ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: The authors sought to explore the role of iron supplementation in the management of neurodevelopmental disorders among children and youths. METHODS: A systematic review in accordance with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines was undertaken. A subset of results was suitable for meta-analysis. The quality of the evidence and strength of the clinical recommendations were assessed by using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation method, and critical appraisal was conducted with the Joanna Briggs Institute critical appraisal tools. RESULTS: Nine articles met inclusion criteria. These articles included studies of attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) (N=7), autism spectrum disorder (N=1), and Tourette's syndrome (N=1). Three randomized controlled trials evaluating iron supplementation for ADHD hyperactivity symptom severity (124 participants: placebo, N=56; supplement, N=68) met inclusion criteria for a meta-analysis. Effect sizes for the placebo and supplement groups were moderate (Cohen's d=0.76) and large (Cohen's d=1.70), respectively, although these differences were not significant. The impact of iron supplementation on inattentive ADHD symptom severity was examined in two trials (75 participants: placebo, N=31; supplement, N=44). Large, nonsignificant effect sizes were demonstrated for the placebo (Cohen's d=1.66) and supplementation (Cohen's d=3.19) groups. The quality of the evidence and strength of the clinical recommendations were considered very low. CONCLUSIONS: Further research is needed to examine the role of iron supplementation in the management of ADHD and neurodevelopmental disorders more generally. Additionally, iron supplementation comes with risks, including death in the case of overdose.
Subject(s)
Dietary Supplements , Neurodevelopmental Disorders , Humans , Iron/administration & dosage , Attention Deficit Disorder with Hyperactivity/drug therapy , Child , Autism Spectrum Disorder/drug therapy , AdolescentABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to identify potentially modifiable risk factors for multidrug-resistant Gram-negative colonization or infection in critically ill burn patients. METHODS: A systematic search was conducted of PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, Web of Science and Central (Cochrane). Risk factors including antibiotic use and hospital interventions were summarized in a random-effects meta-analysis. Risk of publication bias was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation method and funnel plots. RESULTS: A total of 11 studies met the inclusion criteria. We identified several potentially modifiable risk factors and were able to grade their importance based on effect size. Related to prior antibiotic exposure, extended-spectrum cephalosporins (pooled odds ratio (OR) 7.00, 95% confidence interval (CI) 2.77-17.67), carbapenems (pooled OR 6.65, 95% CI 3.49-12.69), anti-pseudomonal penicillins (pooled OR 4.23, 95% CI 1.23-14.61) and aminoglycosides (pooled OR 4.20, 95% CI 2.10-8.39) were most significant. Related to hospital intervention, urinary catheters (pooled OR 11.76, 95% CI 5.03-27.51), arterial catheters (pooled OR 8.99, 95% CI 3.84-21.04), mechanical ventilation (pooled OR 5.49, 95% CI 2.59-11.63), central venous catheters (pooled OR 4.26, 95% CI 1.03-17.59), transfusion or blood product administration (pooled OR 4.19, 95% CI 1.48-11.89) and hydrotherapy (pooled OR 3.29, 95% CI 1.64-6.63) were most significant. CONCLUSION: Prior exposure to extended-spectrum cephalosporins and carbapenems, as well as the use of urinary catheters and arterial catheters pose the greatest threat for infection or colonization with multidrug-resistant Gram-negative organisms in the critically ill burn patient population.