METHODS: Articles were retrieved from EMBASE, Medline and Cochrane Library from inception to January 2016. Treatment outcomes were analysed based on responder, seizure-free, withdrawal and adverse event rates. Quality of each study was also assessed.
RESULTS: Twelve articles fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Heterogeneity and quality of the included studies were considered acceptable. Overall, newer AEDs as adjunct therapy in children with inadequate control of focal seizure showed a trend of better seizure outcomes. The pooled ORs for responder, seizure-free and withdrawal rates were 2.15 (95%CI:1.72, 2.69), 1.99 (95%CI:0.72, 5.48) and 0.69 (95%CI:1.13, 2.39) respectively. Adverse events of newer AEDs were comparatively higher than placebo (OR:1.64, 95%CI:1.13, 2.39).
CONCLUSION: In our updated review, newer AEDs as adjunct therapy for focal epilepsy in children have trends of better effectiveness compared to placebo. Newer AEDs are associated with statistically more children with >50% seizure reduction, and a trend of better seizure freedom. Their tolerability would also be considered acceptable with the observed low withdrawal rate. However, the relative lack of well-conducted RCTs evaluating their effectiveness against other active AED treatment in children would not facilitate evidence-based practice. This highlights the knowledge gap and the need for more well-conducted RCTs against active treatments to ascertain the long term effectiveness and the role of newer AEDs in managing epilepsy in children.
METHODS: A Markov model of a Malaysian hypothetical cohort aged ≥30 years (N = 14,589,900) was used to estimate the total and per-member-per-month (PMPM) costs of RAS uptake. This involved an incidence and prevalence rate of 9.0% and 10.53% of patients with diabetes and hypertension respectively. Transition probabilities of health stages and costs were adapted from published data.
RESULTS: An increasing uptake of RAS drugs would incur a projected total treatment cost ranged from MYR 4.89 billion (PMPM of MYR 27.95) at Year 1 to MYR 16.26 billion (PMPM of MYR 92.89) at Year 5. This would represent a range of incremental costs between PMPM of MYR 0.20 at Year 1 and PMPM of MYR 1.62 at Year 5. Over the same period, the care costs showed a downward trend but drug acquisition costs were increasing. Sensitivity analyses showed the model was minimally affected by the changes in the input parameters.
CONCLUSION: Mild impact to the overall healthcare budget has been reported with an increased utilization of RAS. The long-term positive health consequences of RAS treatment would reduce the cost of care in preventing deterioration of kidney function, thus offsetting the rising costs of purchasing RAS drugs. Optimizing and increasing use of RAS drugs would be considered an affordable and rational strategy to reduce the overall healthcare costs in Malaysia.
METHODS: This was a prospective cohort study conducted in the neonatal intensive care units of two public hospitals in Malaysia. Neonates with a gestational age greater than 34 weeks who were started on empiric antibiotics within 72 h of life were screened. The data were then stratified according to de-escalation and non-de-escalation practices, where de-escalation practice was defined as narrowing down or discontinuation of empiric antibiotic within 72 h of treatment.
RESULTS: A total of 1045 neonates were screened, and 429 were included. The neonates were then divided based on de-escalation (n = 207) and non-de-escalation (n = 222) practices. Neonates under non-de-escalation practices showed significantly longer durations of antibiotic use compared to those under de-escalation practices (p
METHODS: MEDLINE and Embase databases were searched from inception up to September 2019 to identify all studies that compared the predictive performance of cystatin C- and/or creatinine-based eGFR in predicting the clearance of vancomycin. The prediction errors (PEs) (the value of eGFR equations minus vancomycin clearance) were quantified for each equation and were pooled using a random-effects model. The root mean squared errors were also quantified to provide a metric for imprecision.
RESULTS: This meta-analysis included evaluations of seven different cystatin C- and creatinine-based eGFR equations in total from 26 studies and 1,234 patients. The mean PE (MPE) for cystatin C-based eGFR was 4.378 mL min-1 (95% confidence interval [CI], -29.425, 38.181), while the creatinine-based eGFR provided an MPE of 27.617 mL min-1 (95% CI, 8.675, 46.560) in predicting clearance of vancomycin. This indicates the presence of unbiased results in vancomycin clearance prediction by the cystatin C-based eGFR equations. Meanwhile, creatinine-based eGFR equations demonstrated a statistically significant positive bias in vancomycin clearance prediction.
CONCLUSION: Cystatin C-based eGFR equations are better than creatinine-based eGFR equations in predicting the clearance of vancomycin. This suggests that utilising cystatin C-based eGFR equations could result in better accuracy and precision to predict vancomycin pharmacokinetic parameters.
METHODS: Study subjects include patients with various levels of renal function recruited from the nephrology clinic and wards of a tertiary hospital. The blood samples collected were analyzed for serum cystatin C and creatinine levels by particle-enhanced turbidimetric immunoassay and kinetic alkaline picrate method, respectively. DNA was extracted using a commercially available kit. -Polymerase chain reaction results were confirmed by direct DNA Sanger sequencing.
RESULTS: The genotype percentage (G/G = 73%, G/A = 24.1%, and A/A = 2.9%) adhere to the Hardy-Weinberg equilibrium. The dominant allele found in our population was CST3 73G allele (85%). The regression lines' slope of serum cystatin C against creatinine and cystatin C-based eGFR against creatinine-based eGFR, between G and A allele groups, showed a statistically significant difference (z-score = 3.457, p < 0.001 and z-score = 2.158, p = 0.015, respectively). Patients with A allele had a lower serum cystatin C level when the values were extrapolated at a fixed serum creatinine value, suggesting the influence of genetic factor.
CONCLUSION: Presence of CST3 gene G73A polymorphism affects serum cystatin C levels.
SETTING: A single centre study, Malaysia.
PARTICIPANTS: Adults aged between 18 and 60 years with mTBI as a result of road traffic accident, with no previous history of head trauma, minimum of 9 years education and abnormal cognition at 3 months will be included. The exclusion criteria include pre-existing chronic illness or neurological/psychiatric condition, long-term medication that affects cognitive/psychological status, clinical evidence of substance intoxication at the time of injury and major polytrauma. Based on multiple estimated calculations, the minimum intended sample size is 50 participants (Cohen's d effect size=0.35; alpha level of 0.05; 85% power to detect statistical significance; 40% attrition rate).
INTERVENTIONS: Intervention group will receive individualised structured cognitive rehabilitation. Control group will receive the best patient-centred care for attention disorders. Therapy frequency for both groups will be 1 hour per week for 12 weeks.
OUTCOME MEASURES: Primary: Neuropsychological Assessment Battery-Screening Module (S-NAB) scores. Secondary: Diffusion Tensor Imaging (DTI) parameters and Goal Attainment Scaling score (GAS).
RESULTS: Results will include descriptive statistics of population demographics, CogniPlus cognitive program and metacognitive strategies. The effect of intervention will be the effect size of S-NAB scores and mean GAS T scores. DTI parameters will be compared between groups via repeated measure analysis. Correlation analysis of outcome measures will be calculated using Pearson's correlation coefficient.
CONCLUSION: This is a complex clinical intervention with multiple outcome measures to provide a comprehensive evidence-based treatment model.
ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The study protocol was approved by the Medical Research Ethics Committee UMMC (MREC ID NO: 2016928-4293). The findings of the trial will be disseminated through peer-reviewed journals and scientific conferences.
TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT03237676.