A guide to interpreting systematic reviews and meta-analyses in neurosurgery and surgery.

INTRODUCTION: Systematic reviews (SRs) and meta-analyses (MAs) are methods of data analysis used to synthesize information presented in multiple publications on the same topic. A thorough understanding of the steps involved in conducting this type of research and approaches to data analysis is critical for appropriate understanding, interpretation, and application of the findings of these reviews. METHODS: We reviewed reference texts in clinical neuroepidemiology, neurostatistics and research methods and other previously related articles on meta-analyses (MAs) in surgery. Based on existing theories and models and our cumulative years of expertise in conducting MAs, we have synthesized and presented a detailed pragmatic approach to interpreting MAs in Neurosurgery. RESULTS: Herein we have briefly defined SRs sand MAs and related terminologies, succinctly outlined the essential steps to conduct and critically appraise SRs and MAs. A practical approach to interpreting MAs for neurosurgeons is described in details. Based on summary outcome measures, we have used hypothetical examples to illustrate the Interpretation of the three commonest types of MAs in neurosurgery: MAs of Binary Outcome Measures (Pairwise MAs), MAs of proportions and MAs of Continuous Variables. Furthermore, we have elucidated on the concepts of heterogeneity, modeling, certainty, and bias essential for the robust and transparent interpretation of MAs. The basics for the Interpretation of Forest plots, the preferred graphical display of data in MAs are summarized. Additionally, a condensation of the assessment of the overall quality of methodology and reporting of MA and the applicability of evidence to patient care is presented. CONCLUSION: There is a paucity of pragmatic guides to appraise MAs for surgeons who are non-statisticians. This article serves as a detailed guide for the interpretation of systematic reviews and meta-analyses with examples of applications for clinical neurosurgeons.

Epilepsy care and outcome in low- and middle-income countries: A scoping review.

Objectives: Epilepsy is a common neurological condition in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). This study aims to systematically review, analyze, evaluate, and synthesize information on the current state of medical and surgical management and outcomes of epilepsy in LMICs. Materials and Methods: Systematic searches were conducted on MEDLINE, EMBASE, World Health Organization Global Index Medicus, African Journals Online, WOS, and Scopus, covering the period from the inception of the databases to August 18th, 2021, focusing on studies reporting management and outcomes of epilepsy in LMICs. Results: A total of 2298 unique studies were identified, of which, 48 were included (38035 cases). The mean age was 20.1 ± 19.26 years with a male predominance in 60.92% of cases. The type of seizure commonly reported in most of the studies was absence seizures (n = 8302, 21.82%); partial focal seizure (n = 3891, 10.23%); and generalized tonic-clonic seizures (n = 3545, 9.32%) which were the next most common types of seizures. Mesiotemporal epilepsy was less frequently reported (n = 87, 0.22%). Electroencephalogram was commonly used (n = 2516, 6.61%), followed by computed tomography scan (n = 1028, 2.70%), magnetic resonance imaging (n = 638, 1.67%), and video telemetry (n = 484, 1.27%) in the care of patients with seizures. Primary epilepsy was recorded in 582 patients (1.53%) whereas secondary epilepsy was present in 333 patients (0.87%). Carbamazepine was the most used anti-epileptic drug (n = 2121, 5.57%). Surgical treatment was required for 465 (1.22%) patients. Conclusion: In LMICs, epilepsy is underreported. There is still a lack of adequate tools for the diagnosis of primary or secondary epilepsy as well as adequate access to medical management of those reported.

Developing a prehospital care service in a low-resource setting: Barriers and solutions.

Prehospital care (PHC) is critical to the comprehensive and effective functioning of a healthcare system. Given the disproportionate burden of both communicable and non-communicable diseases in low-income nations, its significance cannot be understated. In spite of this, many of these nations lack a comprehensive PHC system. Setting up a cost-effective PHC system in this environment can be difficult and necessitate a variety of stakeholders at various healthcare delivery system levels. Therefore, it is necessary to consider these anticipated barriers and identify feasible solutions for its execution. This will assist in creating a PHC system that is suited to the local needs and achieve sustainable and global health goals. This paper describes the challenges and solutions to establishing a prehospital care service in a low-resource setting.