Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 4 de 4
Filtrar
1.
BMJ Mil Health ; 2023 Dec 12.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38124087

RESUMEN

INTRODUCTION: Chronic non-cancer pain is common among military veterans; however, the prevalence is uncertain. This information gap complicates policy decisions and resource planning to ensure veterans have access to healthcare services that align with their needs. METHODS: Following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Protocols, we searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, CINAHL and Web of Science from inception to 9 February 2023 for observational studies reporting the prevalence of chronic non-cancer pain among military veterans. We performed random-effects meta-analysis to pool pain prevalence data across studies and used the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach to evaluate the certainty of evidence. RESULTS: Forty-two studies that included 14 305 129 veterans were eligible for review, of which 28 studies (n=5 011 634) contributed to our meta-analysis. Most studies (90%; 38 of 42) enrolled US veterans, the median of the mean age among study participants was 55 years (IQR 45-62) and 85% were male. The pooled prevalence of chronic non-cancer pain was 45%; however, we found evidence of a credible subgroup effect based on representativeness of the study population. Moderate certainty evidence found the prevalence of chronic pain among studies enrolling military veterans from the general population was 30% (95% CI 23% to 37%) compared with 51% (95% CI 38% to 64%) among military veterans sampled from populations with high rates of conditions associated with chronic pain (p=0.005). CONCLUSION: We found moderate certainty evidence that 3 in every 10 military veterans from the general population live with chronic non-cancer pain. These findings underscore the importance of ensuring access to evidence-based care for chronic pain for veterans, and the need for prevention and early management to reduce transition from acute to chronic pain. Further research, employing a standardised assessment of chronic pain, is needed to disaggregate meaningful subgroups; for example, the proportion of veterans living with moderate to severe pain compared with mild pain.

2.
J. allergy clin. immunol ; 140(4)Oct. 2017.
Artículo en Inglés | BIGG - guías GRADE | ID: biblio-915635

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Allergic rhinitis (AR) affects 10% to 40% of the population. It reduces quality of life and school and work performance and is a frequent reason for office visits in general practice. Medical costs are large, but avoidable costs associated with lost work productivity are even larger than those incurred by asthma. New evidence has accumulated since the last revision of the Allergic Rhinitis and its Impact on Asthma (ARIA) guidelines in 2010, prompting its update. OBJECTIVE: We sought to provide a targeted update of the ARIA guidelines. METHODS: The ARIA guideline panel identified new clinical questions and selected questions requiring an update. We performed systematic reviews of health effects and the evidence about patients' values and preferences and resource requirements (up to June 2016). We followed the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) evidence-to-decision frameworks to develop recommendations. RESULTS: The 2016 revision of the ARIA guidelines provides both updated and new recommendations about the pharmacologic treatment of AR. Specifically, it addresses the relative merits of using oral H1-antihistamines, intranasal H1-antihistamines, intranasal corticosteroids, and leukotriene receptor antagonists either alone or in combination. The ARIA guideline panel provides specific recommendations for the choice of treatment and the rationale for the choice and discusses specific considerations that clinicians and patients might want to review to choose the management most appropriate for an individual patient. CONCLUSIONS: Appropriate treatment of AR might improve patients' quality of life and school and work productivity. ARIA recommendations support patients, their caregivers, and health care providers in choosing the optimal treatment.


Asunto(s)
Humanos , Asma/prevención & control , Antialérgicos/uso terapéutico , Rinitis Alérgica/tratamiento farmacológico , Antagonistas de los Receptores Histamínicos H1/uso terapéutico , Calidad de Vida , Toma de Decisiones Clínicas
3.
Obes Rev ; 17(10): 945-59, 2016 10.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-27427474

RESUMEN

Marketing of foods and beverages high in fat, sugar and salt are suggested to contribute to poor dietary behaviours in children and diet-related diseases later in life. This systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized trials aimed to assess the effects of unhealthy food and beverage marketing on dietary intake (grams or kilocalories) and dietary preference (preference score or percentage of participants who selected specific foods/beverages) among children 2 to 18 years of age. We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE and PsycINFO up to January 2015 for terms related to advertising, unhealthy foods or beverages among children. Randomized trials that assessed the effects of unhealthy food and beverage marketing compared with non-dietary advertisement or no advertisement in children were considered eligible. Two authors independently extracted information on study characteristics and outcomes of interest and assessed risk of bias and the overall quality of evidence using grade methodology. Meta-analysis was conducted separately for dietary intake and preference using a random-effects model. We identified 29 eligible studies, of which 17 studies were included for meta-analysis of dietary preference and nine for meta-analysis of dietary intake. Almost half of the studies were at high risk of bias. Our meta-analysis showed that in children exposed to unhealthy dietary marketing, dietary intake significantly increased (mean difference [MD] = 30.4 kcal, 95% confidence interval [CI] 2.9 to 57.9, and MD = 4.8 g, 95%CI 0.8 to 8.8) during or shortly after exposure to advertisements. Similarly, children exposed to the unhealthy dietary marketing had a higher risk of selecting the advertised foods or beverages (relative risk = 1.1, 95%CI 1.0 to 1.2; P = 0.052). The evidence indicates that unhealthy food and beverage marketing increases dietary intake (moderate quality evidence) and preference (moderate to low quality evidence) for energy-dense, low-nutrition food and beverage. Unhealthy food and beverage marketing increased dietary intake and influenced dietary preference in children during or shortly after exposure to advertisements. © 2016 World Obesity.


Asunto(s)
Conducta Infantil/psicología , Comportamiento del Consumidor/estadística & datos numéricos , Dieta/efectos adversos , Preferencias Alimentarias/psicología , Mercadotecnía/métodos , Obesidad Infantil/etiología , Publicidad , Bebidas/efectos adversos , Niño , Fenómenos Fisiológicos Nutricionales Infantiles , Señales (Psicología) , Ingestión de Energía , Comida Rápida/efectos adversos , Humanos , Valor Nutritivo , Obesidad Infantil/prevención & control , Obesidad Infantil/psicología , Ensayos Clínicos Controlados Aleatorios como Asunto , Televisión
4.
Nutr Metab Cardiovasc Dis ; 26(8): 649-62, 2016 08.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-27266986

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND AND AIM: Depression affects one in four individuals with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). The impact of T2DM lifestyle interventions on depression is unclear. The aim of this analysis was to examine the influence of lifestyle interventions on depressive symptoms scores in individuals at-risk of or with T2DM. METHOD AND RESULTS: Major bibliographic databases were searched for studies published in English from 1990 to 2015. Meta-analysis was conducted by random-effects model. Nineteen studies were included in the meta-analyses. A significant reduction in depression scores was shown for lifestyle interventions in the pooled analysis (Standardized Mean Difference (SMD): -0.165; 95%CI: -0.265, -0.064; I(2):67.9%) and when limited to individuals with T2DM (SMD: -0.202; 95%CI: -0.288, -0.079; I(2):72.5%). In subgroup analyses the most effective intervention methods were face-to-face individual consultations (SMD: -0.241; 95%CI: -0.403, -0.078, I(2): 50.8%) with a duration of ≤6 months (SMD: -0.203; 95%CI: -0.381, -0.026, I(2):59.9%). Interventions were most effective when delivered four times a month (SMD: -0.247; 95%CI: -0.441, -0.053, I(2):76.3%). CONCLUSIONS: Lifestyle interventions were effective in improving depression among people with T2DM.


Asunto(s)
Depresión/terapia , Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 2/prevención & control , Estilo de Vida , Conducta de Reducción del Riesgo , Adolescente , Adulto , Anciano , Depresión/epidemiología , Depresión/fisiopatología , Depresión/psicología , Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 2/epidemiología , Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 2/fisiopatología , Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 2/psicología , Dieta Saludable , Ejercicio Físico , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Ensayos Clínicos Controlados Aleatorios como Asunto , Medición de Riesgo , Factores de Riesgo , Resultado del Tratamiento , Adulto Joven
SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA
...