Search strategies (filters) to identify systematic reviews in MEDLINE and Embase.

BACKGROUND: Bibliographic databases provide access to an international body of scientific literature in health and medical sciences. Systematic reviews are an important source of evidence for clinicians, researchers, consumers, and policymakers as they address a specific health-related question and use explicit methods to identify, appraise and synthesize evidence from which conclusions can be drawn and decisions made. Methodological search filters help database end-users search the literature effectively with different levels of sensitivity and specificity. These filters have been developed for various study designs and have been found to be particularly useful for intervention studies. Other filters have been developed for finding systematic reviews. Considering the variety and number of available search filters for systematic reviews, there is a need for a review of them in order to provide evidence about their retrieval properties at the time they were developed. OBJECTIVES: To review systematically empirical studies that report the development, evaluation, or comparison of search filters to retrieve reports of systematic reviews in MEDLINE and Embase. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the following databases from inception to January 2023: MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO; Library, Information Science & Technology Abstracts (LISTA) and Science Citation Index (Web of Science). SELECTION CRITERIA: We included studies if one of their primary objectives is the development, evaluation, or comparison of a search filter that could be used to retrieve systematic reviews on MEDLINE, Embase, or both. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently extracted data using a pre-specified and piloted data extraction form using InterTASC Information Specialist Subgroup (ISSG) Search Filter Evaluation Checklist. MAIN RESULTS: We identified eight studies that developed filters for MEDLINE and three studies that developed filters for Embase. Most studies are very old and some were limited to systematic reviews in specific clinical areas. Six included studies reported the sensitivity of their developed filter. Seven studies reported precision and six studies reported specificity. Only one study reported the number needed to read and positive predictive value. None of the filters were designed to differentiate systematic reviews on the basis of their methodological quality. For MEDLINE, all filters showed similar sensitivity and precision, and one filter showed higher levels of specificity. For Embase, filters showed variable sensitivity and precision, with limited study reports that may affect accuracy assessments. The report of these studies had some limitations, and the assessments of their accuracy may suffer from indirectness, considering that they were mostly developed before the release of the PRISMA 2009 statement or due to their limited scope in the selection of systematic review topics. Search filters for MEDLINE Three studies produced filters with sensitivity > 90% with variable degrees of precision, and only one of them was developed and validated in a gold-standard database, which allowed the calculation of specificity. The other two search filters had lower levels of sensitivity. One of these produced a filter with higher levels of specificity (> 90%). All filters showed similar sensitivity and precision in the external validation, except for one which was not externally validated and another one which was conceptually derived and only externally validated. Search filters for Embase We identified three studies that developed filters for this database. One of these studies developed filters with variable sensitivity and precision, including highly sensitive strategies (> 90%); however, it was not externally validated. The other study produced a filter with a lower sensitivity (72.7%) but high specificity (99.1%) with a similar performance in the external validation. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Studies reporting the development, evaluation, or comparison of search filters to retrieve reports of systematic reviews in MEDLINE showed similar sensitivity and precision, with one filter showing higher levels of specificity. For Embase, filters showed variable sensitivity and precision, with limited information about how the filter was produced, which leaves us uncertain about their performance assessments. Newer filters had limitations in their methods or scope, including very focused subject topics for their gold standards, limiting their applicability across other topics. Our findings highlight that consensus guidance on the conduct of search filters and standardized reporting of search filters are needed, as we found highly heterogeneous development methods, accuracy assessments and outcome selection. New strategies adaptable across interfaces could enhance their usability. Moreover, the performance of existing filters needs to be evaluated in light of the impact of reporting guidelines, including the PRISMA 2009, on how systematic reviews are reported. Finally, future filter developments should also consider comparing the filters against a common reference set to establish comparative performance and assess the quality of systematic reviews retrieved by strategies.

Resistencia antimicrobiana y producción porcina de cría intensiva / Antimicrobial resistance and intensive swine production: mini review

Introducción: el impacto de la resistencia antimicrobiana (RAM) generará un aumento de las muertes relacionadas de 10 millones anuales hacia 2050. El 70% de la dispensación de antimicrobianos (ATB) se utiliza en la agroveterinaria y no en salud humana. Es fundamental conocer la portación de RAM en trabajadores de cría de animales y en los animales, para acciones tempranas de salud pública. Métodos: bajo metodología PRISMA se realizó la búsqueda bibliográfica en distintas fuentes disponibles hasta octubre de 2020. Se priorizaron revisiones sistemáticas, metanálisis, ensayos clínicos y estudios observacionales para determinar la RAM en trabajadores de cría de cerdos. De 990 artículos identificados se incluyeron 8 estudios. Resultados: la tasa de colonización por Staphylococcus aureus resistente a la meticilina (SAMR) en trabajadores fue mayor que la de la población general. La prevalencia de SAMR fue significativamente mayor en trabajadores en contacto directo con animales y los de granjas de cría intensiva con respecto a los de extensiva. En cerdos, la prevalencia de RAM en cría intensiva fue significativamente mayor que la de los de cría extensiva. También fue significativa la asociación entre el suministro de antibióticos en la cría intensiva y la presencia de RAM. Las granjas de más de 1250 cerdos presentaron mayor prevalencia de RAM (p < 0,001). El fenotipo de SAMR en cerdos, trabajadores y el ambiente fue el mismo. Conclusiones: existe evidencia de asociación entre la producción agrícola de cría intensiva y la RAM en cerdos y trabajadores. No se encontraron estudios de vigilancia epidemiológica en la Argentina en trabajadores de cría de animales. (AU)

Introduction: it is estimated that the impact of antimicrobial resistance (AMR) will generate an increase of 10 million deaths by 2050, being reflected to a greater extent in low-income countries. 70% of the annual use of antimicrobials is concentrated in agroveterinary but not in human health. Considering the presence of AMR in ranchers and agricultural workers is essential for early public health actions. Methods: using the PRISMA methodology, bibliography was searched in different sources until October 2020. Systematic reviews, meta-analyses, clinical trials and observational studies were prioritized to determine AMR in pig workers. Eight studies of the 990 found have been included. Results: the rate of colonization by methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) in farming workers was higher than the general population. MRSA prevalence was significantly higher in workers who reported direct contact with animals. And also in those workers of intensive farms compared to those of extensive farms. The same situation is observed in swines, in which the prevalence of AMR in intensive farming was significantly higher than in extensive farming. The association between the supply of antibiotics in intensive farming workers and the presence of AMR was also significant. Farms with more than 1,250 swines had a higher prevalence of AMR (p<0.001). The MRSA phenotype found in swine, agricultural workers, and the environment was the same. Conclusions: there is scientific evidence of an association between agricultural production in intensive livestock farming and AMR in swine and farming workers. There aren't Argentine studies of epidemiological surveillance in farming workers. (AU)

A systematic review and meta-analysis of the prevalence of therapeutic targets in cervical cancer.

Cervical Cancer (CC) is a significantly prevalent disease in developing countries. Currently, targeted therapies are not a primary standard of care in CC. This information could be crucial for developing directed therapies and patient screening for biomarkers that would allow personalised treatment of CC. This systematic review aimed to estimate the prevalence of potential therapeutic targets such as the epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) and the PI3K/Akt/mTOR and Ras/Raf/MAPK pathways in patients with CC, identified through genomic and non-genomic testing. Studies were identified through an ad-hoc search strategy from the available on MEDLINE (Ovid), CENTRAL, LILACS, SCOPUS, through the Clinical Trial registry on Clinicaltrials.gov, International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, RENIS (Argentine National Registry of Health Research) and grey literature sources. We included 74 studies which represented a total pool of 7,862 participants. Forty-five studies informed mutations of EGFR, with a combined positivity rate of 53% (95%CI: 45%-60%; I2 = 95%). Twenty studies informed the presence of mutations in PIK3CA with a combined positivity rate of 30% (95%CI: 21%-39%; I2 = 96%). Twenty-three studies reported a mutation in Ras, with a combined positivity rate of 14% (95%CI: 8%-21%; I2 = 95%). Raf mutations were informed in six studies. Six studies informed the presence of Akt mutations, two studies informed mTOR mutations and only one study reported mutations of MAPK. The most frequently described therapeutic targets were EGFR, and the PIK3CA and Ras pathways, though inconsistency in positivity rates was significant. Our study did not allow the identification of any specific clinical characteristics that might explain the observed heterogeneity. Despite the overall good quality of the included studies, the applicability of these results to patients' general population with CC is still unclear.

Ventriculo-peritoneal shunting devices for hydrocephalus.

BACKGROUND: Hydrocephalus is a common neurological disorder, caused by a progressive accumulation of cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) within the intracranial space that can lead to increased intracranial pressure, enlargement of the ventricles (ventriculomegaly) and, consequently, to brain damage. Ventriculo-peritoneal shunt systems are the mainstay therapy for this condition, however there are different types of shunt systems. OBJECTIVES: To compare the effectiveness and adverse effects of conventional and complex shunt devices for CSF diversion in people with hydrocephalus. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (2020 Issue 2); Ovid MEDLINE (1946 to February 2020); Embase (Elsevier) (1974 to February 2020); Latin American and Caribbean Health Science Information Database (LILACS) (1980 to February 2020); ClinicalTrials.gov; and World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform. SELECTION CRITERIA: We selected randomised controlled trials or quasi-randomised trials of different types of ventriculo-peritoneal shunting devices for people with hydrocephalus. Primary outcomes included: treatment failure, adverse events and mortality. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors screened studies for selection, assessed risk of bias and extracted data. Due to the scarcity of data, we performed a Synthesis Without Meta-analysis (SWiM) incorporating GRADE for the quality of the evidence. MAIN RESULTS: We included six studies with 962 participants assessing the effects of standard valves compared to anti-syphon valves, other types of standard valves, self-adjusting CSF flow-regulating valves and external differential programmable pressure valves. All included studies started in a hospital setting and offered ambulatory follow-up. Most studies were conducted in infants or children with hydrocephalus from diverse causes. The certainty of the evidence for most comparisons was low to very low. 1. Standard valve versus anti-syphon valve Three studies with 296 randomised participants were included under this comparison. We are uncertain about the incidence of treatment failure in participants with standard valve and anti-syphon valves (very low certainty of the evidence). The incidence of adverse events may be similar in those with standard valves (range 0 to 1.9%) and anti-syphon valves (range 0 to 2.9%) (low certainty of the evidence). Mortality may be similar in those with standard valves (0%) and anti-syphon valves (0.9%) (RD 0.01%, 95% CI -0.02% to 0.03%, low certainty of the evidence). Ventricular size and head circumference may be similar in those with standard valves and anti-syphon valves (low certainty of the evidence). None of the included studies reported the quality of life of participants. 2. Comparison between different types of standard valves Two studies with 174 randomised participants were included under this comparison. We are uncertain about the incidence of treatment failure in participants with different types of standard valves (early postoperative period: RR 0.41, 95% CI 0.13 to 1.27; at 12 months follow-up: RR 1.17, 95% CI 0.72 to 1.92, very low certainty of the evidence). None of the included studies reported adverse events beyond those included under "treatment failure". We are uncertain about the effects of different types of standard valves on mortality (range 2% to 17%, very low certainty of the evidence). The included studies did not report the effects of these interventions on quality of life, ventricular size reduction or head circumference. 3. Standard valve versus self-adjusting CSF flow-regulating valve One study with 229 randomised participants addressed this comparison. The incidence of treatment failure may be similar in those with standard valves (42.98%) and self-adjusting CSF flow-regulating valves (39.13%) (low certainty of the evidence). The incidence of adverse events may be similar in those with standard valves (range 0 to 1.9%) and those with self-adjusting CSF flow-regulating valves (range 0 to 7.2%) (low certainty of the evidence). The included study reported no deaths in either group in the postoperative period. Beyond the early postoperative period, the authors stated that nine patients died (no disaggregated data by each type of intervention was available, low certainty of the evidence). The included studies did not report the effects of these interventions on quality of life, ventricular size reduction or head circumference. 4. External differential programmable pressure valve versus non-programmable valve One study with 377 randomised participants addressed this comparison. The incidence of treatment failure may be similar in those with programmable valves (52%) and non-programmable valves (52%)  (RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.84 to 1.24, low certainty of the evidence). The incidence of adverse events may be similar in those with programmable valves (6.19%) and non-programmable valves (6.01%) (RR 0.97, 95% CI 0.44 to 2.15, low certainty of the evidence). The included study did not report the effect of these interventions on mortality, quality of life or head circumference. Ventricular size reduction may be similar in those with programmable valves and non-programmable valves (low certainty of the evidence). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Standard shunt valves for hydrocephalus compared to anti-syphon or self-adjusting CSF flow-regulating valves may cause little to no difference on the main outcomes of this review, however we are very uncertain due to the low to very low certainty of evidence. Similarly, different types of standard valves and external differential programmable pressure valves versus non-programmable valves may be associated with similar outcomes. Nevertheless, this review did not include valves with the latest technology, for which we need high-quality randomised controlled trials focusing on patient-important outcomes including costs.

Pharmacological interventions for treating chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome: a Cochrane systematic review.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the effects of pharmacological therapies for chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome (CP/CPPS). PATIENTS AND METHODS: We performed a comprehensive search using multiple databases, trial registries, grey literature and conference proceedings with no restrictions on the language of publication or publication status. The date of the latest search of all databases was July 2019. We included randomised controlled trials. Inclusion criteria were men with a diagnosis of CP/CPPS. We included all available pharmacological interventions. Two review authors independently classified studies and abstracted data from the included studies, performed statistical analyses and rated quality of evidence according to the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) methods. The primary outcomes were prostatitis symptoms and adverse events. The secondary outcomes were sexual dysfunction, urinary symptoms, quality of life, anxiety and depression. RESULTS: We included 99 unique studies in 9119 men with CP/CPPS, with assessments of 16 types of pharmacological interventions. Most of our comparisons included short-term follow-up information. The median age of the participants was 38 years. Most studies did not specify their funding sources; 21 studies reported funding from pharmaceutical companies. We found low- to very low-quality evidence that α-blockers may reduce prostatitis symptoms based on a reduction in National Institutes of Health - Chronic Prostatitis Symptom Index (NIH-CPSI) scores of >2 (but <8) with an increased incidence of minor adverse events such as dizziness and hypotension. Moderate- to low-quality evidence indicates that 5α-reductase inhibitors, antibiotics, anti-inflammatories, and phytotherapy probably cause a small decrease in prostatitis symptoms and may not be associated with a greater incidence of adverse events. Intraprostatic botulinum toxin A (BTA) injection may cause a large reduction in prostatitis symptoms with procedure-related adverse events (haematuria), but pelvic floor muscle BTA injection may not have the same effects (low-quality evidence). Allopurinol may also be ineffective for reducing prostatitis symptoms (low-quality evidence). We assessed a wide range of interventions involving traditional Chinese medicine; low-quality evidence showed they may reduce prostatitis symptoms without an increased incidence in adverse events. Moderate- to high-quality evidence indicates that the following interventions may be ineffective for the reduction of prostatitis symptoms: anticholinergics, Escherichia coli lysate (OM-89), pentosan, and pregabalin. Low- to very low-quality evidence indicates that antidepressants and tanezumab may be ineffective for the reduction of prostatitis symptoms. Low-quality evidence indicates that mepartricin and phosphodiesterase inhibitors may reduce prostatitis symptoms, without an increased incidence in adverse events. CONCLUSIONS: Based on the findings of low- to very low-quality evidence, this review found that some pharmacological interventions such as α-blockers may reduce prostatitis symptoms with an increased incidence of minor adverse events such as dizziness and hypotension. Other interventions may cause a reduction in prostatitis symptoms without an increased incidence of adverse events while others were found to be ineffective.

Pharmacological interventions for treating chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome.

BACKGROUND: Chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome (CP/CPPS) is a common disorder in which the two main clinical features are pelvic pain and lower urinary tract symptoms. There are currently many approaches for its management, using both pharmacological and non-pharmacological interventions. The National Institute of Health - Chronic Prostatitis Symptom Index (NIH-CPSI) score is a validated measure commonly used to measure CP/CPPS symptoms. We considered a 25% decrease of NIH-CPSI baseline score or a six-point reduction as MCID. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of pharmacological therapies for chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome. SEARCH METHODS: We performed a comprehensive search using CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, CINAHL, trial registries, grey literature and conference proceedings, with no restrictions on the language of publication or publication status. The date of the latest search of all databases was July 2019. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials. Inclusion criteria were men with a diagnosis of CP/CPPS. We included all available pharmacological interventions compared to placebo or in head-to-head comparisons. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently assessed study eligibility, extracted data, and assessed the risks of bias of included studies. We assessed the quality of the evidence (QoE) using the GRADE approach. MAIN RESULTS: We included 99 unique studies in 9119 men with CP/CPPS, with assessments of 16 types of pharmacological interventions. Unless stated otherwise, our comparisons were based on short-term follow-up (less than 12 months). Most studies did not specify their funding sources; 21 studies reported funding from pharmaceutical companies.1. Alpha blockers: (24 studies, 2061 participants). We are uncertain about the effects of these drugs on prostatitis symptoms when compared to placebo at short-term follow-up (mean difference (MD) in total NIH-CPSI score -5.01, 95% confidence interval (CI) -7.41 to -2.61; 18 studies, 1524 participants, very low QoE) and at long-term follow-up (MD -5.60, 95% CI -10.89 to -0.32; 4 studies, 235 participants, very low QoE). Alpha blockers may be associated with an increased incidence of adverse events, such as dizziness and postural hypotension (risk ratio (RR) 1.60, 95% CI 1.09 to 2.34; 19 studies, 1588 participants; low QoE). Alpha blockers probably result in little to no difference in sexual dysfunction, quality of life and anxiety and depression (moderate to low QoE).2. 5-alpha reductase inhibitors (5-ARI): (2 studies, 177 participants). Finasteride probably reduces prostatitis symptoms compared to placebo (NIH-CPSI score MD -4.60, 95% CI -5.43 to -3.77; 1 study, 64 participants; moderate QoE) and may not be associated with an increased incidence of adverse events (low QoE). There was no information on sexual dysfunction, quality of life or anxiety and depression.3. Antibiotics: (6 studies, 693 participants). Antibiotics (quinolones) may reduce prostatitis symptoms compared to placebo (NIH-CPSI score MD -2.43, 95% CI -4.72 to -0.15; 5 studies, 372 participants; low QoE) and are probably not associated with an increased incidence in adverse events (moderate QoE). Antibiotics probably result in little to no difference in sexual dysfunction and quality of life (moderate QoE). There was no information on anxiety or depression.4. Anti-inflammatories: (7 studies, 585 participants). Anti-inflammatories may reduce prostatitis symptoms compared to placebo (NIH-CPSI scores MD -2.50, 95% CI -3.74 to -1.26; 7 studies, 585 participants; low QoE) and may not be associated with an increased incidence in adverse events (low QoE). There was no information on sexual dysfunction, quality of life or anxiety and depression.5. Phytotherapy: (7 studies, 551 participants). Phytotherapy may reduce prostatitis symptoms compared to placebo (NIH-CPSI scores MD -5.02, 95% CI -6.81 to -3.23; 5 studies, 320 participants; low QoE) and may not be associated with an increased incidence in adverse events (low QoE). Phytotherapy may not improve sexual dysfunction (low QoE). There was no information on quality of life or anxiety and depression.6. Botulinum toxin A (BTA): Intraprostatic BTA injection (1 study, 60 participants) may cause a large reduction in prostatitis symptom (NIH-CPSI scores MD -25.80, 95% CI -30.15 to -21.45), whereas pelvic floor muscle BTA injection (1 study, 29 participants) may not reduce prostatitis symptoms (low QoE). Both comparisons used a placebo injection. These interventions may not be associated with an increased incidence in adverse events (low QoE). There was no information on sexual dysfunction, quality of life or anxiety and depression.7. Allopurinol: (2 studies, 110 participants). Allopurinol may result in little to no difference in prostatitis symptoms and adverse events when compared to placebo (low QoE). There was no information on sexual dysfunction, quality of life or anxiety and depression.8. Traditional Chinese medicine (TCM): (7 studies, 835 participants); TCM may reduce prostatitis symptoms (NIH-CPSI score, MD -3.13, 95% CI -4.99 to -1.28; low QoE) and may not be associated with an increased incidence in adverse events (low QoE). TCM probably does not improve sexual dysfunction (moderate QoE) and may not improve symptoms of anxiety and depression (low QoE). There was no information on quality of life.The most frequent reasons for downgrading the QoE were study limitations, inconsistency and imprecision. We found few trials with active comparators. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: We found low- to very low-quality evidence that alpha blockers, antibiotics, 5-ARI, anti-inflammatories, phytotherapy, intraprostatic BTA injection, and traditional Chinese medicine may cause a reduction in prostatitis symptoms without an increased incidence of adverse events in the short term, except for alpha blockers which may be associated with an increase in mild adverse events. We found few trials with active comparators and little evidence of the effects of these drugs on sexual dysfunction, quality of life or anxiety and depression. Future clinical trials should include a full report of their methods, including adequate masking, consistent assessment of all patient-important outcomes, including potential treatment-related adverse events, and appropriate sample sizes.

Non-pharmacological interventions for treating chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome: a Cochrane systematic review.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the effects of non-pharmacological therapies for chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome (CP/CPPS). PATIENTS AND METHODS: We performed a comprehensive search using multiple databases, trial registries, grey literature and conference proceedings with no restrictions on the language of publication or publication status. The date of the latest search of all databases was August 2017. We included randomized controlled trials in men with a diagnosis of CP/CPPS. We included all available non-pharmacological interventions. Two review authors independently classified studies and abstracted data from the included studies, performed statistical analyses and rated quality of evidence (QoE) according to the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation methods. The primary outcomes were prostatitis symptoms and adverse events. The secondary outcomes were sexual dysfunction, urinary symptoms, quality of life, anxiety and depression. RESULTS: We included 38 unique studies in 3290 men with CP/CPPS across 23 comparisons, reporting outcomes mostly at short-term follow-up. Our analysis showed that acupuncture probably leads to clinically meaningful reduction in prostatitis symptoms compared with a sham procedure (mean difference [MD] in total National Institutes of Health - Chronic Prostatitis Symptom Index [NIH-CPSI] score -5.79, 95% confidence interval [CI] -7.32 to -4.26, moderate QoE). Acupuncture may result in little or no difference in adverse events (low QoE). Acupuncture may also lead to a clinically meaningful reduction in prostatitis symptoms compared with standard medical therapy (MD -6.05, 95% CI -7.87 to -4.24, two studies, 78 participants, low QoE). Lifestyle modifications may be associated with a reduction in prostatitis symptoms compared with control (risk ratio for improvement in NIH-CPSI scores 3.90, 95% CI 2.20 to 6.92, very low QoE), but we found no information regarding adverse events. A physical activity programme may cause a small reduction in prostatitis symptoms compared with control (NIH-CPSI score MD -2.50, 95% CI -4.69 to -0.31, low QoE), but we found no information regarding adverse events. It was uncertain whether prostatic massage reduces or increases prostatitis symptoms compared with control (very low QoE) and we found no information regarding adverse events. Extracorporeal shockwave therapy reduces prostatitis symptoms compared with control (NIH-CPSI score MD -6.18, 95% CI -7.46 to -4.89, high QoE), but these results may not be sustained at medium-term follow-up (low QoE). This treatment may not be associated with a greater incidence of adverse events (low QoE). Transrectal thermotherapy, alone or in combination with medical therapy, may decrease prostatitis symptoms slightly when compared with medical therapy alone (NIH-CPSI score MD -2.50, 95% CI -3.82 to -1.18, low QoE). One included study reported that participants may experience transient adverse events. CONCLUSIONS: Based on the findings with moderate to high QoE, this review found that some non-pharmacological interventions, such as acupuncture and extracorporeal shockwave therapy, are likely to result in a decrease in prostatitis symptoms and may not be associated with a greater incidence of adverse events. The QoE for most other comparisons was predominantly low. Future clinical trials should include a full report of their methods, including adequate masking, consistent assessment of all patient-important outcomes including potential treatment-related adverse events and appropriate sample sizes.

Prescribed hypocaloric nutrition support for critically-ill adults.

BACKGROUND: There are controversies about the amount of calories and the type of nutritional support that should be given to critically-ill people. Several authors advocate the potential benefits of hypocaloric nutrition support, but the evidence is inconclusive. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of prescribed hypocaloric nutrition support in comparison with standard nutrition support for critically-ill adults SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL, Cochrane Library), MEDLINE, Embase and LILACS (from inception to 20 June 2017) with a specific strategy for each database. We also assessed three websites, conference proceedings and reference lists, and contacted leaders in the field and the pharmaceutical industry for undetected/unpublished studies. There was no restriction by date, language or publication status. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomized and quasi-randomized controlled trials comparing hypocaloric nutrition support to normo- or hypercaloric nutrition support or no nutrition support (e.g. fasting) in adults hospitalized in intensive care units (ICUs). DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. We meta-analysed data for comparisons in which clinical heterogeneity was low. We conducted prespecified subgroup and sensitivity analyses, and post hoc analyses, including meta-regression. Our primary outcomes were: mortality (death occurred during the ICU and hospital stay, or 28- to 30-day all-cause mortality); length of stay (days stayed in the ICU and in the hospital); and Infectious complications. Secondary outcomes included: length of mechanical ventilation. We assessed the quality of evidence with GRADE. MAIN RESULTS: We identified 15 trials, with a total of 3129 ICU participants from university-associated hospitals in the USA, Colombia, Saudi Arabia, Canada, Greece, Germany and Iran. There are two ongoing studies. Participants suffered from medical and surgical conditions, with a variety of inclusion criteria. Four studies used parenteral nutrition and nine studies used only enteral nutrition; it was unclear whether the remaining two used parenteral nutrition. Most of them could not achieve the proposed caloric targets, resulting in small differences in the administered calories between intervention and control groups. Most studies were funded by the US government or non-governmental associations, but three studies received funding from industry. Five studies did not specify their funding sources.The included studies suffered from important clinical and statistical heterogeneity. This heterogeneity did not allow us to report pooled estimates of the primary and secondary outcomes, so we have described them narratively.When comparing hypocaloric nutrition support with a control nutrition support, for hospital mortality (9 studies, 1775 participants), the risk ratios ranged from 0.23 to 5.54; for ICU mortality (4 studies, 1291 participants) the risk ratios ranged from 0.81 to 5.54, and for mortality at 30 days (7 studies, 2611 participants) the risk ratios ranged from 0.79 to 3.00. Most of these estimates included the null value. The quality of the evidence was very low due to unclear or high risk of bias, inconsistency and imprecision.Participants who received hypocaloric nutrition support compared to control nutrition support had a range of mean hospital lengths of stay of 15.70 days lower to 10.70 days higher (10 studies, 1677 participants), a range of mean ICU lengths of stay 11.00 days lower to 5.40 days higher (11 studies, 2942 participants) and a range of mean lengths of mechanical ventilation of 13.20 days lower to 8.36 days higher (12 studies, 3000 participants). The quality of the evidence for this outcome was very low due to unclear or high risk of bias in most studies, inconsistency and imprecision.The risk ratios for infectious complications (10 studies, 2804 participants) of each individual study ranged from 0.54 to 2.54. The quality of the evidence for this outcome was very low due to unclear or high risk of bias, inconsistency and imprecisionWe were not able to explain the causes of the observed heterogeneity using subgroup and sensitivity analyses or meta-regression. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: The included studies had substantial clinical heterogeneity. We found very low-quality evidence about the effects of prescribed hypocaloric nutrition support on mortality in hospital, in the ICU and at 30 days, as well as in length of hospital and ICU stay, infectious complications and the length of mechanical ventilation. For these outcomes there is uncertainty about the effects of prescribed hypocaloric nutrition, since the range of estimates includes both appreciable benefits and harms.Given these limitations, results must be interpreted with caution in the clinical field, considering the unclear balance of the risks and harms of this intervention. Future research addressing the clinical heterogeneity of participants and interventions, study limitations and sample size could clarify the effects of this intervention.

El cuidado de la salud del Ejército de los Andes del general San Martín / The health care of the Army of Andes of General San Martín

A través de la revisión de documentos históricos y otras fuentes bibliográficas, y desde la perspectiva de la enfermería, se describen los recursos y prácticas sanitarias con que contaba el equipo de salud que acompañó al cuerpo del Ejército de los Andes al mando del general José de San Martín desde el inicio del cruce de los Andes el 19 de enero en las Provincias Unidas del Río de la Plata, hasta finalizada la batalla de Chacabuco, en la Capitanía General de Chile, el 12 de febrero de 1817. Este trabajo nos permite conocer el trabajo de los primeros sanitarios militares que asistieron en el cuidado de los soldados de los ejércitos patrios y contribuir así a difundir la historia de la Medicina Argentina. (AU)

Through the review of historical documents and other bibliographic sources, and from the perspective of nursing, we describe the health resources and practices held by the health team that accompanied the Army of Los Andes under the command of General José de San Martín, from the start of crossing Los Andes on January 19th in the Provincias Unidas del Río de la Plata, to finish in the battle of Chacabuco, in the General Captaincy of Chile on February 12th, 1817. This work allows us to know the work of the first military health professionals who assisted in the care of the soldiers of the patriotic armies and contribute to spread the history of the Argentine Medicine. (AU)

Non-pharmacological interventions for treating chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome.

BACKGROUND: Chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome (CP/CPPS) is a common disorder in which the two main clinical features are pelvic pain and lower urinary tract symptoms. There are currently many approaches for its management, using both pharmacological and non-pharmacological interventions. The National Institute of Health - Chronic Prostatitis Symptom Index (NIH-CPSI) score is a validated measure commonly used to measure CP/CPPS symptoms. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of non-pharmacological therapies for chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome (CP/CPPS). SEARCH METHODS: We performed a comprehensive search using multiple databases, trial registries, grey literature and conference proceedings with no restrictions on the language of publication or publication status. The date of the latest search of all databases was August 2017. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials. Inclusion criteria were men with a diagnosis of CP/CPPS. We included all available non-pharmacological interventions. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently classified studies and abstracted data from the included studies, performed statistical analyses and rated quality of evidence (QoE) according to the GRADE methods. MAIN RESULTS: We included 38 unique studies with 3290 men with CP/CPPS across 23 comparisons.1. Acupuncture: (three studies, 204 participants) based on short-term follow-up, acupuncture probably leads to clinically meaningful reduction in prostatitis symptoms compared with sham procedure (mean difference (MD) in total NIH-CPSI score -5.79, 95% confidence interval (CI) -7.32 to -4.26, high QoE). Acupuncture may result in little to no difference in adverse events (low QoE). Acupuncture may not reduce sexual dysfunction when compared with sham procedure (MD in the International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF) Scale -0.50, 95% CI -3.46 to 2.46, low QoE). Acupuncture may also lead to a clinically meaningful reduction in prostatitis symptoms compared with standard medical therapy (MD -6.05, 95% CI -7.87 to -4.24, two studies, 78 participants, low QoE). We found no information regarding quality of life, depression or anxiety.2. Lifestyle modifications: (one study, 100 participants) based on short-term follow-up, lifestyle modifications may be associated with a reduction in prostatitis symptoms compared with control (risk ratio (RR) for improvement in NIH-CPSI scores 3.90, 95% CI 2.20 to 6.92, very low QoE). We found no information regarding adverse events, sexual dysfunction, quality of life, depression or anxiety.3. Physical activity: (one study, 85 participants) based on short-term follow-up, a physical activity programme may cause a small reduction in prostatitis symptoms compared with control (NIH-CPSI score MD -2.50, 95% CI -4.69 to -0.31, low QoE). This programme may not reduce anxiety or depression (low QoE). We found no information regarding adverse events, sexual dysfunction or quality of life.4. Prostatic massage: (two studies, 115 participants) based on short-term follow-up, we are uncertain whether the prostatic massage reduces or increases prostatitis symptoms compared with control (very low QoE). We found no information regarding adverse events, sexual dysfunction, quality of life, depression or anxiety.5. Extracorporeal shockwave therapy: (three studies, 157 participants) based on short-term follow-up, extracorporeal shockwave therapy reduces prostatitis symptoms compared with control (NIH-CPSI score MD -6.18, 95% CI -7.46 to -4.89, high QoE). These results may not be sustained at medium-term follow-up (low QoE). This treatment may not be associated with a greater incidence of adverse events (low QoE). This treatment probably improves sexual dysfunction (MD in the IIEF Scale MD 3.34, 95% CI 2.68 to 4.00, one study, 60 participants, moderate QoE). We found no information regarding quality of life, depression or anxiety.6. Transrectal thermotherapy compared to medical therapy: (two studies, 237 participants) based on short-term follow-up, transrectal thermotherapy alone or in combination with medical therapy may decrease prostatitis symptoms slightly when compared with medical therapy alone (NIH-CPSI score MD -2.50, 95% CI -3.82 to -1.18, low QoE). One included study reported that participants may experience transient adverse events. We found no information regarding sexual dysfunction, quality of life, depression or anxiety.7. Other interventions: there is uncertainty about the effects of most of the other interventions included in this review. We found no information regarding psychological support or prostatic surgery. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Based on the findings of moderate quality evidence, this review found that some non-pharmacological interventions such as acupuncture and extracorporeal shockwave therapy are likely to result in a decrease in prostatitis symptoms and may not be associated with a greater incidence of adverse event. The QoE for most other comparisons was predominantly low. Future clinical trials should include a full report of their methods including adequate masking, consistent assessment of all patient-important outcomes including potential treatment-related adverse events and appropriate sample sizes.

Identification of problems in search strategies in Cochrane Reviews.

OBJECTIVE: Search strategies are essential for the adequate retrieval of studies in a systematic review (SR). Our objective was to identify problems in the design and reporting of search strategies in a sample of new Cochrane SRs first published in The Cochrane Library in 2015. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: We took a random sample of 70 new Cochrane SRs of interventions published in 2015. We evaluated their design and reporting of search strategies using the recommendations from the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions, the Methodological Expectations of Cochrane Intervention Reviews, and the Peer Review of Electronic Search Strategies evidence-based guideline. RESULTS: Most reviews complied with the reporting standards in the Cochrane Handbook and the Methodological Expectations of Cochrane Intervention Reviews; however, 8 SRs did not search trials registers, 3 SRs included language restrictions, and there was inconsistent reporting of contact with individuals and searches of the gray literature. We found problems in the design of the search strategies in 73% of reviews (95% CI, 60-84%) and 53% of these contained problems (95% CI, 38-69%) that could limit both the sensitivity and precision of the search strategies. CONCLUSION: We found limitations in the design and reporting of search strategies. We consider that a greater adherence to the guidelines could improve their quality.

Non-pharmacological interventions for treating chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome.

BACKGROUND: Chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome (CP/CPPS) is a common disorder in which the two main clinical features are pelvic pain and lower urinary tract symptoms. There are currently many approaches for its management, using both pharmacological and non-pharmacological interventions. The National Institute of Health - Chronic Prostatitis Symptom Index (NIH-CPSI) score is a validated measure commonly used to measure CP/CPPS symptoms. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of non-pharmacological therapies for chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome (CP/CPPS). SEARCH METHODS: We performed a comprehensive search using multiple databases, trial registries, grey literature and conference proceedings with no restrictions on the language of publication or publication status. The date of the latest search of all databases was August 2017. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials. Inclusion criteria were men with a diagnosis of CP/CPPS. We included all available non-pharmacological interventions. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently classified studies and abstracted data from the included studies, performed statistical analyses and rated quality of evidence (QoE) according to the GRADE methods. MAIN RESULTS: We included 38 unique studies with 3290 men with CP/CPPS across 23 comparisons.1. Acupuncture: (three studies, 204 participants) based on short-term follow-up, acupuncture reduces prostatitis symptoms in an appreciable number of participants compared with sham procedure (mean difference (MD) in total NIH-CPSI score -5.79, 95% confidence interval (CI) -7.32 to -4.26, high QoE). Acupuncture likely results in little to no difference in adverse events (moderate QoE). It probably also decreases prostatitis symptoms compared with standard medical therapy in an appreciable number of participants (MD -6.05, 95% CI -7.87 to -4.24, two studies, 78 participants, moderate QoE).2. Circumcision: (one study, 713 participants) based on short-term follow-up, early circumcision probably decreases prostatitis symptoms slightly (NIH-CPSI score MD -3.00, 95% CI -3.82 to -2.18, moderate QoE) and may not be associated with a greater incidence of adverse events compared with control (a waiting list to be circumcised, low QoE).3. Electromagnetic chair: (two studies, 57 participants) based on short-term follow-up, we are uncertain of the effects of the use of an electromagnetic chair on prostatitis symptoms. It may be associated with a greater incidence of adverse events compared with sham procedure (low to very low QoE).4. Lifestyle modifications: (one study, 100 participants) based on short-term follow-up, lifestyle modifications may be associated with a greater improvement in prostatitis symptoms in an appreciable number of participants compared with control (risk ratio (RR) for improvement in NIH-CPSI scores 3.90, 95% CI 2.20 to 6.92, very low QoE). We found no information regarding adverse events.5. Physical activity: (one study, 85 participants) based on short-term follow-up, a physical activity programme may cause a small reduction in prostatitis symptoms compared with control (NIH-CPSI score MD -2.50, 95% CI -4.69 to -0.31, low QoE). We found no information regarding adverse events.6. Prostatic massage: (two studies, 115 participants) based on short-term follow-up, we are uncertain whether the prostatic massage reduces or increases prostatitis symptoms compared with control (very low QoE). We found no information regarding adverse events.7. Extracorporeal shockwave therapy: (three studies, 157 participants) based on short-term follow-up, extracorporeal shockwave therapy reduces prostatitis symptoms compared with control (NIH-CPSI score MD -6.18, 95% CI -7.46 to -4.89, high QoE). These results may not be sustained at medium-term follow-up (low QoE). This treatment may not be associated with a greater incidence of adverse events (low QoE).8. Transrectal thermotherapy compared to medical therapy: (two studies, 237 participants) based on short-term follow-up, transrectal thermotherapy alone or in combination with medical therapy may decrease prostatitis symptoms slightly when compared with medical therapy alone (NIH-CPSI score MD -2.50, 95% CI -3.82 to -1.18, low QoE). One included study reported that participants may experience transient adverse events.9. Other interventions: there is uncertainty about the effects of other interventions included in this review. We found no information regarding psychological support or prostatic surgery. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Some of the interventions can decrease prostatitis symptoms in an appreciable number without a greater incidence of adverse events. The QoE was mostly low. Future clinical trials should include a full report of their methods including adequate masking, consistent assessment of all patient-important outcomes including potential treatment-related adverse events and appropriate sample sizes.