Interventions for basal cell carcinoma of the skin.

BACKGROUND: Basal cell carcinoma (BCC) is the commonest cancer affecting white-skinned individuals, and worldwide incidence is increasing. Although rarely fatal, BCC is associated with significant morbidity and costs. First-line treatment is usually surgical excision, but alternatives are available. New published studies and the development of non-surgical treatments meant an update of our Cochrane Review (first published in 2003, and previously updated in 2007) was timely. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of interventions for BCC in immunocompetent adults. SEARCH METHODS: We updated our searches of the following databases to November 2019: Cochrane Skin Group Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, and LILACS. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of interventions for BCC in immunocompetent adults with histologically-proven, primary BCC. Eligible comparators were placebo, active treatment, other treatments, or no treatment. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. Primary outcome measures were recurrence at three years and five years (measured clinically) (we included recurrence data outside of these time points if there was no measurement at three or five years) and participant- and observer-rated good/excellent cosmetic outcome. Secondary outcomes included pain during and after treatment, early treatment failure within six months, and adverse effects (AEs). We used GRADE to assess evidence certainty for each outcome. MAIN RESULTS: We included 52 RCTs (26 new) involving 6690 participants (median 89) in this update. All studies recruited from secondary care outpatient clinics. More males than females were included. Study duration ranged from six weeks to 10 years (average 13 months). Most studies (48/52) included only low-risk BCC (superficial (sBCC) and nodular (nBCC) histological subtypes). The majority of studies were at low or unclear risk of bias for most domains. Twenty-two studies were industry-funded: commercial sponsors conducted most of the studies assessing imiquimod, and just under half of the photodynamic therapy (PDT) studies. Overall, surgical interventions have the lowest recurrence rates. For high-risk facial BCC (high-risk histological subtype or located in the facial 'H-zone' or both), there may be slightly fewer recurrences with Mohs micrographic surgery (MMS) compared to surgical excision (SE) at three years (1.9% versus 2.9%, respectively) (risk ratio (RR) 0.64, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.16 to 2.64; 1 study, 331 participants; low-certainty evidence) and at five years (3.2% versus 5.2%, respectively) (RR 0.61, 95% CI 0.18 to 2.04; 1 study, 259 participants; low-certainty evidence). However, the 95% CI also includes the possibility of increased risk of recurrence and no difference between treatments. There may be little to no difference regarding improvement of cosmetic outcomes between MMS and SE, judged by participants and observers 18 months post-operatively (one study; low-certainty evidence); however, no raw data were available for this outcome. When comparing imiquimod and SE for nBCC or sBCC at low-risk sites, imiquimod probably results in more recurrences than SE at three years (16.4% versus 1.6%, respectively) (RR 10.30, 95% CI 3.22 to 32.94; 1 study, 401 participants; moderate-certainty evidence) and five years (17.5% versus 2.3%, respectively) (RR 7.73, 95% CI 2.81 to 21.3; 1 study, 383 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). There may be little to no difference in the number of participant-rated good/excellent cosmetic outcomes (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.94 to 1.06; 1 study, 326 participants; low-certainty evidence). However, imiquimod may result in greater numbers of good/excellent cosmetic outcomes compared to SE when observer-rated (60.6% versus 35.6%, respectively) (RR 1.70, 95% CI 1.35 to 2.15; 1 study, 344 participants; low-certainty evidence). Both cosmetic outcomes were measured at three years. Based on one study of 347 participants with high- and low-risk primary BCC of the face, radiotherapy may result in more recurrences compared to SE under frozen section margin control at three years (5.2% versus 0%, respectively) (RR 19.11, 95% CI 1.12 to 325.78; low-certainty evidence) and at four years (6.4% versus 0.6%, respectively) (RR 11.06, 95% CI 1.44 to 84.77; low-certainty evidence). Radiotherapy probably results in a smaller number of good participant- (RR 0.76, 95% CI 0.63 to 0.91; 50.3% versus 66.1%, respectively) or observer-rated (RR 0.48, 95% CI 0.37 to 0.62; 28.9% versus 60.3%, respectively) good/excellent cosmetic outcomes compared to SE, when measured at four years, where dyspigmentation and telangiectasia can occur (both moderate-certainty evidence). Methyl-aminolevulinate (MAL)-PDT may result in more recurrences compared to SE at three years (36.4% versus 0%, respectively) (RR 26.47, 95% CI 1.63 to 429.92; 1 study; 68 participants with low-risk nBCC in the head and neck area; low-certainty evidence). There were no useable data for measurement at five years. MAL-PDT probably results in greater numbers of participant- (RR 1.18, 95% CI 1.09 to 1.27; 97.3% versus 82.5%) or observer-rated (RR 1.87, 95% CI 1.54 to 2.26; 87.1% versus 46.6%) good/excellent cosmetic outcomes at one year compared to SE (2 studies, 309 participants with low-risk nBCC and sBCC; moderate-certainty evidence). Based on moderate-certainty evidence (single low-risk sBCC), imiquimod probably results in fewer recurrences at three years compared to MAL-PDT (22.8% versus 51.6%, respectively) (RR 0.44, 95% CI 0.32 to 0.62; 277 participants) and five years (28.6% versus 68.6%, respectively) (RR 0.42, 95% CI 0.31 to 0.57; 228 participants). There is probably little to no difference in numbers of observer-rated good/excellent cosmetic outcomes at one year (RR 0.98, 95% CI 0.84 to 1.16; 370 participants). Participant-rated cosmetic outcomes were not measured for this comparison. AEs with surgical interventions include wound infections, graft necrosis and post-operative bleeding. Local AEs such as itching, weeping, pain and redness occur frequently with non-surgical interventions. Treatment-related AEs resulting in study modification or withdrawal occurred with imiquimod and MAL-PDT. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Surgical interventions have the lowest recurrence rates, and there may be slightly fewer recurrences with MMS over SE for high-risk facial primary BCC (low-certainty evidence). Non-surgical treatments, when used for low-risk BCC, are less effective than surgical treatments, but recurrence rates are acceptable and cosmetic outcomes are probably superior. Of the non-surgical treatments, imiquimod has the best evidence to support its efficacy. Overall, evidence certainty was low to moderate. Priorities for future research include core outcome measures and studies with longer-term follow-up.

Interventions to reduce Staphylococcus aureus in the management of eczema.

BACKGROUND: Staphylococcus aureus (S. aureus) can cause secondary infection in eczema, and may promote inflammation in eczema that does not look infected. There is no standard intervention to reduce S. aureus burden in eczema. It is unclear whether antimicrobial treatments help eczema or promote bacterial resistance. This is an update of a 2008 Cochrane Review. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of interventions to reduce S. aureus for treating eczema. SEARCH METHODS: We updated our searches of the following databases to October 2018: Cochrane Skin Group Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase and LILACS. We searched five trials registers and three sets of conference proceedings. We checked references of trials and reviews for further relevant studies. We contacted pharmaceutical companies regarding ongoing and unpublished trials. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials of products intended to reduce S. aureus on the skin in people diagnosed with atopic eczema by a medical practitioner. Eligible comparators were a similar treatment regimen without the anti-staphylococcal agent. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. Our key outcomes were participant- or assessor-rated global improvement in symptoms/signs, quality of life (QOL), severe adverse events requiring withdrawal, minor adverse events, and emergence of antibiotic-resistant micro-organisms. MAIN RESULTS: We included 41 studies (1753 analysed participants) covering 10 treatment categories. Studies were conducted mainly in secondary care in Western Europe; North America; the Far East; and elsewhere. Twelve studies recruited children; four, adults; 19, both; and six, unclear. Fifty-nine per cent of the studies reported the mean age of participants (range: 1.1 to 34.6 years). Eczema severity ranged from mild to severe. Many studies did not report our primary outcomes. Treatment durations ranged from 10 minutes to 3 months; total study durations ranged from 15 weeks to 27 months. We considered 33 studies at high risk of bias in at least one domain. We present results for three key comparisons. All time point measurements were taken from baseline. We classed outcomes as short-term when treatment duration was less than four weeks, and long-term when treatment was given for more than four weeks. Fourteen studies evaluated topical steroid/antibiotic combinations compared to topical steroids alone (infective status: infected (two studies), not infected (four studies), unspecified (eight studies)). Topical steroid/antibiotic combinations may lead to slightly greater global improvement in good or excellent signs/symptoms than topical steroid alone at 6 to 28 days follow-up (risk ratio (RR) 1.10, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.00 to 1.21; 224 participants; 3 studies, low-quality evidence). There is probably little or no difference between groups for QOL in children, at 14 days follow-up (mean difference (MD) -0.18, 95% CI -0.40 to 0.04; 42 participants; 1 study, moderate-quality evidence). The subsequent results for this comparison were based on very low-quality evidence, meaning we are uncertain of their validity: severe adverse events were rare (follow-up: between 6 to 28 days): both groups reported flare of dermatitis, worsening of the condition, and folliculitis (325 participants; 4 studies). There were fewer minor adverse events (e.g. flare, stinging, itch, folliculitis) in the combination group at 14 days follow-up (218 participants; 2 studies). One study reported antibiotic resistance in children at three months follow-up, with similar results between the groups (65 participants; 1 study). Four studies evaluated oral antibiotics compared to placebo (infective status: infected eczema (two studies), uninfected (one study), one study's participants had colonisation but no clinical infection). Oral antibiotics may make no difference in terms of good or excellent global improvement in infants and children at 14 to 28 days follow-up compared to placebo (RR 0.80; 95% CI 0.18 to 3.50; 75 participants; 2 studies, low-quality evidence). There is probably little or no difference between groups for QOL (in infants and children) at 14 days follow-up (MD 0.11, 95% CI -0.10 to 0.32, 45 participants, 1 study, moderate-quality evidence). The subsequent results for this comparison were based on very low-quality evidence, meaning we are uncertain of their validity: adverse events requiring treatment withdrawal between 14 to 28 days follow-up were very rare, but included eczema worsening (both groups), loose stools (antibiotic group), and Henoch-Schönlein purpura (placebo group) (4 studies, 199 participants). Minor adverse events, including nausea, vomiting, diarrhoea, and stomach and joint pains, at 28 days follow-up were also rare and generally low in both groups (1 study, 68 infants and children). Antibiotic resistance at 14 days was reported as similar in both groups (2 studies, 98 infants and children). Of five studies evaluating bleach baths compared to placebo (water) or bath emollient (infective status: uninfected (two studies), unspecified (three studies)), one reported global improvement and showed that bleach baths may make no difference when compared with placebo at one month follow-up (RR 0.78, 95% CI 0.37 to 1.63; 36 participants; low-quality evidence). One study showed there is probably little or no difference in QOL at 28 days follow-up when comparing bleach baths to placebo (MD 0.90, 95% CI -1.32 to 3.12) (80 infants and children; moderate-quality evidence). We are uncertain if the groups differ in the likelihood of treatment withdrawals due to adverse events at two months follow-up (only one dropout reported due to worsening itch (placebo group)) as the quality of evidence was very low (1 study, 42 participants). One study reported that five participants in each group experienced burning/stinging or dry skin at two months follow-up, so there may be no difference in minor adverse events between groups (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.35 to 2.87, 36 participants, low-quality evidence). Very low-quality evidence means we are also uncertain if antibiotic resistance at four weeks follow-up is different between groups (1 study, 80 participants ≤ 18 years). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: We found insufficient evidence on the effects of anti-staphylococcal treatments for treating people with infected or uninfected eczema. Low-quality evidence, due to risk of bias, imprecise effect estimates and heterogeneity, made pooling of results difficult. Topical steroid/antibiotic combinations may be associated with possible small improvements in good or excellent signs/symptoms compared with topical steroid alone. High-quality trials evaluating efficacy, QOL, and antibiotic resistance are required.

Probiotics for treating eczema.

BACKGROUND: Eczema is a common chronic skin condition. Probiotics have been proposed as an effective treatment for eczema; their use is increasing, as numerous clinical trials are under way. This is an update of a Cochrane Review first published in 2008, which suggested that probiotics may not be an effective treatment for eczema but identified areas in which evidence was lacking. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of probiotics for treating patients of all ages with eczema. SEARCH METHODS: We updated our searches of the following databases to January 2017: the Cochrane Skin Group Specialised Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), in the Cochrane Library, the Global Resource of Eczema Trials (GREAT) database, MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, the Allied and Complementary Medicine Database (AMED), and Latin American Caribbean Health Sciences Literature (LILACS). We searched five trials registers and checked the reference lists of included studies and relevant reviews for further references to relevant randomised controlled trials (RCTs). We also handsearched a number of conference proceedings. We updated the searches of the main databases in January 2018 and of trials registries in March 2018, but we have not yet incorporated these results into the review. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials of probiotics (live orally ingested micro-organisms) compared with no treatment, placebo, or other active intervention with no probiotics for the treatment of eczema diagnosed by a doctor. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used standard methodological procedures as expected by Cochrane. We recorded adverse events from the included studies and from a separate adverse events search conducted for the first review. We formally assessed reporting bias by preparing funnel plots, and we performed trial sequential analysis for the first primary outcome - eczema symptoms at the end of active treatment.We used GRADE to assess the quality of the evidence for each outcome (in italic font). MAIN RESULTS: We included 39 randomised controlled trials involving 2599 randomised participants. We included participants of either gender, aged from the first year of life through to 55 years (only six studies assessed adults), who had mild to severe eczema. Trials were undertaken in primary and secondary healthcare settings, mainly in Europe or Asia. Duration of treatment ranged from four weeks to six months, and duration of follow-up after end of treatment ranged from zero to 36 months. We selected no standard dose: researchers used a variety of doses and concentrations of probiotics. The probiotics used were bacteria of the Lactobacillus and Bifidobacteria species, which were taken alone or combined with other probiotics, and were given with or without prebiotics. Comparators were no treatment, placebo, and other treatments with no probiotics.For all results described in this abstract, the comparator was no probiotics. Active treatment ranged from six weeks to three months for all of the following results, apart from the investigator-rated eczema severity outcome, for which the upper limit of active treatment was 16 weeks. With regard to score, the higher the score, the more severe were the symptoms. All key results reported in this abstract were measured at the end of active treatment, except for adverse events, which were measured during the active treatment period.Probiotics probably make little or no difference in participant- or parent-rated symptoms of eczema (13 trials; 754 participants): symptom severity on a scale from 0 to 20 was 0.44 points lower after probiotic treatment (95% confidence interval (CI) -1.22 to 0.33; moderate-quality evidence). Trial sequential analysis shows that target sample sizes of 258 and 456, which are necessary to demonstrate a minimum mean difference of -2 and -1.5, respectively, with 90% power, have been exceeded, suggesting that further trials with similar probiotic strains for this outcome at the end of active treatment may be futile.We found no evidence suggesting that probiotics make a difference in QoL for patients with eczema (six studies; 552 participants; standardised mean difference (SMD) 0.03, 95% CI -0.36 to 0.42; low-quality evidence) when measured by the participant or the parent using validated disease-specific QoL instruments.Probiotics may slightly reduce investigator-rated eczema severity scores (24 trials; 1596 participants). On a scale of 0 to 103 for total Severity Scoring of Atopic Dermatitis (SCORAD), a score combining investigator-rated eczema severity score and participant scoring for eczema symptoms of itch and sleep loss was 3.91 points lower after probiotic treatment than after no probiotic treatment (95% CI -5.86 to -1.96; low-quality evidence). The minimum clinically important difference for SCORAD has been estimated to be 8.7 points.We noted significant to extreme levels of unexplainable heterogeneity between the results of individual studies. We judged most studies to be at unclear risk of bias; six studies had high attrition bias, and nine were at low risk of bias overall.We found no evidence to show that probiotics make a difference in the risk of adverse events during active treatment (risk ratio (RR) 1.54, 95% CI 0.90 to 2.63; seven trials; 402 participants; low-quality evidence). Studies in our review that reported adverse effects described gastrointestinal symptoms. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Evidence suggests that, compared with no probiotic, currently available probiotic strains probably make little or no difference in improving patient-rated eczema symptoms. Probiotics may make little or no difference in QoL for people with eczema nor in investigator-rated eczema severity score (combined with participant scoring for eczema symptoms of itch and sleep loss); for the latter, the observed effect was small and of uncertain clinical significance. Therefore, use of probiotics for the treatment of eczema is currently not evidence-based. This update found no evidence of increased adverse effects with probiotic use during studies, but a separate adverse events search from the first review revealed that probiotic treatment carries a small risk of adverse events.Results show significant, unexplainable heterogeneity between individual trial results. Only a small number of studies measured some outcomes.Future studies should better measure QoL scores and adverse events, and should report on new probiotics. Researchers should also consider studying subgroups of patients (e.g. patients with atopy or food allergies, adults) and standardising doses/concentrations of probiotics given.

Linkage of national soil quality measurements to primary care medical records in England and Wales: a new resource for investigating environmental impacts on human health.

BACKGROUND: Long-term, low-level exposure to toxic elements in soil may be harmful to human health but large longitudinal cohort studies with sufficient follow-up time to study these effects are cost-prohibitive and impractical. Linkage of routinely collected medical outcome data to systematic surveys of soil quality may offer a viable alternative. METHODS: We used the Geochemical Baseline Survey of the Environment (G-BASE), a systematic X-ray fluorescence survey of soil inorganic chemistry throughout England and Wales to obtain estimates of the concentrations of 15 elements in the soil contained within each English and Welsh postcode area. We linked these data to the residential postcodes of individuals enrolled in The Health Improvement Network (THIN), a large database of UK primary care medical records, to provide estimates of exposure. Observed exposure levels among the THIN population were compared with expectations based on UK population estimates to assess representativeness. RESULTS: Three hundred seventy-seven of three hundred ninety-five English and Welsh THIN practices agreed to participate in the linkage, providing complete residential soil metal estimates for 6,243,363 individuals (92% of all current and former patients) with a mean period of prospective computerised medical data collection (follow-up) of 6.75 years. Overall agreement between the THIN population and expectations was excellent; however, the number of participating practices in the Yorkshire & Humber strategic health authority was low, leading to restricted ranges of measurements for some elements relative to the known variations in geochemical concentrations in this area. CONCLUSIONS: The linked database provides unprecedented population size and statistical power to study the effects of elements in soil on human health. With appropriate adjustment, results should be generalizable to and representative of the wider English and Welsh population.

Long-term topical corticosteroid use and risk of skin cancer: a systematic review.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this systematic review was to synthesize available research evidence to determine the risk of skin cancer in patients with long-term use of topical corticosteroids (TCS). INTRODUCTION: Topical corticosteroids are one of the most commonly prescribed medicines in dermatology and the mainstay of the treatment of atopic dermatitis and other skin conditions such as psoriasis. They are often required for months or years to control the disease and ultimately restore patients' quality of life. In some patients, TCS may have a local immunosuppressive effect and theoretically increase the risk of skin cancer, whilst on the other hand TCS may decrease the risk of skin cancer in patients where TCS are used to treat inflammatory skin disease. To date, no systematic review has been performed to collate evidence on the effect of long-term TCS use on the risk of skin cancer. INCLUSION CRITERIA: This review considered studies that included people of all ages, genders and ethnicities, including HIV and transplant participants or participants with genetic diseases (for example, Gorlin-Goltz syndrome) This review considered studies that evaluated long-term use of topical corticosteroids. "Long-term" was defined as using TCS more than once a week for a month or longer. The review included cohort, cross-sectional and case-control observational studies exploring the association between the stated intervention and outcomes. The primary outcome measures of interest were: non-melanoma skin cancer (keratinocyte carcinoma), cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma (cSSC), basal cell carcinoma (BCC) or melanoma skin cancer. Genital and oral skin cancers are considered to be slightly different so we did not include them in this review. METHODS: We performed a comprehensive search of MEDLINE, Embase and LILACS on November 9, 2017 to identify observational epidemiological studies assessing the association between long-term TCS use and skin cancer. We also searched EThOS at the British Library and three drug safety databases to identify unpublished work. The titles, abstracts and full text identified from the search were assessed independently by two authors against pre-specified inclusion/exclusion criteria. Methodological quality was not assessed as no articles were found which met the inclusion criteria. Data extraction was not possible as no articles were found which met the inclusion criteria. It was not possible to complete data synthesis as no articles were found which met the inclusion criteria. RESULTS: A total of 1703 potentially relevant studies were identified following a comprehensive electronic search. After abstract and title screening, 51 full texts were assessed for eligibility criteria. Of these, no study met the inclusion criteria. No additional records were identified from searching unpublished literature. CONCLUSIONS: We did not find any studies that could help us establish if long-term TCS use is associated with skin cancer. Future research using primary care databases might give a better understanding regarding long-term use of TCS and skin cancer.

Effectiveness of surgery for adults with hallux valgus deformity: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Hallux valgus (HV) is a common foot deformity. In severe stages of this condition, surgery is often necessary. Currently, there is no systematic review comparing the effectiveness of surgery over conservative treatment. OBJECTIVES: The objective of this review was to establish the effectiveness of surgery compared to conservatory management for adults with HV. INCLUSION CRITERIA TYPES OF PARTICIPANTS: The current review included adults (18 years or over) with HV deformity, excluding adults with neurological problems causing foot deformities, for example, cerebral palsy, neuropathy, stroke and multiple sclerosis. TYPES OF INTERVENTIONS: The review included any type of HV surgery compared to no surgery, conservative treatment or different types of HV surgeries. OUTCOMES: The primary outcome was gait measurement, and secondary outcomes included quality of life, patient satisfaction, pain assessed using any validated assessment tool and adverse events. TYPES OF STUDIES: The review included randomized controlled trials. SEARCH STRATEGY: The search strategy aimed to find both published and unpublished studies. A three-step search strategy was utilized in 16 databases without language and date limitations. METHODOLOGICAL QUALITY: Papers selected for retrieval were assessed by two independent reviewers for methodological validity prior to inclusion in the review using standardized critical appraisal instruments developed by the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI). DATA EXTRACTION: Data were extracted from papers included in the review using the standardized data extraction tool developed by the JBI. DATA SYNTHESIS: Quantitative data were, where possible, pooled in statistical meta-analysis using RevMan5 (Copenhagen: The Nordic Cochrane Centre, Cochrane). Effect sizes expressed as risk ratio (for categorical data) and mean differences (MD) or standardized MD (for continuous data) and their 95% confidence intervals were calculated for analysis. Where statistical pooling was not possible, the findings have been presented in narrative form. RESULTS: Searching identified 2412 citations. After removal of duplicates, paper retrieval and critical appraisal, 25 studies were included in the review. The included trials were of medium-to-poor quality.Twenty-four trials compared the effectiveness of different types of surgeries. Meta-analysis revealed no difference in level of pain between distal chevron-type osteotomy and other surgical procedures (standard mean difference [SMD] 0.02, 95% confidence interval [CI] -0.24 to 0.28). One single trial reported that distal chevron osteotomy is more effective than Lindgren osteotomy in terms of walking speed (MD -0.24, 95% CI -0.43 to -0.05).One medium quality trial assessed the effectiveness of HV surgery compared to conservative or no treatment. This trial showed that surgery, specifically distal chevron osteotomy of the first metatarsal, is a more effective procedure for pain compared to conservative treatment (MD -15.00, 95% CI -22.79 to -7.21) and also no treatment in the first year (MD -18.00, 95% CI -25.62 to -10.38). CONCLUSION: The current systematic review showed that differences between various types of surgical procedures, specifically osteotomies of the first metatarsal on clinical outcomes, are minimal. There is evidence from one study, that surgery, specifically distal chevron osteotomy of the first metatarsal is a more effective procedure than conservative or no treatment in reducing pain in the first year following surgery. However, this systematic review has identified that there is a lack of high-quality studies comparing similar types of HV treatments that assess the same outcomes.

Interventions for healthcare professionals, organizations and patients to enhance quality of life for people diagnosed with palliative esophagogastric cancer: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Esophagogastric (EG) cancer is the fifth most common malignancy, and its incidence is increasing. The disease is fast paced, and five-year survival rates are poor. Treatment with palliative intent is provided for the majority of patients but there remains a lack of empirical evidence into the most effective service models to support EG cancer patients. OBJECTIVES: The overall objective of this quantitative systematic review was to establish best practice in relation to interventions targeted at healthcare professionals or the structures in which healthcare professionals deliver care (i.e. models of care and practice) and patients (diagnosed with palliative EG cancer) to enhance the quality of life for people diagnosed with palliative EG cancer. INCLUSION CRITERIA TYPES OF PARTICIPANTS: The current review considered studies that included patients diagnosed with palliative EG cancer and any health professionals involved in the delivery of palliative care to this patient group in a hospital, home or community setting. TYPES OF INTERVENTION: The current review considered studies that evaluated any intervention or combination of intervention strategies aimed at healthcare professionals, organizations or patients to improve quality of life for people diagnosed with palliative EG cancer. TYPES OF STUDIES: The current review considered both experimental and epidemiological study designs. Studies were excluded that evaluated: screening programs, pharmacology alone, palliative oncology and palliative endoscopy. OUTCOMES: The primary outcome measure was objectively measured quality of life. SEARCH STRATEGY: A three-step search strategy was utilized. Sixteen databases were searched for papers from the year 2000 onward and followed by hand searching of reference lists. METHODOLOGICAL QUALITY: Methodological quality was not assessed as no articles were found that met the inclusion criteria. DATA EXTRACTION: Data extraction was not possible as no articles were found that met the inclusion criteria. DATA SYNTHESIS: It was not possible to complete data synthesis as no articles were found that met the inclusion criteria. RESULTS: Comprehensive searching and study selection process failed to identify any studies that were eligible for inclusion in the review. CONCLUSION: There is currently a lack of published evidence to establish which interventions and strategies are most effective in delivering services to patients diagnosed with palliative EG cancer in terms of service structure, process and delivery.

Surgery Versus 5% Imiquimod for Nodular and Superficial Basal Cell Carcinoma: 5-Year Results of the SINS Randomized Controlled Trial.

We previously reported modest clinical 3-year benefit for topical imiquimod compared with surgery for superficial or nodular basal cell carcinoma at low-risk sites in our noninferiority randomized controlled SINS trial. Here we report 5-year data. Participants were randomized to imiquimod 5% cream once daily (superficial basal cell carcinoma, 6 weeks; nodular basal cell carcinoma, 12 weeks) or excisional surgery (4-mm margin). The primary outcome was clinical absence of initial failure or signs of recurrence at the 3-year dermatology review. Five-year success was defined as 3-year success plus absence of recurrences identified through hospital, histopathology, and general practitioner records. Of 501 participants randomized, 401 contributed to the modified intention-to-treat analyses at year 3 (primary outcome), 383 (96%) of whom had data at year 5. Five-year success rates for imiquimod were 82.5% (170/206) compared with 97.7% (173/177) for surgery (relative risk of imiquimod success = 0.84, 95% confidence interval = 0.77-0.91, P < 0.001). These were comparable to year 3 success rates of 83.6% (178/213) and 98.4% (185/188) for imiquimod and surgery, respectively. Most imiquimod treatment failures occurred in year 1. Although surgery is clearly superior to imiquimod, this study shows sustained benefit for lesions that respond early to topical imiquimod.

Long-term topical corticosteroid use and risk of skin cancer: a systematic review protocol.

REVIEW QUESTION/OBJECTIVE: The objective of this systematic review is to synthesize the best available research evidence to determine the risk of skin cancer in patients on long-term use of topical corticosteroids. Specifically the review question is: In people using long-term (regular use over one month) topical corticosteroids, what is the risk of developing skin cancer (clinically or histologically confirmed basal cell carcinoma, squamous cell carcinoma or melanoma)?

Quality of life among adults following bariatric and body contouring surgery: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Weight loss following bariatric surgery is associated with significant improvements in obesity-related comorbidities, body satisfaction and psychosocial outcomes, at least in the short term. However, in the context of extreme weight loss, body image and appearance may worsen again because the "excess" or "loose" skin can lead to both functional and profound dissatisfaction with appearance. These concerns have led to an increasing uptake of post-bariatric surgery, "body-contouring" procedures but the implications for quality of life (QoL) have not been thoroughly considered. OBJECTIVE/PURPOSE: The objective was to identify the best available evidence regarding the QoL outcomes for adults following bariatric and body contouring surgery. INCLUSION CRITERIA TYPES OF PARTICIPANTS: The review considered studies involving people aged 18 years and beyond who underwent bariatric surgery and body contouring surgery. TYPES OF INTERVENTIONS: The review considered studies that evaluated bariatric surgery as well as body contouring surgery. TYPES OF STUDIES: The review considered both experimental and epidemiological study designs. OUTCOMES: The primary outcomes were QoL as measured by validated tools at less than two years, two to five years and more than five years following body contouring surgery. The secondary outcomes were adverse events, unsatisfactory aesthetic appearance and weight gain. SEARCH STRATEGY: Six databases were searched, including Cochrane Central, MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, PsycINFO and CINAHL. Studies published from 1954 to 2014 were considered. Additional searches for unpublished studies were undertaken in BIOSIS citation index, Register of Current Controlled Trials and Global Health Observatory. METHODOLOGICAL QUALITY: The methodological quality of eligible studies was assessed independently by two reviewers using the Joanna Briggs Institute quality assessment tool. DATA EXTRACTION: Data extraction from the included studies was undertaken and summarized independently by two reviewers using the standardized Joanna Briggs Institute data extraction tool. DATA SYNTHESIS: Studies were too heterogeneous and could not be pooled in statistical meta-analysis. Therefore, the data results are presented as a narrative summary in relation to the outcomes of interest. RESULTS: Nine quantitative studies (four comparable cohort studies, including two group design and two four-group designs and five descriptive or case-series studies) were included in the review. The included studies reported significant clinical improvements in appearance, wellbeing and QoL. These included primary outcomes pointing to body image satisfaction, improved self-esteem and confidence, improved physical function/pain and improved social function. The secondary outcomes were related to adverse events in the early postoperative period and reported wound healing problems, including seromas, partial necrosis, dehiscence, hematoma and anemia because of blood loss. Also, some data sets shed light on appearance-related distress and body dysphoria post surgery associated with visible scars and contour deformities. CONCLUSION: Body contouring surgery has been shown to have positive benefits, especially in relation to improved wellbeing, function and QoL. However, adjustment to changing body image following body contouring is both challenging and empowering and seems to be a transitional process.

Patient, nursing and medical staff experiences and perceptions of the care of people with palliative esophagogastric cancer: a systematic review of the qualitative evidence.

BACKGROUND: Esophagogastric cancer is the fifth most common malignancy and its incidence is increasing. The disease progresses quickly and five-year survival rates are poor. Treatment with palliative intent is provided for the majority of patients but there remains a lack of empirical evidence on the most effective service models to support esophagogastric cancer patients. OBJECTIVES: The overall objective of this systematic review was to synthesize the best available evidence on the experiences and perceptions of patients and health professionals with regard to the care of people diagnosed with palliative esophagogastric cancer. INCLUSION CRITERIA TYPES OF PARTICIPANTS: The review considered studies that included patients diagnosed with palliative esophagogastric cancer and any health professionals involved in the delivery of palliative care to this patient group in a hospital, home or community setting. PHENOMENA OF INTEREST: The review considered studies that investigated the experiences and perceptions of people diagnosed with palliative esophagogastric cancer and staff working with these people. CONTEXT: Studies that were carried out in any setting, including in-patient and outpatient areas, specialist cancer and non-specialist palliative care services and those were any patient were in receipt or had experiences of palliative care services were considered. All types of health practitioners delivering palliative care to esophagogastric cancer patients were considered. TYPES OF STUDIES: Studies that focused on qualitative data, including, but not limited to, designs such as phenomenology, grounded theory, ethnography, action research, feminist research and narrative approaches were considered. Mixed methods studies were considered in the review only if qualitative findings were reported separately. SEARCH STRATEGY: A three-step search strategy was utilized. A total 11 databases were searched for studies from 2000 onward, followed by hand searching of reference lists. METHODOLOGICAL QUALITY: Methodological quality was assessed using the Joanna Briggs Institute Qualitative Assessment and Review Instrument critical appraisal tool (JBI-QARI). DATA EXTRACTION: Qualitative findings were extracted using the JBI-QARI data extraction Instrument. DATA SYNTHESIS: Qualitative research findings were pooled using a pragmatic meta-aggregative approach. RESULTS: The review included two publications. There were 46 findings which were aggregated into four categories and one overall synthesized finding: "In addition to support for physical needs, patients need support that takes into account changing life situations to achieve the best quality of life." CONCLUSIONS: The review shows that patients value services and support that addresses their complex, fluctuating and highly individual needs. No evidence was uncovered regarding how these services should be designed and delivered.

The views and experiences of nurses and midwives in the provision and management of provider-initiated HIV testing and counseling: a systematic review of qualitative evidence.

BACKGROUND: Global progress towards HIV prevention and care is contingent upon increasing the number of those aware of their status through HIV testing. Provider-initiated HIV testing and counseling is recommended globally as a strategy to enhance uptake of HIV testing and is primarily conducted by nurses and midwives. Research shows that provider-initiated HIV testing and counseling implementation is sub-optimal. The reasons for this are unclear. OBJECTIVES: The review aimed to explore nurses' and midwives' views and experiences of the provision and management of provider-initiated HIV testing and counseling. TYPES OF PARTICIPANTS: All cadres of nurses and midwives were considered, including those who undertake routine HIV testing as part of a diverse role and those who are specifically trained as HIV counselors. Types of phenomenon of interest: The review sought to understand the views and experiences of the provision and management of provider-initiated HIV testing and counseling (including perceptions, opinions, beliefs, practices and strategies related to HIV testing and its implementation in practice). CONTEXT: The review included only provider-initiated HIV testing and counseling. It excluded all other models of HIV testing. The review included all countries and all healthcare settings. Types of studies: This review considered all forms of qualitative study design and methodology. Qualitative elements of a mixed method study were included if they were presented separately within the publication. SEARCH STRATEGY: A three-step search strategy was utilized. Eight databases were searched for papers published from 1996 to October 2014, followed by hand searching of reference lists. Only studies published in the English language were considered. METHODOLOGICAL QUALITY: Methodological quality was assessed using the Qualitative Assessment and Review Instrument developed by the Joanna Briggs Institute. DATA EXTRACTION: Qualitative findings were extracted using the Joanna Briggs Institute Qualitative Assessment and Review Instrument. DATA SYNTHESIS: Qualitative research findings were pooled using a pragmatic meta-aggregative approach and the Joanna Briggs Institute Qualitative Assessment and Review Instrument software. RESULTS: This review included 21 publications from 18 research studies, representing a wide range of countries and healthcare settings. There were 245 findings which were aggregated into 12 categories and five synthesized findings. 1. Nurses/midwives are supportive of provider-initiated HIV testing and counseling if it is perceived to enhance patient care and to align with perceived professional roles. 2. Nurses'/midwives' ability to perform provider-initiated HIV testing and counseling well requires an appropriate infrastructure and adequate human and material resources. 3. At the organizational level, nurses'/midwives' engagement with provider-initiated HIV testing and counseling is facilitated by an inclusive management structure, alongside the provision of ongoing training and clinical supervision. Provider-initiated HIV testing and counseling is hindered by difficulties in fitting it into existing workloads and routines. 4. Nurses/midwives perceive that good quality care in provider-initiated HIV testing and counseling involves finding a balance between public health needs and individual patient needs. Good care requires time and the ability to apply a patient centred approach. 5. The emotional work involved in provider-initiated HIV testing and counseling can be stressful. Nurses/Midwives may require support to deal with complex moral and ethical issues. CONCLUSIONS: This review shows that provider-initiated HIV testing and counseling is supported by nurses/midwives who strive to implement it according to principles of good care and a patient centered approach. Nurses/midwives face multiple operational, infra-structural, resource and ethical challenges in the implementation of provider-initiated HIV testing and counseling. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: The implementation process for provider-initiated HIV testing and counseling would benefit from using a quality improvement framework. Nurses/midwives undertaking provider-initiated HIV testing and counseling require management support, ongoing training and adequate infrastructure/resources. Additional guidance is required on legal/ethical issues in testing of children and in third party disclosure. IMPLICATIONS FOR RESEARCH: Operational research is required to determine an optimal skill mix and optimal methods of integrating provider-initiated HIV testing and counseling into existing work routines.

Diagnostic test accuracy of nutritional tools used to identify undernutrition in patients with colorectal cancer: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Effective nutritional screening, nutritional care planning and nutritional support are essential in all settings, and there is no doubt that a health service seeking to increase safety and clinical effectiveness must take nutritional care seriously. Screening and early detection of malnutrition is crucial in identifying patients at nutritional risk. There is a high prevalence of malnutrition in hospitalized patients undergoing treatment for colorectal cancer. OBJECTIVES: To synthesize the best available evidence regarding the diagnostic test accuracy of nutritional tools (sensitivity and specificity) used to identify malnutrition (specifically undernutrition) in patients with colorectal cancer (such as the Malnutrition Screening Tool and Nutritional Risk Index) compared to reference tests (such as the Subjective Global Assessment or Patient Generated Subjective Global Assessment). TYPES OF PARTICIPANTS: Patients with colorectal cancer requiring either (or all) surgery, chemotherapy and/or radiotherapy in secondary care. Focus of the review: The diagnostic test accuracy of validated assessment tools/instruments (such as the Malnutrition Screening Tool and Nutritional Risk Index) in the diagnosis of malnutrition (specifically under-nutrition) in patients with colorectal cancer, relative to reference tests (Subjective Global Assessment or Patient Generated Subjective Global Assessment). Types of studies: Diagnostic test accuracy studies regardless of study design. SEARCH STRATEGY: Studies published in English, German, Danish, Swedish and Norwegian were considered for inclusion in this review. Databases were searched from their inception to April 2014. METHODOLOGICAL QUALITY: Methodological quality was determined using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies checklist. DATA COLLECTION: Data was collected using the data extraction form: the Standards for Reporting Studies of Diagnostic Accuracy checklist for the reporting of studies of diagnostic accuracy. DATA SYNTHESIS: The accuracy of diagnostic tests is presented in terms of sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values. In addition, the positive likelihood ratio (sensitivity/ [1 - specificity]) and negative likelihood ratio (1 - sensitivity)/ specificity), were also calculated and presented in this review to provide information about the likelihood that a given test result would be expected when the target condition is present compared with the likelihood that the same result would be expected when the condition is absent. Not all trials reported true positive, true negative, false positive and false negative rates, therefore these rates were calculated based on the data in the published papers. A two-by-two truth table was reconstructed for each study, and sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value positive likelihood ratio and negative likelihood ratio were calculated for each study. A summary receiver operator characteristics curve was constructed to determine the relationship between sensitivity and specificity, and the area under the summary receiver operator characteristics curve which measured the usefulness of a test was calculated. Meta-analysis was not considered appropriate, therefore data was synthesized in a narrative summary. RESULTS: 1. One study evaluated the Malnutrition Screening Tool against the reference standard Patient-Generated Subjective Global Assessment. The sensitivity was 56% and the specificity 84%. The positive likelihood ratio was 3.100, negative likelihood ratio was 0.59, the diagnostic odds ratio (CI 95%) was 5.20 (1.09-24.90) and the Area Under the Curve (AUC) represents only a poor to fair diagnostic test accuracy. A total of two studies evaluated the diagnostic accuracy of Malnutrition Universal Screening Tool (MUST) (index test) compared to both Subjective Global Assessment (SGA) (reference standard) and PG-SGA (reference standard) in patients with colorectal cancer. In MUST vs SGA the sensitivity of the tool was 96%, specificity was 75%, LR+ 3.826, LR- 0.058, diagnostic OR (CI 95%) 66.00 (6.61-659.24) and AUC represented excellent diagnostic accuracy. In MUST vs PG-SGA the sensitivity of the tool was 72%, specificity 48.9%, LR+ 1.382, LR- 0.579, diagnostic OR (CI 95%) 2.39 (0.87-6.58) and AUC indicated that the tool failed as a diagnostic test to identify patients with colorectal cancer at nutritional risk,. The Nutrition Risk Index (NRI) was compared to SGA representing a sensitivity of 95.2%, specificity of 62.5%, LR+ 2.521, LR- 0.087, diagnostic OR (CI 95%) 28.89 (6.93-120.40) and AUC represented good diagnostic accuracy. In regard to NRI vs PG-SGA the sensitivity of the tool was 68%, specificity 64%, LR+ 1.947, LR- 0.487, diagnostic OR (CI 95%) 4.00 (1.23-13.01) and AUC indicated poor diagnostic test accuracy. CONCLUSIONS: There are no single, specific tools used to screen or assess the nutritional status of colorectal cancer patients. All tools showed varied diagnostic accuracies when compared to the reference standards SGA and PG-SGA. Hence clinical judgment combined with perhaps the SGA or PG-SGA should play a major role. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: The PG-SGA offers several advantages over the SGA tool: 1) the patient completes the medical history component, thereby decreasing the amount of time involved; 2) it contains more nutrition impact symptoms, which are important to the patient with cancer; and 3) it has a scoring system that allows patients to be triaged for nutritional intervention. Therefore, the PG-SGA could be used as a nutrition assessment tool as it allows quick identification and prioritization of colorectal cancer patients with malnutrition in combination with other parameters. IMPLICATIONS FOR RESEARCH: This systematic review highlights the need for the following: Further studies needs to investigate the diagnostic accuracy of already existing nutritional screening tools in the context of colorectal cancer patients. If new screenings tools are developed, they should be developed and validated in the specific clinical context within the same patient population (colorectal cancer patients).

A mixed-methods approach to systematic reviews.

There are an increasing number of published single-method systematic reviews that focus on different types of evidence related to a particular topic. As policy makers and practitioners seek clear directions for decision-making from systematic reviews, it is likely that it will be increasingly difficult for them to identify 'what to do' if they are required to find and understand a plethora of syntheses related to a particular topic.Mixed-methods systematic reviews are designed to address this issue and have the potential to produce systematic reviews of direct relevance to policy makers and practitioners.On the basis of the recommendations of the Joanna Briggs Institute International Mixed Methods Reviews Methodology Group in 2012, the Institute adopted a segregated approach to mixed-methods synthesis as described by Sandelowski et al., which consists of separate syntheses of each component method of the review. Joanna Briggs Institute's mixed-methods synthesis of the findings of the separate syntheses uses a Bayesian approach to translate the findings of the initial quantitative synthesis into qualitative themes and pooling these with the findings of the initial qualitative synthesis.

The systematic review of health care evidence: methods, issues, and trends.

The systematic review is a key component to the evidence based health care cycle. There are two main types of systematic reviews: qualitative and quantitative. Systematic reviews bring together large amounts of information that can help support individual patient decision, inform guidelines, policy and primary research. The basic steps for each type of systematic review are the same; however, differences occur in the tools used to appraise the included studies and the method of synthesis. Over the years, many different systems have been used to grade the quality (level) of evidence and the strength of recommendations, which has meant that the same evidence and recommendation could be graded differently according to the system used at the time.

Surgical excision versus imiquimod 5% cream for nodular and superficial basal-cell carcinoma (SINS): a multicentre, non-inferiority, randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Basal-cell carcinoma is the most common form of skin cancer and its incidence is increasing worldwide. We aimed to assess the effectiveness of imiquimod cream versus surgical excision in patients with low-risk basal-cell carcinoma. METHODS: We did a multicentre, parallel-group, pragmatic, non-inferiority, randomised controlled trial at 12 centres in the UK, in which patients were recruited between June 19, 2003, and Feb 22, 2007, with 3 year follow-up from June 26, 2006, to May 26, 2010. Participants of any age were eligible if they had histologically confirmed primary nodular or superficial basal-cell carcinoma at low-risk sites. We excluded patients with morphoeic or recurrent basal-cell carcinoma and those with Gorlin syndrome. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1) via computer-generated blocked randomisation, stratified by centre and tumour type, to receive either imiquimod 5% cream once daily for 6 weeks (superficial) or 12 weeks (nodular), or surgical excision with a 4 mm margin. The randomisation sequence was concealed from study investigators. Because of the nature of the interventions, masking of participants was not possible and masking of outcome assessors was only partly possible. The trial statistician was masked to allocation until all analyses had been done. The primary outcome was the proportion of participants with clinical success, defined as absence of initial treatment failure or signs of recurrence at 3 years from start of treatment. We used a prespecified non-inferiority margin of a relative risk (RR) of 0.87. Analysis was by a modified intention-to-treat population and per protocol. This study is registered as an International Standard Randomised Controlled Trial (ISRCTN48755084), and with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00066872. FINDINGS: 501 participants were randomly assigned to the imiquimod group (n=254) or the surgical excision group (n=247). At year 3, 401 (80%) patients were included in the modified intention-to-treat group. At 3 years, 178 (84%) of 213 participants in the imiquimod group were treated successfully compared with 185 (98%) of 188 participants in the surgery group (RR 0.84, 98% CI 0.78-0.91; p<0.0001). No clear difference was noted between groups in patient-assessed cosmetic outcomes. The most common adverse events were itching (211 patients in the imiquimod group vs 129 in the surgery group) and weeping (160 vs 81). We recorded serious adverse events in 99 (40%) of 249 participants in the imiquimod group and 97 (42%) of 229 in the surgery group had serious adverse events, but none were regarded as related to treatment. 12 (5%) participants in the imiquimod group withdrew because of adverse events compared with four (2%) in the surgery group. INTERPRETATION: Imiquimod was inferior to surgery according to our predefined non-inferiority criterion. Although excisional surgery remains the best treatment for low-risk basal-cell carcinoma, imiquimod cream might still be a useful treatment option for small low-risk superficial or nodular basal-cell carcinoma dependent on factors such as patient preference, size and site of the lesion, and whether the patient has more than one lesion. FUNDING: Cancer Research UK.

The effectiveness of virtual reality interventions in improving balance in adults with impaired balance compared with standard or no treatment: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate whether virtual reality interventions, including interactive gaming systems, are effective at improving balance in adults with impaired balance. DESIGN: Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized control trials. METHODS: Studies were identified from electronic databases (CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE, AMED, CINAHL, PyschINFO, PyschBITE, OTseeker, Ei Compendex, and Inspec) searched to November 2011, and repeated in November 2012. Two reviewers selected studies meeting inclusion criteria and quality of included studies assessed using a Joanna Briggs Institute appraisal tool. Data was pooled and a meta-analysis completed. The systematic review was reported following guidance of the PRISMA statement. RESULTS: A total of 251 articles were screened. Eight randomized control trials were included. These studies presented the results of 239 participants, with various aetiologies, and used a variety of virtual reality systems. The number of falls was documented in only one included study. Meta-analysis was completed on data from the Berg Balance Scale, walking speed, 30 second sit-to-stand test, and Timed Up and Go Test, and favoured standard therapy when compared with standard plus virtual reality interventions. CONCLUSIONS: There was a notable inconsistency in the outcome measures, experimental, and control interventions used within the included studies. The pooled results of the studies showed no significant difference. Therefore this review cannot support nor refute the use of virtual reality interventions, rather than conventional physiotherapy, to improve balance in adults with impaired balance.

Interventions for non-metastatic squamous cell carcinoma of the skin: systematic review and pooled analysis of observational studies.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of treatments for non-metastatic invasive squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) of the skin using evidence from observational studies, given the paucity of evidence from randomised controlled trials. DESIGN: Systematic review of observational studies. DATA SOURCES: Medline, Embase, to December 2012. REVIEW METHODS: Observational studies of interventions for primary, non-metastatic, invasive, SCC of the skin that reported recurrence during follow-up, quality of life, initial response to treatment, adverse events, cosmetic appearance, or death from disease. Studies were excluded if data for primary cutaneous SCC was not separable from other data. Data were extracted independently by two reviewers. Meta-analysis was performed where appropriate using a random effects model to estimate the pooled proportion of an event with 95% confidence intervals. RESULTS: 118 publications were included, covering seven treatment modalities. Pooled estimates of recurrence of SCCs were lowest after cryotherapy (0.8% (95% confidence interval 0.1% to 2%)) and curettage and electrodesiccation (1.7% (0.5% to 3.4%)), but most treated SCCs were small, low risk lesions. After Mohs micrographic surgery, the pooled estimate of local recurrence during variable follow-up periods from 10 studies was 3.0% (2.2% to 3.9%), which was non-significantly lower than the pooled average local recurrence of 5.4% (2.5% to 9.1%) after standard surgical excision (12 studies), and 6.4% (3.0% to 11.0%) after external radiotherapy (7 studies). After an apparently successful initial response of SCCs to photodynamic therapy, pooled average recurrence of 26.4% (12.3% to 43.7%; 8 studies) was significantly higher than other treatments. Evidence was limited for laser treatment (1 study) and for topical and systemic treatments (mostly single case reports or small non-comparative series with limited follow-up). CONCLUSIONS: Many observational studies have looked at different treatment modalities for SCC, but the evidence base for the effectiveness of these interventions is poor. Comparison of outcomes after different treatments should be interpreted cautiously owing to biases inherent in the types of study included, and lack of direct comparisons to enable the estimation of relative treatment effect. Further evidence is needed to develop a prognostic model and stratify individuals at high risk of developing SCC, to improve the evidence base for this common cancer and to optimise clinical management. PROTOCOL REGISTRATION: International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO) registration number CRD42011001450.

Longitudinal, mixed method study to look at the experiences and knowledge of non melanoma skin cancer from diagnosis to one year.

BACKGROUND: Skin cancer is the most common type of cancer in humans and the incidence is increasing worldwide. Our objective was to understanding the needs, experiences and knowledge of individuals with Non Melanoma Skin Cancer (NMSC) from diagnosis up until one year. METHODS: Patients with NMSC completed questionnaires at diagnosis, treatment, 8 weeks post treatment and 12 months post diagnosis. Body image, psychological morbidity and Quality of Life (QOL) were assessed at each time point, with the exception of QOL that was not assessed at diagnosis. Knowledge of NMSC was assessed at baseline and 8 weeks. A sub-sample of participants was also interviewed to allow a more in-depth exploration of patients' experiences. RESULTS: 76 participants completed the initial questionnaire, of which 15 were interviewed. Patients were anxious about a diagnosis of skin cancer, however they were no more depressed or anxious than the general population. QOL significantly improved from diagnosis to 8 weeks and from diagnosis to one year. Knowledge of NMSC was poor and did not improve after treatment. Hairdressers were highlighted as playing an important role in raising awareness and encouraging individuals to seek medical help. Most participants were aware of the need to check their skin for suspicious lesions but were not sure what to look for. At one year participants had forgotten their experience and were not overly concerned about skin cancer. CONCLUSION: There is a need to raise awareness of the signs and symptoms of NMSC. Information on skin cancer needs to be tailored to the individual both at the start of treatment and during the follow up months, ensuring that participants' needs and expectations are met. Targeting education at individuals in the community who regularly come into contact with skin should help in early identification of NMSC. This is important since skin cancer caught early is easily treatable and delay in presentation leads to larger and more complex lesions which impacts in terms of increased morbidity and increased health care costs.