Karen M Schoelles

Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Bariatric Surgery for Pediatric Obesity

Objective:The prevalence of morbid obesity has risen sharply in recent years, even among pediatric patients. Bariatric surgery is used increasingly in an effort to induce weight loss, improve medical comorbidities, enhance quality of life, and extend survival. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of all published evidence pertaining specifically to bariatric surgery in pediatric patients. Methods:We systematically searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, 13 other databases, and article bibliographies to identify relevant evidence. Included studies must have reported outcome data for ≥3 patients aged ≤21, representing ≥50% of pediatric patients enrolled at that center. We only included English language articles on currently performed procedures when data were separated by procedure, and there was a minimum 1-year follow-up for weight and body mass index (BMI). Results:Eight studies of laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding (LAGB) reported data on 352 patients (mean BMI 45.8); 6 studies of Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) included 131 patients (mean BMI 51.8); 5 studies of other surgical procedures included 158 patients (mean BMI 48.8). Average patient age was 16.8 years (range, 9–21). Meta-analyses of BMI reductions at longest follow-up indicated sustained and clinically significant BMI reductions for both LAGB and RYGB. Comorbidity resolution was sparsely reported, but surgery did appear to resolve some medical conditions including diabetes and hypertension. For LAGB, band slippage and micronutrient deficiency were the most frequently reported complications, with sporadic cases of band erosion, port/tube dysfunction, hiatal hernia, wound infection, and pouch dilation. For RYGB, more severe complications have been documented, such as pulmonary embolism, shock, intestinal obstruction, postoperative bleeding, staple line leak, and severe malnutrition. Conclusions:Bariatric surgery in pediatric patients results in sustained and clinically significant weight loss, but also has the potential for serious complications.

Long-Term Opioid Therapy for Chronic Noncancer Pain: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Efficacy and Safety

Opioid therapy for chronic noncancer pain (CNCP) is controversial due to concerns regarding long-term efficacy and adverse events (including addiction). We systematically reviewed the clinical evidence on patients treated with opioids for CNCP for at least six months. Of 115 studies identified by our search of eleven databases (through April 7, 2007), 17 studies (patients [n]=3,079) met inclusion criteria. Studies evaluated oral (studies [k]=7; n=1,504), transdermal (k=3; n=1, 993), and/or intrathecal (k=8; n=177) opioids. Many patients withdrew from the clinical trials due to adverse effects (oral: 32.5% [95% confidence interval (CI), 26.1%-39.6%]; intrathecal: 6.3% [95% CI, 2.9%-13.1%]; transdermal: 17.5% [95% CI, 6.5%-39.0%]), or due to insufficient pain relief (oral: 11.9% [95% CI, 7.8%-17.7%]; intrathecal: 10.5% [95% CI, 3.5%-27.4%]; transdermal: 5.8% [95% CI, 4.2%-7.3%]). Signs of opioid addiction were reported in only 0.05% (1/2,042) of patients and abuse in only 0.43% (3/685). There was an insufficient amount of data on transdermal opioids to quantify pain relief. For patients able to remain on oral or intrathecal opioids for at least six months, pain scores were reduced long-term (oral: standardized mean difference [SMD] 1.99, 95% CI, 1.17-2.80; intrathecal: SMD 1.33, 95% CI, 0.97-1.69). We conclude that many patients discontinue long-term opioid therapy due to adverse events or insufficient pain relief; however, weak evidence suggests that oral and intrathecal opioids reduce pain long-term in the relatively small proportion of individuals with CNCP who continue treatment.

The Top Patient Safety Strategies That Can Be Encouraged for Adoption Now

Over the past 12 years, since the publication of the Institute of Medicines report, “To Err is Human: Building a Safer Health System,” improving patient safety has been the focus of considerable public and professional interest. Although such efforts required changes in policies; education; workforce; and health care financing, organization, and delivery, the most important gap has arguably been in research. Specifically, to improve patient safety we needed to identify hazards, determine how to measure them accurately, and identify solutions that work to reduce patient harm. A 2001 report commissioned by the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, “Making Health Care Safer: A Critical Analysis of Patient Safety Practices” (1), helped identify some early evidence-based safety practices, but it also highlighted an enormous gap between what was known and what needed to be known.

Opioid Pharmacotherapy for Chronic Non-Cancer Pain in the United States: A Research Guideline for Developing an Evidence-Base

UNLABELLED This document reports the consensus of an interdisciplinary panel of research and clinical experts charged with reviewing the use of opioids for chronic noncancer pain (CNCP) and formulating guidelines for future research. Prescribing opioids for chronic noncancer pain has recently escalated in the United States. Contrasting with increasing opioid use are: 1) The lack of evidence supporting long-term effectiveness; 2) Escalating misuse of prescription opioids including abuse and diversion; and 3) Uncertainty about the incidence and clinical salience of multiple, poorly characterized adverse drug events (ADEs) including endocrine dysfunction, immunosuppression and infectious disease, opioid-induced hyperalgesia and xerostomia, overdose, falls and fractures, and psychosocial complications. Chief among the limitations of current evidence are: 1) Sparse evidence on long-term opioid effectiveness in chronic pain patients due to the short-term time frame of clinical trials; 2) Insufficiently comprehensive outcome assessment; and 3) Incomplete identification and quantification of ADEs. The panel called for a strategic interdisciplinary approach to the problem domain in which basic scientists and clinicians cooperate to resolve urgent issues and generate a comprehensive evidence base. It offered 4 recommendations in 3 areas: 1) A research strategy for studying the effectiveness of long-term opioid pharmacotherapy; 2) Improvements in evidence-generation methodology; and 3) Potential research topics for generating new evidence. PERSPECTIVE Prescribing opioids for CNCP has outpaced the growth of scientific evidence bearing on the benefits and harms of these interventions. The need for a strong evidence base is urgent. This guideline offers a strategic approach to creating a comprehensive evidence base to guide safe and effective management of CNCP.

Systematic Review: Comparative Effectiveness of Core-Needle and Open Surgical Biopsy to Diagnose Breast Lesions

BACKGROUND Most women undergoing breast biopsy are found not to have cancer. PURPOSE To compare the accuracy and harms of different breast biopsy methods in average-risk women suspected of having breast cancer. DATA SOURCES Databases, including MEDLINE and EMBASE, searched from 1990 to September 2009. STUDY SELECTION Studies that compared core-needle biopsy diagnoses with open surgical diagnoses or clinical follow-up. DATA EXTRACTION Data were abstracted by 1 of 3 researchers and verified by the primary investigator. DATA SYNTHESIS 33 studies of stereotactic automated gun biopsy; 22 studies of stereotactic-guided, vacuum-assisted biopsy; 16 studies of ultrasonography-guided, automated gun biopsy; 7 studies of ultrasonography-guided, vacuum-assisted biopsy; and 5 studies of freehand automated gun biopsy met the inclusion criteria. Low-strength evidence showed that core-needle biopsies conducted under stereotactic guidance with vacuum assistance distinguished between malignant and benign lesions with an accuracy similar to that of open surgical biopsy. Ultrasonography-guided biopsies were also very accurate. The risk for severe complications is lower with core-needle biopsy than with open surgical procedures (<1% vs. 2% to 10%). Moderate-strength evidence showed that women in whom breast cancer was initially diagnosed by core-needle biopsy were more likely than women with cancer initially diagnosed by open surgical biopsy to be treated with a single surgical procedure (random-effects odds ratio, 13.7 [95% CI, 5.5 to 34.6]). LIMITATION The strength of evidence was rated low for accuracy outcomes because the studies did not report important details required to assess the risk for bias. CONCLUSION Stereotactic- and ultrasonography-guided core-needle biopsy procedures seem to be almost as accurate as open surgical biopsy, with lower complication rates. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality.

Preventing In-Facility Pressure Ulcers as a Patient Safety Strategy: A Systematic Review

Complications from hospital-acquired pressure ulcers cause 60,000 deaths and significant morbidity annually in the United States. The objective of this systematic review is to review evidence regarding multicomponent strategies for preventing pressure ulcers and to examine the importance of contextual aspects of programs that aim to reduce facility-acquired pressure ulcers. CINAHL, the Cochrane Library, EMBASE, MEDLINE, and PreMEDLINE were searched for articles published from 2000 to 2012. Studies (any design) that implemented multicomponent initiatives to prevent pressure ulcers in adults in U.S. acute and long-term care settings and that reported pressure ulcer rates at least 6 months after implementation were selected. Two reviewers extracted study data and rated quality of evidence. Findings from 26 implementation studies (moderate strength of evidence) suggested that the integration of several core components improved processes of care and reduced pressure ulcer rates. Key components included the simplification and standardization of pressure ulcer-specific interventions and documentation, involvement of multidisciplinary teams and leadership, use of designated skin champions, ongoing staff education, and sustained audit and feedback.

An Evidence-based Prehospital Guideline for External Hemorrhage Control: American College of Surgeons Committee on Trauma

Abstract This report describes the development of an evidence-based guideline for external hemorrhage control in the prehospital setting. This project included a systematic review of the literature regarding the use of tourniquets and hemostatic agents for management of life-threatening extremity and junctional hemorrhage. Using the GRADE methodology to define the key clinical questions, an expert panel then reviewed the results of the literature review, established the quality of the evidence and made recommendations for EMS care. A clinical care guideline is proposed for adoption by EMS systems. Key words: tourniquet; hemostatic agents; external hemorrhage

Autologous hematopoietic cell transplantation for multiple sclerosis: a systematic review

Background and objectives: The purpose of this systematic review was to evaluate the safety and efficacy of autologous hematopoietic cell transplantation in patients with progressive multiple sclerosis (MS) refractory to conventional medical treatment. Methods: Eight case series met our a priori inclusion criteria for the primary outcome of progression-free survival. Individual study quality was rated using an 11-item scale for case series. The strength of the overall body of evidence for each outcome was rated using a system developed by the ECRI Institute. Data from different studies were statistically combined using meta-analysis. An additional six studies were included for a summary of mortality and morbidity. Results: For secondary progressive MS, immunoablative therapy with autologous bone marrow/peripheral blood stem cell transplantation was associated with higher progression-free survival (up to 3 years following treatment) when using intermediate-intensity conditioning regimens compared with high-intensity conditioning regimens. The evidence was insufficient to determine whether the treatment was effective in patients with other types of MS. Treatment-related mortality was about 2.7%. Conclusions: Patients with secondary progressive MS refractory to conventional medical treatment have longer progression-free survival following autologous stem cell transplantation with intermediate-intensity conditioning regimens than with high-intensity conditioning regimens.

In-Facility Delirium Prevention Programs as a Patient Safety Strategy: A Systematic Review

Delirium, an acute decline in attention and cognition, occurs among hospitalized patients at rates estimated to range from 14% to 56% and increases the risk for morbidity and mortality. The purpose of this systematic review was to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of in-facility multicomponent delirium prevention programs. A search of 6 databases (including MEDLINE, EMBASE, and CINAHL) was conducted through September 2012. Randomized, controlled trials; controlled clinical trials; interrupted time series; and controlled before-after studies with a prospective postintervention portion were eligible for inclusion. The evidence from 19 studies that met the inclusion criteria suggests that most multicomponent interventions are effective in preventing onset of delirium in at-risk patients in a hospital setting. Evidence was insufficient to determine the benefit of such programs in other care settings. Future comparative effectiveness studies with standardized protocols are needed to identify which components in multicomponent interventions are most effective for delirium prevention.

Observational studies in systemic reviews of comparative effectiveness: AHRQ and the Effective Health Care Program

OBJECTIVE Systematic reviewers disagree about the ability of observational studies to answer questions about the benefits or intended effects of pharmacotherapeutic, device, or procedural interventions. This study provides a framework for decision making on the inclusion of observational studies to assess benefits and intended effects in comparative effectiveness reviews (CERs). STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING The conceptual model and recommendations were developed using a consensus process by members of the methods workgroup of the Effective Health Care Program of the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. RESULTS In considering whether to use observational studies in CERs for addressing beneficial effects, reviewers should answer two questions: (1) Are there gaps in the evidence from randomized controlled trials (RCTs)? (2) Will observational studies provide valid and useful information? The latter question involves the following: (a) refocusing the study questions on gaps in the evidence from RCTs, (b) assessing the risk of bias of the body of evidence of observational studies, and (c) assessing whether available observational studies address the gap review questions. CONCLUSIONS Because it is unusual to find sufficient evidence from RCTs to answer all key questions concerning benefit or the balance of benefits and harms, comparative effectiveness reviewers should routinely assess the appropriateness of inclusion of observational studies for questions of benefit. Furthermore, reviewers should explicitly state the rationale for inclusion or exclusion of observational studies when conducting CERs.