Budget impact analysis of implementing trauma registries in Argentina.

INTRODUCTION: In high-income countries, quality improvement interventions and research are usually guided by trauma registries. In low- and middle-income countries, the implementation of trauma registries has been limited mainly for cost reasons. OBJECTIVE: To analyze the budgetary impact of the implementation of trauma registries in Argentina. METHODS: We estimated direct costs of implementing trauma registries in public hospitals located in cities with a population over 50,000 inhabitants. In large urban areas, we selected hospitals by estimating a minimum volume of 240 severe trauma admissions/year and using the NBATS-2 instrument with geolocation techniques. We estimated costs based on a micro-costing approach of a trauma registry developed by Fundación Trauma. Scenario analysis was carried out restricting the population to hospitals from bigger cities and/or with higher concentration of trauma patients' care. For the high budget impact threshold, we used the total health spending estimation, and alternatively the health spending of the public sector. RESULTS: For the base case, 139 hospitals from 104 cities were included, comprising 175,605 injury-related discharges and 13,707 severely injured patients/year. The average cost for the initial three years was USD 3,753,085 (21.4 USD/per patient), falling below the high budget impact thresholds. The scenarios analysis showed a significantly costs reduction. CONCLUSIONS: The implementation of trauma registries in Argentina would be affordable, and in consequence, it would improve the coordination, management and quality of care for this great public health issue.

Incorporating postmenopausal women's perspectives into osteoporosis clinical guidelines: a systematic review.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the inclusion of individuals' perspectives in the development of osteoporosis Clinical Practice Guidelines (CPGs) for primary fracture prevention in postmenopausal women. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: We performed a comprehensive systematic search across guideline databases and (CPGs) developing organizations websites. Using the AGREE II tool, we assessed the quality of the guidelines, with particular emphasis on the inclusion of patients, or representatives in the development process. We also examined if women's perspectives were considered at the recommendations level and explored the potential association between the inclusion of patients' values and preferences with the quality of the CPGs. RESULTS: We retrieved a total of 491 eligible CPGs, of which 33 were finally included. The majority of the CPGs were developed by scientific societies (63.6%), primarily from Europe (39.4%) and North America (30.3%). One in every four (24.2%) guidelines explicitly included individuals' perspectives in their development, and one in ten (12.1%) included research evidence about this aspect to support their recommendations. The domains with the lowest mean scores in the quality assessment were applicability (42.4%), rigor of development (44.7%), and stakeholder involvement (45.7%), and 61% were recommended for use according to our assessment. Guidelines of higher quality were more likely to include women's perspective in their development (mean difference 39.31, P = .003). CONCLUSION: The incorporation of women's perspectives into the process of developing guidelines for primary fracture prevention in osteoporosis remains inadequate. Our findings serve as a call for guideline developers to improve this situation, and for users, and policymakers to be aware of these limitations, when using or implementing guidelines in this field.

Utilising systematic reviews to assess potential overtreatment and claim for better evidence-based research: an analysis of anticancer drugs versus supportive care in advanced esophageal cancer.

BACKGROUND: Highlighting the identified gaps in evidence-based research concerning advanced esophageal cancer (EC) treatment and care, this review evaluates the efficacy and safety of anticancer drugs compared to supportive care for advanced EC patients, aiming to assess the appropriateness of usual treatments and identify the gaps that need to be filled with primary research. METHODS: We searched (May 2022) MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), Epistemonikos, and trial registries (ClinicalTrials.gov and PROSPERO) for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing anticancer drugs (chemotherapy, immunotherapy, or biological/targeted therapy) with supportive care in advanced EC. The results were summarised using GRADE summary of finding tables. RESULTS: We included 15 RCTs. Most studies did not have a special focus on EC, did not detail the treatment lines in all patients, and did not evaluate all outcomes. Anticancer drugs may result in a slight increase in overall survival (OS) (HR 0.78; 95% CI 0.71, 0.86; MD 0.83 months) and better progression-free survival (PFS) (HR 0.56 95% CI 0.49, 0.64, MD 0.68 months), but also may increase toxicity (RR 1.37; 95% CI 1.13, 1.65), without a significant improvement in quality of life. The certainty of evidence was low or very low due to indirectness of results and lack of specific focus on EC in some studies. CONCLUSION: RCTs on advanced EC lack specificity, detailed treatment line information, and evaluation of all relevant outcomes. Moreover, when they find any benefit, this is negligible. Therefore, the certainty to justify anticancer drug treatments instead of supportive care in advanced EC is low or very low, and this information should be actively shared with affected patients. More and better RCTs should be conducted to assess whether any old or new proposed treatment for advanced EC patients provides a better balance of benefits and harms than the supportive care. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: The study protocol was registered in OSF ( https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/7CHX6 ) on 2022-03-29.

How appropriate is treating patients diagnosed with advanced esophageal cancer with anticancer drugs? A multicenter retrospective cohort Spanish study.

AIM: To assess the appropriateness of systemic oncological treatments (SOT) provided to patients diagnosed with advanced esophageal cancer (EC) across a group of participating hospitals. METHODS: Multicenter, retrospective cohort study in five Spanish hospitals including newly confirmed advanced EC cases between July 1, 2014, and June 30, 2016, with a 5-year follow-up. RESULTS: We identified 157 patients fulfilling the inclusion criteria (median age: 65 years, 85.9% males). Most patients, 125 (79.6%) were treated at least with one active treatment, and 33% received two or more lines of SOT. The 1-, 2- and 5-year overall survival rates were 30.3% [95%CI: 23.8, 38.7], 14.0% [95%CI: 9.3, 21.0], and 7.1% [95% CI: 3.8, 13.1] respectively, and the median survival time 8 months (95% CI: 6, 19) for stages IIIb IIIc and 7 months (95% CI: 5, 9) for stage IV. Clinical stage, receiving more than one line of SOT, and treatment with radiotherapy accelerated the time to death (0.4, 0.9-, and 0.8-times shorter survival respectively, p < 0.05). Better performance status (ECOG < 2) extended survival time by 2.2 times (p = 0.04). Age < 65 years (OR 9.4, 95% CI 3.2, 31.4, p < 0.001), and being treated in one particular hospital (OR 0.2, 95% CI 0.0, 0.8, p < 0.01) were associated with the administration of two or more lines of SOT. Altogether, 18.9% and 9.0% of patients received chemotherapy in the last four and two weeks of life, respectively. Moreover, 2.5% of patients were prescribed a new line of chemotherapy during the last month of life. The proportion of all patients who did not have access to palliative care reached 29.3%, and among those who had access to it, 34.2% initiated it in the last month of life. CONCLUSION: A high proportion of advanced EC patients receive many treatments not based on sound evidence and they do not benefit enough from palliative care services. The most accepted appropriateness indicators point out that some of the analyzed patients could have been overtreated. This study provides important insights into the quality of care provided to advanced EC, and furthermore, for giving valuable insight and opportunities for improvement.

Effectiveness and Cost-Effectiveness of Self-Management Interventions for Adults Living with Heart Failure to Improve Patient-Important Outcomes: An Evidence Map of Randomized Controlled Trials.

Self-management interventions (SMIs) may enhance heart failure (HF) outcomes and address challenges associated with disease management. This study aims to review randomized evidence and identify knowledge gaps in SMIs for adult HF patients. Within the COMPAR-EU project, from 2010 to 2018, we conducted searches in the databases MEDLINE, CINAHL, Embase, Cochrane, and PsycINFO. We performed a descriptive analysis using predefined categories and developed an evidence map of randomized controlled trials (RCTs). We found 282 RCTs examining SMIs for HF patients, comparing two to four interventions, primarily targeting individual patients (97%) globally (34 countries, only 31% from an European country). These interventions involved support techniques such as information sharing (95%) and self-monitoring (62%), often through a mix of in-person and remote sessions (43%). Commonly assessed outcomes included quality of life, hospital admissions, mortality, exercise capacity, and self-efficacy. Few studies have focused on lower socio-economic or minority groups. Nurses (68%) and physicians (30%) were the primary providers, and most studies were at low risk of bias in generating a random sequence for participant allocation; however, the reporting was noticeably unclear of methods used to conceal the allocation process. Our analysis has revealed prevalent support techniques and delivery methods while highlighting methodological challenges. These findings provide valuable insights for researchers, clinicians, and policymakers striving to optimize SMIs for individuals living with HF.

Assessing the methodological strengths and limitations of the Spanish Society of Medical Oncology (SEOM) guidelines: a critical appraisal using AGREE II and AGREE-REX tool

Background The Spanish Society of Medical Oncology (SEOM) has provided open-access guidelines for cancer since 2014. However, no independent assessment of their quality has been conducted to date. This study aimed to critically evaluate the quality of SEOM guidelines on cancer treatment. Methods Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation II (AGREE II) and AGREE-REX tool was used to evaluate the qualities of the guidelines. Results We assessed 33 guidelines, with 84.8% rated as “high quality”. The highest median standardized scores (96.3) were observed in the domain “clarity of presentation”, whereas “applicability” was distinctively low (31.4), with only one guideline scoring above 60%. SEOM guidelines did not include the views and preferences of the target population, nor did specify updating methods. Conclusions Although developed with acceptable methodological rigor, SEOM guidelines could be improved in the future, particularly in terms of clinical applicability and patient perspectives (AU)

Risk of COVID-19 death for people with a pre-existing cancer diagnosis prior to COVID-19-vaccination: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

While previous reviews found a positive association between pre-existing cancer diagnosis and COVID-19-related death, most early studies did not distinguish long-term cancer survivors from those recently diagnosed/treated, nor adjust for important confounders including age. We aimed to consolidate higher-quality evidence on risk of COVID-19-related death for people with recent/active cancer (compared to people without) in the pre-COVID-19-vaccination period. We searched the WHO COVID-19 Global Research Database (20 December 2021), and Medline and Embase (10 May 2023). We included studies adjusting for age and sex, and providing details of cancer status. Risk-of-bias assessment was based on the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. Pooled adjusted odds or risk ratios (aORs, aRRs) or hazard ratios (aHRs) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs) were calculated using generic inverse-variance random-effects models. Random-effects meta-regressions were used to assess associations between effect estimates and time since cancer diagnosis/treatment. Of 23 773 unique title/abstract records, 39 studies were eligible for inclusion (2 low, 17 moderate, 20 high risk of bias). Risk of COVID-19-related death was higher for people with active or recently diagnosed/treated cancer (general population: aOR = 1.48, 95% CI: 1.36-1.61, I2 = 0; people with COVID-19: aOR = 1.58, 95% CI: 1.41-1.77, I2 = 0.58; inpatients with COVID-19: aOR = 1.66, 95% CI: 1.34-2.06, I2 = 0.98). Risks were more elevated for lung (general population: aOR = 3.4, 95% CI: 2.4-4.7) and hematological cancers (general population: aOR = 2.13, 95% CI: 1.68-2.68, I2 = 0.43), and for metastatic cancers. Meta-regression suggested risk of COVID-19-related death decreased with time since diagnosis/treatment, for example, for any/solid cancers, fitted aOR = 1.55 (95% CI: 1.37-1.75) at 1 year and aOR = 0.98 (95% CI: 0.80-1.20) at 5 years post-cancer diagnosis/treatment. In conclusion, before COVID-19-vaccination, risk of COVID-19-related death was higher for people with recent cancer, with risk depending on cancer type and time since diagnosis/treatment.

Assessing the methodological strengths and limitations of the Spanish Society of Medical Oncology (SEOM) guidelines: a critical appraisal using AGREE II and AGREE-REX tool.

BACKGROUND: The Spanish Society of Medical Oncology (SEOM) has provided open-access guidelines for cancer since 2014. However, no independent assessment of their quality has been conducted to date. This study aimed to critically evaluate the quality of SEOM guidelines on cancer treatment. METHODS: Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation II (AGREE II) and AGREE-REX tool was used to evaluate the qualities of the guidelines. RESULTS: We assessed 33 guidelines, with 84.8% rated as "high quality". The highest median standardized scores (96.3) were observed in the domain "clarity of presentation", whereas "applicability" was distinctively low (31.4), with only one guideline scoring above 60%. SEOM guidelines did not include the views and preferences of the target population, nor did specify updating methods. CONCLUSIONS: Although developed with acceptable methodological rigor, SEOM guidelines could be improved in the future, particularly in terms of clinical applicability and patient perspectives.

Self-Management Interventions for Adults Living with Type II Diabetes to Improve Patient-Important Outcomes: An Evidence Map.

Self-management interventions (SMIs) may be promising in the treatment of Diabetes Mellitus Type 2 (T2DM). However, accurate comparisons of their relative effectiveness are challenging, partly due to a lack of clarity and detail regarding the intervention content being evaluated. This study summarizes intervention components and characteristics in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) related to T2DM using a taxonomy for SMIs as a framework and identifies components that are insufficiently incorporated into the design of the intervention or insufficiently reported. Following evidence mapping methodology, we searched MEDLINE, CINAHL, Embase, Cochrane, and PsycINFO from 2010 to 2018 for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on SMIs for T2DM. We used the terms 'self-management', 'adult' and 'T2DM' for content. For data extraction, we used an online platform based on the taxonomy for SMIs. Two independent reviewers assessed eligible references; one reviewer extracted data, and a second checked accuracy. We identified 665 RCTs for SMIs (34% US, 21% Europe) including 164,437 (median 123, range 10-14,559) adults with T2DM. SMIs highly differed in design and content, and characteristics such as mode of delivery, intensity, location and providers involved were poorly described. The majority of interventions aimed to improve clinical outcomes like HbA1c (83%), weight (53%), lipid profile (45%) or blood pressure (42%); 27% (also) targeted quality of life. Improved knowledge, health literacy, patient activation or satisfaction with care were hardly used as outcomes (<16%). SMIs most often used education (98%), self-monitoring (56%), goal-setting (48%) and skills training (42%) to improve outcomes. Management of emotions (17%) and shared decision-making (5%) were almost never mentioned. Although diabetes is highly prevalent in some minority groups, in only 13% of the SMIs, these groups were included. Our findings highlight the large heterogeneity that exists in the design of SMIs for T2DM and the way studies are reported, making accurate comparisons of their relative effectiveness challenging. In addition, SMIs pay limited attention to outcomes other than clinical, despite the importance attached to these outcomes by patients. More standardized and streamlined research is needed to better understand the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of SMIs of T2DM and benefit patient care.

Anticancer Drugs Compared to No Anticancer Drugs in Patients with Advanced Hepatobiliary Cancer: A Mapping Review and Evidence Gap Map.

Introduction: Despite being commonly recommended, the impact of anticancer drugs (ACDs) on patient-important outcomes beyond survival for advanced hepatobiliary cancers (HBCs) may not have been sufficiently assessed. We aim to identify and map the evidence regarding ACDs versus best supportive care (BSC) for advanced HBCs, considering patient-centered outcomes. Methods: In this mapping review, we included systematic reviews, randomized controlled trials, quasi-experimental, and observational studies comparing ACDs (chemotherapy, immunotherapy, biological/targeted therapy) versus BSC for advanced HBCs. We searched MEDLINE (PubMed), EMBASE (Ovid), Cochrane Library, Epistemonikos, PROSPERO and clinicaltrials.gov for eligible studies. Two reviewers performed the screening and data extraction processes. We developed evidence maps for each type of cancer. Results: We included 87 studies (60 for advanced liver cancer and 27 for gallbladder or bile duct cancers). Most of the evidence favored ACDs for survival outcomes, and BSC for toxicity. We identified several evidence gaps for non-survival outcomes, including quality of life or quality of end-of-life care. Discussion: Patient-important outcomes beyond survival in advanced HBCs are insufficiently assessed by the available evidence. Future studies need to address these gaps to better inform decision-making processes.

Latin American and the Caribbean Code Against Cancer 1st edition: Weight, physical activity, diet, breastfeeding, and cancer.

In Latin America and the Caribbean a considerable proportion of the population have excess body weight, do not meet the recommendations of physical activity and healthy diet, and have suboptimal rates of breastfeeding. Excess body weight is associated with at least 15 cancer sites, physical activity protects against three cancers, with some evidence suggesting a protective effect for eight more cancer sites, and sedentary behavior probably increases the risk of five cancer sites. Fiber and wholegrains protect against colorectal cancer, high intake of fruits and vegetables could reduce the risk of aerodigestive cancers; processed and red meat increase the risk of colorectal cancer; and very hot beverages are associated with esophageal cancer. Moreover, sugar-sweetened beverages and ultra-processed foods are a convincing cause for excess body weight, increasing cancer risk through this pathway, with some emerging evidence suggesting also direct pathways. Breastfeeding protects against breast cancer, and could protect against ovarian cancer. Taking this evidence into account, the Latin America and the Caribbean Code Against Cancer recommends the general public to maintain a healthy body weight, be physically active and limit sedentary behavior, eat a healthy diet (eat plenty of vegetables, fruits, wholegrains and legumes; avoid sugar-sweetened beverages and processed meat; and limit ultra-processed foods, red meat and very hot beverages), and breastfeed. Moreover, the Latin America and the Caribbean Code Against Cancer also includes a set of public policy recommendations for cancer prevention to inform policy makers and civil society about the need of policies to shape healthy environments and create opportunities to facilitate the adoption of the recommendations directed to the public.

Quality improvement intervention to increase colorectal cancer screening at the primary care setting: a cluster-randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Approximately 81% of deaths in Argentina are from chronic non-communicable diseases and 21% caused by cancer. Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the second most frequent cancer in Argentina. Even though CRC screening has been recommended for adults from 50 to 75 years old by using a faecal immunochemical test (FIT) annually, screening rates remain below 20% in the country. METHODS: We conducted an 18-month, two-arm, pragmatic cluster-randomised controlled trial evaluating the effect of a quality improvement intervention, based on the Plan-Do-Study-Act cycles, considering barriers and catalysts to articulate theory and practice, to increase CRC screening rates using FITs at primary care level. The study involved ten public primary health centres in Mendoza province, Argentina. The primary outcome measure was the rate of effective CRC screening. Secondary outcomes were the rate of participants with a positive FIT, tests with invalid results and the rate of participants referred for colonoscopy. RESULTS: Screening was effective in 75% of the participants in the intervention arm vs 54.2% in the control arm, OR 2.5 (95% CI 1.4 to 4.4, p=0.001). These results remained unchanged after adjusting for individual demographic and socioeconomic characteristics. Regarding secondary outcomes, the overall prevalence of positive tests was 17.7% (21.1% in the control arm and 14.7% in the intervention arm, p=0.3648). The overall proportion of participants with inadequate test results was 5.2% (4.9% in the control arm vs 5.5% in the intervention arm, p=0.8516). All the participants with positive tests were referred for colonoscopy in both groups. CONCLUSIONS: An intervention based on quality improvement strategies proved to be highly successful in increasing effective CRC screening in Argentina's primary care setting within the public healthcare system. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT04293315.

Blood Pressure Association with the 8-Item Morisky Medication Adherence Scale in Hypertensive Adults from Low-Resource Primary Care Settings: Results from a Prospective Cohort Nested within a Randomised Controlled Trial.

INTRODUCTION: One of the self-report adherence scales most widely used is the 8-item Morisky Medication Adherence Scale (MMAS-8). AIM: To evaluate construct validity and reliability of the MMAS-8 in hypertensive adults from low-resource settings within the public primary care level in Argentina. METHODS: Prospective data from hypertensive adults under antihypertensive pharmacological treatment that participated in the "Hypertension Control Program in Argentina" study was analyzed. Participants were followed at baseline, 6, 12 and 18 months. Based on MMAS-8, adherence was defined as low (score < 6), medium (score 6 to < 8) and high (score of 8). RESULTS: 1214 participants were included in the analysis. In comparison to low adherence, high adherence category was associated with a reduction of - 5.6 mmHg (CI 95%: - 7.2; - 4.0) in systolic blood pressure (BP) and - 3.2 mmHg (CI 95%: - 4.2; - 2.2) in diastolic BP; and with a 56% higher likelihood to have controlled BP (p < .0001). Among those participants with baseline score ≤ 6, two points increase in MMAS-8 along follow-up showed a tendency to reduce BP in almost all-time points and a 34% higher likelihood of having controlled BP at the end of the follow-up (p = 0.0039). Cronbach's alpha total-item values in all time-points were higher than 0.70. CONCLUSIONS: Higher MMAS-8 categories were positively associated with BP reduction and higher likelihood of BP control over time. Internal consistency was acceptable and in line with previous studies.

Hip fracture registries in low- and middle-income countries: a scoping review.

PURPOSE: The study aims to identify, describe, and organize the currently available evidence regarding hip fracture (HF) registries in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). METHODS: We conducted a scoping review adhering to PRISMA-ScR guidelines. We searched MEDLINE (PubMed), Google Scholar, Global Index Medicus, websites related to HF, and study references for eligible studies. Two reviewers independently performed the study selection and data extraction, including studies describing the use of individual patient records with the aim to improve the quality of care in older people with HF in LMICs. RESULTS: A total of 222 abstracts were screened, 59 full-text articles were reviewed, and 10 studies regarding 3 registries were included in the analysis. Malaysia and Mexico implemented a HF registry in public hospitals whereas Argentina implemented a registry in the private setting. The Mexican registry, the most recent one, is the only one that publishes annual reports. There was significant variability in data fields between registries, particularly in functional evaluation and follow-up. The Ministry of Health finances the Malaysian registry, while Argentinian and Mexican registries founding was unclear. CONCLUSION: The adoption of HF registries in LMICs is scarce. The few experiences show promising results but higher support is required to develop more registries. Long-term sustainability remains a challenge.

Effectiveness of a diabetes program based on digital health on capacity building and quality of care in type 2 diabetes: a pragmatic quasi-experimental study.

Health systems in Latin America face many challenges in controlling the increasing burden of diabetes. Digital health interventions are a promise for the provision of care, especially in developing countries where mobile technology has a high penetration. This study evaluated the effectiveness of the implementation of a Diabetes Program (DP) that included digital health interventions to improve the quality of care of persons with type 2 Diabetes (T2DM) in a vulnerable population attending the public primary care network. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A quasi-experimental pre-post uncontrolled study was conducted in 19 primary care centers and hospitals in the province of Corrientes, Argentina. We included persons with T2DM, age > = 18 years with access to a mobile phone. The multicomponent intervention included a mobile app with a diabetes registry, a clinical decision support tool for providers and a text messaging intervention for patients. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION: One thousand sixty-five participants were included, 72.8% had less than 12 years of formal education and 53.5% lacked health coverage. Comorbidities were hypertension (60.8%) and overweight/obesity (88.2%). During follow-up there was a significant increase in the proportion of participants who underwent laboratory check-ups (HbA1c 20.3%-64.4%; p < 0.01) and foot exams (62.1%-87.2%; p < 0.01). No changes were observed at 12 and 24 months in the proportion of participants with poor metabolic control. The proportion of participants with uncontrolled blood pressure (≥ 140/90 mmHg) decreased from 47.2% at baseline to 30.8% at 24 months in those with a follow-up visit. CONCLUSION: The DP was innovative by integrating digital health interventions in the public primary care level. The study showed improvements in quality indicators related with diabetes care processes and in blood pressure control.

Self-management interventions for adults living with obesity to improve patient-relevant outcomes: An evidence map.

OBJECTIVES: To conduct an evidence map on self-management interventions and patient-relevant outcomes for adults living with overweight/obesity. METHODS: Following Arksey and O'Malley methodology, we searched in five electronical databases including randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on SMIs for overweight/obesity. We used the terms "self-management", "adult" and "obesity" for content. Two independent reviewers assessed eligible references; one reviewer extracted data, a second checked accuracy. RESULTS: We identified 497 RCTs (58% US, 20% Europe) including 99,741 (median 112, range 11-5145) adults living with overweight/obesity. Most research evaluated clinical outcomes (617, 55%) and behaviors adherence (255, 23%). Empowerment skills, quality of life and satisfaction were less targeted (8%, 7%, 0.2%, respectively). The most frequent techniques included sharing information (858, 99%), goal setting (619, 72%) and self-monitoring training (614, 71%), provided face-to-face (386, 45%) or in combination with remote techniques (256, 30%). Emotional management, social support and shared-decision were less frequent (18%, 26%, 4%). Socio-economic status, minorities or health literacy were seldom reported. CONCLUSION: There is a need of widening the scope of research by focusing on outcomes important to patients, assessing emotional/social/share-decision support, exploring remote techniques and including vulnerable populations.

Systemic Oncological Treatments versus Supportive Care for Patients with Advanced Hepatobiliary Cancers: An Overview of Systematic Reviews.

BACKGROUND: The trade-off between systemic oncological treatments (SOTs) and UPSC in patients with primary advanced hepatobiliary cancers (HBCs) is not clear in terms of patient-centred outcomes beyond survival. This overview aims to assess the effectiveness of SOTs (chemotherapy, immunotherapy and targeted/biological therapies) versus UPSC in advanced HBCs. METHODS: We searched for systematic reviews (SRs) in PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, Epistemonikos and PROSPERO. Two authors assessed eligibility independently and performed data extraction. We estimated the quality of SRs and the overlap of primary studies, performed de novo meta-analyses and assessed the certainty of evidence for each outcome. RESULTS: We included 18 SRs, most of which were of low quality and highly overlapped. For advanced hepatocellular carcinoma, SOTs showed better overall survival (HR = 0.62, 95% CI 0.55-0.77, high certainty for first-line therapy; HR = 0.85, 95% CI 0.79-0.92, moderate certainty for second-line therapy) with higher toxicity (RR = 1.18, 95% CI 0.87-1.60, very low certainty for first-line therapy; RR = 1.58, 95% CI 1.28-1.96, low certainty for second-line therapy). Survival was also better for SOTs in advanced gallbladder cancer. No outcomes beyond survival and toxicity could be meta-analysed. CONCLUSION: SOTs in advanced HBCs tend to improve survival at the expense of greater toxicity. Future research should inform other patient-important outcomes to guide clinical decision making.

Systemic oncological treatments in patients with advanced pancreatic cancer: a scoping review and evidence map.

PURPOSE: To identify, describe, and organise currently available evidence regarding systemic oncological treatments (SOTs) (chemotherapy, targeted/biological therapies, and immunotherapy) compared to best supportive care (BSC) for patients with advanced pancreatic cancer (PC). METHODS: We conducted a scoping review and evidence mapping, adhering to PRISMA-ScR checklist. We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, Epistemonikos, PROSPERO, and clinicaltrials.gov for eligible studies. We included systematic reviews (SRs), randomised controlled trials (RCTs), quasi-experimental, and observational studies evaluating SOTs compared to BSC or no treatment in patients with advanced PC. Two independent reviewers performed the screening process and data extraction. We developed evidence maps as an interactive visualization display, including the assessed interventions and outcomes. RESULTS: Of the 50,601 records obtained from our search, we included 43 studies: 2 SRs, 16 RCTs, 4 quasi-experimental studies, 20 observational studies, and 1 protocol for a quasi-experimental study. Forty-two studies reported survival-related outcomes and most favoured SOTs, while five reported toxicity and most favoured BSC. Other patient-centred outcomes, such as quality of life, were scarcely reported. CONCLUSIONS: This study highlights the current evidence gaps in studies assessing treatments for patients with advanced PC, mainly the lack of reports of non-survival-related outcomes, pointing out research areas that need further attention to make better recommendations for these patients.

¿Cuáles son las brechas de conocimiento y qué priorizar en investigación en salud mental del adulto mayor? Estudio cuali-cuantitativo utilizando la matriz de estrategias combinadas para Argentina (MECA).

INTRODUCCIÓN: el envejecimiento poblacional es un fenómeno mundial. Los problemas de salud mental, altamente prevalentes en este grupo, impactan en la vida de los individuos, sus familias y la sociedad en su conjunto. OBJETIVO: identificar brechas de conocimiento y prioridades de investigación en salud mental del adulto mayor en Argentina. MATERIAL Y MÉTODOS: diseño cuali-cuantitativo, en tres etapas: (1) diagnóstico de situación, (2) evaluación global de necesidades de investigación y (3) ejercicio de priorización basado en la Matriz de Estrategias Combinadas validada para Argentina (MECA). RESULTADOS: con base en las primeras dos etapas del estudio se identificaron dos áreas temáticas investigar en el país y dimensiones priorizadas: (a) soledad-aislamiento y (b) deterioro cognitivo y demencia. Como resultado del ejercicio de priorización surgieron las siguientes dimensiones: en relación con soledad-aislamiento: 1. efecto de los programas, 2. falta de acceso a los recursos, 3. capacidad de adaptación a los contextos locales (integración social del adulto mayor) y 4. calidad de servicios. En relación con deterioro cognitivo y demencia: 1. impacto cuidadores y entorno, 2. barreras para la implementación de guías y capacitación, 3. estudios de costo-efectividad sobre intervenciones y calidad de vida, y 4. recolección y publicación de datos epidemiológicos. CONCLUSIÓN: se debe enfatizar la importancia de fortalecer la investigación en Argentina sobre la implementación y difusión de intervenciones de promoción, prevención y prestación de servicios en la salud mental del adulto mayor.

Efficacy and Safety of Topical Application of Olive Oil for Preventing Pressure Ulcers: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.

The purpose was to identify and summarize the existing evidence on the efficacy and safety of the topical application of olive oil for preventing pressure ulcers (PUs). We included only randomized controlled trials (RCTs) involving patients at risk of developing PUs, testing the topical application of olive oil versus other products for PU prevention. We assessed the risk of bias using the RoB 2 tool, and the certainty of the evidence with GRADE. Four RCTs met the eligibility criteria. All studies were judged at a low risk of bias overall. The meta-analysis showed that the clinical efficacy of olive oil for prevention occurs by reducing the incidence of PUs (RR = 0.56, 95% CI = 0.30 to 0.79, I2 = 0%); with no differences in adverse effects, it may be associated with a shorter development time of PUs and shorter hospital stays. The certainty of the evidence assessed by the GRADE approach was moderate and low. The topical application of olive oil is effective and safe in reducing the incidence of PUs compared to other treatments. These findings could provide new insights into olive oil as a preventive and alternative treatment for PUs as it is accessible and inexpensive compared to other products.