Systematic reviews of antihypertensive drugs: A review of publication trends, characteristics, and quality.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Esam H
PROVIDER: S-EPMC8678774 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:BackgroundHypertension drives the global burden of cardiovascular disease and its prevalence is estimated to increase by 30% by the year 2025. Nonadherence to chronic medication regimens is common; approximately 43% to 65.5% of patients who fail to adhere to prescribed regimens are hypertensive patients. Nonadherence to medications is a potential contributing factor to the occurrence of concomitant diseases.ObjectiveThis systematic review applied a meta-analytic procedure to investigate the medication nonadherence in adult hypertensive patients.MethodsOriginal research studies, conducted on adult hypertensive patients, using the 8-item Morisky medication adherence scale (MMAS-8) to assess the medication adherence between January 2009 and March 2016 were included. Comprehensive search strategies of 3 databases and MeSH keywords were used to locate eligible literature. Study characteristics, participant demographics, and medication adherence outcomes were recorded. Effect sizes for outcomes were calculated as standardized mean differences using random-effect model to estimate overall mean effects.ResultsA total of 28 studies from 15 countries were identified, in total comprising of 13,688 hypertensive patients, were reviewed. Of 25 studies included in the meta-analysis involving 12,603 subjects, a significant number (45.2%) of the hypertensive patients and one-third (31.2%) of the hypertensive patients with comorbidities were nonadherent to medications. However, a higher proportion (83.7%) of medication nonadherence was noticed in uncontrolled blood pressure (BP) patients. Although a higher percentage (54%) of nonadherence to antihypertensive medications was noticed in females (P < 0.001), the risk of nonadherence was 1.3 times higher in males, with a relative risk of 0.883. Overall, nearly two-thirds (62.5%) of the medication nonadherence was noticed in Africans and Asians (43.5%).ConclusionNonadherence to antihypertensive medications was noticed in 45% of the subjects studied and a higher proportion of uncontrolled BP (83.7%) was nonadherent to medication. Intervention models aiming to improve adherence should be emphasized.
| S-EPMC5287944 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectivesTo examine the quality of reporting of harms in systematic reviews, and to determine the need for a reporting guideline specific for reviews of harms.DesignSystematic review.Data sourcesCochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (CDSR) and Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects (DARE).Review methodsDatabases were searched for systematic reviews having an adverse event as the main outcome, published from January 2008 to April 2011. Adverse events included an adverse reaction, harms, or complications associated with any healthcare intervention. Articles with a primary aim to investigate the complete safety profile of an intervention were also included. We developed a list of 37 items to measure the quality of reporting on harms in each review; data were collected as dichotomous outcomes ("yes" or "no" for each item).ResultsOf 4644 reviews identified, 309 were systematic reviews or meta-analyses primarily assessing harms (13 from CDSR; 296 from DARE). Despite a short time interval, the comparison between the years of 2008 and 2010-11 showed no difference on the quality of reporting over time (P=0.079). Titles in fewer than half the reviews (proportion of reviews 0.46 (95% confidence interval 0.40 to 0.52)) did not mention any harm related terms. Almost one third of DARE reviews (0.26 (0.22 to 0.31)) did not clearly define the adverse events reviewed, nor did they specify the study designs selected for inclusion in their methods section. Almost half of reviews (n=170) did not consider patient risk factors or length of follow-up when reviewing harms of an intervention. Of 67 reviews of complications related to surgery or other procedures, only four (0.05 (0.01 to 0.14)) reported professional qualifications of the individuals involved. The overall, unweighted, proportion of reviews with good reporting was 0.56 (0.55 to 0.57); corresponding proportions were 0.55 (0.53 to 0.57) in 2008, 0.55 (0.54 to 0.57) in 2009, and 0.57 (0.55 to 0.58) in 2010-11.ConclusionSystematic reviews compound the poor reporting of harms data in primary studies by failing to report on harms or doing so inadequately. Improving reporting of adverse events in systematic reviews is an important step towards a balanced assessment of an intervention.
| S-EPMC3898583 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Hypertension continues to be an important public health concern because of its associated morbidity, mortality and economic impact on the society. It is a significant risk factor for cardiovascular, cerebrovascular and renal complications. It has been estimated that by 2025, 1.56 billion individuals will have hypertension. The increasing prevalence of hypertension and the continually increasing expense of its treatment influence the prescribing patterns among physicians and compliance to the treatment by the patients. A number of national and international guidelines for the management of hypertension have been published. Since many years ago, diuretics were considered as the first-line drugs for treatment of hypertension therapy; however, the recent guidelines by the Joint National Commission (JNC8 guidelines) recommend both calcium channel blockers as well as angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors as first-line drugs, in addition to diuretics. Antihypertensive drug combinations are generally used for effective long-term management and to treat comorbid conditions. This review focuses on the antihypertensive medication utilization, their cost factors, adherence to treatment by patients, and physicians' adherence to guidelines in prescribing medications in different settings including Indian scenario. The antihypertensive medication prescribing pattern studies help in monitoring, evaluation and necessary modifications to the prescribing habits to achieve rational and cost-effective treatment. Additionally, periodic updating of recommended guidelines and innovative drug formulations, and prescription monitoring studies help in rational use of antihypertensive drugs, which can be tailored to suit the patients' requirements, including those in the developing countries.
| S-EPMC4808570 | biostudies-other
Project description:BackgroundSystematic reviews should inform American Academy of Ophthalmology (AAO) Preferred Practice Pattern® (PPP) guidelines. The quality of systematic reviews related to the forthcoming Preferred Practice Pattern® guideline (PPP) Refractive Errors & Refractive Surgery is unknown. We sought to identify reliable systematic reviews to assist the AAO Refractive Errors & Refractive Surgery PPP.MethodsSystematic reviews were eligible if they evaluated the effectiveness or safety of interventions included in the 2012 PPP Refractive Errors & Refractive Surgery. To identify potentially eligible systematic reviews, we searched the Cochrane Eyes and Vision United States Satellite database of systematic reviews. Two authors identified eligible reviews and abstracted information about the characteristics and quality of the reviews independently using the Systematic Review Data Repository. We classified systematic reviews as "reliable" when they (1) defined criteria for the selection of studies, (2) conducted comprehensive literature searches for eligible studies, (3) assessed the methodological quality (risk of bias) of the included studies, (4) used appropriate methods for meta-analyses (which we assessed only when meta-analyses were reported), (5) presented conclusions that were supported by the evidence provided in the review.ResultsWe identified 124 systematic reviews related to refractive error; 39 met our eligibility criteria, of which we classified 11 to be reliable. Systematic reviews classified as unreliable did not define the criteria for selecting studies (5; 13%), did not assess methodological rigor (10; 26%), did not conduct comprehensive searches (17; 44%), or used inappropriate quantitative methods (3; 8%). The 11 reliable reviews were published between 2002 and 2016. They included 0 to 23 studies (median = 9) and analyzed 0 to 4696 participants (median = 666). Seven reliable reviews (64%) assessed surgical interventions.ConclusionsMost systematic reviews of interventions for refractive error are low methodological quality. Following widely accepted guidance, such as Cochrane or Institute of Medicine standards for conducting systematic reviews, would contribute to improved patient care and inform future research.
| S-EPMC5584039 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionCase reports on acupuncture-related adverse events (AEs) have been consistently published in the literature. This review aims to assess the current publication status of case reports on acupuncture-related AEs and evaluate their reporting quality in order to identify areas for improvement.MethodsThis study is a systematic review (SR) of case reports. Studies describing cases for acupuncture-related AEs between 2010 and 2023 (until July) were searched in PubMed, Embase, and local databases (China and Korea), as well as by hand-searching references included in published relevant SRs. A bibliometric analysis was conducted to examine the publication trends of the included literature. The appropriateness of the acupuncture described in the cases, the causality assessment between AEs and acupuncture treatment, and the presence of necessary items from the CAse REport guidelines (CARE) checklist were narratively analyzed.ResultsA total of 169 case reports were included in this review. Over the past decade, an average of 12 case reports on acupuncture-related AEs were published annually. However, only 38.2% of the articles provided sufficient information to determine the appropriateness of the acupuncture treatment used in the reported cases, and considerable numbers of the included case reports did not suggest enough information for the assessment of a causal relationship. The majority of cases did not report the timeline (n = 164), patient perspectives (n = 157), and informed consent (n = 121) items from the CARE checklist.DiscussionAcupuncture-related AEs persist in being frequently reported in the literature. Nonetheless, the information concerning acupuncture and causality assessment within these publications is still found to be insufficient. The development of reporting guidelines for future case reports on acupuncture-related AEs is anticipated to promote an academic environment conducive to more comprehensive reporting.
| S-EPMC10569964 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC8356304 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectivesPoor worldwide rate of blood pressure control is largely due to poor adherence to antihypertensive (AHT) drug treatment. The question of whether sex affects adherence has long been debated but conflicting findings have been reported on this issue. Our objective was to evaluate sex differences in the adherence to AHT therapy.Research design and methodsStudies were identified through a systematic search of PubMed, CINAHL, PsycINFO, Web of Science and Google Scholar (through January 2020) and manual handsearching of relevant articles. Observational studies reporting adherence to AHT drugs measured by self-report or pharmacy refill prescription-based methods among men and women were included. Summarised estimates of ORs with 95% CIs were calculated using random-effects model and meta-regression models.ResultsFrom 12 849 potentially relevant publications, 82 studies (15 517 457 men and 18 537 599 women) were included. No significant between-sex differences in adherence to AHT were observed, whether all study-specific estimates were summarised (ORs 1.04, 95% CI 1.00 to 1.09, p=0.07), nor estimates were pooled according to the method for measuring adherence. Among patients aged 65 years or older, lower self-reported adherence was observed in women (ORs 0.84, 95% CI 0.72 to 0.97, p=0.02), while the main result remained unchanged according to other subgroup analyses.ConclusionsDefinitive evidence of sex differences in adherence to AHT therapy cannot be drawn. Our little knowledge about factors affecting adherence, in particular of sex effect among elderly, urgently requires high-quality studies investigating these issues.
| S-EPMC7348648 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundAs the burden of noncommunicable diseases grows, access to safe medical therapy is increasing in importance. The aim of this study was to develop a method for evaluating the quality of antihypertensive drugs and to examine whether this prevalence varies by socioeconomic variables.MethodsWe conducted a cross-sectional survey of registered pharmacies in 6 local government areas (LGAs) in Lagos State, Nigeria. In each LGA, we sampled 17 pharmacies from a list of all registered pharmacies derived from the Pharmacists Council of Nigeria. We assessed drug quality based on (1) the level of active pharmaceutical ingredients (APIs), which identified falsely labeled drug samples; and (2) the amount of impurities, which revealed substandard drug samples in accordance with the international pharmacopoeia guidelines. Good-quality drugs met specifications for both API and impurity.ResultsOf the 102 drug samples collected, 30 (29.3%) were falsely labeled, 76 (74.5%) were substandard,78 (76.5%) were of poor quality and 24 (23.5%) were of good quality.Among the falsely labeled drugs, 2 samples met standards set for purity while 28 did not. Among the 76 substandard drug samples, 28 were also falsely labeled. Of the falsely labeled drugs, 17 (56.7%) came from LGAs with low socioeconomic status, and 40 (52.6%) of the substandard drug samples came from LGAs with high socioeconomic status. Most of the good-quality drug samples, 14 (58.3%), were from LGAs with low socioeconomic status. Eighteen (60%) of the falsely labeled samples, 37 (48.7%) of the substandard samples, and 15 (62.5%) of the good-quality drug samples were from manufacturers based in Asia. The average price was 375.67 Nigerian naira (NGN) for falsely labeled drugs, 383.33 NGN for substandard drugs, and 375.67 NGN for good-quality drugs. The prevalence of falsely labeled and substandard drug samples did not differ by LGA-level socioeconomic status (P = .39) or region of manufacturer (P = .24); however, there was a trend for a difference by price (P = .06).ConclusionThe prevalence of falsely labeled and substandard drug samples was high in Lagos. Treatment of noncommunicable diseases in this setting will require efforts to monitor and assure drug quality.
| S-EPMC6373917 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveTo examine associations between nursing homes' quality and publication of the Nursing Home Compare quality report card.Data sources/study settingsPrimary and secondary data for 2001-2003: 701 survey responses of a random sample of nursing homes; the Minimum Data Set (MDS) with information about all residents in these facilities, and the Nursing Home Compare published quality measure (QM) scores.Study designSurvey responses provided information on 20 specific actions taken by nursing homes in response to publication of the report card. MDS data were used to calculate five QMs for each quarter, covering a period before and following publication of the report. Statistical regression techniques were used to determine if trends in these QMs have changed following publication of the report card in relation to actions undertaken by nursing homes.Principal findingsTwo of the five QMs show improvement following publication. Several specific actions were associated with these improvements.ConclusionsPublication of the Nursing Home Compare report card was associated with improvement in some but not all reported dimensions of quality. This suggests that report cards may motivate providers to improve quality, but it also raises questions as to why it was not effective across the board.
| S-EPMC2517273 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundMeta-narrative review is one of an emerging menu of new approaches to qualitative and mixed-method systematic review. A meta-narrative review seeks to illuminate a heterogeneous topic area by highlighting the contrasting and complementary ways in which researchers have studied the same or a similar topic. No previous publication standards exist for the reporting of meta-narrative reviews. This publication standard was developed as part of the RAMESES (Realist And MEta-narrative Evidence Syntheses: Evolving Standards) project. The project's aim is to produce preliminary publication standards for meta-narrative reviews.MethodsWe (a) collated and summarized existing literature on the principles of good practice in meta-narrative reviews; (b) considered the extent to which these principles had been followed by published reviews, thereby identifying how rigor may be lost and how existing methods could be improved; (c) used a three-round online Delphi method with an interdisciplinary panel of national and international experts in evidence synthesis, meta-narrative reviews, policy and/or publishing to produce and iteratively refine a draft set of methodological steps and publication standards; (d) provided real-time support to ongoing meta-narrative reviews and the open-access RAMESES online discussion list so as to capture problems and questions as they arose; and (e) synthesized expert input, evidence review and real-time problem analysis into a definitive set of standards.ResultsWe identified nine published meta-narrative reviews, provided real-time support to four ongoing reviews and captured questions raised in the RAMESES discussion list. Through analysis and discussion within the project team, we summarized the published literature, and common questions and challenges into briefing materials for the Delphi panel, comprising 33 members. Within three rounds this panel had reached consensus on 20 key publication standards, with an overall response rate of 90%.ConclusionThis project used multiple sources to draw together evidence and expertise in meta-narrative reviews. For each item we have included an explanation for why it is important and guidance on how it might be reported. Meta-narrative review is a relatively new method for evidence synthesis and as experience and methodological developments occur, we anticipate that these standards will evolve to reflect further theoretical and methodological developments. We hope that these standards will act as a resource that will contribute to improving the reporting of meta-narrative reviews.
| S-EPMC3558334 | biostudies-literature