FreshRSS

🔒
❌ Acerca de FreshRSS
Hay nuevos artículos disponibles. Pincha para refrescar la página.
AnteayerTus fuentes RSS

Colchicine for the treatment of patients with COVID-19: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials

Por: Cheema · H. A. · Jafar · U. · Shahid · A. · Masood · W. · Usman · M. · Hermis · A. H. · Naseem · M. A. · Sahra · S. · Sah · R. · Lee · K. Y.
Objectives

We conducted an updated systematic review and meta-analysis to investigate the effect of colchicine treatment on clinical outcomes in patients with COVID-19.

Design

Systematic review and meta-analysis.

Data sources

We searched PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Library, medRxiv and ClinicalTrials.gov from inception to January 2023.

Eligibility criteria

All randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that investigated the efficacy of colchicine treatment in patients with COVID-19 as compared with placebo or standard of care were included. There were no language restrictions. Studies that used colchicine prophylactically were excluded.

Data extraction and synthesis

We extracted all information relating to the study characteristics, such as author names, location, study population, details of intervention and comparator groups, and our outcomes of interest. We conducted our meta-analysis by using RevMan V.5.4 with risk ratio (RR) and mean difference as the effect measures.

Results

We included 23 RCTs (28 249 participants) in this systematic review. Colchicine did not decrease the risk of mortality (RR 0.99; 95% CI 0.93 to 1.05; I2=0%; 20 RCTs, 25 824 participants), with the results being consistent among both hospitalised and non-hospitalised patients. There were no significant differences between the colchicine and control groups in other relevant clinical outcomes, including the incidence of mechanical ventilation (RR 0.75; 95% CI 0.48 to 1.18; p=0.22; I2=40%; 8 RCTs, 13 262 participants), intensive care unit admission (RR 0.77; 95% CI 0.49 to 1.22; p=0.27; I2=0%; 6 RCTs, 961 participants) and hospital admission (RR 0.74; 95% CI 0.48 to 1.16; p=0.19; I2=70%; 3 RCTs, 8572 participants).

Conclusions

The results of this meta-analysis do not support the use of colchicine as a treatment for reducing the risk of mortality or improving other relevant clinical outcomes in patients with COVID-19. However, RCTs investigating early treatment with colchicine (within 5 days of symptom onset or in patients with early-stage disease) are needed to fully elucidate the potential benefits of colchicine in this patient population.

PROSPERO registration number

CRD42022369850.

Facilitators and barriers to pressure injury prevention, management and education: Perspectives from healthcare professionals—A qualitative study

Abstract

This study aims to (1) characterize healthcare professionals' (HCPs') experiences related to the prevention and management of pressure injuries (PIs) and (2) explore the educational needs of individuals with a past or current history of PIs and their caregivers from the perspective of HCPs. This is a qualitative descriptive study. HCPs (n = 18) were interviewed using a semi-structured interview guide. Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed verbatim and coded using NVivo. Three overarching themes encompassing various dimensions were identified: (1) Facilitators related to PI prevention and management, (2) Challenges related to PI prevention and management and (3) Recommendations for improving patient and caregiver PI education. HCPs identified a greater number of challenges than facilitators related to PI care. This study emphasizes the importance of a patient-centred and interprofessional approach to patient education for PI prevention and management. Meaningful interventions focused on the patient may improve health literacy and empower patients and caregivers in PI care. Investing in preventive measures and raising awareness are crucial to reducing PI incidence. The findings have implications for HCPs and researchers seeking to enhance patient care and promote effective PI prevention strategies.

❌