Effect of the 1-h bundle on mortality in patients with suspected sepsis in the emergency department: a stepped wedge cluster randomized clinical trial.

PURPOSE: The efficacy of the 1-h bundle for emergency department (ED) patients with suspected sepsis, which includes lactate measurement, blood culture, broad-spectrum antibiotics administration, administration of 30 mL/kg crystalloid fluid for hypotension or lactate ≥ 4 mmol/L, remains controversial. METHODS: We carried out a pragmatic stepped-wedge cluster-randomized trial in 23 EDs in France and Spain. Adult patients with Sepsis-3 criteria or a quick sequential organ failure assessment (SOFA) score ≥ 2 or a lactate > 2 mmol/L were eligible. The intervention was the implementation of the 1-h sepsis bundle. The primary outcome was in-hospital mortality truncated at 28 days. Secondary outcomes included volume of fluid resuscitation at 24 h, acute heart failure at 24 h, SOFA score at 72 h, intensive care unit (ICU) length of stay, number of days on mechanical ventilation or renal replacement therapy, vasopressor free days, unnecessary antibiotic administration, and mortality at 28 days. 1148 patients were planned to be analysed; the study period ended after 873 patients were included. RESULTS: 872 patients (mean age 66, 42% female) were analyzed: 387 (44.4%) in the intervention group and 485 (55.6%) in the control group. Median SOFA score was 3 [1-5]. Median time to antibiotic administration was 40 min in the intervention group vs 113 min in the control group (difference - 73 [95% confidence interval (CI) - 93 to - 53]). There was a significantly higher rate, volume, and shorter time to fluid resuscitation within 3 h in the intervention group. There were 47 (12.1%) in-hospital deaths in the intervention group compared to 61 (12.6%) in the control group (difference in percentage - 0.4 [95% CI - 5.1 to 4.2], adjusted relative risk (aRR) 0.81 [95% CI 0.48 to 1.39]). There were no differences between groups for other secondary endpoints. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with suspected sepsis in the ED, the implementation of the 1-h sepsis bundle was not associated with significant difference in in-hospital mortality. However, this study may be underpowered to report a statistically significant difference between groups.

Evaluation of use and identification of predictive factors for nonuse of peripheral venous catheters in the emergency department.

The placement of peripheral venous catheters (PVC) is a frequent procedure in the emergency department (ED), which exposes patients to complications (hematoma, fluid leakage, phlebitis, edema, infection), increases hemolysis of blood samples, is time-consuming and costly. The main aim of this study is to analyze the rate of PVC nonuse in the ED and to identify predictive factors of their nonuse. This prospective single-center observational study was conducted in the ED of the Saint-Antoine Hospital in Paris, France between February and March 2022. Adult patients receiving a PVC were included. In addition to demographic and medical data, the reason for PVC prescription and the prescribing physician's expectation of PVC use were collected. A total of 304 patients were included, with a median age of 61.5 years (IQR: 43-79 years), of whom 152 (50%) were men. PVC were primarily prescribed for intravenous medication administration. Seventy-two (23.7%) PVC were not used. In multivariable analysis, the predictive factors of nonuse were the prescribing physician's expectation of nonuse [OR 6.35, CI 95% (2.64-15.29), for "no" and "not sure" vs. "yes" responses] and the reason for prescribing "just in case" [OR 3.54, CI 95% (1.37-9.17)]. PVC were not used in 23.7% of cases. Predictors of nonuse were the prescribing physician's expectation of nonuse and the reason for prescribing "just in case". A PVC should probably not be prescribed if the prescribing physician thinks it will not be used or prescribes it "just in case".

Overnight Stay in the Emergency Department and Mortality in Older Patients.

Importance: Patients in the emergency department (ED) who are waiting for hospital admission on a wheeled cot may be subject to harm. However, mortality and morbidity among older patients who spend the night in the ED while waiting for a bed in a medical ward are unknown. Objective: To assess whether older adults who spend a night in the ED waiting for admission to a hospital ward are at increased risk of in-hospital mortality. Design, Settings, and Participants: This was a prospective cohort study of older patients (≥75 years) who visited the ED and were admitted to the hospital on December 12 to 14, 2022, at 97 EDs across France. Two groups were defined and compared: those who stayed in the ED from midnight until 8:00 am (ED group) and those who were admitted to a ward before midnight (ward group). Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary end point was in-hospital mortality, truncated at 30 days. Secondary outcomes included in-hospital adverse events (ie, falls, infection, bleeding, myocardial infarction, stroke, thrombosis, bedsores, and dysnatremia) and hospital length of stay. A generalized linear-regression mixed model was used to compare end points between groups. Results: The total sample comprised 1598 patients (median [IQR] age, 86 [80-90] years; 880 [55%] female and 718 [45%] male), with 707 (44%) in the ED group and 891 (56%) in the ward group. Patients who spent the night in the ED had a higher in-hospital mortality rate of 15.7% vs 11.1% (adjusted risk ratio [aRR], 1.39; 95% CI, 1.07-1.81). They also had a higher risk of adverse events compared with the ward group (aRR, 1.24; 95% CI, 1.04-1.49) and increased median length of stay (9 vs 8 days; rate ratio, 1.20; 95% CI, 1.11-1.31). In a prespecified subgroup analysis of patients who required assistance with the activities of daily living, spending the night in the ED was associated with a higher in-hospital mortality rate (aRR, 1.81; 95% CI, 1.25-2.61). Conclusions and Relevance: The findings of this prospective cohort study indicate that for older patients, waiting overnight in the ED for admission to a ward was associated with increased in-hospital mortality and morbidity, particularly in patients with limited autonomy. Older adults should be prioritized for admission to a ward.

Spike protein genetic evolution in patients at high-risk of severe COVID-19 treated by monoclonal antibodies.

BACKGROUND: High-risk patients, often immunocompromised and not responding to vaccine, continue to experience severe COVID-19 and death. Monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) were shown effective to prevent severe COVID-19 for these patients. Nevertheless, concerns about the emergence of resistance mutations were raised. METHODS: We conducted a multicentric prospective cohort study, including 264 patients with mild-to moderate COVID-19 at high risk for progression to severe COVID-19 and treated early with Casirivimab/Imdevimab, Sotrovimab or Tixagevimab/Cilgavimab. We sequenced the SARS-CoV-2 genome during follow-up and searched for emerging Spike mutations. RESULTS: Immunocompromised patients have a 6-fold increased risk of developing mutations, which are associated with a prolonged duration of viral clearance but no clinical worsening. Emerging P337S/R/L/H, E340D/K/A/Q/V/G and K356T/R substitutions in patients treated with Sotrovimab are associated with higher viral RNA loads for up to 14 days post-treatment initiation. Tixagevimab/Cilgavimab is associated with a 5-fold increased risk of developing mutations. R346K/I/T/S and K444R/N/M substitutions associated with Tixagevimab/Cilgavimab have been identified in multiple SARS-CoV-2 lineages, including BQ.1 and XBB. CONCLUSIONS: In conclusion, the probability of emerging mutations arising in response to mAbs is significant, emphasizing the crucial need to investigate these mutations thoroughly and assess their impact on patients and the evolutionary trajectory of the SARS-CoV-2.

Effect of Noninvasive Airway Management of Comatose Patients With Acute Poisoning: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Tracheal intubation is recommended for coma patients and those with severe brain injury, but its use in patients with decreased levels of consciousness from acute poisoning is uncertain. Objective: To determine the effect of intubation withholding vs routine practice on clinical outcomes of comatose patients with acute poisoning and a Glasgow Coma Scale score less than 9. Design, Setting, and Participants: This was a multicenter, randomized trial conducted in 20 emergency departments and 1 intensive care unit (ICU) that included comatose patients with suspected acute poisoning and a Glasgow Coma Scale score less than 9 in France between May 16, 2021, and April 12, 2023, and followed up until May 12, 2023. Intervention: Patients were randomized to undergo conservative airway strategy of intubation withholding vs routine practice. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was a hierarchical composite end point of in-hospital death, length of ICU stay, and length of hospital stay. Key secondary outcomes included adverse events resulting from intubation as well as pneumonia within 48 hours. Results: Among the 225 included patients (mean age, 33 years; 38% female), 116 were in the intervention group and 109 in the control group, with respective proportions of intubations of 16% and 58%. No patients died during the in-hospital stay. There was a significant clinical benefit for the primary end point in the intervention group, with a win ratio of 1.85 (95% CI, 1.33 to 2.58). In the intervention group, there was a lower proportion with any adverse event (6% vs 14.7%; absolute risk difference, 8.6% [95% CI, -16.6% to -0.7%]) compared with the control group, and pneumonia occurred in 8 (6.9%) and 16 (14.7%) patients, respectively (absolute risk difference, -7.8% [95% CI, -15.9% to 0.3%]). Conclusions and Relevance: Among comatose patients with suspected acute poisoning, a conservative strategy of withholding intubation was associated with a greater clinical benefit for the composite end point of in-hospital death, length of ICU stay, and length of hospital stay. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04653597.

Sotrovimab therapy elicits antiviral activities against Omicron BQ.1.1 and XBB.1.5 in sera of immunocompromised patients.

Antibodies effective against the recent Omicron sublineages are missing. By taking advantage of a multi-centric prospective cohort of immunocompromised individuals treated for mild-to-moderate COVID-19, Bruel et al. show that administration of 500 mg of sotrovimab induces serum neutralization and antibody-dependent cellular cytotoxicity of BQ.1.1 and XBB.1.5. Therefore, sotrovimab may remain a therapeutic option against these variants.

Pregnant women with mild COVID-19 followed in community setting by telemedicine, and factors associated with unfavorable outcome.

OBJECTIVES: Few is known on pregnant women with mild COVID-19 managed in a community setting with a telemedicine solution, including their outcomes. The objective of this study is to evaluate the adverse fetal outcomes and hospitalization rates of pregnant COVID-19 outpatients who were monitored with the Covidom© telemedicine solution. METHODS: A nested study was conducted on pregnant outpatients with confirmed COVID-19, who were managed with Covidom© between March and November 2020. The patients were required to complete a standard medical questionnaire on co-morbidities and symptoms at inclusion, and were then monitored daily for 30 days after symptom onset. Adverse fetal outcome was defined as a composite of preterm birth, low birthweight, or stillbirth, and was collected retrospectively through phone contact with a standardized questionnaire. RESULTS: The study included 714 pregnant women, with a median age of 32.0 [29.0-35.0] and a median BMI of 23.8 [21.3-27.0]. The main comorbidities observed were smoking (53%), hypertension (19%). The most common symptoms were asthenia (45.6%), cough (40.3%) and headache (25.7%), as well as anosmia (28.4%) and agueusia (32.3%). Adverse fetal outcomes occurred in 64 (9%) cases, including 38 (5%) preterm births, 33 (5%) low birthweights, and 6 (1%) stillbirths. Hospitalization occurred in 102 (14%) cases and was associated with adverse fetal outcomes (OR 2.4, 95% CI 1.3-4.4). CONCLUSIONS: Our study suggests that adverse fetal outcomes are rare in pregnant women with mild COVID-19 who are monitored at home with telemedicine. However, hospitalization for COVID-19 and pregnancy-induced hypertension are associated with a higher risk of adverse fetal outcome.

Antiviral activities of sotrovimab against BQ.1.1 and XBB.1.5 in sera of treated patients.

Background: Monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) targeting the spike of SARS-CoV-2 prevent severe COVID-19. Omicron subvariants BQ.1.1 and XBB.1.5 evade neutralization of therapeutic mAbs, leading to recommendations against their use. Yet, the antiviral activities of mAbs in treated patients remain ill-defined. Methods: We investigated neutralization and antibody-dependent cellular cytotoxicity (ADCC) of D614G, BQ.1.1 and XBB.1.5 in 320 sera from 80 immunocompromised patients with mild-to-moderate COVID-19 prospectively treated with mAbs (sotrovimab, n=29; imdevimab/casirivimab, n=34; cilgavimab/tixagevimab, n=4) or anti-protease (nirmatrelvir/ritonavir, n=13). We measured live-virus neutralization titers and quantified ADCC with a reporter assay. Findings: Only Sotrovimab elicits serum neutralization and ADCC against BQ.1.1 and XBB.1.5. As compared to D614G, sotrovimab neutralization titers of BQ.1.1 and XBB.1.5 are reduced (71- and 58-fold, respectively), but ADCC levels are only slightly decreased (1.4- and 1-fold, for BQ.1.1 and XBB.1.5, respectively). Interpretation: Our results show that sotrovimab is active against BQ.1.1 and XBB.1.5 in treated individuals, suggesting that it may be a valuable therapeutic option.

Effectiveness and Medicoeconomic Evaluation of Home Monitoring of Patients With Mild COVID-19: Covidom Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: Covidom was a telemonitoring solution for home monitoring of patients with mild to moderate COVID-19, deployed in March 2020 in the Greater Paris area in France to alleviate the burden on the health care system. The Covidom solution included a free mobile application with daily monitoring questionnaires and a regional control center to quickly handle patient alerts, including dispatching emergency medical services when necessary. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to provide an overall evaluation of the Covidom solution 18 months after its inception in terms of effectiveness, safety, and cost. METHODS: Our primary outcome was to measure effectiveness using the number of handled alerts, response escalation, and patient-reported medical contacts outside of Covidom. Then, we analyzed the safety of Covidom by assessing its ability to detect clinical worsening, defined as hospitalization or death, and the number of patients with clinical worsening without any preceding alert. We evaluated the cost of Covidom and compared the cost of hospitalization for Covidom and non-Covidom patients with mild COVID-19 cases seen in the emergency departments of the largest network of hospitals in the Greater Paris area (Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris). Finally, we reported on user satisfaction. RESULTS: Of the 60,073 patients monitored by Covidom, the regional control center handled 285,496 alerts and dispatched emergency medical services 518 times. Of the 13,204 respondents who responded to either of the follow-up questionnaires, 65.8% (n=8690) reported having sought medical care outside the Covidom solution during their monitoring period. Of the 947 patients who experienced clinical worsening while adhering to daily monitoring, only 35 (3.7%) did not previously trigger alerts (35 were hospitalized, including 1 who died). The average cost of Covidom was €54 (US $1=€0.8614) per patient, and the cost of hospitalization for COVID-19 worsening was significantly lower in Covidom than in non-Covidom patients with mild COVID-19 cases seen in the emergency departments of Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris. The patients who responded to the satisfaction questionnaire had a median rating of 9 (out of 10) for the likelihood of recommending Covidom. CONCLUSIONS: Covidom may have contributed to alleviating the pressure on the health care system in the initial months of the pandemic, although its impact was lower than anticipated, with a substantial number of patients having consulted outside of Covidom. Covidom seems to be safe for home monitoring of patients with mild to moderate COVID-19.

The Association Between Age and Admission to an Inappropriate Ward: A Cross-Sectional Survey in France.

Half of elderly patient hospitalizations are preceded by an emergency department (ED) visit. Hospitalization in inappropriate wards (IWs), which is more frequent in case of ED overcrowding and high hospital occupancy, leads to increased morbidity. Elderly individuals are the most exposed to these negative health care outcomes. Based on a nationwide cross-sectional survey involving all EDs in France, the aim of this study was to explore whether age was associated with admission to an IW after visiting an ED. Among the 4384 patients admitted in a medical ward, 4065 were admitted in the same hospital where the ED was located, among which 17.7% were admitted to an IW. Older age was associated with an increased likelihood of being admitted to an IW (OR = 1.39; 95% CI = 1.02-1.90 for patients aged 85 years and older and OR = 1.40; 95% CI = 1.02-1.91 for patients aged 75-84 years, compared with those under 45 years). ED visits during peak periods and cardio-pulmonary presenting complaint were also associated with an increased likelihood of admission to an IW. Despite their higher vulnerability, elderly patients are more likely to be admitted to an IW than younger patients. This result reinforces the need for special attention to be given to the hospitalization of this fragile population.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of direct admission to acute geriatric unit versus admission after an emergency department visit for elderly patients.

BACKGROUND: Elderly individuals represent an increasing proportion of emergency department (ED) users. In the Greater Paris University Hospitals (APHP) direct-admission study, direct admission (DA) to an acute geriatric unit (AGU) was associated with a shorter hospital length of stay (LOS), lower post-acute care transfers, and lower risk of an ED return visit in the month following the AGU hospitalization compared with admission after an ED visit. Until now, no economic evaluation of DA has been available. METHODS: We aimed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of DA to an AGU versus admission after an ED visit in elderly patients. This was conducted alongside the APHP direct-admission study which used electronic medical records and administrative claims data from the Greater Paris University Hospitals (APHP) Health Data Warehouse and involved 19 different AGUs. We included all patients ≥ 75 years old who were admitted to an AGU for more than 24 h between January 1, 2013 and December 31, 2018. The effectiveness criterion was the occurrence of ED return visit in the month following AGU hospitalization. We compared the costs of an AGU stay in the DA versus the ED visit group. The perspective was that of the payer. To characterise and summarize uncertainty, we used a non-parametric bootstrap resampling and constructed cost-effectiveness accessibility curves. RESULTS: At baseline, mean costs per patient were €5113 and €5131 in the DA and ED visit groups, respectively. ED return visit rates were 3.3% (n = 81) in the DA group and 3.9% (n = 160) in the ED group (p = 0.21). After bootstrap, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was €-4249 (95%CI= -66,001; +45,547) per ED return visit averted. Acceptability curves showed that DA could be considered a cost-effective intervention at a threshold of €-2405 per ED return visit avoided. CONCLUSION: The results of this cost-effectiveness analysis of DA to an AGU versus admission after an ED visit for elderly patients argues in favor of DA, which could help provide support for public decision making.

External validation of Glasgow-Blatchford, modified Glasgow-Blatchford and CANUKA scores to identify low-risk patients with upper gastrointestinal bleeding in emergency departments: a retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB) is a medical emergency with an approximate mortality of 10%, which results in a high hospitalisation rate. The Glasgow-Blatchford score (GBS) is recommended to identify low-risk patients who can be discharged from the emergency department (ED). A modified GBS (mGBS) and CANUKA score have recently been proposed but have not been well studied. The aim of this study was to assess whether the use of GBS, mGBS or CANUKA score could identify patients at low risk of death or need for intervention. METHODS: A single-centre retrospective study was performed including patients with suspected UGIB visiting the ED of Saint-Antoine hospital (Paris, France) from January 2016 to December 2018. Demographic and medical data needed to calculate GBS and CANUKA were collected, as well as outcomes data. Need for intervention was defined as the need for blood transfusion, endoscopic haemostasis or rebleeding within 7 days. In-hospital mortality was also collected. Sensitivity, specificity and predictive values were measured for the score thresholds of interest. RESULTS: A total of 386 patients were included. Median age was 60 years (38-78), 65.3% (n=252) were male and 60% (n=233) were hospitalised. A GBS≤1, mGBS=0 and CANUKA≤2 categorised 24.9%, 18.2% and 18.9% of patients as low risk, respectively. There was a need for intervention in 2.2%, 4.6% and 0% of those patients categorised as low risk by GBS, mGBS and CANUKA, respectively. No deaths occurred in the patients identified as low risk, regardless of the score used. All scores had a high sensitivity and negative predictive value. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with UGIB, the use of a GBS≤1 or CANUKA score ≤2 appears to be safe for identifying patients at low risk of death or need for intervention.

Time to negative PCR conversion amongst high-risk patients with mild-to-moderate Omicron BA.1 and BA.2 COVID-19 treated with sotrovimab or nirmatrelvir.

OBJECTIVES: Our aim was to compare the clinical and virological outcomes in Omicron BA.1- and BA.2-infected patients who received sotrovimab with those in patients who received nirmatrelvir for the prevention of severe COVID-19. METHODS: In this multi-centric, prospective ANRS 0003S CoCoPrev cohort study, patients at a high risk of progression of mild-to-moderate BA.1 or BA.2 COVID-19 who received sotrovimab or nirmatrelvir were included. The proportion of patients with progression to severe COVID-19, time between the start of treatment to negative PCR conversion, SARS-CoV-2 viral decay, and characterization of resistance variants were determined. A multi-variable Cox proportional hazard model was used to determine the time to negative PCR conversion and a mixed-effect model for the dynamics of viral decay. RESULTS: Amongst 255 included patients, 199 (80%) received ≥3 vaccine doses, 195 (76%) received sotrovimab, and 60 (24%) received nirmatrelvir. On day 28, new COVID-19-related hospitalization occurred in 4 of 193 (2%; 95% CI, 1-5%) sotrovimab-treated patients and 0 of 55 nirmatrelvir-treated patients (p 0.24). One out of the 55 nirmatrelvir-treated patients died (2%; 95% CI, 0-10%). The median time to negative PCR conversion was 11.5 days (95% CI, 10.5-13) in the sotrovimab-treated patients vs. 4 days (95% CI, 4-9) in the nirmatrelvir-treated patients (p < 0.001). Viral decay was faster in the patients who received nirmatrelvir (p < 0.001). In the multi-variable analysis, nirmatrelvir and nasopharyngeal PCR cycle threshold values were independently associated with faster conversion to negative PCR (hazard ratio, 2.35; 95% CI, 1.56-3.56; p < 0.0001 and hazard ratio, 1.05; 95% CI, 1.01-1.08; p 0.01, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Early administration of nirmatrelvir in high-risk patients compared with that of sotrovimab was associated with faster viral clearance. This may participate to decrease transmission and prevent viral resistance.

Characteristics and outcomes of asthmatic outpatients with COVID-19 who receive home telesurveillance.

Background: The prognosis of asthmatic outpatients with COVID-19 needs to be clarified. The objectives of this study were: 1) to investigate the characteristics and outcomes of asthmatic patients receiving initial ambulatory care and home monitoring for COVID-19 with Covidom, a telesurveillance solution; and 2) to compare the characteristics and outcomes between asthmatic and non-asthmatic patients. Methods: Inclusion criteria were age ≥18 years, suspected or confirmed COVID-19 diagnosis allowing initial ambulatory care, registration in Covidom between March 2020 and April 2021 and completion of the initial medical questionnaire. We compared clinical characteristics and outcomes between asthmatic and non-asthmatic patients, and we evaluated whether asthma was independently associated with clinical worsening (hospitalisation or death) within 30 days follow-up using a multivariate logistic regression model. Results: 33 815 patients met the inclusion criteria. Asthma was reported in 4276 (12.6%). The main comorbidities among asthmatic patients were obesity (23.1%), hypertension (12.7%) and diabetes (4.5%). As compared with non-asthmatic patients, asthmatic patients were more often female (70.0 versus 62.1%, p<0.001), of younger age (42.2 versus 43.8 years, p<0.001) and obese (23.1 versus 17.6%, p<0.001). The rate of hospitalisation did not differ significantly (4.7 versus 4.2%, p=0.203) and no asthmatic patient died during follow-up (versus 25 non-asthmatic patients, 0.1%; p=0.109). In multivariate analysis, asthma was independently associated with higher risk of clinical worsening (OR 1.23, 95% CI 1.04-1.44, p=0.013). Conclusion: In a large French cohort of patients receiving initial ambulatory care and home monitoring for COVID-19, asthma was independently associated with higher risk of clinical worsening although no asthmatic patient died within the 30 days follow-up.

Meta-analyses frequently include old trials that are associated with a larger intervention effect: a meta-epidemiological study.

OBJECTIVE: To assess whether meta-analyses include older randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and whether intervention effect differ between older and recent RCTs. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: In this meta-epidemiological study of 295 meta-analyses (2940 RCTs) published in 2017-2018, we evaluated the difference in intervention effects between older (i.e., published before 2000) and recent RCTs. We also compared effects by quarters of publication year within each meta-analysis (from quarter 1 including the 25% oldest trials to quarter 4 including the 25% most recent trials). A ratio of odds ratio (ROR) <1 indicates larger effects in older than recent RCTs. RESULTS: Trials published before 2000 and before 1990 represented 25% and 10% of all trials, respectively. Intervention effects were significantly larger for old than recent RCTs (ROR = 0.92, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.85-1.00, I2 = 22%). Compared with the most recent trials (quarter 4), intervention effects were significantly larger for the oldest trials (quarter 1) (ROR = 0.85, 95% CI 0.79-0.92) and for trials in quarter 2 (ROR = 0.89, 95% CI 0.83-0.96) but not for trials in quarter 3 (ROR = 0.98, 95% CI 0.91-1.05). CONCLUSIONS: Intervention effects were larger for older than recent RCTs. Meta-analyses including older trials should be interpreted cautiously.