COVID-19 Incidence After Emergency Department Visit.

Background: The emergency department (ED) at the Veterans Affairs Greater Los Angeles Healthcare System (VAGLAHS) saw a decrease in the number of visits during the early stages of the COVID-19 pandemic. Little is known whether risk mitigation procedures may help reduce the spread of COVID-19 infections for veterans visiting the ED. Therefore, we reviewed patient visits to the ED for diagnoses other than COVID-19 to assess whether these patients had an increased COVID-19 positivity rate within 21 days of the initial visit. Observations: Risk mitigation procedures instituted by the VAGLAHS ED included a COVID-19 outdoor testing tent, immediate isolation of persons under investigation for COVID-19, disinfection protocols between high-risk patient encounters, dedicated training in donning and doffing personal protective equipment, implementation of 2-physician airway teams for COVID-19 intubations, use of electronic tablets to communicate with COVID-19 patients, and implementation of social distancing initiatives in the waiting room to minimize COVID-19 exposures. The average positivity rate at the VAGLAHS ED during this time frame was 0% to 6.7%, compared with 6.9% to 33.3% within the wider VAGLAHS. Conclusions: Implementing risk mitigation procedures in the VAGLAHS ED helped minimize exposure and subsequent diagnosis of COVID-19 for veterans who visited the VAGLAHS ED for symptoms not associated with COVID-19 infection. Seeking acute medical care in the ED did not put patients at higher risk of contracting COVID-19.

Transitioning from One Electronic Health Record to Another: A Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: Transitioning to a new electronic health record (EHR) presents different challenges than transitions from paper to electronic records. We synthesized the body of peer-reviewed literature on EHR-to-EHR transitions to evaluate the generalizability of published work and identify knowledge gaps where more evidence is needed. METHODS: We conducted a broad search in PubMed through July 2022 and collected all publications from two prior reviews. Peer-reviewed publications reporting on data from an EHR-to-EHR transition were included. We extracted data on study design, setting, sample size, EHR systems involved, dates of transition and data collection, outcomes reported, and key findings. RESULTS: The 40 included publications were grouped into thematic categories for narrative synthesis: clinical care outcomes (n = 15), provider perspectives (n = 11), data migration (n = 8), patient experience (n = 4), and other topics (n = 5). Many studies described single sites that are early adopters of technology with robust research resources, switching from a homegrown system to a commercial system, and emphasized the dynamic effect of transitioning on important clinical care and other outcomes over time. DISCUSSION: The published literature represents a heterogeneous mix of study designs and outcome measures, and while some of the stronger studies in this review used longitudinal approaches to compare outcomes across more sites, the current literature is primarily descriptive and is not designed to offer recommendations that can guide future EHR transitions. Transitioning from one EHR to another constitutes a major organizational change that requires nearly every person in the organization to change how they do their work. Future research should include human factors as well as diverse methodological approaches such as mixed methods and implementation science.

Endoscopic therapies for patients with obesity: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Obesity is a major threat to public health and traditional bariatric surgery continues to have low utilization. Endoscopic treatments for obesity have emerged that offer less risk, but questions remain regarding efficacy, durability, and safety. We compared the efficacy of endoscopic bariatric procedures as compared to other existing treatments. METHODS: A literature search of Embase, Cochrane Central, and Pubmed was conducted from January 1, 2014 to December 7, 2021, including endoscopic bariatric therapies that were FDA or CE approved at the time of search to non-endoscopic treatments. Thirty-seven studies involving 15,639 patients were included. Primary outcomes included % total body weight loss (%TBWL), % excess body weight loss (%EBWL), and adverse events. Secondary outcomes included quality of life data and differences in hemoglobin A1C levels. Strength of clinical trial and observational data were graded according to the Cochrane methods. RESULTS: Intragastric balloons achieved greater %TBWL with a range of 7.6-14.1% compared to 3.3-6.7% with lifestyle modification at 6 months, and 7.5-14.0% compared to 3.1-7.9%, respectively, at 12 months. When endoscopic sleeve gastroplasty (ESG) was compared to laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG), ESG had less %TBWL at 4.7-14.4% compared to 18.8-26.5% after LSG at 6 months, and 4.5-18.6% as compared to 28.4-29.3%, respectively, at 12 months. For the AspireAssist, there was greater %TBWL with aspiration therapy compared to lifestyle modification at 12 months, 12.1-18.3% TBWL versus 3.5-5.9% TBWL, respectively. All endoscopic interventions had higher adverse events rates compared to lifestyle modification. CONCLUSION: This review is the first to evaluate various endoscopic bariatric therapies using only RCTs and observational studies for evaluation of weight loss compared with conservative management, lifestyle modification, and bariatric surgery. Endoscopic therapies result in greater weight loss compared to lifestyle modification, but not as much as bariatric surgery. Endoscopic therapies may be beneficial as an alternative to bariatric surgery.

Patient and researcher stakeholder preferences for use of electronic health record data: a qualitative study to guide the design and development of a platform to honor patient preferences.

OBJECTIVE: This qualitative study aimed to understand patient and researcher perspectives regarding consent and data-sharing preferences for research and a patient-centered system to manage consent and data-sharing preferences. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We conducted focus groups with patient and researcher participants recruited from three academic health centers via snowball sampling. Discussions focused on perspectives on the use of electronic health record (EHR) data for research. Themes were identified through consensus coding, starting from an exploratory framework. RESULTS: We held two focus groups with patients (n = 12 patients) and two with researchers (n = 8 researchers). We identified two patient themes (1-2), one theme common to patients and researchers (3), and two researcher themes (4-5). Themes included (1) motivations for sharing EHR data, (2) perspectives on the importance of data-sharing transparency, (3) individual control of personal EHR data sharing, (4) how EHR data benefits research, and (5) challenges researchers face using EHR data. DISCUSSION: Patients expressed a tension between the benefits of their data being used in studies to benefit themselves/others and avoiding risk by limiting data access. Patients resolved this tension by acknowledging they would often share their data but wanted greater transparency on its use. Researchers expressed concern about incorporating bias into datasets if patients opted out. CONCLUSIONS: A research consent and data-sharing platform must consider two competing goals: empowering patients to have more control over their data and maintaining the integrity of secondary data sources. Health systems and researchers should increase trust-building efforts with patients to engender trust in data access and use.

Use of Acupuncture for Adult Health Conditions, 2013 to 2021: A Systematic Review.

Importance: Acupuncture is a popular treatment that has been advocated for dozens of adult health conditions and has a vast evidence base. Objective: To map the systematic reviews, conclusions, and certainty or quality of evidence for outcomes of acupuncture as a treatment for adult health conditions. Evidence Review: Computerized search of PubMed and 4 other databases from 2013 to 2021. Systematic reviews of acupuncture (whole body, auricular, or electroacupuncture) for adult health conditions that formally rated the certainty, quality, or strength of evidence for conclusions. Studies of acupressure, fire acupuncture, laser acupuncture, or traditional Chinese medicine without mention of acupuncture were excluded. Health condition, number of included studies, type of acupuncture, type of comparison group, conclusions, and certainty or quality of evidence. Reviews with at least 1 conclusion rated as high-certainty evidence, reviews with at least 1 conclusion rated as moderate-certainty evidence, and reviews with all conclusions rated as low- or very low-certainty evidence; full list of all conclusions and certainty of evidence. Findings: A total of 434 systematic reviews of acupuncture for adult health conditions were found; of these, 127 reviews used a formal method to rate certainty or quality of evidence of their conclusions, and 82 reviews were mapped, covering 56 health conditions. Across these, there were 4 conclusions that were rated as high-certainty evidence, and 31 conclusions that were rated as moderate-certainty evidence. All remaining conclusions (>60) were rated as low- or very low-certainty evidence. Approximately 10% of conclusions rated as high or moderate-certainty were that acupuncture was no better than the comparator treatment, and approximately 75% of high- or moderate-certainty evidence conclusions were about acupuncture compared with a sham or no treatment. Conclusions and Relevance: Despite a vast number of randomized trials, systematic reviews of acupuncture for adult health conditions have rated only a minority of conclusions as high- or moderate-certainty evidence, and most of these were about comparisons with sham treatment or had conclusions of no benefit of acupuncture. Conclusions with moderate or high-certainty evidence that acupuncture is superior to other active therapies were rare.

Pilot RCT Testing A Mailing About Sleeping Pills and Cognitive Behavioral Therapy for Insomnia: Impact on Benzodiazepines and Z-Drugs.

OBJECTIVES: The aim is to pilot a low-touch program for reducing benzodiazepine receptor agonist (BZRA; benzodiazepines, z-drugs) prescriptions among older veterans. METHODS: Pilot randomized controlled trial consists of 2,009 veterans aged ≥ 65 years who received BZRA prescriptions from a Veterans Health Administration pharmacy (Colorado or Montana) during the prior 18 months. Active: Arm 1 was a mailed brochure about BZRA risks that also included information about a free, online cognitive behavioral therapy for the insomnia (CBTI) program. Arm 2 was a mailed brochure (same as arm 1) and telephone reinforcement call. Control: Arm 3 was a mailed brochure without insomnia treatment information. Active BZRA prescriptions at follow-up (6 and 12 months) were measured. RESULTS: In logistic regression analyses, the odds of BZRA prescription at 6- and 12-month follow-ups were not significantly different for arm 1 or 2 (active) versus arm 3 (control), including models adjusted for demographics and prescription characteristics (p-values >0.36). CONCLUSIONS: Although we observed no differences in active BZRA prescriptions, this pilot study provides guidance for conducting a future study, indicating a need for a more potent intervention. A full-scale trial testing an optimized program would provide conclusive results. CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: Mailing information about BZRA risks and CBTI did not affect BZRA prescriptions.

Care coordination needs for deprescribing benzodiazepines and benzodiazepine receptor agonists.

Deprescribing of medications such as benzodiazepines and benzodiazepine receptor agonists (z-drugs) can be a complex process that varies across practices, specialties, and health care systems. Care coordination among healthcare providers, patients, families, and other healthcare system components is critical to achieving high levels of deprescribing and person-centered care. We present a framework for promoting care coordination in the context of benzodiazepine/z-drug deprescribing. Future efforts are needed to study the impact of better care coordination on benzodiazepines/z-drug discontinuation and other outcomes that are important to stakeholders.

Clinical outcomes and cost of robotic ventral hernia repair: systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Robotic ventral hernia repair (VHR) has seen rapid adoption, but with limited data assessing clinical outcome or cost. This systematic review compared robotic VHR with laparoscopic and open approaches. METHODS: This systematic review was undertaken in accordance with PRISMA guidelines. PubMed, MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane databases were searched for articles with terms relating to 'robot-assisted', 'cost effectiveness', and 'ventral hernia' or 'incisional hernia' from 1 January 2010 to 10 November 2020. Intraoperative and postoperative outcomes, pain, recurrence, and cost data were extracted for narrative analysis. RESULTS: Of 25 studies that met the inclusion criteria, three were RCTs and 22 observational studies. Robotic VHR was associated with a longer duration of operation than open and laparoscopic repairs, but with fewer transfusions, shorter hospital stay, and lower complication rates than open repair. Robotic VHR was more expensive than laparoscopic repair, but not significantly different from open surgery in terms of cost. There were no significant differences in rates of intraoperative complication, conversion to open surgery, surgical-site infection, readmission, mortality, pain, or recurrence between the three approaches. CONCLUSION: Robotic VHR was associated with a longer duration of operation, fewer transfusions, a shorter hospital stay, and fewer complications compared with open surgery. Robotic VHR had higher costs and a longer operating time than laparoscopic repair. Randomized or matched data with standardized reporting, long-term outcomes, and cost-effectiveness analyses are still required to weigh the clinical benefits against the cost of robotic VHR.

Comparison of Clinical Outcomes of Robot-Assisted, Video-Assisted, and Open Esophagectomy for Esophageal Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

Importance: The utilization of robot-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy (RAMIE) for esophageal cancer is increasing, despite limited data comparing RAMIE with other surgical approaches. Objective: To evaluate the literature for clinical outcomes of RAMIE compared with video-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy (VAMIE) and open esophagectomy (OE). Data Sources: A systematic search of PubMed, Cochrane, Ovid Medline, and Embase databases from January 1, 2013, to May 6, 2020, was performed. Study Selection: Studies that compared RAMIE with VAMIE and/or OE for cancer were included. Data Extraction and Synthesis: Following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) reporting guideline, data were extracted by independent reviewers. A random-effects meta-analysis of 9 propensity-matched studies was performed for the RAMIE vs VAMIE comparison only. A narrative synthesis of RAMIE vs VAMIE and OE was performed. Main Outcomes and Measures: The outcomes of interest were intraoperative outcomes (ie, estimated blood loss [EBL], operative time, lymph node [LN] harvest), short-term outcomes (anastomotic leak, recurrent laryngeal nerve [RLN] palsy, pulmonary and total complications, and 90-day mortality), and long-term oncologic outcomes. Results: Overall, 21 studies (2 randomized clinical trials, 11 propensity-matched studies, and 8 unmatched studies) with 9355 patients were included. A meta-analysis was performed with 9 propensity-matched studies comparing RAMIE with VAMIE. The random-effects pooled estimate found an adjusted risk difference (RD) of -0.06 (95% CI, -0.11 to -0.01) favoring fewer pulmonary complications with RAMIE. There was no evidence of differences between RAMIE and VAMIE in LN harvest (mean difference [MD], -1.1 LN; 95% CI, -2.45 to 0.25 LNs), anastomotic leak (RD, 0.0; 95% CI, -0.03 to 0.03), EBL (MD, -6.25 mL; 95% CI, -18.26 to 5.77 mL), RLN palsy (RD, 0.01; 95% CI, -0.08 to 0.10), total complications (RD, 0.05; 95% CI, -0.01 to 0.11), or 90-day mortality (RD, -0.01; 95% CI, -0.02 to 0.0). There was low certainty of evidence that RAMIE was associated with a longer disease-free survival compared with VAMIE. For OE comparisons (data not pooled), RAMIE was associated with a longer operative time, decreased EBL, and less pulmonary and total complications. Conclusions and Relevance: In this study, RAMIE had similar outcomes as VAMIE but was associated with fewer pulmonary complications compared with VAMIE and OE. Studies on long-term functional and cancer outcomes are needed.

Intraoperative and postoperative outcomes of robot-assisted cholecystectomy: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Rapid adoption of robotic-assisted general surgery procedures, particularly for cholecystectomy, continues while questions remain about its benefits and utility. The objective of this study was to compare the clinical effectiveness of robot-assisted cholecystectomy for benign gallbladder disease as compared with the laparoscopic approach. METHODS: A literature search was performed from January 2010 to March 2020, and a narrative analysis was performed as studies were heterogeneous. RESULTS: Of 887 articles screened, 44 met the inclusion criteria (range 20-735,537 patients). Four were randomized controlled trials, and four used propensity-matching. There were variable comparisons between operative techniques with only 19 out of 44 studies comparing techniques using the same number of ports. Operating room time was longer for the robot-assisted technique in the majority of studies (range 11-55 min for 22 studies, p < 0.05; 15 studies showed no difference; two studies showed shorter laparoscopic times), while conversion rates and intraoperative complications were not different. No differences were detected for the length of stay, surgical site infection, or readmissions. Across studies comparing single-port robot-assisted to multi-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy, there was a higher rate of incisional hernia; however, no differences were noted when comparing single-port robot-assisted to single-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy. CONCLUSIONS: Clinical outcomes were similar for benign, elective gallbladder disease for robot-assisted compared with laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Overall, the rates of complications were low. More high-quality studies are needed as the robot-assisted technique expands to more complex gallbladder disease, where its utility may prove increasingly beneficial. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42020156945.

Perioperative and Long-Term Outcomes of Robot-Assisted Partial Nephrectomy: A Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: Adoption of the robotic surgical platform for small renal cancers has rapidly expanded, but its utility compared to other approaches has not been established. The objective of this review is to assess perioperative and long-term oncologic and functional outcomes of robot-assisted partial nephrectomy (RAPN) compared to laparoscopic partial nephrectomy (LPN) and open partial nephrectomy (OPN). METHODS: A search in PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane (2010-2019) was conducted. Of 3877 articles screened, 7 observational studies were included. RESULTS: RAPN was associated with 24-50 mL less intraoperative blood loss compared to LPN and 39-84 mL less than OPN. RAPN also demonstrated trends of other postoperative benefits, such as shorter length of stay and fewer major complications. Several studies reported better long-term functional kidney outcomes, but these findings were inconsistent. Recurrence and cancer-specific survival (CSS) were similar across groups. While RAPN had a 5-year CSS of 90.1%-97.9%, LPN and OPN had survival rates of 85.9%-86.9% and 88.5-96.3% respectively. CONCLUSIONS: RAPN may be associated with a lower estimated blood loss and comparable long-term outcomes when compared to other surgical approaches. However, additional randomized or propensity matched studies are warranted to fully assess long-term functional kidney and oncologic outcomes.

Scaling Beyond Early Adopters: a Content Analysis of Literature and Key Informant Perspectives.

BACKGROUND: Innovations and improvements in care delivery are often not spread across all settings that would benefit from their uptake. Scale-up and spread efforts are deliberate efforts to increase the impact of innovations successfully tested in pilot projects so as to benefit more people. The final stages of scale-up and spread initiatives must contend with reaching hard-to-engage sites. OBJECTIVE: To describe the process of scale-up and spread initiatives, with a focus on hard-to-engage sites and strategies to approach them. DESIGN: Qualitative content analysis of systematically identified literature and key informant interviews. PARTICIPANTS: Leads from large magnitude scale-up and spread projects. APPROACH: We conducted a systematic literature search on large magnitude scale-up and spread and interviews with eight project leads, who shared their perspectives on strategies to scale-up and spread clinical and administrative practices across healthcare systems, focusing on hard-to-engage sites. We synthesized these data using content analysis. KEY RESULTS: Searches identified 1919 titles, of which 52 articles were included. Thirty-four discussed general scale-up and spread strategies, 11 described hard-to-engage sites, and 7 discussed strategies for hard-to-engage sites. These included publications were combined with interview findings to describe a fourth phase of the national scale-up and spread process, common challenges for spreading to hard-to-engage sites, and potential benefits of working with hard-to-engage sites, as well as useful strategies for working with hard-to-engage sites. CONCLUSIONS: We identified scant published evidence that describes strategies for reaching hard-to-engage sites. The sparse data we identified aligned with key informant accounts. Future work could focus on better documentation of the later stages of spread efforts, including specific tailoring of approaches and strategies used with hard-to-engage sites. Spread efforts should include a "flexible, tailored approach" for this highly variable group, especially as implementation science is looking to expand its impact in routine care settings.

Clinical Effectiveness and Resource Utilization of Surgery versus Endovascular Therapy for Chronic Limb-Threatening Ischemia.

BACKGROUND: The clinical effectiveness of surgical versus endovascular therapy for chronic limb-threatening ischemia (CLTI) continues to be debated, and the resources required for each therapy are unclear. METHODS: Systematic review of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies comparing surgery with endovascular therapy for CLTI, which reported clinical effectiveness and resource utilization. Short-term and long-term clinical outcomes were examined. RESULTS: The search yielded 4,231 titles, of which 17 publications met our inclusion criteria. Five publications were all from 1 RCT, and 12 publications were observational studies. In the RCT, the surgical approach had greater resource use in the first year (total hospital days across all admissions for surgery versus angioplasty: 46.14 ± 53.87 vs. 36.35 ± 51.39; P < 0.001; also true for days in high-dependency and intensive therapy units), but differences were not statistically significant in subsequent years. All-cause mortality presented a nonsignificant difference favoring angioplasty in the first 2 years (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR], 1.27; 95% confidence interval [95% CI], 0.75-2.15), but after 2 years, it favored surgical treatment (aHR, 0.34; 95% CI, 0.17-0.71). The observational studies reported short-term effectiveness and resource utilization favoring endovascular therapy, but most differences were not statistically significant. Long-term outcomes were more mixed; in particular, mortality outcomes generally favored surgery, although concluding that cause and effect is not possible as endovascularly treated patients tended to be older and may have had a shorter life expectancy regardless of therapy. CONCLUSIONS: The clinical effectiveness and resource utilization of surgery compared with endovascular therapy for CLTI is not known with certainty and will not be known until ongoing trials report results. It is likely that findings will vary by the time horizon, where initial outcomes and utilization tend to favor endovascular interventions, but long-term outcomes favor surgical revascularization.

Sitters as a Patient Safety Strategy to Reduce Hospital Falls: A Systematic Review.

Background: Bedside "sitters" are often used for patients at high risk for falls, but they are expensive and their effectiveness is unclear. Purpose: To review evidence about the effect of sitters and alternatives to sitters on patient falls in acute care hospitals. Data Sources: PubMed searches to 8 October 2019, other databases from inception to December 2018, citation searches on key articles, and a Google search (22 October 2019). Study Selection: English-language studies of any design that assessed the effect of adding sitters to usual care or compared alternatives to sitters (for example, video monitors or "close observation units") for adult patients on general wards of acute care hospitals and reported falls as a primary outcome. Data Extraction: Dual-reviewer extraction of study data and risk of bias; single reviewer with group discussion for GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) certainty of evidence. Data Synthesis: Of 20 studies meeting inclusion criteria, 2 added sitters to usual care and 18 compared alternatives to sitters. There were no randomized trials, 11 time-series studies, 1 retrospective quasi-experimental study, and 8 pre-post studies. All studies had at least 1 methodological limitation. Two studies provided very-low-certainty evidence that adding sitters reduced falls. Eight studies provided moderate-certainty evidence that interventions that included video monitoring reduced sitter use and either did not affect or reduced the number of falls. Very-low-certainty evidence suggested that interventions that included nurse assessment tools (3 studies) or a close observation unit (2 studies) were effective alternatives to sitters. Limitation: No studies had low risk of bias, publication bias is likely, and studies may have been missed. Conclusion: Despite a compelling rationale, evidence is scant that adding sitters to usual care reduces falls. Primary Funding Source: Veterans Affairs Quality Enhancement Research Initiative. (PROSPERO: CRD42019127424).

What Is the Optimal Primary Care Panel Size?: A Systematic Review.

Background: Primary care for a panel of patients is a central component of population health, but the optimal panel size is unclear. Purpose: To review evidence about the association of primary care panel size with health care outcomes and provider burnout. Data Sources: English-language searches of multiple databases from inception to October 2019 and Google searches performed in September 2019. Study Selection: English-language studies of any design, including simulation models, that assessed the association between primary care panel size and safety, efficacy, patient-centeredness, timeliness, efficiency, equity, or provider burnout. Data Extraction: Independent, dual-reviewer extraction; group consensus rating of certainty of evidence. Data Synthesis: Sixteen hypothesis-testing studies and 12 simulation modeling studies met inclusion criteria. All but 1 hypothesis-testing study were cross-sectional assessments of association. Three studies each provided low-certainty evidence that increasing panel size was associated with no or modestly adverse effects on patient-centered and effective care. Eight studies provided low-certainty evidence that increasing panel size was associated with variable effects on timely care. No studies assessed the effect of panel size on safety, efficiency, or equity. One study provided very-low-certainty evidence of an association between increased panel size and provider burnout. The 12 simulation studies evaluated 5 models; all used access as the only outcome of care. Five and 2 studies, respectively, provided moderate-certainty evidence that adjusting panel size for case mix and adding clinical conditions to the case mix resulted in better access. Limitation: No studies had concurrent comparison groups, and published and unpublished studies may have been missed. Conclusion: Evidence is insufficient to make evidence-based recommendations about the optimal primary care panel size for achieving beneficial health outcomes. Primary Funding Source: Veterans Affairs Quality Enhancement Research Initiative.

Massage for Pain: An Evidence Map.

Objectives: Massage therapy has been proposed for painful conditions, but it can be difficult to understand the breadth and depth of evidence, as various painful conditions may respond differently to massage. The authors conducted an evidence mapping process and generated an "evidence map" to visually depict the distribution of evidence available for massage and various pain indications to identify gaps in evidence and to inform future research priorities. Design: The authors searched PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane for systematic reviews reporting pain outcomes for massage therapy. The authors assessed the quality of each review using the Assessing the Methodological Quality of Systematic Reviews (AMSTAR) criteria. The authors used a bubble plot to depict the number of included articles, pain indication, effect of massage for pain, and strength of findings for each included systematic review. Results: The authors identified 49 systematic reviews, of which 32 were considered high quality. Types of pain frequently included in systematic reviews were cancer pain, low back pain, and neck pain. High quality reviews concluded that there was low strength of evidence of potential benefits of massage for labor, shoulder, neck, low back, cancer, arthritis, postoperative, delayed onset muscle soreness, and musculoskeletal pain. Reported attributes of massage interventions include style of massage, provider, co-interventions, duration, and comparators, with 14 high-quality reviews reporting all these attributes in their review. Conclusion: Prior reviews have conclusions of low strength of evidence because few primary studies of large samples with rigorous methods had been conducted, leaving evidence gaps about specific massage type for specific pain. Primary studies often do not provide adequate details of massage therapy provided, limiting the extent to which reviews are able to draw conclusions about characteristics such as provider type.

Effectiveness of multifocal and monofocal intraocular lenses for cataract surgery and lens replacement: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

PURPOSE: Multifocal intraocular lenses (IOLs) offer the possibility of spectacle-free vision following cataract surgery compared to standard IOLs. Existing systematic reviews have generally concluded that multifocal IOLs result in better uncorrected near vision and greater spectacle independence, but more unwanted visual phenomena such as glare and halos, compared to monofocal IOLs. However, the certainty of evidence has been low for most outcomes, and pooled analyses have grouped together technologically obsolete lenses with newer lenses, potentially obscuring differences in performance across different lens types. METHODS: We performed a systematic review searching for RCTs of a multifocal IOL to a standard IOL or monovision that reported spectacle independence, visual acuity, or quality of life. Databases were searched from 1/1/2006-4/30/2017. Existing reviews were used to identify older studies. Title/abstract screening and data extraction were done in duplicate. Where possible, random effects meta-analysis was performed to synthesize results. In addition to comparing multifocal IOLs as a group to monofocal IOLs, we also compared newer diffractive lenses to obsolete or refractive lenses. RESULTS: Twenty-five eligible studies were identified. There was no difference in pooled estimates of corrected or uncorrected distance vision between multifocal and standard IOLs. Compared to monofocal IOLs, multifocal IOLs had statistically significantly better pooled results for the outcome of near vision (10 studies, 1025 patients, mean difference in logMAR of -0.26 (95% CI -0.37, -0.15)); spectacle dependence (12 studies, 1237 patients, relative risk of 0.27 (95% CI 0.20, 0.38)) and borderline significantly better quality of vision (6 studies, 596 patients, standardized mean difference of -0.54, (95% CI -1.12, 0.04)). Compared to monofocal IOLs, multifocal IOLs had statistically significantly worse pooled results for the outcomes of glare (9 studies, 847 patients, risk ratio of 1.36 (95% CI 1.15, 1.61) and halos (7 studies, 754 patients, risk ratio of 3.14 (95% CI 1.63, 6.08). Newer multifocal lenses had statistically significantly better outcomes than older diffractive lenses or refractive lenses, when compared to monofocal IOLs, in near vision, quality of vision, and risk of halos. CONCLUSIONS: Multifocal IOLs compared to standard IOLs or monovision result in better uncorrected near vision and a higher proportion of patients who achieve spectacle independence, but greater risk of unwanted visual phenomena. Newer diffractive lenses may be better than refractive lenses in near vision and quality of vision outcomes, with less risk of halos than older diffractive lenses and refractive lenses. (PROSPERO registration CRD42017069949).