Indications for accurate and appropriate use of personal protective equipment for healthcare professionals. A systematic review

ABSTRACT BACKGROUND: The speed of the spread of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has put enormous pressure on hospitals and other healthcare facilities. This, together with blockages in several countries, has hindered the availability and accessibility of the necessary personal protective equipment (PPE). OBJECTIVE: To identify, systematically evaluate and summarize the available scientific evidence on the efficacy, safety, safe use and reuse of PPE for healthcare professionals, for preventing severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection. DESIGN AND SETTING: Systematic review of studies analyzing products for disinfecting and enabling reuse of PPE for coronavirus within the evidence-based health program of a federal university in São Paulo (SP), Brazil. METHODS: A systematic search of the relevant literature was conducted in the PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, CINAHL, SCOPUS, Web of Science and LILACS databases, for articles published up to November 30, 2020. RESULTS: Ten studies were selected. These analyzed the use of N95, surgical and cotton masks, face shields, flexible enclosures with plastic covers or polycarbonate intubation boxes and plastic curtains; and also PPE disinfection using several substances. CONCLUSION: Combined use of a face shield with a N95 mask proved to be superior to other associations for protecting healthcare workers. Some products are useful for disinfecting PPE, such as 70% ethanol, 0.1% sodium hypochlorite and a mixture of quaternary ammonium and H2O2, and hydrogen peroxide. Ultraviolet light and dry heat at 70 °C can be used to decontaminate N95 masks. REGISTRATION NUMBER: DOI: 10.17605/OSF.IO/4V5FD at the OPENSCIENCE Framework.

Methodological Quality Analysis of Systematic Review for the Treatment of Rotator Cuff Disease / Análise da qualidade metodológica de revisões sistemáticas para tratamento de disfunções do manguito rotador

Abstract Objective To evaluate the methodological quality of systematic reviews for the surgical and nonsurgical treatment of individuals with rotator cuff syndrome; to compare, through the Assessing the methodological quality of systematic reviews (AMSTAR) instrument, the quality of studies found in the Cochrane Library, PubMed (Publisher Medline), EMBASE andQinsightdatabases. Methods This is a descriptive and comparative cross-sectional study, in which two independent authors analyzed, through the AMSTAR instrument, the methodological quality of Cochrane and non-Cochrane systematic reviews on the treatment of individuals diagnosed with rotator cuff syndrome. Results A total of 76 systematic reviews were evaluated by the AMSTAR instrument. The overall mean score was 6.1 (±2.1) and the mean per database was 9.1 (±0.9) for the Cochrane reviews and 5.7 (±1.8) for the non-Cochrane reviews. The lowest-scoring item of AMSTAR was 11, related to the display of the conflict of interests of the publication. In a comparative analysis of the final variable score, there was a statistical difference between the Cochrane and non-Cochrane studies. Conclusion According to the present study, systematic reviews using the Cochrane methodology have a better methodological quality compared to non-Cochrane studies on the treatment of rotator cuff dysfunctions.

Resumo Objetivo Avaliar a qualidade metodológica das revisões sistemáticas para tratamento cirúrgico e não cirúrgico de indivíduos com síndrome do manguito rotador; comparar, através do instrumento Assessingthemethodologicalqualityofsystematic reviews(AMSTAR, na sigla em inglês), a qualidade dos estudos encontrados nas bases de dados Cochrane Library, PubMed (Publisher Medline), EMBASE e Qinsight. Métodos Trata-se de um estudo transversal descritivo e comparativo, em que dois autores independentes analisaram, por meio do instrumento AMSTAR, a qualidade metodológica das revisões sistemáticas Cochrane e nãoCochrane sobre tratamento de indivíduos com diagnóstico de síndrome do manguito rotador. Resultados 76 revisões sistemáticas foram avaliadas pelo instrumento AMSTAR. O escore médio geral foi de 6,1(±2,1) e a média por base de dados foi 9,1(±0,9) para as revisões Cochrane e 5,7(±1,8) para as não Cochrane. O item de menor pontuação do AMSTAR foi 11, relacionada à exibição dos conflitos de interesse da publicação. Em uma análise comparativa do escore da variável final, houve uma diferença estatística entre os estudos Cochrane e nãoCochrane. Conclusão De acordo com o presenteestudo, revisões sistemáticas utilizando a metodologia Cochrane têm uma melhor qualidade metodológica em comparação com estudos nãoCochrane sobre o tratamento de disfunções do manguito rotador.

Evidence for the efficacy of Tai Chi for treating rheumatoid arthritis: an overview of systematic reviews

ABSTRACT BACKGROUND: Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is a chronic disease with higher prevalence among women aged between 30 and 50 years and general prevalence of 1% worldwide. Interventions promoting improvement of quality of life for individuals with RA are required. Tai Chi appears to be a low-cost alternative, with studies showing positive results from this technique. However, regarding aspects of RA such as pain and sensitivity, studies remain inconclusive. OBJECTIVES: To compare the effectiveness of the Tai Chi method for treating patients diagnosed with rheumatoid arthritis, among systematic reviews. DESIGN AND SETTING: Overview of systematic reviews with Cochrane and non-Cochrane methodology. METHODS: Systematic reviews involving quasi-randomized and randomized clinical trials (RCTs) on use of Tai Chi, with no restrictions regarding the date and language of publication, were included. RESULTS: Three systematic reviews were included. The effects of Tai Chi associated with education and stretching exercises versus education and stretching were evaluated in these reviews. They showed that improvements in the variables of mood, depression and functional index were associated with use of Tai Chi. CONCLUSIONS: The findings suggest that clinical improvement was achieved, although not statistically significant with regard to pain and disease pattern, as assessed using the ACR20 measurement. Improvements relating to disability and quality of life were also seen. There was a low level of evidence and therefore caution in data analysis is recommended. The three studies included showed poor reliability for providing an accurate and complete summary of use of Tai Chi among people diagnosed with rheumatoid arthritis. PROSPERO: CRD42019125501.

Environmental cleaning to prevent COVID-19 infection. A rapid systematic review

ABSTRACT BACKGROUND: Faced with a pandemic, all healthcare actions need to reflect best practices, in order to avoid high transmissibility, complications and even hospitalizations. For hospital environments, the products recommended and authorized by regulatory institutions for environmental cleaning and disinfection need to be highly effective. OBJECTIVE: To identify, systematically evaluate and summarize the best available scientific evidence on environmental cleaning to prevent COVID-19 infection. DESIGN AND SETTING: A systematic review of studies analyzing cleaning products that inactivate coronavirus, conducted within the evidence-based health program of a federal university in São Paulo (SP), Brazil. METHODS: A systematic search of the relevant literature was conducted in the PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, CINAHL and LILACS databases, for articles published up to May 27, 2020, relating to studies evaluating cleaning products that inactivate coronavirus in the environment. RESULTS: Seven studies were selected. These analyzed use of 70% alcohol, detergent, detergent containing iodine, household bleach, sodium hypochlorite, hydrogen peroxide, chlorine dioxide, glutaraldehyde, ultraviolet irradiation and plasma air purifier. The effectiveness of treating sewage with sodium hypochlorite and chlorine dioxide was also evaluated. CONCLUSION: Disinfection of environments, especially those in ordinary use, such as bathrooms, needs to be done constantly. Viral inactivation was achieved using chlorine-based disinfectants, alcohol, detergents, glutaraldehyde, iodine-containing detergents, hydrogen peroxide compounds and household bleaches. Alcohol showed efficient immediate activity. In sewage, sodium hypochlorite had better action than chlorine dioxide. REGISTRATION NUMBER: DOI: 10.17605/OSF.IO/YC5P4 in the Open Science Framework.

Máscaras de tecido na contenção de gotículas respiratórias - revisão sistemática / Mascarillas caseras para contener gotas respiratórias - revisión sistemática / Homemade cloth face masks as a barrier against respiratory droplets - systematic review

Resumo Objetivo Identificar, avaliar sistematicamente e sumarizar as melhores evidências científicas disponíveis sobre a eficácia e a segurança das máscaras de tecido para a comunidade. Métodos Foram consultadas as bases de dados Cochrane, PUBMED, EMBASE, LILACS e a literatura cinzenta por meio do Opengrey . Também foi realizada busca nas referências bibliográficas dos estudos primários e secundários identificados. Não houve restrição de idioma, nem período de tempo. Foram incluídos todos os artigos que tenham como objetivo verificar a eficácia e segurança do uso de máscaras de tecido como proteção contra a transmissão viral, bem como estudos laboratoriais que avaliassem barreiras de contenção de partículas. Foram excluídos os estudos que envolvessem o uso de máscaras por profissionais de saúde. Dois avaliadores independentes selecionaram os estudos e as discrepâncias foram resolvidas por um terceiro avaliador. Resultados Após o processo de seleção, não foram localizados estudos clínicos randomizados envolvendo máscaras de tecidos para a população em geral. Incluímos sete estudos que avaliaram diferentes tecidos no bloqueio de gotículas de nível laboratorial e um estudo de revisão. Conclusão O uso de máscara de tecido possibilita uma barreira às gotículas quando comparada a nenhuma máscara. A máscara é um recurso adicional na prevenção e deve sempre ser associada à etiqueta respiratória, higienização das mãos, distanciamento social e isolamento dos casos.

Resumen Objetivo Identificar, evaluar sistemáticamente y resumir las mejores evidencias científicas disponibles sobre la eficacia y la seguridad de las mascarillas caseras para la comunidad. Métodos Se consultaron las bases de datos Cochrane, PUBMED, EMBASE, LILACS y literatura gris por medio de Opengrey. También se realizó búsqueda en las referencias bibliográficas de los estudios primarios y secundarios identificados. No hubo restricción de idioma ni período de tiempo. Se incluyeron todos los artículos que tuvieran como objetivo verificar la eficacia y seguridad del uso de mascarillas caseras como protección contra la transmisión viral, así como estudios de laboratorio que evaluaran barreras de contención de partículas. Se excluyeron los estudios que abarcaran el uso de mascarillas por profesionales de la salud. Dos evaluadores independientes seleccionaron los estudios y las discrepancias fueron resueltas por un tercer evaluador. Resultados Luego del proceso de selección, no se localizaron estudios clínicos aleatorizados que incluyeran mascarillas caseras para la población en general. Incluimos siete estudios que evaluaron diferentes telas para el bloqueo de gotas de nivel de laboratorio y un estudio de revisión. Conclusión El uso de mascarillas caseras permite una barrera para las gotas al compararlo con ninguna mascarilla. La mascarilla es un recurso adicional en la prevención y siempre debe estar asociada a la etiqueta respiratoria, higienización de manos, distanciamiento social y aislamiento de casos.

Abstract Objective To identify, systematically review, and summarize the best scientific evidence available on the efficacy and safety of homemade cloth face masks for the community. Methods The search was conducted using the Cochrane, PUBMED, EMBASE, and LILACS databases, as well as grey literature, using Opengrey . A search was also conducted using references from primary and secondary studies that were found. No language or time period restrictions were applied. All papers that objective was to check efficacy and safety of the use of cloth face masks as protection against viral transmission were included, as well as laboratory studies assessing barriers against particles. We excluded studies approaching the use of face masks by healthcare providers. Two independent reviewers selected the studies, and discrepancies were decided by a third reviewer. Results No randomized clinical trials involving cloth face masks for the general population were found. Seven studies assessing different types of cloth to prevent the penetration of droplets at a laboratory level and a review study were included. Conclusion Using cloth face masks provides a barrier against droplets when compared with not using any face masks. The face mask is an additional preventive mesuare and must be used along with respiratory etiquette, hand hygiene, social distancing, and isolation of cases.

What do Cochrane Systematic Reviews say about conservative and surgical therapeutic interventions for treating rotator cuff disease? Synthesis of evidence

ABSTRACT BACKGROUND: Shoulder pain is considered to be the third largest cause of musculoskeletal functional alterations in individuals presenting pain during movement. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this synthesis of evidence was to identify the clinical effectiveness of conservative and surgical treatments reported in Cochrane systematic reviews among individuals diagnosed with rotator cuff disease. DESIGNAND SETTING: Review of systematic reviews, conducted in the Federal University of São Paulo (Universidade Federal de São Paulo, UNIFESP). METHODS: This synthesis of evidence included systematic reviews that had been published in the Cochrane database. The inclusion criteria were that these systematic reviews should involve individuals aged ≥ 16 years with rotator cuff disease, comparing surgical procedures with or without associated nonsurgical procedures versus placebo, no treatment or other nonsurgical interventions. RESULTS: Thirty-one systematic reviews were included, involving comparisons between surgical procedures and conservative treatment; procedures either combined or not combined with drugs, versus other procedures; and procedures involving exercises, manual therapy and electrothermal or phototherapeutic resources. CONCLUSIONS: The findings suggest that strengthening exercises, with or without associated manual therapy techniques and other resources, were the interventions with greatest power of treatment over the medium and long terms, for individuals with shoulder pain. These had greater therapeutic power than surgical procedures, electrotherapy or photobiomodulation. Protocol registration number in the PROSPERO database: ID - CRD42018096578.