Evaluating the Efficacy of Psycho-Behavioral Interventions for Cardiovascular Risk among People Living with HIV: A Systematic Review and Meta-Synthesis of Randomized Controlled Trials.

People with HIV (PWH) are disproportionately affected by cardiovascular disease (CVD). Psycho-behavioral therapies are capable of targeting the pathophysiology underlying HIV-CVD comorbidity. This study synthesized findings from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of psycho-behavioral therapies for reducing CVD risk among PWH following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. Inclusion criteria were: (1) utilized an RCT design, (2) evaluated a cognitive-behavioral or mindfulness-based therapy, (3) sampled adults (age ≥18 years) with HIV, (4) measured a behavioral (e.g., diet) or biological (e.g., immune functioning) CVD risk factor, and (5) published in an English-language peer-reviewed journal. Electronic searches were conducted in six databases (e.g., MEDLINE) using controlled vocabulary and free-text synonyms for HIV, psycho-behavioral therapy, and CVD risk. Data were independently extracted with consensus reached. Outcomes were immune activation, tobacco-smoking, stress, inflammation, and physical activity from 33 studies. There were stronger effects for psycho-behavioral interventions compared to controls on CD4 (Hedge's g=0.262, 95% Confidence Interval [CI]=0.127, 0.396) and tobacco-smoking abstinence (Hedge's g=0.537, 95% CI=0.215, 0.86). There were no differences or insufficient data for stress, inflammation, or physical activity. No eligible studies examined psycho-behavioral interventions on blood pressure, lipids, or weight in PWH. There is increasing importance to further invest in broader CVD risk reduction effort for PWH that include psycho-behavioral intervention strategies.

Household Air Pollution Interventions to Improve Health in Low- and Middle-Income Countries: An Official American Thoracic Society Research Statement.

Background: An estimated 3 billion people, largely in low- and middle-income countries, rely on unclean fuels for cooking, heating, and lighting to meet household energy needs. The resulting exposure to household air pollution (HAP) is a leading cause of pneumonia, chronic lung disease, and other adverse health effects. In the last decade, randomized controlled trials of clean cooking interventions to reduce HAP have been conducted. We aim to provide guidance on how to interpret the findings of these trials and how they should inform policy makers and practitioners.Methods: We assembled a multidisciplinary working group of international researchers, public health practitioners, and policymakers with expertise in household air pollution from within academia, the American Thoracic Society, funders, nongovernmental organizations, and global organizations, including the World Bank and the World Health Organization. We performed a literature search, convened four sessions via web conference, and developed consensus conclusions and recommendations via the Delphi method.Results: The committee reached consensus on 14 conclusions and recommendations. Although some trials using cleaner-burning biomass stoves or cleaner-cooking fuels have reduced HAP exposure, the committee was divided (with 55% saying no and 45% saying yes) on whether the studied interventions improved measured health outcomes.Conclusions: HAP is associated with adverse health effects in observational studies. However, it remains unclear which household energy interventions reduce exposure, improve health, can be scaled, and are sustainable. Researchers should engage with policy makers and practitioners working to scale cleaner energy solutions to understand and address their information needs.

In-Hospital Neurologic Complications, Neuromonitoring, and Long-Term Neurologic Outcomes in Patients With Sepsis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

OBJECTIVES: Although delirium is well described in patients with sepsis, there are limited data on other neurologic complications. We aimed to systematically review the prevalence, neuromonitoring tools, and neurocognitive outcomes in sepsis patients with neurologic complications. DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE and six other databases (Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane CENTRAL, and ClinicalTrials.gov ) were searched through January 2023. STUDY SELECTION: Studies of adult patients with sepsis reported neurologic complications, use of neuromonitoring tools, neuropathology, and cognitive outcomes. DATA EXTRACTION: Two independent reviewers extracted the data. Random-effect meta-analyses were used to pool data. DATA SYNTHESIS: Seventy-four studies ( n = 146,855) were included. Neurologic complications were reported in 38 studies ( n = 142,193) including septic encephalopathy (36%, 95% CI, 27-46%; I 2 = 99%), ischemic stroke (5%, 95% CI, 2.1-11.5; I 2 = 99%), intracranial hemorrhage (2%, 95% CI, 1.0-4.4%; I 2 = 96%), seizures (1%, 95% CI, 0.2-7%; I 2 = 96%), posterior reversible encephalopathy syndrome (9%), and hypoxic-ischemic brain injury (7%). In the meta-regression analysis, pulmonary infection, sepsis induced by a gram-positive organism, higher sequential organ failure assessment score, acute physiology and chronic health evaluation II score at admission, and longer ICU length of stay were associated with higher risk of developing septic encephalopathy. Three studies ( n = 159) reported postmortem neuropathological findings, acute brain injury was noted in 47% of patients. Twenty-six studies ( n = 1,358) reported the use of neuromonitoring tools, electroencephalogram was the most used tool for seizure detection. Transcranial Doppler and near infrared spectroscopy were used for monitoring cerebral hemodynamic changes to detect early ischemia. Six studies reported cognitive outcomes ( n = 415) up to 12 months postdischarge and cognitive impairment (≥ one domain) was reported in 30%. CONCLUSIONS: In-hospital neurologic complications are common in patients with sepsis. However, the mechanism and timing of those sepsis-associated complications are poorly understood and there are limited data on standardized neuromonitoring in this population.

Person-Centered Models for Cardiovascular Care: A Review of the Evidence: A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association.

Cardiovascular disease remains the leading cause of death and disability in the United States and globally. Disease burden continues to escalate despite technological advances associated with improved life expectancy and quality of life. As a result, longer life is associated with multiple chronic cardiovascular conditions. Clinical guidelines provide recommendations without considering prevalent scenarios of multimorbidity and health system complexities that affect practical adoption. The diversity of personal preferences, cultures, and lifestyles that make up one's social and environmental context is often overlooked in ongoing care planning for symptom management and health behavior support, hindering adoption and compromising patient outcomes, particularly in groups at high risk. The purpose of this scientific statement was to describe the characteristics and reported outcomes in existing person-centered care delivery models for selected cardiovascular conditions. We conducted a scoping review using Ovid MEDLINE, Embase.com, Web of Science, CINAHL Complete, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials through Ovid, and ClinicalTrials.gov from 2010 to 2022. A range of study designs with a defined aim to systematically evaluate care delivery models for selected cardiovascular conditions were included. Models were selected on the basis of their stated use of evidence-based guidelines, clinical decision support tools, systematic evaluation processes, and inclusion of the patient's perspective in defining the plan of care. Findings reflected variation in methodological approach, outcome measures, and care processes used across models. Evidence to support optimal care delivery models remains limited by inconsistencies in approach, variation in reimbursement, and inability of health systems to meet the needs of patients with chronic, complex cardiovascular conditions.

COVID-19 and the risk of CNS demyelinating diseases: A systematic review.

Background: Viral infections are a proposed possible cause of inflammatory central nervous system (CNS) demyelinating diseases, including multiple sclerosis (MS), neuromyelitis optica spectrum disorder (NMOSD), and myelin oligodendrocyte glycoprotein antibody-associated disease (MOGAD). During the past 2 years, CNS demyelinating events associated with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection have been reported, but causality is unclear. Objective: To investigate the relationship between CNS demyelinating disease development and exacerbation with antecedent and/or concurrent SARS-CoV-2 infection. Methods: A systematic literature review of all publications describing either a new diagnosis or relapse of CNS demyelinating diseases (MS, NMOSD, MOGAD) in association with SARS-CoV-2 infection was performed utilizing PRISMA guidelines. Descriptive statistics were used for data analysis, using a case analysis approach. Results: Sixty-seven articles met the inclusion criteria for the study. Most of the reported cases of NMOSD (n = 13, 72.2% of reported cases) and MOGAD (n = 27, 96.5% of reported cases) were of new disease onset, presenting with typical clinical and radiographic features of these conditions, respectively. In contrast, reported MS cases varied amongst newly diagnosed cases (n = 10, 10.5% of reported cases), relapses (n = 63, 66.4%) and pseudo-relapses (n = 22, 23.2%). The median duration between COVID-19 infection and demyelinating event onset was 11.5 days (range 0-90 days) in NMOSD, 6 days (range-7 to +45 days) in MOGAD, and 13.5 days (range-21 to +180 days) in MS. Most cases received high-dose corticosteroids with a good clinical outcome. Conclusion: Based upon available literature, the rate of CNS demyelinating events occurring in the setting of preceding or concurrent SARS-CoV-2 infection is relatively low considering the prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 infection. The clinical outcomes of new onset or relapsing MS, NMOSD, or MOGAD associated with antecedent or concurrent infection were mostly favorable. Larger prospective epidemiological studies are needed to better delineate the impact of COVID-19 on CNS demyelinating diseases.

Neuro-Ophthalmological Complications of the COVID-19 Vaccines: A Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: A worldwide mass vaccination campaign against the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic is currently underway. Although the safety data of the clinical trials did not report specific concerns regarding neuro-ophthalmological adverse events, they involved a limited number of individuals and were conducted over a relatively short time. The aim of the current review is to summarize the available postmarketing data regarding the occurrence of neuro-ophthalmological and other ocular complications of the COVID-19 vaccines. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: Electronic searches for published literature were conducted using Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, Google Scholar, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and ClinicalTrials.gov. The search strategy incorporated controlled vocabulary and free-text synonyms for the concepts of COVID, vaccines, and visual and neuro-ophthalmologic diseases and symptoms. RESULTS: A total of 14 case reports and 2 case series have been selected for inclusion in the final report, reporting 76 cases of post-COVID-vaccination adverse events. The most common adverse event was optic neuritis (n = 61), followed by uveitis (n = 3), herpes zoster ophthalmicus (n = 2), acute macular neuroretinopathy (n = 2), optic disc edema as an atypical presentation of Guillain-Barré syndrome (n = 1), (arteritic anterior ischemic optic neuropathy; n = 1), abducens nerve palsy (n = 1), oculomotor nerve palsy (n = 1), Tolosa-Hunt syndrome (n = 1), central serous retinopathy (n = 1), acute zonal occult outer retinopathy (n = 1), and bilateral choroiditis (n = 1). Most cases were treated with high-dose steroids and had a favorable clinical outcome. CONCLUSION: Since the implementation of the COVID-19 vaccination campaign in the past year, several post-COVID-vaccination neuro-ophthalmological complications have been described. However, considering the number of individuals that have been exposed to the vaccines, the risk seems very low, and the clinical outcome in most cases is favorable. Therefore, on a population level, the benefits of the vaccines far outweigh the risk of neuro-ophthalmological complications.