No abstract

Objective To evaluate the clinical benefit of lipid lowering drug treatment in patients with and without diabetes mellitus, for primary and secondary prevention. Design Systematic review and meta-analysis. Data sources Cochrane, Medline, Embase, and reference lists up to April 2004. Study selection Randomised, placebo controlled, double blind trials with a follow-up of at least three years that evaluated lipid lowering drug treatment in patients with and without diabetes mellitus. Data extraction Two independent reviewers extracted data. The primary outcome was major coronary events defined as coronary heart disease death, non-fatal myocardial infarction, or myocardial revascularisation procedures. Results Twelve studies were included. Lipid lowering drug treatment was found to be at least as effective in diabetic patients as in non-diabetic patients. In primary prevention, the risk reduction for major coronary events was 21% (95% confidence interval 11% to 30%; P < 0.0001) in diabetic patients and 23% (12% to 33%; P = 0.0003) in non-diabetic patients. In secondary prevention, the corresponding risk reductions were 21% (10% to 31%; P = 0.0005) and 23% (19% to 26%; P ≤ 0.00001). However, the absolute risk difference was three times higher in secondary prevention. When results were adjusted for baseline risk, diabetic patients benefited more in both primary and secondary prevention. Blood lipids were reduced to a similar degree in both groups. Conclusions The evidence that lipid lowering drug treatment (especially statins) significantly reduce cardiovascular risk in diabetic and non-diabetic patients is strong and suggests that diabetic patients benefit more, in both primary and secondary prevention. Future research should define the threshold for treatment of these patients and the desired target lipid concentrations, especially for primary prevention.

Objective To systematically review longitudinal studies evaluating use of angiotensin converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors or angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) and risk of pneumonia.Design Systematic review and meta-analysis.Data sources Medline through PubMed, Web of Science with conference proceedings (inception to June 2011), and US Food and Drug Administration website (June 2011). Systematic reviews and references of retrieved articles were also searched.Study selection Two reviewers independently selected randomised controlled trials and cohort and case-control studies evaluating the use of ACE inhibitors or ARBs and risk of pneumonia and retrieved characteristics of the studies and data estimates.Data synthesis The primary outcome was incidence of pneumonia and the secondary outcome was pneumonia related mortality. Subgroup analyses were carried according to baseline morbidities (stroke, heart failure, and chronic kidney disease) and patients' characteristics (Asian and non-Asian). Pooled estimates of odds ratios and 95% confidence intervals were derived by random effects meta-analysis. Adjusted frequentist indirect comparisons between ACE inhibitors and ARBs were estimated and combined with direct evidence whenever available. Heterogeneity was assessed using the I 2 test.Results 37 eligible studies were included. ACE inhibitors were associated with a significantly reduced risk of pneumonia compared with control treatment (19 studies: odds ratio 0.66, 95% confidence interval 0.55 to 0.80; I 2 =79%) and ARBs (combined direct and indirect odds ratio estimate 0.69, 0.56 to 0.85). In patients with stroke, the risk of pneumonia was also lower in those treated with ACE inhibitors compared with control treatment (odds ratio 0.46, 0.34 to 0.62) and ARBs (0.42, 0.22 to 0.80). ACE inhibitors were associated with a significantly reduced risk of pneumonia among Asian patients (0.43, 0.34 to 0.54) compared with non-Asian patients (0.82, 0.67 to 1.00; P<0.001). Compared with control treatments, both ACE inhibitors (seven studies: odds ratio 0.73, 0.58 to 0.92; I 2 =51%) and ARBs (one randomised controlled trial: 0.63, 0.40 to 1.00) were associated with a decrease in pneumonia related mortality, without differences between interventions. ConclusionsThe best evidence available points towards a putative protective role of ACE inhibitors but not ARBs in risk of pneumonia. Patient populations that may benefit most are those with previous stroke and Asian patients. ACE inhibitors were also associated with a decrease in pneumonia related mortality, but the data lacked strength. IntroductionPneumonia represents an important clinical condition because of its relatively high incidence (0.5% to 1.1% annually in the United Kingdom) and associated morbidity and mortality. Susceptibility is higher among elderly people (≥65 years), those with alcohol dependency, smokers, and patients with heart failure, previous stroke, diabetes, chronic kidney disease, and chronic lung disease. [3][4][5][6] Pneumonia is a common reason for h...

Dignity therapy resulted in a beneficial effect on depression and anxiety symptoms in end-of-life care. The therapeutic benefit of dignity therapy was sustained over a 30-day period. Having established its efficacy, future trials of dignity therapy may now begin, comparing it with other psychotherapeutic approaches within the context of terminal illness.

Despite being an expensive test format, evidence suggests that the use of OSCE produces reliable results. The study also suggests that one reason for the wide-scale adoption of the OSCE and the feasibility of its use in different contexts and situations is its inherent flexibility in terms of the number of students that can be assessed, the number of examiners included, the type of patients represented and the format of the examination itself, including the length of the examination, the number and duration of stations.

Abstract. Several studies conducted worldwide report an inverse association between caffeine/coffee consumption and the risk of developing Parkinson's disease (PD). However, heterogeneity and conflicting results between studies preclude a correct estimation of the strength of this association. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of published epidemiological studies to better estimate the effect of caffeine exposure on the incidence of PD. Data sources searched included Medline, LILACS, Scopus, Web of Science and reference lists, up to September 2009. Cohort, case-control and cross-sectional studies were included. Three independent reviewers selected the studies and extracted the data on to standardized forms. Twenty-six studies were included: 7 cohort, 2 nested case-control, 16 case-control, and 1 cross-sectional study. Quantitative data synthesis of the most precise estimates from each study was accomplished through random effects meta-analysis. Heterogeneity was quantified using the I 2 statistic. The summary RR for the association between caffeine intake and PD was 0.75 [95% Confidence Interval (95%CI): 0.68-0.82], with low to moderate heterogeneity (I 2 = 28.8%). Publication bias for case-control/cross-sectional studies may exist (Egger's test, p = 0.053). When considering only the cohort studies, the RR was 0.80 (95%CI: 0.71-90; I 2 = 8.1%). The negative association was weaker when only women were considered (RR = 0.86, 95%CI: 0.73-1.02; I 2 = 12.9%). A linear relation was observed between levels of exposure to caffeine and the RR estimates: RR of 0.76 (95%CI: 0.72-0.80; I 2 = 35.1%) per 300 mg increase in caffeine intake. This study confirm an inverse association between caffeine intake and the risk of PD, which can hardly by explained by bias or uncontrolled confounding.

Abstract.A recent meta-analysis of 4 studies published up to January 2004 suggests a negative association between coffee consumption and Alzheimer's disease, despite important heterogeneity in methods and results. Several epidemiological studies on this issue have been published since then, warranting an update of the insights on this topic. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of published studies quantifying the relation between caffeine intake and cognitive decline or dementia. Data sources searched included Medline, LILACS, Scopus, Web of Science and reference lists, up to September 2009. Cohort and case-control studies were included. Three independent reviewers selected the studies and extracted the data on to standardized forms. Nine cohort and two case-control studies were included. Quantitative data synthesis of the most precise estimates from each study was accomplished through random effects meta-analysis. Heterogeneity was quantified using the I 2 statistic. The outcomes of the studies considered for meta-analysis were Alzheimer's disease in four studies, dementia or cognitive impairment in two studies, and cognitive decline in three studies. The summary relative risk (RR) for the association between caffeine intake and different measures of cognitive impairment/decline was 0.84 [95% Confidence Interval (95% CI): 0.72-0.99; I 2 = 42.6%]. When considering only the cohort studies, the summary RR was 0.93 (95% CI: 0.83-1.04, I 2 = 0.0%), and 0.77 (95% CI: 0.63-0.95, I 2 = 34.7%), if the most influential study was excluded. This systematic review and meta-analysis found a trend towards a protective effect of caffeine, but the large methodological heterogeneity across a still limited number of epidemiological studies precludes robust and definite statements on this topic.

Objective: Dignity therapy (DT) is a short-term psychotherapy developed for patients living with a life-limiting illness. Our aim was to determine the influence of DT on symptoms of depression and anxiety in people with a life-threatening disease with high level of distress, referred to an inpatient palliative care unit.Method:This was an open-label randomized controlled trial. Sixty terminally ill patients were randomly assigned to one of two groups: intervention group (DTþ standard palliative care [SPC]) or control group (SPC alone). The main outcomes were symptoms of depression and anxiety, measured with the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale, assessed at baseline, day 4, day 15, and day 30 of follow-up.Results: Of the 60 participants, 29 were randomized to DTand 31 to SPC. Baseline characteristics were similar between the two groups. DT was associated with a significant decrease in depressive symptoms at day 4 and day 15 (mean ¼ 24.46, 95% CI, 26.91-2.02, p ¼ 0.001; mean¼ 23.96, 95% CI, 27.33 to 20.61; p ¼ 0.022, respectively), but not at day 30 (mean ¼ 23.33, 95% CI, 27.32-0.65, p ¼ 0.097). DTwas also associated with a significant decrease in anxiety symptoms at each follow-up (mean¼ 23.96, 95% CI, 26.66 to 21.25, p ¼ 0.005; mean¼ 26.19, 95% CI, 210.49 to 21.88, p ¼ 0.006; mean ¼ 25.07, 95% CI, 210.22 to 20.09, p ¼ 0.054, respectively).Significance of results: DT appears to have a short-term beneficial effect on the depression and anxiety symptoms that often accompany patients at the end of their lives. Future research with larger samples compared with other treatments is needed to better understand the potential benefits of this psychotherapy.