Smokefree legislation effects on respiratory and sensory disorders: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

AIMS: The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis is to synthesize the available evidence in scientific papers of smokefree legislation effects on respiratory diseases and sensory and respiratory symptoms (cough, phlegm, red eyes, runny nose) among all populations. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Systematic review and meta-analysis were carried out. A search between January 1995 and February 2015 was performed in PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, Scopus, Web of Science, and Google Scholar databases. Inclusion criteria were: 1) original scientific studies about smokefree legislation, 2) Data before and after legislation were collected, and 3) Impact on respiratory and sensory outcomes were assessed. Paired reviewers independently carried out the screening of titles and abstracts, data extraction from full-text articles, and methodological quality assessment. RESULTS: A total number of 1606 papers were identified. 50 papers were selected, 26 were related to symptoms (23 concerned workers). Most outcomes presented significant decreases in the percentage of people suffering from them, especially in locations with comprehensive measures and during the immediate post-ban period (within the first six months). Four (50%) of the papers concerning pulmonary function reported some significant improvement in expiratory parameters. Significant decreases were described in 13 of the 17 papers evaluating asthma hospital admissions, and there were fewer significant reductions in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease admissions (range 1-36%) than for asthma (5-31%). Six studies regarding different respiratory diseases showed discrepant results, and four papers about mortality reported significant declines in subgroups. Low bias risk was present in 23 (46%) of the studies. CONCLUSIONS: Smokefree legislation appears to improve respiratory and sensory symptoms at short term in workers (the overall effect being greater in comprehensive smokefree legislation in sensory symptoms) and, to a lesser degree, rates of hospitalization for asthma.

Effectiveness of the Epley's maneuver performed in primary care to treat posterior canal benign paroxysmal positional vertigo: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Vertigo is a common medical condition with a broad spectrum of diagnoses which requires an integrated approach to patients through a structured clinical interview and physical examination. The main cause of vertigo in primary care is benign paroxysmal positional vertigo (BPPV), which should be confirmed by a positive D-H positional test and treated with repositioning maneuvers. The objective of this study is to evaluate the effectiveness of Epley's maneuver performed by general practitioners (GPs) in the treatment of BPPV. METHODS/DESIGN: This study is a randomized clinical trial conducted in the primary care setting. The study's scope will include two urban primary care centers which provide care for approximately 49,400 patients. All patients attending these two primary care centers, who are newly diagnosed with benign paroxysmal positional vertigo, will be invited to participate in the study and will be randomly assigned either to the treatment group (Epley's maneuver) or to the control group (a sham maneuver). Both groups will receive betahistine. Outcome variables will be: response to the D-H test, patients' report on presence or absence of vertigo during the previous week (dichotomous variable: yes/no), intensity of vertigo symptoms on a Likert-type scale in the previous week, total score on the Dizziness Handicap Inventory (DHI) and quantity of betahistine taken. DISCUSSION: Positive results from our study will highlight that treatment of benign paroxysmal positional vertigo can be performed by trained general practitioners (GPs) and, therefore, its widespread practice may contribute to improve the quality of life of BPPV patients. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01969513.