Hospital rehabilitation for patients with obesity: a scoping review.

PURPOSE: To explore the evidence on rehabilitation for hospitalized patients with obesity. METHODS: Medline, Embase, CENTRAL, CINAHL, and PubMed were searched from 1994 to May 2016. Grey literature was hand-searched. Two reviewers independently selected studies examining patients with obesity receiving hospital-based therapy for a physical impairment. One reviewer extracted the data and a second reviewer verified a random sample. RESULTS: Thirty-nine studies (two trials, 37 observational) were included. Patients underwent rehabilitation following orthopaedic surgery (n = 25), neurological conditions (n = 7), acute medical illnesses (n = 3), or various procedures (n = 4). Three studies investigated the effectiveness of a specific rehabilitation program in patients with obesity; however, two lacked a control group, precluding inferences of causal associations. Most studies compared functional outcomes across patients in different BMI categories (n = 33). There was much variability in the rehabilitation components, intensity, and providers used across the studies. The most frequent components were gait training and mobility (n = 17) and training in assistive devices (n = 12). Across the 50 outcomes measured, length of hospital stay (n = 24) and Functional Independence Measure (n = 15) were assessed most frequently. CONCLUSIONS: Evidence to guide rehabilitation for patients with obesity is sparse and weak. Rigorous comparative studies with clearly defined interventions and consensus outcome measures are needed. Implications for Rehabilitation Obesity rates have dramatically increased among patients requiring rehabilitation following joint arthroplasty, stroke, injury, or an acute medical event. There are currently no guidelines by which to define best practice for rehabilitating patients with obesity and comparative studies on rehabilitation programs are needed. Professional development focused on patient-centered rehabilitation and sensitivity training is known to promote quality care, reduce weight bias, and improve patient satisfaction. Access to and knowledge about equipment is necessary to promote patient and health care provider safety.

Clinical review: Effect of vitamin D3 supplementation on improving glucose homeostasis and preventing diabetes: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

CONTEXT: Observational studies report consistent associations between low vitamin D concentration and increased glycemia and risk of type 2 diabetes, but results of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are mixed. OBJECTIVE: The objective of the study was to systematically review RCTs that report on the effects of vitamin D supplementation on glucose homeostasis or diabetes prevention. DATA SOURCES: Sources of data for the study were MEDLINE, EMBASE, SCOPUS, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects, Health Technology Assessment, and Science Citation Index from inception to June 2013. STUDY SELECTION: Study selection was trials that compared vitamin D3 supplementation with placebo or a non-vitamin D supplement in adults with normal glucose tolerance, prediabetes, or type 2 diabetes. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: Two reviewers collected data and assessed trial quality using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool. Random-effects models were used to estimate mean differences (MDs) and odds ratios. The main outcomes of interest were homeostasis model assessment of insulin resistance, homeostasis model assessment of ß-cell function, hemoglobin A1c levels, fasting blood glucose, incident diabetes, and adverse events. DATA SYNTHESIS: Thirty-five trials (43 407 patients) with variable risk of bias were included. Vitamin D had no significant effects on insulin resistance [homeostasis model assessment of insulin resistance: MD -0.04; 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.30 to 0.22, I-squared statistic (I(2)) = 45%], insulin secretion (homeostasis model of ß-cell function: MD 1.64; 95% CI -25.94 to 29.22, I(2) = 40%), or hemoglobin A1c (MD -0.05%; 95% CI -0.12 to 0.03, I(2) = 55%) compared with controls. Four RCTs reported on the progression to new diabetes and found no effect of vitamin D (odds ratio 1.02; 95% CI 0.94 to 1.10, I(2) = 0%). Adverse events were rare, and there was no evidence of publication bias. CONCLUSIONS: Evidence from available trials shows no effect of vitamin D3 supplementation on glucose homeostasis or diabetes prevention. Definitive conclusions may be limited in the context of the moderate degree of heterogeneity, variable risk of bias, and short-term follow-up duration of the available evidence to date.

Parenteral ω-3 fatty acid lipid emulsions for children with intestinal failure and other conditions: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: There is growing interest in the use of ω-3 fatty acid (n-3FA) lipid emulsions to prevent complications associated with parenteral nutrition. The authors systematically reviewed the evidence on the benefits and safety of n-3FA compared with standard lipid emulsions in children with intestinal disease, critical illness, trauma, or postoperative complications. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The authors searched 4 bibliographic databases from their inception to March 2011, conference proceedings, trial registries, and reference lists. Two reviewers independently selected studies, assessed methodological quality, and rated the strength of the evidence. One reviewer extracted and a second reviewer verified data. The authors summarized findings qualitatively and conducted meta-analysis when appropriate. RESULTS: Five randomized controlled trials with unclear risk of bias and 3 high-quality prospective cohort studies were included. The studies examined premature, low birth weight infants (n = 6) and children with heart disease (n = 1) or intestinal failure (n = 1). The strength of evidence was consistently low or very low across all lipid emulsion comparisons and outcomes. In young children, n-3FA emulsions resulted in improvement in some biochemical outcomes of intestinal failure-associated liver disease but no difference in mortality. Few studies examined patient-important outcomes, such as length of hospital and intensive care stay; need for transplantation, growth, and cognitive development; or the long-term effects and potential harms associated with these therapies. CONCLUSIONS: Currently, there is a lack of sufficient high-quality data to support the use of parenteral n-3FA lipid emulsions in children. Future trials examining long-term clinical outcomes and harms are needed.

Antipsychotics for children and young adults: a comparative effectiveness review.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Despite increasing on-label and off-label use of antipsychotics, prescribing antipsychotics to children remains controversial due to uncertainty of their relative benefits and safety. We systematically reviewed the effectiveness and safety of first- (FGA) and second-generation antipsychotics (SGA) for patients aged ≤24 years with psychiatric and behavioral conditions. METHODS: We searched 10 databases from January 1987 to February 2011, gray literature, trial registries, and reference lists. Two reviewers independently selected studies, assessed methodologic quality, and graded the evidence. One reviewer extracted, and a second verified, data. We summarized findings qualitatively and conducted meta-analyses when appropriate. RESULTS: Sixty-four trials and 17 cohort studies were included. Most trials had a high risk of bias; cohort studies had moderate quality. All comparisons of FGAs versus SGAs, FGAs versus FGAs, and FGAs versus placebo had low or insufficient strength of evidence. There was moderate strength of evidence for the following comparisons. Olanzapine caused more dyslipidemia and weight gain, but fewer prolactin-related events, than risperidone. Olanzapine caused more weight gain than quetiapine. Compared with placebo, SGAs improved clinical global impressions (schizophrenia, bipolar and disruptive behavior disorders) and diminished positive and negative symptoms (schizophrenia), behavior symptoms (disruptive behavior disorders), and tics (Tourette syndrome). CONCLUSIONS: This is the first comprehensive review comparing the effectiveness and safety across the range of antipsychotics for children and young adults. The evidence on the comparative benefits and harms of antipsychotics is limited. Some SGAs have a better side effect profile than other SGAs. Additional studies using head-to-head comparisons are needed.

Screening and diagnosing gestational diabetes mellitus.

BACKGROUND: There is uncertainty as to the optimal approach for screening and diagnosis of gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM). Based on systematic reviews published in 2003 and 2008, the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force concluded that there was insufficient evidence upon which to make a recommendation regarding routine screening of all pregnant women. OBJECTIVES: (1) Identify properties of screening tests for GDM, (2) evaluate benefits and harms of screening for GDM, (3) assess the effects of different screening and diagnostic thresholds on outcomes for mothers and their offspring, and (4) determine the benefits and harms of treatment for a diagnosis of GDM. DATA SOURCES: We searched 15 electronic databases from 1995 to May 2012, including MEDLINE and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (which contains the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group registry); gray literature; Web sites of relevant organizations; trial registries; and reference lists. METHODS: Two reviewers independently conducted study selection and quality assessment. One reviewer extracted data, and a second reviewer verified the data. We included published randomized and nonrandomized controlled trials and prospective and retrospective cohort studies that compared any screening or diagnostic test with any other screening or diagnostic test; any screening with no screening; women who met various thresholds for GDM with those who did not meet various criteria, where women in both groups did not receive treatment; any treatment for GDM with no treatment. We conducted a descriptive analysis for all studies and meta-analyses when appropriate. Key outcomes included preeclampsia, maternal weight gain, birth injury, shoulder dystocia, neonatal hypoglycemia, macrosomia, and long-term metabolic outcomes for the child and mother. RESULTS: The search identified 14,398 citations and included 97 studies (6 randomized controlled trials, 63 prospective cohort studies, and 28 retrospective cohort studies). Prevalence of GDM varied across studies and diagnostic criteria: American Diabetes Association (75 g) 2 to 19 percent; Carpenter and Coustan 3.6 to 38 percent; National Diabetes Data Group 1.4 to 50 percent; and World Health Organization 2 to 24.5 percent. Lack of a gold standard for the diagnosis of GDM and little evidence about the accuracy of screening strategies for GDM remain problematic. The 50 g oral glucose challenge test with a glucose threshold of 130 mg/dL versus 140 mg/dL improves sensitivity and reduces specificity. Both thresholds have high negative predictive values (NPV) but variable positive predictive values (PPVs) across a range of prevalence. There was limited evidence for the screening of GDM diagnosed less than 24 weeks' gestation (three studies). One study compared the International Association of Diabetes in Pregnancy Study Groups' (IADPSG) diagnostic criteria with a two-step strategy. Sensitivity was 82 percent, specificity was 94 percent. Only two studies examined the effects on health outcomes from screening for GDM. One retrospective cohort study (n=1,000) showed more cesarean deliveries in the screened group. A survey within a prospective cohort study (n=93) found the same incidence of macrosomia (≥4.3 kg) in screened and unscreened groups (7 percent each group). Thirty-eight studies examined health outcomes for women who met different criteria for GDM and did not undergo treatment. Methodologically strong studies showed a continuous positive relationship between increasing glucose levels and the incidence of primary cesarean section and macrosomia. One of these studies also found significantly fewer cases of preeclampsia, cesarean section, shoulder dystocia and/or birth injury, clinical neonatal hypoglycemia, and hyperbilirubinemia for women without GDM compared with those meeting IADPSG criteria. Among the other studies, fewer cases of preeclampsia were observed for women with no GDM and women who were false positive versus those meeting Carpenter and Coustan criteria. For maternal weight gain, few comparisons showed differences. For fetal birth trauma, single studies showed no differences for women with Carpenter and Coustan GDM and World Health Organization impaired glucose tolerance versus women without GDM. Women diagnosed based on National Diabetes Data Group GDM had more fetal birth trauma compared with women without GDM. Fewer cases of macrosomia were seen in the group without GDM compared with Carpenter and Coustan GDM, Carpenter and Coustan 1 abnormal oral glucose tolerance test, National Diabetes Data Group GDM, National Diabetes Data Group false positives, and World Health Organization impaired glucose tolerance. Fewer cases of neonatal hypoglycemia were found among patient groups without GDM compared with those meeting Carpenter and Coustan criteria. There was more childhood obesity for Carpenter and Coustan GDM versus patient groups with no GDM. Eleven studies compared diet modification, glucose monitoring, and insulin as needed with no treatment. Moderate evidence showed fewer cases of preeclampsia in the treated group. The evidence was insufficient for maternal weight gain and birth injury. Moderate evidence found less shoulder dystocia with treatment for GDM. Low evidence showed no difference for neonatal hypoglycemia between treated and untreated GDM. Moderate evidence showed benefits of treatment for reduction of macrosomia (>4,000 g). There was insufficient evidence for long-term metabolic outcomes among offspring. Five studies provided data on harms of treating GDM. No difference was found for cesarean delivery, induction of labor, small for gestational age, or admission to a neonatal intensive care unit. There were significantly more prenatal visits among those treated. CONCLUSIONS: While evidence supports a positive association with increasing plasma glucose on a 75 g or 100 g oral glucose tolerance test and macrosomia and primary cesarean section, clear thresholds for increased risk were not found. The 50 g oral glucose challenge test has high NPV but variable PPV. Treatment of GDM results in less preeclampsia and macrosomia. Current evidence does not show that treatment of GDM has an effect on neonatal hypoglycemia or future poor metabolic outcomes. There is little evidence of short-term harm from treating GDM other than an increased demand for services. Research is needed on the long-term metabolic outcome for offspring as a result of GDM and its treatment, and the "real world" effects of GDM treatment on use of care.

Social Stories ™ to improve social skills in children with autism spectrum disorder: a systematic review.

Over the past 20 years a variety of treatments have been developed to remediate deficits associated with autism. Since the early 1990 s, Social Stories ™ have been suggested to positively affect the social development of children with autism spectrum disorder (ASD). Despite much research, there remains uncertainty regarding the effectiveness of this modality. We conducted a systematic review of the literature using pre-defined, rigorous methods. Studies were considered eligible if they were controlled trials evaluating Social Stories ™ among persons with ASD. Two reviewers independently screened articles for inclusion, applied eligibility criteria, extracted data, and assessed methodological quality. A qualitative analysis was conducted on six eligible controlled trials. Five of the six trials showed statistically significant benefits for a variety of outcomes related to social interaction. This review underscores the need for further rigorous research and highlights some outstanding questions regarding maintenance and generalization of the benefits of Social Stories ™.

Systematic review: nonoperative and operative treatments for rotator cuff tears.

BACKGROUND: Many approaches exist for managing rotator cuff tears. PURPOSE: To compare the benefits and harms of nonoperative and operative interventions on clinically important outcomes in adults with rotator cuff tears. DATA SOURCES: 12 electronic databases (1990 to September 2009), gray literature, trial registries, and reference lists were searched. STUDY SELECTION: Controlled and uncontrolled studies that assessed nonoperative or operative treatments or postoperative rehabilitation for adults with confirmed rotator cuff tears were included. Operative studies in English-language publications and nonoperative and postoperative rehabilitation studies in English, French, or German were considered. Studies were assessed in duplicate. DATA EXTRACTION: 2 reviewers assessed risk for bias by using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool and the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. One reviewer rated the evidence by using a modified GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation) approach. Data were extracted by one reviewer and verified by another. DATA SYNTHESIS: 137 studies met eligibility criteria. All trials had high risk for bias. Cohort and uncontrolled studies were of moderate quality. Reported functional outcomes did not differ between open versus mini-open repair, mini-open versus arthroscopic repair, arthroscopic repair with versus without acromioplasty, or single-row versus double-row fixation. Earlier return to work was reported for mini-open repair versus open repair and for continuous passive motion with physical therapy versus physical therapy alone. Open repairs showed greater improvement in function than did arthroscopic debridement. Complication rates were low across all interventions. LIMITATIONS: Limited evidence, which was often of low quality, precluded conclusions for most comparisons. Language restrictions may have excluded some relevant studies, and selective outcome reporting may have introduced bias. CONCLUSION: Evidence on the comparative effectiveness and harms of various operative and nonoperative treatments for rotator cuff tears is limited and inconclusive. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality.