METHODS: A systematic literature search was conducted using CINAHL, EMBASE, Ovid MEDLINE, PsycINFO and SPORTDiscus databases to retrieve articles published from 1st January 2000 to 31st December 2017. Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-experimental studies comparing different strategies in managing overweight and obesity among schoolchildren (6 to 12 years of age) were included. The main outcomes of interest were reductions in weight related variables included anthropometry and body composition measurements. All variables were analysed using random effects meta-analyses.
RESULTS: Fourteen studies were reviewed, 13 were RCTs and one was a quasi-experimental study. The risk of bias for randomisation was low risk for all of RCTs except for one, which was unclear. The risk of bias for randomisation was high for the quasi-experimental study. Most interventions incorporated lifestyle changes and behavioural strategies such as coping and problem solving skills with family involvement. The meta-analyses did not show significant effects of the intervention in reducing weight related outcomes when compared with controls.
CONCLUSION: Meta-analyses of the selected studies did not show significant effects of the interventions on weight related outcomes among overweight and obese schoolchildren when compared with controls. The role of interdisciplinary team approaches with family involvement using behaviour and lifestyle strategies to curb obesity among schoolchildren is important.
METHODS: This is a pragmatic randomized control trial study where elective admitted patients will be randomly divided into the intervention (SS) or control (NN) group. All data will be collected during a face-to-face interview, anthropometric measurement, blood sampling (albumin, white blood count, hemoglobin, and c-reactive protein), handgrip strength, and postoperative complications. Group SS will be receiving a tailored lifestyle and intensively supplemented with oral nutrition support as compared to Group NN that will receive standard medical care. The primary outcome for this study is the length of stay in the hospital. Additional outcome measures are changes in biochemical profile and nutritional and functional status. The effects of intervention between groups on the outcome parameters will be analyzed by using the SPSS General Linear Model (GLM) for the repeated measure procedure.
DISCUSSION: The intervention implemented in this study will serve as baseline data in providing appropriate nutritional management in patients undergoing gastrointestinal and oncological surgery.
TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Protocol Registration and Results System (PRS) NCT04347772 . Registered on 20 November 2019.
METHODS: We used the 19-item Control, Autonomy, Self-realization and Pleasure scale, a validated instrument that measures psychological well-being related to QoL in older persons. Scores range from 0 to 57, and higher scores indicate better QoL. We included several factors as covariates. Analysis of complex samples was carried out using Stata 15. Descriptive analysis was carried out to determine QoL by sociodemographic characteristics and other factors. Linear regression analysis was used to identify psychosocial factors that influence QoL.
RESULTS: A total of 3444 individuals aged ≥60 years completed all 19-item Control, Autonomy, Self-realization and Pleasure items. The estimated mean QoL score was 47.01 (95% CI 46.30-47.72). Adjusted for confounders, QoL was lower among individuals with no formal education (-2.554, 95% CI -3.684, -1.424), probable depression (-1.042, 95% CI -1.212, -0.871) and food insecurity (-0.815, 95% CI -1.083, -0.548). QoL continued to improve with improved ADL score (0.302, 95% CI 0.052, 0.552), IADL score (0.646, 95% CI 0.382, 0.909) and better social support (0.308, 95% CI 0.187, 0.429).
CONCLUSIONS: Lower education, depression, food insecurity, presence of limited functional status and poor social support negatively influenced QoL in older Malaysians. This study identified potentially modifiable factors that could be targeted for interventions to enhance QoL of older persons in Malaysia. Geriatr Gerontol Int 2020; 20: 92-97.
OBJECTIVE: The systematic review and meta-analysis in this study aimed to explore the effect of exercise intervention on health-related quality of life of colorectal cancer survivors.
METHODS: The current study followed guidelines outlined in the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses 2020 (PRISMA 2020) to identify relevant literature. Comprehensive searches were conducted using EBSCOhost, Web of Science (WOS), Scopus, Science Direct, and PubMed. The inclusion criteria included are randomised control trials studies written in English, with no restrictions for the time of publication that reported the effects of exercise intervention on health-related quality of live among colorectal cancer survivors. Meta-analysis was conducted by pooling the mean and standard deviation of post-intervention scores across randomised control trial studies using a random effects model.
RESULT: A total of 467 articles were identified but only seven articles were randomised control trials (RCT) (n = 7) with PEDro scores ranging from 6 to 9 showing good internal validity were included in the review. The results of the meta-analysis of pooled data from six RCTs studies on HRQoL showed no significant effect of exercise intervention on HRQoL in the intervention group compared to control group [SMD = 0.25; 95% CI; -0.0, 0.51; Z = 1.88; p = 0.06; I2 = 30.8%].
CONCLUSION: This meta-analysis provides key insights into the effect of exercise on the health-related quality of life (HRQoL) of colorectal cancer (CRC) survivors. Therefore, more experimental studies should be carried out with rigorous methodology to evaluate the effectiveness of exercise interventions before it is recommended as a routine activity in post-treatment management for CRC survivors.
Methods: A pool of items was generated from a qualitative study, literature reviews, and expert reviews. Exploratory factor analysis (EFA) was performed on the original 40 items of the E-CIS and followed by 27 items for confirmatory factor analysis (CFA). A total of 470 elderly people with chronic constipation were involved.
Results: The mean age of the participants was 68.64 ± 6.57. Finally, only 22 items were indicated as appropriately representing the E-CIS, which were grouped into seven subscales: 'daily activities', 'treatment satisfaction', 'lack of control of bodily function', 'diet restriction', 'symptom intensity', 'anxiety' and 'preventive actions'. The scale was confirmed as valid (root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA) = 0.04, comparative fit index (CFI) = 0.961, Tucker-Lewis index (TLI) = 0.952 and chi-square/degree of freedom (chiSq/df) = 1.44) and reliable (Cronbach's alpha: 0.66-0.85, composite reliability (CR) = 0.699-0.851) to assess the impact of chronic constipation on the elderly's QoL.
Conclusions: The E-CIS is useful to measure the impact of chronic constipation on the elderly's QoL. A further test is needed to determine the validity and reliability of this scale in other elderly population.
OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of cell-based therapy for people with ALS/MND, compared with placebo or no treatment.
SEARCH METHODS: On 31 July 2019, we searched the Cochrane Neuromuscular Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, and Embase. We also searched two clinical trials registries for ongoing or unpublished studies.
SELECTION CRITERIA: We included RCTs that assigned people with ALS/MND to receive cell-based therapy versus a placebo or no additional treatment. Co-interventions were allowed, provided that they were given to each group equally.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We followed standard Cochrane methodology.
MAIN RESULTS: Two RCTs involving 112 participants were eligible for inclusion in this review. One study compared autologous bone marrow-mesenchymal stem cells (BM-MSC) plus riluzole versus control (riluzole only), while the other study compared combined intramuscular and intrathecal administration of autologous mesenchymal stem cells secreting neurotrophic factors (MSC-NTF) to placebo. The latter study was reported as an abstract and provided no numerical data. Both studies were funded by biotechnology companies. The only study that contributed to the outcome data in the review involved 64 participants, comparing BM-MSC plus riluzole versus control (riluzole only). It reported outcomes after four to six months. It had a low risk of selection bias, detection bias and reporting bias, but a high risk of performance bias and attrition bias. The certainty of evidence was low for all major efficacy outcomes, with imprecision as the main downgrading factor, because the range of plausible estimates, as shown by the 95% confidence intervals (CIs), encompassed a range that would likely result in different clinical decisions. Functional impairment, expressed as the mean change in the Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis Functional Rating Scale-Revised (ALSFRS-R) score from baseline to six months after cell injection was slightly reduced (better) in the BM-MSC group compared to the control group (mean difference (MD) 3.38, 95% CI 1.22 to 5.54; 1 RCT, 56 participants; low-certainty evidence). ALSFRS-R has a range from 48 (normal) to 0 (maximally impaired); a change of 4 or more points is considered clinically important. The trial did not report outcomes at 12 months. There was no clear difference between the BM-MSC and the no treatment group in change in respiratory function (per cent predicted forced vital capacity; FVC%; MD -0.53, 95% CI -5.37 to 4.31; 1 RCT, 56 participants; low-certainty evidence); overall survival at six months (risk ratio (RR) 1.07, 95% CI 0.94 to 1.22; 1 RCT, 64 participants; low-certainty evidence); risk of total adverse events (RR 0.86, 95% CI 0.62 to 1.19; 1 RCT, 64 participants; low-certainty evidence) or serious adverse events (RR 0.47, 95% CI 0.13 to 1.72; 1 RCT, 64 participants; low-certainty evidence). The study did not measure muscle strength.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Currently, there is a lack of high-certainty evidence to guide practice on the use of cell-based therapy to treat ALS/MND. Uncertainties remain as to whether this mode of therapy is capable of restoring muscle function, slowing disease progression, and improving survival in people with ALS/MND. Although one RCT provided low-certainty evidence that BM-MSC may slightly reduce functional impairment measured on the ALSFRS-R after four to six months, this was a small phase II trial that cannot be used to establish efficacy. We need large, prospective RCTs with long-term follow-up to establish the efficacy and safety of cellular therapy and to determine patient-, disease- and cell treatment-related factors that may influence the outcome of cell-based therapy. The major goals of future research are to determine the appropriate cell source, phenotype, dose and method of delivery, as these will be key elements in designing an optimal cell-based therapy programme for people with ALS/MND. Future research should also explore novel treatment strategies, including combinations of cellular therapy and standard or novel neuroprotective agents, to find the best possible approach to prevent or reverse the neurological deficit in ALS/MND, and to prolong survival in this debilitating and fatal condition.