RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: The Palliative Prognostic Score (PaP) is the most widely validated prognostic tool for cancer survival prediction, with modified versions available. A systematic evaluation of PaP tools is lacking. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the performance and prognostic utility of PaP, Delirium-PaP (D-PaP), and PaP without clinician prediction in predicting 30-day survival of cancer patients and compare their performance. METHODS: Six databases were searched for peer-reviewed studies and grey literature published from inception till 2/6/2023. English studies must assess PaP, D-PaP, or PaP without clinician predicted survival for 30-day survival in adults ≥18 years old with any stage or type of cancer. Outcomes were pooled using the random effects model or summarised narratively when meta-analysis was not possible. RESULTS: Thirty-nine studies (n = 10,617 patients) were included. PaP is an accurate prognostic tool (pooled AUC = 0.82, 95% CI 0.79-0.84) and outperforms PaP without clinician predicted survival (pooled AUC = 0.74, 95% CI 0.71-0.78), suggesting that the original PaP should be preferred. The meta-analysis found PaP and D-PaP performance to be comparable. Most studies reported survival probabilities corresponding to the PaP risk groups, and higher risk groups were significantly associated with shorter survival. CONCLUSIONS: PaP is a validated prognostic tool for cancer patients that can enhance clinicians' confidence and accuracy in predicting survival. Future studies should investigate if accuracy differs depending on clinician characteristics. Reporting of validation studies must be improved, as most studies were at high risk of bias, primarily because calibration was not assessed.
RESUMEN
Geriatric patients frequently encounter orthostatic hypotension (OH), a multifaceted condition characterized by a significant drop in blood pressure upon assuming an upright position. As the elderly population is particularly susceptible to OH, our review endeavors to comprehensively explore the complex nature of this condition and various factors contributing to its development. We investigate the impact of comorbidities, polypharmacy, age-related physiological changes, and autonomic dysfunction in the pathogenesis of OH. Geriatric patients with OH are faced with an elevated risk of falls, syncope, a decline in their overall quality of life, and hence increased mortality. These implications require careful consideration, necessitating a thorough examination of therapeutic strategies. We evaluate various pharmaceutical and nonpharmacological therapies, delving into the effectiveness and safety of each approach in managing OH within geriatric populations. We explore the role of pharmacotherapy in alleviating symptoms and mitigating OH-related complications, as well as the potential benefits of volume expansion techniques to augment blood volume and stabilize blood pressure. We place particular emphasis on the significance of lifestyle changes and nonpharmacological interventions in enhancing OH management among the elderly. These interventions encompass dietary modifications, regular physical activity, and postural training, all tailored to the unique needs of the individual patient. To optimize outcomes and ensure patient safety, we underscore the importance of individualized treatment plans that take into account the geriatric patient's overall health status, existing comorbidities, and potential interactions with other medications. This review aims to improve clinical practice and patient outcomes by advocating for early detection, properly tailored management, and targeted interventions to address OH in the elderly population. By raising awareness of OH's prevalence and complexities among healthcare professionals, we hope to foster a comprehensive understanding of OH and contribute to the overall wellness and quality of life of this vulnerable demographic.
RESUMEN
Objectives: Case Reporting and Surveillance (CRS) are crucial to combat the global spread of the Monkeypox virus (Mpox). To support CRS, the World Health Organization (WHO) has released standardized case definitions for suspected, probable, confirmed, and discarded cases. However, these definitions are often subject to localized adaptations by countries leading to heterogeneity in the collected data. Herein, we compared the differences in Mpox case definitions in 32 countries that collectively reported 96% of the global Mpox caseload. Methods: We extracted information regarding Mpox case definitions issued by the competent authorities in 32 included countries for suspected, probable, confirmed, and discarded cases. All data were gathered from online public sources. Results: For confirmed cases, 18 countries (56%) followed WHO guidelines and tested for Mpox using species specific PCR and/or sequencing. For probable and suspected cases, seven and eight countries, respectively were found to have not released definitions in their national documentations. Furthermore, none of the countries completely matched WHO's criteria for probable and suspected cases. Overlapping amalgamations of the criteria were frequently noticed. Regarding discarded cases, only 13 countries (41%) reported definitions, with only two countries (6%) having definition consistent with WHO guidelines. For case reporting, 12 countries (38%) were found to report both probable and confirmed cases, in line with WHO requirements. Conclusion: The heterogeneity in case definitions and reporting highlights the pressing need for homogenization in implementation of these guidelines. Homogenization would drastically improve data quality and aid data-scientists, epidemiologists, and clinicians to better understand and model the true disease burden in the society, followed by formulation and implementation of targeted interventions to curb the virus spread.
