AHRQ series paper 4: assessing harms when comparing medical interventions: AHRQ and the effective health-care program

Multimorbidity and analgesic-related harms: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Multimorbidity is the presence of two or more long-term medical conditions. Chronic pain affects more than half of people with multimorbidity, and optimal treatment strategies are unknown. We aimed to quantify the risk of adverse outcomes from the following analgesics: opioids, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), and gabapentinoids in adults with multimorbidity.

METHOD

The review was registered on PROSPERO (CRD42023462592). We searched Medline, CINAHL, Web of Science, Embase, and CENTRAL for studies reporting analgesic-related harms in people with multimorbidity or the impact of multimorbidity on harms in adults exposed to analgesics. Two researchers independently screened titles/abstracts, completed full-text reviews, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias using the Newcastle-Ottawa scale. Studies were synthesised narratively, grouping by analgesic class and direction of effect.

RESULTS

We screened 6690 records and 344 full texts, with 27 studies included (n=2 671 958 patients). Studies were heterogenous, with variable quality (high risk of bias, n=11). Most studies on opioids reported adverse outcomes (12/16). Opioid use compared with non-use was associated with increased mortality in adults with multimorbidity. Multimorbidity was associated with opioid overdose and death among adults prescribed opioids for pain. Half of studies of NSAIDs reported adverse outcomes (6/11) including gastrointestinal bleeding. Only one study assessed gabapentinoids which found an association with delirium and pneumonia, but not mortality in people with multimorbidity.

CONCLUSIONS

There is evidence of harms associated with opioids in adults with multimorbidity, including overdose and increased mortality. There is a lack of evidence on gabapentinoids. Further research is required to understand optimal analgesic management in people with multimorbidity.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW PROTOCOL

PROSPERO (CRD42023462592).

Harms associated with retinal implantation of a stimulating electrode array to treat outer-retinal degeneration: a systematic review and meta-analysis of safety

Retinal implantation of an electrode array is an emerging treatment for vision loss caused by outer-retinal degeneration. This article collects and analyses harms associated with the treatment reported in the peer-reviewed literature, thus enabling informed decision-making by patients, clinicians, researchers, engineers, and policymakers. We searched MEDLINE, Embase, and clinical trials registries for peer-reviewed journal articles reporting harms outcomes. We extracted data from articles including study design, definitions of 'serious adverse event', and timing of adverse events. We applied the McMaster tool to these articles to assess the risk of bias in harms assessment and reporting. Our searches returned 585 abstracts. We reviewed the full text of 59 articles describing 11 different devices. McMaster scores ranged from 3 to 12 (maximum 15; higher scores indicate less risk). We compiled a comprehensive list of all serious and non-serious adverse events associated with retinal implantation. Several harms were common across devices. Our meta-analysis showed that serious adverse events are log-uniformly distributed throughout follow-up. Improved reporting and further clinical studies are needed to develop a reliable safety profile of retinal implantation. Our findings will help guide the design, conduct, and reporting of future clinical trials of retinal implantation and other emerging treatments for vision loss. (PROSPERO registration: CRD42022308123.).

Comparison of efficacy and safety of different anticoagulation regimens in plasma exchange: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Extracorporeal line clotting during plasma exchange (PE) not only delays efficient treatment, but also cause great waste of nursing resources. There is a lack of comprehensive comparison of the efficacy and safety among different anticoagulation regimens in plasma exchange in literature.

METHODS

A systematic search was performed in EMBASE, MEDLINE via PubMed, Cochrane Central Library, and CNKI. Studies that had compared at least two anticoagulation regimens in PE were considered eligible. The anticoagulative efficacy outcome was assessed by the occurrence of extracorporeal circuit clotting. The safety outcome was assessed by the occurrence of bleeding events, post-treatment APTT values, and post-treatment platelets counts. The risk of bias was assessed by the AHRQ tool. Mean differences or standardized mean differences with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) of continuous variables and risk ratios (RRs) with 95% CIs of categorical variables were pooled using a random-effects or a fixed-effects model as appropriate.

RESULTS

In all, 7 studies with 1638 patients and 10951 sessions of PE treatment were included. Pooled results indicated the anticoagulative efficacy of UFH was better than that of saline flushing, yet did not differ with those of LMWH or RCA. Although the occurrence of bleeding events had no difference among different pairs of anticoagulation regimens, anticoagulation using UFH might lead to longer post-treatment APTT value and lower post-treatment platelet counts. Only one study was judged to have low risk of bias in each of the five domains in the AHRQ tool.

CONCLUSIONS

The current anticoagulation regimens are generally effective and well tolerated in PE; however, the number of included studies was too limited to draw definitive conclusions.

A framework for human evaluation of large language models in healthcare derived from literature review

With generative artificial intelligence (GenAI), particularly large language models (LLMs), continuing to make inroads in healthcare, assessing LLMs with human evaluations is essential to assuring safety and effectiveness. This study reviews existing literature on human evaluation methodologies for LLMs in healthcare across various medical specialties and addresses factors such as evaluation dimensions, sample types and sizes, selection, and recruitment of evaluators, frameworks and metrics, evaluation process, and statistical analysis type. Our literature review of 142 studies shows gaps in reliability, generalizability, and applicability of current human evaluation practices. To overcome such significant obstacles to healthcare LLM developments and deployments, we propose QUEST, a comprehensive and practical framework for human evaluation of LLMs covering three phases of workflow: Planning, Implementation and Adjudication, and Scoring and Review. QUEST is designed with five proposed evaluation principles: Quality of Information, Understanding and Reasoning, Expression Style and Persona, Safety and Harm, and Trust and Confidence.

AI as a Medical Device Adverse Event Reporting in Regulatory Databases: Protocol for a Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

The reporting of adverse events (AEs) relating to medical devices is a long-standing area of concern, with suboptimal reporting due to a range of factors including a failure to recognize the association of AEs with medical devices, lack of knowledge of how to report AEs, and a general culture of nonreporting. The introduction of artificial intelligence as a medical device (AIaMD) requires a robust safety monitoring environment that recognizes both generic risks of a medical device and some of the increasingly recognized risks of AIaMD (such as algorithmic bias). There is an urgent need to understand the limitations of current AE reporting systems and explore potential mechanisms for how AEs could be detected, attributed, and reported with a view to improving the early detection of safety signals.

OBJECTIVE

The systematic review outlined in this protocol aims to yield insights into the frequency and severity of AEs while characterizing the events using existing regulatory guidance.

METHODS

Publicly accessible AE databases will be searched to identify AE reports for AIaMD. Scoping searches have identified 3 regulatory territories for which public access to AE reports is provided: the United States, the United Kingdom, and Australia. AEs will be included for analysis if an artificial intelligence (AI) medical device is involved. Software as a medical device without AI is not within the scope of this review. Data extraction will be conducted using a data extraction tool designed for this review and will be done independently by AUK and a second reviewer. Descriptive analysis will be conducted to identify the types of AEs being reported, and their frequency, for different types of AIaMD. AEs will be analyzed and characterized according to existing regulatory guidance.

RESULTS

Scoping searches are being conducted with screening to begin in April 2024. Data extraction and synthesis will commence in May 2024, with planned completion by August 2024. The review will highlight the types of AEs being reported for different types of AI medical devices and where the gaps are. It is anticipated that there will be particularly low rates of reporting for indirect harms associated with AIaMD.

CONCLUSIONS

To our knowledge, this will be the first systematic review of 3 different regulatory sources reporting AEs associated with AIaMD. The review will focus on real-world evidence, which brings certain limitations, compounded by the opacity of regulatory databases generally. The review will outline the characteristics and frequency of AEs reported for AIaMD and help regulators and policy makers to continue developing robust safety monitoring processes.

INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID)

PRR1-10.2196/48156.

Detecting Algorithmic Errors and Patient Harms for AI-Enabled Medical Devices in Randomized Controlled Trials: Protocol for a Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

Artificial intelligence (AI) medical devices have the potential to transform existing clinical workflows and ultimately improve patient outcomes. AI medical devices have shown potential for a range of clinical tasks such as diagnostics, prognostics, and therapeutic decision-making such as drug dosing. There is, however, an urgent need to ensure that these technologies remain safe for all populations. Recent literature demonstrates the need for rigorous performance error analysis to identify issues such as algorithmic encoding of spurious correlations (eg, protected characteristics) or specific failure modes that may lead to patient harm. Guidelines for reporting on studies that evaluate AI medical devices require the mention of performance error analysis; however, there is still a lack of understanding around how performance errors should be analyzed in clinical studies, and what harms authors should aim to detect and report.

OBJECTIVE

This systematic review will assess the frequency and severity of AI errors and adverse events (AEs) in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) investigating AI medical devices as interventions in clinical settings. The review will also explore how performance errors are analyzed including whether the analysis includes the investigation of subgroup-level outcomes.

METHODS

This systematic review will identify and select RCTs assessing AI medical devices. Search strategies will be deployed in MEDLINE (Ovid), Embase (Ovid), Cochrane CENTRAL, and clinical trial registries to identify relevant papers. RCTs identified in bibliographic databases will be cross-referenced with clinical trial registries. The primary outcomes of interest are the frequency and severity of AI errors, patient harms, and reported AEs. Quality assessment of RCTs will be based on version 2 of the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool (RoB2). Data analysis will include a comparison of error rates and patient harms between study arms, and a meta-analysis of the rates of patient harm in control versus intervention arms will be conducted if appropriate.

RESULTS

The project was registered on PROSPERO in February 2023. Preliminary searches have been completed and the search strategy has been designed in consultation with an information specialist and methodologist. Title and abstract screening started in September 2023. Full-text screening is ongoing and data collection and analysis began in April 2024.

CONCLUSIONS

Evaluations of AI medical devices have shown promising results; however, reporting of studies has been variable. Detection, analysis, and reporting of performance errors and patient harms is vital to robustly assess the safety of AI medical devices in RCTs. Scoping searches have illustrated that the reporting of harms is variable, often with no mention of AEs. The findings of this systematic review will identify the frequency and severity of AI performance errors and patient harms and generate insights into how errors should be analyzed to account for both overall and subgroup performance.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

PROSPERO CRD42023387747; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=387747.

INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID)

PRR1-10.2196/51614.

Adverse renal outcomes following targeted therapies in renal cell carcinoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Introduction: To clarify the prevalence of adverse renal outcomes following targeted therapies in renal cell carcinoma (RCC). Methods: A systematic search was performed in MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane Central Library. Studies that had reported adverse renal outcomes following targeted therapies in RCC were eligible. Outcomes included adverse renal outcomes defined as either renal dysfunction as evidenced by elevated serum creatinine levels or the diagnosis of acute kidney injury, or proteinuria as indicated by abnormal urine findings. The risk of bias was assessed according to Cochrane handbook guidelines. Publication bias was assessed using Funnel plot analysis and Egger Test. Results: The occurrences of the examined outcomes, along with their corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs), were combined using a random-effects model. In all, 23 studies including 10 RCTs and 13 observational cohort studies were included. The pooled incidence of renal dysfunction and proteinuria following targeted therapies in RCC were 17% (95% CI: 12%-22%; I2 = 88.5%, p < 0.01) and 29% (95% CI: 21%-38%; I2 = 93.2%, p < 0.01), respectively. The pooled incidence of both types of adverse events varied substantially across different regimens. Occurrence is more often in polytherapy compared to monotherapy. The majority of adverse events were rated as CTCAE grades 1 or 2 events. Four studies were assessed as having low risk of bias. Conclusion: Adverse renal outcomes reflected by renal dysfunction and proteinuria following targeted therapies in RCC are not uncommon and are more often observed in polytherapy compared to monotherapy. The majority of the adverse events were of mild severity. Systematic Review Registration: Identifier CRD42023441979.

Physical harms associated with suprascapular nerve block interventions in the non-surgical management of acute and chronic shoulder pain: A systematic review

Background

The utility of the suprascapular nerve block (SSNB) in the non-surgical management of shoulder pain continues to be explored, whilst its associated physical harms have not. This systematic review aims to report the physical harms associated with the SSNB in the non-surgical management of shoulder pain.

Methods

A search was undertaken of AMED, CINAHL, Cochrane Library, EMBASE, Medline, Pubmed, and Scopus databases. Studies were included if they reported the presence or absence of harm following a SSNB intervention (injection, pulsed radiofrequency, ablation) in the non-surgical management of acute or chronic shoulder pain. Excluded studies were those which utilised SSNB for peri, intra, or post-surgical intervention. The McMaster tool for assessing quality of harms assessment and reporting was utilised.

Results

A total of 111 studies were included in this review of which 168 episodes of harm were reported across 4142 participants. Harm severity ranged from pneumothorax (n = 5) to local pain and bruising (n = 50). The quality of harms assessment and reporting across all studies was poor.

Discussion

Despite heterogeneity in SSNB intervention, and low-quality evidence, SSNB carries a low risk of physical harm. Further work is needed in addressing the poor quality of harms assessment and reporting in SSNB studies.

Review: Adverse event monitoring and reporting in studies of pediatric psychosocial interventions: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Adverse event monitoring in studies of psychotherapy is crucial to clinical decision-making, particularly for weighing of benefits and harms of treatment approaches. In this systematic review, we identified how adverse events are defined, measured, and reported in studies of psychosocial interventions for children with mental disorders.

METHOD

Medline, PsycINFO, Embase, ProQuest Dissertations and Theses Global, and the Cochrane Library were searched from January 2011-January 2023, and Google Scholar from January 2011-February 2023. English language experimental and quasi-experimental studies that evaluated the efficacy or effectiveness of psychosocial interventions for childhood mental disorders were included. Information on the definition, assessment, and report of adverse events was extracted using a checklist based on Good Clinical Practice guidelines.

RESULTS

In this review, 117 studies were included. Studies most commonly involved treating anxiety disorders or obsessive-compulsive disorder (32/117; 27%); 44% of the experimental interventions tested (52/117) were cognitive behavioral therapies. Adverse events were monitored in 36 studies (36/117; 31%) with a protocol used in 19 of these studies to guide monitoring (19/36; 53%). Twenty-seven different events were monitored across the studies with hospitalization the most frequently monitored (3/36; 8%). Event severity was fully assessed in 6 studies (17%) and partially assessed in 12 studies (33%). Only 4/36 studies (11%) included assessing events for cause.

CONCLUSIONS

To date, adverse events have been inconsistently defined, measured and reported in psychosocial intervention studies of childhood mental health disorders. Information on adverse events is an essential knowledge component for understanding the potential impacts and risks of therapeutic interventions.

CONSORT Harms 2022 statement, explanation, and elaboration: updated guideline for the reporting of harms in randomized trials

Randomized controlled trials remain the reference standard for healthcare research on effects of interventions, and the need to report both benefits and harms is essential. The Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (the main CONSORT) statement includes one item on reporting harms (i.e., all important harms or unintended effects in each group). In 2004, the CONSORT group developed the CONSORT Harms extension; however, it has not been consistently applied and needs to be updated. Here, we describe CONSORT Harms 2022, which replaces the CONSORT Harms 2004 checklist, and shows how CONSORT Harms 2022 items could be incorporated into the main CONSORT checklist. Thirteen items from the main CONSORT were modified to improve harms reporting. Three new items were added. In this article, we describe CONSORT Harms 2022 and how it was integrated into the main CONSORT checklist and elaborate on each item relevant to complete reporting of harms in randomized controlled trials. Until future work from the CONSORT group produces an updated checklist, authors, journal reviewers, and editors of randomized controlled trials should use the integrated checklist presented in this paper.

A Systematic Review on the Safety of Mycobacterium tuberculosis-Specific Antigen-Based Skin Tests for Tuberculosis Infection Compared With Tuberculin Skin Tests

Background

A systematic review showed that the accuracy of Mycobacterium tuberculosis antigen-based skin tests (TBSTs) for tuberculosis is similar to that of interferon γ release assay, but the safety of TBSTs has not been systematically reviewed.

Methods

We searched for studies reporting injection site reactions (ISRs) and systemic adverse events associated with TBSTs. We searched Medline, Embase, e-library, the Chinese Biomedical Literature Database, and the China National Knowledge Infrastructure database for studies through 30 July 2021, and the database search was updated until 22 November 2022.

Results

We identified 7 studies for Cy-Tb (Serum Institute of India), 7 (including 2 found through the updated search) for C-TST (Anhui Zhifei Longcom), and 11 for Diaskintest (Generium). The pooled risk of any injection site reactions (ISRs) due to Cy-Tb (n = 2931; 5 studies) did not differ significantly from that for tuberculin skin tests (TSTs; risk ratio, 1.05 [95% confidence interval, .70-1.58]). More than 95% of ISRs were reported as mild or moderate; common ISRs included pain, itching, and rash. In 1 randomized controlled study, 49 of 153 participants (37.6%) given Cy-Tb experience any systemic adverse event (eg, fever and headache), compared with 56 of 149 participants (37.6%) given TST (risk ratio, 0.85 [95% confidence interval, .6-1.2]). In a randomized controlled study in China (n = 14 579), the frequency of systemic adverse events in participants given C-TST was similar to that for TST, and the frequency of ISRs was similar to or lower than that for TST. Reporting of the safety data on Diaskintest was not standardized, precluding meta-analysis.

Conclusion

The safety profile of TBSTs appears similar to that of TSTs and is associated with mostly mild ISRs.

Conducting separate reviews of benefits and harms could improve systematic reviews and meta-analyses

Guidance for systematic reviews of interventions recommends both benefits and harms be included. Systematic reviews may reach conclusions about harms (or lack of harms) that are not true when reviews include only some relevant studies, rely on incomplete data from eligible studies, use inappropriate methods for synthesizing data, and report results selectively. Separate reviews about harms could address some of these problems, and we argue that conducting separate reviews of harms is a feasible alternative to current standards and practices. Systematic reviews of potential benefits could be organized around the use of interventions for specific health problems. Systematic reviews of potential harms could be broader, including more diverse study designs and including all people at risk of harms (who might use the same intervention to treat different health problems). Multiple reviews about benefits could refer to a single review of harms. This approach could improve the reliability, completeness, and efficiency of systematic reviews.

The Effect of Trypsin-Chymotrypsin on Postoperative Pain after Single Visit Endodontic Treatment: A Randomized Controlled Trial

INTRODUCTION

The efficacy of trypsin-chymotrypsin in postoperative pain management following single-visit root canal treatment of teeth with symptomatic irreversible pulpitis was evaluated. Additionally, synergistic effects with nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and reported side effects were also investigated.

METHODS

This prospective, parallel, triple-blinded phase IV randomized controlled trial included 60 patients with mandibular first molars exhibiting symptomatic irreversible pulpitis. The patients were randomly allocated using computer software to one of four treatment groups (n = 15 each), and either ibuprofen (600 mg), ambezim-G (trypsin 5mg-chymotrypsin 5 mg), a combination of both, or a placebo drug were administered postoperatively. The participants scored pain intensity at different time-intervals using a numerical scale, and passive surveillance of harm was used to detect clinical safety. Age was compared between groups using a one-way analysis of variance test. Pain scores were analyzed using the Kruskal-Wallis and Friedman's tests and, if significant, Dunn's test was used for pairwise comparisons. The chi-square test was used to compare qualitative data, and the significance level was set at P value ≤ .05.

RESULTS

All interventions were found to be effective in reducing postoperative pain, and no statistically significant differences were observed between the ibuprofen, trypsin-chymotrypsin, and combination groups. However, all 3 groups differed significantly from the placebo group. The safety profile of the interventions did not differ significantly.

CONCLUSIONS

Trypsin-chymotrypsin exhibits comparable efficacy to nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs. No synergistic effects occur when the 2 are used in combination. This is the first randomized controlled trial to assess the effects of proteolytic enzymes on postendodontic pain.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

clinicaltrials.gov, Identifier: NCT05479747.

Effect of Topical Prostaglandin Analogue Therapy on Central Corneal Thickness: A Systematic Review

To investigate whether prostaglandin analogue (PGA) eyedrops have a significant effect on central corneal thickness (CCT), we conducted a systematic search of literature published from 2000 to 2021. Among the studies conducted on topical PGA therapy in open-angle glaucoma or ocular hypertension patients over 18 years old, prospective studies with CCT change as an outcome were included. A single-arm meta-analysis was conducted to assess the overall effect on CCT, and subgroup analysis according to exposure time of PGA eyedrops was also performed. We counted the number of articles that reported on severe events (CCT reduction of 25 μm or more) and obtained their proportion. The methodological quality was assessed by the McHarm tool. Twenty-two reports of prospective studies were selected. The results of the single-arm meta-analysis showed very high heterogeneity. Still, in subgroup analysis, when PGA was used for more than 6 months, heterogeneity was low, and a significant decrease in CCT was observed. Severe events were reported in two reports and occurred in 3.8% to 14.8% of participants. PGA eyedrop use may cause a clinically significant CCT decrease, requiring CCT follow-up.

Appraising the safety and reporting quality of thread-embedding acupuncture: a protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

Thread-embedding acupuncture (TEA) is a special type of acupuncture treatment in which medical threads are inserted into subcutaneous tissues or muscles at therapeutic points. TEA is a medical practice that combines acupuncture and medical threads. As such, it is necessary to evaluate the safety of TEA. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to assess the safety of TEA and reporting quality of studies regarding TEA.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

The systematic review will be conducted using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines and the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. Searching strategies will be systemically conducted using the following databases from their inception date to September 2022: MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), CiNii, J-STAGE, Korean Medical Database, Korean Studies Information Service System (KISS), ScienceON and Oriental Medicine Advanced Searching Integrated System (OASIS). The search strategies will be adjusted for each database as appropriate. The risk of bias will be assessed using the McMaster tool to identify the quality of harm assessment and reporting in study reports (McHarm). A meta-analysis will be used to synthesise the frequency and incidence of adverse events.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

No ethical approval and consent is required for this systematic review. The results of this systematic review will be disseminated through peer-reviewed publications and conference presentations.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42022297123.

Outcomes After Orthopedic Trauma Surgery - What is the Role of the Anesthesia Choice?

The body of literature concerning the influence of anesthetic type on many perioperative outcomes has grown considerably in recent years. Most studies have suggested that particularly in orthopedic patients, regional anesthesia may be associated with improved perioperative outcomes. Orthopedic trauma presents itself as a field that might benefit from increased utilization of regional techniques with the goal to improve outcomes. This narrative review concludes that, indeed, regional anesthesia seems to provide benefits for morbidity, pain control, and improved return to function in hip fracture, rib fracture, and isolated extremity fracture patients.

Effectiveness of interventions for dry eye: a protocol for an overview of systematic reviews

INTRODUCTION

Dry eye is a leading cause of ocular morbidity and economic and societal burden for patients and healthcare systems. There are several treatment options available for dry eye and high-quality systematic reviews synthesise the evidence for their effectiveness and potential harms.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

We will search the Cochrane Eyes and Vision US satellite (CEV@US) database of eyes and vision systematic reviews for systematic reviews on interventions for dry eye. CEV@US conducted an initial search of PubMed and Embase to populate the CEV@US database of eyes and vision systematic reviews in 2007, which was updated most recently in August 2021. We will search the database for systematic reviews published since 1 January 2016 because systematic reviews more than 5 years are unlikely to be up to date. We will consider Cochrane and non-Cochrane systematic reviews eligible for inclusion. Two authors will independently screen articles. We will include studies that evaluate interventions for dry eye and/or meibomian gland dysfunction with no restriction on types of participants or review language. We will select reliable systematic reviews (ie, those meeting pre-established methodological criteria) for inclusion, assessed by one investigator and verified by a second investigator. We will extract ratings of the certainty of evidence from within each review. We will report the degree of overlap for systematic reviews that answer similar questions and include overlapping primary studies. We will present results of the overview in alignment with guidelines in the Cochrane Handbook of Systematic Reviews of Interventions (Online Chapter 5: Overviews of Reviews), the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses statement, and an overview of reviews quality and transparency checklist. The anticipated start and completion dates for this overview are 1 May 2021 and 30 April 2022, respectively.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

This overview will not require the approval of an Ethics Committee because it will use published studies. We will publish results in a peer-reviewed journal.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42021279880.

Harms in Systematic Reviews Paper 2: Methods used to assess harms are neglected in systematic reviews of gabapentin

OBJECTIVE

We compared methods used with current recommendations for synthesizing harms in systematic reviews and meta-analyses (SRMAs) of gabapentin.

STUDY DESIGN & SETTING

We followed recommended systematic review practices. We selected reliable SRMAs of gabapentin (i.e., met a pre-defined list of methodological criteria) that assessed at least one harm. We extracted and compared methods in four areas: pre-specification, searching, analysis, and reporting. Whereas our focus in this paper is on the methods used, Part 2 examines the results for harms across reviews.

RESULTS

We screened 4320 records and identified 157 SRMAs of gabapentin, 70 of which were reliable. Most reliable reviews (51/70; 73%) reported following a general guideline for SRMA conduct or reporting, but none reported following recommendations specifically for synthesizing harms. Across all domains assessed, review methods were designed to address questions of benefit and rarely included the additional methods that are recommended for evaluating harms.

CONCLUSION

Approaches to assessing harms in SRMAs we examined are tokenistic and unlikely to produce valid summaries of harms to guide decisions. A paradigm shift is needed. At a minimal, reviewers should describe any limitations to their assessment of harms and provide clearer descriptions of methods for synthesizing harms.

Harms in Systematic Reviews Paper 1: An introduction to research on harms

OBJECTIVE

Most systematic reviews of interventions focus on potential benefits. Common methods and assumptions that are appropriate for assessing benefits can be inappropriate for harms. This paper provides a primer on researching harms, particularly in systematic reviews.

STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING

Commentary describing challenges with assessing harm.

RESULTS

Investigators should be familiar with various terminologies used to describe, classify, and group harms. Published reports of clinical trials include limited information about harms, so systematic reviewers should not depend on these studies and journal articles to reach conclusions about harms. Visualizations might improve communication of multiple dimensions of harms such as severity, relatedness, and timing.

CONCLUSION

The terminology, classification, detection, collection, and reporting of harms create unique challenges that take time, expertise, and resources to navigate in both primary studies and evidence syntheses. Systematic reviewers might reach incorrect conclusions if they focus on evidence about harms found in published reports of randomized trials of a particular health problem. Systematic reviews could be improved through better identification and reporting of harms in primary studies and through better training and uptake of appropriate methods for synthesizing evidence about harms.

Adverse Events Reporting of Clinical Trials in Exercise Oncology Research (ADVANCE): Protocol for a Scoping Review

INTRODUCTION

Adequate, transparent, and consistent reporting of adverse events (AEs) in exercise oncology trials is critical to assess the safety of exercise interventions for people following a cancer diagnosis. However, there is little understanding of how AEs are reported in exercise oncology trials. Thus, we propose to conduct a scoping review to summarise and evaluate current practice of reporting of AEs in published exercise oncology trials with further exploration of factors associated with inadequate reporting of AEs. The study findings will serve to inform the need for future research on standardisation of the definition, collection, and reporting of AEs for exercise oncology research.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The ADVANCE (ADverse eVents reporting of clinicAl trials iN exerCise oncology rEsearch) study will be conducted and reported following the PRISMA extension for scoping reviews guideline. Any type of clinical trial involving an exercise intervention in people living with and beyond cancer with a full-text report in English will be included. Six electronic databases (Embase, PubMed, Google Scholar, Web of Science Core Collection, SPORTDiscus, and CINAHL Plus) will be searched for studies. Two independent review authors will assess eligibility of identified studies, chart data using pre-established extraction forms, and evaluate adequacy of reporting of AEs-related data against a 20-item scoring checklist derived from the CONSORT (Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials) harms extension. We will summarise results using descriptive and inferential analysis methods.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

No ethics approval will be required to conduct the ADVANCE study owing to inclusion of only published data. The study results will be disseminated via publications in peer-reviewed journals and presentations at national and internationa  conferences.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION

Open Science Framework: https://osf.io/NXEJD/ (doi:10.17605/OSF.IO/NXEJD).

A Systematic Review on Nerve-Related Adverse Effects following Mandibular Nerve Block Anesthesia

Inferior alveolar nerve (IAN) block injections are commonly used in clinical practice, but they are not free from complications. The aim of the present systematic review is to assess the nerve-related adverse effects of IAN block anesthesia. A structured and systematic search was performed on the major electronic databases (PubMed, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, Scopus and CINAHL) for studies published in English until 30 September 2021. A total of 131 articles were identified through database searching using combinations of keywords. Fifteen papers were included and assessed for eligibility. Overall, nerve damage following an IAN block anesthesia injection is a rare occurrence, probably due to the direct nerve trauma of the needle, a neurotoxic effect of the used anesthetic solution and/or a combination of them. From a medico-legal point of view, a balanced discussion prior to nerve block anesthesia should be pursued in order to avoid patients' reluctance to undergo necessary dental treatment due to the remote eventuality of nerve injury.

Peripheral nerve block anesthesia/analgesia for patients undergoing primary hip and knee arthroplasty: recommendations from the International Consensus on Anesthesia-Related Outcomes after Surgery (ICAROS) group based on a systematic review and meta-analysis of current literature

BACKGROUND

Evidence-based international expert consensus regarding the impact of peripheral nerve block (PNB) use in total hip/knee arthroplasty surgery.

METHODS

A systematic review and meta-analysis: randomized controlled and observational studies investigating the impact of PNB utilization on major complications, including mortality, cardiac, pulmonary, gastrointestinal, renal, thromboembolic, neurologic, infectious, and bleeding complications.Medline, PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library including Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, NHS Economic Evaluation Database, were queried from 1946 to August 4, 2020.The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation approach was used to assess evidence quality and for the development of recommendations.

RESULTS

Analysis of 122 studies revealed that PNB use (compared with no use) was associated with lower ORs for (OR with 95% CIs) for numerous complications (total hip and knee arthroplasties (THA/TKA), respectively): cognitive dysfunction (OR 0.30, 95% CI 0.17 to 0.53/OR 0.52, 95% CI 0.34 to 0.80), respiratory failure (OR 0.36, 95% CI 0.17 to 0.74/OR 0.37, 95% CI 0.18 to 0.75), cardiac complications (OR 0.84, 95% CI 0.76 to 0.93/OR 0.83, 95% CI 0.79 to 0.86), surgical site infections (OR 0.55 95% CI 0.47 to 0.64/OR 0.86 95% CI 0.80 to 0.91), thromboembolism (OR 0.74, 95% CI 0.58 to 0.96/OR 0.90, 95% CI 0.84 to 0.96) and blood transfusion (OR 0.84, 95% CI 0.83 to 0.86/OR 0.91, 95% CI 0.90 to 0.92).

CONCLUSIONS

Based on the current body of evidence, the consensus group recommends PNB use in THA/TKA for improved outcomes.

RECOMMENDATION

PNB use is recommended for patients undergoing THA and TKA except when contraindications preclude their use. Furthermore, the alignment of provider skills and practice location resources needs to be ensured. Evidence level: moderate; recommendation: strong.

Drug tolerability: How much ambiguity can be tolerated? A systematic review of the assessment of tolerability in clinical studies

AIMS

Drug tolerability refers to the degree to which drugs' overt adverse effects can be tolerated by patients. The tolerability profile is of comparative importance to its efficacy and safety, as it largely determines adherence to treatment and ultimately treatment success or failure. However, the term is frequently used imprecisely, and it is unclear if tolerability is limited to subjective patient-reported symptoms or also covers certain objective signs and findings. The aim of this systematic review was to assess how clinical studies define, evaluate and present drug tolerability.

METHODS

The study consisted of a systematic review of clinical studies in PubMed® reporting the term "tolerability".

RESULTS

Eighty clinical studies were screened and 56 studies reporting drug tolerability were retained. None of the retained studies defined events encompassed by the term tolerability by making a distinction between safety and tolerability. Twenty-five studies claimed to evaluate tolerability, but none of them described how to evaluate tolerability from the patient perspective. Most studies (54 out of 56) concluded that the treatment was well tolerated, apparently implying favourable safety. However, none of them actually presented tolerability in terms of a contrast between safety and tolerability.

CONCLUSIONS

Tolerability is used frequently, albeit incorrectly, to refer to a drug's favourable safety profile. Focused evaluation of drug tolerability (i.e., the patient perspective of adverse drug reactions) should become routine. Presentation in regulatory documents, such as risk management plan summaries, product information and patient leaflets should be a continuation of the process of patient-centred healthcare.

To Expand the Evidence Base About Harms from Tests and Treatments

Rigorous evidence about the broad range of harms that might be experienced by a patient in the course of testing and treatment is sparse. We aimed to generate recommendations for how researchers might more comprehensively evaluate potential harms of healthcare interventions, to allow clinicians and patients to better include this evidence in clinical decision-making. We propose seven domains of harms of tests and treatments that are relevant to patients: (1) physical impairment, (2) psychological distress, (3) social disruption, (4) disruption in connection to healthcare, (5) labeling, (6) financial impact, and (7) treatment burden. These domains will include a range of severity of harms and variation in timing after testing or treatment, attributable to the service itself or a resulting care cascade. Although some new measures may be needed, diverse data and tools are available to allow the assessment of harms comprehensively across these domains. We encourage researchers to evaluate harms in sub-populations, since the harms experienced may differ importantly by demographics, social determinants, presence of comorbid illness, psychological state, and other characteristics. Regulators, funders, and editors might require either assessment or reporting of harms in each domain or require justification for inclusion and exclusion of different domains.

Defining and measuring meditation-related adverse effects in mindfulness-based programs

BACKGROUND

Research on the adverse effects of mindfulness-based programs (MBPs) has been sparse and hindered by methodological imprecision.

METHODS

The 44-item Meditation Experiences Interview (MedEx-I) was used by an independent assessor to measure meditation-related side effects (MRSE) following three variants of an 8-week program of mindfulness-based cognitive therapy (n = 96). Each item was queried for occurrence, causal link to mindfulness meditation practice, duration, valence, and impact on functioning.

RESULTS

Eighty-three percent of the MBP sample reported at least one MRSE. Meditation-related adverse effects (MRAEs) with negative valences or negative impacts on functioning occurred in 58% and 37% of the sample, respectively. Lasting bad effects occurred in 6-14% of the sample and were associated with signs of dysregulated arousal (hyperarousal and dissociation).

CONCLUSION

Meditation practice in MBPs is associated with transient distress and negative impacts at similar rates to other psychological treatments.

Adverse events and their management during enhanced external counterpulsation treatment in patients with refractory angina pectoris: observations from a routine clinical practice

AIMS 

Enhanced external counterpulsation (EECP) is a non-invasive treatment (35 one-hour sessions) for patients with refractory angina pectoris (RAP). To avoid interruption of treatment, more knowledge is needed about potential adverse events (AE) of EECP and their appropriate management. To describe occurrence of AE and clinical actions related to EECP treatment in patients with RAP and compare the distribution of AE between responders and non-responders to treatment.

METHODS AND RESULTS 

A retrospective study was conducted by reviewing medical records of 119 patients with RAP who had undergone one EECP treatment and a 6-min-walk test pre- and post-treatment. Sociodemographic, medical, and clinical data related to EECP were collected from patients' medical records. An increased walking distance by 10% post-treatment, measured by 6-min-walk test, was considered a responder. The treatment completion rate was high, and the occurrence of AE was low. Adverse events occurred more often in the beginning and gradually decreased towards the end of EECP treatment. The AE were either device related (e.g. muscle pain/soreness) or non-device related (e.g. bradycardia). Medical (e.g. medication adjustments) and/or nursing (e.g. extra padding around the calves, wound dressing) actions were used. The AE distribution did not differ between responders (n = 49, 41.2%) and non-responders. Skin lesion/blister occurred mostly in responders and paraesthesia occurred mostly in non-responders.

CONCLUSION 

Enhanced external counterpulsation appears to be a safe and well-tolerated treatment option in patients with RAP. However, nurses should be attentive and flexible to meet their patients' needs to prevent AE and early termination of treatment.

The ROBINS-I and the NOS had similar reliability but differed in applicability: A random sampling observational studies of systematic reviews/meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

There is a lack of evidence on the usage of the quality assessment tool-the Risk Of Bias In Nonrandomized Studies-of Interventions (ROBINS-I). This article aimed to measure the reliability, criterion validity, and feasibility of the ROBINS-I and the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS).

METHODS

A sample of systematic reviews or meta-analyses of observational studies were selected from Medline (2013-2017) and assessed by two reviewers using ROBINS-I and the NOS. We reported on reliability in terms of the first-order agreement coefficient (AC1) statistic. Correlation coefficient statistic was used to explore the criterion validity of the ROBINS-I. We compared the feasibility of the ROBINS-I and NOS by recording the time to complete an assessment and the instances where assessing was difficult.

RESULTS

Five systematic reviews containing 41 cohort studies were finally included. Interobserver agreement on the individual domain of the ROBINS-I as well as the NOS was substantial with a mean AC1 statistic of 0.67 (95% CI: 0.50-0.83) and 0.73 (95% CI: 0.65-0.81), respectively. The criterion validity of the ROBNS-I was moderate (K = 0.52) against NOS. The time in assessing a single study by ROBINS-I varied from 7 hours initially to 3 hours compared with 30 minutes for the NOS. Both reviewers rated "bias due to departure from the intended interventions" the most time-consuming domain in the ROBINS-I, items in the NOS were equal.

CONCLUSIONS

The ROBINS-I and the NOS seem to provide the same reliability but vary in applicability. The over-complicated feature of ROBINS-I may limit its usage and a simplified version is needed.

Adverse Events of Mind-Body Interventions in Children: A Systematic Review

Mind-body interventions (MBIs) are one of the top ten complementary approaches utilized in pediatrics, but there is limited knowledge on associated adverse events (AE). The objective of this review was to systematically review AEs reported in association with MBIs in children. In this systematic review the electronic databases MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, CDSR, and CCRCT were searched from inception to August 2018. We included primary studies on participants ≤ 21 years of age that used an MBI. Experimental studies were assessed for whether AEs were reported on or not, and all other study designs were included only if they reported an AE. A total of 441 were included as primary pediatric MBI studies. Of these, 377 (85.5%) did not explicitly report the presence/absence of AEs or a safety assessment. There were 64 included studies: 43 experimental studies reported that no AE occurred, and 21 studies reported AEs. There were 37 AEs found, of which the most serious were grade 3. Most of the studies reporting AEs did not report on severity (81.0%) or duration of AEs (52.4%). MBIs are popularly used in children; however associated harms are often not reported and lack important information for meaningful assessment.

Adverse events from pharmacopuncture treatment in Korea: A protocol for systematic review and meta analysis

BACKGROUND

Pharmacopuncture is a combination of acupuncture and herbal medicine, which involves the injection of herbal extracts into acupuncture points (acupoints). Pharmacopuncture has become one of the major therapeutic tools used in Korea; however, safety is one of the major concerns associated with it. We aim to systematically review clinical studies on the adverse events of pharmacopuncture in Korea.

METHODS

To collect data on the incidence and characteristics of adverse events (AEs) and to evaluate pharmacopuncture safety, 2 or more researchers will conduct a comprehensive search of pertinent English and Korean databases using the keywords "pharmacopuncture" and "adverse events." Regardless of the participants' conditions or treatment types, we will include clinical studies on the AEs of pharmacopuncture. Studies that were not conducted in Korea, and acupoint injections containing Western medications, vitamins, or autologous serum will be excluded from this study. The severity of AEs will be classified using the common terminology criteria for adverse events, and the causality between pharmacopuncture and AEs will be assessed using the World Health Organization-Uppsala Monitoring Centre (WHO-UMC) causality scale. The quality of identifying and reporting the AEs will be assessed using the McHarm scale. The risk of selection bias will be assessed using the Cochrane risk of bias and the risk of bias for non-randomized studies tools. Studies will be assessed for heterogeneity utilizing Higgins's I2 statistics, and the risk of publication bias will be assessed and expressed in the form of a contour-enhanced funnel plot.

RESULTS AND CONCLUSION

Comprehensive investigation of all types of clinical studies in Korea will provide clearer evidence of the safety of pharmacopuncture. The results of this study will be useful for traditional medical doctors and patients who use such treatments and interventions.Systematic Review Registration: Open Science Foundation (osf.io/umhyz).

A proposed framework to guide evidence synthesis practice for meta-analysis with zero-events studies

OBJECTIVE

In evidence synthesis practice, researchers often face the problem of how to deal with zero-events. Inappropriately dealing with zero-events studies may lead to research waste and mislead healthcare practice. We propose a framework to guide researchers to better deal with zero-events in meta-analysis.

STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING

We used two dimensions, one with respect to the total events count across all studies in the comparative arms in a meta-analysis, and a second with respect to whether included studies have single or both arms with zero-events, to establish the framework for the classification of meta-analysis with zero-events studies. A dataset from Cochrane systematic reviews was used to evaluate the classification.

RESULTS

The proposed framework classifies meta-analysis with zero-events studies into six subtypes. The classification matched well to the large real-world dataset. The applicability of existing methods for zero-events were then presented under each meta-analysis subtype based on this framework, with a 5-step principle to help researchers in evidence synthesis practice.

CONCLUSIONS

The proposed framework should be considered by researchers when making decisions on the selection of the synthesis methods in a meta-analysis. It also provides a reasonable basis for the development of methodological guidelines to deal with zero-events in meta-analysis.

Risk of foetal harm with letrozole use in fertility treatment: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The aromatase inhibitor letrozole is increasingly recommended for ovulation induction, as it is more effective with fewer side-effects than other agents. But many clinicians are reluctant to use the drug for fertility treatment due to a strong-label warning against its use, which warns about congenital malformation risk to the foetus in women seeking pregnancy.

OBJECTIVE AND RATIONALE

The aim of this study was to determine the risks of congenital malformations and pregnancy loss with letrozole compared with clomiphene primarily, and with other fertility drugs and natural conception.

SEARCH METHODS

A systematic review and meta-analysis using PRISMA harms guidelines. We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE and other sources from inception until January 2020, with the MeSH words for 'letrozole' and pregnancy OR foetal/neonatal outcome. We included studies reported on congenital malformations in foetuses born to mothers conceived after fertility treatment, with letrozole versus clomiphene, placebo, gonadotrophins, metformin, natural conception or other agents, from randomised trials, comparative cohort studies and non-comparative observational cohorts. Quality of the studies was assessed using Cochrane risk of bias tool and Newcastle Ottawa Scale. The McMaster tool was used to assess the quality of reported harm for foetal congenital malformations in the studies. We compared the absolute risk of events using risk difference measures and pooled the findings using a fixed-effect model. We evaluated the statistical heterogeneity using forest plots and the I2 statistic and funnel plot to assess publication bias. We assessed the strength of evidence for congenital malformation and pregnancy loss as per the GRADE recommendations and with the Fragility index.

OUTCOMES

We included 46 studies (18 randomised trials; 21 comparative cohorts; 7 non-comparative cohorts). Overall 2.15% (101/4697; 95% CI 1.7 to 2.5) of babies conceived on letrozole for fertility treatment had congenital foetal malformations. We did not observe a significant increase in congenital malformations with letrozole versus clomiphene in the randomised trials (risk difference (RD) 0.01, 95% CI -0.02, 0.03; I2 = 0%; 14 studies) and found a significant reduction in the cohort studies (RD -0.02, 95% CI -0.04, -0.01; I2 = 0%, 11 studies). The fragility index was 44% (7/16) (either an increase in the intervention arm or a decrease in control arm was needed to alter the results). The risks of pregnancy loss were not increased with letrozole versus clomiphene in the 14 randomised trials (RD -0.01, 95% CI -0.06, 0.04; I2 = 0%), and the risks were reduced in the six cohort studies (RD -0.09, 95% CI -0.17, -0.00; I2 = 68%). The GRADE quality of evidence was low to moderate for congenital malformations and pregnancy loss. We did not find any increased congenital malformation risk with letrozole versus gonadotrophins, natural conception or natural cycle ART, but the number of studies was small.

WIDER IMPLICATIONS

There is no evidence that letrozole increases the risk of congenital foetal malformation or pregnancy loss compared with clomiphene, natural conception or other fertility agents, to warrant warning against its use. Given its therapeutic benefits and lack of evidence of harm to the foetus, clinicians should consider letrozole as first-line agent for ovulation induction.

Glossary for randomized clinical trials

Randomized clinical trials are positioned at the highest level of primary clinical evidence, as they are designed to be unbiased with a reduced risk of systematic error. The Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) statement was first developed in 1996 to improve the reporting quality of randomized clinical trials with updates being published subsequently. Recently, the Preferred Reporting Items for RAndomized Trials in Endodontics (PRIRATE) 2020 guidelines were developed exclusively for the field of Endodontics to address the suboptimal quality of randomized clinical trials submitted to Endodontic journals, which result in many being rejected. A principal flaw in submissions is the fact that many authors are unclear on the keys terms that should be used when developing manuscripts for publication. Clearly, authors should be aware of the most common terms used when conducting and reporting randomized clinical trials. Hence, the aim of the current paper is to present a comprehensive glossary of the terminology used in randomized clinical trials in order to assist authors when designing, executing and writing-up randomized clinical trials.

Benefits and Harms of Exercise Therapy for Patients With Diabetic Foot Ulcers: A Systematic Review

AIM

Exercise therapy is a core element in the treatment of diabetes, but the benefits and harms for patients with a diabetic foot ulcer (DFU) are unknown. We therefore aimed to systematically review the benefits on health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and harms of exercise therapy for patients with DFU.

METHODS

We searched 6 major databases. We performed citation and reference searches of included studies and contacted authors of ongoing trials. We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to assess potential benefits on HRQoL and harms of exercise therapy. Observational studies were included to identify potential harms of exercise therapy.

RESULTS

We included 10 published publications of 9 trials and results from 2 unpublished trials including a total of 281 individuals with DFUs receiving various forms of exercise therapy. Due to lack of HRQoL measurements and high heterogeneity, it was not possible to perform meta-analyses. Results on HRQoL was present in one unpublished study. Harms reported ranged from musculoskeletal problems, increased wound size, to amputation; however, no safe conclusions could be drawn from the available data due to high heterogeneity and risk of bias in the trials.

CONCLUSIONS/INTERPRETATION

Protective strategies are often preferred over therapeutic exercise that might have unforeseen consequences for patients over time. Based on the current literature, no evidence-based recommendations can be provided on the benefits and harms of exercise therapy for patients with DFUs. Well-conducted RCTs are needed to guide rehabilitation including detailed description of adverse events and an exercise program in a semisupervised or fully supervised setting.

Cardiopulmonary exercise testing and aerobic treadmill training after stroke: Feasibility of a controlled trial

PURPOSE

To investigate the feasibility and safety of a randomized controlled trial that performed cardiopulmonary exercise testing and 12 weeks of aerobic treadmill training in individuals in the chronic phase after stroke.

METHODS

The following data were recorded: number of individuals contacted to participate, that attended in the evaluation session, and that were included (recruited) in the study; retention, attendance and adherence rates; reasons for exclusion, withdrawal, non-attendance and non-completing exercise; adverse events.

RESULTS

From 230 individuals that were contacted, 39 (17%) attended the evaluation session and 22 (9.6%) were recruited in the study, 11 in each group (control and experimental). The main source of recruitment was other research projects (43.5%). The main reason for exclusion was unavailability (22%). Six out of 39 individuals (15.4%) that attended in the evaluation session were not able to perform the cardiopulmonary exercise testing. All subjects included showed a respiratory exchange ratio ≥1.0 (considered as maximal effort in the CPET). Retention rate was 81% and the main reason of withdrawal was unavailability (75%). The overall attendance rate was 88% and the main reason for non-attendance was illness/sickness (20.8%). The adherence rate was 99% and the reasons for non-completing sessions were illness/sickness (60%) or delay (40%). No serious adverse events occurred.

CONCLUSION

Recruitment rate was low, retention rate was moderate, attendance and adherence rates were high. No serious adverse events occurred. It was feasible and safe to execute a randomized clinical trial that performed cardiopulmonary exercise testing and 12 weeks of aerobic treadmill training.

Screw-Related Complications After Instrumentation of the Osteoporotic Spine: A Systematic Literature Review With Meta-Analysis

STUDY DESIGN

Systematic literature review with meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE

Osteoporosis is common in elderly patients, who frequently suffer from spinal fractures or degenerative diseases and often require surgical treatment with spinal instrumentation. Diminished bone quality impairs primary screw purchase, which may lead to loosening and its sequelae, in the worst case, revision surgery. Information about the incidence of spinal instrumentation-related complications in osteoporotic patients is currently limited to individual reports. We conducted a systematic literature review with the aim of quantifying the incidence of screw loosening in osteoporotic spines.

METHODS

Publications on spinal instrumentation of osteoporotic patients reporting screw-related complications were identified in 3 databases. Data on screw loosening and other local complications was collected. Pooled risks of experiencing such complications were estimated with random effects models. Risk of bias in the individual studies was assessed with an adapted McHarm Scale.

RESULTS

From 1831 initial matches, 32 were eligible and 19 reported screw loosening rates. Studies were heterogeneous concerning procedures performed and risk of bias. Screw loosening incidences were variable with a pooled risk of 22.5% (95% CI 10.8%-36.6%, 95% prediction interval [PI] 0%-81.2%) in reports on nonaugmented screws and 2.2% (95% CI 0.0%-7.2%, 95% PI 0%-25.1%) in reports on augmented screws.

CONCLUSIONS

The findings of this meta-analysis suggest that screw loosening incidences may be considerably higher in osteoporotic spines than with normal bone mineral density. Screw augmentation may reduce loosening rates; however, this requires confirmation through clinical studies. Standardized reporting of prespecified complications should be enforced by publishers.

Adverse events associated with paediatric massage therapy: a systematic review

INTRODUCTION

Massage therapy (MT) is frequently used in children. No study has systematically assessed its safety in children and adolescents. We systematically review adverse events (AEs) associated with paediatric MT.

METHODS

We searched seven electronic databases from inception to December 2018. We included studies if they (1) were primary studies published in a peer-reviewed journal, (2) involved children aged 0-18 years and (3) a type of MT was used for any indication. No restriction was applied to language, year of publication and study design. AEs were classified based on their severity and association to the intervention.

RESULTS

Literature searches identified 12 286 citations, of which 938 citations were retrieved for full-text evaluation and 60 studies were included. In the included studies, 31 (51.6%) did not report any information on AEs, 13 (21.6%) reported that no AE occurred and 16 studies (26.6%) reported at least one AE after MT. There were 20 mild events (grade 1) that resolved with minimal intervention, 26 moderate events (grades 2-3) that required medical intervention, and 18 cases of severe AEs (grades 4-5) that resulted in hospital admission or prolongation of hospital stay; of these, 17 AEs were volvulus in premature infants, four of which were ultimately fatal events.

CONCLUSION

We identified a range of AEs associated with MT use, from mild to severe. Unfortunately, the majority of included studies did not report if an AE occurred or not, leading to publication bias. This review reports an association between abdominal massage with volvulus without malrotation in preterm infants; it is still to be defined if this is casual or not, but our findings warrant caution in the use of abdominal massage in preterm infants.

Prophylactic plasma transfusion for patients without inherited bleeding disorders or anticoagulant use undergoing non-cardiac surgery or invasive procedures

BACKGROUND

In the absence of bleeding, plasma is commonly transfused to people prophylactically to prevent bleeding. In this context, it is transfused before operative or invasive procedures (such as liver biopsy or chest drainage tube insertion) in those considered at increased risk of bleeding, typically defined by abnormalities of laboratory tests of coagulation. As plasma contains procoagulant factors, plasma transfusion may reduce perioperative bleeding risk. This outcome has clinical importance given that perioperative bleeding and blood transfusion have been associated with increased morbidity and mortality. Plasma is expensive, and some countries have experienced issues with blood product shortages, donor pool reliability, and incomplete screening for transmissible infections. Thus, although the benefit of prophylactic plasma transfusion has not been well established, plasma transfusion does carry potentially life-threatening risks.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the clinical effectiveness and safety of prophylactic plasma transfusion for people with coagulation test abnormalities (in the absence of inherited bleeding disorders or use of anticoagulant medication) requiring non-cardiac surgery or invasive procedures.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched for randomised controlled trials (RCTs), without language or publication status restrictions in: Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; 2017 Issue 7); Ovid MEDLINE (from 1946); Ovid Embase (from 1974); Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL; EBSCOHost) (from 1937); PubMed (e-publications and in-process citations ahead of print only); Transfusion Evidence Library (from 1950); Latin American Caribbean Health Sciences Literature (LILACS) (from 1982); Web of Science: Conference Proceedings Citation Index-Science (CPCI-S) (Thomson Reuters, from 1990); ClinicalTrials.gov; and World Health Organization (WHO) International Clinical Trials Registry Search Platform (ICTRP) to 28 January 2019.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included RCTs comparing: prophylactic plasma transfusion to placebo, intravenous fluid, or no intervention; prophylactic plasma transfusion to alternative pro-haemostatic agents; or different haemostatic thresholds for prophylactic plasma transfusion. We included participants of any age, and we excluded trials incorporating individuals with previous active bleeding, with inherited bleeding disorders, or taking anticoagulant medication before enrolment.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane.

MAIN RESULTS

We included five trials in this review, all were conducted in high-income countries. Three additional trials are ongoing. One trial compared fresh frozen plasma (FFP) transfusion with no transfusion given. One trial compared FFP or platelet transfusion or both with neither FFP nor platelet transfusion given. One trial compared FFP transfusion with administration of alternative pro-haemostatic agents (factors II, IX, and X followed by VII). One trial compared the use of different transfusion triggers using the international normalised ratio measurement. One trial compared the use of a thromboelastographic-guided transfusion trigger using standard laboratory measurements of coagulation. Four trials enrolled only adults, whereas the fifth trial did not specify participant age. Four trials included only minor procedures that could be performed by the bedside. Only one trial included some participants undergoing major surgical operations. Two trials included only participants in intensive care. Two trials included only participants with liver disease. Three trials did not recruit sufficient participants to meet their pre-calculated sample size. Overall, the quality of evidence was low to very low across different outcomes according to GRADE methodology, due to risk of bias, indirectness, and imprecision. One trial was stopped after recruiting two participants, therefore this review's findings are based on the remaining four trials (234 participants). When plasma transfusion was compared with no transfusion given, we are very uncertain whether there was a difference in 30-day mortality (1 trial comparing FFP or platelet transfusion or both with neither FFP nor platelet transfusion, 72 participants; risk ratio (RR) 0.38, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.13 to 1.10; very low-quality evidence). We are very uncertain whether there was a difference in major bleeding within 24 hours (1 trial comparing FFP transfusion vs no transfusion, 76 participants; RR 0.33, 95% CI 0.01 to 7.93; very low-quality evidence; 1 trial comparing FFP or platelet transfusion or both with neither FFP nor platelet transfusion, 72 participants; RR 1.59, 95% CI 0.28 to 8.93; very low-quality evidence). We are very uncertain whether there was a difference in the number of blood product transfusions per person (1 trial, 76 participants; study authors reported no difference; very low-quality evidence) or in the number of people requiring transfusion (1 trial comparing FFP or platelet transfusion or both with neither FFP nor platelet transfusion, 72 participants; study authors reported no blood transfusion given; very low-quality evidence) or in the risk of transfusion-related adverse events (acute lung injury) (1 trial, 76 participants; study authors reported no difference; very low-quality evidence). When plasma transfusion was compared with other pro-haemostatic agents, we are very uncertain whether there was a difference in major bleeding (1 trial; 21 participants; no events; very low-quality evidence) or in transfusion-related adverse events (febrile or allergic reactions) (1 trial, 21 participants; RR 9.82, 95% CI 0.59 to 162.24; very low-quality evidence). When different triggers for FFP transfusion were compared, the number of people requiring transfusion may have been reduced (for overall blood products) when a thromboelastographic-guided transfusion trigger was compared with standard laboratory tests (1 trial, 60 participants; RR 0.18, 95% CI 0.08 to 0.39; low-quality evidence). We are very uncertain whether there was a difference in major bleeding (1 trial, 60 participants; RR 0.33, 95% CI 0.01 to 7.87; very low-quality evidence) or in transfusion-related adverse events (allergic reactions) (1 trial; 60 participants; RR 0.33, 95% CI 0.01 to 7.87; very low-quality evidence). Only one trial reported 30-day mortality. No trials reported procedure-related harmful events (excluding bleeding) or quality of life.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Review findings show uncertainty for the utility and safety of prophylactic FFP use. This is due to predominantly very low-quality evidence that is available for its use over a range of clinically important outcomes, together with lack of confidence in the wider applicability of study findings, given the paucity or absence of study data in settings such as major body cavity surgery, extensive soft tissue surgery, orthopaedic surgery, or neurosurgery. Therefore, from the limited RCT evidence, we can neither support nor oppose the use of prophylactic FFP in clinical practice.

Major Adverse Cardiac Events and Mortality Associated with Electroconvulsive Therapy: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Cardiac events after electroconvulsive therapy have been reported sporadically, but a systematic assessment of the risk is missing. The goal of this study was to obtain a robust estimate of the incidence of major adverse cardiac events in adult patients undergoing electroconvulsive therapy.

METHODS

Systematic review and meta-analysis of studies that investigated electroconvulsive therapy and reported major adverse cardiac events and/or mortality. Endpoints were incidence rates of major adverse cardiac events, including myocardial infarction, arrhythmia, pulmonary edema, pulmonary embolism, acute heart failure, and cardiac arrest. Additional endpoints were all-cause and cardiac mortality. The pooled estimated incidence rates and 95% CIs of individual major adverse cardiac events and mortality per 1,000 patients and per 1,000 electroconvulsive therapy treatments were calculated.

RESULTS

After screening of 2,641 publications and full-text assessment of 284 studies, the data of 82 studies were extracted (total n = 106,569 patients; n = 786,995 electroconvulsive therapy treatments). The most commonly reported major adverse cardiac events were acute heart failure, arrhythmia, and acute pulmonary edema with an incidence (95% CI) of 24 (12.48 to 46.13), 25.83 (14.83 to 45.00), and 4.92 (0.85 to 28.60) per 1,000 patients or 2.44 (1.27 to 4.69), 4.66 (2.15 to 10.09), and 1.50 (0.71 to 3.14) per 1,000 electroconvulsive therapy treatments. All-cause mortality was 0.42 (0.11 to 1.52) deaths per 1,000 patients and 0.06 (0.02 to 0.23) deaths per 1,000 electroconvulsive therapy treatments. Cardiac death accounted for 29% (23 of 79) of deaths.

CONCLUSIONS

Major adverse cardiac events and death after electroconvulsive therapy are infrequent and occur in about 1 of 50 patients and after about 1 of 200 to 500 electroconvulsive therapy treatments.

Adverse Events of the Duodenal-Jejunal Bypass Liner: a Systematic Review

A systematic review was conducted on adverse events (AEs) associated with the use of the duodenal-jejunal bypass liner (DJBL). PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane library were searched up to January 2018. The quality of reporting AEs was determined by the McHarm questionnaire and the risk of bias by the Newcastle-Ottawa scale. Thirty-eight studies were included. The comparability of the studies was low and the McHarm questionnaire showed incompleteness for most parameters in all studies. A total of 891 AEs were reported in 1056 patients. Thirty-three AEs (3.7%) were classified as severe, including hepatic abscess and esophageal perforation. The anchor of the DJBL caused or likely caused 85% of the SAEs. To improve the safety margin of the DJBL, adjustments to the anchoring system are needed.

Spinal manual therapy in infants, children and adolescents: A systematic review and meta-analysis on treatment indication, technique and outcomes

BACKGROUND

Studies on effectiveness and safety of specific spinal manual therapy (SMT) techniques in children, which distinguish between age groups, are lacking.

OBJECTIVE

To conduct a systematic review of the evidence for effectiveness and harms of specific SMT techniques for infants, children and adolescents.

METHODS

PubMed, Index to Chiropractic Literature, Embase, CINAHL and Cochrane Library were searched up to December 2017. Controlled studies, describing primary SMT treatment in infants (<1 year) and children/adolescents (1-18 years), were included to determine effectiveness. Controlled and observational studies and case reports were included to examine harms. One author screened titles and abstracts and two authors independently screened the full text of potentially eligible studies for inclusion. Two authors assessed risk of bias of included studies and quality of the body of evidence using the GRADE methodology. Data were described according to PRISMA guidelines and CONSORT and TIDieR checklists. If appropriate, random-effects meta-analysis was performed.

RESULTS

Of the 1,236 identified studies, 26 studies were eligible. Infants and children/adolescents were treated for various (non-)musculoskeletal indications, hypothesized to be related to spinal joint dysfunction. Studies examining the same population, indication and treatment comparison were scarce. Due to very low quality evidence, it is uncertain whether gentle, low-velocity mobilizations reduce complaints in infants with colic or torticollis, and whether high-velocity, low-amplitude manipulations reduce complaints in children/adolescents with autism, asthma, nocturnal enuresis, headache or idiopathic scoliosis. Five case reports described severe harms after HVLA manipulations in four infants and one child. Mild, transient harms were reported after gentle spinal mobilizations in infants and children, and could be interpreted as side effect of treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

Based on GRADE methodology, we found the evidence was of very low quality; this prevented us from drawing conclusions about the effectiveness of specific SMT techniques in infants, children and adolescents. Outcomes in the included studies were mostly parent or patient-reported; studies did not report on intermediate outcomes to assess the effectiveness of SMT techniques in relation to the hypothesized spinal dysfunction. Severe harms were relatively scarce, poorly described and likely to be associated with underlying missed pathology. Gentle, low-velocity spinal mobilizations seem to be a safe treatment technique in infants, children and adolescents. We encourage future research to describe effectiveness and safety of specific SMT techniques instead of SMT as a general treatment approach.

Preexposure Prophylaxis for the Prevention of HIV Infection: Evidence Report and Systematic Review for the US Preventive Services Task Force

IMPORTANCE

Effective prevention strategies for HIV infection are an important public health priority. Preexposure prophylaxis (PrEP) involves use of antiretroviral therapy (ART) daily or before and after sex to decrease risk of acquiring HIV infection.

OBJECTIVE

To synthesize the evidence on the benefits and harms of PrEP, instruments for predicting incident HIV infection, and PrEP adherence to inform the US Preventive Services Task Force.

DATA SOURCES

Ovid MEDLINE, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and EMBASE through June 2018, with surveillance through January 2019.

STUDY SELECTION

English-language placebo-controlled randomized clinical trials of oral PrEP with tenofovir disoproxil fumarate/emtricitabine or tenofovir disoproxil fumarate monotherapy; studies on the diagnostic accuracy of instruments for predicting incident HIV infection; and studies on PrEP adherence.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

Dual review of titles and abstracts, full-text articles, study quality, and data abstraction. Data were pooled using the Dersimonian and Laird random-effects model for effects of PrEP on HIV infection, mortality, and harms.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

HIV acquisition, mortality, and harms; adherence to PrEP; and diagnostic test accuracy and discrimination.

RESULTS

Fourteen RCTs (N = 18 837), 8 observational studies (N = 3884), and 7 studies of diagnostic accuracy (N = 32 279) were included. PrEP was associated with decreased risk of HIV infection vs placebo or no PrEP after 4 months to 4 years (11 trials; relative risk [RR], 0.46 [95% CI, 0.33-0.66]; I2 = 67%; absolute risk reduction [ARD], -2.0% [95% CI, -2.8% to -1.2%]). Greater adherence was associated with greater efficacy (RR with adherence ≥70%, 0.27 [95% CI, 0.19-0.39]; I2 = 0%) in 6 trials. PrEP was associated with an increased risk of renal adverse events (12 trials; RR, 1.43 [95% CI, 1.18-1.75]; I2 = 0%; ARD, 0.56% [95% CI, 0.09%-1.04%]) and gastrointestinal adverse events (12 trials; RR, 1.63 [95% CI, 1.26-2.11]; I2 = 43%; ARD, 1.95% [95% CI, 0.48%-3.43%]); most adverse events were mild and reversible. Instruments for predicting incident HIV infection had moderate discrimination (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve, 0.49-0.72) and require further validation. Adherence to PrEP in the United States in men who have sex with men varied widely (22%-90%).

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

In adults at increased risk of HIV infection, PrEP with oral tenofovir disoproxil fumarate monotherapy or tenofovir disoproxil fumarate/emtricitabine was associated with decreased risk of acquiring HIV infection compared with placebo or no PrEP, although effectiveness decreased with suboptimal adherence.

Overview: comprehensive and carefully constructed strategies are required when conducting searches for adverse effects data

OBJECTIVES

Methodological research has been undertaken to investigate the many challenges in searching for adverse effects data. It is imperative that the search approach adopted in systematic reviews is based on the best available evidence. We provide a detailed summary of the results and implications of the current evidence base to assist future searches for adverse effects.

STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING

This article is a narrative review from the authors of the Cochrane Handbook chapter on adverse effects.

RESULTS

The specified search strategy must be based on the population, intervention, comparator, outcome(s) format for question formulation and appropriate study designs for adverse effects data. Search filters and suggested search terms are available for the adverse effects of drug, medical devices, and surgical interventions. The use of generic adverse effects terms (such as harms and complications) as text words and indexing terms and specific adverse effects terms (such as rash and wound infection) are warranted. Searching databases beyond MEDLINE has proven useful, as well as the use of nondatabase sources.

CONCLUSION

This article provides the most up-to-date evidence-based guidance in identifying adverse effects data in the literature. It will support searchers and researchers evaluating the potential for harm of medical interventions in systematic reviews.

Comparative Efficacy and Safety of Different Antiviral Agents for Cytomegalovirus Prophylaxis in Allogeneic Hematopoietic Cell Transplantation: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Over the past 25 years, several randomized controlled trials have investigated the efficacy of different antiviral agents for cytomegalovirus (CMV) prophylaxis in allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation. We performed a systematic literature review, conventional meta-analysis, and network meta-analysis using a random-effects model and risk ratios (RRs) with corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs) as effect estimates. Fifteen randomized controlled trials were identified, including 7 different antiviral agents: acyclovir, ganciclovir, maribavir, brincidofovir, letermovir, valacyclovir, and vaccine. Twelve trials used placebo as comparator while 3 trials compared different antiviral agents. We found evidence for CMV disease and infection being significantly reduced by antiviral prophylaxis, with an RR of .66 (95% CI, .48 to .90) and .63 (95% CI, .50 to .79). Across the network, ganciclovir showed the best relative efficacy for CMV disease while letermovir provided first rank of being the best option for CMV infection. The risk for death was not significantly influenced by antiviral prophylaxis in the meta-analysis, with an RR of .92 (95% CI, .78 to 1.08), as well as in the network meta-analysis. In terms of safety, letermovir was at least similar in comparison with placebo and most agents while both letermovir and acyclovir showed significantly reduced risk for serious adverse events compared with ganciclovir, with RRs of .55 (95% CI, .30 to 1.00) for letermovir and .63 (95% CI, .42 to .93) for acyclovir. With a probability of 81%, letermovir appears to be the best option in terms of safety. Future randomized head-to-head comparisons are needed to evaluate the definite efficacy and safety of different prophylactic strategies.

Effectiveness and harms of pharmacological interventions in the treatment of delirium in adults in intensive care units post cardiac surgery: a systematic review protocol

REVIEW QUESTION/OBJECTIVE

The review objective is to synthesize the best available evidence on the effectiveness and harms of pharmacological interventions in the treatment of delirium in adults in intensive care units (ICU) after cardiac surgery.The specific review question is: What is the effectiveness and what are the harms of pharmacological interventions in relation to the duration and severity of delirium episodes, length of stay in ICU, length of stay in hospital, functional capacity and quality of life and mortality for critically ill adult patients treated in intensive care after cardiac surgery?