Depression screening and patient outcomes in cancer: a systematic review

Background

Several practice guidelines recommend screening for depression in cancer care, but no systematic reviews have examined whether there is evidence that depression screening benefits cancer patients. The objective was to evaluate the potential benefits of depression screening in cancer patients by assessing the (1) accuracy of depression screening tools; (2) effectiveness of depression treatment; and (3) effect of depression screening, either alone or in the context of comprehensive depression care, on depression outcomes.

Methods

Data sources were CINAHL, Cochrane, EMBASE, ISI, MEDLINE, PsycINFO and SCOPUS databases through January 24, 2011; manual journal searches; reference lists; citation tracking; trial registry reviews. Articles on cancer patients were included if they (1) compared a depression screening instrument to a valid criterion for major depressive disorder (MDD); (2) compared depression treatment with placebo or usual care in a randomized controlled trial (RCT); (3) assessed the effect of screening on depression outcomes in a RCT.

Results

There were 19 studies of screening accuracy, 1 MDD treatment RCT, but no RCTs that investigated effects of screening on depression outcomes. Screening accuracy studies generally had small sample sizes (median = 17 depression cases) and used exploratory methods to set sample-specific cutoff scores that varied substantially across studies. A nurse-delivered intervention for MDD reduced depressive symptoms moderately (effect size = 0.37).

Conclusions

The one treatment study reviewed reported modest improvement in depressive symptoms, but no evidence was found on whether or not depression screening in cancer patients, either alone or in the context of optimal depression care, improves depression outcomes compared to usual care. Depression screening in cancer should be evaluated in a RCT in which all patients identified as depressed, either through screening or via physician recognition and referral in a control group, have access to comprehensive depression care.     

Postoperative outcomes for Indigenous Peoples in Canada: a systematic review

Background:Substantial health inequities exist for Indigenous Peoples in Canada. The remote and distributed population of Canada presents unique challenges for access to and use of surgery. To date, the surgical outcome data for Indigenous Peoples in Canada have not been synthesized.Methods:We searched 4 databases to identify studies comparing surgical outcomes and utilization rates of adults of First Nations, Inuit or Métis identity with non-Indigenous people in Canada. Independent reviewers completed all stages in duplicate. Our primary outcome was mortality; secondary outcomes included utilization rates of surgical procedures, complications and hospital length of stay. We performed meta-analysis of the primary outcome using random effects models. We assessed risk of bias using the ROBINS-I tool.Results:Twenty-eight studies were reviewed involving 1 976 258 participants (10.2% Indigenous). No studies specifically addressed Inuit or Métis populations. Four studies, including 7 cohorts, contributed adjusted mortality data for 7135 participants (5.2% Indigenous); Indigenous Peoples had a 30% higher rate of death after surgery than non-Indigenous patients (pooled hazard ratio 1.30, 95% CI 1.09–1.54; I² = 81%). Complications were also higher for Indigenous Peoples, including infectious complications (adjusted OR 1.63, 95% CI 1.13–2.34) and pneumonia (OR 2.24, 95% CI 1.58–3.19). Rates of various surgical procedures were lower, including rates of renal transplant, joint replacement, cardiac surgery and cesarean delivery.Interpretation:The currently available data on postoperative outcomes and surgery utilization rates for Indigenous Peoples in Canada are limited and of poor quality. Available data suggest that Indigenous Peoples have higher rates of death and adverse events after surgery, while also encountering barriers accessing surgical procedures. These findings suggest a need for substantial re-evaluation of surgical care for Indigenous Peoples in Canada to ensure equitable access and to improve outcomes. Protocol registration:PROSPERO-CRD42018098757

Safe, timely and affordable access to surgical care is essential to overall population health, as conditions amenable to surgical intervention account for one-third of the global burden of disease.^1,2 Surgery is responsible for 65% of cancer cure and control, it is key to trauma management, and access to cesarean delivery reduces neonatal deaths by up to 70%.¹ The magnitude and ubiquity of surgical conditions makes tracking their prevalence and treatment within local and national monitoring systems essential to fully capture the health and welfare of populations in Canada, including Indigenous Peoples.About 1.67 million people in Canada are Indigenous, representing 4.9% of the total population (58% First Nations, 4% Inuit, 35% Métis).³ Health inequities exist for the Indigenous population; life expectancy at birth is 5–11 years shorter than for non-Indigenous Peoples^4,5 and higher rates of communicable and noncommunicable diseases, unintentional injury and suicide are well documented.^4,6–14 These health inequities are direct impacts of the social determinants of health, which are in turn effects of colonialism and government policies, including the Indian residential school system.^8,11 People living in remote regions have less access to publicly funded health care than other people in Canada, with worse outcomes.¹⁵Given the substantial impact of surgical disease on population health and the recognized disparities in health care access for Indigenous Peoples in Canada, understanding access to surgical services and subsequent outcomes is a key step to addressing health inequities. To date, limited research has been conducted on surgical and postoperative care involving Indigenous Peoples in Canada and the available literature has not been synthesized. Our objective was to systematically review studies comparing postoperative outcomes between Indigenous and non-Indigenous Peoples in Canada.     

San Francisco Syncope Rule to predict short-term serious outcomes: a systematic review

Background:

The San Francisco Syncope Rule has been proposed as a clinical decision rule for risk stratification of patients presenting to the emergency department with syncope. It has been validated across various populations and settings. We undertook a systematic review of its accuracy in predicting short-term serious outcomes.

Methods:

We identified studies by means of systematic searches in seven electronic databases from inception to January 2011. We extracted study data in duplicate and used a bivariate random-effects model to assess the predictive accuracy and test characteristics.

Results:

We included 12 studies with a total of 5316 patients, of whom 596 (11%) experienced a serious outcome. The prevalence of serious outcomes across the studies varied between 5% and 26%. The pooled estimate of sensitivity of the San Francisco Syncope Rule was 0.87 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.79–0.93), and the pooled estimate of specificity was 0.52 (95% CI 0.43–0.62). There was substantial between-study heterogeneity (resulting in a 95% prediction interval for sensitivity of 0.55–0.98). The probability of a serious outcome given a negative score with the San Francisco Syncope Rule was 5% or lower, and the probability was 2% or lower when the rule was applied only to patients for whom no cause of syncope was identified after initial evaluation in the emergency department. The most common cause of false-negative classification for a serious outcome was cardiac arrhythmia.

Interpretation:

The San Francisco Syncope Rule should be applied only for patients in whom no cause of syncope is evident after initial evaluation in the emergency department. Consideration of all available electrocardiograms, as well as arrhythmia monitoring, should be included in application of the San Francisco Syncope Rule. Between-study heterogeneity was likely due to inconsistent classification of arrhythmia.Syncope is defined as sudden, transient loss of consciousness with the inability to maintain postural tone, followed by spontaneous recovery and return to pre-existing neurologic function.^1–5 It represents a common clinical problem, accounting for 1%–3% of visits to the emergency department and up to 6% of admissions to acute care hospitals.^6,7Assessment of syncope in patients presenting to the emergency department is challenging because of the heterogeneity of underlying pathophysiologic processes and diseases. Although many underlying causes of syncope are benign, others are associated with substantial morbidity or mortality, including cardiac arrhythmia, myocardial infarction, pulmonary embolism and occult hemorrhage.^4,8–10 Consequently, a considerable proportion of patients with benign causes of syncope are admitted for inpatient evaluation.^11,12 Therefore, risk stratification that allows for the safe discharge of patients at low risk of a serious outcome is important for efficient management of patients in emergency departments and for reduction of costs associated with unnecessary diagnostic workup.^12,13In recent years, various prediction rules based on the probability of an adverse outcome after an episode of syncope have been proposed.^3,14–16 However, the San Francisco Syncope Rule, derived by Quinn and colleagues in 2004,³ is the only prediction rule for serious outcomes that has been validated in a variety of populations and settings. This simple, five-step clinical decision rule is intended to identify patients at low risk of short-term serious outcomes^3,17 (Box 1).

Box 1:

San Francisco Syncope Rule³

AimPrediction of short-term (within 30 days) serious outcomes in patients presenting to the emergency department with syncope.DefinitionsSyncope: Transient loss of consciousness with return to baseline neurologic function. Trauma-associated and alcohol- or drug-related loss of consciousness excluded, as is definite seizure or altered mental status.Serious outcome: Death, myocardial infarction, arrhythmia, pulmonary embolism, stroke, subarachnoid hemorrhage, significant hemorrhage or any condition causing or likely to cause a return visit to the emergency department and admission to hospital for a related event.Selection of predictors in multivariable analysis: Fifty predictor variables were evaluated for significant associations with a serious outcome and combined to create a minimal set of predictors that are highly sensitive and specific for prediction of a serious outcome.Clinical decision ruleFive risk factors, indicated by the mnemonic “CHESS,” were identified to predict patients at high risk of a serious outcome:

• C – History of congestive heart failure
• H – Hematocrit < 30%
• E – Abnormal findings on 12-lead ECG or cardiac monitoring¹⁷ (new changes or nonsinus rhythm)
• S – History of shortness of breath
• S – Systolic blood pressure < 90 mm Hg at triage

Note: ECG = electrocardiogram.The aim of this study was to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis of the accuracy of the San Francisco Syncope Rule in predicting short-term serious outcome for patients presenting to the emergency department with syncope.     

Recipient outcomes after ABO-incompatible liver transplantation: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

ABO-incompatible live transplantation (ILT) is not occasionally performed due to a relative high risk of graft failure. Knowledge of both graft and patient survival rate after ILT is essential for donor selection and therapeutic strategy. We systematically reviewed studies containing outcomes after ILT compared to that after ABO-compatible liver transplantation (CLT).

Methodology/Principal Findings

We carried out a comprehensive search strategy on MEDLINE (1966–July 2010), EMBASE (1980–July 2010), Biosis Preview (1969–July 2010), Science Citation Index (1981–July 2010), Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (Cochrane Library, issue 7, 2010) and the National Institute of Health (July 2010). Two reviewers independently assessed the quality of each study and abstracted outcome data. Fourteen eligible studies were included which came from various medical centers all over the world. Meta-analysis results showed that no significantly statistical difference was found in pediatric graft survival rate, pediatric and adult patient survival rate between ILT and CLT group. In adult subgroup, the graft survival rate after ILT was significantly lower than that after CLT. The value of totally pooled OR was 0.64 (0.55, 0.74), 0.92 (0.62, 1.38) for graft survival rate and patient survival rate respectively. The whole complication incidence (including acute rejection and biliary complication) after ILT was higher than that after CLT, as the value of totally pooled OR was 3.02 (1.33, 6.85). Similarly, in acute rejection subgroup, the value of OR was 2.02 (1.01, 4.02). However, it was 4.08 (0.90, 18.51) in biliary complication subgroup.

Conclusions/Significance

In our view, pediatric ILT has not been a contraindication anymore due to a similar graft and patient survival rate between ILT and CLT group. Though adult graft survival rate is not so satisfactory, ILT is undoubtedly life-saving under exigent condition. Most studies included in our analysis are observational researches. Larger scale of researches and Randomized-Control Studies are still needed.     

Cosleeping and sleep problems in children: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Sleep and Biological Rhythms - There exist inconsistent findings about the relation between cosleeping and sleep problems in children. We conducted a meta-analysis to assess these relations and...     

Short- and long-term outcomes in infective endocarditis patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

Despite advances in medical knowledge, technology and antimicrobial therapy, infective endocarditis (IE) is still associated with devastating outcomes. No reviews have yet assessed the outcomes of IE patients undergoing short- and long-term outcome evaluation, such as all-cause mortality and IE-related complications. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to examine the short- and long-term mortality, as well as IE-related complications in patients with definite IE.

Methods

A computerized systematic literature search was carried out in PubMed, Scopus and Google Scholar from 2000 to August, 2016. Included studies were published studies in English that assessed short-and long-term mortality for adult IE patients. Pooled estimations with 95% confidence interval (CI) were calculated with DerSimonian-Laird (DL) random-effects model. Sensitivity and subgroup analyses were also performed. Publication bias was evaluated using inspection of funnel plots and statistical tests.

Results

Twenty five observational studies (retrospective, 14; prospective, 11) including 22,382 patients were identified. The overall pooled mortality estimates for IE patients who underwent short- and long-term follow-up were 20% (95% CI: 18.0–23.0, P?<?0.01) and 37% (95% CI: 27.0–48.0, P?<?0.01), respectively. The pooled prevalence of cardiac complications in patients with IE was found to be 39% (95%CI: 32.0–46.0) while septic embolism and renal complications accounted for 25% (95% CI: 20.0–31) and 19% (95% CI: 14.0–25.0) (all P?<?0.01), respectively.

Conclusion

Irrespective of the follow-up period, a significantly higher mortality rate was reported in IE patients, and the burden of IE-related complications were immense. Further research is needed to assess the determinants of overall mortality in IE patients, as well as well-designed observational studies to conform our results.

     

Growth assessment in children with Williams-Beuren syndrome: a systematic review

Journal of Applied Genetics - Williams-Beuren syndrome (WBS) is a rare genetic disease caused by a sporadic heterozygous microdeletion in 7q11.23. It is characterized by distinctive facial...     

Prediction tools for unfavourable outcomes in Clostridium difficile infection: a systematic review

Context

Identifying patients at risk for adverse outcomes of Clostridium difficile infection (CDI), including recurrence and death, will become increasingly important as novel therapies emerge, which are more effective than traditional approaches but very expensive. Clinical prediction rules (CPRs) can improve the accuracy of medical decision-making. Several CPRs have been developed for CDI, but none has gained a widespread acceptance.

Methods

We systematically reviewed studies describing the derivation or validation of CPRs for unfavourable outcomes of CDI, in medical databases (Medline, Embase, PubMed, Web of Science and Cochrane) and abstracts of conferences.

Results

Of 2945 titles and abstracts screened, 13 studies on the derivation of a CPR were identified: two on recurrences, five on complications (including mortality), five on mortality alone and one on response to treatment. Two studies on the validation of different severity indices were also retrieved. Most CPRs were developed as secondary analyses using cohorts assembled for other purposes. CPRs presented several methodological limitations that could explain their limited use in clinical practice. Except for leukocytosis, albumin and age, there was much heterogeneity in the variables used, and most studies were limited by small sample sizes. Eight models used a retrospective design. Only four studies reported the incidence of the outcome of interest, even if this is essential to evaluate the potential usefulness of a model in other populations. Only five studies performed multivariate analyses to adjust for confounders.

Conclusions

The lack of weighing variables, of validation, calibration and measures of reproducibility, the weak validities and performances when assessed, and the absence of sensitivity analyses, all led to suboptimal quality and debatable utility of those CPRs. Evidence-based tools developed through appropriate prospective cohorts would be more valuable for clinicians than empirically-developed CPRs.     

Pharmacogenetics of glucose-lowering drug treatment: a systematic review

Intensive blood glucose lowering can significantly reduce the risk of micro- and macrovascular complications in patients with diabetes mellitus. However, 30% of all treated patients do not achieve optimal blood glucose levels. Genetic factors may influence the response to glucose-lowering medication. A search of MEDLINE-indexed literature published between January 1966 and July 2007 revealed 37 studies reporting data on genetic polymorphisms and response to glucose-lowering drugs. Most studies involving cytochrome P450 (CYP) genes had small sample sizes (21 studies <50 subjects) and were among healthy volunteers. Multiple studies indicated that the CYP2C9 *3 allele (Ile359Leu polymorphism) was associated with decreased clearance of sulfonylurea drugs. Supporting this, one study reported an increased insulin secretion in CYP2C9*3 allele carriers when using the sulfonylurea agent glyburide. The CYP2C9*3 allele was also associated with a decreased clearance of meglitinides, whereas the CYP2C8*3 (Arg139Lys; Lys399Arg) variant increased the clearance of meglitinides. Polymorphisms in genes encoding the inwardly rectifying potassium channel Kir6.2 (KCNJ11) and the insulin receptor substrate-1 (IRS1) were reported to be associated with an increased risk of (secondary) failure to respond to sulfonylurea therapy. A significant decrease in fasting plasma glucose and hemoglobin A(1c) (HbA(1c)) in response to rosiglitazone was seen in subjects carrying the Pro12Ala polymorphism of the peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor-gamma (PPARG) gene. Conversely, carriers of this polymorphism also had a higher conversion to diabetes mellitus when treated with acarbose; this effect was also seen in adiponectin (ADIPOQ) gene polymorphism carriers. Future studies with adequate sample sizes in which several SNPs in multiple candidate genes are genotyped in patients with diabetes should provide reliable information on genetic variants and response to glucose-lowering drugs.     

Hypertension outcomes of adrenalectomy in patients with primary aldosteronism: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

The hypertension cure rate of unilateral adrenalectomy in primary aldosteronism (PA) patients varies widely in existing studies.

Methods

We conducted an observational meta-analysis to summarize the pooled hypertension cure rate of unilateral adrenalectomy in PA patients. Comprehensive electronic searches of PubMed, Embase, Cochrane, China National Knowledge Internet (CNKI), WanFang, SinoMed and Chongqing VIP databases were performed from initial state to May 20, 2016. We manually selected eligible studies from references in accordance with the inclusion criteria. The pooled hypertension cure rate of unilateral adrenalectomy in PA patients was calculated using the DerSimonian–Laird method to produce a random-effects model.

Results

Forty-three studies comprising approximately 4000 PA patients were included. The pooled hypertension cure rate was 50.6% (95% CI: 42.9–58.2%) for unilateral adrenalectomy in PA. Subgroup analyses showed that the hypertension cure rate was 61.3% (95% CI: 49.4–73.3%) in Chinese studies and 43.7% (95% CI: 38.0–49.4%) for other countries. Furthermore, the hypertension cure rate at 6-month follow-up was 53.3% (95% CI: 36.0–70.5%) and 49.6% (95% CI: 40.9–58.3%) for follow-up exceeding 6 months. The pooled hypertension cure rate was 50.9% (95% CI: 40.5–61.3%) from 2001 to 2010 and 50.2% (95% CI: 39.0–61.5%) from 2011 to 2016.

Conclusions

The hypertension cure rate for unilateral adrenalectomy in PA is not optimal. Large clinical trials are required to verify the utility of potential preoperative predictors in developing a novel and effective prediction model.