Leveraging continuous glucose monitoring as a catalyst for behaviour change: a scoping review.

BACKGROUND: Amidst the escalating prevalence of glucose-related chronic diseases, the advancements, potential uses, and growing accessibility of continuous glucose monitors (CGM) have piqued the interest of healthcare providers, consumers, and health behaviour researchers. Yet, there is a paucity of literature characterising the use of CGM in behavioural intervention research. This scoping review aims to describe targeted populations, health behaviours, health-related outcomes, and CGM protocols in randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that employed CGM to support health behaviour change. METHODS: We searched Ovid MEDLINE, Elsevier Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, EBSCOhost PsycINFO, and ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global from inception to January 2024 for RCTs of behavioural interventions conducted in adults that incorporated CGM-based biological feedback. Citation searching was also performed. The review protocol was registered ( https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/SJREA ). FINDINGS: Collectively, 5389 citations were obtained from databases and citation searching, 3995 articles were screened, and 31 were deemed eligible and included in the review. Most studies (n = 20/31, 65%) included adults with type 2 diabetes and reported HbA1c as an outcome (n = 29/31, 94%). CGM was most commonly used in interventions to target changes in diet (n = 27/31, 87%) and/or physical activity (n = 16/31, 52%). 42% (n = 13/31) of studies provided prospective CGM-based guidance on diet or activity, while 61% (n = 19/31) included retrospective CGM-based guidance. CGM data was typically unblinded (n = 24/31, 77%) and CGM-based biological feedback was most often provided through the CGM and two-way communication (n = 12/31, 39%). Communication typically occurred in-person (n = 13/31, 42%) once per CGM wear (n = 13/31; 42%). CONCLUSIONS: This scoping review reveals a predominant focus on diabetes in CGM-based interventions, pointing out a research gap in its wider application for behaviour change. Future research should expand the evidence base to support the use of CGM as a behaviour change tool and establish best practices for its implementation. TRIAL REGISTRATION: doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/SJREA.

Protocols to reduce seclusion in inpatient mental health units.

The use of seclusion to manage conflict behaviours in psychiatric inpatient settings is increasingly viewed as an intervention of last resort. Many protocols have, thus, been developed to reduce the practice. We conducted a systematic review to determine the effectiveness of protocols to reduce seclusion on process outcomes (e.g., seclusion, restraint), patient outcomes (e.g., injuries, aggressive incidents, satisfaction), and staff outcomes (e.g., injuries, satisfaction). We searched Medline, Embase, the Cochrane Register of Clinical Trials, PsycINFO, CINAHL, cairn.info, and ClinicalTrials.gov for protocols to reduce seclusion practices for adult patients on inpatient mental health units (from inception to September 6, 2022). We summarised and categorised reported elements of the protocols designed to reduce seclusion using the Behaviour Change Wheel Intervention Functions and resources needed to implement the protocol in psychiatric units. We assessed risk of bias and determined certainty of evidence using GRADE. Forty-eight reports addressed five approaches to reduce seclusion: hospital/unit restructuring (N = 4), staff education/training (N = 3), sensory modulation rooms (N = 7), risk assessment and management protocols (N = 7), and comprehensive/mixed interventions (N = 22; N = 6 without empirical data). The relationship between the various protocols and outcomes was mixed. Psychiatric units that implement architecturally positive designs, sensory rooms, the Brøset Violence Checklist, and various multi-component comprehensive interventions may reduce seclusion events, though our certainty in these findings is low due to studies' methodological limitations. Future research and practice may benefit from standardised reporting of process and outcome measures and analyses that account for confounders.

Evidence Synthesis for Complex Interventions Using Meta-Regression Models.

A goal of evidence synthesis for trials of complex interventions is to inform the design or implementation of novel versions of complex interventions by predicting expected outcomes with each intervention version. Conventional aggregate data meta-analyses of studies comparing complex interventions have limited ability to provide such information. We argue that evidence synthesis for trials of complex interventions should forgo aspirations of estimating causal effects and instead model the response surface of study results to 1) summarize the available evidence and 2) predict the average outcomes of future studies or in new settings. We illustrate this modeling approach using data from a systematic review of diabetes quality improvement (QI) interventions involving at least 1 of 12 QI strategy components. We specify a series of meta-regression models to assess the association of specific components with the posttreatment outcome mean and compare the results to conventional meta-analysis approaches. Compared with conventional approaches, modeling the response surface of study results can better reflect the associations between intervention components and study characteristics with the posttreatment outcome mean. Modeling study results using a response surface approach offers a useful and feasible goal for evidence synthesis of complex interventions that rely on aggregate data.

Treatment Patterns and Population Characteristics of Nonpharmacological Management of Chronic Pain in the United States' Medicare Population: A Scoping Review.

Background and Objectives: Clinical practice guidelines recommend noninvasive nonpharmacological pain therapies; however, reviews that assess the literature pertaining to nonpharmacological pain management among older adults and people with long-term disabilities who are disproportionately affected by pain are lacking. This scoping review aimed to systematically map and characterize the existing studies about the receipt of noninvasive, nonpharmacological pain therapies by Medicare beneficiaries. Research Design and Methods: We conducted a literature search in MEDLINE (PubMed), CINAHL (EBSCO), SocINDEX (EBSCO), Cochrane Library, Web of Science citation indices, and various sources of gray literature. The initial search was conducted on November 2, 2021, and updated on March 9, 2022. Two independent reviewers screened titles, abstracts, and full texts for inclusion and extracted the characteristics of the studies, studied populations, and nonpharmacological pain therapies. Data were summarized using tabular and narrative formats. Results: The final review included 33 studies. Of these, 24 were quantitative, 7 were qualitative, and 2 were mixed-methods studies. Of 32 studies that focused on Medicare beneficiaries, 10 did not specify the Medicare type, and all but one of the remaining studies were restricted to fee-for-service enrollees. Back and neck pain and arthritis were the most commonly studied pain types. Chiropractic care (n = 19) and physical therapy (n = 17) appeared frequently among included studies. The frequency and/or duration of nonpharmacological treatment were mentioned in 13 studies. Trends in the utilization of nonpharmacological pain therapies were assessed in 6 studies but none of these studies went beyond 2008. Discussion and Implications: This scoping review found that manipulative therapies, mainly chiropractic, have been the most widely studied approaches for nonpharmacological pain management in the Medicare population. The review also identified the need for future research that updates trend data and addresses contemporary issues such as rising Medicare Advantage enrollment and promulgation of practice guidelines for pain management.

Identifying behaviour change techniques in 287 randomized controlled trials of audit and feedback interventions targeting practice change among healthcare professionals.

BACKGROUND: Audit and feedback (A&F) is among the most widely used implementation strategies, providing healthcare professionals with summaries of their practice performance to prompt behaviour change and optimize care. Wide variability in effectiveness of A&F has spurred efforts to explore why some A&F interventions are more effective than others. Unpacking the variability of the content of A&F interventions in terms of their component behaviours change techniques (BCTs) may help advance our understanding of how A&F works best. This study aimed to systematically specify BCTs in A&F interventions targeting healthcare professional practice change. METHODS: We conducted a directed content analysis of intervention descriptions in 287 randomized trials included in an ongoing Cochrane systematic review update of A&F interventions (searched up to June 2020). Three trained researchers identified and categorized BCTs in all trial arms (treatment & control/comparator) using the 93-item BCT Taxonomy version 1. The original BCT definitions and examples in the taxonomy were adapted to include A&F-specific decision rules and examples. Two additional BCTs ('Education (unspecified)' and 'Feedback (unspecified)') were added, such that 95 BCTs were considered for coding. RESULTS: In total, 47/95 BCTs (49%) were identified across 360 treatment arms at least once (median = 5.0, IQR = 2.3, range = 129 per arm). The most common BCTs were 'Feedback on behaviour' (present 89% of the time; e.g. feedback on drug prescribing), 'Instruction on how to perform the behaviour' (71%; e.g. issuing a clinical guideline), 'Social comparison' (52%; e.g. feedback on performance of peers), 'Credible source' (41%; e.g. endorsements from respected professional body), and 'Education (unspecified)' (31%; e.g. giving a lecture to staff). A total of 130/287 (45%) control/comparator arms contained at least one BCT (median = 2.0, IQR = 3.0, range = 0-15 per arm), of which the most common were identical to those identified in treatment arms. CONCLUSIONS: A&F interventions to improve healthcare professional practice include a moderate range of BCTs, focusing predominantly on providing behavioural feedback, sharing guidelines, peer comparison data, education, and leveraging credible sources. We encourage the use of our A&F-specific list of BCTs to improve knowledge of what is being delivered in A&F interventions. Our study provides a basis for exploring which BCTs are associated with intervention effectiveness. TRIAL REGISTRATIONS: N/A.

Reduced Compared With Traditional Schedules for Routine Antenatal Visits: A Systematic Review.

OBJECTIVE: To assess differences in maternal and child outcomes in studies comparing reduced routine antenatal visit schedules with traditional schedules. DATA SOURCES: A search was conducted of PubMed, Cochrane databases, EMBASE, CINAHL, and ClinicalTrials.gov through February 12, 2022, searching for antenatal (prenatal) care, pregnancy, obstetrics, telemedicine, remote care, smartphones, telemonitoring, and related terms, as well as primary study designs. The search was restricted to high-income countries. METHODS OF STUDY SELECTION: Double independent screening was done in Abstrackr for studies comparing televisits and in-person routine antenatal care visits for maternal, child, health care utilization, and harm outcomes. Data were extracted into SRDRplus with review by a second researcher. TABULATION, INTEGRATION, AND RESULTS: Five randomized controlled trials and five nonrandomized comparative studies compared reduced routine antenatal visit schedules with traditional schedules. Studies did not find differences between schedules in gestational age at birth, likelihood of being small for gestational age, likelihood of a low Apgar score, likelihood of neonatal intensive care unit admission, maternal anxiety, likelihood of preterm birth, and likelihood of low birth weight. There was insufficient evidence for numerous prioritized outcomes of interest, including completion of the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists-recommended services and patient experience measures. CONCLUSION: The evidence base is limited and heterogeneous and allowed few specific conclusions. Reported outcomes included, for the most part, standard birth outcomes that do not have strong plausible biological connection to structural aspects of antenatal care. The evidence did not find negative effects of reduced routine antenatal visit schedules, which may support implementation of fewer routine antenatal visits. However, to enhance confidence in this conclusion, future research is needed, particularly research that includes outcomes of most importance and relevance to changing antenatal care visits. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO, CRD42021272287.

Televisits Compared With In-Person Visits for Routine Antenatal Care: A Systematic Review.

OBJECTIVE: To compare benefits and harms of televisits and in-person visits in people receiving routine antenatal care. DATA SOURCES: A search was conducted of PubMed, Cochrane databases, EMBASE, CINAHL, and ClinicalTrials.gov through February 12, 2022, for antenatal (prenatal) care, pregnancy, obstetrics, telemedicine, remote care, smartphones, telemonitoring, and related terms, as well as primary study designs. The search was restricted to high-income countries. METHODS OF STUDY SELECTION: Double independent screening was done in Abstrackr for studies comparing televisits and in-person routine antenatal care visits for maternal, child, health care utilization, and harm outcomes. Data were extracted into SRDRplus with review by a second researcher. TABULATION, INTEGRATION, AND RESULTS: Two randomized controlled trials, four nonrandomized comparative studies, and one survey compared visit types between 2004 and 2020, three of which were conducted during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. Number, timing, and mode of televisits and who provided care varied across studies. Low-strength evidence from studies comparing hybrid (televisits and in-person visits) and all in-person visits did not indicate differences in rates of neonatal intensive care unit admission of the newborn (summary odds ratio [OR] 1.02, 95% CI 0.82-1.28) or preterm births (summary OR 0.93, 95% CI 0.84-1.03). However, the studies with stronger, although still statistically nonsignificant, associations between use of hybrid visits and preterm birth compared the COVID-19 pandemic and prepandemic eras, confounding the association. There is low-strength evidence that satisfaction with overall antenatal care was greater in people who were pregnant and receiving hybrid visits. Other outcomes were sparsely reported. CONCLUSION: People who are pregnant may prefer hybrid televisits and in-person visits. Although there is no evidence of differences in clinical outcomes between hybrid visits and in-person visits, the evidence is insufficient to evaluate most outcomes. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO, CRD42021272287.

Quality improvement strategies for diabetes care: Effects on outcomes for adults living with diabetes.

BACKGROUND: There is a large body of evidence evaluating quality improvement (QI) programmes to improve care for adults living with diabetes. These programmes are often comprised of multiple QI strategies, which may be implemented in various combinations. Decision-makers planning to implement or evaluate a new QI programme, or both, need reliable evidence on the relative effectiveness of different QI strategies (individually and in combination) for different patient populations. OBJECTIVES: To update existing systematic reviews of diabetes QI programmes and apply novel meta-analytical techniques to estimate the effectiveness of QI strategies (individually and in combination) on diabetes quality of care. SEARCH METHODS: We searched databases (CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase and CINAHL) and trials registers (ClinicalTrials.gov and WHO ICTRP) to 4 June 2019. We conducted a top-up search to 23 September 2021; we screened these search results and 42 studies meeting our eligibility criteria are available in the awaiting classification section. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised trials that assessed a QI programme to improve care in outpatient settings for people living with diabetes. QI programmes needed to evaluate at least one system- or provider-targeted QI strategy alone or in combination with a patient-targeted strategy. - System-targeted: case management (CM); team changes (TC); electronic patient registry (EPR); facilitated relay of clinical information (FR); continuous quality improvement (CQI). - Provider-targeted: audit and feedback (AF); clinician education (CE); clinician reminders (CR); financial incentives (FI). - Patient-targeted: patient education (PE); promotion of self-management (PSM); patient reminders (PR). Patient-targeted QI strategies needed to occur with a minimum of one provider or system-targeted strategy. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We dual-screened search results and abstracted data on study design, study population and QI strategies. We assessed the impact of the programmes on 13 measures of diabetes care, including: glycaemic control (e.g. mean glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c)); cardiovascular risk factor management (e.g. mean systolic blood pressure (SBP), low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C), proportion of people living with diabetes that quit smoking or receiving cardiovascular medications); and screening/prevention of microvascular complications (e.g. proportion of patients receiving retinopathy or foot screening); and harms (e.g. proportion of patients experiencing adverse hypoglycaemia or hyperglycaemia). We modelled the association of each QI strategy with outcomes using a series of hierarchical multivariable meta-regression models in a Bayesian framework. The previous version of this review identified that different strategies were more or less effective depending on baseline levels of outcomes. To explore this further, we extended the main additive model for continuous outcomes (HbA1c, SBP and LDL-C) to include an interaction term between each strategy and average baseline risk for each study (baseline thresholds were based on a data-driven approach; we used the median of all baseline values reported in the trials). Based on model diagnostics, the baseline interaction models for HbA1c, SBP and LDL-C performed better than the main model and are therefore presented as the primary analyses for these outcomes. Based on the model results, we qualitatively ordered each QI strategy within three tiers (Top, Middle, Bottom) based on its magnitude of effect relative to the other QI strategies, where 'Top' indicates that the QI strategy was likely one of the most effective strategies for that specific outcome. Secondary analyses explored the sensitivity of results to choices in model specification and priors.  Additional information about the methods and results of the review are available as Appendices in an online repository. This review will be maintained as a living systematic review; we will update our syntheses as more data become available. MAIN RESULTS: We identified 553 trials (428 patient-randomised and 125 cluster-randomised trials), including a total of 412,161 participants. Of the included studies, 66% involved people living with type 2 diabetes only. Participants were 50% female and the median age of participants was 58.4 years. The mean duration of follow-up was 12.5 months. HbA1c was the commonest reported outcome; screening outcomes and outcomes related to cardiovascular medications, smoking and harms were reported infrequently. The most frequently evaluated QI strategies across all study arms were PE, PSM and CM, while the least frequently evaluated QI strategies included AF, FI and CQI. Our confidence in the evidence is limited due to a lack of information on how studies were conducted.  Four QI strategies (CM, TC, PE, PSM) were consistently identified as 'Top' across the majority of outcomes. All QI strategies were ranked as 'Top' for at least one key outcome. The majority of effects of individual QI strategies were modest, but when used in combination could result in meaningful population-level improvements across the majority of outcomes. The median number of QI strategies in multicomponent QI programmes was three.  Combinations of the three most effective QI strategies were estimated to lead to the below effects:  - PR + PSM + CE: decrease in HbA1c by 0.41% (credibility interval (CrI) -0.61 to -0.22) when baseline HbA1c < 8.3%; - CM + PE + EPR: decrease in HbA1c by 0.62% (CrI -0.84 to -0.39) when baseline HbA1c > 8.3%;  - PE + TC + PSM: reduction in SBP by 2.14 mmHg (CrI -3.80 to -0.52) when baseline SBP < 136 mmHg; - CM + TC + PSM: reduction in SBP by 4.39 mmHg (CrI -6.20 to -2.56) when baseline SBP > 136 mmHg;  - TC + PE + CM: LDL-C lowering of 5.73 mg/dL (CrI -7.93 to -3.61) when baseline LDL < 107 mg/dL; - TC + CM + CR: LDL-C lowering by 5.52 mg/dL (CrI -9.24 to -1.89) when baseline LDL > 107 mg/dL. Assuming a baseline screening rate of 50%, the three most effective QI strategies were estimated to lead to an absolute improvement of 33% in retinopathy screening (PE + PR + TC) and 38% absolute increase in foot screening (PE + TC + Other). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There is a significant body of evidence about QI programmes to improve the management of diabetes. Multicomponent QI programmes for diabetes care (comprised of effective QI strategies) may achieve meaningful population-level improvements across the majority of outcomes. For health system decision-makers, the evidence summarised in this review can be used to identify strategies to include in QI programmes. For researchers, this synthesis identifies higher-priority QI strategies to examine in further research regarding how to optimise their evaluation and effects. We will maintain this as a living systematic review.

Changes to Prenatal Care Visit Frequency and Telehealth: A Systematic Review of Qualitative Evidence.

OBJECTIVE: To systematically review patient, partner or family, and clinician perspectives, preferences, and experiences related to prenatal care visit schedules and televisits for routine prenatal care. DATA SOURCES: PubMed, the Cochrane databases, EMBASE, CINAHL, ClinicalTrials.gov , PsycINFO, and SocINDEX from inception through February 12, 2022. METHODS OF STUDY SELECTION: This review of qualitative research is a subset of a larger review on both the qualitative experiences and quantitative benefits and harms of reduced prenatal care visit schedules and televisits for routine prenatal care that was produced by the Brown Evidence-based Practice Center for the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. For the qualitative review, we included qualitative research studies that examined perspectives, preferences, and experiences about the number of scheduled visits and about televisits for routine prenatal care. TABULATION, INTEGRATION, AND RESULTS: We synthesized barriers and facilitators to the implementation of reduced care visits or of televisits into 1 of 14 domains defined by the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF) and a Best Fit Framework approach. We summarized themes within TDF domains. We assessed our confidence in the summary statements using the GRADE-CERQual (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation-Confidence in Evidence from Reviews of Qualitative research) tool. Four studies addressed the number of scheduled routine prenatal visits, and five studies addressed televisits. Across studies, health care professionals believed fewer routine visits may be more convenient for patients and may increase clinic capacity to provide additional care for patients with high-risk pregnancies. However, both patients and clinicians had concerns about potential lesser care with fewer visits, including concerns about quality of care and challenges with implementing new delivery-of-care models. CONCLUSION: Although health care professionals and patients had some concerns about reduced visit schedules and use of televisits, several potential benefits were also noted. Our synthesis of qualitative evidence provides helpful insights into the perspectives, preferences, and experiences of important stakeholders with respect to implementing changes to prenatal care delivery that may complement findings of traditional quantitative evidence syntheses. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO, CRD42021272287.

Parent perceptions and decision making about treatments for epilepsy: a qualitative evidence synthesis.

OBJECTIVES: Epilepsy treatment decision making is complex and understanding what informs caregiver decision making about treatment for childhood epilepsy is crucial to better support caregivers and their children. We synthesised evidence on caregivers' perspectives and experiences of treatments for childhood epilepsy. DESIGN: Systematic review of qualitative studies using a best-fit framework and Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation Confidence in the Evidence from Reviews of Qualitative Research (GRADE-CERQual) approach. DATA SOURCES: Searched Embase, PubMed, CINAHL, PsycINFO, SocINDEX and Web of Science from 1 January 1999 to 19 August 2021. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: We included qualitative studies examining caregiver's perspectives on antiseizure medication, diet or surgical treatments for childhood epilepsy. We excluded studies not reported in English. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: We extracted qualitative evidence into 1 of 14 domains defined by the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF). One reviewer extracted study data and methodological characteristics, and two reviewers extracted qualitative findings. The team verified all extractions. We identified themes within TDF domains and synthesised summary statements of these themes. We assessed our confidence in our summary statements using GRADE-CERQual. RESULTS: We identified five studies (in six reports) of good methodological quality focused on parent perceptions of neurosurgery; we found limited indirect evidence on parents' perceptions of medications or diet. We identified themes within 6 of the 14 TDF domains relevant to treatment decisions: knowledge, emotion; social/professional role and identity; social influence; beliefs about consequences; and environmental context and resources. CONCLUSIONS: Parents of children with epilepsy navigate a complex process to decide whether to have their child undergo surgery. Educational resources, peer support and patient navigators may help support parents through this process. More qualitative studies are needed on non-surgical treatments for epilepsy and among caregivers from different cultural and socioeconomic backgrounds to fully understand the diversity of perspectives that informs treatment decision making.

Rehabilitation for Total Knee Arthroplasty: A Systematic Review.

ABSTRACT: We sought to determine the comparative benefit and harm of rehabilitation interventions for patients who have undergone elective, unilateral total knee arthroplasty for the treatment of primary osteoarthritis. We searched PubMed, Embase, The Cochrane Register of Clinical Trials, CINAHL, PsycINFO, Scopus, and ClinicalTrials.gov from January 1, 2005, through May 3, 2021. We included randomized controlled trials and adequately adjusted nonrandomized comparative studies of rehabilitation programs reporting performance-based, patient-reported, or healthcare utilization outcomes. Three researchers extracted study data and assessed risk of bias, verified by an independent researcher. The team assessed strength of evidence. Evidence from 53 studies randomized controlled trials suggests that various rehabilitation programs after total knee arthroplasty may lead to comparable improvements in pain, range of motion, and activities of daily living. Rehabilitation in the acute phase may lead to increased strength but result in similar strength when delivered in the postacute phase. No studies reported evidence of risk of harms due to rehabilitation delivered in the acute period after total knee arthroplasty; risk of harms among various postacute rehabilitation programs seems comparable. All findings were of low strength of evidence. Evaluation of rehabilitation after total knee arthroplasty needs a systematic overhaul to sufficiently guide future practice or research including the use of standardized intervention components and core outcomes.

Prehabilitation for Total Knee or Total Hip Arthroplasty: A Systematic Review.

ABSTRACT: We sought to systematically review the evidence on the benefits and harms of prehabilitation interventions for patients who are scheduled to undergo elective, unilateral total knee arthroplasty or total hip arthroplasty surgery for the treatment of primary osteoarthritis. We searched PubMed, Embase, The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, CINAHL, PsycINFO, Scopus, and ClinicalTrials.gov from January 1, 2005, through May 3, 2021. We selected for inclusion randomized controlled trials and adequately adjusted nonrandomized comparative studies of prehabilitation programs reporting performance-based, patient-reported, or healthcare utilization outcomes. Three researchers extracted study data and assessed risk of bias, verified by an independent researcher. Experts in rehabilitation content and complex interventions independently coded rehabilitation interventions. The team assessed strength of evidence. While large heterogeneity across evaluated prehabilitation programs limited strong conclusions, evidence from 13 total knee arthroplasty randomized controlled trials suggest that prehabilitation may result in increased strength and reduced length of stay and may not lead to increased harms but may be comparable in terms of pain, range of motion, and activities of daily living (all low strength of evidence). There was no evidence or insufficient evidence for all other outcomes after total knee arthroplasty. Although there were six total hip arthroplasty randomized controlled trials, there was no evidence or insufficient evidence for all total hip arthroplasty outcomes.

Rehabilitation for Total Hip Arthroplasty: A Systematic Review.

ABSTRACT: We sought to determine the comparative benefits and harms of rehabilitation interventions for patients who have undergone elective, unilateral THA surgery for the treatment of primary osteoarthritis. We searched PubMed, Embase, The Cochrane Register of Clinical Trials, CINAHL, PsycINFO, Scopus, and ClinicalTrials.gov from January 1, 2005, through May 3, 2021. We included randomized controlled trials and adequately adjusted nonrandomized comparative studies of rehabilitation programs reporting performance-based, patient-reported, or healthcare utilization outcomes. Three researchers extracted study data and assessed risk of bias, verified by an independent researcher. Experts in rehabilitation content and complex interventions independently coded rehabilitation interventions. The team assessed strength of evidence. Large heterogeneity across evaluated rehabilitation programs limited conclusions. Evidence from 15 studies suggests that diverse rehabilitation programs may not differ in terms of risk of harm or outcomes of pain, strength, activities of daily living, or quality of life (all low strength of evidence). Evidence is insufficient for other outcomes. In conclusion, no differences in outcomes were found between different rehabilitation programs after THA. Further evidence is needed to inform decisions on what attributes of rehabilitation programs are most effective for various outcomes.

Exploring the association of paid sick leave with healthcare utilization and health outcomes in the United States:a rapid evidence review / 《全球健康杂志（英文）》

Objective:Paid sick leave(PSL)laws mandate employers give workers paid time off when they are sick or injured.This current study aims to examine whether access to PSL is associated with healthcare utilization and health outcomes and to summarize the types of utilization and outcomes which have been reported to be associated with PSL.Methods:We conducted a rapid evidence review.Our search of seven databases,including Medline,Embase,PsycINFO,Cochrane Library,CINAHL,Scopus,and JSTOR,on September 21,2020,identified 757 studies,30 of which were retained.Results:Previous evidence is mostly provided by cross-sectional studies with survey data.In this study,evidence suggests that PSL is significantly associated with some types of healthcare utilization and health outcomes.In terms of healthcare utilization,findings indicate PSL is associated with an increase in the use of some preventive services and a decrease in the use of emergency care;while findings are mixed regarding associations of PSL with health provider visits and the use of mammograms and pap smears.As for health outcomes,findings suggest PSL is associated with improved mental and self-rated health,decreased incidence of influenza-like illness,and lower occupational injuries and mortality rates.Conclusion:PSL may be an effective tool in improving some healthcare utilization and health outcomes.Future research could help identify mechanisms through which PSL access works and identify what policy components lead to better outcomes.

Diagnostic Imaging and Medical Management of Acute Left-Sided Colonic Diverticulitis : A Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: Clinicians need to better understand the value of computed tomography (CT) imaging and nonsurgical treatment options to manage acute left-sided colonic diverticulitis. PURPOSE: To evaluate CT imaging, outpatient treatment of uncomplicated diverticulitis, antibiotic treatment, and interventional radiology for patients with complicated diverticulitis. DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Embase, CINAHL, and ClinicalTrials.gov from 1 January 1990 through 16 November 2020. STUDY SELECTION: Existing systematic reviews of CT imaging accuracy, as well as randomized trials and adjusted nonrandomized comparative studies reporting clinical or patient-centered outcomes. DATA EXTRACTION: 6 researchers extracted study data and risk of bias, which were verified by an independent researcher. The team assessed strength of evidence across studies. DATA SYNTHESIS: Based on moderate-strength evidence, CT imaging is highly accurate for diagnosing acute diverticulitis. For patients with uncomplicated acute diverticulitis, 6 studies provide low-strength evidence that initial outpatient and inpatient management have similar risks for recurrence or elective surgery, but they provide insufficient evidence regarding other outcomes. Also, for patients with uncomplicated acute diverticulitis, 5 studies comparing antibiotics versus no antibiotics provide low-strength evidence that does not support differences in risks for treatment failure, elective surgery, recurrence, posttreatment complications, and other outcomes. Evidence is insufficient to determine choice of antibiotic regimen (7 studies) or effect of percutaneous drainage (2 studies). LIMITATIONS: The evidence base is mostly of low strength. Studies did not adequately assess heterogeneity of treatment effect. CONCLUSION: Computed tomography imaging is accurate for diagnosing acute diverticulitis. For patients with uncomplicated diverticulitis, no differences in outcomes were found between outpatient and inpatient care. Avoidance of antibiotics for uncomplicated acute diverticulitis may be safe for most patients. The evidence is too sparse for other evaluated questions. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality and American College of Physicians. (PROSPERO: CRD42020151246).

Pharmacotherapy interventions for adolescent co-occurring substance use and mental health disorders: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Co-occurring mental health and substance use (SU) disorders among adolescents are common, with two-thirds of adolescents who seek SU treatment also requiring support for mental health. Primary care physicians play a key role in the pharmacological treatment of mental health disorders among adolescents, however, little is known about the impact of these treatments on SU outcomes. OBJECTIVES: This systematic review summarizes the evidence regarding commonly used pharmacotherapy interventions for mental health and their impact on adolescent SU. METHODS: Literature searches were conducted across five databases as part of a larger systematic review of adolescent SU interventions. Studies were screened for eligibility by two researchers, and study data were extracted regarding study design, patient and treatment characteristics and results. Risk of bias analyses and qualitative syntheses were completed to evaluate the strength of the evidence and the impact of pharmacotherapy on SU outcomes. RESULTS: Ten randomized controlled trials exploring seven pharmacotherapies met criteria for inclusion. All studies had low to moderate risk of bias. Four studies evaluated pharmacotherapy for co-occurring depression and SU, three evaluated attention deficit hyperactivity disorder and SU, and three evaluated bipolar disorder and SU. Five of the 10 studies also included a behavioural intervention. We found no evidence that pharmacotherapy for co-occurring mental health diagnoses impacted SU. CONCLUSION: Family medicine clinicians prescribing pharmacotherapy for mental health should be aware that additional interventions will likely be needed to address co-occurring SU.

Many adolescents have both mental health and substance use problems. Adolescents have difficulty getting effective treatment for both substance use and mental health concerns, in part because these treatments are often offered separately. Primary care physicians, who often care for adolescents with mental health concerns, may prescribe medications for diagnoses such as attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, depression or early symptoms of bipolar disorder. However, there is little research indicating whether these medications are helpful for co-occurring substance use disorder symptoms. This paper presents a review of existing research on medications used to treat common mental health disorders to evaluate their effect on substance use. Ten studies address this question and suggest that medications for mental health are insufficient for helping adolescents with substance use disorders or substance use problems.