The study protocol was published and registered in ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03140995. One hundred and one (101) people were identified through clinics, 36 through social media. Of these, 24 met the eligibility criteria, with 20 randomized (18% recruitment; 100% female; mean age 57 (SD 7.3 years). Ten intervention participants (100%) and eight control participants (80%) completed final assessments, with both groups equivalent for all variables at baseline. Participants in the intervention group completed 87.5% of supervised sessions and 93% of unsupervised sessions. No serious adverse events were related to the intervention. Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index global score showed a significant mean improvement between the exercise group-6.6 (SD 3.3) compared to the control group-0.25 (SD 1.1) (p = 0.012); Intervention was feasible, safe and highly acceptable to study participants, with those participants in the exercise group reporting improvements in sleep duration and sleep quality compared to the control group. Based on these findings, a fully powered randomized trial is recommended. Trial registration number: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03140995 (April 25th, 2017).

Risk factors for falling for people with Multiple Sclerosis identified in a prospective cohort study.

OBJECTIVE: To identify risk factors for falling for people with Multiple Sclerosis. DESIGN: Prospective cohort study. SETTING: Neurology service in a tertiary hospital. SUBJECTS: Participants were 101 people with Multiple Sclerosis and Expanded Disability Status Score of 3-6.5. One participant withdrew after the baseline assessment; data were analysed for 100 participants. INTERVENTIONS: No intervention. MAIN MEASURES: Outcome was rate of falls, and predictors were Timed Up and Go, Symbol Digit Modalities test, demographics and 15 self-report questions about various symptoms including fatigue, concentration, dual tasking, bladder and bowel control. Three-month prospective diaries recorded falls. RESULTS: There were 791 falls reported over the 3-month period from a total of 56 fallers. Falls rate per person-year was 32.08 falls. Following multivariable regression analysis, the model with the greatest levels of clinical utility and discriminative ability (sensitivity 88% and area under the receiving operating curve statistic = 0.72, 95% CI 0.62-0.82), included the variables of history of a fall, not having visual problems, problems with bladder control and a slower speed on the Timed Up and Go. CONCLUSION: This study confirms the high incidence of falls for people with Multiple Sclerosis and provides a risk prediction model including fall history, problems with bladder control, not having visual problems and a slower Timed Up and Go speed that may be used to identify those at greater risk and in need of tailored falls prevention intervention.

Airborne transmission of SARS-CoV-2 via aerosols.

A key consideration in the Covid-19 pandemic is the dominant modes of transmission of the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) virus. The objective of this review was to synthesise the evidence for the potential airborne transmission of SARS-CoV-2 via aerosols. Systematic literature searches were conducted in PubMed, Embase, Europe PMC and National Health Service UK evidence up to 27 July 2020. A protocol was published and Cochrane guidance for rapid review methodology was adhered to throughout. Twenty-eight studies were identified. Seven out of eight epidemiological studies suggest aerosol transmission may occur, with enclosed environments and poor ventilation noted as possible contextual factors. Ten of the 16 air sampling studies detected SARS-CoV-2 ribonucleic acid; however, only three of these studies attempted to culture the virus with one being successful in a limited number of samples. Two of four virological studies using artificially generated aerosols indicated that SARS-CoV-2 is viable in aerosols. The results of this review indicate there is inconclusive evidence regarding the viability and infectivity of SARS-CoV-2 in aerosols. Epidemiological studies suggest possible transmission, with contextual factors noted. Viral particles have been detected in air sampling studies with some evidence of clinical infectivity, and virological studies indicate these particles may represent live virus, adding further plausibility. However, there is uncertainty as to the nature and impact of aerosol transmission of SARS-CoV-2, and its relative contribution to the Covid-19 pandemic compared with other modes of transmission.

Alternative clinical specimens for the detection of SARS-CoV-2: A rapid review.

The collection of nasopharyngeal swabs to test for the presence of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is an invasive technique with implications for patients and clinicians. Alternative clinical specimens from the upper respiratory tract may offer benefits in terms of collection, comfort and infection risk. The objective of this review was to synthesise the evidence for detection of SARS-CoV-2 ribonucleic acid (RNA) using reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) tested saliva or nasal specimens compared with RT-PCR tested nasopharyngeal specimens. Searches were conducted in PubMed, Embase, Europe PMC and NHS evidence from December 2019 to 20 July 2020. Eighteen studies were identified; 12 for saliva, four for nasal and two included both specimen types. For saliva-based studies, the proportion of saliva samples testing positive relative to all positive samples in each study ranged from 82.9% to 100%; detection in nasopharyngeal specimens ranged from 76.7% to 100%; positive agreement between specimens for overall detection ranged from 65.4% to 100%. For nasal-based studies, the proportion of nasal swabs testing positive relative to all positive samples in each study ranged from 81.9% to 100%; detection in nasopharyngeal specimens ranged from 70% to 100%; positive agreement between specimens for overall detection ranged from 62.3% to 100%. The results indicate an inconsistency in the detection of SARS-CoV-2 RNA in the specimen types included, often with neither the index nor the reference of interest detecting all known cases. Depending on the test environment, these clinical specimens may offer a viable alternative to standard. However, at present the evidence is limited, of variable quality, and relatively inconsistent.

The duration of infectiousness of individuals infected with SARS-CoV-2.

OBJECTIVES: To summarise the evidence on the duration of infectiousness of individuals in whom SARS-CoV-2 ribonucleic acid is detected. METHODS: A rapid review was undertaken in PubMed, Europe PubMed Central and EMBASE from 1 January 2020 to 26 August 2020. RESULTS: We identified 15 relevant studies, including 13 virus culture and 2 contact tracing studies. For 5 virus culture studies, the last day on which SARS-CoV-2 was isolated occurred within 10 days of symptom onset. For another 5 studies, SARS-CoV-2 was isolated beyond day 10 for approximately 3% of included patients. The remaining 3 virus culture studies included patients with severe or critical disease; SARS-CoV-2 was isolated up to day 32 in one study. Two studies identified immunocompromised patients from whom SARS-CoV-2 was isolated for up to 20 days. Both contact tracing studies, when close contacts were first exposed greater than 5 days after symptom onset in the index case, found no evidence of laboratory-confirmed onward transmission of SARS-CoV-2. CONCLUSION: COVID-19 patients with mild-to-moderate illness are highly unlikely to be infectious beyond 10 days of symptoms. However, evidence from a limited number of studies indicates that patients with severe-to-critical illness or who are immunocompromised, may shed infectious virus for longer.

Effectiveness of non-pharmacological falls prevention interventions for people with Multiple Sclerosis, Parkinson's Disease and stroke: protocol for an umbrella review.

Background: Falls are common among people with neurological diseases and are associated with many negative physical, psychosocial and economic consequences. Implementation of single diagnosis falls prevention interventions is currently problematic due to lack of participants and resources. Given the similarities in falls risk factors across stroke, Parkinson's Disease (PD) and Multiple Sclerosis (MS), the development of an intervention designed for mixed neurological populations seems plausible and may provide a solution to current implementation challenges. This umbrella review aims to summarise the totality of evidence regarding the effectiveness of non-pharmacological falls prevention interventions for people with MS, PD and stroke and to identify the commonalities and differences between interventions that are effective for each disease to inform the development of an intervention for mixed diagnoses. Methods: This umbrella review will be conducted and reported in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement. Electronic databases and grey literature will be searched. Systematic reviews of randomised controlled trials (RCTS) and studies investigating the effects of non-pharmacological falls prevention interventions on falls outcomes among people with MS, PD and stroke will be included. Methodological quality of included reviews will be assessed using the Assessment of Multiple Systematic Reviews 2 tool. The Grading of Recommendations Assessments, Development and Evaluation framework will be used to rate the quality of evidence. A summary of evidence table and narrative synthesis will be utilised to clearly indicate the findings. Discussion: This umbrella review presents a novel and timely approach to synthesise existing falls literature to identify effective non-pharmacological interventions for people with MS, PD and stroke. Of importance, this umbrella review will use a robust methodology to explore the key differences and similarities in effective interventions for individuals with these neurological diseases to facilitate the development of an intervention for mixed neurological groups.

Falls in People with Multiple Sclerosis: Risk Identification, Intervention, and Future Directions.

Falls are highly prevalent in people with multiple sclerosis (MS) and result in a range of negative consequences, such as injury, activity curtailment, reduced quality of life, and increased need for care and time off work. This narrative review aims to summarize key literature and to discuss future work needed in the area of fall prevention for people with MS. The incidence of falls in people with MS is estimated to be more than 50%, similar to that in adults older than 80 years. The consequences of falls are considerable because rate of injury is high, and fear of falling and low self-efficacy are significant problems that lead to activity curtailment. A wide range of physiological, personal, and environmental factors have been highlighted as potential risk factors and predictors of falls. Falls are individual and multifactorial, and, hence, approaches to interventions will likely need to adopt a multifactorial approach. However, the literature to date has largely focused on exercise-based interventions, with newer, more comprehensive interventions that use both education and exercise showing promising results. Several gaps in knowledge of falls in MS remain, in particular the lack of standardized definitions and outcome measures, to enable data pooling and comparison. Moving forward, the involvement of people with MS in the design and evaluation of programs is essential, as are approaches to intervention development that consider implementation from the outset.

Biopsychosocial Characteristics of Contemporary and Irish University-Level Student Dancers A Pilot Study.

In addition to the difficulties encountered by non-dancing university students, university-level dancers may encounter a range of challenges due to their status as aesthetic athletes. This pilot study compares the biopsychosocial characteristics of contemporary dance (CD) and Irish dance (ID) university students. CD (N = 30) and ID (N = 27) participants from institutions in Ireland and the United Kingdom were screened using a host of subjective and objective tools to establish baseline biopsychosocial characteristics. Participants also provided extensive information regarding their injury history over the previous year. The groups were compared using simple descriptive statistics, independent t-test or Mann Whitney U tests and chi-square tests as appropriate. CD participants danced for significantly more hours each week (p < 0.001) than the ID group, who spent significantly less time warming up (p < 0.001) and more time engaged in weekly non-dance-related physical activities (p = 0.022). CD participants performed significantly better that the ID group on the Star Excursion Balance Test (p = < 0.001), plank-hold (p = 0.004), and fitness test (p = 0.045). Substantial rates of injury were reported by both groups, with no significant difference in terms of number of injuries or days lost to injury (p > 0.05). Indications of a shared dancer mentality including ego-driven motivation, passion for dance, and lower mood were present and required vigilance on the part of teachers and coaches to mitigate possible negative physical and psychological consequences. Additionally, CD participants demonstrated higher levels of catastrophizing (p = 0.019) and reported significantly more subjective health complaints (p = 0.010) than the ID group.

Discriminative ability and clinical utility of the Timed Up and Go (TUG) in identifying falls risk in people with multiple sclerosis: a prospective cohort study.

OBJECTIVE:: To investigate discriminative ability and clinical utility of the Timed Up and Go under single- and dual-task conditions between fallers and non-fallers in multiple sclerosis (MS). DESIGN:: Prospective cohort study. SETTING:: Neurology service in a tertiary hospital. SUBJECTS:: Participants were 101 people with MS and Expanded Disability Status Scale score of 3-6.5. One participant withdrew after the baseline assessment, and hence the data were analysed for 100 participants. INTERVENTIONS:: No specific intervention. MAIN MEASURES:: Timed Up and Go and Timed Up and Go-Cognitive. Three-month prospective diaries recorded falls. RESULTS:: Mean age was 52.6 (SD 10.7) and 66 were female. Majority of the participants had progressive MS (72) and 73 used a walking aid; 56 participants recorded 791 falls. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve values for Timed Up and Go and Timed Up and Go-Cognitive in distinguishing fallers (person with ⩾1 fall) from non-fallers are 0.60 and 0.57, respectively, and in distinguishing multiple fallers (⩾2 falls) the values are 0.46 and 0.43. A Timed Up and Go score of ⩾9 seconds has a sensitivity of 0.82 and a specificity of 0.34 to identify fallers and a sensitivity of 0.79 and a specificity of 0.27 to identify multiple fallers. A Timed Up and Go-Cognitive score of ⩾11 seconds has a sensitivity of 0.77 and a specificity of 0.30 to identify fallers and a sensitivity of 0.71 and a specificity of 0.26 to identify multiple fallers. CONCLUSION:: The Timed Up and Go and Timed Up and Go-Cognitive do not demonstrate sufficient clinical utility or discriminative ability for assessing falls risk in MS.

Postural control deficits in people with Multiple Sclerosis: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Multiple sclerosis (MS) is a neurological condition that can affect the postural stability of the individual and predispose falls in this population. METHODS: A systematic literature search identified case-control studies investigating differences in postural control across a diversity of task conditions, with the exception of gait, between people with MS and healthy controls. Meta-analysis was conducted where a variable was presented by four or more studies. RESULTS: Forty-three studies of people with a mean Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS) of 1.0 to 6.0 were included. Seven conditions of assessment and 105 individual measurement variables relating to postural control were included. Quiet stance was the only condition (11 studies) possessing sufficient data to contribute to meta-analysis in terms of centre of pressure path length (SMD = 1.04, 95% CI {0.86-1.22}, p < 0.001), medio-lateral velocity (SMD = 1.35, 95% CI {0.77-1.92}, p < 0.001) and 95% confidence ellipse (SMD = 0.83 95% CI {0.59-1.08}, p < 0.001). RESULTS: indicate that regardless of task complexity or sensory condition, people with MS display considerable deficits in postural control in comparison to healthy controls. CONCLUSIONS: The large number of variables and lack of standardisation of reporting makes data synthesis challenging, however, people with MS display considerable deficits in postural control compared to healthy controls regardless of task condition or complexity.

The ability of clinical balance measures to identify falls risk in multiple sclerosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the ability of clinical measures of balance to distinguish fallers from non-fallers and to determine their predictive validity in identifying those at risk of falls. DATA SOURCES: AMED, CINAHL, Medline, Scopus, PubMed Central and Google Scholar. First search: July 2015. Final search: October 2017. REVIEW METHODS: Inclusion criteria were studies of adults with a definite multiple sclerosis diagnosis, a clinical balance assessment and method of falls recording. Data were extracted independently by two reviewers. Study quality was assessed using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2 scale and the modified Newcastle-Ottawa Quality Assessment Scale. Statistical analysis was conducted for the cross-sectional studies using Review Manager 5. The mean difference with 95% confidence interval in balance outcomes between fallers and non-fallers was used as the mode of analysis. RESULTS: We included 33 studies (19 cross-sectional, 5 randomised controlled trials, 9 prospective) with a total of 3901 participants, of which 1917 (49%) were classified as fallers. The balance measures most commonly reported were the Berg Balance Scale, Timed Up and Go and Falls Efficacy Scale International. Meta-analysis demonstrated fallers perform significantly worse than non-fallers on all measures analysed except the Timed Up and Go Cognitive ( p < 0.05), but discriminative ability of the measures is commonly not reported. Of those reported, the Activities-specific Balance Confidence Scale had the highest area under the receiver operating characteristic curve value (0.92), but without reporting corresponding measures of clinical utility. CONCLUSION: Clinical measures of balance differ significantly between fallers and non-fallers but have poor predictive ability for falls risk in people with multiple sclerosis.

Medication usage and falls in people with multiple sclerosis.

There is a need to identify modifiable risk factors for falls in people with multiple sclerosis (MS) to enable the design of successful falls prevention interventions. There is conflicting evidence regarding the association between medication use and occurrence of falls in MS. A total of 101 people with MS had medications classified using the Anatomical Therapeutic Classification system and number of falls prospectively monitored for 3 months. No association was noted between number of medications and falls. The use of genitourinary and sex hormones (odds ratio (OR) = 5.154, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.427-18.609, p = 0.012) and centrally acting muscle relaxant (OR = 5.181, 95% CI = 1.546-17.364, p = 0.008) medications were associated with an increased odds of being a faller.