National Trauma Research Institute

The deleterious consequences of traumatic brain injury (TBI) impair capacity to return to many avenues of pre-morbid life. However, there has been limited longitudinal research examining outcome beyond five years post-injury. The aim of this study was to examine aspects of function, previously shown to be affected following TBI, over a span of 10 years. One hundred and forty one patients with TBI were assessed at two, five, and 10 years post-injury using the Structured Outcome Questionnaire. Fatigue and balance problems were the most common neurological symptoms, with reported rates decreasing only slightly during the 10-year period. Mobility outcomes were good in more than 75% of patients, with few participants requiring aids for mobility. Changes in cognitive, communication, behavioral, and emotional functions were reported by approximately 60% of the sample at all time points. Levels of independence in activities of daily living were high during the 10-year period, and as many as 70% of subjects returned to driving. Nevertheless, approximately 40% of patients required more support than before their injury. Only half the sample returned to previous leisure activities and fewer than half were employed at each assessment time post-injury. Although marital status remained stable over time, approximately 30% of participants reported difficulties in personal relationships. Older age at injury did not substantially alter the pattern of changes over time, except in employment. Overall, problems that were evident at two years post-injury persisted until 10 years post-injury. The importance of these findings is discussed with reference to rehabilitation programs.

The current difficulties in keeping systematic reviews up to date leads to considerable inaccuracy, hampering the translation of knowledge into action. Incremental advances in conventional review updating are unlikely to lead to substantial improvements in review currency. A new approach is needed. We propose living systematic review as a contribution to evidence synthesis that combines currency with rigour to enhance the accuracy and utility of health evidence. Living systematic reviews are high quality, up-to-date online summaries of health research, updated as new research becomes available, and enabled by improved production efficiency and adherence to the norms of scholarly communication. Together with innovations in primary research reporting and the creation and use of evidence in health systems, living systematic review contributes to an emerging evidence ecosystem.

Chemokines and their receptors have crucial roles in the trafficking of leukocytes, and are of particular interest in the context of the unique immune responses elicited in the central nervous system (CNS). The chemokine system CC ligand 2 (CCL2) with its receptor CC receptor 2 (CCR2), as well as the receptor CXCR2 and its multiple ligands CXCL1, CXCL2 and CXCL8, have been implicated in a wide range of neuropathologies, including trauma, ischemic injury and multiple sclerosis. This review aims to overview the current understanding of chemokines as mediators of leukocyte migration into the CNS under neuroinflammatory conditions. We will specifically focus on the involvement of two chemokine networks, namely CCL2/CCR2 and CXCL8/CXCR2, in promoting macrophage and neutrophil infiltration, respectively, into the lesioned parenchyma after focal traumatic brain injury. The constitutive brain expression of these chemokines and their receptors, including their recently identified roles in the modulation of neuroprotection, neurogenesis, and neurotransmission, will be discussed. In conclusion, the value of evidence obtained from the use of Ccl2- and Cxcr2-deficient mice will be reported, in the context of potential therapeutics inhibiting chemokine activity which are currently in clinical trial for various inflammatory diseases.

BACKGROUND: Surgery is a foundational component of health-care systems. However, previous efforts to integrate surgical services into global health initiatives do not reflect the scope of surgical need and many health systems do not provide essential interventions. We estimate the minimum global volume of surgical need to address prevalent diseases in 21 epidemiological regions from the Global Burden of Disease Study 2010 (GBD). METHODS: Prevalence data were obtained from GBD 2010 and organised into 119 disease states according to the WHO's Global Health Estimate (GHE). These data, representing 187 countries, were then apportioned into the 21 GBD epidemiological regions. Using previously defined values for the incident need for surgery for each of the 119 GHE disease states, we calculate minimum global need for surgery based on the prevalence of each condition in each region. FINDINGS: We estimate that at least 321·5 million surgical procedures would be needed to address the burden of disease for a global population of 6·9 billion in 2010. Minimum rates of surgical need vary across regions, ranging from 3383 operations per 100 000 in central Latin America to 6495 operations per 100 000 in western sub-Saharan Africa. Global surgical need also varied across subcategories of disease, ranging from 131 412 procedures for nutritional deficiencies to 45·8 million procedures for unintentional injuries. INTERPRETATION: The estimated need for surgical procedures worldwide is large and addresses a broad spectrum of disease states. Surgical need varies between regions of the world according to disease prevalence and many countries do not meet the basic needs of their populations. These estimates could be useful for policy makers, funders, and ministries of health as they consider how to incorporate surgical capacity into health systems. FUNDING: US National Institutes of Health.

Previous investigations of long-term outcome following traumatic brain injury (TBI) have yielded mixed results regarding the predictive power of injury severity and demographic factors. Furthermore, there has been limited investigation of the association between long-term outcome and current cognitive functioning and psychiatric state. The aim of this study was to investigate the association of injury severity, demographic factors, and concurrent cognitive and psychiatric functioning with functional outcome 10 years following mild to severe TBI. Outcome was rated using the Extended Glasgow Outcome Scale (GOSE) for 60 participants, who also completed neuropsychological measures of attention, speed of processing, memory and executive function and the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS). Outcome on the GOSE ranged from upper good recovery (32%) to lower severe disability (2%). Participants showing poorer outcome on the GOSE had significantly longer posttraumatic amnesia duration; less education; performed more poorly on cognitive measures of information processing speed, attention, memory, and executive function; and showed higher levels of anxiety on the HADS.

Cerebral inflammation involves molecular cascades contributing to progressive damage after traumatic brain injury (TBI). The chemokine CC ligand-2 (CCL2) (formerly monocyte chemoattractant protein-1, MCP-1) is implicated in macrophage recruitment into damaged parenchyma after TBI. This study analyzed the presence of CCL2 in human TBI, and further investigated the role of CCL2 in physiological and cellular mechanisms of secondary brain damage after TBI. Sustained elevation of CCL2 was detected in the cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) of severe TBI patients for 10 days after trauma, and in cortical homogenates of C57Bl/6 mice, peaking at 4 to 12 h after closed head injury (CHI). Neurological outcome, lesion volume, macrophage/microglia infiltration, astrogliosis, and the cerebral cytokine network were thus examined in CCL2-deficient (-/-) mice subjected to CHI. We found that CCL2-/- mice showed altered production of multiple cytokines acutely (2 to 24 h); however, this did not affect lesion size or cell death within the first week after CHI. In contrast, by 2 and 4 weeks, a delayed reduction in lesion volume, macrophage accumulation, and astrogliosis were observed in the injured cortex and ipsilateral thalamus of CCL2-/- mice, corresponding to improved functional recovery as compared with wild-type mice after CHI. Our findings confirm the significant role of CCL2 in mediating post-traumatic secondary brain damage.

BACKGROUND: Evidence mapping describes the quantity, design and characteristics of research in broad topic areas, in contrast to systematic reviews, which usually address narrowly-focused research questions. The breadth of evidence mapping helps to identify evidence gaps, and may guide future research efforts. The Global Evidence Mapping (GEM) Initiative was established in 2007 to create evidence maps providing an overview of existing research in Traumatic Brain Injury (TBI) and Spinal Cord Injury (SCI). METHODS: The GEM evidence mapping method involved three core tasks:1. Setting the boundaries and context of the map: Definitions for the fields of TBI and SCI were clarified, the prehospital, acute inhospital and rehabilitation phases of care were delineated and relevant stakeholders (patients, carers, clinicians, researchers and policymakers) who could contribute to the mapping were identified. Researchable clinical questions were developed through consultation with key stakeholders and a broad literature search. 2. Searching for and selection of relevant studies: Evidence search and selection involved development of specific search strategies, development of inclusion and exclusion criteria, searching of relevant databases and independent screening and selection by two researchers. 3. Reporting on yield and study characteristics: Data extraction was performed at two levels - 'interventions and study design' and 'detailed study characteristics'. The evidence map and commentary reflected the depth of data extraction. RESULTS: One hundred and twenty-nine researchable clinical questions in TBI and SCI were identified. These questions were then prioritised into high (n = 60) and low (n = 69) importance by the stakeholders involved in question development. Since 2007, 58 263 abstracts have been screened, 3 731 full text articles have been reviewed and 1 644 relevant neurotrauma publications have been mapped, covering fifty-three high priority questions. CONCLUSIONS: GEM Initiative evidence maps have a broad range of potential end-users including funding agencies, researchers and clinicians. Evidence mapping is at least as resource-intensive as systematic reviewing. The GEM Initiative has made advancements in evidence mapping, most notably in the area of question development and prioritisation. Evidence mapping complements other review methods for describing existing research, informing future research efforts, and addressing evidence gaps.

BACKGROUND: In mental health services, the past several decades has seen a slow but steady trend towards employment of past or present consumers of the service to work alongside mental health professionals in providing services. However the effects of this employment on clients (service recipients) and services has remained unclear.We conducted a systematic review of randomised trials assessing the effects of employing consumers of mental health services as providers of statutory mental health services to clients. In this review this role is called 'consumer-provider' and the term 'statutory mental health services' refers to public services, those required by statute or law, or public services involving statutory duties. The consumer-provider's role can encompass peer support, coaching, advocacy, case management or outreach, crisis worker or assertive community treatment worker, or providing social support programmes. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of employing current or past adult consumers of mental health services as providers of statutory mental health services. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL, The Cochrane Library 2012, Issue 3), MEDLINE (OvidSP) (1950 to March 2012), EMBASE (OvidSP) (1988 to March 2012), PsycINFO (OvidSP) (1806 to March 2012), CINAHL (EBSCOhost) (1981 to March 2009), Current Contents (OvidSP) (1993 to March 2012), and reference lists of relevant articles. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials of current or past consumers of mental health services employed as providers ('consumer-providers') in statutory mental health services, comparing either: 1) consumers versus professionals employed to do the same role within a mental health service, or 2) mental health services with and without consumer-providers as an adjunct to the service. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently selected studies and extracted data. We contacted trialists for additional information. We conducted analyses using a random-effects model, pooling studies that measured the same outcome to provide a summary estimate of the effect across studies. We describe findings for each outcome in the text of the review with considerations of the potential impact of bias and the clinical importance of results, with input from a clinical expert. MAIN RESULTS: We included 11 randomised controlled trials involving 2796 people. The quality of these studies was moderate to low, with most of the studies at unclear risk of bias in terms of random sequence generation and allocation concealment, and high risk of bias for blinded outcome assessment and selective outcome reporting.Five trials involving 581 people compared consumer-providers to professionals in similar roles within mental health services (case management roles (4 trials), facilitating group therapy (1 trial)). There were no significant differences in client quality of life (mean difference (MD) -0.30, 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.80 to 0.20); depression (data not pooled), general mental health symptoms (standardised mean difference (SMD) -0.24, 95% CI -0.52 to 0.05); client satisfaction with treatment (SMD -0.22, 95% CI -0.69 to 0.25), client or professional ratings of client-manager relationship; use of mental health services, hospital admissions and length of stay; or attrition (risk ratio 0.80, 95% CI 0.58 to 1.09) between mental health teams involving consumer-providers or professional staff in similar roles.There was a small reduction in crisis and emergency service use for clients receiving care involving consumer-providers (SMD -0.34 (95%CI -0.60 to -0.07). Past or present consumers who provided mental health services did so differently than professionals; they spent more time face-to-face with clients, and less time in the office, on the telephone, with clients' friends and family, or at provider agencies.Six trials involving 2215 people compared mental health services with or without the addition of consumer-providers. There were no significant differences in psychosocial outcomes (quality of life, empowerment, function, social relations), client satisfaction with service provision (SMD 0.76, 95% CI -0.59 to 2.10) and with staff (SMD 0.18, 95% CI -0.43 to 0.79), attendance rates (SMD 0.52 (95% CI -0.07 to 1.11), hospital admissions and length of stay, or attrition (risk ratio 1.29, 95% CI 0.72 to 2.31) between groups with consumer-providers as an adjunct to professional-led care and those receiving usual care from health professionals alone. One study found a small difference favouring the intervention group for both client and staff ratings of clients' needs having been met, although detection bias may have affected the latter. None of the six studies in this comparison reported client mental health outcomes.No studies in either comparison group reported data on adverse outcomes for clients, or the financial costs of service provision. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Involving consumer-providers in mental health teams results in psychosocial, mental health symptom and service use outcomes for clients that were no better or worse than those achieved by professionals employed in similar roles, particularly for case management services.There is low quality evidence that involving consumer-providers in mental health teams results in a small reduction in clients' use of crisis or emergency services. The nature of the consumer-providers' involvement differs compared to professionals, as do the resources required to support their involvement. The overall quality of the evidence is moderate to low. There is no evidence of harm associated with involving consumer-providers in mental health teams.Future randomised controlled trials of consumer-providers in mental health services should minimise bias through the use of adequate randomisation and concealment of allocation, blinding of outcome assessment where possible, the comprehensive reporting of outcome data, and the avoidance of contamination between treatment groups. Researchers should adhere to SPIRIT and CONSORT reporting standards for clinical trials.Future trials should further evaluate standardised measures of clients' mental health, adverse outcomes for clients, the potential benefits and harms to the consumer-providers themselves (including need to return to treatment), and the financial costs of the intervention. They should utilise consistent, validated measurement tools and include a clear description of the consumer-provider role (eg specific tasks, responsibilities and expected deliverables of the role) and relevant training for the role so that it can be readily implemented. The weight of evidence being strongly based in the United States, future research should be located in diverse settings including in low- and middle-income countries.

The question as to whether mild traumatic brain injury (mTBI) results in persisting sequelae over and above those experienced by individuals sustaining general trauma remains controversial. This prospective study aimed to document outcomes 1 week and 3 months post-injury following mTBI assessed in the emergency department (ED) of a major adult trauma center. One hundred and twenty-three patients presenting with uncomplicated mTBI and 100 matched trauma controls completed measures of post-concussive symptoms and cognitive performance (Immediate Post-Concussion Assessment and Cognitive Testing battery; ImPACT) and pre-injury health-related quality of life (SF-36) in the ED. These measures together with measures of psychiatric status (the Mini-International Neuropsychiatric Interview [MINI]) pre- and post-injury, the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale, Visual Analogue Scale for Pain, Functional Assessment Questionnaire, and PTSD Checklist-Specific, were re-administered at follow-up. Participants with mTBI showed significantly more severe post-concussive symptoms in the ED and at 1 week post-injury. They performed more poorly than controls on the Visual Memory subtest of the ImPACT at 1 week and 3 months post-injury. Both the mTBI and control groups recovered well physically, and most were employed 3 months post-injury. There were no significant group differences in psychiatric function. However, the group with mild TBI was more likely to report ongoing memory and concentration problems in daily activities. Further investigation of factors associated with these ongoing problems is warranted.

BACKGROUND: Adhesive capsulitis (also termed frozen shoulder) is commonly treated by manual therapy and exercise, usually delivered together as components of a physical therapy intervention. This review is one of a series of reviews that form an update of the Cochrane review, 'Physiotherapy interventions for shoulder pain.' OBJECTIVES: To synthesise available evidence regarding the benefits and harms of manual therapy and exercise, alone or in combination, for the treatment of patients with adhesive capsulitis. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL Plus, ClinicalTrials.gov and the WHO ICTRP clinical trials registries up to May 2013, unrestricted by language, and reviewed the reference lists of review articles and retrieved trials, to identify potentially relevant trials. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-randomised trials, including adults with adhesive capsulitis, and comparing any manual therapy or exercise intervention versus placebo, no intervention, a different type of manual therapy or exercise or any other intervention. Interventions included mobilisation, manipulation and supervised or home exercise, delivered alone or in combination. Trials investigating the primary or adjunct effect of a combination of manual therapy and exercise were the main comparisons of interest. Main outcomes of interest were participant-reported pain relief of 30% or greater, overall pain (mean or mean change), function, global assessment of treatment success, active shoulder abduction, quality of life and the number of participants experiencing adverse events. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently selected trials for inclusion, extracted the data, performed a risk of bias assessment and assessed the quality of the body of evidence for the main outcomes using the GRADE approach. MAIN RESULTS: We included 32 trials (1836 participants). No trial compared a combination of manual therapy and exercise versus placebo or no intervention. Seven trials compared a combination of manual therapy and exercise versus other interventions but were clinically heterogeneous, so opportunities for meta-analysis were limited. The overall impression gained from these trials is that the few outcome differences between interventions that were clinically important were detected only up to seven weeks. Evidence of moderate quality shows that a combination of manual therapy and exercise for six weeks probably results in less improvement at seven weeks but a similar number of adverse events compared with glucocorticoid injection. The mean change in pain with glucocorticoid injection was 58 points on a 100-point scale, and 32 points with manual therapy and exercise (mean difference (MD) 26 points, 95% confidence interval (CI) 15 points to 37 points; one RCT, 107 participants), for an absolute difference of 26% (15% to 37%). Mean change in function with glucocorticoid injection was 39 points on a 100-point scale, and 14 points with manual therapy and exercise (MD 25 points, 95% CI 35 points to 15 points; one RCT, 107 participants), for an absolute difference of 25% (15% to 35%). Forty-six per cent (26/56) of participants reported treatment success with manual therapy and exercise compared with 77% (40/52) of participants receiving glucocorticoid injection (risk ratio (RR) 0.6, 95% CI 0.44 to 0.83; one RCT, 108 participants), with an absolute risk difference of 30% (13% to 48%). The number reporting adverse events did not differ between groups: 56% (32/57) reported events with manual therapy and exercise, and 53% (30/57) with glucocorticoid injection (RR 1.07, 95% CI 0.76 to 1.49; one RCT, 114 participants), with an absolute risk difference of 4% (-15% to 22%). Group differences in improvement in overall pain and function at six months and 12 months were not clinically important.We are uncertain of the effect of other combinations of manual therapy and exercise, as most evidence is of low quality. Meta-analysis of two trials (86 participants) suggested no clinically important differences between a combination of manual therapy, exercise, and electrotherapy for four weeks and placebo injection compared with glucocorticoid injection alone or placebo injection alone in terms of overall pain, function, active range of motion and quality of life at six weeks, six months and 12 months (though the 95% CI suggested function may be better with glucocorticoid injection at six weeks). The same two trials found that adding a combination of manual therapy, exercise and electrotherapy for four weeks to glucocorticoid injection did not confer clinically important benefits over glucocorticoid injection alone at each time point. Based on one high quality trial (148 participants), following arthrographic joint distension with glucocorticoid and saline, a combination of manual therapy and supervised exercise for six weeks conferred similar effects to those of sham ultrasound in terms of overall pain, function and quality of life at six weeks and at six months, but provided greater patient-reported treatment success and active shoulder abduction at six weeks. One trial (119 participants) found that a combination of manual therapy, exercise, electrotherapy and oral non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID) for three weeks did not confer clinically important benefits over oral NSAID alone in terms of function and patient-reported treatment success at three weeks.On the basis of 25 clinically heterogeneous trials, we are uncertain of the effect of manual therapy or exercise when not delivered together, or one type of manual therapy or exercise versus another, as most reported differences between groups were not clinically or statistically significant, and the evidence is mostly of low quality. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: The best available data show that a combination of manual therapy and exercise may not be as effective as glucocorticoid injection in the short-term. It is unclear whether a combination of manual therapy, exercise and electrotherapy is an effective adjunct to glucocorticoid injection or oral NSAID. Following arthrographic joint distension with glucocorticoid and saline, manual therapy and exercise may confer effects similar to those of sham ultrasound in terms of overall pain, function and quality of life, but may provide greater patient-reported treatment success and active range of motion. High-quality RCTs are needed to establish the benefits and harms of manual therapy and exercise interventions that reflect actual practice, compared with placebo, no intervention and active interventions with evidence of benefit (e.g. glucocorticoid injection).

The entry of therapeutic compounds into the brain and spinal cord is normally restricted by barrier mechanisms in cerebral blood vessels (blood-brain barrier) and choroid plexuses (blood-CSF barrier). In the injured brain, ruptured cerebral blood vessels circumvent these barrier mechanisms by allowing blood contents to escape directly into the brain parenchyma. This process may contribute to the secondary damage that follows the initial primary injury. However, this localized compromise of barrier function in the injured brain may also provide a 'window of opportunity' through which drugs that do not normally cross the blood-brain barriers are able to do so. This paper describes a systematic study of barrier permeability in a mouse model of traumatic brain injury using both small and large inert molecules that can be visualized or quantified. The results show that soon after trauma, both large and small molecules are able to enter the brain in and around the injury site. Barrier restriction to large (protein-sized) molecules is restored by 4-5 h after injury. In contrast, smaller molecules (286-10,000 Da) are still able to enter the brain as long as 4 days postinjury. Thus the period of potential secondary damage from barrier disruption and the period during which therapeutic compounds have direct access to the injured brain may be longer than previously thought.

BACKGROUND: Caesarean section rates are steadily increasing globally. The factors contributing to these observed increases are complex. Non-clinical interventions, those applied independent of patient care in a clinical encounter, may have a role in reducing unnecessary caesarean sections. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the effectiveness and safety of non-clinical interventions for reducing unnecessary caesarean sections. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the following electronic databases: the Cochrane Effective Practice and Organisation of Care (EPOC) Group Specialised Register (29 March 2010), the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group Specialised Register (29 March 2010), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (The Cochrane Library 2010, Issue 2); MEDLINE (1950 to March 2010); EMBASE (1947 to March 2010) and CINAHL (1982 to March 2010). SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs), quasi-experimental studies, controlled clinical trials (CCTs), controlled before and after studies (CBAs) with at least two intervention and control sites, and interrupted time series analyses (ITS) where the intervention time was clearly defined and there were at least three data points before and three after the intervention. Studies evaluated non-clinical interventions to reduce unnecessary caesarean section rates. Participants included pregnant women and their families, healthcare providers who work with expectant mothers, communities and advocacy groups. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Three review authors independently assessed the quality and abstracted data of all eligible studies using a standardised data extraction form, modified from the Cochrane EPOC checklists. We contacted study authors for additional information. MAIN RESULTS: We included 16 studies in this review.Six studies specifically targeted pregnant women. Two RCTs were shown to be effective in reducing caesarean section rates: a nurse-led relaxation training programme for women with a fear or anxiety of childbirth and birth preparation sessions. However, both RCTs were small in size and targeted younger mothers with their first pregnancies. There is insufficient evidence that prenatal education and support programmes, computer patient decision-aids, decision-aid booklets and intensive group therapy are effective.Ten studies targeted health professionals. Three of these studies were effective in reducing caesarean section rates. A cluster-RCT of guideline implementation with mandatory second opinion resulted in a small, statistically significant reduction in total caesarean section rates (adjusted risk difference (RD) -1.9; 95% confidence interval (CI) -3.8 to -0.1); this reduction was predominately in intrapartum sections. An ITS study of mandatory second opinion and peer review feedback at department meetings found statistically significant results at 48 months for reducing repeat caesarean section rates (change in level was -6.4%; 95% CI -9.7% to -3.1% and change in slope -1.14%; 95% CI -1.9% to -0.3%) but not for total caesarean section rates. A cluster-RCT of guideline implementation with support from local opinion leaders increased the proportion of women with a previous caesarean section being offered a trial of labour (absolute difference 16.8%) and the number who had a vaginal birth (VBAC rates) (absolute difference 13.5%). The P values are, however, not reported due to unit of analysis errors. There was insufficient evidence that audit and feedback, training of public health nurses, insurance reform, external peer review and legislative changes are effective. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Implementation of guidelines with mandatory second opinion can lead to a small reduction in caesarean section rates, predominately in intrapartum sections. Peer review, including pre-caesarean consultation, mandatory secondary opinion and postcaesarean surveillance can lead to a reduction in repeat caesarean section rates. Guidelines disseminated with endorsement and support from local opinion leaders may increase the proportion of women with previous caesarean sections being offered a trial of labour in certain settings. Nurse-led relaxation classes and birth preparation classes may reduce caesarean section rates in low-risk pregnancies.

BACKGROUND: Self-management education programmes are complex interventions specifically targeted at patient education and behaviour modification. They are designed to encourage people with chronic disease to take an active self-management role to supplement medical care and improve outcomes. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effectiveness of self-management education programmes for people with osteoarthritis. SEARCH METHODS: The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, EMBASE, PyscINFO, SCOPUS and the World Health Organization (WHO) International Clinical Trial Registry Platform were searched, without language restriction, on 17 January 2013. We checked references of reviews and included trials to identify additional studies. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials of self-management education programmes in people with osteoarthritis were included. Studies with participants receiving passive recipients of care and studies comparing one type of programme versus another were excluded. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: In addition to standard methods we extracted components of the self-management interventions using the eight domains of the Health Education Impact Questionnaire (heiQ), and contextual and participant characteristics using PROGRESS-Plus and the Health Literacy Questionnaire (HLQ). Outcomes included self-management of osteoarthritis, participant's positive and active engagement in life, pain, global symptom score, self-reported function, quality of life and withdrawals (including dropouts and those lost to follow-up). We assessed the quality of the body of evidence for these outcomes using the GRADE approach. MAIN RESULTS: We included twenty-nine studies (6,753 participants) that compared self-management education programmes to attention control (five studies), usual care (17 studies), information alone (four studies) or another intervention (seven studies). Although heterogeneous, most interventions included elements of skill and technique acquisition (94%), health-directed activity (85%) and self-monitoring and insight (79%); social integration and support were addressed in only 12%. Most studies did not provide enough information to assess all PROGRESS-Plus items. Eight studies included predominantly Caucasian, educated female participants, and only four provided any information on participants' health literacy. All studies were at high risk of performance and detection bias for self-reported outcomes; 20 studies were at high risk of selection bias, 16 were at high risk of attrition bias, two were at high risk of reporting bias and 12 were at risk of other biases. We deemed attention control as the most appropriate and thus the main comparator.Compared with attention control, self-management programmes may not result in significant benefits at 12 months. Low-quality evidence from one study (344 people) indicates that self-management skills were similar in active and control groups: 5.8 points on a 10-point self-efficacy scale in the control group, and the mean difference (MD) between groups was 0.4 points (95% confidence interval (CI) -0.39 to 1.19). Low-quality evidence from four studies (575 people) indicates that self-management programmes may lead to a small but clinically unimportant reduction in pain: the standardised mean difference (SMD) between groups was -0.26 (95% CI -0.44 to -0.09); pain was 6 points on a 0 to 10 visual analogue scale (VAS) in the control group, treatment resulted in a mean reduction of 0.8 points (95% CI -0.14 to -0.3) on a 10-point scale, with number needed to treat for an additional beneficial outcome (NNTB) of 8 (95% CI 5 to 23). Low-quality evidence from one study (251 people) indicates that the mean global osteoarthritis score was 4.2 on a 0 to 10-point symptom scale (lower better) in the control group, and treatment reduced symptoms by a mean of 0.14 points (95% CI -0.54 to 0.26). This result does not exclude the possibility of a clinically important benefit in some people (0.5 point reduction included in 95% CI). Low-quality evidence from three studies (574 people) showed no signficant difference in function between groups (SMD -0.19, 95% CI -0.5 to 0.11); mean function was 1.29 points on a 0 to 3-point scale in the control group, and treatment resulted in a mean improvement of 0.04 points with self-management (95% CI -0.10 to 0.02). Low-quality evidence from one study (165 people) showed no between-group difference in quality of life (MD -0.01, 95% CI -0.03 to 0.01) from a control group mean of 0.57 units on 0 to 1 well-being scale. Moderate-quality evidence from five studies (937 people) shows similar withdrawal rates between self-management (13%) and control groups (12%): RR 1.11 (95% CI 0.78 to 1.57). Positive and active engagement in life was not measured.Compared with usual care, moderate-quality evidence from 11 studies (up to 1,706 participants) indicates that self-management programmes probably provide small benefits up to 21 months, in terms of self-management skills, pain, osteoarthritis symptoms and function, although these are of doubtful clinical importance, and no improvement in positive and active engagement in life or quality of life. Withdrawal rates were similar. Low to moderate quality evidence indicates no important differences in self-management , pain, symptoms, function, quality of life or withdrawal rates between self-management programmes and information alone or other interventions (exercise, physiotherapy, social support or acupuncture). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Low to moderate quality evidence indicates that self-management education programmes result in no or small benefits in people with osteoarthritis but are unlikely to cause harm.Compared with attention control, these programmes probably do not improve self-management skills, pain, osteoarthritis symptoms, function or quality of life, and have unknown effects on positive and active engagement in life. Compared with usual care, they may slightly improve self-management skills, pain, function and symptoms, although these benefits are of unlikely clinical importance.Further studies investigating the effects of self-management education programmes, as delivered in the trials in this review, are unlikely to change our conclusions substantially, as confounding from biases across studies would have likely favoured self-management. However, trials assessing other models of self-management education programme delivery may be warranted. These should adequately describe the intervention they deliver and consider the expanded PROGRESS-Plus framework and health literacy, to explore issues of health equity for recipients.

BACKGROUND: A wide range of diverse and inconsistent terminology exists in the field of knowledge translation. This limits the conduct of evidence syntheses, impedes communication and collaboration, and undermines knowledge translation of research findings in diverse settings. Improving uniformity of terminology could help address these challenges. In 2012, we convened an international working group to explore the idea of developing a common terminology and an overarching framework for knowledge translation interventions. FINDINGS: Methods included identifying and summarizing existing frameworks, mapping together a subset of those frameworks, and convening a multi-disciplinary group to begin working toward consensus. The group considered four potential approaches to creating a simplified framework: melding existing taxonomies, creating a framework of intervention mechanisms rather than intervention strategies, using a consensus process to expand one of the existing models/frameworks used by the group, or developing a new consensus framework. CONCLUSIONS: The work group elected to draft a new, simplified consensus framework of interventions to promote and integrate evidence into health practices, systems and policies. The framework will include four key components: strategies and techniques (active ingredients), how they function (causal mechanisms), how they are delivered (mode of delivery), and what they aim to change (intended targets). The draft framework needs to be further developed by feedback and consultation with the research community and tested for usefulness through application and evaluation.

IMPORTANCE: Delayed-onset posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) accounts for approximately 25% of PTSD cases. Current models do not adequately explain the delayed increases in PTSD symptoms after trauma exposure. OBJECTIVE: To test the roles of initial psychiatric reactions, mild traumatic brain injury (MTBI), and ongoing stressors on delayed-onset PTSD. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: In this prospective cohort study, patients were selected from recent admissions to 4 major trauma hospitals across Australia. A total of 1084 traumatically injured patients were assessed during hospital admission from April 1, 2004, through February 28, 2006, and 785 (72.4%) were followed up at 3, 12, and 24 months after injury. MAIN OUTCOME AND MEASURE: Severity of PTSD was determined at each assessment with the Clinician-Administered PTSD Scale. RESULTS: Of those who met PTSD criteria at 24 months, 44.1% reported no PTSD at 3 months and 55.9% had subsyndromal or full PTSD. In those who displayed subsyndromal or full PTSD at 3 months, PTSD severity at 24 months was predicted by prior psychiatric disorder, initial PTSD symptom severity, and type of injury. In those who displayed no PTSD at 3 months, PTSD severity at 24 months was predicted by initial PTSD symptom severity, MTBI, length of hospitalization, and the number of stressful events experienced between 3 and 24 months. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: These data highlight the complex trajectories of PTSD symptoms over time. This study also points to the roles of ongoing stress and MTBI in delayed cases of PTSD and suggests the potential of ongoing stress to compound initial stress reactions and lead to a delayed increase in PTSD symptom severity. This study also provides initial evidence that MTBI increases the risk of delayed PTSD symptoms, particularly in those with no acute symptoms.

BACKGROUND: Carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS) is a condition where one of two main nerves in the wrist is compressed, which can lead to pain in the hand, wrist and sometimes arm, and numbness and tingling in the thumb, index and long finger. Splinting is usually offered to people with mild to moderate symptoms. However, the effectiveness and duration of the benefit of splinting for this condition remain unknown. OBJECTIVES: To compare the effectiveness of splinting for carpal tunnel syndrome with no treatment, placebo or another non-surgical intervention. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Neuromuscular Disease Group Specialized Register (10 January 2011), CENTRAL, NHSEED and DARE (The Cochrane Library 2011, Issue 4), MEDLINE (January 1966 to December 2011), EMBASE (January 1980 to January 2012), AMED (January 1985 to January 2012), and CINAHL Plus (January 1937 to January 2012), using no time limits. We searched the reference lists of all included trials and relevant reviews for further relevant studies. SELECTION CRITERIA: All randomised and quasi-randomised trials comparing splinting with no treatment (or a placebo) or with other non-surgical treatments were eligible for inclusion. We also included studies comparing one splint type or regimen versus another. We excluded studies comparing splinting with surgical treatment. There were no language restrictions. We included all patients diagnosed with carpal tunnel syndrome unless they had undergone surgical release. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently selected trials for inclusion, and performed data extraction. Two authors also independently performed the assessment of risk of bias. We calculated measures of effect as risk ratios (RR) for dichotomous outcomes and mean differences (MD) for continuous outcomes, with 95% confidence intervals (CI) reported and statistical significance set at P < 0.05 for all outcome comparisons. MAIN RESULTS: The review included 19 studies randomising 1190 participants with carpal tunnel syndrome. Two studies compared splinting with no treatment, five compared different splint designs, one compared different splint-wearing regimens, seven compared splint delivered as a single intervention with another non-surgical intervention, and five compared splint delivered alongside other non-surgical interventions with another non-surgical intervention. Only three studies reported concealing the allocation sequence, and only one reported blinding of participants. Three studies measured the primary outcome, short-term overall improvement at three months or less. One low quality study with 80 wrists found that compared to no treatment, splints worn at night more than tripled the likelihood of reporting overall improvement at the end of four weeks of treatment (RR 3.86, 95% CI 2.29 to 6.51). However, the lack of patient blinding and unclear allocation concealment suggests this result should be interpreted with caution. A very low quality quasi-randomised trial with 90 wrists found that wearing a neutral splint more than doubled the likelihood of reporting 'a lot or complete relief' at the end of two weeks of treatment compared with an extension splint (RR 2.43, 95% CI 1.12 to 5.28). The third study which measured short-term overall improvement did not report outcome data separately per group. Nine studies measured adverse effects of splinting and all found either no or few participants reporting discomfort or swelling due to splinting; however, the precision of all RRs was very low. Differences between groups in the secondary outcomes - symptoms, function, and neurophysiologic parameters - were most commonly small with 95% CIs incorporating effects in either direction. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Overall, there is limited evidence that a splint worn at night is more effective than no treatment in the short term, but there is insufficient evidence regarding the effectiveness and safety of one splint design or wearing regimen over others, and of splint over other non-surgical interventions for CTS. More research is needed on the long-term effects of this intervention for CTS.

INTRODUCTION: The unmet global burden of surgical disease is substantial. Currently, two billion people do not have access to emergency and essential surgical care. This results in unnecessary deaths from injury, infection, complications of pregnancy, and abdominal emergencies. Inadequately treated surgical disease results in disability, and many children suffer deformity without corrective surgery. METHODS: A consensus meeting was held between representatives of Surgical and Anaesthetic Colleges and Societies to obtain agreement about which indicators were the most appropriate and credible. The literature and state of national reporting of perioperative mortality rates was reviewed by the authors. RESULTS: There is a need for a credible national and/or regional indicator that is relevant to emergency and essential surgical care. We recommend introducing the perioperative mortality rate (POMR) as an indicator of access to and safety of surgery and anaesthesia. POMR should be measured at two time periods: death on the day of surgery and death before discharge from hospital or within 30 days of the procedure, whichever is sooner. The rate should be expressed as the number of deaths (numerator) over the number of procedures (denominator). The option of before-discharge or 30 days is practical for those low- to middle-income countries where postdischarge follow-up is likely to be incomplete, but it allows those that currently can report 30-day mortality rates to continue to do so. Clinical interpretation of POMR at a hospital or health service level will be facilitated by risk stratification using age, urgency (elective and emergency), procedure/procedure group, and the American Society of Anesthesiologists grade. CONCLUSIONS: POMR should be reported as a health indicator by all countries and regions of the world. POMR reporting is feasible, credible, achieves a consensus of acceptance for reporting at national level. Hospital and Service level POMR requires interpretation using simple measures of risk adjustment such as urgency, age, the condition being treated or the procedure being performed and ASA status.

Early diagnosis of haemorrhagic shock (HS) might be difficult because of compensatory mechanisms. Clinical scoring systems aimed at predicting transfusion needs might assist in early identification of patients with HS. The Shock Index (SI) - defined as heart rate divided by systolic BP - has been proposed as a simple tool to identify patients with HS. This systematic review discusses the SI's utility post-trauma in predicting critical bleeding (CB). We searched the databases MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, Cochrane Library, Scopus and PubMed from their commencement to 1 September 2013. Studies that described an association with SI and CB, defined as at least 4 units of packed red blood cells (pRBC) or whole blood within 24 h, were included. Of the 351 located articles identified by the initial search strategy, five met inclusion criteria. One study pertained to the pre-hospital setting, one to the military, two to the in-hospital setting, and one included analysis of both pre-hospital and in-hospital values. The majority of papers assessed predictive properties of the SI in ≥10 units pRBC in the first 24 h. The most frequently suggested optimal SI cut-off was ≥0.9. An association between higher SI and bleeding was demonstrated in all studies. The SI is a readily available tool and may be useful in predicting CB on arrival to hospital. The evaluation of improved utility of the SI by performing and recording at earlier time-points, including the pre-hospital phase, is indicated.

BACKGROUND: Non-surgical treatment, including exercises and mobilisation, has been offered to people experiencing mild to moderate symptoms arising from carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS). However, the effectiveness and duration of benefit from exercises and mobilisation for this condition remain unknown. OBJECTIVES: To review the efficacy and safety of exercise and mobilisation interventions compared with no treatment, a placebo or another non-surgical intervention in people with CTS. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Neuromuscular Disease Group Specialised Register (10 January 2012), CENTRAL (2011, Issue 4), MEDLINE (January 1966 to December 2011), EMBASE (January 1980 to January 2012), CINAHL Plus (January 1937 to January 2012), and AMED (January 1985 to January 2012). SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised or quasi-randomised controlled trials comparing exercise or mobilisation interventions with no treatment, placebo or another non-surgical intervention in people with CTS. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently assessed searches and selected trials for inclusion, extracted data and assessed risk of bias of the included studies. We calculated risk ratios (RR) and mean differences (MD) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for primary and secondary outcomes of the review. We collected data on adverse events from included studies. MAIN RESULTS: Sixteen studies randomising 741 participants with CTS were included in the review. Two compared a mobilisation regimen to a no treatment control, three compared one mobilisation intervention (for example carpal bone mobilisation) to another (for example soft tissue mobilisation), nine compared nerve mobilisation delivered as part of a multi-component intervention to another non-surgical intervention (for example splint or therapeutic ultrasound), and three compared a mobilisation intervention other than nerve mobilisation (for example yoga or chiropractic treatment) to another non-surgical intervention. The risk of bias of the included studies was low in some studies and unclear or high in other studies, with only three explicitly reporting that the allocation sequence was concealed, and four reporting blinding of participants. The studies were heterogeneous in terms of the interventions delivered, outcomes measured and timing of outcome assessment, therefore, we were unable to pool results across studies. Only four studies reported the primary outcome of interest, short-term overall improvement (any measure in which patients indicate the intensity of their complaints compared to baseline, for example, global rating of improvement, satisfaction with treatment, within three months post-treatment). However, of these, only three fully reported outcome data sufficient for inclusion in the review. One very low quality trial with 14 participants found that all participants receiving either neurodynamic mobilisation or carpal bone mobilisation and none in the no treatment group reported overall improvement (RR 15.00, 95% CI 1.02 to 220.92), though the precision of this effect estimate is very low. One low quality trial with 22 participants found that the chance of being 'satisfied' or 'very satisfied' with treatment was 24% higher for participants receiving instrument-assisted soft tissue mobilisation compared to standard soft tissue mobilisation (RR 1.24, 95% CI 0.89 to 1.75), though participants were not blinded and it was unclear if the allocation sequence was concealed. Another very low-quality trial with 26 participants found that more CTS-affected wrists receiving nerve gliding exercises plus splint plus activity modification had no pathologic finding on median and ulnar nerve distal sensory latency assessment at the end of treatment than wrists receiving splint plus activity modification alone (RR 1.26, 95% CI 0.69 to 2.30). However, a unit of analysis error occurred in this trial, as the correlation between wrists in participants with bilateral CTS was not accounted for. Only two studies measured adverse effects, so more data are required before any firm conclusions on the safety of exercise and mobilisation interventions can be made. In general, the results of secondary outcomes of the review (short- and long-term improvement in CTS symptoms, functional ability, health-related quality of life, neurophysiologic parameters, and the need for surgery) for most comparisons had 95% CIs which incorporated effects in either direction. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There is limited and very low quality evidence of benefit for all of a diverse collection of exercise and mobilisation interventions for CTS. People with CTS who indicate a preference for exercise or mobilisation interventions should be informed of the limited evidence of effectiveness and safety of this intervention by their treatment provider. Until more high quality randomised controlled trials assessing the effectiveness and safety of various exercise and mobilisation interventions compared to other non-surgical interventions are undertaken, the decision to provide this type of non-surgical intervention to people with CTS should be based on the clinician's expertise in being able to deliver these treatments and patient's preferences.

This is a protocol for a Cochrane Review (Intervention). The objectives are as follows: To assess the effectiveness of self‐management education programmes for people with OA.