FreshRSS

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

Excitatory amino acid inhibitors in adults with acute moderate to severe traumatic brain injury: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Por: Bouras · M. · Costerousse · O. · Verret · M. · Oconnor · S. · Zarychanski · R. · Gagnon · M.-A. · Torkomyan · T. H. · Ouellet · A. · Lauzier · F. · English · S. · Moore · L. · Turgeon · A. F.
Objective

To evaluate the effectiveness of early administration of excitatory amino acid (EAA) inhibitors on long-term neurological outcomes in adults with acute moderate to severe traumatic brain injury (TBI).

Design

Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials (RCTs).

Data sources

MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane CENTRAL, Web of Science, WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform and ClinicalTrials.gov from inception to January 2026.

Study selection

RCTs comparing EAA inhibitors with placebo, standard care or any other interventions were included. Trials enrolled adult patients (≥18 years) with moderate to severe TBI (Glasgow Coma Scale score ≤12) receiving the intervention within the acute phase of care (first week).

Data extraction and synthesis

Pairs of reviewers independently screened trials, extracted data, assessed the risk of bias (RoB) with the Cochrane RoB tool 2 and graded the certainty of evidence using the Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach. Random effects models were used for all effect measures and trial sequential analyses (TSA) were performed for each outcome.

Main outcome measures

The primary outcome was long-term neurological function at 6 months (or the nearest earlier time point), assessed with the Glasgow Outcome Scale (GOS) or extended version (GOS-E), using the classical definitions of an unfavourable outcome (GOS 1–3 or GOS-E 1–4).

Results

28 trials enrolling 4238 patients were included. Early administration of EAA inhibitors was not associated with reduced unfavourable neurological outcomes (relative risk 0.93 (95% CI (0.84 to 1.03); I²=40%; 15 trials, n=3613, moderate certainty). No statistically significant difference was observed based on EAA inhibitor type, timing or duration of administration, RoB or TBI severity. Mortality, intensive care unit lengths of stay and mean intracranial pressure were not statistically different between groups, but hospital length of stay was reduced in the EAA inhibitors group. The early use of EAA inhibitors was not associated with adverse events (low certainty). TSA showed insufficient power for the primary outcome.

Conclusions

In adults with moderate to severe TBI, the early administration of EAA inhibitors was not associated with a reduction of unfavourable neurological outcomes. Further high-quality and adequately powered RCTs are required to clarify their role in TBI management.

PROSPERO registration number

CRD42025635527.

Beyond one-size-fits-all: leveraging mixed-methods qualitative analysis of local stakeholders to tailor validated prehospital care solutions in the Cameroonian cultural context

Por: OConnor · K. · Hayashi · A. · Tabe · V. · Dissak-Delon · F. N. · Nsen · L. · Joel · M. · Tanue · E. A. · Oke · R. · Delaney · P. G. · Eisner · Z. · Chichom Mefire · A. · Juillard · C. · Christie · A. S.
Introduction

Prehospital care, though critical to injury survival, is largely unavailable in many low and middle-income countries, including Cameroon. Lay first responder (LFR) programmes train persons with high injury exposure in first-aid and emergency transport, but stakeholder buy-in from trainees and healthcare workers (HCWs) is essential. To design a context-appropriate prehospital care system, we evaluated barriers and facilitators of implementing a driver-based LFR programme in Cameroon.

Methods

In April 2023, we performed a mixed-methods evaluation targeting commercial mototaxi drivers and HCW in Limbe, Cameroon. Drivers were recruited for focus groups through union leaders. Trauma HCW at Limbe Regional Hospital completed Likert surveys and a subgroup completed semistructured interviews. Data collection focused on perceptions, barriers and facilitators of LFR programme implementation. Survey data were summarised using median and IQR. Interviews were recorded, transcribed, translated and analysed with open and axial coding using reflexive thematic analysis.

Results

Overall, 92 mototaxi drivers and 34 HCWs participated in the LFR programme assessment. Among the HCW surveyed, 93% felt mototaxi drivers were capable of training as LFR but only 44% felt that drivers would be able to provide care safely. Interviews identified negative HCW perceptions of drivers, including drivers being uneducated and financially motivated, as key barriers, whereas driver exposure to injury was identified as a facilitator to LFR programme implementation. Driver groups demonstrated a positive perception of LFR training but identified unpaid time spent transporting injured persons as a significant barrier. Both groups described a need for hospital involvement in trainings and bidirectional standardised communication with HCW.

Conclusions

In Cameroon, driver-based LFR may facilitate increased prehospital care but further exploration of possible systems of collaboration that promote long-term success of the programme is required. Specifically, sustainable implementation will need to include clear bidirectional communication guidelines and provide driver incentive commensurate to effort.

Fertility, family planning, pregnancy and motherhood among women doctors working in the EU and UK: a scoping review

Por: Biju · S. · Madden · C. · OConnor · P. · Byrne · D. · Humphries · N. · Jeffrey · G. · Finnegan · J. · ODonoghue · K. · Fitzgibbon · S. · Lydon · S.
Objectives

Women doctors face considerable challenges navigating family planning, pregnancy and motherhood. Their experiences can have relevance for health system functioning, including doctor retention. This scoping review synthesises research on family planning, fertility, pregnancy and motherhood among women doctors in the EU and the UK.

Design

Scoping review conducted according to JBI best practice guidance.

Data sources

MEDLINE, CINAHL, Academic Search Complete, PsycInfo and Web of Science were searched, and supplemented with backwards and forwards citation chasing.

Eligibility criteria

Peer-reviewed, original research, in English, focusing on either fertility and family planning, pregnancy and/or motherhood among women doctors in an EU country(s) and/or the UK.

Data extraction and synthesis

Data were extracted independently by two authors. Data were synthesised using deductive content analysis and collated using narrative synthesis.

Results

In total, 34 studies were identified. Family planning appears complicated by medical careers. Medical specialty choice is particularly impacted, with certain specialties (eg, General Practice) considered particularly family friendly and others markedly less so. Pregnancy complications among women doctors, especially surgeons, were documented. However, women doctors’ and non-doctors’ pregnancy outcomes were overall not significantly different. Notably, doctor-mothers had fewer children and were more likely to report making compromises or facing negative consequences when balancing family and career than doctor-fathers.

Conclusions

Women doctors in the EU and UK report challenges in balancing work and motherhood. With the potential for their experiences to impact on health system functioning and patient outcomes, training bodies and health organisations should take proactive action to better support women doctors and ensure they can remain in the profession and practice in their desired specialty. Future research examining working practices/schedules during pregnancy, breastfeeding experiences, parenting and childcare and maternal mental health will support a better understanding of women doctors’ experiences and facilitate implementation of effective supports.

MaxiMoM InForM: individualised fortification of human milk for very low birthweight infants-- protocol of a three-arm randomised clinical trial

Por: Beggs · M. R. · Pichardo · D. · Chrzaniecki · A. · Kotsopoulos · K. · Bishara · R. · Ng · E. · Tomlinson · C. · Campbell · D. · Vaz · S. · Kiss · A. · Unger · S. · OConnor · D. L.
Introduction

To meet the elevated nutritional requirements of very low birthweight (

Methods and analysis

This is a three-arm, pragmatic, multicentre, double-blind, randomised clinical trial of 615 human milk–fed infants born either (1) ≤1250 g or (2)

Ethics and dissemination

Ethical approval was obtained from Clinical Trials Ontario (CTO) and local research ethics boards that are not CTO members. Study findings will be disseminated to clinicians at seminars and conferences and in peer-reviewed publications.

Trial registration number

NCT05308134.

Using artificial intelligence in health research

Por: Rodger · D. · OConnor · S.

Artificial intelligence (AI) is now widely accessible and already being used by healthcare researchers throughout various stages in the research process, such as assisting with systematic reviews, supporting data collection, facilitating data analysis and drafting manuscripts for publication.1 The most common AI tools used are forms of generative AI such as ChatGPT, Claude and Gemini. Generative AI is a type of AI that can generate human-like text, audio, videos, code and images based on text-based prompts inputted by a human user. Generative AI is trained on large amounts of data, and the outputs are sophisticated and can be indistinguishable from a response from a skilled human.2 In this article, we outline several AI applications that can be used in healthcare research, examining their benefits, limitations and outline best practices for maintaining research integrity and ethical standards.

Benefits and capabilities of AI

There are several...

The adaptive physical activity programme in stroke (TAPAS): protocol for a process evaluation in a sequential multiple assignment randomised trial

Por: Rocliffe · P. · Whiston · A. · O Mahony · A. · OReilly · S. M. · OConnor · M. · Cunningham · N. · Glynn · L. · Walsh · J. C. · Walsh · C. · Hennessy · E. · Murphy · E. · Hunter · A. · Butler · M. · Paul · L. · Fitzsimons · C. F. · Richardson · I. · Bradley · J. G. · Salsberg · J. · Hayes
Introduction

Participation in physical activity (PA) is a cornerstone of the secondary prevention of stroke. Given the heterogeneous nature of stroke, PA interventions that are adaptive to individual performance capability and associated co-morbidity levels are recommended. Mobile health (mHealth) has been identified as a potential approach to supporting PA post-stroke. To this end, we used a Sequential Multiple Assignment Randomised Trial design to develop an adaptive, mHealth intervention to improve PA post-stroke – The Adaptive Physical Activity programme in Stroke (TAPAS) (Clinicaltrials.Gov NCT05606770). As the first trial in stroke recovery literature to use this design, there is an opportunity to conduct a process evaluation for this type of adaptive intervention. The aim of this process evaluation is to examine the implementation process, mechanism of change and contextual influences of TAPAS among ambulatory people with stroke in the community.

Methods and analysis

Guided by the Medical Research Council Framework for process evaluations, qualitative and quantitative methods will be used to examine the (1) implementation process and the content of TAPAS (fidelity adaptation, dose and reach); (2) mechanisms of change (participants’ response to the intervention; mediators; unexpected pathways and consequences) and (3) influence of the context of the intervention. Quantitative data will be presented descriptively, for example, adherence to exercise sessions. Qualitative data will be collected among TAPAS participants and the interventionist using semi-structured one-to-one or focus group interviews. Transcribed interviews will be analysed using reflexive thematic analysis. Key themes and sub-themes will be developed.

Ethics and dissemination

Ethical approval has been granted by the Health Service Executive Mid-Western Ethics Committee (REC Ref: 026/2022) (25/03/2024). The findings will be submitted for publication and presented at relevant national and international academic conferences.

❌