Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 20 de 94
Filtrar
1.
J Clin Epidemiol ; 2022 Aug 04.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35934266

RESUMO

INTRODUCTION: GRADE guidance to rate the certainty domain of imprecision is presently not fully operationalized for rating down by two levels and when different or uncertainty in baseline risks are considered. In addition, there are scenarios in which lowering the certainty of evidence by three levels for imprecision is more appropriate than lowering it by two levels. In this article, we conceptualize and operationalize rating down for imprecision by one, two and three levels for imprecision using the contextualized GRADE approaches. METHODS: Through iterative discussions and refinement in online meetings and through email communication, we developed draft guidance to rating the certainty of evidence down by up to three levels based on examples. The lead authors revised the approach according to the feedback and the comments received during these meetings and developed GRADE guidance for how to apply it. We presented a summary of the results to all attendees of the GRADE Working Group meeting for feedback in October 2021 (approximately 80 people) where the approach was formally approved. RESULTS: This guidance provides GRADE's novel approach for rating down for imprecision by one, two and three levels based on serious, very serious and extremely serious concerns. The approach includes identifying or defining thresholds for health outcomes that correspond to trivial or none, small, moderate or large effects and using them to rate imprecision. It facilitates the use of evidence to decision frameworks and also provides guidance for how to address imprecision about implausible large effects and trivial or no effects using the concept of the 'review information size' and for varying baseline risks. The approach is illustrated using practical examples, an online calculator and graphical displays and can be applied to dichotomous and continuous outcomes. CONCLUSION: In this GRADE guidance article, we provide updated guidance for how to rate down for imprecision by up to three levels using the partially and fully contextualized GRADE approaches for making recommendations or decisions, considering alternate baseline risks and for both dichotomous and continuous outcomes.

2.
Br J Haematol ; 2022 Jul 25.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35877546

RESUMO

The risk of recurrence after discontinuation of anticoagulation for a combined oral contraceptive (COC)-associated venous thromboembolism (VTE) is unclear. Therefore, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to estimate the incidence of recurrent VTE among women with COC-associated VTE, unprovoked VTE and to compare the incidence of recurrent VTE between the two groups. The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Embase Classic +Embase and Medline ALL to July 2020 and citations from included studies were searched. Randomized controlled trials, prospective cohort studies and meta-analyses of these study types were selected. The analysis was conducted by random-effects model. Nineteen studies were identified including 1537 women [5828 person-years (PY)] with COC-associated VTE and 1974 women (7798 PY) with unprovoked VTE. Studies were at low risk of bias. The incidence rate of VTE recurrence was 1.22/100 PY [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.92-1.62, I2  = 6%] in women with COC-associated VTE, 3.89/100 PY (95% CI 2.93-5.17, I2  = 74%) in women with unprovoked VTE and the unadjusted incidence rate ratio was 0.34 (95% CI 0.26-0.46, I2  = 3%). The recurrence risk in women after COC-associated VTE is low and lower than after an unprovoked VTE.

3.
Gynecol Oncol ; 166(1): 154-161, 2022 Jul.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35606168

RESUMO

INTRODUCTION: Frailty is increasingly recognized as a predictor of postoperative morbidity and oncologic outcomes. Evidence of the predictive value of frailty assessment in gynecologic oncology remains sparse. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) comorbidity-based modified Frailty Index-5 (mFI-5) as predictor of severe postoperative complications, non-completion of chemotherapy and other patient-centered outcomes in gynecologic oncology patients >70 years-old undergoing surgery. METHODS: Prospectively-collected NSQIP data and retrospective chart review of patients undergoing elective laparotomies for gynecologic malignances at a tertiary academic center in Ontario, Canada, between 01/2016-09/2020 were reviewed. Primary outcome was rate of 30-day Clavien-Dindo (Clavien) grade III-V complications. Secondary outcomes included Clavien II-V complications, postoperative length of stay (LOS), non-home discharge and non-completion of chemotherapy. Logistic regression analyses and receiver-operator curves were performed. RESULTS: Two-hundred and fifty-nine patients were included; 103 were planned to receive adjuvant chemotherapy. Fifty-three patients (20.5%) had an mFI ≥ 2 and were categorized as frail. On multivariable analyses, frailty independently predicted grade III-V complications (OR 24.49, 95%CI 9.72-70.67, p < 0.0001), grade II-V complications (OR 4.64, 95%CI 2.31-9.94, p < 0.0001), non-home discharge (OR 7.37, 95%CI 2.81-20.46, p < 0.0001), LOS ≥ 7d (OR 3.6, 95% CI 1.54-8.6, p = 0.003) and non-completion of chemotherapy (OR 8.42, 95%CI 2.46-32.79, p = 0.001). Adjusted C-statistics demonstrated strong predictive value of the mFI-5 for grade III-V (0.92, 95%CI 0.86-0.97) and grade II-V (0.74, 95%CI 0.68-0.8) complications as well as non-home discharge (0.86, 95%CI 0.78-0.95) and chemotherapy non-completion (0.87, 95%CI 0.8-0.95). CONCLUSION: Frailty as assessed with the mFI-5 predicted adverse postoperative and chemotherapy outcomes in gynecologic oncology patients aged ≥70 undergoing a laparotomy. The mFI-5 is a concise tool that can be used for routine frailty screening and risk stratification.


Assuntos
Fragilidade , Neoplasias dos Genitais Femininos , Idoso , Feminino , Fragilidade/complicações , Fragilidade/epidemiologia , Neoplasias dos Genitais Femininos/complicações , Neoplasias dos Genitais Femininos/tratamento farmacológico , Neoplasias dos Genitais Femininos/cirurgia , Humanos , Ontário , Complicações Pós-Operatórias/diagnóstico , Complicações Pós-Operatórias/epidemiologia , Complicações Pós-Operatórias/etiologia , Estudos Retrospectivos , Medição de Risco , Fatores de Risco
4.
N Engl J Med ; 386(21): 1986-1997, 2022 05 26.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35363452

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Perioperative bleeding is common in patients undergoing noncardiac surgery. Tranexamic acid is an antifibrinolytic drug that may safely decrease such bleeding. METHODS: We conducted a trial involving patients undergoing noncardiac surgery. Patients were randomly assigned to receive tranexamic acid (1-g intravenous bolus) or placebo at the start and end of surgery (reported here) and, with the use of a partial factorial design, a hypotension-avoidance or hypertension-avoidance strategy (not reported here). The primary efficacy outcome was life-threatening bleeding, major bleeding, or bleeding into a critical organ (composite bleeding outcome) at 30 days. The primary safety outcome was myocardial injury after noncardiac surgery, nonhemorrhagic stroke, peripheral arterial thrombosis, or symptomatic proximal venous thromboembolism (composite cardiovascular outcome) at 30 days. To establish the noninferiority of tranexamic acid to placebo for the composite cardiovascular outcome, the upper boundary of the one-sided 97.5% confidence interval for the hazard ratio had to be below 1.125, and the one-sided P value had to be less than 0.025. RESULTS: A total of 9535 patients underwent randomization. A composite bleeding outcome event occurred in 433 of 4757 patients (9.1%) in the tranexamic acid group and in 561 of 4778 patients (11.7%) in the placebo group (hazard ratio, 0.76; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.67 to 0.87; absolute difference, -2.6 percentage points; 95% CI, -3.8 to -1.4; two-sided P<0.001 for superiority). A composite cardiovascular outcome event occurred in 649 of 4581 patients (14.2%) in the tranexamic acid group and in 639 of 4601 patients (13.9%) in the placebo group (hazard ratio, 1.02; 95% CI, 0.92 to 1.14; upper boundary of the one-sided 97.5% CI, 1.14; absolute difference, 0.3 percentage points; 95% CI, -1.1 to 1.7; one-sided P = 0.04 for noninferiority). CONCLUSIONS: Among patients undergoing noncardiac surgery, the incidence of the composite bleeding outcome was significantly lower with tranexamic acid than with placebo. Although the between-group difference in the composite cardiovascular outcome was small, the noninferiority of tranexamic acid was not established. (Funded by the Canadian Institutes of Health Research and others; POISE-3 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03505723.).


Assuntos
Antifibrinolíticos , Ácido Tranexâmico , Antifibrinolíticos/efeitos adversos , Antifibrinolíticos/uso terapêutico , Canadá , Hemorragia/etiologia , Hemorragia/prevenção & controle , Humanos , Procedimentos Cirúrgicos Operatórios , Trombose/induzido quimicamente , Trombose/tratamento farmacológico , Ácido Tranexâmico/efeitos adversos , Ácido Tranexâmico/uso terapêutico
5.
BMJ ; 376: e066785, 2022 03 09.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35264372

RESUMO

OBJECTIVE: To systematically compare the effect of direct oral anticoagulants and low molecular weight heparin for thromboprophylaxis on the benefits and harms to patients undergoing non-cardiac surgery. DESIGN: Systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials. DATA SOURCES: Medline, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), up to August 2021. REVIEW METHODS: Randomised controlled trials in adults undergoing non-cardiac surgery were selected, comparing low molecular weight heparin (prophylactic (low) or higher dose) with direct oral anticoagulants or with no active treatment. Main outcomes were symptomatic venous thromboembolism, symptomatic pulmonary embolism, and major bleeding. Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines were used for network meta-analyses. Abstracts and full texts were screened independently in duplicate. Data were abstracted on study participants, interventions, and outcomes, and risk of bias was assessed independently in duplicate. Frequentist network meta-analysis with multivariate random effects models provided odds ratios with 95% confidence intervals, and GRADE (grading of recommendations, assessment, development, and evaluation) assessments indicated the certainty of the evidence. RESULTS: 68 randomised controlled trials were included (51 orthopaedic, 10 general, four gynaecological, two thoracic, and one urological surgery), involving 45 445 patients. Low dose (odds ratio 0.33, 95% confidence interval 0.16 to 0.67) and high dose (0.19, 0.07 to 0.54) low molecular weight heparin, and direct oral anticoagulants (0.17, 0.07 to 0.41) reduced symptomatic venous thromboembolism compared with no active treatment, with absolute risk differences of 1-100 per 1000 patients, depending on baseline risks (certainty of evidence, moderate to high). None of the active agents reduced symptomatic pulmonary embolism (certainty of evidence, low to moderate). Direct oral anticoagulants and low molecular weight heparin were associated with a 2-3-fold increase in the odds of major bleeding compared with no active treatment (certainty of evidence, moderate to high), with absolute risk differences as high as 50 per 1000 in patients at high risk. Compared with low dose low molecular weight heparin, high dose low molecular weight heparin did not reduce symptomatic venous thromboembolism (0.57, 0.26 to 1.27) but increased major bleeding (1.87, 1.06 to 3.31); direct oral anticoagulants reduced symptomatic venous thromboembolism (0.53, 0.32 to 0.89) and did not increase major bleeding (1.23, 0.89 to 1.69). CONCLUSIONS: Direct oral anticoagulants and low molecular weight heparin reduced venous thromboembolism compared with no active treatment but probably increased major bleeding to a similar extent. Direct oral anticoagulants probably prevent symptomatic venous thromboembolism to a greater extent than prophylactic low molecular weight heparin. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42018106181.


Assuntos
Anticoagulantes/administração & dosagem , Heparina de Baixo Peso Molecular/administração & dosagem , Complicações Pós-Operatórias/prevenção & controle , Embolia Pulmonar/prevenção & controle , Tromboembolia Venosa/prevenção & controle , Hemorragia/induzido quimicamente , Humanos , Metanálise em Rede , Complicações Pós-Operatórias/etiologia , Embolia Pulmonar/etiologia , Ensaios Clínicos Controlados Aleatórios como Assunto , Procedimentos Cirúrgicos Operatórios/efeitos adversos , Resultado do Tratamento , Tromboembolia Venosa/etiologia
6.
Trials ; 23(1): 101, 2022 Jan 31.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35101083

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: For patients undergoing noncardiac surgery, bleeding and hypotension are frequent and associated with increased mortality and cardiovascular complications. Tranexamic acid (TXA) is an antifibrinolytic agent with the potential to reduce surgical bleeding; however, there is uncertainty about its efficacy and safety in noncardiac surgery. Although usual perioperative care is commonly consistent with a hypertension-avoidance strategy (i.e., most patients continue their antihypertensive medications throughout the perioperative period and intraoperative mean arterial pressures of 60 mmHg are commonly accepted), a hypotension-avoidance strategy may improve perioperative outcomes. METHODS: The PeriOperative Ischemic Evaluation (POISE)-3 Trial is a large international randomized controlled trial designed to determine if TXA is superior to placebo for the composite outcome of life-threatening, major, and critical organ bleeding, and non-inferior to placebo for the occurrence of major arterial and venous thrombotic events, at 30 days after randomization. Using a partial factorial design, POISE-3 will additionally determine the effect of a hypotension-avoidance strategy versus a hypertension-avoidance strategy on the risk of major cardiovascular events, at 30 days after randomization. The target sample size is 10,000 participants. Patients ≥45 years of age undergoing noncardiac surgery, with or at risk of cardiovascular and bleeding complications, are randomized to receive a TXA 1 g intravenous bolus or matching placebo at the start and at the end of surgery. Patients, health care providers, data collectors, outcome adjudicators, and investigators are blinded to the treatment allocation. Patients on ≥ 1 chronic antihypertensive medication are also randomized to either of the two blood pressure management strategies, which differ in the management of patient antihypertensive medications on the morning of surgery and on the first 2 days after surgery, and in the target mean arterial pressure during surgery. Outcome adjudicators are blinded to the blood pressure treatment allocation. Patients are followed up at 30 days and 1 year after randomization. DISCUSSION: Bleeding and hypotension in noncardiac surgery are common and have a substantial impact on patient prognosis. The POISE-3 trial will evaluate two interventions to determine their impact on bleeding, cardiovascular complications, and mortality. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03505723. Registered on 23 April 2018.


Assuntos
Antifibrinolíticos , Hipotensão , Ácido Tranexâmico , Antifibrinolíticos/efeitos adversos , Perda Sanguínea Cirúrgica/prevenção & controle , Humanos , Hipotensão/induzido quimicamente , Hipotensão/diagnóstico , Hipotensão/prevenção & controle , Assistência Perioperatória , Ácido Tranexâmico/efeitos adversos
7.
Can J Kidney Health Dis ; 9: 20543581211069225, 2022.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35024154

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Most patients who take antihypertensive medications continue taking them on the morning of surgery and during the perioperative period. However, growing evidence suggests this practice may contribute to perioperative hypotension and a higher risk of complications. This protocol describes an acute kidney injury substudy of the Perioperative Ischemic Evaluation-3 (POISE-3) trial, which is testing the effect of a perioperative hypotension-avoidance strategy versus a hypertension-avoidance strategy in patients undergoing noncardiac surgery. OBJECTIVE: To conduct a substudy of POISE-3 to determine whether a perioperative hypotension-avoidance strategy reduces the risk of acute kidney injury compared with a hypertension-avoidance strategy. DESIGN: Randomized clinical trial with 1:1 randomization to the intervention (a perioperative hypotension-avoidance strategy) or control (a hypertension-avoidance strategy). INTERVENTION: If the presurgery systolic blood pressure (SBP) is <130 mmHg, all antihypertensive medications are withheld on the morning of surgery. If the SBP is ≥130 mmHg, some medications (but not angiotensin receptor blockers [ACEIs], angiotensin receptor blockers [ARBs], or renin inhibitors) may be continued in a stepwise manner. During surgery, the patients' mean arterial pressure (MAP) is maintained at ≥80 mmHg. During the first 48 hours after surgery, some antihypertensive medications (but not ACEIs, ARBs, or renin inhibitors) may be restarted in a stepwise manner if the SBP is ≥130 mmHg. CONTROL: Patients receive their usual antihypertensive medications before and after surgery. The patients' MAP is maintained at ≥60 mmHg from anesthetic induction until the end of surgery. SETTING: Recruitment from 108 centers in 22 countries from 2018 to 2021. PATIENTS: Patients (~6800) aged ≥45 years having noncardiac surgery who have or are at risk of atherosclerotic disease and who routinely take antihypertensive medications. MEASUREMENTS: The primary outcome of the substudy is postoperative acute kidney injury, defined as an increase in serum creatinine concentration of either ≥26.5 µmol/L (≥0.3 mg/dL) within 48 hours of randomization or ≥50% within 7 days of randomization. METHODS: The primary analysis (intention-to-treat) will examine the relative risk and 95% confidence interval of acute kidney injury in the intervention versus control group. We will repeat the primary analysis using alternative definitions of acute kidney injury and examine effect modification by preexisting chronic kidney disease, defined as a prerandomization estimated glomerular filtration rate <60 mL/min/1.73 m2. RESULTS: Substudy results will be analyzed in 2022. LIMITATIONS: It is not possible to mask patients or providers to the intervention; however, objective measures will be used to assess acute kidney injury. CONCLUSIONS: This substudy will provide generalizable estimates of the effect of a perioperative hypotension-avoidance strategy on the risk of acute kidney injury.


CONTEXTE: La plupart des patients qui prennent des médicaments antihypertenseurs continuent de les prendre le matin d'une intervention chirurgicale et pendant la période périopératoire. De plus en plus de preuves suggèrent que cette pratique pourrait entraîner l'hypotension périopératoire et augmenter le risque de complications. Ce protocole décrit une sous-étude sur l'insuffisance rénale aiguë (IRA) découlant de l'essai Perioperative Ischemic Evaluation-3 (POISE-3). Cet essai teste l'effet d'une stratégie d'évitement de l'hypotension périopératoire par rapport à une stratégie d'évitement de l'hypertension chez des patients qui subissent une chirurgie non cardiaque. OBJECTIFS: Cette sous-étude de l'essai POISE-3 vise à déterminer si une stratégie d'évitement de l'hypotension périopératoire réduit le risque d'IRA comparativement à la stratégie d'évitement de l'hypertension. TYPE D'ÉTUDE: Essai clinique randomisé à répartition 1:1 au groupe intervention (stratégie d'évitement de l'hypotension périopératoire) ou au groupe témoin (stratégie d'évitement de l'hypertension). GROUPE INTERVENTION: Si la pression artérielle systolique (PAS) avant l'opération est <130 mmHg, tous les médicaments antihypertenseurs sont suspendus le matin de la chirurgie. Si la PAS est ≥130 mmHg, certains médicaments (excluant les inhibiteurs de l'enzyme de conversion de l'angiotensine [IECA], les antagonistes du récepteur de l'angiotensine [ARA] ou les inhibiteurs de la rénine) peuvent être poursuivis de façon graduelle. Pendant la chirurgie, la pression artérielle moyenne (PAM) du patient est maintenue à ≥80 mmHg. Dans les 48 heures suivant l'intervention chirurgicale, certains médicaments antihypertenseurs (excluant les IECA, les ARA ou les inhibiteurs de la rénine) peuvent être réintroduits par étapes si la PAS est ≥130 mmHg. GROUPE TÉMOIN: Les patients reçoivent leurs médicaments antihypertenseurs habituels avant et après la chirurgie. La PAM du patient est maintenue à ≥60 mmHg de l'induction de l'anesthésie à la fin de l'intervention chirurgicale. CADRE: Recrutement à partir de 108 centres dans 22 pays entre 2018 à 2021. SUJETS: Des patients (~6 800) âgés de 45 ans et plus atteints d'athérosclérose, ou présentant un risque de l'être, devant subir une chirurgie non cardiaque et prenant des médicaments antihypertenseurs sur une base régulière. MESURES: Le principal critère d'évaluation de cette sous-étude est une IRA postopératoire définie par une hausse d'au moins 26,5 µmol/L (≥0,3 mg/dL) de la créatinine sérique dans les 48 heures suivant la randomisation ou d'au moins 50 % dans les 7 jours suivant la randomisation. MÉTHODOLOGIE: L'analyse primaire (par intention de traiter) examinera le risque relatif d'une IRA et l'intervalle de confiance à 95 % dans le groupe intervention par rapport au groupe témoin. Nous répéterons l'analyse primaire en utilisant d'autres définitions de l'IRA et nous examinerons la modification de l'effet en présence d'une insuffisance rénale préexistante (définie par un DFGe prérandomisation <60 ml/min/1,73 m2). RÉSULTATS: Les résultats de cette sous-étude seront analysés en 2022. LIMITES: Il n'est pas possible de procéder à l'insu des patients ou des prestataires de soins pour cette intervention; des mesures objectives seront toutefois utilisées pour évaluer l'IRA. CONCLUSION: Cette sous-étude fournira des estimations généralisables de l'effet d'une stratégie visant à éviter l'hypotension périopératoire sur le risque d'insuffisance rénale aiguë.

8.
JMIR Mhealth Uhealth ; 10(2): e24916, 2022 02 28.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34876396

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Wearable continuous monitoring biosensor technologies have the potential to transform postoperative care with early detection of impending clinical deterioration. OBJECTIVE: Our aim was to validate the accuracy of Cloud DX Vitaliti continuous vital signs monitor (CVSM) continuous noninvasive blood pressure (cNIBP) measurements in postsurgical patients. A secondary aim was to examine user acceptance of the Vitaliti CVSM with respect to comfort, ease of application, sustainability of positioning, and aesthetics. METHODS: Included participants were ≥18 years old and recovering from surgery in a cardiac intensive care unit (ICU). We targeted a maximum recruitment of 80 participants for verification and acceptance testing. We also oversampled to minimize the effect of unforeseen interruptions and other challenges to the study. Validation procedures were according to the International Standards Organization (ISO) 81060-2:2018 standards for wearable, cuffless blood pressure (BP) measuring devices. Baseline BP was determined from the gold-standard ICU arterial catheter. The Vitaliti CVSM was calibrated against the reference arterial catheter. In static (seated in bed) and supine positions, 3 cNIBP measurements, each 30 seconds, were taken for each patient with the Vitaliti CVSM and an invasive arterial catheter. At the conclusion of each test session, captured cNIBP measurements were extracted using MediCollector BEDSIDE data extraction software, and Vitaliti CVSM measurements were extracted to a secure laptop through a cable connection. The errors of these determinations were calculated. Participants were interviewed about device acceptability. RESULTS: The validation analysis included data for 20 patients. The average times from calibration to first measurement in the static position and to first measurement in the supine position were 133.85 seconds (2 minutes 14 seconds) and 535.15 seconds (8 minutes 55 seconds), respectively. The overall mean errors of determination for the static position were -0.621 (SD 4.640) mm Hg for systolic blood pressure (SBP) and 0.457 (SD 1.675) mm Hg for diastolic blood pressure (DBP). Errors of determination were slightly higher for the supine position, at 2.722 (SD 5.207) mm Hg for SBP and 2.650 (SD 3.221) mm Hg for DBP. The majority rated the Vitaliti CVSM as comfortable. This study was limited to evaluation of the device during a very short validation period after calibration (ie, that commenced within 2 minutes after calibration and lasted for a short duration of time). CONCLUSIONS: We found that the Cloud DX's Vitaliti CVSM demonstrated cNIBP measurement in compliance with ISO 81060-2:2018 standards in the context of evaluation that commenced within 2 minutes of device calibration; this device was also well-received by patients in a postsurgical ICU setting. Future studies will examine the accuracy of the Vitaliti CVSM in ambulatory contexts, with attention to assessment over a longer duration and the impact of excessive patient motion on data artifacts and signal quality. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03493867; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03493867.


Assuntos
Determinação da Pressão Arterial , Dispositivos Eletrônicos Vestíveis , Adolescente , Pressão Sanguínea/fisiologia , Humanos , Monitorização Fisiológica
9.
Can J Cardiol ; 38(2): 267-278, 2022 02.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34742860

RESUMO

The pursuit of more efficient patient-friendly health systems and reductions in tertiary health services use has seen enormous growth in the application and study of remote patient monitoring systems for cardiovascular patient care. While there are many consumer-grade products available to monitor patient wellness, the regulation of these technologies varies considerably, with most products having little to no evaluation data. As the science and practice of virtual care continues to evolve, clinicians and researchers can benefit from an understanding of more comprehensive solutions capable of monitoring multiple biophysical parameters (eg, oxygen saturation, heart rate) continuously and simultaneously. These devices, herein referred to as continuous multiparameter remote automated monitoring (CM-RAM) devices, have the potential to revolutionise virtual patient care. Through seamless integration of multiple biophysical signals, CM-RAM technologies can allow for the acquisition of high-volume big data for the development of algorithms to facilitate early detection of negative changes in patient health status and timely clinician response. In this article, we review key principles, architecture, and components of CM-RAM technologies. Work to date in this field and related implications are also presented, including strategic priorities for advancing the science and practice of CM-RAM.


Assuntos
Cardiologia/métodos , Doenças Cardiovasculares/diagnóstico , Monitorização Fisiológica/métodos , Telemedicina/métodos , Humanos
10.
BMJ Open ; 11(12): e053021, 2021 12 13.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34903545

RESUMO

INTRODUCTION: COVID-19 is an international public health crisis with more than 132 million infections worldwide. Beyond acute infection, emerging data indicate patients diagnosed with COVID-19 may experience persistent sequelae similar to survivors of sepsis or acute respiratory syndromes, including mobility limitations and fatigue. However, there is limited evidence on the trajectory of functional recovery in those hospitalised with COVID-19. The primary aim of the Coronavirus Registry Functional Recovery (COREG-FR) study is to understand the trajectory of functional recovery among individuals hospitalised for COVID-19 over the medium (up to 6 months) and longer term (6-12 months) that will guide clinical care and optimal management of serious COVID-19 illness and recovery. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: COREG-FR is a multicentre longitudinal cohort study. We will enrol a minimum of 211 adults age 18 years and older with COVID-19 from five hospitals. Participants will be followed from admission to hospital as an inpatient, to hospital discharge, and at 3-month, 6-month, 9-month and up to 12-month post-hospital discharge. We will conduct telephone interviews at ward admission and discharge, and telephone interviews plus in-person assessments of physical function and lung function at all remaining follow-ups. Our primary outcome is the Activity Measure for Post-Acute Care mobility scale measured at all time points. We will conduct linear mixed effects regression analyses to explore determinants of functional outcomes after COVID-19 illness. Subgroup analyses based on age (≤65 vs >65 years), frailty status (Clinical Frailty Scale score ≤4 vs >5) and variants of concern will be conducted. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: COREG-FR has been approved by Research Ethics Boards at participating sites. We will disseminate this work through peer-reviewed manuscripts, presentations at national and international meetings and through the established COREG website (www.coregontario.ca). COREG-FR is designed as a data platform for future studies evaluating COVID-19 recovery. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT04602260; Pre-results.


Assuntos
COVID-19 , Adolescente , Idoso , Hospitalização , Humanos , Estudos Longitudinais , SARS-CoV-2
11.
BMJ ; 374: n2209, 2021 09 30.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34593374

RESUMO

OBJECTIVE: To determine if virtual care with remote automated monitoring (RAM) technology versus standard care increases days alive at home among adults discharged after non-elective surgery during the covid-19 pandemic. DESIGN: Multicentre randomised controlled trial. SETTING: 8 acute care hospitals in Canada. PARTICIPANTS: 905 adults (≥40 years) who resided in areas with mobile phone coverage and were to be discharged from hospital after non-elective surgery were randomised either to virtual care and RAM (n=451) or to standard care (n=454). 903 participants (99.8%) completed the 31 day follow-up. INTERVENTION: Participants in the experimental group received a tablet computer and RAM technology that measured blood pressure, heart rate, respiratory rate, oxygen saturation, temperature, and body weight. For 30 days the participants took daily biophysical measurements and photographs of their wound and interacted with nurses virtually. Participants in the standard care group received post-hospital discharge management according to the centre's usual care. Patients, healthcare providers, and data collectors were aware of patients' group allocations. Outcome adjudicators were blinded to group allocation. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome was days alive at home during 31 days of follow-up. The 12 secondary outcomes included acute hospital care, detection and correction of drug errors, and pain at 7, 15, and 30 days after randomisation. RESULTS: All 905 participants (mean age 63.1 years) were analysed in the groups to which they were randomised. Days alive at home during 31 days of follow-up were 29.7 in the virtual care group and 29.5 in the standard care group: relative risk 1.01 (95% confidence interval 0.99 to 1.02); absolute difference 0.2% (95% confidence interval -0.5% to 0.9%). 99 participants (22.0%) in the virtual care group and 124 (27.3%) in the standard care group required acute hospital care: relative risk 0.80 (0.64 to 1.01); absolute difference 5.3% (-0.3% to 10.9%). More participants in the virtual care group than standard care group had a drug error detected (134 (29.7%) v 25 (5.5%); absolute difference 24.2%, 19.5% to 28.9%) and a drug error corrected (absolute difference 24.4%, 19.9% to 28.9%). Fewer participants in the virtual care group than standard care group reported pain at 7, 15, and 30 days after randomisation: absolute differences 13.9% (7.4% to 20.4%), 11.9% (5.1% to 18.7%), and 9.6% (2.9% to 16.3%), respectively. Beneficial effects proved substantially larger in centres with a higher rate of care escalation. CONCLUSION: Virtual care with RAM shows promise in improving outcomes important to patients and to optimal health system function. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04344665.


Assuntos
Assistência ao Convalescente/métodos , Monitorização Ambulatorial/métodos , Procedimentos Cirúrgicos Operatórios/enfermagem , Telemedicina/métodos , Idoso , COVID-19/epidemiologia , Canadá/epidemiologia , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Erros de Medicação/estatística & dados numéricos , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Dor Pós-Operatória/epidemiologia , Pandemias , Alta do Paciente , Período Pós-Operatório , Procedimentos Cirúrgicos Operatórios/mortalidade
12.
Ann Intern Med ; 174(8): 1126-1132, 2021 08.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34029483

RESUMO

In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, the Scientific Medical Policy Committee (SMPC) of the American College of Physicians (ACP) began developing "practice points" to provide clinical advice based on the best available evidence for the public, patients, clinicians, and public health professionals. As one of the first organizations in the United States to develop evidence-based clinical guidelines, ACP continues to lead and advance the science of evidence-based medicine by implementing new methods to rapidly publish practice points and maintain them as living advice that regularly assesses and incorporates new evidence. The overarching aim of practice points is to answer targeted key questions for which there is a timely need to synthesize evidence for decision making. The SMPC believes these methods can potentially be adapted to address various clinical and public health topics beyond the COVID-19 pandemic. This article presents an overview of the SMPC's living, rapid practice points development process, which includes a rapid systematic review, use of the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) method, use of stringent policies on the disclosure of interests and management of conflicts of interest, incorporating a public (nonclinician) perspective, and maintenance of the documents as living through ongoing surveillance and synthesis of new evidence as it emerges.


Assuntos
COVID-19/diagnóstico , COVID-19/terapia , Medicina Baseada em Evidências/métodos , Guias de Prática Clínica como Assunto , Teste para COVID-19 , Tomada de Decisão Clínica , Conflito de Interesses , Humanos , Pandemias , Revisões Sistemáticas como Assunto/métodos , Estados Unidos
13.
Ann Intern Med ; 174(6): 822-827, 2021 06.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33819054

RESUMO

DESCRIPTION: Antimicrobial overuse is a major health care issue that contributes to antibiotic resistance. Such overuse includes unnecessarily long durations of antibiotic therapy in patients with common bacterial infections, such as acute bronchitis with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) exacerbation, community-acquired pneumonia (CAP), urinary tract infections (UTIs), and cellulitis. This article describes best practices for prescribing appropriate and short-duration antibiotic therapy for patients presenting with these infections. METHODS: The authors conducted a narrative literature review of published clinical guidelines, systematic reviews, and individual studies that addressed bronchitis with COPD exacerbations, CAP, UTIs, and cellulitis. This article is based on the best available evidence but was not a formal systematic review. Guidance was prioritized to the highest available level of synthesized evidence. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 1: Clinicians should limit antibiotic treatment duration to 5 days when managing patients with COPD exacerbations and acute uncomplicated bronchitis who have clinical signs of a bacterial infection (presence of increased sputum purulence in addition to increased dyspnea, and/or increased sputum volume). BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 2: Clinicians should prescribe antibiotics for community-acquired pneumonia for a minimum of 5 days. Extension of therapy after 5 days of antibiotics should be guided by validated measures of clinical stability, which include resolution of vital sign abnormalities, ability to eat, and normal mentation. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 3: In women with uncomplicated bacterial cystitis, clinicians should prescribe short-course antibiotics with either nitrofurantoin for 5 days, trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole (TMP-SMZ) for 3 days, or fosfomycin as a single dose. In men and women with uncomplicated pyelonephritis, clinicians should prescribe short-course therapy either with fluoroquinolones (5 to 7 days) or TMP-SMZ (14 days) based on antibiotic susceptibility. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 4: In patients with nonpurulent cellulitis, clinicians should use a 5- to 6-day course of antibiotics active against streptococci, particularly for patients able to self-monitor and who have close follow-up with primary care.


Assuntos
Antibacterianos/administração & dosagem , Infecções Bacterianas/tratamento farmacológico , Uso Excessivo de Medicamentos Prescritos/prevenção & controle , Bronquite/tratamento farmacológico , Celulite (Flegmão)/tratamento farmacológico , Infecções Comunitárias Adquiridas/tratamento farmacológico , Cistite/tratamento farmacológico , Esquema de Medicação , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Pneumonia Bacteriana/tratamento farmacológico , Atenção Primária à Saúde , Doença Pulmonar Obstrutiva Crônica/tratamento farmacológico , Pielonefrite/tratamento farmacológico
14.
BMJ ; 373: n949, 2021 04 26.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33903131

RESUMO

OBJECTIVE: To determine and compare the effects of drug prophylaxis on SARS-CoV-2 infection and covid-19. DESIGN: Living systematic review and network meta-analysis. DATA SOURCES: World Health Organization covid-19 database, a comprehensive multilingual source of global covid-19 literature to 25 March 2021, and six additional Chinese databases to 20 February 2021. STUDY SELECTION: Randomised trials of people at risk of covid-19 who were assigned to receive prophylaxis or no prophylaxis (standard care or placebo). Pairs of reviewers independently screened potentially eligible articles. METHODS: Random effects bayesian network meta-analysis was performed after duplicate data abstraction. Included studies were assessed for risk of bias using a modification of the Cochrane risk of bias 2.0 tool, and certainty of evidence was assessed using the grading of recommendations assessment, development, and evaluation (GRADE) approach. RESULTS: The first iteration of this living network meta-analysis includes nine randomised trials-six of hydroxychloroquine (n=6059 participants), one of ivermectin combined with iota-carrageenan (n=234), and two of ivermectin alone (n=540), all compared with standard care or placebo. Two trials (one of ramipril and one of bromhexine hydrochloride) did not meet the sample size requirements for network meta-analysis. Hydroxychloroquine has trivial to no effect on admission to hospital (risk difference 1 fewer per 1000 participants, 95% credible interval 3 fewer to 4 more; high certainty evidence) or mortality (1 fewer per 1000, 2 fewer to 3 more; high certainty). Hydroxychloroquine probably does not reduce the risk of laboratory confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection (2 more per 1000, 18 fewer to 28 more; moderate certainty), probably increases adverse effects leading to drug discontinuation (19 more per 1000, 1 fewer to 70 more; moderate certainty), and may have trivial to no effect on suspected, probable, or laboratory confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection (15 fewer per 1000, 64 fewer to 41 more; low certainty). Owing to serious risk of bias and very serious imprecision, and thus very low certainty of evidence, the effects of ivermectin combined with iota-carrageenan on laboratory confirmed covid-19 (52 fewer per 1000, 58 fewer to 37 fewer), ivermectin alone on laboratory confirmed infection (50 fewer per 1000, 59 fewer to 16 fewer) and suspected, probable, or laboratory confirmed infection (159 fewer per 1000, 165 fewer to 144 fewer) remain very uncertain. CONCLUSIONS: Hydroxychloroquine prophylaxis has trivial to no effect on hospital admission and mortality, probably increases adverse effects, and probably does not reduce the risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection. Because of serious risk of bias and very serious imprecision, it is highly uncertain whether ivermectin combined with iota-carrageenan and ivermectin alone reduce the risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: This review was not registered. The protocol established a priori is included as a supplement. READERS' NOTE: This article is a living systematic review that will be updated to reflect emerging evidence. Updates may occur for up to two years from the date of original publication.


Assuntos
COVID-19 , Carragenina/farmacologia , Saúde Global/estatística & dados numéricos , Hidroxicloroquina/farmacologia , Ivermectina/farmacologia , Anti-Infecciosos/farmacologia , COVID-19/prevenção & controle , Quimioprevenção/métodos , Quimioprevenção/estatística & dados numéricos , Humanos , SARS-CoV-2 , Resultado do Tratamento , Incerteza
15.
CMAJ Open ; 9(1): E142-E148, 2021.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33653769

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: After nonelective (i.e., semiurgent, urgent and emergent) surgeries, patients discharged from hospitals are at risk of readmissions, emergency department visits or death. During the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, we are undertaking the Post Discharge after Surgery Virtual Care with Remote Automated Monitoring Technology (PVC-RAM) trial to determine if virtual care with remote automated monitoring (RAM) compared with standard care will increase the number of days adult patients remain alive at home after being discharged following nonelective surgery. METHODS: We are conducting a randomized controlled trial in which 900 adults who are being discharged after nonelective surgery from 8 Canadian hospitals are randomly assigned to receive virtual care with RAM or standard care. Outcome adjudicators are masked to group allocations. Patients in the experimental group learn how to use the study's tablet computer and RAM technology, which will measure their vital signs. For 30 days, patients take daily biophysical measurements and complete a recovery survey. Patients interact with nurses via the cellular modem-enabled tablet, who escalate care to preassigned and available physicians if RAM measurements exceed predetermined thresholds, patients report symptoms, a medication error is identified or the nurses have concerns they cannot resolve. The primary outcome is number of days alive at home during the 30 days after randomization. INTERPRETATION: This trial will inform management of patients after discharge following surgery in the COVID-19 pandemic and offer insights for management of patients who undergo nonelective surgery in a nonpandemic setting. Knowledge dissemination will be supported through an online multimedia resource centre, policy briefs, presentations, peer-reviewed journal publications and media engagement. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, no. NCT04344665.


Assuntos
Assistência ao Convalescente/tendências , Monitorização Ambulatorial/métodos , Alta do Paciente/normas , Consulta Remota/instrumentação , Adulto , COVID-19/diagnóstico , COVID-19/epidemiologia , Canadá/epidemiologia , Computadores de Mão/provisão & distribuição , Humanos , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Período Pós-Operatório , SARS-CoV-2/genética , Interface Usuário-Computador
18.
CJC Open ; 2(6): 577-584, 2020 Nov.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33305218

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Physicians commonly judge whether a myocardial infarction (MI) is type 1 (thrombotic) vs type 2 (supply/demand mismatch) based on clinical information. Little is known about the accuracy of physicians' clinical judgement in this regard. We aimed to determine the accuracy of physicians' judgement in the classification of type 1 vs type 2 MI in perioperative and nonoperative settings. METHODS: We performed an online survey using cases from the Optical Coherence Tomographic Imaging of Thrombus (OPTIMUS) Study, which investigated the prevalence of a culprit lesion thrombus based on intracoronary optical coherence tomography (OCT) in patients experiencing MI. Four MI cases, 2 perioperative and 2 nonoperative, were selected randomly, stratified by etiology. Physicians were provided with the patient's medical history, laboratory parameters, and electrocardiograms. Physicians did not have access to intracoronary OCT results. The primary outcome was the accuracy of physicians' judgement of MI etiology, measured as raw agreement between physicians and intracoronary OCT findings. Fleiss' kappa and Gwet's AC1 were calculated to correct for chance. RESULTS: The response rate was 57% (308 of 536). Respondents were 62% male; median age was 45 years (standard deviation ± 11); 45% had been in practice for > 15 years. Respondents' overall accuracy for MI etiology was 60% (95% confidence interval [CI] 57%-63%), including 63% (95% CI 60%-68%) for nonoperative cases, and 56% (95% CI 52%-60%) for perioperative cases. Overall chance-corrected agreement was poor (kappa = 0.05), consistent across specialties and clinical scenarios. CONCLUSIONS: Physician accuracy in determining MI etiology based on clinical information is poor. Physicians should consider results from other testing, such as invasive coronary angiography, when determining MI etiology.


CONTEXTE: Les médecins déterminent généralement s'ils sont en présence d'un infarctus du myocarde (IM) de type 1 (thrombotique) ou de type 2 (demande accrue ou apport réduit en oxygène) sur la base des renseignements cliniques. On en sait cependant très peu au sujet de la justesse du jugement clinique des médecins à cet égard. Nous avons donc cherché à déterminer si les médecins réussissent à distinguer correctement les IM de type 1 et de type 2 dans les contextes périopératoire et non opératoire. MÉTHODOLOGIE: Nous avons mené une enquête en ligne en utilisant les cas de l'étude OPTIMUS ( Op tical Coherence T omographic Im aging of Thromb us ), qui avait évalué la prévalence des lésions causant un thrombus au moyen de la tomographie par cohérence optique (TCO) endocoronaire chez les patients subissant un IM. Nous avons choisi au hasard quatre cas d'IM stratifiés en fonction de leur cause : deux cas en contexte périopératoire et deux cas en contexte non opératoire. Les médecins avaient accès aux antécédents médicaux, aux résultats des analyses de laboratoire et aux électrocardiogrammes des patients, mais pas aux résultats de la TCO endocoronaire. Le principal paramètre d'évaluation était la justesse du jugement du médecin concernant la cause de l'IM, mesurée en fonction de la concordance approximative entre le jugement du médecin et les observations à la TCO endocoronaire. Les coefficients de concordance kappa de Fleiss et AC1 de Gwet ont servi à corriger pour le hasard. RÉSULTATS: Le taux de réponse était de 57 % (308 sur 536). Des participants, 62 % étaient des hommes et 45 % exerçaient depuis plus de 15 ans; l'âge médian était de 45 ans (écart-type : ± 11). La justesse globale avec laquelle les répondants ont déterminé la cause des IM était de 60 % (intervalle de confiance [IC] à 95 % : 57-63 %) : 63 % (IC à 95 % : 60-68 %) dans le cas des IM en contexte non opératoire et 56 % (IC à 95 % : 52-60 %) dans le cas des IM en contexte périopératoire. La concordance globale corrigée pour le hasard était faible (kappa = 0,05) et demeurait constante, sans égard au domaine de spécialité ou au scénario clinique. CONCLUSIONS: La justesse du jugement des médecins évaluant la cause d'un IM en fonction des renseignements cliniques est faible. Les médecins devraient envisager de recourir à des tests additionnels, y compris la coronarographie invasive, avant de déterminer la cause d'un IM.

19.
Lancet Haematol ; 7(10): e746-e755, 2020 Oct.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32976752

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Study-level meta-analyses provide high-certainty evidence that heparin reduces the risk of symptomatic venous thromboembolism for patients with cancer; however, whether the benefits and harms associated with heparin differ by cancer type is unclear. This individual participant data meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials examines the effect of heparin on survival, venous thromboembolism, and bleeding in patients with cancer in general and by type. METHODS: In this systematic review and meta-analysis we searched MEDLINE, Embase, and The Cochrane Library for randomised controlled trials comparing parenteral anticoagulants with placebo or standard care in ambulatory patients with solid tumours and no indication for anticoagulation published from the inception of each database to January 14, 2017, and updated it on May 14, 2020, without language restrictions. We calculated the effect of parenteral anticoagulant administration on all-cause mortality, venous thromboembolism occurrence, and bleeding related outcomes through multivariable hierarchical models with patient-level variables as fixed effects and a categorical trial variable as a random effect, adjusting for age, cancer type, and metastatic status. Interaction terms were tested to investigate effects in predefined subgroups. This study is registered with PROSPERO, CRD42013003526. FINDINGS: We obtained individual participant data from 14 of 20 eligible randomised controlled trials (8278 [79%] of 10 431 participants; 4139 included in the low-molecular-weight heparin group and 4139 in the control group). Meta-analysis showed an adjusted relative risk (RR) of mortality at 1 year of 0·99 (95% CI 0·93-1·06) and a hazard ratio of 1·01 (95% CI 0·96-1·07). The number of patients with venous thromboembolic events was 158 (4·0%) of 3958 with available data in the low-molecular-weight heparin group compared with 279 (7·1%) of 3957 in the control group. Major bleeding events occurred in 71 (1·7%) of 4139 patients in the control population and 88 (2·1%) in the low-molecular-weight heparin group, and minor bleeding events in 478 (12·1%) of 3945 patients with available data in the control group and 652 (16·6%) of 3937 patients in the low-molecular-weight heparin group. The adjusted RR was 0·58 (95% CI 0·47-0·71) for venous thromboembolism, 1·27 (0·92-1·74) for major bleeding, and 1·34 (1·19-1·51) for minor bleeding. Prespecified subgroup analysis of venous thromboembolism occurrence by cancer type identified the most certain benefit from heparin treatment in patients with lung cancer (RR 0·59 [95% CI 0·42-0·81]), which dominated the overall reduction in venous thromboembolism. Certainty of the evidence for the outcomes ranged from moderate to high. INTERPRETATION: Low-molecular-weight heparin reduces risk of venous thromboembolism without increasing risk of major bleeding compared with placebo or standard care in patients with solid tumours, but it does not improve survival. FUNDING: Canadian Institutes of Health Research.


Assuntos
Anticoagulantes/uso terapêutico , Heparina/uso terapêutico , Neoplasias/complicações , Tromboembolia Venosa/etiologia , Tromboembolia Venosa/prevenção & controle , Anticoagulantes/efeitos adversos , Hemorragia/induzido quimicamente , Heparina/efeitos adversos , Heparina de Baixo Peso Molecular/efeitos adversos , Heparina de Baixo Peso Molecular/uso terapêutico , Humanos , Análise de Sobrevida
20.
BMJ ; 370: m2980, 2020 07 30.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32732190

RESUMO

OBJECTIVE: To compare the effects of treatments for coronavirus disease 2019 (covid-19). DESIGN: Living systematic review and network meta-analysis. DATA SOURCES: WHO covid-19 database, a comprehensive multilingual source of global covid-19 literature, up to 1 March 2021 and six additional Chinese databases up to 20 February 2021. Studies identified as of 12 February 2021 were included in the analysis. STUDY SELECTION: Randomised clinical trials in which people with suspected, probable, or confirmed covid-19 were randomised to drug treatment or to standard care or placebo. Pairs of reviewers independently screened potentially eligible articles. METHODS: After duplicate data abstraction, a bayesian network meta-analysis was conducted. Risk of bias of the included studies was assessed using a modification of the Cochrane risk of bias 2.0 tool, and the certainty of the evidence using the grading of recommendations assessment, development, and evaluation (GRADE) approach. For each outcome, interventions were classified in groups from the most to the least beneficial or harmful following GRADE guidance. RESULTS: 196 trials enrolling 76 767 patients were included; 111 (56.6%) trials and 35 098 (45.72%) patients are new from the previous iteration; 113 (57.7%) trials evaluating treatments with at least 100 patients or 20 events met the threshold for inclusion in the analyses. Compared with standard care, corticosteroids probably reduce death (risk difference 20 fewer per 1000 patients, 95% credible interval 36 fewer to 3 fewer, moderate certainty), mechanical ventilation (25 fewer per 1000, 44 fewer to 1 fewer, moderate certainty), and increase the number of days free from mechanical ventilation (2.6 more, 0.3 more to 5.0 more, moderate certainty). Interleukin-6 inhibitors probably reduce mechanical ventilation (30 fewer per 1000, 46 fewer to 10 fewer, moderate certainty) and may reduce length of hospital stay (4.3 days fewer, 8.1 fewer to 0.5 fewer, low certainty), but whether or not they reduce mortality is uncertain (15 fewer per 1000, 30 fewer to 6 more, low certainty). Janus kinase inhibitors may reduce mortality (50 fewer per 1000, 84 fewer to no difference, low certainty), mechanical ventilation (46 fewer per 1000, 74 fewer to 5 fewer, low certainty), and duration of mechanical ventilation (3.8 days fewer, 7.5 fewer to 0.1 fewer, moderate certainty). The impact of remdesivir on mortality and most other outcomes is uncertain. The effects of ivermectin were rated as very low certainty for all critical outcomes, including mortality. In patients with non-severe disease, colchicine may reduce mortality (78 fewer per 1000, 110 fewer to 9 fewer, low certainty) and mechanical ventilation (57 fewer per 1000, 90 fewer to 3 more, low certainty). Azithromycin, hydroxychloroquine, lopinavir-ritonavir, and interferon-beta do not appear to reduce risk of death or have an effect on any other patient-important outcome. The certainty in effects for all other interventions was low or very low. CONCLUSION: Corticosteroids and interleukin-6 inhibitors probably confer important benefits in patients with severe covid-19. Janus kinase inhibitors appear to have promising benefits, but certainty is low. Azithromycin, hydroxychloroquine, lopinavir-ritonavir, and interferon-beta do not appear to have any important benefits. Whether or not remdesivir, ivermectin, and other drugs confer any patient-important benefit remains uncertain. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: This review was not registered. The protocol is publicly available in the supplementary material. READERS' NOTE: This article is a living systematic review that will be updated to reflect emerging evidence. Updates may occur for up to two years from the date of original publication. This is the fourth version of the original article published on 30 July 2020 (BMJ 2020;370:m2980), and previous versions can be found as data supplements. When citing this paper please consider adding the version number and date of access for clarity.


Assuntos
Antivirais/uso terapêutico , Betacoronavirus/isolamento & purificação , Infecções por Coronavirus/terapia , Pneumonia Viral/terapia , Respiração Artificial/estatística & dados numéricos , Monofosfato de Adenosina/análogos & derivados , Monofosfato de Adenosina/uso terapêutico , Alanina/análogos & derivados , Alanina/uso terapêutico , Betacoronavirus/patogenicidade , COVID-19 , Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, U.S./estatística & dados numéricos , China/epidemiologia , Infecções por Coronavirus/diagnóstico , Infecções por Coronavirus/tratamento farmacológico , Infecções por Coronavirus/mortalidade , Infecções por Coronavirus/virologia , Bases de Dados Factuais/estatística & dados numéricos , Combinação de Medicamentos , Medicina Baseada em Evidências/métodos , Medicina Baseada em Evidências/estatística & dados numéricos , Glucocorticoides/uso terapêutico , Humanos , Hidroxicloroquina/uso terapêutico , Lopinavir/uso terapêutico , Metanálise em Rede , Pandemias , Pneumonia Viral/diagnóstico , Pneumonia Viral/mortalidade , Pneumonia Viral/virologia , Ensaios Clínicos Controlados Aleatórios como Assunto , Ritonavir/uso terapêutico , SARS-CoV-2 , Índice de Gravidade de Doença , Padrão de Cuidado , Resultado do Tratamento , Estados Unidos/epidemiologia
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA
...