Browsing by Author "Shekelle, Paul G."

Now showing 1 - 5 of 5
  • Thumbnail Image
    Are Ayurvedic herbs for diabetes effective?
    Shekelle, Paul G.; Hardy, Mary; Morton, Sally C.; Coulter, Ian; Venuturupalli, Swamy; Favreau, Joya; Hilton, Lara K. (Frontline Medical Communications Inc., 2005-10)
    Objective: To evaluate and synthesize the evidence on the effect of Ayurvedic therapies for diabetes mellitus. Design: Systematic review of trials. Measurements and main results: We found no study that assessed Ayurvedic as a system of care. Botanical therapy was by far the most commonly studied Ayurvedic treatment. Herbs were studied either singly or as formulas. In all, 993 titles in Western computerized databases and 318 titles identified by hand-searching journals in India were examined, yield ing 54 articles reporting the results of 62 studies. The most-studied herbs were G sylvestre, C indica, fenugreek, and Eugenia jambo/ana. A number of herbal formulas were tested, but Ayush- 82 and 0 -400 were most often studied. Thirty-five of the studies included came from the Western literature, 27 from the Indian. Seven were randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and 10 controlled clinical trials (CCTs) or natural experiments. Twenty-two studies went on to further analysis based on a set of criteria. Of these, 10 were RCTs, eCTs, or natural experiments, 12 were case series or cohort studies. There is evidence to suggest that the herbs C indica, holy basil, fenugreek, and G sylvestre, and the herbal formulas Ayush-82 and 0 -400 have a glucose-lowering effect and deserve further study. Evidence of effectiveness of several other herbs is less extensive (C tamala, E jambo/ana, and Momordica charantia). Conclusions: There is heterogeneity in the available literature on Ayurvedic treatment for diabetes. Most studies test herbal therapy. Heterogeneity exists in the herbs and formulas tested (more than 44 different interventions identified) and in the method of their preparation. Despite these limitations, there are sufficient data for several herbs or herbal formulas to warrant further studies.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Economic Evaluation of Quality Improvement Interventions Designed to Prevent Hospital Readmission A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis
    Morton, Sally C.; Nuckols, Teryl K.; Keeler, Emmett B.; Anderson, Laura J.; Doyle, Brian J.; Pevnick, Joshua; Booth, Marika; Shanman, Roberta; Arifkhanova, Aziza; Shekelle, Paul G. (AMA, 2017-05-30)
    IMPORTANCE Quality improvement (QI) interventions can reduce hospital readmission, but little is known about their economic value. OBJECTIVE To systematically review economic evaluations of QI interventions designed to reduce readmissions. DATA SOURCES Databases searched included PubMed, Econlit, the Centre for Reviews & Dissemination Economic Evaluations, New York Academy of Medicine's Grey Literature Report, andWorldcat (January 2004 to July 2016). STUDY SELECTION Dual reviewers selected English-language studies from high-income countries that evaluated organizational or structural changes to reduce hospital readmission, and that reported program and readmission-related costs. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS Dual reviewers extracted intervention characteristics, study design, clinical effectiveness, study quality, economic perspective, and costs.We calculated the risk difference and net costs to the health system in 2015 US dollars.Weighted least-squares regression analyses tested predictors of the risk difference and net costs. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES Main outcomes measures included the risk difference in readmission rates and incremental net cost. This systematic review and data analysis is reported in accordance with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. RESULTS Of 5205 articles, 50 unique studies were eligible, including 25 studies in populations limited to heart failure (HF) that included 5768 patients, 21 in general populations that included 10 445 patients, and 4 in unique populations. Fifteen studies lasted up to 30 days while most others lasted 6 to 24 months. Based on regression analyses, readmissions declined by an average of 12.1% among patients with HF (95%CI, 8.3%-15.9%; P < .001; based on 22 studies with complete data) and by 6.3%among general populations (95%CI, 4.0%-8.7%; P < .001; 18 studies). The mean net savings to the health system per patient was $972 among patients with HF (95%CI, −$642 to $2586; P = .23; 24 studies), and the mean net loss was $169 among general populations (95%CI, −$2610 to $2949; P = .90; 21 studies), reflecting nonsignificant differences. Among general populations, interventions that engaged patients and caregivers were associated with greater net savings ($1714 vs −$6568; P = .006). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE Multicomponent QI interventions can be effective at reducing readmissions relative to the status quo, but net costs vary. Interventions that engage general populations of patients and their caregivers may offer greater value to the health system, but the implications for patients and caregivers are unknown.
  • Thumbnail Image
    The effectiveness of computerized order entry at reducing preventable adverse drug events and medication errors in hospital settings: a systematic review and meta-analysis reducing preventable adverse drug events and medication errors in hospital settings: a systematic review and meta-analysis
    Nuckols, Teryl K.; Smith-Spangler, Crystal; Morton, Sally C.; Asch, Steven M.; Patel, Vaspaan M.; Anderson, Laura J.; Deichsel, Emily L.; Shekelle, Paul G. (BMC, 2014)
    Background: The Health Information Technology for Economic and Clinical Health (HITECH) Act subsidizes implementation by hospitals of electronic health records with computerized provider order entry (CPOE), which may reduce patient injuries caused by medication errors (preventable adverse drug events, pADEs). Effects on pADEs have not been rigorously quantified, and effects on medication errors have been variable. The objectives of this analysis were to assess the effectiveness of CPOE at reducing pADEs in hospital-related settings, and examine reasons for heterogeneous effects on medication errors. Methods: Articles were identified using MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, Econlit, web-based databases, and bibliographies of previous systematic reviews (September 2013). Eligible studies compared CPOE with paper-order entry in acute care hospitals, and examined diverse pADEs or medication errors. Studies on children or with limited event-detection methods were excluded. Two investigators extracted data on events and factors potentially associated with effectiveness. We used random effects models to pool data. Results: Sixteen studies addressing medication errors met pooling criteria; six also addressed pADEs. Thirteen studies used pre-post designs. Compared with paper-order entry, CPOE was associated with half as many pADEs (pooled risk ratio (RR) = 0.47, 95% CI 0.31 to 0.71) and medication errors (RR = 0.46, 95% CI 0.35 to 0.60). Regarding reasons for heterogeneous effects on medication errors, five intervention factors and two contextual factors were sufficiently reported to support subgroup analyses or meta-regression. Differences between commercial versus homegrown systems, presence and sophistication of clinical decision support, hospital-wide versus limited implementation, and US versus non-US studies were not significant, nor was timing of publication. Higher baseline rates of medication errors predicted greater reductions (P < 0.001). Other context and implementation variables were seldom reported. Conclusions: In hospital-related settings, implementing CPOE is associated with a greater than 50% decline in pADEs, although the studies used weak designs. Decreases in medication errors are similar and robust to variations in important aspects of intervention design and context. This suggests that CPOE implementation, as subsidized under the HITECH Act, may benefit public health. More detailed reporting of the context and process of implementation could shed light on factors associated with greater effectiveness.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Efficacy and Safety of Ephedra and Ephedrine for Weight Loss and Athletic Performance: A Meta-analysis
    Shekelle, Paul G.; Hardy, Mary; Morton, Sally C.; Maglione, Margaret; Mojica, Walter A.; Suttorp, Marika J.; Rhodes, Shannon L.; Jungvig, Lara; Gagné, James (AMA, 2003-03-26)
    CONTEXT: Ephedra and ephedrine sometimes are used for weight loss or enhanced athletic performance, but the efficacy and safety of these compounds are uncertain. OBJECTIVE: To assess the efficacy and safety of ephedra and ephedrine used for weight loss and enhanced athletic performance. DATA SOURCES: We searched 9 databases using the terms ephedra, ephedrine, adverse effect, side effect, efficacy, effective, and toxic. We included unpublished trials and non-English-language documents. Adverse events reported to the US Food and Drug Administration MedWatch program were assessed. STUDY SELECTION: Eligible studies were controlled trials of ephedra or ephedrine used for weight loss or athletic performance and case reports of adverse events associated with such use. Eligible studies for weight loss were human studies with at least 8 weeks of follow-up; and for athletic performance, those having no minimum follow-up. Eligible case reports documented that ephedra or ephedrine was consumed within 24 hours prior to an adverse event or that ephedrine or an associated product was found in blood or urine, and that other potential causes had been excluded. Of the 530 articles screened, 52 controlled trials and 65 case reports were included in the adverse events analysis. Of more than 18 000 other case reports screened, 284 underwent detailed review. DATA EXTRACTION: Two reviewers independently identified trials of efficacy and safety of ephedra and ephedrine on weight loss or athletic performance; disagreements were resolved by consensus. Case reports were reviewed with explicit and implicit methods. DATA SYNTHESIS: No weight loss trials assessed duration of treatment greater than 6 months. Pooled results for trials comparing placebo with ephedrine (n = 5), ephedrine and caffeine (n = 12), ephedra (n = 1), and ephedra and herbs containing caffeine (n = 4) yielded estimates of weight loss (more than placebo) of 0.6 (95% confidence interval, 0.2-1.0), 1.0 (0.7-1.3), 0.8 (0.4-1.2), and 1.0 (0.6-1.3) kg/mo, respectively. Sensitivity analyses did not substantially alter the latter 3 results. No trials of ephedra and athletic performance were found; 7 trials of ephedrine were too heterogeneous to synthesize. Safety data from 50 trials yielded estimates of 2.2- to 3.6-fold increases in odds of psychiatric, autonomic, or gastrointestinal symptoms, and heart palpitations. Data are insufficient to draw conclusions about adverse events occurring at a rate less than 1.0 per thousand. The majority of case reports are insufficiently documented to allow meaningful assessment. CONCLUSIONS: Ephedrine and ephedra promote modest short-term weight loss (approximately 0.9 kg/mo more than placebo) in clinical trials. There are no data regarding long-term weight loss, and evidence to support use of ephedra for athletic performance is insufficient. Use of ephedra or ephedrine and caffeine is associated with increased risk of psychiatric, autonomic, or gastrointestinal symptoms, and heart palpitations.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Interventions for the prevention of falls in older adults: systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised clinical trials
    Chang, John T.; Morton, Sally C.; Rubenstein, Laurence Z.; Mojica, Walter A.; Maglione, Margaret; Suttorp, Marika J.; Roth, Elizabeth A.; Shekelle, Paul G. (BMJ Publishing Group Ltd, 2004-03-20)
    Objective: To assess the relative effectiveness of interventions to prevent falls in older adults to either a usual care group or control group. Design: Systematic review and meta-analyses. Data sources Medline, HealthSTAR, Embase, the Cochrane Library, other health related databases, and the reference lists from review articles and systematic reviews. Data extraction: Components of falls intervention: multifactorial falls risk assessment with management programme, exercise, environmental modifications, or education. Results: 40 trials were identified. A random effects analysis combining trials with risk ratio data showed a reduction in the risk of falling (risk ratio 0.88, 95% confidence interval 0.82 to 0.95), whereas combining trials with incidence rate data showed a reduction in the monthly rate of falling (incidence rate ratio 0.80, 0.72 to 0.88). The effect of individual components was assessed by meta-regression. A multifactorial falls risk assessment and management programme was the most effective component on risk of falling (0.82, 0.72 to 0.94, number needed to treat 11) and monthly fall rate (0.63, 0.49 to 0.83; 11.8 fewer falls in treatment group per 100 patients per month). Exercise interventions also had a beneficial effect on the risk of falling (0.86, 0.75 to 0.99, number needed to treat 16) and monthly fall rate (0.86, 0.73 to 1.01; 2.7). Conclusions: Interventions to prevent falls in older adults are effective in reducing both the risk of falling and the monthly rate of falling. The most effective intervention was a multifactorial falls risk assessment and management programme. Exercise programmes were also effective in reducing the risk of falling.