RESUMEN

Acne fulminans (AF) is a severe form of inflammatory acne commonly associated with adolescents. It is characterized by an abrupt onset of painful nodules and plaques and can progress to suppurative, ulcerative, and hemorrhagic lesions. AF can be associated with systemic symptoms such as fever, arthralgia, and bone pain. The etiology of AF is unknown but it has been linked to the use of certain medications and has been rarely found in autoinflammatory syndromes. In previous years, there have been reports of <200 cases in the literature; however, AF may be more common in clinical practice than reported. The most common presentation of AF is seen in adolescents starting isotretinoin therapy. Diagnosis of AF is determined based on its clinical findings. The main purpose of this article is to provide clinicians with a practical approach to treating AF. Current evidence for its treatment is limited to case reports and case series. The mainstay treatment of AF is a combination of prednisone and isotretinoin. It is important to taper or discontinue any exacerbating or precipitating medications such as isotretinoin, antibiotics, or androgens when AF is identified. Along with treatment of AF, it is important to treat associated scarring. Early identification and treatment of AF in adolescents is crucial to minimize both acute symptoms and long-term scarring, and further research is needed to determine optimal management.

RESUMEN

"Spin" refers to misleading reporting, interpretation, and extrapolation of findings in primary and secondary research (such as in systematic reviews). The study of spin primarily focuses on beneficial outcomes. The objectives of this research were threefold: first, to develop a framework for identifying spin associated with harms in systematic reviews of interventions; second, to apply the framework to a set of reviews, thereby pinpointing instances where spin may be present; and finally, to revise the spin examples, offering guidance on how spin can be rectified.The authors developed their framework through an iterative process that engaged an international group of researchers specializing in spin and reporting bias. The framework comprises 12 specific types of spin for harms, grouped by 7 categories across the 3 domains (reporting, interpretation, and extrapolation). The authors subsequently gathered instances of spin from a random sample of 100 systematic reviews of interventions. Of the 58 reviews that assessed harm and the 42 that did not, they found that 28 (48%) and 6 (14%), respectively, had at least 1 of the 12 types of spin for harms. Inappropriate extrapolation of the results and conclusions for harms to populations, interventions, outcomes, or settings not assessed in a review was the most common category of spin in 17 of 100 reviews.The authors revised the examples to remove spin, taking into consideration the context (for example, medical discipline, source population), findings for harms, and methodological limitations of the original reviews. They provide guidance for authors, peer reviewers, and editors in recognizing and rectifying or (preferably) avoiding spin, ultimately enhancing the clarity and accuracy of harms reporting in systematic review publications.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Dry eye is a common condition with serious implications worldwide. The unique composition of autologous serum (AS) eye drops has been hypothesized as a possible treatment. OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to review the effectiveness and safety of AS. DATA SOURCES: We searched five databases and three registries up to September 30, 2022. STUDY ELIGIBILITY: We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing AS with artificial tears, saline, or placebo for participants with dry eye. STUDY APPRAISAL AND SYNTHESIS METHODS: We adhered to Cochrane methods for study selection, data extraction, risk-of-bias assessment, and synthesis. We used the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation framework to evaluate the certainty of evidence. RESULTS: We included six RCTs with 116 participants. Four trials compared AS with artificial tears. We found low-certainty evidence that AS may improve symptoms (0- to 100-point pain scale) after 2 weeks of treatment compared with saline (mean difference, -12.00; 95% confidence interval, -20.16 to -3.84; 1 RCT, 20 participants). Ocular surface outcomes (corneal staining, conjunctival staining, tear breakup time, Schirmer test) were inconclusive. Two trials compared AS with saline. Very low-certainty evidence suggested that Rose Bengal staining (0- to 9-point scale) may be slightly improved after 4 weeks of treatment compared with saline (mean difference, -0.60; 95% confidence interval, -1.11 to -0.09; 35 eyes). None of the trials reported outcomes of corneal topography, conjunctival biopsy, quality of life, economic outcomes, or adverse events. LIMITATIONS: We were unable to use all data because of unclear reporting. CONCLUSIONS: The effectiveness of AS is uncertain based on current data. Symptoms improved slightly with AS compared with artificial tears for 2 weeks. Staining scores improved slightly with AS compared with saline, with no benefit identified for other measures. IMPLICATIONS OF KEY FINDINGS: High-quality, large trials enrolling diverse participants with varying severity are needed. A core outcome set would allow for evidence-based treatment decisions consistent with current knowledge and patient values.

Asunto(s)

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

For centuries, yellow fever virus infection generated substantial fear among explorers, tourist travellers, workers, military personnel, and others entering areas of transmission. Currently, there is transmission only in some areas of tropical South America and sub-Saharan Africa. When symptomatic, yellow fever infection causes severe liver dysfunction and coagulopathy with elevated mortality rates. Since there is no effective treatment, vaccination against yellow fever, available since 1937, represents an important preventive intervention in endemic areas. Every year, an increasing number of individuals are travelling to yellow fever endemic areas, many of whom have complex medical conditions. Travel health practitioners should do individualised assessments of the risks and benefits of yellow fever vaccination to identify potential contraindications. The most relevant contraindications include a history of thymoma or thymus dysfunction, AIDS, and individuals receiving immunosuppressive drugs including biological therapies or chemotherapy. We briefly review strategies to prevent yellow fever infection in travellers with the use of yellow fever vaccination and the use of personal protection measures to avoid mosquito bites.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to review loneliness interventions for older adults living in long-term care (LTC) facilities over the past 10 years, to categorize interventions by type, and to compare effectiveness of loneliness interventions in these settings. METHODS: Systematic review followed PRISMA guidelines. Articles matching search criteria were collected from PubMed, PsycINFO, and Web of Science from 2009 to 2019. The inclusion criteria were as follows: 1) English language, 2) intervention studies with a quantitative measure that compares pre-trial to post-trial changes, 3) loneliness as a primary or secondary outcome 4) subjects age >65, and 5) subjects living in a LTC facility, such as a nursing home, assisted-living, or hospice. RESULTS: A total of 15 intervention studies qualified for systematic review. Most of these interventions were psychological therapies and leisure/skill development interventions. Approximately, 87% of studies reported significant decreases in loneliness following intervention. Laughter therapy, horticultural therapy, and reminiscence therapy were associated with the greatest decreases in loneliness. DISCUSSION: Results suggest that, although less common than interventions in the community, there are several effective interventions to reduce loneliness among older adults living in LTC facilities. Lack of standardized measures and high-quality studies limits comparisons between intervention types and generalizability to different populations.

Asunto(s)