Search

This study will be a systematic review of the currently available literature on comparative non-randomized studies of perioperative immunotherapy for resectable non-small cell lung cancer.

Protocol for a rapid and living systematic review on COVID-19 transmission in swimming-related activities.

Additional file 3. Evidence to Decision tables.

Additional file 1. Interview Guide.

Additional file 2. Prioritized questions for the adolopment of the 2021 American College of Rheumatology (ACR) Guideline for the Treatment of Rheumatoid Arthritis (RA) in Saudi Arabia.

Title: Antibiotic Misuse in Respiratory Tract Infections (RTIs)Background: Antibiotic resistance is a global threat mainly driven by antibiotic misuse, commonly seen in RTIs.Objectives: To assess the antibiotic misuse in RTIs through assessing the antibiotic prescribing in RTIs in the Lebanese community and to understand the trend of antibiotic consumption in France and its association with RTIs.Methods: We performed a secondary study using a database of a cross-sectional survey to identify the rate of non-adherence of antibiotic prescriptions to clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) in RTIs by Lebanese physicians, a cross-sectional study using a patient-simulated case of acute bacterial rhinosinusitis in Lebanese community pharmacies to evaluate the rate of antibiotic prescribing and a secondary study using surveillance data to describe the trend of antibiotic consumption and its association with influenza-like illnesses (ILIs) in France.Results: The non-adherence of antibiotic prescriptions to CPGs in RTIs by physicians was 89% and the associated factors were the patient’s sex, affiliation to an international society and diagnosis. In pharmacies, the antibiotic prescribing rate was 31% with little counseling. The associated factors were the contact person, governorate, diagnosis and specific questions. In France, there was an overall constant trend of antibiotic consumption, higher than that of other EU countries. The beta-lactam penicillins was the most consumed and the only class increasing. There was a correlation between the incidence of ILIs and the antibiotic consumption in the community.Conclusion: Antibiotic misuse is common. Interventions and additional research are needed on several levels., Titre: Mésusage des antibiotiques dans les infections des voies respiratoires (IVR)Introduction: L’antibiorésistance est une menace mondiale principalement due au mesusage des antibiotiques souvent observé dans les IVR.Objectif: Évaluer la fréquence du mésusage des antibiotiques relatifs aux IVR et étudier l’évolution de leur consommation.Méthodes: Nous avons à partir d’une étude transversale estimé le taux de non-adhésion des prescriptions d'antibiotiques aux guides de bonne pratique clinique (GPC) dans les IVR par les médecins au Liban. Une étude transversale utilisant un cas simulé de rhinosinusite bactérienne aiguë nous a permis d’évaluer le taux de prescription d'antibiotiques par les pharmaciens. Enfin nous avons analysé les données de consommation d'antibiotiques en Europe et les données de déclaration de syndromes grippaux (SG) en France.Résultats: La non-conformité des prescriptions d'antibiotiques par les médecins était de 89% et les facteurs associés étaient le sexe du patient, l’affiliation à une société internationale et le diagnostic. Dans les pharmacies, le taux de prescription d'antibiotiques était de 31% avec peu de conseils donnés. Les facteurs associés étaient la personne de contact, le diagnostic et les questions spécifiques. En France, la consommation globale d'antibiotiques était supérieure à celle des autres pays de l'UE. Les pénicillines bêta-lactamines sont les plus consommées et la seule classe en augmentation. Il existe une corrélation entre l'incidence des SG et la consommation d'antibiotiques.Conclusion: Le mésusage des antibiotiques est fréquent. Des interventions et des recherches supplémentaires sont nécessaires à plusieurs niveaux.

Additional file 1: Appendix 1a. COVID-19 L��OVE search terms. Appendix 1b. COVID-19 L��OVE list of searched databases. Appendix 2a. Excluded studies (n = 26). Appendix 2b. Excluded guidance documents (n = 23). Appendix 3. Characteristics of included guidance documents (n = 50). Appendix 4. Detailed description of recommendations organized by topics and sub-topics (n = 50).

Background:\ud Mechanical ventilation is used to treat respiratory failure in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19).\ud \ud Purpose:\ud To review multiple streams of evidence regarding the benefits and harms of ventilation techniques for coronavirus infections, including that causing COVID-19. (PROSPERO registration: CRD42020178187)\ud \ud Data Sources:\ud 21 standard, World Health Organization–specific and COVID-19–specific databases, without language restrictions, until 1 May 2020.\ud \ud Study Selection:\ud Studies of any design and language comparing different oxygenation approaches in patients with coronavirus infections, including severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) or Middle East respiratory syndrome (MERS), or with hypoxemic respiratory failure. Animal, mechanistic, laboratory, and preclinical evidence was gathered regarding aerosol dispersion of coronavirus. Studies evaluating risk for virus transmission to health care workers from aerosol-generating procedures (AGPs) were included.\ud \ud Data Extraction:\ud Independent and duplicate screening, data abstraction, and risk of bias assessment (GRADE for certainty of evidence and AMSTAR 2 for included systematic reviews).\ud \ud Data Synthesis:\ud 123 studies were eligible (45 on COVID-19, 70 on SARS, 8 on MERS), but only 5 studies (1 on COVID-19, 3 on SARS, 1 on MERS) adjusted for important confounders. A study in hospitalized patients with COVID-19 reported slightly higher mortality with noninvasive ventilation (NIV) than with invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV), but 2 opposing studies, 1 in patients with MERS and 1 in patients with SARS, suggest a reduction in mortality with NIV (very low-certainty evidence). Two studies in patients with SARS report a reduction in mortality with NIV compared with no mechanical ventilation (low-certainty evidence). Two systematic reviews suggest a large reduction in mortality with NIV compared with conventional oxygen therapy. Other included studies suggest increased odds of transmission from AGPs.\ud \ud Limitation:\ud Direct studies in COVID-19 are limited and poorly reported.\ud \ud Conclusion:\ud Indirect and low-certainty evidence suggests that use of NIV, similar to IMV, probably reduces mortality but may increase the risk for transmission of COVID-19 to health care workers.