SETTING: The analysis was from the perspective of the National Health Service in England and Wales.
PARTICIPANTS: 6221 patients from four of the Hyperglycaemia and Adverse Pregnancy Outcomes (HAPO) study centres (two UK, two Australian), 6308 patients from the Atlantic Diabetes in Pregnancy study and 12 755 patients from UK clinical practice.
PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES PLANNED: The incremental cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY), net monetary benefit (NMB) and the probability of being cost-effective at CE thresholds of £20 000 and £30 000 per QALY.
RESULTS: In a population of pregnant women from the four HAPO study centres and using NICE-defined risk factors for GDM, diagnosing GDM using NICE 2015 criteria had an NMB of £239 902 (relative to no treatment) at a CE threshold of £30 000 per QALY compared with WHO 2013 criteria, which had an NMB of £186 675. NICE 2015 criteria had a 51.5% probability of being cost-effective compared with the WHO 2013 diagnostic criteria, which had a 27.6% probability of being cost-effective (no treatment had a 21.0% probability of being cost-effective). For women without NICE risk factors in this population, the NMBs for NICE 2015 and WHO 2013 criteria were both negative relative to no treatment and no treatment had a 78.1% probability of being cost-effective.
CONCLUSION: The NICE 2015 diagnostic criteria for GDM can be considered cost-effective relative to the WHO 2013 alternative at a CE threshold of £30 000 per QALY. Universal screening for GDM was not found to be cost-effective relative to screening based on NICE risk factors.
CLINICAL QUESTION: What is the role of drugs in the treatment of patients with covid-19?
CONTEXT: The evidence base for therapeutics for covid-19 is evolving with numerous randomised controlled trials (RCTs) recently completed and underway. Emerging SARS-CoV-2 variants and subvariants are changing the role of therapeutics.
WHAT IS NEW?: The guideline development group (GDG) defined 1.5% as a new threshold for an important reduction in risk of hospitalisation in patients with non-severe covid-19. Combined with updated baseline risk estimates, this resulted in stratification into patients at low, moderate, and high risk for hospitalisation. New recommendations were added for moderate risk of hospitalisation for nirmatrelvir/ritonavir, and for moderate and low risk of hospitalisation for molnupiravir and remdesivir. New pharmacokinetic evidence was included for nirmatrelvir/ritonavir and molnupiravir, supporting existing recommendations for patients at high risk of hospitalisation. The recommendation for ivermectin in patients with non-severe illness was updated in light of additional trial evidence which reduced the high degree of uncertainty informing previous guidance. A new recommendation was made against the antiviral agent VV116 for patients with non-severe and with severe or critical illness outside of randomised clinical trials based on one RCT comparing the drug with nirmatrelvir/ritonavir. The structure of the guideline publication has also been changed; recommendations are now ordered by severity of covid-19.
ABOUT THIS GUIDELINE: This living guideline from the World Health Organization (WHO) incorporates new evidence to dynamically update recommendations for covid-19 therapeutics. The GDG typically evaluates a therapy when the WHO judges sufficient evidence is available to make a recommendation. While the GDG takes an individual patient perspective in making recommendations, it also considers resource implications, acceptability, feasibility, equity, and human rights. This guideline was developed according to standards and methods for trustworthy guidelines, making use of an innovative process to achieve efficiency in dynamic updating of recommendations. The methods are aligned with the WHO Handbook for Guideline Development and according to a pre-approved protocol (planning proposal) by the Guideline Review Committee (GRC). A box at the end of the article outlines key methodological aspects of the guideline process. MAGIC Evidence Ecosystem Foundation provides methodological support, including the coordination of living systematic reviews with network meta-analyses to inform the recommendations. The full version of the guideline is available online in MAGICapp and in PDF on the WHO website, with a summary version here in The BMJ. These formats should facilitate adaptation, which is strongly encouraged by WHO to contextualise recommendations in a healthcare system to maximise impact.
FUTURE RECOMMENDATIONS: Recommendations on anticoagulation are planned for the next update to this guideline. Updated data regarding systemic corticosteroids, azithromycin, favipiravir and umefenovir for non-severe illness, and convalescent plasma and statin therapy for severe or critical illness, are planned for review in upcoming guideline iterations.
METHODS: A multi-centre study involving 21 laboratories worldwide generated data on the susceptibility of seven mosquito species (Aedes aegypti, Aedes albopictus, Anopheles gambiae sensu stricto [An. gambiae s.s.], Anopheles funestus, Anopheles stephensi, Anopheles minimus and Anopheles albimanus) to seven public health insecticides in five classes, including pyrethroids (metofluthrin, prallethrin and transfluthrin), neonicotinoids (clothianidin), pyrroles (chlorfenapyr), juvenile hormone mimics (pyriproxyfen) and butenolides (flupyradifurone), in glass bottle assays. The data were analysed using a Bayesian binomial model to determine the concentration-response curves for each insecticide-species combination and to assess the within-bioassay variability in the susceptibility endpoints, namely the concentration that kills 50% and 99% of the test population (LC50 and LC99, respectively) and the concentration that inhibits oviposition of the test population by 50% and 99% (OI50 and OI99), to measure mortality and the sterilizing effect, respectively.
RESULTS: Overall, about 200,000 mosquitoes were tested with the new bottle bioassay, and LC50/LC99 or OI50/OI99 values were determined for all insecticides. Variation was seen between laboratories in estimates for some mosquito species-insecticide combinations, while other test results were consistent. The variation was generally greater with transfluthrin and flupyradifurone than with the other compounds tested, especially against Anopheles species. Overall, the mean within-bioassay variability in mortality and oviposition inhibition were health insecticides currently deployed for vector control. The datasets presented in this study have been used recently by the WHO to establish 17 new insecticide discriminating concentrations (DCs) for either Aedes spp. or Anopheles spp. The bottle bioassay and DCs can now be widely used to monitor baseline insecticide susceptibility of wild populations of vectors of malaria and Aedes-borne diseases worldwide.
METHODS: This was a prospective multicenter study conducted in Sindh. Children aged ≤14 years enrolled from June to November 2016 were included. A structured data collection tool was used to gather information with respect to patients' socio-demographic, clinical and microbiological data. Additionally, to collect the information related to socio-economic and education level of caregivers, validated questionnaire was administered to the caregivers. Treatment outcomes were assessed according to the World Health Organization (WHO) guidelines. The relationship of unsuccessful treatment outcome with socio-demographic and clinical attributes of TB patients was analyzed using logistic regression model.
RESULTS: Childhood TB represented 19.3% (508/2634) of all TB cases in selected hospitals. Of these, 268/508 (52.8%) were females and one third of the children were aged ≤2 years (34.3%). In multivariate analysis, pulmonary smear positive TB (PTB+) (AOR = 5.910, 95%CI = 1.64-21.29), those with adverse drug reactions (AOR = 11.601, 95%CI = 4.06-33.12) and those who had known TB contacts (AOR = 3.128, 95%CI = 1.21-8.06) showed statistically significant association with unsuccessful treatment outcomes.
CONCLUSIONS: The high proportion of childhood TB cases (19.3%) demonstrates the continuation of TB transmission in the study setting. Furthermore, an increased focus on PTB+ patients, those with adverse drug reactions and household contact with TB is warranted.
METHODS: This was a nationwide cross-sectional study using two-stage stratified random sampling. In total, 3977 older adults aged ≥60 years were involved in this study. Socio-demography characteristics were obtained using self-administered questionnaire. AO was measured using waist circumference and classified according to the cut-off values of ≥90 cm for men and ≥80 cm for women based on the WHO recommendation. Descriptive and multiple logistic regression analysis using a complex sample design were performed for data analysis.
RESULTS: Our findings showed that 2371 (67.3%) older adults had AO. Older adults who were from urban areas (69.7%), of women (78.4%), married (66.7%), with tertiary education (73.6%) and unemployed (70.9%) had the highest prevalence of AO. Those from urban areas (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] = 1.29), women (aOR = 3.12), unemployed (aOR = 1.14), diagnosed with hypertension (aOR = 1.56) and diabetes mellitus (aOR = 2.08) were also significantly associated with a higher risk of AO.
CONCLUSIONS: This study identified several risk factors that are associated with AO among older adults in Malaysia. Such information is important and needed to improve the healthcare system systematically, enable nutrition screening and appropriate intervention to combat the growing AO in Malaysia. Geriatr Gerontol Int 2020; 20: 68-72.