Analysis of patients' narratives posted on social media websites on benfluorex's (Mediator® ) withdrawal in France.

WHAT IS KNOWN AND OBJECTIVE: Websites and discussion lists on health issues are among the most popular resources on the Web. Use experience reported on social media websites may provide useful information on drugs and their adverse reactions (ADRs). Clear communication on the benefit/harm balance of drugs is important to inform proper use of drugs. Some data have shown that communication (advisories or warnings) is difficult. This study aimed to explore the Internet as a source of data on patients' perception of risk associated with benfluorex and the impact of wider media coverage. METHODS: Three French websites were selected: Doctissimo, Atoute.org considered the best-known and visited website in France for health questions and Vivelesrondes (Long live the Tubbies) for overweight people. Three periods were chosen: (1) before November 2009 (i.e. before benfluorex withdrawal), (2) between November 2009 and November 2010 (when the risk of valvulopathy with benfluorex appeared in social media) and (3) after November 2010. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION: Two hundred twenty initial postings were analysed. These lead to 660 secondary postings which were analysed separately. In period 1, 114 initial postings were analysed, mostly concerning efficacy of the drug (72%). In period 2, 42 initial postings were analysed involving mainly ADRs or warnings (73%). In period 3, 64 initial postings were analysed; most frequent expressing anger directed at the healthcare system (58%) and anxiety about cardiovascular ADRs (30%). Online consumer postings showed that there were drastic changes in consumers' perceptions following media coverage. WHAT IS NEW AND CONCLUSION: This study suggests that analysis of website data can inform on drug ADRs. Social media are important for communicating information on drug ADRs and for assessing consumer behaviour and their risk perception.

Melatonin for the prevention and treatment of jet lag.

BACKGROUND: : Jet-lag commonly affects air travellers who cross several time zones. It results from the body's internal rhythms being out of step with the day-night cycle at the destination. Melatonin is a pineal hormone that plays a central part in regulating bodily rhythms and has been used as a drug to re-align them with the outside world. OBJECTIVES: : To assess the effectiveness of oral melatonin taken in different dosage regimens for alleviating jet-lag after air travel across several time zones. SEARCH STRATEGY: : We searched the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register, MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsychLit and Science Citation Index electronically, and the journals 'Aviation, Space and Environmental Medicine' and 'Sleep' by hand. We searched citation lists of relevant studies for other relevant trials. We asked principal authors of relevant studies to tell us about unpublished trials. Reports of adverse events linked to melatonin use outside randomised trials were searched for systematically in 'Side Effects of Drugs' (SED) and SED Annuals, 'Reactions Weekly', MEDLINE, and the adverse drug reactions databases of the WHO Uppsala Monitoring Centre (UMC) and the US Food & Drug Administration. SELECTION CRITERIA: : Randomised trials in airline passengers, airline staff or military personnel given oral melatonin, compared with placebo or other medication. Outcome measures should consist of subjective rating of jet-lag or related components, such as subjective wellbeing, daytime tiredness, onset and quality of sleep, psychological functioning, duration of return to normal, or indicators of circadian rhythms. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: : Ten trials met the inclusion criteria. All compared melatonin with placebo; one in addition compared it with a hypnotic, zolpidem. Nine of the trials were of adequate quality to contribute to the assessment, one had a design fault and could not be used in the assessment. Reports of adverse events outside trials were found through MEDLINE, 'Reactions Weekly', and in the WHO UMC database. MAIN RESULTS: : Nine of the ten trials found that melatonin, taken close to the target bedtime at the destination (10pm to midnight), decreased jet-lag from flights crossing five or more time zones. Daily doses of melatonin between 0.5 and 5mg are similarly effective, except that people fall asleep faster and sleep better after 5mg than 0.5mg. Doses above 5mg appear to be no more effective. The relative ineffectiveness of 2mg slow-release melatonin suggests that a short-lived higher peak concentration of melatonin works better. Based on the review, the number needed to treat (NNT) is 2. The benefit is likely to be greater the more time zones are crossed, and less for westward flights. The timing of the melatonin dose is important: if it is taken at the wrong time, early in the day, it is liable to cause sleepiness and delay adaptation to local time. The incidence of other side effects is low. Case reports suggest that people with epilepsy, and patients taking warfarin may come to harm from melatonin. REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS: : Melatonin is remarkably effective in preventing or reducing jet-lag, and occasional short-term use appears to be safe. It should be recommended to adult travellers flying across five or more time zones, particularly in an easterly direction, and especially if they have experienced jet-lag on previous journeys. Travellers crossing 2-4 time zones can also use it if need be. The pharmacology and toxicology of melatonin needs systematic study, and routine pharmaceutical quality control of melatonin products must be established. The effects of melatonin in people with epilepsy, and a possible interaction with warfarin, need investigation.

Melatonin for preventing and treating jet lag.

BACKGROUND: Jet-lag commonly affects air travellers who cross several time zones. It results from the body's internal rhythms being out of step with the day-night cycle at the destination. Melatonin is a pineal hormone that plays a central part in regulating bodily rhythms and has been used as a drug to re-align them with the outside world. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effectiveness of oral melatonin taken in different dosage regimens for alleviating jet-lag after air travel across several time zones. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register, MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsychLit and Science Citation Index electronically, and the journals 'Aviation, Space and Environmental Medicine' and 'Sleep' by hand. We searched citation lists of relevant studies for other relevant trials. We asked principal authors of relevant studies to tell us about unpublished trials. Reports of adverse events linked to melatonin use outside randomised trials were searched for systematically in 'Side Effects of Drugs' (SED) and SED Annuals, 'Reactions Weekly', MEDLINE, and the adverse drug reactions databases of the WHO Uppsala Monitoring Centre (UMC) and the US Food & Drug Administration. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised trials in airline passengers, airline staff or military personnel given oral melatonin, compared with placebo or other medication. Outcome measures should consist of subjective rating of jet-lag or related components, such as subjective wellbeing, daytime tiredness, onset and quality of sleep, psychological functioning, duration of return to normal, or indicators of circadian rhythms. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: : Ten trials met the inclusion criteria. All compared melatonin with placebo; one in addition compared it with a hypnotic, zolpidem. Nine of the trials were of adequate quality to contribute to the assessment, one had a design fault and could not be used in the assessment. Reports of adverse events outside trials were found through MEDLINE, 'Reactions Weekly', and in the WHO UMC database. MAIN RESULTS: : Nine of the ten trials found that melatonin, taken close to the target bedtime at the destination (10pm to midnight), decreased jet-lag from flights crossing five or more time zones. Daily doses of melatonin between 0.5 and 5mg are similarly effective, except that people fall asleep faster and sleep better after 5mg than 0.5mg. Doses above 5mg appear to be no more effective. The relative ineffectiveness of 2mg slow-release melatonin suggests that a short-lived higher peak concentration of melatonin works better. Based on the review, the number needed to treat (NNT) is 2. The benefit is likely to be greater the more time zones are crossed, and less for westward flights. The timing of the melatonin dose is important: if it is taken at the wrong time, early in the day, it is liable to cause sleepiness and delay adaptation to local time. The incidence of other side effects is low. Case reports suggest that people with epilepsy, and patients taking warfarin may come to harm from melatonin. REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS: Melatonin is remarkably effective in preventing or reducing jet-lag, and occasional short-term use appears to be safe. It should be recommended to adult travellers flying across five or more time zones, particularly in an easterly direction, and especially if they have experienced jet-lag on previous journeys. Travellers crossing 2-4 time zones can also use it if need be. The pharmacology and toxicology of melatonin needs systematic study, and routine pharmaceutical quality control of melatonin products must be established. The effects of melatonin in people with epilepsy, and a possible interaction with warfarin, need investigation.

Oestrogens and progestogens for preventing and treating postnatal depression.

BACKGROUND: Postnatal depression, with a prevalence of at least 10%, is probably the most common complication of the puerperium. A deficiency or imbalance of sex hormones has repeatedly been suggested as a cause. OBJECTIVES: The objective of this review was to evaluate the role of oestrogens and progestogens in the prevention and treatment of postnatal depression. SEARCH STRATEGY: The register of clinical trials maintained and updated by the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group. SELECTION CRITERIA: All trials were considered in which pregnant or postpartum women (up to 18 months) were randomised to receive postpartum oestrogen or progestogen or placebo for the treatment or prevention of postnatal depression. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two published randomised placebo controlled trials were identified for inclusion in the analyses for this review. One study was excluded. MAIN RESULTS: Depot norethisterone enanthate given within 48 hours of delivery and lasting 8-12 weeks was associated with significantly higher postpartum depression scores than placebo. Oestrogen therapy in severely depressed women was associated with a greater improvement in depression scores than placebo. REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS: There is no place for synthetic progestogens in the prevention of treatment of postnatal depression. Long-acting norethisterone enanthate is associated with an increased risk of postnatal depression. It and other long-acting progestogen contraceptives should be used with caution in the postnatal period, especially in women with a history of depression. The role of progesterone in the prevention and treatment of postnatal depression has yet to be evaluated in a randomised placebo-controlled trial. Oestrogen therapy may be of modest value at a late stage of severe postnatal depression. Its role in the prevention of recurrent postnatal depression has not been evaluated. Further research on its value is unlikely for ethical reasons.

Camelford water poisoning accident: serial neuropsychological assessments and further observations on bone aluminium.

The serial cognitive assessment of ten individuals made between 8 and 26 months after the water at Camelford in Cornwall was accidentally contaminated with aluminium sulphate, showed consistent evidence of impairment of information processing and memory. There was no obvious relationship between these impairments and measurements of anxiety and depression. Serial bone biopsies in two individuals showed that the aluminium which was present 6 and 7 months after the accident had disappeared by 19 months. In the eight individuals biopsied 12-17 months after the accident the bone showed no stainable aluminium. Thus, aluminium deposited in the bone of normal individuals can disappear within 18 months. After an accident such as that at Camelford important evidence of toxicity is likely to be missed if an investigation is delayed. The abnormal neuropsychological findings indicate cognitive impairment, but whether this was caused by an acute episode of brain damage, or other causes such as the psychological effects of stress resulting from the accident, is uncertain.

Advertisements for medicines in leading medical journals in 18 countries: a 12-month survey of information content and standards.

The information content of 6,710 advertisements for medicines in medical journals was surveyed to provide a baseline for monitoring the effect of WHO's Ethical Criteria for Medicinal Drug Promotion. The advertisements (ads) appeared during 12 months (1987-1988) in 23 leading national medical journals in 18 countries. Local participants, mostly doctors or pharmacists, examined them. The presence or absence in each ad of important information was noted. In most ads the generic name appeared in smaller type than the brand name. Indications were mentioned more often than the negative effects of medicines. The ads gave less pharmacological than medical information. However, important warnings and precautions were missing in half, and side effects and contraindications in about 40 percent. Prices tended to be given only in countries where a social security system pays for the medicines. The information content of ads in the developing countries differed surprisingly little from that in the industrialized countries. Almost all the ads (96 percent) included one or more pictures; 58 percent of these were considered irrelevant. The authors believe it is a mistake to regard ads as trivial. If they are not considered seriously they will influence the use of medicines as they are intended to do, but read critically they can provide useful information.

Promotion by the British pharmaceutical industry, 1983-8: a critical analysis of self regulation.

Since 1958 the Association of the British Pharmaceutical Industry (ABPI) has attempted to regulate the promotion of prescription medicines through its code of practice. This regulation is described and analysed for the six years 1983-8 using the reports on 302 complaints considered by its code of practice committee and annual reports. The complaints came mainly from doctors (143, 48%) and competing companies (103, 33%). The committee found a total of 379 breaches of the code in 192 (63%) of the complaints. Additional breaches were detected by informational scrutiny of advertisements by the ABPI secretariat. Analysis showed that 270 (71%) of these breaches involved possible breaches of the Medicines Act. The rules that forbid misleading or unsubstantiated information and misleading claims or comparisons were broken most often. The committee found the most frequent offenders to be Organon (32 breaches), Smith Kline and French (23), Glaxo (21), A H Robins (18), Bayer (17), Merck Sharp and Dohme (17), and Lederle (16). Often the promotion of one product led to several breaches. The promotional wars over histamine H2 receptor antagonists accounted for 33 breaches. It is estimated that in 1983-8 about 100 breaches of the code were detected a year. In the 18 years 1972-88 the Medicines Act was breached probably over 1200 times. Health ministers, by not enforcing the regulations controlling promotion, have abrogated their responsibility to the ABPI, but the evidence suggests that the code has failed to deter promotional excesses. The ABPI's wish to secure compliance with the code seems weaker than its wish to pre-empt outside criticism and action: its self regulation seems to be a service to itself rather than to the public. It is suggested that the code of practice committee should become publicly accountable, that the majority of its members should represent the health professions and the public, and that effective sanctions are needed.

Quality of Cochrane reviews: assessment of sample from 1998.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the quality of Cochrane reviews. DESIGN: Ten methodologists affiliated with the Cochrane Collaboration independently examined, in a semistructured way, the quality of reviews first published in 1998. Each review was assessed by two people; if one of them noted any major problems, they agreed on a common assessment. Predominant types of problem were categorised. SETTING: Cyberspace collaboration coordinated from the Nordic Cochrane Centre. STUDIES: All 53 reviews first published in issue 4 of the Cochrane Library in 1998. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Proportion of reviews with various types of major problem. RESULTS: No problems or only minor ones were found in most reviews. Major problems were identified in 15 reviews (29%). The evidence did not fully support the conclusion in nine reviews (17%), the conduct or reporting was unsatisfactory in 12 reviews (23%), and stylistic problems were identified in 12 reviews (23%). The problematic conclusions all gave too favourable a picture of the experimental intervention. CONCLUSIONS: Cochrane reviews have previously been shown to be of higher quality and less biased on average than other systematic reviews, but improvement is always possible. The Cochrane Collaboration has taken steps to improve editorial processes and the quality of its reviews. Meanwhile, the Cochrane Library remains a key source of evidence about the effects of healthcare interventions. Its users should interpret reviews cautiously, particularly those with conclusions favouring experimental interventions and those with many typographical errors.