| 1. |
|
|
| 2. |
- Allen, Natalie E., et al.
(författare)
-
Interventions for preventing falls in Parkinson's disease
- 2022
-
Ingår i: Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. - : John Wiley & Sons. - 1469-493X .- 1469-493X. ; :6
-
Forskningsöversikt (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background Most people with Parkinson's disease (PD) experience at least one fall during the course of their disease. Several interventions designed to reduce falls have been studied. An up-to-date synthesis of evidence for interventions to reduce falls in people with PD will assist with informed decisions regarding fall-prevention interventions for people with PD. Objectives To assess the effects of interventions designed to reduce falls in people with PD. Search methods CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, four other databases and two trials registers were searched on 16 July 2020, together with reference checking, citation searching and contact with study authors to identify additional studies. We also conducted a top-up search on 13 October 2021. Selection criteria We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of interventions that aimed to reduce falls in people with PD and reported the effect on falls. We excluded interventions that aimed to reduce falls due to syncope. Data collection and analysis We used standard Cochrane Review procedures. Primary outcomes were rate of falls and number of people who fell at least once. Secondary outcomes were the number of people sustaining one or more fall-related fractures, quality of life, adverse events and economic outcomes. The certainty of the evidence was assessed using GRADE. Main results This review includes 32 studies with 3370 participants randomised. We included 25 studies of exercise interventions (2700 participants), three studies of medication interventions (242 participants), one study of fall-prevention education (53 participants) and three studies of exercise plus education (375 participants). Overall, participants in the exercise trials and the exercise plus education trials had mild to moderate PD, while participants in the medication trials included those with more advanced disease. All studies had a high or unclear risk of bias in one or more items. Illustrative risks demonstrating the absolute impact of each intervention are presented in the summary of findings tables. Twelve studies compared exercise (all types) with a control intervention (an intervention not thought to reduce falls, such as usual care or sham exercise) in people with mild to moderate PD. Exercise probably reduces the rate of falls by 26% (rate ratio (RaR) 0.74, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.63 to 0.87; 1456 participants, 12 studies; moderate-certainty evidence). Exercise probably slightly reduces the number of people experiencing one or more falls by 10% (risk ratio (RR) 0.90, 95% CI 0.80 to 1.00; 932 participants, 9 studies; moderate-certainty evidence). We are uncertain whether exercise makes little or no difference to the number of people experiencing one or more fall-related fractures (RR 0.57, 95% CI 0.28 to 1.17; 989 participants, 5 studies; very low-certainty evidence). Exercise may slightly improve health-related quality of life immediately following the intervention (standardised mean difference (SMD) -0.17, 95% CI -0.36 to 0.01; 951 participants, 5 studies; low-certainty evidence). We are uncertain whether exercise has an effect on adverse events or whether exercise is a cost-effective intervention for fall prevention. Three studies trialled a cholinesterase inhibitor (rivastigmine or donepezil). Cholinesterase inhibitors may reduce the rate of falls by 50% (RaR 0.50, 95% CI 0.44 to 0.58; 229 participants, 3 studies; low-certainty evidence). However, we are uncertain if this medication makes little or no difference to the number of people experiencing one or more falls (RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.90 to 1.14230 participants, 3 studies) and to health-related quality of life (EQ5D Thermometer mean difference (MD) 3.00, 95% CI -3.06 to 9.06; very low-certainty evidence). Cholinesterase inhibitors may increase the rate of non fall-related adverse events by 60% (RaR 1.60, 95% CI 1.28 to 2.01; 175 participants, 2 studies; low-certainty evidence). Most adverse events were mild and transient in nature. No data was available regarding the cost-effectiveness of medication for fall prevention. We are uncertain of the effect of education compared to a control intervention on the number of people who fell at least once (RR 10.89, 95% CI 1.26 to 94.03; 53 participants, 1 study; very low-certainty evidence), and no data were available for the other outcomes of interest for this comparison We are also uncertain (very low-certainty evidence) whether exercise combined with education makes little or no difference to the number of falls (RaR 0.46, 95% CI 0.12 to 1.85; 320 participants, 2 studies), the number of people sustaining fall-related fractures (RR 1.45, 95% CI 0.40 to 5.32,320 participants, 2 studies), or health-related quality of life (PDQ39 MD 0.05, 95% CI -3.12 to 3.23, 305 participants, 2 studies). Exercise plus education may make little or no difference to the number of people experiencing one or more falls (RR 0.89, 95% CI 0.75 to 1.07; 352 participants, 3 studies; low-certainty evidence). We are uncertain whether exercise combined with education has an effect on adverse events or is a cost-effective intervention for fall prevention. Authors' conclusions Exercise interventions probably reduce the rate of falls, and probably slightly reduce the number of people falling in people with mild to moderate PD. Cholinesterase inhibitors may reduce the rate of falls, but we are uncertain if they have an effect on the number of people falling. The decision to use these medications needs to be balanced against the risk of non fall-related adverse events, though these adverse events were predominantly mild or transient in nature. Further research in the form of large, high-quality RCTs are required to determine the relative impact of different types of exercise and different levels of supervision on falls, and how this could be influenced by disease severity. Further work is also needed to increase the certainty of the effects of medication and further explore falls prevention education interventions both delivered alone and in combination with exercise.
|
|
| 3. |
|
|
| 4. |
|
|
| 5. |
- Atieh, Momen A, et al.
(författare)
-
Interventions for replacing missing teeth: alveolar ridge preservation techniques for dental implant site development.
- 2015
-
Ingår i: The Cochrane database of systematic reviews. - 1469-493X. ; :5
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Alveolar bone changes following tooth extraction can compromise prosthodontic rehabilitation. Alveolar ridge preservation (ARP) has been proposed to limit these changes and improve prosthodontic and aesthetic outcomes when implants are used.To assess the clinical effects of various materials and techniques for ARP after tooth extraction compared with extraction alone or other methods of ARP, or both, in patients requiring dental implant placement following healing of extraction sockets.The following electronic databases were searched: the Cochrane Oral Health Group's Trials Register (to 22 July 2014), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library, 2014, Issue 6), MEDLINE via OVID (1946 to 22 July 2014), EMBASE via OVID (1980 to 22 July 2014), LILACS via BIREME (1982 to 22 July 2014), the Meta Register of Current Controlled Trials (to 22 July 2014), ClinicalTrials.gov (to 22 July 2014), the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (to 22 July 2014), Web of Science Conference Proceedings (1990 to 22 July 2014), Scopus (1966 to 22 July 2014), ProQuest Dissertations and Theses (1861 to 22 July 2014) and OpenGrey (to 22 July 2014). A number of journals were also handsearched. Trial authors were contacted to identify unpublished randomised controlled trials. There were no restrictions regarding language and date of publication in the searches of the electronic databases.We included all randomised controlled trials (RCTs) on the use of alveolar ridge preservation techniques with at least six months of follow-up. Outcome measures were: changes in the bucco-lingual/palatal width of alveolar ridge, changes in the vertical height of the alveolar ridge, complications, the need for additional augmentation prior to implant placement, aesthetic outcomes, implant failure rates, peri-implant marginal bone level changes, changes in probing depths and clinical attachment levels at teeth adjacent to the extraction site, and complications of future prosthodontic rehabilitation.Two review authors extracted data independently and assessed risk of bias for each included trial. Corresponding authors were contacted to obtain missing information. Results were combined using random-effects models with mean differences (MD) for continuous outcomes and risk ratios (RR) for dichotomous outcomes, with 95% confidence intervals (95% CI). We constructed 'Summary of findings' tables to present the main findings.A total of 50 trials were potentially eligible for inclusion, of which 42 trials were excluded. We included eight RCTs with a total of 233 extraction sites in 184 participants. One trial was judged to be at unclear risk of bias and the remaining trials were at high risk of bias. From two trials comparing xenograft with extraction alone (70 participants, moderate quality evidence), there was some evidence of a reduction in loss of alveolar ridge height (MD -2.60 mm; 95% CI -3.43 to -1.76) and width (MD -1.97 mm; 95% CI -2.48 to -1.46). This was also found in one trial comparing allograft with extraction (24 participants, low quality evidence): ridge height (MD -2.20 mm; 95% CI -0.75 to -3.65) and width (MD - 1.40 mm; 95% CI 0.00 to -2.80) and height. From two RCTs comparing alloplast versus xenograft no evidence was found that either ridge preservation technique caused a smaller reduction in loss of ridge height (MD -0.35 mm; 95% CI -0.86 to 0.16) or width (MD -0.44 mm; 95% CI -0.90 to 0.02; two trials (55 participants); moderate quality evidence). There was insufficient evidence to determine whether there are clinically significant differences between different ARP techniques and extraction based on the need for additional augmentation prior to implant placement, complications, implant failure, or changes in peri-implant marginal bone levels and probing depths of neighbouring teeth. We found no trials which evaluated parameters relating to clinical attachment levels, specific aesthetic or prosthodontic outcomes.There is limited evidence that ARP techniques may minimise the overall changes in residual ridge height and width six months after extraction. There is also lack of evidence of any differences in implant failure, aesthetic outcomes or any other clinical parameters due to the lack of information or long-term data. There is no convincing evidence of any clinically significant difference between different grafting materials and barriers used for ARP. Further long term RCTs that follow CONSORT guidelines (www.consort-statement.org) are necessary.
|
|
| 6. |
- Axelsson, Inge, 1947-, et al.
(författare)
-
Inhaled corticosteroids in children with persistent asthma : effects of different drugs and delivery devices on growth
- 2019
-
Ingår i: Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. - : John Wiley & Sons. - 1469-493X .- 1469-493X. ; :6
-
Forskningsöversikt (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background: Inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) are the most effective treatment for children with persistent asthma. Although treatment with ICS is generally considered to be safe in children, the potential adverse effects of these drugs on growth remains a matter of concern for parents and physicians.Objectives: To assess the impact of different inhaled corticosteroid drugs and delivery devices on the linear growth of children with persistent asthma.Search methods: We searched the Cochrane Airways Trials Register, which is derived from systematic searches of bibliographic databases including CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, AMED and PsycINFO. We handsearched respiratory journals and meeting abstracts. We also conducted a search of ClinicalTrials.gov and manufacturers' clinical trial databases, or contacted the manufacturer, to search for potential relevant unpublished studies. The literature search was initially conducted in September 2014, and updated in November 2015, September 2018, and April 2019.Selection criteria: We selected parallel‐group randomized controlled trials of at least three months' duration. To be included, trials had to compare linear growth between different inhaled corticosteroid molecules at equivalent doses, delivered by the same type of device, or between different devices used to deliver the same inhaled corticosteroid molecule at the same dose, in children up to 18 years of age with persistent asthma.Data collection and analysis: At least two review authors independently selected studies and assessed risk of bias in included studies. The data were extracted by one author and checked by another. The primary outcome was linear growth velocity. We conducted meta‐analyses using Review Manager 5.3 software. We used mean differences (MDs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs ) as the metrics for treatment effects, and the random‐effects model for meta‐analyses. We did not perform planned subgroup analyses due to there being too few included trials.Main results: We included six randomized trials involving 1199 children aged from 4 to 12 years (per‐protocol population: 1008), with mild‐to‐moderate persistent asthma. Two trials were from single hospitals, and the remaining four trials were multicentre studies. The duration of trials varied from six to 20 months.One trial with 23 participants compared fluticasone with beclomethasone, and showed that fluticasone given at an equivalent dose was associated with a significant greater linear growth velocity (MD 0.81 cm/year, 95% CI 0.46 to 1.16, low certainty evidence). Three trials compared fluticasone with budesonide. Fluticasone given at an equivalent dose had a less suppressive effect than budesonide on growth, as measured by change in height over a period from 20 weeks to 12 months (MD 0.97 cm, 95% CI 0.62 to 1.32; 2 trials, 359 participants; moderate certainty evidence). However, we observed no significant difference in linear growth velocity between fluticasone and budesonide at equivalent doses (MD 0.39 cm/year, 95% CI ‐0.94 to 1.73; 2 trials, 236 participants; very low certainty evidence).Two trials compared inhalation devices. One trial with 212 participants revealed a comparable linear growth velocity between beclomethasone administered via hydrofluoroalkane‐metered dose inhaler (HFA‐MDI) and beclomethasone administered via chlorofluorocarbon‐metered dose inhaler (CFC‐MDI) at an equivalent dose (MD ‐0.44 cm/year, 95% CI ‐1.00 to 0.12; low certainty evidence). Another trial with 229 participants showed a small but statistically significant greater increase in height over a period of six months in favour of budesonide via Easyhaler, compared to budesonide given at the same dose via Turbuhaler (MD 0.37 cm, 95% CI 0.12 to 0.62; low certainty evidence).Authors' conclusions: This review suggests that the drug molecule and delivery device may impact the effect size of ICS on growth in children with persistent asthma. Fluticasone at an equivalent dose seems to inhibit growth less than beclomethasone and budesonide. Easyhaler is likely to have less adverse effect on growth than Turbuhaler when used for delivery of budesonide. However, the evidence from this systematic review of head‐to‐head trials is not certain enough to inform the selection of inhaled corticosteroid or inhalation device for the treatment of children with persistent asthma. Further studies are needed, and pragmatic trials and real‐life observational studies seem more attractive and feasible.
|
|
| 7. |
|
|
| 8. |
- Bedenis, Rachel, et al.
(författare)
-
Antiplatelet agents for preventing thrombosis after peripheral arterial bypass surgery
- 2015
-
Ingår i: Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. - 1469-493X. ; :2, s. 000535-000535
-
Forskningsöversikt (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background Peripheral arterial disease (PAD) may cause occlusions (blockages) in the main arteries of lower limbs. One treatment option is bypass surgery using autologous (the patient's own tissue) vein graft or prosthetic (artificial) graft. A number of factors influence occlusion rates in these patients, including the material used. To prevent graft occlusion patients are usually treated with antiplatelet, antithrombotic drugs, or a combination of both. Objectives To determine the effects of antiplatelet agents for the prevention of thrombosis in people with lower limb atherosclerosis who were undergoing femoropopliteal or femorodistal bypass grafting. Outcomes included the overall success of therapy (graft patency and limb salvage rates) and complications of treatment. Search methods For this update the Cochrane Peripheral Vascular Diseases Group Trials Search Co-ordinator searched the Specialised Register (last searched June 2014) and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (2014, Issue 5). We sought additional trials through screening the reference lists of relevant papers. Selection criteria Two review authors, RB and AL, independently reviewed studies found in the search and evaluated them based on the inclusion and exclusion criteria, resolving disagreements through discussion. Data collection and analysis RB and AL independently extracted details of the selected studies for the update. We compared the treatment and control groups for important prognostic factors and differences described. If any data were unavailable, we sought further information from study authors. We synthesised data by comparing group results. We addressed unit of analysis issues by subgroup analysis. Main results We include 16 studies with 5683 randomised participants. Nine different treatment groups were evaluated: aspirin (ASA) or aspirin and dipyridamole (ASA/DIP) versus placebo or nothing (six studies); ASA or ASA/DIP versus pentoxifylline (two studies); ASA/DIP versus indobufen (one study); ASA or ASA/DIP versus vitamin K antagonists (two studies); ASA/DIP versus low molecular weight heparin (one study); ticlopidine versus placebo (one study); ASA versus prostaglandin E1 (one study); ASA versus naftidrofuryl (one study); and clopidogrel and ASA versus ASA alone (one study). The treatment comparisons were evaluated separately, and, where possible, we performed subgroup analysis for venous grafts and prosthetic grafts and at different follow-up time points. The quality of evidence was low to moderate as many of the treatment comparisons had very few studies to contribute data, several of the included studies had unit of analysis issues, the treatment dosages varied between studies, and data for many outcomes important to this review were not given in any of the studies, or differed greatly between studies. Overall study quality was moderate, with the largest problem being that the majority of studies did not describe their methods of randomisation, allocation concealment or blinding of outcome assessors, leading to risk ratings of 'unclear'. The other main issue with study quality was studies not blinding participants or personnel. The treatment comparison with the most number of included studies, which allowed for robust conclusions, was that of aspirin (ASA) or ASA and dipyridamole (ASA/DIP) versus placebo or nothing, covered by six studies. For this treatment group, there was improved graft patency in the ASA or ASA/DIP treatment group, odds ratio (OR) 0.42 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.22 to 0.83; P = 0.01; 952 participants). This effect was not seen for venous grafts alone at any of the time points, but was observed for all time points in prosthetic grafts, including the final time point of 12 months (OR 0.19, 95% CI 0.10 to 0.36; P < 0.00001; 222 participants). Only a single study evaluated secondary patency, for which there was no difference between treatment groups. For the comparison ASA or ASA/DIP versus placebo or nothing there was no difference for any of the side effects, including general, gastrointestinal, bleeding and wound/graft infection. Amputations, cardiovascular events and mortality were also similar between the treatment groups. The comparison of ASA or ASA/DIP versus vitamin K antagonists included two studies, one of which was very large, with over 2000 participants. There were no differences between treatment for primary graft patency at three, six, 12 or 24 months, and there was also no evidence of a difference for limb amputation, cardiovascular events or mortality. One large study (851 participants) evaluated clopidogrel and ASA versus ASA alone, and for all grafts there was no evidence of a difference of primary patency at 24 months. There was evidence of increased total bleeding in the clopidogrel and ASA group (OR 2.65, 95% CI 1.69 to 4.15) from an increase in mild (OR 2.34, 95% CI 1.37 to 4.00), and moderate bleeding (OR 4.13, 95% CI 1.37 to 12.45), but no difference in severe or fatal bleeding. There was no difference between the treatment groups for limb amputation or mortality. For the remaining treatment comparisons there is not currently enough evidence to draw any robust conclusions about the efficacy or safety of the treatment on graft patency after peripheral bypass. Authors' conclusions Antiplatelet therapy with aspirin or with aspirin plus dipyridamole had a beneficial effect on primary patency of peripheral bypass grafts compared to placebo or no treatment. This effect was not evident when evaluating venous grafts alone, but antiplatelet therapy did have a beneficial effect on patency in those who had prosthetic grafts. There was no evidence of differences in side effects (including general, gastrointestinal, bleeding or infection), amputation, cardiovascular events or mortality between the treatment groups. However, the number of participants included in this analysis might be too small to detect a statistically significant effect for side effects, amputation, cardiovascular morbidity or mortality. We found no difference in primary graft patency when aspirin or aspirin with dipyridamole was compared to a vitamin K antagonist or when clopidogrel with aspirin was compared to aspirin alone. However, there was evidence of increase bleeding in the clopidogrel with aspirin group for the latter comparison. The remaining six treatment comparisons did not include enough data to draw any robust conclusions about their efficacy or safety at this time.
|
|
| 9. |
|
|
| 10. |
- Bruschettini, Matteo, et al.
(författare)
-
Antithrombin for the prevention of intraventricular hemorrhage in very preterm infants
- 2016
-
Ingår i: Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. - 1469-493X. ; :3
-
Forskningsöversikt (refereegranskat)abstract
- BACKGROUND: Preterm birth remains the major risk factor for the development of intraventricular hemorrhage, an injury that occurs in 25% of very low birth weight infants. Intraventricular hemorrhage is thought to be venous in origin and intrinsic thromboses in the germinal matrix are likely to play a triggering role. Antithrombin, a glycoprotein synthesized in the liver, is the major plasma inhibitor of thrombin thus modulating blood coagulation. Very low birth weight newborn infants have low levels of antithrombin and the risk of developing intraventricular hemorrhage is increased by the presence of hypercoagulability in the first hours of life. The administration of anticoagulants such as antithrombin may offset the increased risk of developing intraventricular hemorrhage. Anticoagulants may also reduce the risk of developing parenchymal venous infarct, a condition known to complicate intraventricular hemorrhage.OBJECTIVES: To assess whether the prophylactic administration of antithrombin (started within the first 24 hours after birth) reduces the incidence of germinal matrix-intraventricular hemorrhage in very preterm neonates when compared to placebo, no treatment, or heparin.SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (The Cochrane Library 2015), MEDLINE (1996 to 22 November 2015), EMBASE (1980 to 22 November 2015), and CINAHL (1982 to 22 November 2015). No language restrictions were applied. We searched the abstracts of the major congresses in the field (Perinatal Society of Australia and New Zealand and Pediatric Academic Societies) from 2000 to 2015.SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials, quasi-randomised controlled trials and cluster trials comparing the administration of early, i.e. within the first 24 hours of life, antithrombin in very preterm infants (gestational age < 32 weeks, any birth weight).DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: For each of the included trials, two authors independently extracted data (e.g. number of participants, birth weight, gestational age, antithrombin formulation (plasma-derived or recombinant), mode of administration, and duration of therapy, etc.) and assessed the risk of bias (e.g. adequacy of randomization, blinding, completeness of follow-up). The primary outcomes considered in this review are intraventricular hemorrhage and severe intraventricular hemorrhage.MAIN RESULTS: Two randomized controlled trials, for a total of 182 infants, met the inclusion criteria of this review. Both trials compared antithrombin with placebo. We found no significant differences in the rates of intraventricular hemorrhage (typical RR 1.30, CI 95% 0.87 to 1.93, typical RD 0.09, 95% CI -0.05 to 0.23; 2 studies, 175 infants; I² = 18% for RR and I² = 42% for RD) and severe intraventricular hemorrhage (typical RR 1.04, CI 95% 0.55 to 1.94; typical RD 0.01, 95% CI -0.11 to 0.12; 2 studies, 175 infants; I² = 0% for RR and I² = 0% for RD). Among secondary outcomes, we found no significant differences in terms of neonatal mortality (typical RR 2.00, CI 95% 0.62 to 6.45; typical RD 0.04, 95% CI -0.03 to 0.12; 2 studies, 182 infants; I² = 46% for RR and I² = 61% for RD) and in the other specified outcomes, such as bronchopulmonary dysplasia. The quality of the evidence supporting these findings is limited due to the imprecision of the estimates.AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: The administration of antithrombin seems not to reduce the incidence and severity of intraventricular hemorrhage in very preterm infants. Limited evidence is available on other clinically relevant outcomes. Given the imprecision of the estimate, the results of this systematic review are consistent with either a benefit or a detrimental effect of antithrombin and do not provide a definitive answer to the review question.
|
|
