Mohammed Nabhan

Patient engagement in research: a systematic review

BackgroundA compelling ethical rationale supports patient engagement in healthcare research. It is also assumed that patient engagement will lead to research findings that are more pertinent to patients’ concerns and dilemmas. However; it is unclear how to best conduct this process. In this systematic review we aimed to answer 4 key questions: what are the best ways to identify patient representatives? How to engage them in designing and conducting research? What are the observed benefits of patient engagement? What are the harms and barriers of patient engagement?MethodsWe searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycInfo, Cochrane, EBSCO, CINAHL, SCOPUS, Web of Science, Business Search Premier, Academic Search Premier and Google Scholar. Included studies were published in English, of any size or design that described engaging patients or their surrogates in research design. We conducted an environmental scan of the grey literature and consulted with experts and patients. Data were analyzed using a non-quantitative, meta-narrative approach.ResultsWe included 142 studies that described a spectrum of engagement. In general, engagement was feasible in most settings and most commonly done in the beginning of research (agenda setting and protocol development) and less commonly during the execution and translation of research. We found no comparative analytic studies to recommend a particular method. Patient engagement increased study enrollment rates and aided researchers in securing funding, designing study protocols and choosing relevant outcomes. The most commonly cited challenges were related to logistics (extra time and funding needed for engagement) and to an overarching worry of a tokenistic engagement.ConclusionsPatient engagement in healthcare research is likely feasible in many settings. However, this engagement comes at a cost and can become tokenistic. Research dedicated to identifying the best methods to achieve engagement is lacking and clearly needed.

Patient and service user engagement in research: a systematic review and synthesized framework

There is growing attention towards increasing patient and service user engagement (PSUE) in biomedical and health services research. Existing variations in language and design inhibit reporting and indexing, which are crucial to comparative effectiveness in determining best practices.

Charged particle therapy versus photon therapy for paranasal sinus and nasal cavity malignant diseases: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND Malignant tumours arising within the nasal cavity and paranasal sinuses are rare and composed of several histological types, rendering controlled clinical trials to establish the best treatment impractical. We undertook a systematic review and meta-analysis to compare the clinical outcomes of patients treated with charged particle therapy with those of individuals receiving photon therapy. METHODS We identified studies of nasal cavity and paranasal sinus tumours through searches of databases including Embase, Medline, Scopus, and the Cochrane Collaboration. We included treatment-naive cohorts (both primary and adjuvant radiation therapy) and those with recurrent disease. Primary outcomes of interest were overall survival, disease-free survival, and locoregional control, at 5 years and at longest follow-up. We used random-effect models to pool outcomes across studies and compared event rates of combined outcomes for charged particle therapy and photon therapy using an interaction test. FINDINGS 43 cohorts from 41 non-comparative observational studies were included. Median follow-up for the charged particle therapy group was 38 months (range 5-73) and for the photon therapy group was 40 months (14-97). Pooled overall survival was significantly higher at 5 years for charged particle therapy than for photon therapy (relative risk 1·51, 95% CI 1·14-1·99; p=0·0038) and at longest follow-up (1·27, 1·01-1·59; p=0·037). At 5 years, disease-free survival was significantly higher for charged particle therapy than for photon therapy (1·93, 1·36-2·75, p=0·0003) but, at longest follow-up, this event rate did not differ between groups (1·51, 1·00-2·30; p=0·052). Locoregional control did not differ between treatment groups at 5 years (1·06, 0·68-1·67; p=0·79) but it was higher for charged particle therapy than for photon therapy at longest follow-up (1·18, 1·01-1·37; p=0·031). A subgroup analysis comparing proton beam therapy with intensity-modulated radiation therapy showed significantly higher disease-free survival at 5 years (relative risk 1·44, 95% CI 1·01-2·05; p=0·045) and locoregional control at longest follow-up (1·26, 1·05-1·51; p=0·011). INTERPRETATION Compared with photon therapy, charged particle therapy could be associated with better outcomes for patients with malignant diseases of the nasal cavity and paranasal sinuses. Prospective studies emphasising collection of patient-reported and functional outcomes are strongly encouraged. FUNDING Mayo Foundation for Medical Education and Research.

Charged Particle Radiation Therapy for Uveal Melanoma: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Charged particle therapy (CPT) delivered with either protons, helium ions, or carbon ions, has been used to treat uveal melanoma. The present analysis was performed to systematically evaluate the efficacy and adverse effects of CPT for uveal melanoma. We searched EMBASE, MEDLINE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and SciVerse Scopus and cross-referenced recent systematic reviews through January 2012. Two independent reviewers identified clinical trials and observational studies of CPT (protons, helium ions, and carbon ions). These reviewers extracted data and assessed study quality. Twenty-seven studies enrolling 8809 uveal melanoma patients met inclusion criteria. The rate of local recurrence was significantly less with CPT than with brachytherapy (odds ratio [OR] = 0.22, 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.21-0.23). There were no significant differences in mortality or enucleation rates. Results were robust in multiple sensitivity analyses. CPT was also associated with lower retinopathy and cataract formation rates. Data suggest better outcomes may be possible with charged particle therapy with respect to local recurrence, retinopathy, and cataract formation rates. The overall quality of the evidence is low, and higher quality comparative effectiveness studies are needed to provide better evidence.

Comparative systematic review and meta-analysis of compression modalities for the promotion of venous ulcer healing and reducing ulcer recurrence

OBJECTIVE This was a systematic review of the literature to determine which compression method is superior in promoting ulcer healing and reducing recurrence in patients with lower extremity venous ulcer disease. METHODS We conducted a comprehensive search of multiple databases for randomized and nonrandomized comparative studies from 1990 to December 2013. RESULTS We identified 36 studies and two Cochrane systematic reviews. Many studies had moderate risk of bias. We found no overall difference between compression stockings vs compression bandages with respect to ulcer healing, time to ulcer healing, or ulcer recurrence outcomes. When we compared stockings vs short stretch bandages, stockings were superior with respect to ulcer healing. However, stockings compared with four-layer systems showed no difference in ulcer healing outcomes. When four-layer systems were compared with compression with less than four layers, there was also no significant difference in ulcer healing outcomes. Similarly, short stretch bandages were not superior to long stretch bandages with respect to ulcer healing, time to ulcer healing, or ulcer recurrence. One Cochrane review presented many additional comparisons and reported increased wound healing with compression compared with no compression, with multicomponent systems over single component systems, and compression systems with an elastic component over no elastic component. Another Cochrane review demonstrated a reduction in recurrence with compression in patients with healed ulcers. CONCLUSIONS At least moderate-quality evidence supports compression over no compression, multicomponent systems over single component systems, and systems with an elastic component over those without. We did not find significant differences with respect to ulcer healing outcomes for other comparisons. Low-quality evidence supports the effect of compression on ulcer recurrence.

What is preventable harm in healthcare? A systematic review of definitions

BackgroundMitigating or reducing the risk of harm associated with the delivery of healthcare is a policy priority. While the risk of harm can be reduced in some instances (i.e. preventable), what constitutes preventable harm remains unclear. A standardized and clear definition of preventable harm is the first step towards safer and more efficient healthcare delivery system. We aimed to summarize the definitions of preventable harm and its conceptualization in healthcare.MethodsWe conducted a comprehensive electronic search of relevant databases from January 2001 to June 2011 for publications that reported a definition of preventable harm. Only English language publications were included. Definitions were coded for common concepts and themes. We included any study type, both original studies and reviews. Two reviewers screened the references for eligibility and 28% (127/460) were finally included. Data collected from studies included study type, description of the study population and setting, and data corresponding to the outcome of interest. Three reviewers extracted the data. The level of agreement between the reviewers was calculated.ResultsOne hundred and twenty seven studies were eligible. The three most prevalent preventable harms in the included studies were: medication adverse events (33/127 studies, 26%), central line infections (7/127, 6%) and venous thromboembolism (5/127, 4%). Seven themes or definitions for preventable harm were encountered. The top three were: presence of an identifiable modifiable cause (58/132 definitions, 44%), reasonable adaptation to a process will prevent future recurrence (30/132, 23%), adherence to guidelines (22/132, 16%). Data on the validity or operational characteristic (e.g., accuracy, reproducibility) of definitions were limited.ConclusionsThere is limited empirical evidence of the validity and reliability of the available definitions of preventable harm, such that no single one is supported by high quality evidence. The most common definition is “presence of an identifiable, modifiable cause of harm”.

Systematic review and meta-analysis of surgical interventions versus conservative therapy for venous ulcers

OBJECTIVE This goal of this study was to systematically review the literature to determine if surgical intervention (open or endovascular) is superior to compression alone with respect to ulcer healing, ulcer recurrence, and time to ulcer healing in patients with lower extremity venous ulcer disease. METHODS We conducted a comprehensive search of multiple databases for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and comparative observational studies from 1990 to December 2013. The interventions of interest were any open or endovascular surgical interventions on the venous system in the lower extremity compared with compression alone. RESULTS We included 11 studies (seven RCTs and four observational studies) with moderate to increased risk of bias. The meta-analysis of all studies demonstrated increased healing rate (pooled risk ratio [RR], 1.06; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.00-1.13; I(2) = 10%) and lower risk of recurrence (RR, 0.54; 95% CI, 0.34-0.85; I(2) = 27%) with open surgical procedures compared with compression. However, the meta-analysis of only RCTs showed no difference, possibly due to imprecision. The meta-analysis of three RCTs showed no difference in time to ulcer healing, -0.41 (95% CI, -0.89 to 0.07). Two studies of endovascular surgical procedures compared with compression showed no significant difference in ulcer healing (RR, 1.65; 95% CI, 0.43-6.32). One study of open surgical venous ligation and stripping compared with endovenous laser also showed no significant difference in ulcer recurrence (RR, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.21-3.27). CONCLUSIONS Open surgical interventions may improve lower extremity venous ulcer healing. The quality of this evidence is low because the analysis was dominated by the results of observational studies. The current evidence does not definitively support the superiority of endovascular surgical interventions compared with compression alone.

Glucose Targets in Pregnant Women With Diabetes: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND Glucose-lowering treatments are used during pregnancy to reduce the risk for complications in the mother and offspring, yet treatment targets have not been established. OBJECTIVE Our objective was to appraise and summarize the available evidence regarding the association between different blood glucose targets during pregnancy and fetal and maternal outcomes. METHODS We searched Medline, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, Scopus, PsycInfo, and CINAHL through May 2011 for randomized trials and observational studies that enrolled women with diabetes during pregnancy and reported planned or achieved glucose targets. We used random-effects meta-regression models to estimate the odds ratio for the association of outcomes of interest and glucose targets. When possible, we adjusted for diabetes type, trimester, and diabetes treatment. RESULTS We included 34 studies enrolling 9433 women. The studies had moderate to high risk of bias due to evidence of reporting bias and insufficient adjustment for important covariates, particularly maternal body mass index. A fasting glucose target of <90 mg/dL was the most commonly reported and the one most strongly associated with reduced risk of macrosomia (odds ratio = 0.53, 95% confidence interval = 0.31-0.90, P = .02) for women with gestational diabetes during the third trimester. For type 1 and type 2 diabetes, and for pre- and postprandial targets, data were sparse and inconclusive. CONCLUSIONS Evidence warranting very low confidence in the estimates suggests that a fasting glucose target of <90 mg/dL is associated with a lower risk of macrosomia and other outcomes of different importance in women with gestational diabetes. Whether this target can be extrapolated to women with pregestational diabetes or whether targets above or below this threshold offer a better benefit/risk balance remains unclear.

A systematic review and meta-analysis of glycemic control for the prevention of diabetic foot syndrome

OBJECTIVE The objective of this review was to synthesize the available randomized controlled trials (RCTs) estimating the relative efficacy and safety of intensive vs less intensive glycemic control in preventing diabetic foot syndrome. METHODS We used the umbrella design (systematic review of systematic reviews) to identify eligible RCTs. Two reviewers determined RCT eligibility and extracted descriptive, methodologic, and diabetic foot outcome data. Random-effects meta-analysis was used to pool outcome data across studies, and the I(2) statistic was used to quantify heterogeneity. RESULTS Nine RCTs enrolling 10,897 patients with type 2 diabetes were included and deemed to be at moderate risk of bias. Compared with less intensive glycemic control, intensive control (hemoglobin A1c, 6%-7.5%) was associated with a significant decrease in risk of amputation (relative risk [RR], 0.65; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.45-0.94; I(2) = 0%). Intensive control was significantly associated with slower decline in sensory vibration threshold (mean difference, -8.27; 95% CI, -9.75 to -6.79). There was no effect on other neuropathic changes (RR, 0.89; 95% CI, 0.75-1.05; I(2) = 32%) or ischemic changes (RR, 0.92; 95% CI, 0.67-1.26; I(2) = 0%). The quality of evidence is likely moderate. CONCLUSIONS Compared with less intensive glycemic control therapy, intensive control may decrease the risk of amputation in patients with diabetic foot syndrome. The reported risk reduction is likely overestimated because the trials were open and the decision to proceed with amputation could be influenced by glycemic control.

A systematic review and meta-analysis of adjunctive therapies in diabetic foot ulcers

BACKGROUND Multiple adjunctive therapies have been proposed to accelerate wound healing in patients with diabetes and foot ulcers. The aim of this systematic review is to summarize the best available evidence supporting the use of hyperbaric oxygen therapy (HBOT), arterial pump devices, and pharmacologic agents (pentoxifylline, cilostazol, and iloprost) in this setting. METHODS We searched MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Web of Science, and Scopus through October 2011. Pairs of independent reviewers selected studies and extracted data. Predefined outcomes of interest were complete wound healing and amputation. RESULTS We identified 18 interventional studies; of which 9 were randomized, enrolling 1526 patients. The risk of bias in the included studies was moderate. In multiple randomized trials, the addition of HBOT to conventional therapy (wound care and offloading) was associated with increased healing rate (Peto odds ratio, 14.25; 95% confidence interval, 7.08-28.68) and reduced major amputation rate (odds ratio, 0.30; 95% confidence interval, 0.10-0.89), compared with conventional therapy alone. In one small trial, arterial pump devices had a favorable effect on complete healing compared with HBOT and in another small trial compared with placebo devices. Neither iloprost nor pentoxifylline had a significant effect on amputation rate compared with conventional therapy. No comparative studies were identified for cilostazol in diabetic foot ulcers. CONCLUSIONS There is low- to moderate-quality evidence supporting the use of HBOT as an adjunctive therapy to enhance diabetic foot ulcer healing and potentially prevent amputation. However, there are only sparse data regarding the efficacy of arterial pump devices and pharmacologic interventions.