Articles: ninos.
-
This study quantifies antispike protein antibody responses to first-dose messenger RNA (mRNA) COVID-19 vaccines in solid organ transplant recipients to better understand the immunogenicity of the vaccines in immunocompromised individuals.
-
Cochrane Db Syst Rev · May 2021
Review Meta AnalysisRapid versus standard antimicrobial susceptibility testing to guide treatment of bloodstream infection.
Rapid antimicrobial susceptibility tests are expected to reduce the time to clinically important results of a blood culture. This might enable clinicians to better target therapy to a person's needs, and thereby, improve health outcomes (mortality, length of hospital stay), and reduce unnecessary prescribing of broad-spectrum antibiotics; thereby reducing antimicrobial resistance rates. ⋯ Two review authors independently screened references, full-text reports of potentially relevant studies, extracted data from the studies, and assessed risk of bias. Any disagreement was discussed and resolved with a third review author. For mortality, a dichotomous outcome, we extracted the number of events in each arm, and presented a risk ratio (RR) with 95% confidence interval (CI) to compare rapid susceptibility testing to conventional methods. We used Review Manager 5.4 to meta-analyse the data. For other outcomes, which are time-to-event outcomes (time-to-discharge from hospital, time-to-first appropriate antibiotic change), we conducted qualitative narrative synthesis, due to heterogeneity of outcome measures. MAIN RESULTS: We included six trials, with 1638 participants. For rapid antimicrobial susceptibility testing compared to conventional methods, there was little or no difference in mortality between groups (RR 1.10, 95% CI 0.82 to 1.46; 6 RCTs, 1638 participants; low-certainty evidence). In subgroup analysis, for rapid genotypic or molecular antimicrobial susceptibility testing compared to conventional methods, there was little or no difference in mortality between groups (RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.69 to 1.49; 4 RCTs, 1074 participants; low-certainty evidence). For phenotypic rapid susceptibility testing compared to conventional methods, there was little or no difference in mortality between groups (RR 1.37, 95% CI 0.80 to 2.35; 2 RCTs, 564 participants; low-certainty evidence). In qualitative analysis, rapid susceptibility testing may make little or no difference in time-to-discharge (4 RCTs, 1165 participants; low-certainty evidence). In qualitative analysis, rapid genotypic susceptibility testing compared to conventional testing may make little or no difference in time-to-appropriate antibiotic (3 RCTs, 929 participants; low-certainty evidence). In subgroup analysis, rapid phenotypic susceptibility testing compared to conventional testing may improve time-to-appropriate antibiotic (RR -17.29, CI -45.05 to 10.47; 2 RCTs, 564 participants; low-certainty evidence). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: The theoretical benefits of rapid susceptibility testing have not been demonstrated to directly improve mortality, time-to-discharge, or time-to-appropriate antibiotic in these randomized studies. Future large prospective studies should be designed to focus on the most clinically meaningful outcomes, and aim to optimize blood culture pathways.
-
It is estimated that sailors who are assigned to surface ships and submarines are deployed for more than 1 year across their careers and they spend 15% to 23% of their time away from home. Research suggests that shipboard sailors experience rates of behavioral health issues similar to those with ground combat experiences. Despite the rigorous operational tempo and the unique shipboard environment experienced by these service members, little military health research has examined the health outcomes of sailors serving aboard ships. The objectives of this study were to develop an evidence map of the peer-reviewed literature to (1) identify potential threats to the health and readiness of shipboard sailors, (2) identify health and performance issues experienced by this population, and (3) identify gaps in the current peer-reviewed published literature on shipboard health and performance. ⋯ The evidence map identified various gaps in the research pertaining to the health and performance of shipboard sailors. These gaps included a lack of research on the risk factors for common health and performance issues experienced by sailors and on the relationship between stressors of shipboard life and sailors' health, performance, and readiness. The results of this evidence map should be used to inform the development, implementation, and evaluation of interventions to improve the shipboard environment and/or the preventive health behaviors used by sailors while underway or deployed.