Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 2 de 2
Filtrar
Mais filtros

Bases de dados
Ano de publicação
Tipo de documento
País de afiliação
Intervalo de ano de publicação
1.
BMC Geriatr ; 18(1): 175, 2018 08 07.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30086714

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Alzheimer disease (AD) is the most common type of dementia with cognitive decline as one of the core symptoms in older adults. Numerous studies have suggested the value of psychosocial interventions to improve cognition in this population, but which one should be preferred are still matters of controversy. Consequently, we aim to compare and rank different psychosocial interventions in the management of mild to moderate AD with cognitive symptoms. METHODS: We did a network meta-analysis to identify both direct and indirect evidence in relevant studies. We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO through the OVID database, CENTRAL through the Cochrane Library for clinical randomized controlled trials investigating psychosocial interventions of cognitive symptoms in patients with Alzheimer disease, published up to August 31, 2017. We included trials of home-based exercise(HE), group exercise(GE), walking program(WP), reminiscence therapy(RT), art therapy(AT) or the combination of psychosocial interventions and acetylcholinesterase inhibitor (ChEIs). We extracted the relevant information from these trials with a predefined data extraction sheet and assessed the risk of bias with the Cochrane risk of bias tool. The outcomes investigated were Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) and compliance. We did a pair-wise meta-analysis using the fixed-effects model and then did a random-effects network meta-analysis within a Bayesian framework. RESULTS: We deemed 10 trials eligible, including 682 patients and 11 treatments. The quality of included study was rated as low in most comparison with Cochrane tools. Treatment effects from the network meta-analysis showed WP was better than control (SMD 4.89, 95% CI -0.07 to 10.00) while cognitive training and acetylcholinesterase inhibitor (CT + ChEIs) was significantly better than the other treatments, when compared with simple ChEIs treatment, assessed by MMSE. In terms of compliance, the pair-wise meta-analysis indicated that WP and HE are better than GE and AT, while CT + ChEIs, CST + ChEIs are better than other combined interventions. CONCLUSION: Our study confirmed the effectiveness of psychosocial interventions for improving cognition or slowing down the progression of cognitive impairment in AD patients and recommended several interventions for clinical practice.


Assuntos
Doença de Alzheimer/psicologia , Doença de Alzheimer/terapia , Metanálise em Rede , Ensaios Clínicos Controlados Aleatórios como Assunto/métodos , Comportamento Social , Idoso , Doença de Alzheimer/diagnóstico , Teorema de Bayes , Inibidores da Colinesterase/farmacologia , Inibidores da Colinesterase/uso terapêutico , Cognição/efeitos dos fármacos , Cognição/fisiologia , Transtornos Cognitivos/diagnóstico , Transtornos Cognitivos/psicologia , Transtornos Cognitivos/terapia , Disfunção Cognitiva/diagnóstico , Disfunção Cognitiva/psicologia , Disfunção Cognitiva/terapia , Progressão da Doença , Humanos
2.
Endocrine ; 65(3): 531-541, 2019 09.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31313224

RESUMO

OBJECTIVE: Reporting Items for Clinical Practice Guidelines (CPGs) in HealThcare (RIGHT) checklist was used as a tool to assess the reporting quality of 2014-2018 CPGs on diabetes treatment, aiming to promote the application of RIGHT and improve the reporting quality of future guidelines. METHODS: We searched Chinese Biomedical Literature Service System (CBM), China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), Wanfang Data, VIP database, Medline, Embase, Allied, and Complementary MEdicine Database (AMED), and Medlive and Google Scholar (Google academics), and collected published CPGs on diabetes with published date during 1st January, 2014 and 7th November, 2018. CPGs on diabetes issued since 2014 were included and filtered by two reviewers independently. Then the basic information extraction and RIGHT evaluation of the included CPG are carried out. RESULTS: A total of 34 guidelines were included, out of which 7 are for Chinese and 27 for other countries. Overall, basic information (domain 1) got the highest (64.66%) reporting rate, while financing and conflict-of-interest statements and management (domain 6) got the lowest (8.1%). For all guidelines, classification of guidelines (item 1c) was sufficiently reported, and description of the specific sources of funding for all stages of guideline development (item 18a) was not reported. For Chinese CPGs, financing and conflict-of-interest statements and management (domain 6) was most insufficiently reported, and only identification of guideline in the title (item 1a), corresponding information of the developer or author (item 4), description of basic epidemiology (item 5), and subgroup description (item 7b) out of 22 items were better reported than foreign guidelines. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, the CPGs on diabetes during 2014-2018 adhered to ~41% RIGHT checklist, of which Chinese CPGs adhered less than that of foreign guidelines. It is suggested that the RIGHT reporting checklist should be endorsed and used by CPG developers to ensure higher quality and adequate use of guidelines.


Assuntos
Lista de Checagem , Diabetes Mellitus/terapia , Guias de Prática Clínica como Assunto , Relatório de Pesquisa/normas , Conflito de Interesses , Bases de Dados Factuais , Diabetes Mellitus/economia , Diabetes Mellitus/epidemiologia , Financiamento da Assistência à Saúde , Humanos , Disseminação de Informação , Idioma , Organização Mundial da Saúde
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA