METHODS: We performed a meta-analysis of PEW prevalence from contemporary studies including more than 50 subjects with kidney disease, published during 2000-2014 and reporting on PEW prevalence by subjective global assessment or malnutrition-inflammation score. Data were reviewed throughout different strata: (1) acute kidney injury (AKI), (2) pediatric chronic kidney disease (CKD), (3) nondialyzed CKD 3-5, (4) maintenance dialysis, and (5) subjects undergoing kidney transplantation (Tx). Sample size, period of publication, reporting quality, methods, dialysis technique, country, geographical region, and gross national income were a priori considered factors influencing between-study variability.
RESULTS: Two studies including 189 AKI patients reported a PEW prevalence of 60% and 82%. Five studies including 1776 patients with CKD stages 3-5 reported PEW prevalence ranging from 11% to 54%. Finally, 90 studies from 34 countries including 16,434 patients on maintenance dialysis were identified. The 25th-75th percentiles range in PEW prevalence among dialysis studies was 28-54%. Large variation in PEW prevalence across studies remained even when accounting for moderators. Mixed-effects meta-regression identified geographical region as the only significant moderator explaining 23% of the observed data heterogeneity. Finally, two studies including 1067 Tx patients reported a PEW prevalence of 28% and 52%, and no studies recruiting pediatric CKD patients were identified.
CONCLUSION: By providing evidence-based ranges of PEW prevalence, we conclude that PEW is a common phenomenon across the spectrum of AKI and CKD. This, together with the well-documented impact of PEW on patient outcomes, justifies the need for increased medical attention.
METHOD: This systematic review used the preferred reporting items of Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA). We conducted a systematic review of randomized controlled and quasi-experimental studies published from the establishment of the database to October 2022. Marital self-disclosure interventions were conducted with both cancer patients and their spouses. Studies published in a language other than English or Chinese, and studies below a quality grade of C were excluded. Data were extracted through a standardized data collection form, and two reviewers independently extracted and evaluated the data. The quality of the included studies was assessed using the Cochrane Handbook of Systematic Reviews of Interventions, and a third reviewer adjudicated in case of disagreement. The data were synthesized by vote counting based on direction of effect according to the Synthesis Without Meta-analysis (SWiM) reporting guideline.
RESULTS: Thirteen studies were included in the review. Based on quality evaluation, three studies were categorized as grade A (good), and ten studies were grade B (moderate). Seven studies reported moderate rates of participant refusal and attrition. The structure and topics of marital self-disclosure varied across different studies. The five studies had various prespecified disclosure topics, such as fear of cancer recurrence, benefit finding, and emotional distress. The overall results suggest that marital self-disclosure interventions can improve physical and psychological health, enhance marital relationships, and increase self-disclosure ability.
CONCLUSION: The limited number of studies, small sample sizes, diverse intervention strategies, and methodological heterogeneity weakened the evidence base for the effectiveness of marital self-disclosure interventions. Therefore, further high-quality randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are recommended to confirm the effectiveness of such interventions. These studies should also evaluate the interventions' long-term impact, analyze optional topics and methods, identify key features, and explore the development of the best intervention program.