Comparative Effectiveness Of Pharmacologic Interventions Research Articles

Comparative effectiveness of pharmacological interventions for hand osteoarthritis: a systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomised trials

ObjectiveTo explore the comparative effectiveness of pharmacological interventions for hand osteoarthritis (OA).MethodsWe systematically searched Embase, MEDLINE, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials from inception until 26 December 2021,...

Comparative effectiveness of pharmacological interventions to prevent postoperative delirium: a network meta-analysis

Many pharmacologic agents were investigated for the effect to prevent delirium. We aimed to comprehensively compare the effect of the pharmacological interventions to prevent postoperative delirium. A Bayesian network meta-analysis of randomized trials was performed using random effects model. PubMed, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Embase were searched on 20 January 2021. Randomized trials comparing the effect of a drug to prevent postoperative delirium with another drug or placebo in adult patients undergoing any kind of surgery were included. Primary outcome was the postoperative incidence of delirium. Eighty-six trials with 26,992 participants were included. Dexmedetomidine, haloperidol, and atypical antipsychotics significantly decreased the incidence of delirium than placebo [dexmedetomidine: odds ratio 0.51, 95% credible interval (CrI) 0.40–0.66, moderate quality of evidence (QOE); haloperidol: odds ratio 0.59, 95% CrI 0.37–0.95, moderate QOE; atypical antipsychotics: odds ratio 0.27, 95% CrI 0.14–0.51, moderate QOE]. Dexmedetomidine and atypical antipsychotics had the highest-ranking probabilities to be the best. However, significant heterogeneity regarding diagnostic time window as well as small study effects precludes firm conclusion.

Comparative Effectiveness of Pharmacological Interventions for Covid-19: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis.

Background: Several pharmacological interventions are now under investigation for the treatment of Covid-19, and the evidence is evolving rapidly. Our aim is to assess the comparative efficacy and safety of these drugs. Methods and Findings: We performed a systematic review and network meta-analysis searching Medline, Pubmed, Embase, Cochrane Covid-19 register, international trial registers, medRxiv, bioRxiv, and arXiv up to December 10, 2020. We included all randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing any pharmacological intervention for Covid-19 against any drugs, placebo or standard care (SC). Data extracted from published reports were assessed for risk of bias in accordance with the Cochrane tool, and using the GRADE framework. Primary outcomes were all-cause mortality, adverse events (AEs) and serious adverse events (SAEs). We estimated summary risk ratio (RR) using pairwise and network meta-analysis with random effects (Prospero, number CRD42020176914). We performed a systematic review and network meta-analysis searching Medline, Pubmed, Embase, Cochrane Covid-19 register, international trial registers, medRxiv, bioRxiv, and arXiv up to December 10, 2020. We included all randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing any pharmacological intervention for Covid-19 against any drugs, placebo or standard care (SC). Data extracted from published reports were assessed for risk of bias in accordance with the Cochrane tool, and using the GRADE framework. Primary outcomes were all-cause mortality, adverse events (AEs) and serious adverse events (SAEs). We estimated summary risk ratio (RR) using pairwise and network meta-analysis with random effects (Prospero, number CRD42020176914). We included 96 RCTs, comprising of 34,501 patients. The network meta-analysis showed in terms of all-cause mortality, when compared to SC or placebo, only corticosteroids significantly reduced the mortality rate (RR 0.90, 95%CI 0.83, 0.97; moderate certainty of evidence). Corticosteroids significantly reduced the mortality rate also when compared to hydroxychloroquine (RR 0.83, 95%CI 0.74, 0.94; moderate certainty of evidence). Remdesivir proved to be better in terms of SAEs when compared to SC or placebo (RR 0.75, 95%CI 0.63, 0.89; high certainty of evidence) and plasma (RR 0.57, 95%CI 0.34, 0.94; high certainty of evidence). The combination of lopinavir and ritonavir proved to reduce SAEs when compared to plasma (RR 0.49, 95%CI 0.25, 0.95; high certainty of evidence). Most of the RCTs were at unclear risk of bias (42 of 96), one third were at high risk of bias (34 of 96) and 20 were at low risk of bias. Certainty of evidence ranged from high to very low. Conclusion: At present, corticosteroids reduced all-cause mortality in patients with Covid-19, with a moderate certainty of evidence. Remdesivir appeared to be a safer option than SC or placebo, while plasma was associated with safety concerns. These preliminary evidence-based observations should guide clinical practice until more data are made public.

Consequences on Private Insurance Coverage: The AAOS Clinical Practice Guidelines and Hyaluronic Acid Injections.

Consequences on Private Insurance Coverage: The AAOS Clinical Practice Guidelines and Hyaluronic Acid Injections.

Comparative effectiveness of pharmacologic interventions to prevent shivering after surgery: a network meta-analysis.

Although many drugs have been studied to prevent postoperative shivering, their comparative effectiveness is unknown. We attempted to assess the comparative effectiveness of the pharmacologic strategies to prevent shivering after surgery including intravenous (IV) and intrathecal (IT) meperidine, IV and IT dexmedetomidine, IV and IT clonidine, nefopam, tramadol, ketamine, and serotonin receptor antagonists. We implemented a frequentist network meta-analysis of randomized trials. Random effect model was selected according to deviance information criteria. The incidence of moderate or severe shivering and the overall incidence of postoperative shivering were compared in all patients and subgroups of general and spinal anesthesia. Seventy trials with 6062 participants were included. All interventions except clonidine IT and dexmedetomidine IT significantly decreased the incidence of moderate or severe shivering. All interventions except clonidine IT significantly decreased the overall incidence of shivering. Nefopam IV was ranked best regarding both the incidence of moderate or severe shivering (odds ratio [OR] 0.04, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.04-0.25, SUCRA 86.2, moderate quality-evidence), and the overall incidence of shivering (OR 0.07, 95% CI 0.03 to 0.15, SUCRA 85.7, moderate quality-evidence), which was consistent in the subgroups of anesthesia. Nefopam was ranked best regarding both severity and incidence of postoperative shivering. In addition to nefopam, tramadol, meperidine IV and IT, and dexmedetomidine IV were ranked high. However, there was significant heterogeneity regarding the individual drug regimen and surgery type, precluding firm conclusion. Further randomized trials are required to compare the efficacy of the drugs with high rank.

PND3 - Comparative Effectiveness of Pharmacological Interventions For Preventing Migraine In Children And Adolescent: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis

PND3 - Comparative Effectiveness of Pharmacological Interventions For Preventing Migraine In Children And Adolescent: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis

Comparative Effectiveness of Pharmacologic Interventions for Pulmonary Arterial Hypertension: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis

We conducted a systematic review and network meta-analysis to examine comparative efficacy and tolerability of pharmacologic interventions for pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH). MEDLINE, the Cochrane Register, EMBASE, CINAHL, and clinicaltrials.gov were searched (January 1, 1990 to March 3, 2016). Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) studying the approved pharmacologic agents endothelin receptor antagonists (ERA), phosphodiesterase inhibitors (PDE5i), the oral/inhaled (PO/INH) and IV/subcutaneous (SC) prostanoids, and riociguat and selexipag, alone or in combination, for pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH) and reporting at least one efficacy outcome were selected. Thirty-one RCTs with 6,565 patients were selected. In network meta-analysis, when compared with a median placebo rate of 14.5%, clinical worsening was estimated at 2.8%with riociguat (risk ratio [RR], 0.19; 95%CI, 0.05-0.76); at 3.9%with ERA+ PDE5i (RR, 0.27; 95%CI, 0.14-0.52), and at 5.7%with PDE5i (RR, 0.39; 95%CI, 0.24-0.62). For improvement in functional status, when compared with 16.2%in the placebo group, improvement in at least one New York Heart Association/World Health Organization (NYHA/WHO) functional class was estimated at 81.8%with IV/SC prostanoids (RR, 5.06; 95%CI, 2.3211.04), at 28.3%with ERA+ PDE5i (RR, 1.75; 95%CI, 1.05-2.92), and at 25.2%with ERA (RR, 1.56; 95%CI, 1.22-2.00). Differences in mortality were not significant. Adverse events leading to discontinuation of therapy were highest with the PO/INH prostanoids (RR,2.92; 95%CI, 1.68-5.06) and selexipag (RR, 2.06; 95%CI, 1.04-3.88) compared with placebo. Currently approved pharmacologic agents have varying effects on morbidity and functional status in patients with PAH. Future comparative effectiveness trials are warranted with a focus on a patient-centered approach to therapy. PROSPERO CRD42016036803.

Exam 2: Comparative Effectiveness of Pharmacological Interventions for Severe Alcoholic Hepatitis: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-analysis

Exam 2: Comparative Effectiveness of Pharmacological Interventions for Severe Alcoholic Hepatitis: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-analysis

Comparative Effectiveness of Pharmacological Interventions for Severe Alcoholic Hepatitis: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-analysis

Severe alcoholic hepatitis (AH) has high mortality. We assessed the comparative effectiveness of pharmacological interventions for severe AH, through a network meta-analysis combining direct and indirect treatment comparisons. We conducted a systematic literature review, through February 2015, for randomized controlled trials of adults with severe AH (discriminant function ≥32 and/or hepatic encephalopathy) that compared the efficacy of active pharmacologic interventions (corticosteroids, pentoxifylline, and N-acetylcysteine [NAC], alone or in combination) with each other or placebo, in reducing short-term mortality (primary outcome) and medium-term mortality, acute kidney injury, and/or infections (secondary outcomes). We performed direct and Bayesian network meta-analysis for all treatments, and used Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation criteria to appraise quality of evidence. We included 22 randomized controlled trials (2621 patients) comparing 5 different interventions. In a direct meta-analysis, only corticosteroids decreased risk of short-term mortality. In a network meta-analysis, moderate quality evidence supported the use of corticosteroids alone (relative risk [RR], 0.54; 95% credible interval [CrI], 0.39-0.73) or in combination with pentoxifylline (RR, 0.53; 95% CrI, 0.36-0.78) or NAC (RR, 0.15; 95% CI, 0.05-0.39), to reduce short-term mortality; low quality evidence showed that pentoxifylline also decreased short-term mortality (RR, 0.70; 95% CrI, 0.50-0.97). The addition of NAC, but not pentoxifylline, to corticosteroids may be superior to corticosteroids alone for reducing short-term mortality. No treatment was effective in reducing medium-term mortality. Imprecise estimates and the small number of direct trials lowered the confidence in several comparisons. In patients with severe AH, pentoxifylline and corticosteroids (alone and in combination with pentoxifylline or NAC) can reduce short-term mortality. No treatment decreases risk of medium-term mortality.

Comparative effectiveness of pharmacologic interventions for knee osteoarthritis: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.

The relative efficacy of available treatments of knee osteoarthritis (OA) must be determined for rational treatment algorithms to be formulated. To examine the efficacy of treatments of primary knee OA using a network meta-analysis design, which estimates relative effects of all treatments against each other. MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science, Google Scholar, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials from inception through 15 August 2014, and unpublished data. Randomized trials of adults with knee OA comparing 2 or more of the following: acetaminophen, diclofenac, ibuprofen, naproxen, celecoxib, intra-articular (IA) corticosteroids, IA hyaluronic acid, oral placebo, and IA placebo. Two reviewers independently abstracted study data and assessed study quality. Standardized mean differences were calculated for pain, function, and stiffness at 3-month follow-up. Network meta-analysis was performed using a Bayesian random-effects model; 137 studies comprising 33,243 participants were identified. For pain, all interventions significantly outperformed oral placebo, with effect sizes from 0.63 (95% credible interval [CrI], 0.39 to 0.88) for the most efficacious treatment (hyaluronic acid) to 0.18 (CrI, 0.04 to 0.33) for the least efficacious treatment (acetaminophen). For function, all interventions except IA corticosteroids were significantly superior to oral placebo. For stiffness, most of the treatments did not significantly differ from one another. Lack of long-term data, inadequate reporting of safety data, possible publication bias, and few head-to-head comparisons. This method allowed comparison of common treatments of knee OA according to their relative efficacy. Intra-articular treatments were superior to nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, possibly because of the integrated IA placebo effect. Small but robust differences were observed between active treatments. All treatments except acetaminophen showed clinically significant improvement from baseline pain. This information, along with the safety profiles and relative costs of included treatments, will be helpful for individualized patient care decisions. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality.