Evidence for clinician underprescription of and patient non-adherence to guideline-recommended cardiovascular medications among adults with peripheral artery disease: protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

International guidelines recommend that adults with peripheral artery disease (PAD) be prescribed antiplatelet, statin and antihypertensive medications. However, it is unclear how often people with PAD are underprescribed these drugs, which characteristics predict clinician underprescription of and patient non-adherence to guideline-recommended cardiovascular medications, and whether underprescription and non-adherence are associated with adverse health and health system outcomes.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

We will search MEDLINE, EMBASE and Evidence-Based Medicine Reviews from 2006 onwards. Two investigators will independently review abstracts and full-text studies. We will include studies that enrolled adults and reported the incidence and/or prevalence of clinician underprescription of or patient non-adherence to guideline-recommended cardiovascular medications among people with PAD; adjusted risk factors for underprescription of/non-adherence to these medications; and adjusted associations between underprescription/non-adherence to these medications and outcomes. Outcomes will include mortality, major adverse cardiac and limb events (including revascularisation procedures and amputations), other reported morbidities, healthcare resource use and costs. Two investigators will independently extract data and evaluate study risk of bias. We will calculate summary estimates of the incidence and prevalence of clinician underprescription/patient non-adherence across studies. We will also conduct subgroup meta-analyses and meta-regression to determine if estimates vary by country, characteristics of the patients and treating clinicians, population-based versus non-population-based design, and study risks of bias. Finally, we will calculate pooled adjusted risk factors for underprescription/non-adherence and adjusted associations between underprescription/non-adherence and outcomes. We will use Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation to determine estimate certainty.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Ethics approval is not required as we are studying published data. This systematic review will synthesise existing evidence regarding clinician underprescription of and patient non-adherence to guideline-recommended cardiovascular medications in adults with PAD. Results will be used to identify evidence-care gaps and inform where interventions may be required to improve clinician prescribing and patient adherence to prescribed medications.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42022362801.

A Systematic Review of the Cost-Effectiveness of Cleft Care in Low- and Middle-Income Countries: What is Needed?

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this paper is to conduct a systematic review that summarizes the cost-effectiveness of cleft lip and/or palate (CL/P) care in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) based on existing literature.

DESIGN

We searched eleven electronic databases for articles from January 1, 2000 to December 29, 2020. This study is registered in PROSPERO (CRD42020148402). Two reviewers independently conducted primary and secondary screening, and data extraction.

SETTING

All CL/P cost-effectiveness analyses in LMIC settings.

PATIENTS, PARTICIPANTS

In total, 2883 citations were screened. Eleven articles encompassing 1,001,675 patients from 86 LMICs were included.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

We used cost-effectiveness thresholds of 1% to 51% of a country's gross domestic product per capita (GDP/capita), a conservative threshold recommended for LMICs. Quality appraisal was conducted using the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) checklist.

RESULTS

Primary CL/P repair was cost-effective at the threshold of 51% of a country's GDP/capita across all studies. However, only 1 study met at least 70% of the JBI criteria. There is a need for context-specific cost and health outcome data for primary CL/P repair, complications, and existing multidisciplinary management in LMICs.

CONCLUSIONS

Existing economic evaluations suggest primary CL/P repair is cost-effective, however context-specific local data will make future cost-effectiveness analyses more relevant to local decision-makers and lead to better-informed resource allocation decisions in LMICs.

Tranexamic acid versus placebo to reduce perioperative blood transfusion in patients undergoing liver resection: protocol for the haemorrhage during liver resection tranexamic acid (HeLiX) randomised controlled trial

INTRODUCTION

Despite use of operative and non-operative interventions to reduce blood loss during liver resection, 20%-40% of patients receive a perioperative blood transfusion. Extensive intraoperative blood loss is a major risk factor for postoperative morbidity and mortality and receipt of blood transfusion is associated with serious risks including an association with long-term cancer recurrence and overall survival. In addition, blood products are scarce and associated with appreciable expense; decreasing blood transfusion requirements would therefore have health system benefits. Tranexamic acid (TXA), an antifibrinolytic, has been shown to reduce the probability of receiving a blood transfusion by one-third for patients undergoing cardiac or orthopaedic surgery. However, its applicability in liver resection has not been widely researched.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

This protocol describes a prospective, blinded, randomised controlled trial being conducted at 10 sites in Canada and 1 in the USA. 1230 eligible and consenting participants will be randomised to one of two parallel groups: experimental (2 g of intravenous TXA) or placebo (saline) administered intraoperatively. The primary endpoint is receipt of blood transfusion within 7 days of surgery. Secondary outcomes include blood loss, postoperative complications, quality of life and 5-year disease-free and overall survival.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

This trial has been approved by the research ethics boards at participating centres and Health Canada (parent control number 177992) and is currently enrolling participants. All participants will provide written informed consent. Results will be distributed widely through local and international meetings, presentation, publication and ClinicalTrials.gov.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT02261415.

Evaluating probiotics for the prevention of ventilator-associated pneumonia: a randomised placebo-controlled multicentre trial protocol and statistical analysis plan for PROSPECT

INTRODUCTION

Ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP) is the most common healthcare-associated infection in critically ill patients. Prior studies suggest that probiotics may reduce VAP and other infections in critically ill patients; however, most previous randomised trials were small, single centre studies. The Probiotics: Prevention of Severe Pneumonia and Endotracheal Colonization Trial (PROSPECT) aims to determine the impact of the probiotic Lactobacillus rhamnosus GG on VAP and other clinically important outcomes in critically ill adults.

METHODS

PROSPECT is a multicentre, concealed, randomised, stratified, blinded, controlled trial in patients ≥18 years old, anticipated to be mechanically ventilated ≥72 hours, in intensive care units (ICUs) in Canada, the USA and Saudi Arabia. Patients receive either 1×10¹⁰ colony forming units of L. rhamnosus GG twice daily or an identical appearing placebo. Those at increased risk of probiotic infection are excluded. The primary outcome is VAP. Secondary outcomes are other ICU-acquired infections including Clostridioides difficile infection, diarrhoea (including antibiotic-associated diarrhoea), antimicrobial use, ICU and hospital length of stay and mortality. The planned sample size of 2650 patients is based on an estimated 15% VAP rate and will provide 80% power to detect a 25% relative risk reduction.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

This protocol and statistical analysis plan outlines the methodology, primary and secondary analyses, sensitivity analyses and subgroup analyses. PROSPECT is approved by Health Canada (#9427-M1133-45C), the research ethics boards of all participating hospitals and Public Health Ontario. Results will be disseminated via academic channels (peer reviewed journal publications, professional healthcare fora including international conferences) and conventional and social media. The results of PROSPECT will inform practice guidelines worldwide.

TRIALREGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT02462590; Pre-results.