Development of a core outcome set for venous leg ulceration (CoreVen) research evaluations (protocol)

BackgroundA venous leg ulcer is a chronic leg wound caused by poor venous blood circulation in the lower limbs. It is a recurring condition causing pain, malodour, reduced mobility, and depression. Randomised controlled trials evaluating treatments for venous leg ulcers provide important evidence to inform clinical decision-making. However, for findings to be useful, outcomes need to be clinically meaningful, consistently reported across trials, and fully reported. Research has identified the large number of outcomes reported in venous leg ulcer trials, impacting both synthesis of results, and clinical decision-making. To address this, a core outcome set will be developed. A core outcome set is an agreed standardised set of outcomes which should be, as a minimum, measured and reported in all trials which evaluate treatment effectiveness for a given indication. A core outcome set has the potential to reduce research waste, improve the utility of RCTs, reduce reporting bias, facilitate treatment comparisons across different sources of evidence and expedite the production of systematic reviews, meta-analyses and evidence-based clinical guidelines.AimThe aim of this project is to develop a core outcome set for research evaluating the effectiveness of interventions for treating venous leg ulceration.MethodsThrough a scoping review of the literature on venous leg ulceration, we will firstly identify a list of candidate outcome domains (broad categories in relation to what is being measured) from randomised controlled trials and qualitative research, and outcomes (specific methods in relation to what is being measured). In two further stages, we will use the resulting lists of outcome domains and outcomes to design two online surveys. A range of stakeholders will be invited to participate in the surveys and they will be asked to indicate which outcome domains and outcomes are most important and should be considered as core in future research reports.     

Identifying current uses of return to work screening tests and their effectiveness of reducing the risk of reinjury in athletic occupations – A systematic review

ObjectiveTo identify the current return-to-work (RTW) screening tests conducted for athletic occupations following injury and their effectiveness of reducing reinjury risk.MethodsA search was made of multiple databases (BioMed Central, CINAHL through ebscohost, EMBASE, Google Scholar, PUBMED, Scopus, SPORTDiscus and Web of Science) from their inception to March 2022, using relevant terms to identify articles meeting predefined inclusion/exclusion criteria. The search, data extraction, risk of bias, and evaluation of the certainty of the findings were completed independently by two authors. To understand the effectiveness of screening tests and their impact in reducing in reinjury rates, results were split into the following three time points: “Short-term” (≤1 year), “Medium-term” (≥2 years) and “Long-term” (≥3 years).ResultsFive studies (n = 507) met the inclusion criteria. There was a very low level of certainty for the effectiveness of screening tools reducing reinjury risk at short-term, medium-term and long-term follow ups. Only one study recorded a large effect in the reducing reinjury risk.ConclusionThe results demonstrated very low level of certainty for the effectiveness of screening tests reducing the risk of reinjury. A gap in our understanding currently exists for the effectiveness of RTW screening tests in tactical athletic occupations following injury and further research investigating is required.     

A Review of Aerosol Generation Mitigation in International Dental Guidance

IntroductionThe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) led to the worldwide closure of dental practices or reduction of dental services. By the end of April 2020, governments and professional organisations were publishing recommendations or guidance for the reopening/restructuring of dental services. The aim of this study was to assess how dental aerosol-generating procedures (AGPs) were defined in international dental guidelines, what mitigation processes were advised, and whether they were linked to COVID-19 epidemiology.MethodsElectronic searches of a broad range of databases, along with grey literature searches, without language restriction were conducted up to 13 July 2020. Recommendations for the use of face masks and fallow times with patients without COVID-19 were assessed against the deaths per 1 million population in the included countries and country income level using Pearson Chi-squared statistics.ResultsSixty-three guidance documents were included. Most (98%) indicated that AGPs can be performed with patients without COVID-19 with caveats, including advice to restrict AGPs where possible, with 21% only recommending AGPs for dental emergencies. Face masks were recommended by most documents (94%), with 91% also specifying the use of goggles or face shields. Fallow periods for patients without COVID-19 were mentioned in 48% of documents, ranging from 2 to 180 minutes. There were no significant differences in recommendations for face masks or fallow time in patients without COVID-19 by country death rate (P = .463 and P = .901) or World Bank status (P = .504 and P = .835). Most documents recommended procedural or environmental mitigations such as preprocedural mouthwash (82%) and general ventilation (52%). Few documents provided underpinning evidence for their recommendations.ConclusionsWhile the amount of high-quality direct evidence related to dentistry and COVID-19 remains limited, it is important to be explicit about the considered judgements for recommendations as well as generate new evidence to face this challenge.     

Spitz melanocytic tumours – a review

Spitz tumours comprise a spectrum of melanocytic proliferations that share a set of distinct cytological features and molecular pathways. They include benign naevi, intermediate or indeterminate tumours and rare melanomas. Spitz tumours are notorious for the difficulty of distinguishing benign neoplasms with atypical features from melanomas and the related diagnostic uncertainty. Advances in the knowledge of the molecular pathways and genomic aberrations associated with these neoplasms have permitted opportunities for a reduction in the number of uncertain diagnoses and a more objective distinction between Spitz tumours from Spitz-like neoplasms. The presence of a Spitz molecular pathway, such as Harvey rat sarcoma viral oncogene homologue (HRAS) aberrations or kinase fusions, distinguishes a bona fide Spitz neoplasm from Spitz-like naevi or melanomas with conventional driver mutations. Spitz neoplasms with benign histopathological features and, if such testing is performed, benign cytogenetic and molecular findings, are termed Spitz naevi. Spitz neoplasms with frankly malignant histopathological findings or ambiguous microscopic findings associated with genetic or genomic aberrations most in keeping with melanoma are designated as Spitz melanoma. Tumours with microscopic features and genetic/genomic aberrations in between naevi and melanomas are classified as Spitz melanocytoma.     

The Cost-Effectiveness of Intermediate-Acting,Long-Acting,Ultralong-Acting,and Biosimilar Insulins for Type 1 Diabetes Mellitus: A Systematic Review

ObjectivesThe incidence of type 1 diabetes mellitus is increasing every year requiring substantial expenditure on treatment and complications. A systematic review was conducted on the cost-effectiveness of insulin formulations, including ultralong-, long-, or intermediate-acting insulin, and their biosimilar insulin equivalents.MethodsMEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, HTA, and NHS EED were searched from inception to June 11, 2021. Cost-effectiveness and cost-utility analyses were included if insulin formulations in adults (≥ 16 years) with type 1 diabetes mellitus were evaluated. Two reviewers independently screened titles, abstracts, and full-text articles, extracted study data, and appraised their quality using the Drummond 10-item checklist. Costs were converted to 2020 US dollars adjusting for inflation and purchasing power parity across currencies.ResultsA total of 27 studies were included. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios ranged widely across the studies. All pairwise comparisons (11 of 11, 100%) found that ultralong-acting insulin was cost-effective compared with other long-acting insulins, including a long-acting biosimilar. Most pairwise comparisons (24 of 27, 89%) concluded that long-acting insulin was cost-effective compared with intermediate-acting insulin. Few studies compared long-acting insulins with one another.ConclusionsLong-acting insulin may be cost-effective compared with intermediate-acting insulin. Future studies should directly compare biosimilar options and long-acting insulin options and evaluate the long-term consequences of ultralong-acting insulins.