Impact of cholinesterase inhibitors on behavioral and psychological symptoms of Alzheimer's disease:a meta-analysis

Objective: To determine the efficacy of cholinesterase inhibitors (ChEIs) in improving the behavioral and psychological symptoms of dementia (BPSD) in patients with Alzheimer’s disease (AD). Data sources: We searched MEDLINE, Cochrane Registry, and the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL) from 1966 to 2007. We limited our search to English Language, full text, published articles and human studies. Data extraction: We included randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials evaluating the efficacy of donepezil, rivastigmine, or galantamine in managing BPSD displayed by AD patients. Using the United States Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) guidelines, we critically appraised all studies and included only those with an attrition rate of less than 40%, concealed measurement of the outcomes, and intention to treat analysis of the collected data. All data were imputed into pre-defined evidence based tables and were pooled using the Review Manager 4.2.1 software for data synthesis. Results: We found 12 studies that met our inclusion criteria but only nine of them provided sufficient data for the meta-analysis. Among patients with mild to severe AD and in comparison to placebo, ChEIs as a class had a beneficial effects on reducing BPSD with a standard mean difference (SMD) of -0.10 (95% confidence interval [CI]; -0.18, -0.01) and a weighted mean difference (WMD) of -1.38 neuropsychiatry inventory point (95% CI; -2.30, -0.46). In studies with mild AD patients, the WMD was -1.92 (95% CI; -3.18, -0.66); and in studies with severe AD patients, the WMD was -0.06 (95% CI; -2.12, +0.57). Conclusion: Cholinesterase inhibitors lead to a statistical significant reduction in BPSD among patients with AD, yet the clinical relevance of this effect remains unclear.

Impact in contact lenses and the anterior eye:challenges prevailing in 2015

As we settle into a new year, this second issue of Contact Lens and Anterior Eye allows us to reflect on how new research in this field impacts our understanding, but more importantly, how we use this evidence basis to enhance our day to day practice, to educate the next generation of students and to construct the research studies to deepen our knowledge still further. The end of 2014 saw the publication of the UK governments Research Exercise Framework (REF) which ranks Universities in terms of their outputs (which includes their paper, publications and research income), environment (infrastructure and staff support) and for the first time impact (defined as “any effect on, change or benefit to the economy, society, culture, public policy or services, health, the environment or quality of life, beyond academia” [8]). The REF is a process of expert review, carried out in 36 subject-based units of assessment, of which our field is typically submitted to the Allied Health, Dentistry, Nursing and Pharmacy panel. Universities that offer Optometry did very well with Cardiff, Manchester and Aston in the top 10% out of the 94 Universities that submitted to this panel (Grade point Average ranked order). While the format of the new exercise (probably in 2010) to allocate the more than £2 billion of UK government research funds is yet to be determined, it is already rumoured that impact will contribute an even larger proportion to the weighting. Hence it is even more important to reflect on the impact of our research. In this issue, Elisseef and colleagues [5] examine the intriguing potential of modifying a lens surface to allow it to bind to known wetting agents (in this case hyaluronic acid) to enhance water retention. Such a technique has the capacity to reduced friction between the lens surface and the eyelids/ocular surface, presumably leading to higher comfort and less reason for patients to discontinue with lens wear. Several papers in this issue report on the validity of new high precision, fast scanning imaging and quantification equipment, utilising techniques such as Scheimpflug, partial coherence interferometry, aberrometry and video allowing detailed assessment of anterior chamber biometry, corneal topography, corneal biomechanics, peripheral refraction, ocular aberrations and lens fit. The challenge is how to use this advanced instrumentation which is becoming increasingly available to create real impact. Many challenges in contact lenses and the anterior eye still prevail in 2015 such as: -While contact lens and refractive surgery complications are relatively rare, they are still too often devastating to the individual and their quality of life (such as the impact and prognosis of patients with Acanthmoeba Keratitis reported by Jhanji and colleagues in this issue [7]). How can we detect those patients who are going to be affected and what modifications do we need to make to contact lenses and patient management prevent this occurring? -Drop out from contact lenses still occurs at a rapid rate and symptoms of dry eye seem to be the leading cause driving this discontinuation of wear [1] and [2]. What design, coating, material and lubricant release mechanism will make a step change in end of day comfort in particular? -Presbyopia is a major challenge to hassle free quality vision and is one of the first signs of ageing noticed by many people. As an emmetrope approaching presbyopia, I have a vested interest in new medical devices that will give me high quality vision at all distances when my arms won’t stretch any further. Perhaps a new definition of presbyopia could be when you start to orientate your smartphone in the landscape direction to gain the small increase in print size needed to read! Effective accommodating intraocular lenses that truly mimic the pre-presbyopic crystalline lenses are still a way off [3] and hence simultaneous images achieved through contact lenses, intraocular lenses or refractive surgery still have a secure future. However, splitting light reaching the retina and requiring the brain to supress blurred images will always be a compromise on contrast sensitivity and is liable to cause dysphotopsia; so how will new designs account for differences in a patient's task demands and own optical aberrations to allow focused patient selection, optimising satisfaction? -Drug delivery from contact lenses offers much in terms of compliance and quality of life for patients with chronic ocular conditions such as glaucoma, dry eye and perhaps in the future, dry age-related macular degeneration; but scientific proof-of-concept publications (see EIShaer et al. [6]) have not yet led to commercial products. Part of this is presumably the regulatory complexity of combining a medical device (the contact lens) and a pharmaceutical agent. Will 2015 be the year when this innovation finally becomes a reality for patients, bringing them an enhanced quality of life through their eye care practitioners and allowing researchers to further validate the use of pharmaceutical contact lenses and propose enhancements as the technology matures? -Last, but no means least is the field of myopia control, the topic of the first day of the BCLA's Conference in Liverpool, June 6–9th 2015. The epidemic of myopia is a blight, particularly in Asia, with significant concerns over sight threatening pathology resulting from the elongated eye. This is a field where real impact is already being realised through new soft contact lens optics, orthokeratology and low dose pharmaceuticals [4], but we still need to be able to better predict which technique will work best for an individual and to develop new techniques to retard myopia progression in those who don’t respond to current treatments, without increasing their risk of complications or the treatment impacting their quality of life So what will your New Year's resolution be to make 2015 a year of real impact, whether by advancing science or applying the findings published in journals such as Contact Lens and Anterior Eye to make a real difference to your patients’ lives?

Medication discrepancies at transitions in pediatrics:a review of the literature

Medication reconciliation is an important process in reducing medication errors in many countries. Canada, the USA, and UK have incorporated medication reconciliation as a priority area for national patient safety initiatives and goals. The UK national guidance excludes the pediatric population. The aim of this review was to explore the occurrence of medication discrepancies in the pediatric population. The primary objective was to identify studies reporting the rate and clinical significance of the discrepancies and the secondary objective was to ascertain whether any specific interventions have been used for medication reconciliation in pediatric settings. The following electronic bibliographic databases were used to identify studies: PubMed, OVID EMBASE (1980 to 2012 week 1), ISI Web of Science, ISI Biosis, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, and OVID International Pharmaceutical Abstracts (1970 to January 2012). Primary studies were identified that observed medication discrepancies in children under 18 years of age upon hospital admission, transfer and discharge, or had reported medication reconciliation interventions. Two independent reviewers screened titles and abstracts for relevant articles and extracted data using pre-defined data fields, including risk of bias assessment. Ten studies were identified with variances in reportage of stage and rate of discrepancies. Studies were heterogeneous in definitions, methods, and patient populations. Most studies related to admissions and reported consistently high rates of discrepancies ranging from 22 to 72.3 % of patients (sample size ranging from 23 to 272). Seven of the studies were low-quality observational studies and three studies were 'grey literature' non-peer reviewed conference abstracts. Studies involving small numbers of patients have shown that medication discrepancies occur at all transitions of care in children. Further research is required to investigate and demonstrate how implementing medication reconciliation can reduce discrepancies and potential patient harm. © 2013 Springer International Publishing Switzerland.

Perceptions and experiences of the implementation, management, use and optimisation of electronic prescribing systems in hospital settings:protocol for a systematic review of qualitative studies

Introduction: There is increasing evidence that electronic prescribing (ePrescribing) or computerised provider/physician order entry (CPOE) systems can improve the quality and safety of healthcare services. However, it has also become clear that their implementation is not straightforward and may create unintended or undesired consequences once in use. In this context, qualitative approaches have been particularly useful and their interpretative synthesis could make an important and timely contribution to the field. This review will aim to identify, appraise and synthesise qualitative studies on ePrescribing/CPOE in hospital settings, with or without clinical decision support. Methods and analysis: Data sources will include the following bibliographic databases: MEDLINE, MEDLINE In Process, EMBASE, PsycINFO, Social Policy and Practice via Ovid, CINAHL via EBSCO, The Cochrane Library (CDSR, DARE and CENTRAL databases), Nursing and Allied Health Sources, Applied Social Sciences Index and Abstracts via ProQuest and SCOPUS. In addition, other sources will be searched for ongoing studies (ClinicalTrials.gov) and grey literature: Healthcare Management Information Consortium, Conference Proceedings Citation Index (Web of Science) and Sociological abstracts. Studies will be independently screened for eligibility by 2 reviewers. Qualitative studies, either standalone or in the context of mixed-methods designs, reporting the perspectives of any actors involved in the implementation, management and use of ePrescribing/CPOE systems in hospital-based care settings will be included. Data extraction will be conducted by 2 reviewers using a piloted form. Quality appraisal will be based on criteria from the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme checklist and Standards for Reporting Qualitative Research. Studies will not be excluded based on quality assessment. A postsynthesis sensitivity analysis will be undertaken. Data analysis will follow the thematic synthesis method. Ethics and dissemination: The study does not require ethical approval as primary data will not be collected. The results of the study will be published in a peer-reviewed journal and presented at relevant conferences.