Background Non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) is a leading cause of chronic liver disease worldwide. Many individuals have risk factors associated with NAFLD, but the majority do not develop advanced liver disease: cirrhosis, hepatic decompensation, or hepatocellular carcinoma. Identifying people at high risk of experiencing these complications is important in order to prevent disease progression. This review synthesises the evidence on metabolic risk factors and their potential to predict liver disease outcomes in the general population at risk of NAFLD or with diagnosed NAFLD. Methods and findings We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of population-based cohort studies. Databases (including MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, and ClinicalTrials.gov) were searched up to 9 January 2020. Studies were included that reported severe liver disease outcomes (defined as liver cirrhosis, complications of cirrhosis, or liver-related death) or advanced fibrosis/non-alcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH) in adult individuals with metabolic risk factors, compared with individuals with no metabolic risk factors. Cohorts selected on the basis of a clinically indicated liver biopsy were excluded to better reflect general population risk. Risk of bias was assessed using the QUIPS tool. The results of similar studies were pooled, and overall estimates of hazard ratio (HR) were obtained using random-effects meta-analyses. Of 7,300 unique citations, 22 studies met the inclusion criteria and were of sufficient quality, with 18 studies contributing data suitable for pooling in 2 random-effects meta-analyses. Type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) was associated with an increased risk of
Objective: Polypharmacy is widespread among older people, but the adverse outcomes associated with it are unclear. We aim to synthesize current evidence on the adverse health, social, medicines management, and health care utilization outcomes of polypharmacy in older people. Design: A systematic review, of systematic reviews and meta-analyses of observational studies, was conducted. Eleven bibliographic databases were searched from 1990 to February 2018. Quality was assessed using AMSTAR (A Measurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews). Setting and participants: Older people in any health care setting, residential setting, or country. Results: Twenty-six reviews reporting on 230 unique studies were included. Almost all reviews operationalized polypharmacy as medication count, and few examined medication classes or disease states within this. Evidence for an association between polypharmacy and many adverse outcomes, including adverse drug events and disability, was conflicting. The most consistent evidence was found for hospitalization and inappropriate prescribing. No research had explored polypharmacy in the very old (aged 85 years), or examined the potential social consequences associated with medication use, such as loneliness and isolation. Conclusions and implications: The literature examining the adverse outcomes of polypharmacy in older people is complex, extensive, and conflicting. Until polypharmacy is operationalized in a more clinically relevant manner, the adverse outcomes associated with it will not be fully understood. Future studies should work toward this approach in the face of rising multimorbidity and population aging. Ó 2019 AMDA e The Society for Post-Acute and Long-Term Care Medicine. Polypharmacy describes the situation where multiple medications are prescribed for an individual, and it is most commonly defined as the concomitant use of 5 or more medicines. 1,2 Polypharmacy among older people has become more common in recent years 3,4 because of disease-specific prescribing guidelines, 5e7 rising levels of multimorbidity due to population ageing, 7,8 and a lack of evidence to support deprescribing approaches. 9 Indeed, the proportion of older people taking 10 or more medicinesdso-called hyperpolypharmacydmore than tripled between 1995 (4.9%) and 2010 (17.2%). 3 Polypharmacy in older people may be appropriate 7 but it also has potential negative effects including reduced adherence, adverse drug events, increased health care utilization, falls, cognitive impairment, and mortality. 10,11 The literature relating to polypharmacy has expanded over the past 2 decades, with many groups exploring its adverse outcomes through systematic review. 12e14 Despite this progress and the growing literature base, the data relating to the spectrum of polypharmacy-related adverse effects is conflicting in people aged 65 years, and even less clearly defined in the very old (aged 85 years), or across a range of health care and residential settings. This is problematic as the very old are the fastest-growing sec...
Background: The number of older people living and dying with frailty is rising, but our understanding of their end-of-life care needs is limited. Aim: To synthesise evidence on the end-of-life care needs of people with frailty. Design: Systematic review of literature and narrative synthesis. Protocol registered prospectively with PROSPERO (CRD42016049506). Data sources: Fourteen electronic databases (CINAHL, Cochrane, Embase, EThOS, Google, Medline, NDLTD, NHS Evidence, NICE, Open grey, Psychinfo, SCIE, SCOPUS and Web of Science) searched from inception to October 2017 and supplemented with bibliographic screening and reference chaining. Studies were included if they used an explicit definition or measure of frailty. Quality was assessed using the National Institute for Health tool for observational studies. Results: A total of 4,998 articles were retrieved. Twenty met the inclusion criteria, providing evidence from 92,448 individuals (18,698 with frailty) across seven countries. Thirteen different measures or definitions of frailty were used. People with frailty experience pain and emotional distress at levels similar to people with cancer and also report a range of physical and psychosocial needs, including weakness and anxiety. Functional support needs were high and were highest where people with frailty were cognitively impaired. Individuals with frailty often expressed a preference for reduced intervention, but these preferences were not always observed at critical phases of care. Conclusion: People with frailty have varied physical and psychosocial needs at the end of life that may benefit from palliative care. Frailty services should be tailored to patient and family needs and preferences at the end of life.
Promoting 'care closer to home' for ill children is a policy and practice objective internationally. Progress towards this goal is hampered by a perceived lack of evidence on effectiveness and costs. The aim of the work reported here was to establish the strength of current international evidence on the effectiveness and costs of paediatric home care by updating and extending an earlier systematic review. A systematic review following Centre for Reviews and Dissemination guidelines involved updating electronic searches, and extending them to cover paediatric home care for short-term acute conditions. Twenty-one databases were searched from 1990 to April 2007. Hand searching was also carried out. Pairs of team members, guided by an algorithm, selected randomized controlled trials (RCTs), other comparative studies and studies including health economics data. A third reviewer resolved any disagreements. The quality of RCTs was assessed, but a 'best-evidence' approach was taken overall. Data were extracted into specifically designed spreadsheets and a second team member checked all data. Narrative synthesis was used throughout. This paper reports findings from RCTs and studies with health economics data. In total, 16 570 publications were identified after de-duplication. Eleven new RCTs (reported in 17 papers) and 20 papers with health economics data were included and reviewed. Evidence on costs and effectiveness of paediatric home care has not grown substantially since the previous review, but this updated review adds weight to the conclusion that it can deliver equivalent clinical outcomes for children and not impose a greater burden on families. Indeed, in some cases, there is evidence of reduced burden and costs for families compared with hospital care. There is also growing evidence, albeit based on weaker evidence, that paediatric home care may reduce costs for health services, particularly for children with complex and long-term needs.
Objectiveto investigate the impact of the availability and supply of social care on healthcare utilisation (HCU) by older adults in high income countries.Designsystematic review and meta-analysis.Data sourcesmedline, EMBASE, Scopus, Health Management Information Consortium, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, NIHR Health Technology Assessment, NHS Economic Evaluation Database, Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effectiveness, SCIE Online and ASSIA. Searches were carried out October 2016 (updated April 2017 and May 2018). (PROSPERO CRD42016050772).Study selectionobservational studies from high income countries, published after 2000 examining the relationship between the availability of social care (support at home or in care homes with or without nursing) and healthcare utilisation by adults >60 years. Studies were quality assessed.Resultstwelve studies were included from 11,757 citations; ten were eligible for meta-analysis. Most studies (7/12) were from the UK. All reported analysis of administrative data. Seven studies were rated good in quality, one fair and four poor. Higher social care expenditure and greater availability of nursing and residential care were associated with fewer hospital readmissions, fewer delayed discharges, reduced length of stay and expenditure on secondary healthcare services. The overall direction of evidence was consistent, but effect sizes could not be confidently quantified. Little evidence examined the influence of home-based social care, and no data was found on primary care use.Conclusionsadequate availability of social care has the potential to reduce demand on secondary health services. At a time of financial stringencies, this is an important message for policy-makers.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.