Isoniazid use, effectiveness, and safety for treatment of latent tuberculosis infection: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: The treatment strategy for latent tuberculosis infection is to reduce the number of tuberculosis cases and consequently reduce the transmission of pathogenic bacteria. This study aimed to determine the safety, effectiveness, and adherence of isoniazid use for latent tuberculosis infection treatment. METHODS: To identify studies on isoniazid use for latent tuberculosis infection, five electronic databases were searched. The methods and results are presented in accordance with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. RESULTS: Most studies (53) used isoniazid for 9 months. The prevalence of use and adherence to treatment varied considerably (18% to 100%), and were evaluated by participant completion of isoniazid treatment for latent tuberculosis infection. The adverse events most frequently reported were hepatotoxicity, gastric intolerance, and neuropathy; the rates of occurrence ranged from < 1% to 48%. In the studies that evaluated the effectiveness of isoniazid for latent tuberculosis infection, the rate varied from 0 to 19.7% for patients who did not have active tuberculosis after the follow-up period. CONCLUSIONS: The importance of maintaining follow up for patients using isoniazid should be emphasized due to the risk of developing adverse events. Despite the treatment challenges, the rates of patients who used isoniazid and developed active tuberculosis during the follow-up period were low. We believe that isoniazid continues to contribute to tuberculosis control worldwide, and better care strategies are required.

Isoniazid use, effectiveness, and safety for treatment of latent tuberculosis infection: a systematic review

ABSTRACT Background: The treatment strategy for latent tuberculosis infection is to reduce the number of tuberculosis cases and consequently reduce the transmission of pathogenic bacteria. This study aimed to determine the safety, effectiveness, and adherence of isoniazid use for latent tuberculosis infection treatment. Methods: To identify studies on isoniazid use for latent tuberculosis infection, five electronic databases were searched. The methods and results are presented in accordance with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. Results: Most studies (53) used isoniazid for 9 months. The prevalence of use and adherence to treatment varied considerably (18% to 100%), and were evaluated by participant completion of isoniazid treatment for latent tuberculosis infection. The adverse events most frequently reported were hepatotoxicity, gastric intolerance, and neuropathy; the rates of occurrence ranged from < 1% to 48%. In the studies that evaluated the effectiveness of isoniazid for latent tuberculosis infection, the rate varied from 0 to 19.7% for patients who did not have active tuberculosis after the follow-up period. Conclusions: The importance of maintaining follow up for patients using isoniazid should be emphasized due to the risk of developing adverse events. Despite the treatment challenges, the rates of patients who used isoniazid and developed active tuberculosis during the follow-up period were low. We believe that isoniazid continues to contribute to tuberculosis control worldwide, and better care strategies are required.

The quality of research on judicialization and its influence on public policies on access to medicines in Brazil: a systematic review.

Patients without access to medicines often resort to the judicial system. However, no systematic review has discussed the quality of studies and the factors that may influence the access to medicines from judicialization. This study aimed to characterize the quality of research on access to judicialized medicines and their influence on public policies in Brazil. A search was conducted in the LILACS, PubMed/Medline, Scopus, and Web of Science databases using the terms "judicialization" and "medication". Two reviewers identified articles that met the inclusion criteria. Only studies written in English, Portuguese, or Spanish published from 1990 to 2018 were included. The study selection resulted in a final sample of 45 articles. The retrospective descriptive design was the most common methods, based on reports and lawsuits. A high level of heterogeneity among the studies hindered the comparison and generation of evidence capable of supporting judges' decisions based on technical-scientific criteria. This review showed that studies were heterogeneous and had low methodological quality. Moreover, they did not propose viable solutions for health managers and formulators to face the problem.

The quality of research on judicialization and its influence on public policies on access to medicines in Brazil: a systematic review / A qualidade das pesquisas sobre judicialização e sua influência nas políticas públicas de acesso aos medicamentos no Brasil: uma revisão sistemática

Abstract Patients without access to medicines often resort to the judicial system. However, no systematic review has discussed the quality of studies and the factors that may influence the access to medicines from judicialization. This study aimed to characterize the quality of research on access to judicialized medicines and their influence on public policies in Brazil. A search was conducted in the LILACS, PubMed/Medline, Scopus, and Web of Science databases using the terms "judicialization" and "medication". Two reviewers identified articles that met the inclusion criteria. Only studies written in English, Portuguese, or Spanish published from 1990 to 2018 were included. The study selection resulted in a final sample of 45 articles. The retrospective descriptive design was the most common methods, based on reports and lawsuits. A high level of heterogeneity among the studies hindered the comparison and generation of evidence capable of supporting judges' decisions based on technical-scientific criteria. This review showed that studies were heterogeneous and had low methodological quality. Moreover, they did not propose viable solutions for health managers and formulators to face the problem.

Resumo Pacientes sem acesso a medicamentos geralmente recorrem ao sistema judicial. No entanto, nenhuma revisão sistemática discutiu a qualidade dos estudos e os fatores que podem influenciar o acesso aos medicamentos pela judicialização. Este estudo teve como objetivo caracterizar a qualidade da pesquisa sobre acesso a medicamentos judicializados e sua influência nas políticas públicas no Brasil. Foi realizada uma pesquisa nas bases de dados LILACS, PubMed/Medline, Scopus e Web of Science usando os termos "judicialization" e "medication". Dois revisores identificaram artigos que atendiam aos critérios de inclusão. Apenas estudos escritos em inglês, português ou espanhol publicados de 1990 a 2018 foram incluídos. A seleção do estudo resultou em uma amostra final de 45 artigos. O desenho descritivo retrospectivo foi o método mais comum, com base em relatos e ações judiciais. Um alto nível de heterogeneidade entre os estudos impediu a comparação e a geração de evidências capazes de apoiar as decisões dos juízes com base em critérios técnico-científicos. Esta revisão mostrou que os estudos eram heterogêneos e apresentavam baixa qualidade metodológica. Além disso, não propuseram soluções viáveis ​​para gerentes e formuladores de saúde enfrentarem o problema.

Harm Prevalence Due to Medication Errors Involving High-Alert Medications: A Systematic Review.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of the study was to determine the prevalence and main types of harm caused by high-alert medication after medication errors (MEs) in hospitals. METHOD: A literature systematic review was conducted on PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Lilacs. Eligible studies published until June 2017 were included. RESULT: Of 6244 studies identified through searching four electronic databases, five studies meeting the selection criteria of this study were analyzed. There was wide variation in the overall prevalence of harm due to MEs involving HAM, from 3.8% to 100%, whereas the pooled prevalence was 16.3%. Overall, 0.01% of harm caused by MEs involving HAM resulted in death. The severity of errors ranged from 0.1% to 19.2% for moderate errors, 0.2% to 15.4% for serious errors, and 1.9% lethal to the patients. The highest prevalences of harm occurred after errors involving potassium chloride 15%, insulin, and epoprostenol. The lowest prevalence of harm was related to errors of anticoagulants administration. The methodological heterogeneity limited direct comparisons among the studies. CONCLUSIONS: Of the 15 drugs on the list of Institute for Safe Medication Practices HAMs in the United States and Brazil, nine did not present scientific evidence of the potential for harm. In general, few studies, characterized by methodological and conceptual heterogeneity, were performed to determine the harm prevalence resulting from errors involving these drugs.