How Safe Are Common Analgesics for the Treatment of Acute Pain for Children? A Systematic Review.

Background. Fear of adverse events and occurrence of side effects are commonly cited by families and physicians as obstructive to appropriate use of pain medication in children. We examined evidence comparing the safety profiles of three groups of oral medications, acetaminophen, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, and opioids, to manage acute nonsurgical pain in children (<18 years) treated in ambulatory settings. Methods. A comprehensive search was performed to July 2015, including review of national data registries. Two reviewers screened articles for inclusion, assessed methodological quality, and extracted data. Risks (incidence rates) were pooled using a random effects model. Results. Forty-four studies were included; 23 reported on adverse events. Based on limited current evidence, acetaminophen, ibuprofen, and opioids have similar nausea and vomiting profiles. Opioids have the greatest risk of central nervous system adverse events. Dual therapy with a nonopioid/opioid combination resulted in a lower risk of adverse events than opioids alone. Conclusions. Ibuprofen and acetaminophen have similar reported adverse effects and notably less adverse events than opioids. Dual therapy with a nonopioid/opioid combination confers a protective effect for adverse events over opioids alone. This research highlights challenges in assessing medication safety, including lack of more detailed information in registry data, and inconsistent reporting in trials.

Behavioral Programs for Type 1 Diabetes Mellitus: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Whether behavioral approaches for self-management programs benefit individuals with type 1 diabetes mellitus is unclear. PURPOSE: To determine the effects of behavioral programs for patients with type 1 diabetes on behavioral, clinical, and health outcomes and to investigate factors that might moderate effect. DATA SOURCES: 6 electronic databases (1993 to June 2015), trial registries and conference proceedings (2011 to 2014), and reference lists. STUDY SELECTION: 36 prospective, controlled studies involving participants of any age group that compared behavioral programs with usual care, active controls, or other programs. DATA EXTRACTION: One reviewer extracted and another verified data. Two reviewers assessed quality and strength of evidence (SOE). DATA SYNTHESIS: Moderate SOE showed reduction in glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) at 6 months after the intervention compared with usual care (mean difference, -0.29 [95% CI, -0.45 to -0.13] percentage points) and compared with active controls (-0.44 [CI, -0.69 to -0.19] percentage points). At the end of the intervention and 12-month follow-up or longer, there were no statistically significant differences in HbA1c (low SOE) for comparisons with usual care or active control. Compared with usual care, generic quality of life at program completion did not differ (moderate SOE). Other outcomes had low or insufficient SOE. Adults appeared to benefit more for glycemic control at program completion (-0.28 [CI, -0.57 to 0.01] percentage points) than did youth (-0.12 [CI, -0.43 to 0.19] percentage points). Program intensity appeared not to influence effectiveness; some individual delivery appears beneficial. LIMITATIONS: All studies had medium or high risk of bias. There was scarce evidence for many outcomes. CONCLUSION: Behavioral programs for type 1 diabetes offer some benefit for glycemic control, at least at short-term follow-up, but improvement for other outcomes has not been shown. (PROSPERO registration number: CRD42014010515). PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. (PROSPERD registration number: CRD42014010515).

Behavioral Programs for Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Behavioral programs may improve outcomes for individuals with type 2 diabetes mellitus, but there is a large diversity of behavioral interventions and uncertainty about how to optimize the effectiveness of these programs. PURPOSE: To identify factors moderating the effectiveness of behavioral programs for adults with type 2 diabetes. DATA SOURCES: 6 databases (1993 to January 2015), conference proceedings (2011 to 2014), and reference lists. STUDY SELECTION: Duplicate screening and selection of 132 randomized, controlled trials evaluating behavioral programs compared with usual care, active controls, or other behavioral programs. DATA EXTRACTION: One reviewer extracted and another verified data. Two reviewers independently assessed risk of bias. DATA SYNTHESIS: Behavioral programs were grouped on the basis of program content and delivery methods. A Bayesian network meta-analysis showed that most lifestyle and diabetes self-management education and support programs (usually offering ≥ 11 contact hours) led to clinically important improvements in glycemic control (≥ 0.4% reduction in hemoglobin A1c [HbA1c]), whereas most diabetes self-management education programs without added support-especially those offering 10 or fewer contact hours-provided little benefit. Programs with higher effect sizes were more often delivered in person than via technology. Lifestyle programs led to the greatest reductions in body mass index. Reductions in HbA1c seemed to be greater for participants with a baseline HbA1c level of 7.0% or greater, adults younger than 65 years, and minority persons (subgroups with ≥ 75% nonwhite participants). LIMITATIONS: All trials had medium or high risk of bias. Subgroup analyses were indirect, and therefore exploratory. Most outcomes were reported immediately after the interventions. CONCLUSION: Diabetes self-management education offering 10 or fewer hours of contact with delivery personnel provided little benefit. Behavioral programs seem to benefit persons with suboptimal or poor glycemic control more than those with good control. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. (PROSPERO registration number: CRD42014010515).