Dataset Information

Effectiveness of interventions for prevention of common infections in people who use opioids: a protocol for a systematic review of systematic reviews

ABSTRACT:

Background

The North American opioid crisis is driven by opioid-related mortality and morbidity, including opioid use-associated infections (OUAIs), resulting in a substantial burden for society. Users of legal and illegal opioids are at an increased risk of OUAIs compared to individuals not using opioids. As reported for hepatitis C virus (HCV), human immunodeficiency virus (HIV), bacterial, fungal, and other infections, OUAIs transmission and acquisition risks may be modifiable. Several systematic reviews (SRs) synthetized data regarding interventions to prevent infections in persons using drugs (e.g., opioid substitution therapy, needle and syringes exchange programs, psycho-social interventions); however, their conclusions varied. Therefore, SR of published SRs is needed to synthesize the highest level of evidence on the scope and effectiveness of interventions to prevent OUAIs in people using opioids legally or illegally.

Methods

We will comprehensively search for SRs in the PubMed, Embase, PsycINFO, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Epistemonikos, and Google Scholar databases from inception to November 2020. Data selection and extraction for each SR will be performed independently by two researchers, with disagreements resolved by consensus. All SRs regarding interventions with evaluated effectiveness to prevent OUAI in legal and/or illegal opioid users will be eligible. Risk of bias assessment will be performed using the AMSTAR2 tool. The results will be qualitatively synthesized, and a typology of interventions’ effectiveness with a statement on the strength of evidence for each category will be created.

Discussion

Our pilot search of PubMed resulted in 379 SRs analyzing the effectiveness of interventions to prevent HCV and HIV in persons who inject different types of drugs, including opioids. Of these 379 SRs, 8 evaluated primary studies where participants used opioids and would therefore be eligible for inclusion. The search results thus justify the application of SR of SRs approach. Comprehensive data on the scope and effectiveness of existing interventions to prevent OUAIs will help policy-makers to plan and implement preventive interventions and will assist clinicians in the guidance for their patients using opioids.

Systematic review registration

Registered in PROSPERO on 30 July 2020 (#195929).

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13643-021-01852-w.

SUBMITTER: Kudrina I

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8591821 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundThe North American opioid crisis is marked by high opioid-related mortality and morbidity, including opioid use-associated infections (OUAIs). Users of pharmaceutical and non-pharmaceutical opioids are at an increased risk of acquiring hepatitis C (HCV), human immunodeficiency virus (HIV), and other infections. No high-level evidence, however, has been synthesized regarding effectiveness of interventions to prevent OUAIs in legal, and illegal/mixed opioid users. The aim of the study is to synthesize available systematic review (SR)-level evidence on the scope and effectiveness of interventions to prevent OUAIs among opioid users.MethodsA SR of SRs approach was applied. We searched PubMed, Embase, PsycINFO, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Epistemonikos and Google Scholar from inception to September 2020. Data selection and extraction were performed independently by three researchers. Risk of bias and quality of evidence were assessed using the AMSTAR2 tool. Results were narratively synthesized. Strength of evidence for each category was reported.ResultsEleven of twelve identified SRs included interventions to prevent HCV/HIV transmission in persons who inject drugs (PWID), including opioids. One SR evaluated interventions to prevent recurrent infectious endocarditis. There was sufficient and tentative SR of SRs-level evidence for the effectiveness of opioid substitution therapy (OST) in preventing HIV and HCV, respectively. We found tentative evidence to support effectiveness of needle/syringe exchange programs (NSP) in HIV prevention, and sufficient evidence to support effectiveness of the combined OST and NSP in HCV prevention. There was insufficient SR-level evidence to support or discount effectiveness of other interventions to prevent OUAIs. No SR focused on non-PWID populations.ConclusionSR-level evidence supports the use of OST, NSP, and combined interventions for the reduction of HCV and HIV transmission in PWID. More research on prevention of other OUAIs and on prevention of OUAIs in non-PWID populations is urgently needed.Systematic review registrationRegistered in PROSPERO on July 30, 2020. https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=195929, identifier: #195929.

Project description:IntroductionInterventions targeting behaviours of physician prescribers of opioids for chronic non-cancer pain have been introduced to combat the opioid crisis. Systematic reviews have evaluated effects of specific interventions (eg, prescriber education, prescription drug monitoring programmes) on patient and population health outcomes and prescriber behaviour. Integration of findings across intervention types is needed to better understand the effects of prescriber-targeted interventions.Methods and analysisWe will conduct an overview of systematic reviews. Eligible systematic reviews will include primary studies that evaluated any intervention targeting the behaviours of physician prescribers of opioids for chronic non-cancer pain in an outpatient or mixed setting, compared with no intervention, usual practice or another active or control intervention. Eligible outcomes will pertain to the intervention effect on patient and population health or opioid prescribing behaviour. We will search MEDLINE, Embase and PsycInfo via Ovid; the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews and Epistemonikos from inception. We will also hand search reference lists for additional publications. Screening and data extraction will be conducted independently by two reviewers, with disagreements resolved by consensus or consultation with a third reviewer. The risk of bias of included systematic reviews will be assessed in duplicate by two reviewers using the Risk of Bias in Systematic Reviews tool. Results will be synthesised narratively by intervention type and grouped by outcome. To assist with result interpretation, outcomes will be labelled as intended or unintended according to intervention objectives, and as positive, negative, evidence of no effect or inconclusive evidence according to effect on the population (for patient and population health outcomes) or intervention objectives (for prescriber outcomes).Ethics and disseminationAs the proposed study will use published data, ethics approval is not required. Dissemination of results will be achieved through publication of a manuscript in a peer-reviewed journal and conference presentations.Prospero registration numberCRD42020156815.

Project description:INTRODUCTION:Timely interventions are required in order to change unhealthy lifestyles because if continued for a prolonged period of time, these become risk factors for non-communicable diseases (NCDs). Education through mass media is an important factor in bringing out the behavioural change which may get missed in community-based interventions due to their limited reach. Many countries engage in mass media interventions, however, the nature of interventions and their effectiveness differs. We, therefore, describe the protocol of a systematic review to evaluate the effectiveness of the mass media interventions to reduce the risk of NCDs in the general population and compare the differences in effectiveness estimates across low/middle-income countries and developed countries. METHODS AND ANALYSIS:We will search The Cochrane Library, Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effectiveness, PubMed, Excerpta Medica Database limited to publications since 2000 to October 2019. Specific terms for the search strategy will be piloted as database-controlled vocabulary in the databases searched. The searches will include variations of the following terms: mass media, mass communication, campaign, publicity and terms for types of media, that is, print media, mobile, digital media, social media and broadcast. Study designs to be included will be systematic reviews followed by grey literature and other good quality reviews identified. The primary outcome of effectiveness will be the percentage change in population having different behavioural risk factors. In addition, mean overall change in levels of several physical or biochemical parameters will be studied as secondary outcomes. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION:The review is being done under the doctoral research which has been approved by the Institute Ethics Committee of the Post Graduate Institute of Medical Education and Research Dissemination will be done by submitting scientific articles to academic peer-reviewed journals. We will present the results at relevant conferences and meetings. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER:CRD42016048013.

Project description:IntroductionDry eye is a leading cause of ocular morbidity and economic and societal burden for patients and healthcare systems. There are several treatment options available for dry eye and high-quality systematic reviews synthesise the evidence for their effectiveness and potential harms.Methods and analysisWe will search the Cochrane Eyes and Vision US satellite (CEV@US) database of eyes and vision systematic reviews for systematic reviews on interventions for dry eye. CEV@US conducted an initial search of PubMed and Embase to populate the CEV@US database of eyes and vision systematic reviews in 2007, which was updated most recently in August 2021. We will search the database for systematic reviews published since 1 January 2016 because systematic reviews more than 5 years are unlikely to be up to date. We will consider Cochrane and non-Cochrane systematic reviews eligible for inclusion. Two authors will independently screen articles. We will include studies that evaluate interventions for dry eye and/or meibomian gland dysfunction with no restriction on types of participants or review language. We will select reliable systematic reviews (ie, those meeting pre-established methodological criteria) for inclusion, assessed by one investigator and verified by a second investigator. We will extract ratings of the certainty of evidence from within each review. We will report the degree of overlap for systematic reviews that answer similar questions and include overlapping primary studies. We will present results of the overview in alignment with guidelines in the Cochrane Handbook of Systematic Reviews of Interventions (Online Chapter 5: Overviews of Reviews), the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses statement, and an overview of reviews quality and transparency checklist. The anticipated start and completion dates for this overview are 1 May 2021 and 30 April 2022, respectively.Ethics and disseminationThis overview will not require the approval of an Ethics Committee because it will use published studies. We will publish results in a peer-reviewed journal.Prospero registration numberCRD42021279880.

Project description:BackgroundTobacco smoking is the leading cause of cancer, preventable death, and disability. Smoking cessation can increase life expectancy by nearly a decade if achieved in the third or fourth decades of life. Various stop smoking interventions are available including pharmacotherapies, electronic cigarettes, behavioural support, and alternative therapies. This protocol outlines an evidence review which will evaluate the benefits and harms of stop smoking interventions in adults.MethodsThe evidence review will consist of two stages. First, an overview of systematic reviews evaluating the benefits and harms of various stop smoking interventions delivered in or referred from the primary care setting will be conducted. The second stage will involve updating a systematic review on electronic cigarettes identified in the overview; randomized controlled trials will be considered for outcomes relating to benefits while randomized controlled trials, non-randomized controlled trials, and comparative observational studies will be considered for evaluating harms. Search strategies will be developed and peer-reviewed by medical information specialists. The search strategy for the updated review on e-cigarettes will be developed using that of the candidate systematic review. The MEDLINE®, PsycINFO, Embase, and the Cochrane Library electronic databases will be searched as of 2008 for the overview of reviews and from the last search date of the selected review for the updated review. Organizational websites and trial registries will be searched for unpublished or ongoing reviews/studies. Two reviewers will independently screen the title and abstracts of citations using the liberal accelerated method. Full-text screening will be performed independently by two reviewers. Extracted data will be verified by a second reviewer. Disagreements regarding full-text screening and data extraction will be resolved by consensus or third-party adjudication. The methodological quality of systematic reviews, risk of bias of randomized and non-randomized trials, and methodological quality of cohort studies will be evaluated using AMSTAR 2, the Cochrane risk of bias tool, and a modified version of the Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network critical appraisal tool, respectively. The GRADE framework will be used to assess the quality of the evidence for outcomes.DiscussionThe evidence review will evaluate the benefits and harms of various stop smoking interventions for adults. Findings will be used to inform a national tobacco cessation guideline by the Canadian Task Force on Preventive Health Care.Systematic review registrationPROSPERO (CRD42018099691, CRD42018099692).

Project description:BACKGROUND: Worldwide, there are an estimated 15 million individuals with drug use disorders and over five times as many with alcohol use disorders (WHO 1:2, 2005). Most individuals with substance misuse have families who are affected. Initial scoping searches identified an expanse of broad and disparate studies and reviews on the family interventions for substance misuse. This systematic review of systematic reviews aims to bring together the expanse of research on the effectiveness of family-based interventions in substance misuse.Initial scoping searches identified an expanse of broad and disparate studies and reviews on the family interventions for substance misuse. This systematic review of systematic reviews aims to bring together the expanse of research on the effectiveness of family-based interventions in substance misuse. METHODS: Extensive electronic and manual searches will be undertaken. Screening, data extraction and quality assessment will be undertaken by two reviewers with disagreements resolved through discussion.The inclusion criteria will be that the study is a systematically undertaken review, the population is individuals with substance misuse problems and the interventions include a family-focused component. Reviews that focus on prevention rather than treatment will be excluded. The reviews will be assessed for quality and relevance. The evidence from included systematic reviews will be mapped by focus of intervention (promoting engagement of user into treatment/joint involvement in treatment of user/treating family member in own right) for both adults and adolescents for drug and/or alcohol misusers to allow assessment of the density of available evidence. The higher-quality, up-to-date evidence for each domain will be identified and described, and conclusions will be drawn with limitations of the evidence highlighted. DISCUSSION: This systematic review of systematic reviews will be an efficient and robust way of looking at the current state of the evidence in the field of family-based interventions for substance misuse. It will evaluate all the available systematic-review-level literature to report on the effectiveness of family-based psychological interventions in improving substance-related outcomes and improving health and wellbeing of substance misusers and/or their families. This will inform future treatment policies and commissioning decisions.In addition, it will identify areas of poor quality, inconsistency and gaps in the evidence base for family-based psychological interventions in substance misuse with respect to secondary evidence in order to inform future research. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42014006834.