EVIPNet

BACKGROUND: Severe malaria kills over a million people every year. We sought evidence of superiority of artesunate compared with the standard treatment quinine. OBJECTIVES: To compare artesunate with quinine for treating severe malaria. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Cochrane Infectious Diseases Group Specialized Register (January 2007), CENTRAL (The Cochrane Library 2006, Issue 4), MEDLINE (1966 to January 2007), EMBASE (1974 to January 2007), LILACS (1982 to January 2007), ISI Web of Science (1945 to January 2007), the metaRegister of Controlled trials (mRCT), conference proceedings, and reference lists of articles. We contacted researchers and the World Health Organization. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomized controlled trials comparing intravenous, intramuscular, or rectal artesunate with intravenous or intramuscular quinine for treating adults and children with severe malaria who are unable to take medication by mouth. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two authors assessed the eligibility and methodological quality of trials, extracted and analysed data, and drafted the review. The third author contributed to the design and writing of the review. Death was the primary outcome. Dichotomous outcomes were summarized using relative risks and continuous outcomes by mean differences. Where appropriate, we combined data in meta-analyses. Heterogeneity was investigated for the primary outcome using subgroup analyses. MAIN RESULTS: Six trials enrolling 1938 participants (1664 adults and 274 children) met our inclusion criteria. All six trials were conducted in Asia, and only one small trial enrolled only children. Five trials used intravenous artesunate and one trial intramuscular artesunate; all six used intravenous quinine. Treatment with artesunate significantly reduced the risk of death (RR 0.62, 95% CI 0.51 to 0.75; 1938 participants, 6 trials), reduced parasite clearance time (WMD 8.14 h, 95% CI 11.55 to 4.73; 292 participants, 3 trials), and hypoglycaemia detected by routine monitoring (RR 0.46, 95% CI 0.25 to 0.87; 185 participants, 2 trials). There was no evidence of a difference in neurological sequelae, coma recovery time, time to hospital discharge, fever clearance time, or adverse effects other than hypoglycaemia. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Intravenous artesunate is the drug of choice for adults with severe malaria, particularly if acquired in Asia. This review did not identify sufficient data to make firm conclusions about the treatment of children or t (AU)(hide)

BACKGROUND: Educational outreach visits (EOVs) have been identified as an intervention that may improve the practice of healthcare professionals. This type of face-to-face visit has been referred to as university-based educational detailing, academic detailing, and educational visiting. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of EOVs on health professional practice or patient outcomes. SEARCH STRATEGY: For this update, we searched the Cochrane EPOC register to March 2007. In the original review, we searched multiple bibliographic databases including MEDLINE and CINAHL. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised trials of EOVs that reported an objective measure of professional performance or healthcare outcomes. An EOV was defined as a personal visit by a trained person to healthcare professionals in their own settings. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two reviewers independently extracted data and assessed study quality. We used bubble plots and box plots to visually inspect the data. We conducted both quantitative and qualitative analyses. We used meta-regression to examine potential sources of heterogeneity determined a priori. We hypothesised eight factors to explain variation across effect estimates. In our primary visual and statistical analyses, we included only studies with dichotomous outcomes, with baseline data and with low or moderate risk of bias, in which the intervention included an EOV and was compared to no intervention. MAIN RESULTS: We included 69 studies involving more than 15,000 health professionals. Twenty-eight studies (34 comparisons) contributed to the calculation of the median and interquartile range for the main comparison. The median adjusted risk difference (RD) in compliance with desired practice was 5.6% (interquartile range 3.0% to 9.0%). The adjusted RDs were highly consistent for prescribing (median 4.8%, interquartile range 3.0% to 6.5% for 17 comparisons), but varied for other types of professional performance (median 6.0%, interquartile range 3.6% to 16.0% for 17 comparisons). Meta-regression was limited by the large number of potential explanatory factors (eight) with only 31 comparisons, and did not provide any compelling explanations for the observed variation in adjusted RDs. There were 18 comparisons with continuous outcomes, with a median adjusted relative improvement of 21% (interquartile range 11% to 41%). There were eight trials (12 comparisons) in which the intervention included an EOV and was compared to another type of inte (AU)(hide)

BACKGROUND: Pharmaceuticals can be important for people's health. At the same time drugs are major components of health care costs. Pharmaceutical pricing and purchasing policies are used to determine or affect the prices that are paid for drugs. Examples are price controls, maximum prices, price negotiations, reference pricing, index pricing and volume-based pricing policies. The essence of reference pricing is to establish a maximum level of reimbursement for a group of drugs assumed to be therapeutically equivalent. OBJECTIVES: To determine the effects of pharmaceutical pricing and purchasing policies on drug use, healthcare utilisation, health outcomes and costs (expenditures). SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the following databases and web sites: Effective Practice and Organisation of Care Group Register (date of last search: 22/08/03), Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (15/10/03), MEDLINE (07/09/05), EMBASE (07/09/05), ISI Web of Science (08/09/05), CSA Worldwide Political Science Abstracts (21/10/03), EconLit (23/10/03), SIGLE (12/11/03), INRUD (21/11/03), PAIS International (23/03/04), International Political Science Abstracts (09/01/04), NHS EED (20/02/04), PubMed (25/02/04), NTIS (03/03/04), IPA (22/04/04), OECD Publications & Documents (30/08/05), SourceOECD (30/08/05), World Bank Documents & Reports (30/08/05), World Bank e-Library (04/05/05), JOLIS (22/08/05), Global Jolis (22/08/05 and 23/08/05), WHOLIS (29/08/05). SELECTION CRITERIA: Policies in this review were defined as laws, rules, financial and administrative orders made by governments, non-government organisations or private insurers. To be included a study had to include an objective measure of at least one of the following outcomes: drug use, healthcare utilisation, health outcomes, and costs (expenditures); the study must be a randomised controlled trial, non-randomised controlled trial, interrupted time series analysis, repeated measures study or controlled before-after study of a pharmaceutical pricing or purchasing policy for a large jurisdiction or system of care. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two reviewers independently extracted data and assessed study limitations. Quantitative analysis of time series data, for studies with sufficient data, and qualitative analyses were undertaken. MAIN RESULTS: We included 10 studies of reference pricing and one study of index pricing. Most of the reference pricing studies were for senior citizens in British Columbia, Canada. T (AU)(hide)

BACKGROUND: Pharmaceuticals, while central to medical therapy, pose a significant burden to health care budgets. Therefore regulations to control prescribing costs and improve quality of care are implemented increasingly. These include the use of financial incentives for prescribers, namely increased financial accountability using budgets and performance based payments. OBJECTIVES: To determine the effects on drug use, healthcare utilisation, health outcomes and costs (expenditures) of policies, that intend to affect prescribers by means of financial incentives. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the following databases and web sites: Effective Practice and Organisation of Care Group Register (August 2003), Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (October 2003), MEDLINE (October 2005), EMBASE (October 2005), and other databases. SELECTION CRITERIA: Policies were defined as laws, rules, financial and administrative orders made by governments, non-government organisations or private insurers. One of the following outcomes had to be reported: drug use, healthcare utilisation, health outcomes, and costs. The study had to be a randomised or non-randomised controlled trial, interrupted time series analysis, repeated measures study or controlled before-after study evaluating financial incentives for prescribers introduced for a jurisdiction or healthcare system. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently extracted data and assessed study limitations. MAIN RESULTS: Thirteen evaluations of budgetary policies and none of performance based payments met our inclusion criteria. Ten studies evaluated general practice fundholding in the UK, one the Irish Indicative Drug Target Savings Scheme (IDTSS) and two evaluated German drug budgets for physicians in private practice. The interrupted time series analyses had some limitations. All the controlled before-after studies (all from the UK) had serious limitations.Drug expenditure (per item and per patient) and prescribed drug volume decreased with budgets in all three countries. Evidence indicated increased use of generic drugs in the UK and Ireland, but was inconclusive on the use of new and expensive drugs. We found no clear evidence of increased health care utilisation and no studies reporting effects on health. Administration costs were not reported. No studies on the effects of performance-based payments or other policies met our inclusion criteria. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Based on the evidence (AU)(hide)

BACKGROUND: The importance of consumer involvement in health care is widely recognised. Consumers can be involved in developing healthcare policy and research, clinical practice guidelines and patient information material, through consultations to elicit their views or through collaborative processes. Consultations can be single events, or repeated events, large or small scale. They can involve individuals or groups of consumers to allow debate; the groups may be convened especially for the consultation or be established consumer organisations. They can be organised in different forums and through different media. We anticipated finding few comparative evaluations that reliably evaluated the effects of consumer involvement. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of consumer involvement and compare different methods of involvement in developing healthcare policy and research, clinical practice guidelines, and patient information material. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched: the Cochrane Consumers and Communication Review Group's Specialised Register (4 May 2006); the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library, Issue 1 2006), MEDLINE (1966 to January Week 2 2006); EMBASE (1980 to Week 03 2006); CINAHL (1982 to December Week 2 2005), PsycINFO (1806 to January Week 3 2006); Sociological Abstracts (1952 to 24 January 2006); and SIGLE (System for Information on Grey Literature in Europe) (1980 to 2003/1). We scanned reference lists from relevant articles and contacted authors. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised and quasi-randomised trials, interrupted time series analyses, and controlled before-after studies assessing methods for involving consumers in developing healthcare policy and research, clinical practice guidelines or patient information material. The outcome measures were: participation or response rates of consumers; consumer views elicited; consumer influence on decisions, healthcare outcomes or resource utilisation; consumers' or professionals' satisfaction with the involvement process or resulting products; impact on the participating consumers; costs. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently selected trials for inclusion, assessed their quality and extracted data. We contacted study authors for clarification and to seek missing data. We presented results in a narrative summary and pooled data as appropriate. MAIN RESULTS: Five randomised controlled trials of moderate or low methodological quality involving 1031 (AU)(hide)

BACKGROUND: Audit and feedback continues to be widely used as a strategy to improve professional practice. It appears logical that healthcare professionals would be prompted to modify their practice if given feedback that their clinical practice was inconsistent with that of their peers or accepted guidelines. Yet, audit and feedback has not consistently been found to be effective. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of audit and feedback on the practice of healthcare professionals and patient outcomes. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Cochrane Effective Practice and Organisation of Care Group's register and pending file up to January 2004. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised trials of audit and feedback (defined as any summary of clinical performance over a specified period of time) that reported objectively measured professional practice in a healthcare setting or healthcare outcomes. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two reviewers independently extracted data and assessed study quality. Quantitative (meta-regression), visual and qualitative analyses were undertaken. For each comparison we calculated the risk difference (RD) and risk ratio (RR), adjusted for baseline compliance when possible, for dichotomous outcomes and the percentage and the percent change relative to the control group average after the intervention, adjusted for baseline performance when possible, for continuous outcomes. We investigated the following factors as possible explanations for the variation in the effectiveness of interventions across comparisons: the type of intervention (audit and feedback alone, audit and feedback with educational meetings, or multifaceted interventions that included audit and feedback), the intensity of the audit and feedback, the complexity of the targeted behaviour, the seriousness of the outcome, baseline compliance and study quality. MAIN RESULTS: Thirty new studies were added to this update, and a total of 118 studies are included. In the primary analysis 88 comparisons from 72 studies were included that compared any intervention in which audit and feedback is a component compared to no intervention. For dichotomous outcomes the adjusted risk difference of compliance with desired practice varied from - 0.16 (a 16 % absolute decrease in compliance) to 0.70 (a 70% increase in compliance) (median = 0.05, inter-quartile range = 0.03 to 0.11) and the adjusted risk ratio varied from 0.71 to 18.3 (median = 1.08, inter-quartile range = 0.99 to 1.30). For continu (AU)(hide)

BACKGROUND: Artemisinin-based combination treatments are strongly advocated, but supplies are limited. Sulfadoxine combined with amodiaquine is an alternative non-artemisinin combination. OBJECTIVES: To compare sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine plus amodiaquine (SP plus AQ) with sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine plus artesunate (SP plus AS) for treating uncomplicated Plasmodium falciparum malaria. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Cochrane Infectious Diseases Group Specialized Register (October 2005), CENTRAL (The Cochrane Library 2005, Issue 4), MEDLINE (1966 to October 2005), EMBASE (1988 to October 2005), LILACS (October 2005), and reference lists. We also contacted researchers and organizations working in this field. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomized controlled trials comparing SP plus AS with SP plus AQ for treating uncomplicated P. falciparum malaria. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two authors independently applied the inclusion criteria, extracted data, and assessed methodological quality. The primary outcome measure was treatment failure (parasitological or clinical evidence of treatment failure between start of treatment and day 28). We calculated the relative risk (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) for dichotomous data. MAIN RESULTS: Four trials (775 participants) met the inclusion criteria. All were from areas of high and seasonal malaria transmission in Africa. Fewer participants using SP plus AQ failed treatment by day 28 (RR 0.59, 95% CI 0.42 to 0.83; 652 participants, 3 trials). Even excluding new infections, SP plus AQ performed better (RR 0.62, 95% CI 0.40 to 0.96; 649 participants, 3 trials). There was no statistically significant difference between the two treatments for treatment failure at day 14 (RR 1.14, 95% CI 0.47 to 2.78; 775 participants, 4 trials). SP plus AS was more effective at reducing gametocyte carriage at day seven (RR 2.31, 95% CI 1.36 to 3.92; 220 participants, 1 trial). One trial reported that one person - in the SP plus AQ group - developed severe malaria. Adverse events were poorly reported, but did not seem to differ in type and number between the two treatment combinations. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: SP plus AQ performed better at controlling treatment failure at day 28, but was not as good as SP plus AS at reducing gametocyte carriage at day seven. Careful consideration of local resistance patterns is required because resistance to sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine and amodiaquine are high in many areas. In order to delay development of (AU)(hide)