Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 2 de 2
Filter
Add more filters










Database
Language
Publication year range
1.
BMJ Open ; 14(5): e074929, 2024 May 30.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38816059

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: Multiple sclerosis (MS) is an immune-mediated demyelinating disease with a significant burden of neuropsychiatric sequelae. These symptoms, including depression and anxiety, are predictors of morbidity and mortality in people with MS. Despite a high prevalence of obsessive-compulsive disorder in MS, potentially shared pathophysiological mechanisms and overlap in possible treatments, no review has specifically examined the clinical dimensions of people with obsessive-compulsive and related disorders (OCRD) and MS. In this scoping review, we aim to map the available knowledge on the clinical dimensions of people with co-occurring OCRD and MS. Understanding the characteristics of this population in greater detail will inform more patient-centred care and create a framework for future studies. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: We developed a search strategy to identify all articles that include people with co-occurring OCRD and MS. The search strategy (extending to the grey literature) was applied to MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, CINAHL, Web of Science and ProQuest Dissertations & Theses. Records will undergo title and abstract screening by two independent reviewers. Articles meeting inclusion criteria based on title and abstract screening will go on to full-text review by the two independent reviewers. After reaching a consensus about articles for inclusion in the final review, data will be extracted using a standardised extraction form. The extracted data will include clinical characteristics of patients such as age, gender, medication use and severity of MS, among others. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This scoping review does not require research ethics approval. Results will be shared at national and/or international conferences, in a peer-reviewed journal publication, in a plain language summary and in a webinar for the general public.


Subject(s)
Multiple Sclerosis , Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder , Humans , Multiple Sclerosis/complications , Multiple Sclerosis/epidemiology , Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder/epidemiology , Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder/complications , Research Design , Review Literature as Topic , Comorbidity
2.
J Burn Care Res ; 2023 Dec 05.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38051821

ABSTRACT

This Clinical Practice Guideline (CPG) addresses the topic of acute fluid resuscitation during the first 48 hours following a burn injury for adults with burns ≥20% of the total body surface area (%TBSA). The listed authors formed an investigation panel and developed clinically relevant PICO (Population, Intervention, Comparator, Outcome) questions. A systematic literature search returned 5978 titles related to this topic and after 3 levels of screening, 24 studies met criteria to address the PICO questions and were critically reviewed. We recommend that clinicians consider the use of human albumin solution, especially in patients with larger burns, to lower resuscitation volumes and improve urine output. We recommend initiating resuscitation based on providing 2 mL/kg/% TBSA burn in order to reduce resuscitation fluid volumes. We recommend selective monitoring of intra-abdominal and intraocular pressure during burn shock resuscitation. We make a weak recommendation for clinicians to consider the use of computer decision support software to guide fluid titration and lower resuscitation fluid volumes. We do not recommend the use of transpulmonary thermodilution-derived variables to guide burn shock resuscitation. We are unable to make any recommendations on the use of high-dose vitamin C (ascorbic acid), fresh frozen plasma (FFP), early continuous renal replacement therapy, or vasopressors as adjuncts during acute burn shock resuscitation. Mortality is an important outcome in burn shock resuscitation, but it was not formally included as a PICO outcome because the available scientific literature is missing studies of sufficient population size and quality to allow us to confidently make recommendations related to the outcome of survival at this time.

SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...