Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 20 de 350
Filtrar
1.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33007509

RESUMO

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Latitudinal gradient effect is described for several autoimmune diseases including celiac disease in the United States. However, the association between latitude and global celiac disease prevalence is unknown. We aimed to explore the association between latitude and serology-based celiac disease prevalence through meta-analysis. METHODS: We searched MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane, and Scopus databases from their beginning through June 29, 2018, to identify screening studies that targeted a general population sample, used serology-based screening tests, and provided a clear location from which we could assign a latitude. Studies were excluded if sampling was based on symptoms, risk factors, or referral. Study selection and data extraction were performed by independent reviewers. The association measures between latitude and prevalence of serology-based celiac disease were evaluated with random-effects meta-analyses and meta-regression. RESULTS: Of the identified 4,667 unique citations, 128 studies were included, with 155 prevalence estimates representing 40 countries. Celiac disease was more prevalent at the higher latitudes of 51º to 60º (relative risk, 1.62; 95% CI: 1.09-2.38) and 61º to 70º (relative risk, 2.30; 95% CI: 1.36-3.89) compared with the 41º to 50º reference level. No statistically significant difference was observed in lower latitudes. When latitude was treated as continuous, we found statistically significant association between CD prevalence and latitude overall in the world (RR=1.03, 95% CI: 1.01 - 1.05) and subregional analysis of Europe (RR=1.05, 95% CI: 1.02 - 1.07) and North America (RR=1.1, 95% CI: 1.0 - 1.2). CONCLUSIONS: In this comprehensive review of screening studies, we found that higher latitude was associated with greater serology-based celiac disease prevalence.

2.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33031488

RESUMO

OBJECTIVES: Clinical studies of chloroquine (CQ) and hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) in COVID-19 disease reported conflicting results. We sought to systematically evaluate the effect of CQ and HCQ with or without azithromycin on outcomes of COVID-19 patients. METHODS: We searched multiple databases, preprints and grey literature up to 17 July 2020. We pooled only adjusted-effect estimates of mortality using a random-effect model. We summarized the effect of CQ or HCQ on viral clearance, ICU admission/mechanical ventilation and hospitalization. RESULTS: Seven randomized clinical trials (RCTs) and 14 cohort studies were included (20 979 patients). Thirteen studies (1 RCT and 12 cohort studies) with 15 938 hospitalized patients examined the effect of HCQ on short-term mortality. The pooled adjusted OR was 1.05 (95% CI 0.96-1.15, I2 = 0%). Six cohort studies examined the effect of the HCQ+azithromycin combination with a pooled adjusted OR of 1.32 (95% CI 1.00-1.75, I2 = 68.1%). Two cohort studies and four RCTs found no effect of HCQ on viral clearance. One small RCT demonstrated improved viral clearance with CQ and HCQ. Three cohort studies found that HCQ had no significant effect on mechanical ventilation/ICU admission. Two RCTs found no effect for HCQ on hospitalization risk in outpatients with COVID-19. CONCLUSIONS: Moderate certainty evidence suggests that HCQ, with or without azithromycin, lacks efficacy in reducing short-term mortality in patients hospitalized with COVID-19 or risk of hospitalization in outpatients with COVID-19.

3.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32951056

RESUMO

OBJECTIVE: This guideline will provide the practicing endocrinologist with an approach to assessment and treatment of dyslipidemia in patients with endocrine diseases, with the objective of prevention of cardiovascular events and triglyceride-induced pancreatitis. The guideline reviews data on dyslipidemia and ASCVD risk in patients with endocrine disorders and discusses the evidence for correction of dyslipidemia by treatment of the endocrine disease. The guideline also addresses whether treatment of the endocrine disease reduces ASCVD risk. CONCLUSION: This guideline focuses on lipid and lipoprotein abnormalities associated with endocrine diseases, including diabetes mellitus, and whether treatment of the endocrine disorder improves not only the lipid abnormalities, but also cardiovascular outcomes. Based on the available evidence, recommendations are made for the assessment and management of dyslipidemia in patients with endocrine diseases.

4.
Clin Transl Gastroenterol ; 11(8): e00225, 2020 Aug.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32955206

RESUMO

INTRODUCTION: To assess the effects of sleeve gastrectomy (SG) and Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) on acid reflux and esophageal motor function and to evaluate the observation of esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC) after bariatric surgery. METHODS: We searched 5 databases for adults who underwent SG or RYGB and had esophageal pH test and/or esophageal manometry before and after surgery. A separate systemic search of observational studies and a retrospective review at 3 institutions of adults who developed EAC after these surgeries were conducted. Outcomes were changes in manometric and pH parameters and EAC cases after SG and RYGB. RESULTS: A total of 27 nonrandomized studies (SG: 612 patients; RYGB: 470 patients) were included. After SG, lower esophageal sphincter pressure and esophageal body amplitude were decreased and the risk of ineffective esophageal motility was increased. Total and recumbent acid exposure times were increased. After RYGB, an increased risk of ineffective esophageal motility was observed. Total, upright, and recumbent acid exposure times were decreased. The total reflux episodes remained unchanged but with increased nonacid reflux and decreased acid reflux events. Including our largest series, 31 EAC cases have been reported to date after SG and RYGB. DISCUSSION: This systematic review demonstrates increased acid reflux after SG and decreased acid reflux after RYGB. An observed increased nonacid reflux after RYGB might contribute to failure of gastroesophageal reflux disease improvement. This refluxate might be noxious to the esophagus, warranting further studies. RYGB might not entirely preserve esophageal function as previously believed.

6.
Clin Infect Dis ; 2020 Sep 12.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32918466

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: The availability of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) serologic testing has rapidly increased. Current assays use a variety of technologies, measure different classes of immunoglobulin or immunoglobulin combinations and detect antibodies directed against different portions of the virus. The overall accuracy of these tests, however, has not been well-defined. The Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA) convened an expert panel to perform a systematic review of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) serology literature and construct best practice guidance related to SARS-CoV-2 serologic testing. This guideline is the fourth in a series of rapid, frequently updated COVID-19 guidelines developed by IDSA. OBJECTIVE: IDSA's goal was to develop evidence-based recommendations that assist clinicians, clinical laboratories, patients and policymakers in decisions related to the optimal use of SARS-CoV-2 serologic tests in a variety of settings. We also highlight important unmet research needs pertaining to the use of anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibody tests for diagnosis, public health surveillance, vaccine development and the selection of convalescent plasma donors. METHODS: A multidisciplinary panel of infectious diseases clinicians, clinical microbiologists and experts in systematic literature review identified and prioritized clinical questions related to the use of SARS-CoV-2 serologic tests. Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology was used to assess the certainty of evidence and make testing recommendations. RESULTS: The panel agreed on eight diagnostic recommendations. CONCLUSIONS: Information on the clinical performance and utility of SARS-CoV-2 serologic tests are rapidly emerging. Based on available evidence, detection of anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies may be useful for confirming the presence of current or past infection in selected situations. The panel identified three potential indications for serologic testing including: 1) evaluation of patients with a high clinical suspicion for COVID-19 when molecular diagnostic testing is negative and at least two weeks have passed since symptom onset; 2) assessment of multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children; and 3) for conducting serosurveillance studies. The certainty of available evidence supporting the use of serology for either diagnosis or epidemiology was, however, graded as very low to moderate.

7.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32954428

RESUMO

CONTEXT: Hyperthyroidism is associated with low levels of cholesterol and triglycerides, and hypothyroidism is associated with hypercholesterolemia and hypertriglyceridemia. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this systematic review was to investigate the impact of therapy for overt and subclinical hyper- and hypothyroidism on serum lipids. DATA SOURCES: We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and Scopus through April 5, 2018. STUDY SELECTION: Pairs of independent reviewers selected randomized and observational studies evaluating lipid parameters in patients undergoing treatment for hyper- or hypothyroidism. DATA EXTRACTION: Pairs of independent reviewers extracted data and appraised studies. DATA SYNTHESIS: Treatment of overt hyperthyroidism showed a significant increase in total cholesterol (TC) by 44.50 mg/dL (95% confidence interval [CI], 37.99, 51.02), low-density lipoprotein (LDL-C) by 31.13 mg/dL (95% CI 24.33, 37.93), high-density lipoprotein (HDL-C) by 5.52 mg/dL (95% CI 1.48, 9.56), apolipoprotein A (Apo A) by 15.6 mg/dL (95% CI 10.38, 20.81), apolipoprotein B (apo B) by 26.12 mg/dL (95% CI 22.67, 29.57) and lipoprotein (Lp[a]) by 4.18 mg/dL (95% CI 1.65, 6.71). There was no significant change in triglyceride (TG) levels. Treatment of subclinical hyperthyroidism did not change any lipid parameters significantly. Levothyroxine therapy in overt hypothyroidism showed a statistically significant decrease in TC by -58.4 mg/dL (95% CI -64.70, -52.09), LDL-C by -41.11 mg/dL (95% CI -46.53, -35.69), HDL-C by -4.14 mg/dL (95% CI -5.67, -2.61), TGs by -27.25 mg/dL (95% CI -36.63, 17.87), apo A by -12.59 mg/dL (95% CI -17.98, -7.19), apo B by -33.96 mg/dL (95% CI 41.14, -26.77), and Lp(a) by -5.6 mg/dL (95% CI -9.06, -2.14). Levothyroxine therapy in subclinical hypothyroidism showed similar changes but with a smaller magnitude. The studies contained varied population characteristics, severity of thyroid dysfunction, and follow-up duration. CONCLUSIONS: Treatment of overt but not subclinical hyperthyroidism is associated with worsening of the lipid profile. Levothyroxine therapy in both overt and subclinical hypothyroidism leads to improvement in the lipid profile, with a smaller magnitude of improvement in subclinical hypothyroidism.

8.
Oncol Nurs Forum ; 47(5): E161-E170, 2020 Sep 01.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32830796

RESUMO

PROBLEM IDENTIFICATION: Secondary lymphedema is a chronic condition that may result from cancer-related treatments. Evidence is emerging on prospective surveillance and risk reduction. LITERATURE SEARCH: Databases were systematically searched through April 1, 2019, for comparative studies evaluating interventions aiming to prevent lymphedema in patients with cancer. DATA EVALUATION: A random-effects model was used to perform meta-analysis, when appropriate. SYNTHESIS: A total of 26 studies (4,095 patients) were included, with 23 providing data sufficient for meta-analysis. Surveillance programs increased the likelihood of detecting lymphedema. Physiotherapy, exercise programs, and delayed exercise reduced the incidence of lymphedema. IMPLICATIONS FOR RESEARCH: Future research should standardize (a) evidence-based interventions to reduce the development of lymphedema and increase the likelihood of early detection and (b) outcome measures to build a body of evidence that leads to practice change. SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIAL CAN BE FOUND AT HTTPS: //onf.ons.org/supplementary-material-systematic-review-cancer-treatment-related-lymphedema.

9.
Oncol Nurs Forum ; 47(5): E149-E160, 2020 Sep 01.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32830797

RESUMO

PROBLEM IDENTIFICATION: Preventing and managing skin toxicities can minimize treatment disruptions and improve well-being. This systematic review aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of interventions for the prevention and management of cancer treatment-related skin toxicities. LITERATURE SEARCH: The authors systematically searched for comparative studies published before April 1, 2019. Study selection and appraisal were conducted by pairs of independent reviewers. DATA EVALUATION: The random-effects model was used to conduct meta-analysis when appropriate. SYNTHESIS: 39 studies (6,006 patients) were included; 16 of those provided data for meta-analysis. Prophylactic minocycline reduced the development of all-grade and grade 1 acneform rash in patients who received erlotinib. Prophylaxis with pyridoxine 400 mg in capecitabine-treated patients lowered the risk of grade 2 or 3 hand-foot syndrome. Several treatments for hand-foot skin reaction suggested benefit in heterogeneous studies. Scalp cooling significantly reduced the risk for severe hair loss or total alopecia associated with chemotherapy. IMPLICATIONS FOR RESEARCH: Certainty in the available evidence was limited for several interventions, suggesting the need for future research. SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIAL CAN BE FOUND AT HTTPS: //onf.ons.org/supplementary-material-targeted-therapy-and-chemotherapy-associated-skin-toxicity-systematic-review.

10.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32745306

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Hyperbaric oxygen has been reported to improve disease activity in hospitalised ulcerative colitis (UC) patients. AIM: To evaluate dosing strategies with hyperbaric oxygen for hospitalised UC patients. METHODS: We enrolled UC patients hospitalised for acute flares (Mayo score 6-12). Initially, all patients received 3 days of hyperbaric oxygen at 2.4 atmospheres (90 minutes with two air breaks) in addition to intravenous steroids. Day 3 responders (reduction of partial Mayo score ≥ 2 points and rectal bleeding score ≥ 1 point) were randomised to receive a total of 5 days vs 3 days of hyperbaric oxygen. RESULTS: We treated 20 patients with hyperbaric oxygen (75% prior biologic failure). Day 3 response was achieved in 55% (n = 11/20), with significant reductions in stool frequency, rectal bleeding and CRP (P < 0.01). A more significant reduction in disease activity was observed with 5 days vs 3 days of hyperbaric oxygen (P = 0.03). Infliximab or colectomy was required in only three patients (15%) despite a predicted probability of 80% for second-line therapy. Day 3 hyperbaric oxygen responders were less likely to require re-hospitalisation or colectomy by 3 months vs non-responders (0% vs 66%, P = 0.002). No treatment-related adverse events were observed. CONCLUSION: Hyperbaric oxygen appears to be effective for optimising response to intravenous steroids in UC patients hospitalised for acute flares, with low rates of re-hospitalisation or colectomy at 3 months. An optimal clinical response is achieved with 5 days of hyperbaric oxygen. Larger phase 3 trials are needed to confirm efficacy and obtain labelled approval.

11.
Res Synth Methods ; 2020 Aug 13.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32790064

RESUMO

Often clinicians are interested in determining whether a subject's measurement falls within a normal range, defined as a range of values of a continuous outcome which contains some proportion (eg, 95%) of measurements from a healthy population. Several studies in the biomedical field have estimated reference ranges based on a meta-analysis of multiple studies with healthy individuals. However, the literature currently gives no guidance about how to estimate the reference range of a new subject in such settings. Instead, meta-analyses of such normative range studies typically report the pooled mean as a reference value, which does not incorporate natural variation across healthy individuals in different studies. We present three approaches to calculating the normal reference range of a subject from a meta-analysis of normally or lognormally distributed outcomes: a frequentist random effects model, a Bayesian random effects model, and an empirical approach. We present the results of a simulation study demonstrating that the methods perform well under a variety of scenarios, though users should be cautious when the number of studies is small and between-study heterogeneity is large. Finally, we apply these methods to two examples: pediatric time spent awake after sleep onset and frontal subjective postural vertical measurements.

12.
Arthritis Rheumatol ; 2020 Aug 02.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32741139

RESUMO

OBJECTIVE: Antirheumatic disease therapies have been used to treat coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and its complications. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to describe the current evidence. METHODS: A search of published and preprint databases in all languages was performed. Included studies described one or more relevant clinical outcomes in five or more people who were infected with SARS-CoV-2 and were treated with antirheumatic disease therapy between 01/01/2019 and 05/29/2020. Pairs of reviewers screened articles and extracted data and assessed risk of bias. A meta-analysis of effect sizes using the random-effects models was performed when possible. RESULTS: The search identified 3,935 articles, of which 45 were included (4 randomized controlled trials, 29 cohort studies, and 12 case series). All studies evaluated hospitalized patients and 29 out of 45 had been published in a peer-reviewed journal. In a meta-analysis of three cohort studies with a low risk of bias, hydroxychloroquine use was not significantly associated with mortality (pooled hazard ratio (HR) 1.41, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.83-2.42). In a meta-analysis of two cohort studies with some concerns/high risk of bias, anakinra use was associated with lower mortality (pooled HR 0.2, 95% CI 0.1-0.4). Evidence was inconclusive with regard to other antirheumatic disease therapies and the majority of other studies had a high risk of bias. CONCLUSION: In this systematic review and meta-analysis, hydroxychloroquine use was not associated with benefit or harm with regard to COVID-19 mortality. The evidence supporting the effect of other antirheumatic disease therapies in COVID-19 is currently inconclusive.

14.
Clin Infect Dis ; 2020 Jul 27.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32716496

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: SARS-CoV-2 is a highly transmissible virus that can infect health care personnel and patients in health care settings. Specific care activities, in particular aerosol-generating procedures, may have a higher risk of transmission. The rapid emergence and global spread of SARS-CoV-2 has created significant challenges in health care facilities, particularly with severe shortages of personal protective equipment (PPE) used to protect health care personnel (HCP). Evidence-based recommendations for what PPE to use in conventional, contingency, and crisis standards of care are needed. Where evidence is lacking, the development of specific research questions can help direct funders and investigators. OBJECTIVE: Develop evidence-based rapid guidelines intended to support HCP in their decisions about infection prevention when caring for patients with suspected or known COVID-19. METHODS: IDSA formed a multidisciplinary guideline panel including front-line clinicians, infectious disease specialists, experts in infection control and guideline methodologists with representation from the disciplines of preventive care, public health, medical microbiology, pediatrics, critical care medicine and gastroenterology. The process followed a rapid recommendation checklist. The panel prioritized questions and outcomes. Then a systematic review of the peer-reviewed and grey literature was conducted. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach was used to assess the certainty of evidence and make recommendations. RESULTS: The IDSA guideline panel agreed on eight recommendations and provided narrative summaries of other interventions undergoing evaluations. CONCLUSIONS: Using a combination of direct and indirect evidence, the panel was able to provide recommendations for eight specific questions on the use of PPE for HCP providing care for patients with suspected or known COVID-19. Where evidence was lacking, attempts were made to provide potential avenues for investigation. There remain significant gaps in the understanding of the transmission dynamics of SARS-CoV-2 and PPE recommendations may need to be modified in response to new evidence.

16.
Clin Infect Dis ; 2020 Jun 16.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-608444

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Accurate molecular diagnostic tests are necessary for confirming a diagnosis of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Direct detection of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) nucleic acids in respiratory tract specimens informs patient, healthcare institution and public health level decision-making. The numbers of available SARS-CoV-2 nucleic acid detection tests are rapidly increasing, as is the COVID-19 diagnostic literature. Thus, the Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA) recognized a significant need for frequently updated systematic reviews of the literature to inform evidence-based best practice guidance. OBJECTIVE: The IDSA's goal was to develop an evidence-based diagnostic guideline to assists clinicians, clinical laboratorians, patients and policymakers in decisions related to the optimal use of SARS-CoV-2 nucleic acid amplification tests. In addition, we provide a conceptual framework for understanding molecular diagnostic test performance, discuss the nuance of test result interpretation in a variety of practice settings, and highlight important unmet research needs in the COVID-19 diagnostic testing space. METHODS: IDSA convened a multidisciplinary panel of infectious diseases clinicians, clinical microbiologists, and experts in systematic literature review to identify and prioritize clinical questions and outcomes related to the use of SARS-CoV-2 molecular diagnostics. Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology was used to assess the certainty of evidence and make testing recommendations. RESULTS: The panel agreed on 15 diagnostic recommendations. CONCLUSIONS: Universal access to accurate SARS-CoV-2 nucleic acid testing is critical for patient care, hospital infection prevention and the public response to the COVID-19 pandemic. Information on the clinical performance of available tests is rapidly emerging, but the quality of evidence of the current literature is considered low to very low. Recognizing these limitations, the IDSA panel weighed available diagnostic evidence and recommends nucleic acid testing for all symptomatic individuals suspected of having COVID-19. In addition, testing is recommended for asymptomatic individuals with known or suspected contact with a COVID-19 case. Testing asymptomatic individuals without known exposure is suggested when the results will impact isolation/quarantine/personal protective equipment (PPE) usage decisions, dictate eligibility for surgery, or inform administration of immunosuppressive therapy. Ultimately, prioritization of testing will depend on institutional-specific resources and the needs of different patient populations.

17.
Clin Infect Dis ; 2020 Jun 16.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-601759

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Accurate molecular diagnostic tests are necessary for confirming a diagnosis of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Direct detection of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) nucleic acids in respiratory tract specimens informs patient, healthcare institution and public health level decision-making. The numbers of available SARS-CoV-2 nucleic acid detection tests are rapidly increasing, as is the COVID-19 diagnostic literature. Thus, the Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA) recognized a significant need for frequently updated systematic reviews of the literature to inform evidence-based best practice guidance. OBJECTIVE: The IDSA's goal was to develop an evidence-based diagnostic guideline to assists clinicians, clinical laboratorians, patients and policymakers in decisions related to the optimal use of SARS-CoV-2 nucleic acid amplification tests. In addition, we provide a conceptual framework for understanding molecular diagnostic test performance, discuss the nuance of test result interpretation in a variety of practice settings, and highlight important unmet research needs in the COVID-19 diagnostic testing space. METHODS: IDSA convened a multidisciplinary panel of infectious diseases clinicians, clinical microbiologists, and experts in systematic literature review to identify and prioritize clinical questions and outcomes related to the use of SARS-CoV-2 molecular diagnostics. Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology was used to assess the certainty of evidence and make testing recommendations. RESULTS: The panel agreed on 15 diagnostic recommendations. CONCLUSIONS: Universal access to accurate SARS-CoV-2 nucleic acid testing is critical for patient care, hospital infection prevention and the public response to the COVID-19 pandemic. Information on the clinical performance of available tests is rapidly emerging, but the quality of evidence of the current literature is considered low to very low. Recognizing these limitations, the IDSA panel weighed available diagnostic evidence and recommends nucleic acid testing for all symptomatic individuals suspected of having COVID-19. In addition, testing is recommended for asymptomatic individuals with known or suspected contact with a COVID-19 case. Testing asymptomatic individuals without known exposure is suggested when the results will impact isolation/quarantine/personal protective equipment (PPE) usage decisions, dictate eligibility for surgery, or inform administration of immunosuppressive therapy. Ultimately, prioritization of testing will depend on institutional-specific resources and the needs of different patient populations.

18.
Mayo Clin Proc ; 2020 Jun 16.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-599150

RESUMO

Contact tracing is a cornerstone of communicable disease containment and involves identifying, quarantining, and monitoring contacts of infected people. Although contact tracing is a known evidence-based strategy in the community setting, the COVID-19 pandemic highlighted the challenges to implementing labor-intensive contact tracing in the occupational setting of large health care systems and hospitals, the epicenter of the pandemic. We present a framework for feasible, scalable COVID-19 contact tracing in a large multistate health system in the United States employing approximately 69,000 health care personnel. The framework is shared with sufficient details to allow adoption or adaptation by other health systems. Continuous enhancement, optimization, and evaluation of the framework are ongoing.

19.
Mayo Clin Proc ; 2020 Jun 16.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-599149

RESUMO

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic requires making rapid decisions based on sparse and rapidly changing evidence. Evidence synthesis programs conduct systematic reviews for guideline developers, health systems clinicians, and decision-makers that usually take an average 6 to 8 months to complete. We present a framework for evidence synthesis programs to respond to pandemics that has proven feasible and practical during the COVID-19 response in a large multistate health system employing more than 78,000 people. The framework includes four components: an approach for conducting rapid reviews, a repository of rapid reviews, a registry for all original studies about COVID-19, and twice-weekly prioritized update of new evidence sent to key stakeholders. As COVID-19 will not be our last pandemic, we share the details of this framework to allow replication in other institutions and re-implementation in future pandemics.

20.
Mayo Clin Proc ; 95(7): 1404-1419, 2020 Jul.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32499126

RESUMO

OBJECTIVE: To assess the efficacy and safety profiles of different dosing regimens of tofacitinib, baricitinib, and upadacitinib, novel selective oral Janus activated kinase inhibitors, in rheumatoid arthritis (RA). METHODS: Randomized controlled trials of tofacitinib (5 and 10 mg twice daily) baricitinib (2 and 4 mg daily), and upadacitinib (15 and 30 mg daily) in RA were identified from MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases through December 11, 2019. Random-effects models were used to estimate pooled mean differences and relative risks (RRs). American College of Rheumatology 20%, Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index, adverse events, risk for infection, venous thromboembolic events, and malignancy were calculated. RESULTS: Twenty trials with an overall low risk of bias involving 8982 patients were identified. Tofacitinib, baricitinib, and upadacitinib improved RA control as determined by American College of Rheumatology 20% (RR, 2.03; 95% CI, 1.87 to 2.20) and Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index scores (mean differences, -0.31; 95% CI, -0.34 to -0.28) compared with placebo. Adverse events were more frequent with upadacitinib, 30 mg, daily (RR, 1.15; 95% CI, 1.02 to 1.30); upadacitinib, 15 mg, daily (RR, 1.14; 95% CI, 1.02 to 1.27); and baricitinib, 4 mg, daily (RR, 1.13; 95% CI, 1.02 to 1.24). The risk for infection was highest with tofacitinib, 10 mg, twice daily (RR, 2.75; 95% CI, 1.72 to 4.41), followed by upadacitinib, 15 mg, daily (RR, 1.35; 95% CI, 1.14 to 1.60) and baricitinib, 4 mg, daily (RR, 1.28; 95% CI, 1.12 to 1.45). Data for venous thromboembolic events were not available for tofacitinib or baricitinib, but there was no increase in risk with upadacitinib (15 mg daily: RR, 2.34; 95% CI, 0.34 to 15.92). CONCLUSION: Tofacitinib, baricitinib, and upadacitinib significantly improve RA control. Head-to-head Janus activated kinase inhibitor clinical trials are needed to further inform decision making.

SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA