Renal denervation for uncontrolled hypertension: a systematic review and meta-analysis examining multiple subgroups.

This systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted to assess the randomized controlled trial (RCT) evidence available for renal denervation (RDN) in uncontrolled arterial hypertension. Twenty-five RCTs met the eligibility criteria for the systematic review, and 16 RCTs were included in the meta-analysis. The results of the random effects meta-analysis estimated a mean difference of -8.5 mmHg [95% confidence interval (CI) -13.5 to -3.6] for office SBP, -3.6 mmHg (95% CI -5.2 to -2.0) for 24 h SBP and -3.9 mmHg (95% CI -5.6 to -2.2) for ambulatory daytime SBP in favour of RDN compared with control (medication and/or sham-only) at primary follow-up. Similarly favourable results were observed across a range of prespecified subgroup analyses, including treatment-resistant hypertension. This meta-analysis suggests that the use of RDN in uncontrolled hypertension leads to consistent reductions in blood pressure. Reductions appear to be statistically consistent in the presence or absence of medications and in populations resistant to the use of three medications.

Systematic literature review and network meta-analysis of lurasidone, brexpiprazole and cariprazine for schizophrenia.

A systematic review was undertaken to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing the efficacy and safety of lurasidone, brexpiprazole and cariprazine (selected because of a shared safety profile) with each other or placebo in adult patients with schizophrenia. Key outcomes included: Positive and Negative Syndrome Scales (PANSS), Clinical Global Impression-Severity (CGI-S) scores and cardiovascular and metabolic parameters. A feasibility assessment evaluated the trials' suitability for inclusion in a Bayesian network meta-analysis (NMA). Random effects models were used. In total, 1138 records were identified and 19 RCTs contributed to the NMA. Lurasidone doses of 160 mg performed best in terms of change in PANSS and CGI-S scores at 6 weeks, with stronger evidence when compared with brexpiprazole than cariprazine. The safety outcomes were variable; for all treatments, the 95% credible intervals usually contained 'no difference'. Active treatments were associated with lower odds of discontinuation due to any cause, and higher odds of experiencing any adverse event. Lurasidone was comparable to brexpiprazole and cariprazine for efficacy and safety outcomes assessed at 6 weeks, with the 160 mg dose being superior for the change in PANSS and CGI-S outcomes. The lurasidone results were relatively consistent across doses compared with brexpiprazole and cariprazine.

Retrospective coding of health care professional cancer screening behaviours and of real-world interventions designed to support them: Identifying recommendations to optimize intervention design.

OBJECTIVES: Screening can detect cancer earlier. Uptake of breast, cervical, and bowel cancer screening in England is below 75%. This study identifies the barriers and facilitators underpinning HCP screening behaviours which can support screening uptake, and reviews the design of real-world interventions targeting these, assessing for congruence between the two. The aim was to provide recommendations to improve the design of interventions. DESIGN AND METHODS: Barriers/facilitators were identified by a literature review and qualitatively coded using the theoretical domains framework (TDF). Interventions were identified by stakeholders and coded using the behaviour change wheel and the taxonomy of behaviour change techniques. Congruence was assessed through comparing the intervention designs with behavioural science experts' recommendations which link the TDF domains to intervention design. Recommendations targeted missed opportunities. RESULTS: Barriers/facilitators were extracted from 60 papers and most frequently coded to the TDF domains: environmental context and resources, knowledge and beliefs about consequences. Thirty-one interventions were identified, most frequently education, training or enablement functions, delivered via communication/marketing or service provision, and using BCTs designed to shape knowledge or highlight the consequences of or antecedents to screening. Intervention design was largely congruent with recommendations. However, there was less use of persuasion and modelling intervention functions and a reliance on BCTs such as providing instruction when other BCTs could be considered. CONCLUSIONS: Recommendations include to consider a broader range of intervention functions and BCTs, particularly for training interventions which should make use of recommended BCTs such as 'graded tasks'.