PubMed Health⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

A Cranney

Publications and source records attributed to A Cranney.

At least 19 recordsLinked to original sources
PubMed2007

Could a policy of provision of hip protectors to elderly nursing home residents result in cost savings in acute hip fracture care? The case of Ontario, Canada.

UNLABELLED: Hip fractures are an important problem in nursing homes. Hip protectors are external devices that decrease the risk of hip fracture in elderly nursing home residents. We estimated the overall healthcare cost savings from a hypothetical strategy of provision of hip protectors to elderly nursing home residents in Ontario, Canada. In a recent meta-analysis, we determined that a strategy of provision of hip protectors decreases the risk of hip fracture in nursing home residents. INTRODUCTION: Our objective was to determine whether the provision of hip protectors to all Ontario nursing home residents aged > or =65 years could result in cost savings, stemming from reductions in initial hospitalizations for hip fracture. METHODS: We conducted a cost analysis from a Ministry of Health perspective (one year cycle length). The efficacy of the intervention was estimated from a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. RESULTS: A strategy of provision of hip protectors to all 60,775 elderly Ontario nursing home residents could result in an overall mean cost savings of 6.0 million Canadian dollars in one year (95% credibility interval, -26.4 million, 39.7 million), with a probability of cost savings of 0.63 (assuming no additional labor costs). In sensitivity analyses, decreasing hip protector price increased cost savings, whereas additional labor expenditures for application for hip protectors decreased cost savings. CONCLUSION: In conclusion, if hip protectors can be provided to elderly Ontario nursing home residents without additional labor expenditures, there is a reasonable probability that such a strategy may result in healthcare cost savings.

Aged↗
PubMed2006

Strontium ranelate for preventing and treating postmenopausal osteoporosis.

BACKGROUND: Strontium ranelate is a new treatment for osteoporosis therefore, its benefits and harms need to be known. OBJECTIVES: To determine the efficacy and safety of strontium ranelate for the treatment and prevention of postmenopausal osteoporosis. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched MEDLINE (1996 to March 2005), EMBASE (1996 to week 9 2005), the Cochrane Library (1996 to Issue 1 2005), reference lists of relevant articles and conference proceedings from the last two years. Additional data was sought from authors. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of at least one year duration comparing strontium ranelate versus placebo reporting fracture incidence, bone mineral density (BMD), health related quality of life or safety in postmenopausal women. Treatment (versus prevention) population was defined as women with prevalent vertebral fractures and/or lumbar spine BMD T score < -2.5 SD. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two reviewers independently determined study eligibility, assessed trial quality and extracted the relevant data. Disagreements were resolved by consensus. RCTs were grouped by dose of strontium ranelate and treatment duration. Where possible, meta-analysis was conducted using the random effects model. MAIN RESULTS: Four trials met the inclusion criteria. Three included a treatment population (0.5 to 2 g of strontium ranelate daily) and one a prevention population (0.125 g, 0.5 g and 1 g daily). A 37% reduction in vertebral fractures (RR 0.63, 95% CI 0.56, 0.71) and a 14% reduction in non-vertebral fractures (RR 0.86, 95% CI 0.75, 0.98) were demonstrated over three years with 2 g of strontium ranelate daily in a treatment population. An increase in BMD was shown at all BMD sites after two to three years in both populations. Lower doses of strontium ranelate were superior to placebo and the highest dose demonstrated the greatest reduction in vertebral fractures and increase in BMD. An increased risk of diarrhea with 2 g of strontium ranelate was found; however, adverse events did not affect the risk of discontinuing treatment nor did it increase the risk of serious side effects, gastritis or death. Additional data suggests that the risk of vascular and nervous system side-effects is slightly increased with taking 2 g of strontium ranelate daily over three to four years. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There is silver level evidence (www.cochranemsk.org) to support the efficacy of strontium ranelate for the reduction of fractures (vertebral and to a lesser extent non-vertebral) in postmenopausal osteoporotic women and an increase in BMD in postmenopausal women with/without osteoporosis. Diarrhea may occur however, adverse events leading to study withdrawal were not significantly increased with taking 2 g of strontium ranelate daily. Potential vascular and neurological side-effects need to be further explored.

Bone Density↗
PubMed2006

Strontium ranelate for preventing and treating postmenopausal osteoporosis.

BACKGROUND: Strontium ranelate is a new anti-osteoporosis therapy therefore, its benefits and harms need to be known. OBJECTIVES: To determine the efficacy and safety of strontium ranelate for the treatment and prevention of postmenopausal osteoporosis. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched MEDLINE (1996 to March 2005), EMBASE (1996 to week 9 2005), the Cochrane Library (1996 to Issue 1 2005), reference lists of relevant articles and conference proceedings from the last two years. Additional data was sought from authors and industry sponsors. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of at least one year duration comparing strontium ranelate versus placebo reporting fracture incidence, bone mineral density (BMD), health related quality of life and/or safety outcomes in postmenopausal women. Treatment (versus prevention) population was defined as women with prevalent vertebral fractures and/or lumbar spine BMD T score < -2.5 SD. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two reviewers independently determined study eligibility, assessed trial quality and extracted the relevant data. Disagreements were resolved by consensus. RCTs were grouped by dose of strontium ranelate and treatment duration. Where possible, meta-analysis was conducted using the random effects model. MAIN RESULTS: A total of four trials met our inclusion criteria, three of which investigated the effects of strontium ranelate compared to placebo in a treatment population (doses ranged from 0.5 to 2 g daily) and one, in a prevention population (doses 0.125, 0.5 and 1 g daily). In osteoporotic, postmenopausal women a 37% reduction in vertebral fractures (two trials, n = 5082, RR 0.63, 95% CI 0.56 to 0.71) and a 14% reduction in non-vertebral fractures (two trials, n = 6572, RR 0.86, 95% CI 0.75 to 0.98) was demonstrated over a three year period with 2 g of strontium ranelate daily. An increase in BMD at all sites was shown with the same dose: lumbar spine BMD (two trials, n = 1614, WMD adjusted for strontium content 5.44, 95% CI 3.41 to 7.46 and WMD not adjusted 11.29, 95% CI 10.22 to 12.37 over two years), femoral neck and total hip (two trials, n = 4230, WMD 8.25, 95% CI 7.84 to 8.66 and WMD 9.83, 95% CI 9.39 to 10.26 respectively over three years). One gram of strontium ranelate daily in postmenopausal women without osteoporosis increased BMD at all sites over a two year period: lumbar spine (one trial, n = 59, WMD adjusted for strontium content 2.39, 95% CI 0.15 to 4.63 and WMD not adjusted 6.68, 95% CI 5.16 to 8.20), femoral neck (one trial, n= 60, WMD 2.52, 95%CI 0.96 to 4.09) and total hip (one trial, n = 60, WMD 1.02, 95% CI 0.48 to 1.56). In both the treatment and prevention populations, lower doses of strontium ranelate were superior to placebo with the highest dose of strontium ranelate demonstrating the greatest reduction in vertebral fractures and increase in BMD. There is some evidence to suggest that 2 g of strontium ranelate daily compared to placebo may have a beneficial effect on health related quality of life in postmenopausal women after three years of treatment. Two grams of strontium ranelate daily increased the risk of diarrhea (RR 1.38%, 95% CI 1.02 to 1.87); however, adverse events did not affect the risk of discontinuing strontium ranelate nor did it increase the risk of serious side effects, gastritis or death. Additional data obtained suggests that the risk of vascular system disorders including venous thromboembolism (two trials, n = 6669, 2.2% versus 1.5%, OR 1.5, 95% CI 1.1 to 2.1) and pulmonary embolism (two trials, n = 6669, 0.8% versus 0.4%, OR 1.7, 95% CI 1.0 to 3.1) as well as nervous system disorders such as headaches (3.9% versus 2.9%), seizures (0.3% versus 0.1%), memory loss (2.4% versus 1.9%) and disturbance in consciousness (2.5% versus 2.0%) is slightly increased with taking 2 g of strontium ranelate daily over a 3 to 4 year period. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There is silver level evidence to support the efficacy of strontium ranelate for the reduction of vertebral fractures (and to a lesser extent non-vertebral fractures) in postmenopausal osteoporotic women and an increase in BMD (all sites) in postmenopausal women with and without osteoporosis. Diarrhea may occur however, adverse events leading to study withdrawal were not significantly increased in the strontium ranelate group. Potential risks to the vascular and neurological system associated with taking 2 g of strontium ranelate daily need to be further explored and quantified.

Bone Density↗
PubMed2006

Fragility fractures and the osteoporosis care gap: an international phenomenon.

OBJECTIVES: To describe practice patterns in the management of osteoporosis after fragility fracture. METHODS: Systematic review of articles in MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane, and CINAHL databases (1996 to February 2005). Diagnostic outcomes included clinical osteoporosis diagnoses, laboratory tests, and bone density scans. Treatment outcomes included initiation of calcium, vitamin D, hormone replacement therapy, bisphosphonates, calcitonin, raloxifene and falls assessments. RESULTS: Thirty-five studies met our inclusion criteria and demonstrated that adults who experience fragility fracture are not receiving osteoporosis management. An osteoporosis diagnosis was reported in 1 to 45% of patients with fractures; laboratory tests were ordered for 1 to 49% and 1 to 32% of patients had bone density scans. Calcium/vitamin D and pharmacological therapy was reported in 2 to 62% and 1 to 65% of patients, respectively. Osteoporosis treatment was recommended more often in women than men, and more often in patients with vertebral fractures than in patients with nonvertebral fractures. Older patients were more likely to be diagnosed with osteoporosis, but treatment was more likely in younger patients. A history of prior fracture was reported in 7 to 67% of patients. Between 1 and 22% of patients had a subsequent fracture during follow-up periods of 6 months to 5 years. Falls assessments were not often reported; when they were, they were infrequently performed. A greater proportion of patients were diagnosed/treated during follow-up studies than in studies evaluating diagnosis/treatment on discharge from acute care. CONCLUSIONS: The majority of individuals who sustain fragility fractures are not receiving adequate osteoporosis management. Future research should address barriers to appropriate management and the efficacy of implementation strategies designed to close the osteoporosis care gap. RELEVANCE: This article is of particular importance to health care professionals who provide care for patients with fragility fracture.

Fractures, Spontaneous↗
PubMed2006

The impact of a gluten-free diet on adults with coeliac disease: results of a national survey.

UNLABELLED: OBJECTIVE We sought to evaluate the impact of the gluten-free diet on the 5,240 members of the Canadian Celiac Association (CCA). Data are presented on 2,681 adults (>or=16 years) with biopsy-proven celiac disease (CD). METHODS: A mail-out survey was used. Quality of life was evaluated using the 'SF12', and celiac-specific questions. RESULTS: Mean age was 56 years, mean age at diagnosis was 45 years, and 75% were female. The 'SF12' summary scores were similar to normative Canadian data, but were significantly lower for females and newly diagnosed patients. Respondents reported: following a gluten-free (GF) diet (90%), improvement on the diet (83%), and difficulties following the diet (44%), which included: determining if foods were GF (85%), finding GF foods in stores (83%), avoiding restaurants (79%), and avoiding travel (38%). Most common reactions to consumed gluten (among 73%) included pain, diarrhea, bloating, fatigue, nausea, and headache. Excellent information on CD and its treatment was provided by the CCA (64%), gastroenterologists (28%), dietitians (26%) and family doctor (12%). CONCLUSIONS: Quality of life in those with CD could be increased with early diagnosis, increased availability of gluten-free foods, improved food labelling, and better dietary instruction. Education of physicians and dietitians about CD and its treatment is essential.

Canada↗
PubMed2005

Health-related quality of life measurements in elderly Canadians with osteoporosis compared to other chronic medical conditions: a population-based study from the Canadian Multicentre Osteoporosis Study (CaMos).

The objective of this research was to determine the relative decrement in health-related quality of life, as measured by the health utilities index mark 3 (HUI3), in osteoporosis compared to other chronic medical conditions. The impact of chronic medical conditions other than osteoporosis on HUI3 measurements had been previously established in the 1996/1997 Canadian National Population Health Survey (NPHS). The Canadian Multicentre Osteoporosis Study (CaMos) is a national population-based study in which regional participants were randomly recruited, regardless of presence of osteoporosis. We analyzed data from participants aged > or = 65 years who completed a baseline HUI3 questionnaire and provided information on their medical history (n=3,750). We determined the age- and gender-adjusted mean decrement in HUI3 for several chronic medical conditions, including osteoporosis. The mean changes in HUI3 adjusted for age and gender (with 95% confidence intervals) were as follows: arthritis -0.10 (-0.11, -0.09), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) -0.07 (-0.09, -0.05), diabetes mellitus -0.05 (-0.08, -0.03), heart disease -0.06 (-0.08, -0.04), hypertension -0.02 (-0.03, -0.01), and osteoporosis -0.08 (-0.11, -0.06), respectively (model r2=0.17; P<0.0001). These findings were comparable to those observed in the NPHS, with the exception of osteoporosis, which had not been previously studied in this fashion. The decrement in HUI3 score seen in participants with osteoporosis was comparable to that observed in other chronic medical conditions, such as arthritis, COPD, diabetes mellitus or heart disease.

Aged↗
PubMed2004

Calcium supplementation on bone loss in postmenopausal women.

BACKGROUND: Although calcium is one the simplest and least expensive strategies for preventing osteoporotic fractures calcium supplementation is nevertheless not without controversy (Kanis 1989; Nordin 1990). The Food and Drug Administration in the US has permitted a bone health claim for calcium-rich foods, and the NIH in its Consensus Development Process approved a statement that high calcium intake reduces the risk of osteoporosis. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of calcium on bone density and fractures in postmenopausal women. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched Cochrane Controlled Register, MEDLINE and EMBASE up to 2001, and examined citations of relevant articles and proceedings of international meetings. SELECTION CRITERIA: Trials that randomized postmenopausal women to calcium supplementation or usual calcium intake in the diet and reported bone mineral density of the total body, vertebral spine, hip, or forearm or recorded the number of fractures, and followed patients for at least one year were considered for inclusion. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Three independent reviewers assessed the methodologic quality and extracted data for each trial. For each bone density site (lumbar spine, total body, combined hip and combined forearm), we calculated the weighted mean difference in bone density between treatment and control groups using the percentage change from baseline. We constructed regression models in which the independent variables were year and dose, and the dependent variable was the effect size. This regression was used to determine the years across which pooling was appropriate. Heterogeneity was assessed. For each fracture analysis we calculated a risk ratio. MAIN RESULTS: Fifteen trials, representing 1806 participants, were included. Calcium was more effective than placebo in reducing rates of bone loss after two or more years of treatment. The pooled difference in percentage change from baseline was 2.05% (95% CI 0.24 to 3.86) for total body bone density, 1.66% (95% CI 0.92 to 2.39) for the lumbar spine at 2 years, 1.60% (95% CI 0.78 to 2.41) for the hip, and 1.91% (95% CI 0.33 to 3.50) for the distal radius. The relative risk of fractures of the vertebrae was 0.79 (95% CI 0.54 to 1.09); the relative risk for non-vertebral fractures was 0.86 (95% CI 0.43 to 1.72). REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS: Calcium supplementation alone has a small positive effect on bone density. The data show a trend toward reduction in vertebral fractures, but it is unclear if calcium reduces the incidence of non vertebral fractures.

Bone Density↗
PubMed2004

Celiac disease.

Explore the source record for details and available documents.

Adult↗
PubMed2003

Risedronate for the prevention and treatment of postmenopausal osteoporosis.

BACKGROUND: Postmenopausal osteoporosis results in an increased susceptibility to low-trauma fractures due to reduced bone volume and microarchitectural deterioration. Risedronate, a third generation bisphosphonate, has been shown in multiple clinical trials to reduce fracture risk and improve bone mineral density in postmenopausal women with osteoporosis. First and second generation bisphosphonates are known to have gastrointestinal side-effects and risedronate may be better tolerated. OBJECTIVES: To systematically review the efficacy of risedronate on bone density, and fracture reduction in postmenopausal women. SEARCH STRATEGY: The Cochrane Controlled Trials Registry Medline, and Current Contents were searched from 1990 - 2001. The electronic search was supplemented by handsearching four osteoporosis journals and their conference proceedings, as well as contacting content experts and industry sources for unpublished data. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included eight trials that randomised women to risedronate or an alternative (placebo or calcium and /or vitamin D) and measured bone mineral density for at least one year. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: For each trial three independent reviewers assessed the methodological quality and abstracted data. Data was extracted for outcomes of fracture, bone mineral density and adverse events. The more conservative random effects model was used to pool data. The quality of trials was assessed according to the Jadad five-point scale. MAIN RESULTS: Both vertebral and non-vertebral fractures were statistically and clinically reduced with risedronate. Eleven out of one hundred women who received risedronate had a vertebral fracture compared to 17 out of one hundred of those who received an alternative treatment (pooled relative risk for vertebral fractures of 0.64 (95% CI 0.52 - 0.77). Three percent of participants who received risedronate had a non-vertebral fracture compared to 4.6% of those who received an alternative treatment (pooled relative risk for nonvertebral fractures of 0.73 (95% CI 0.61 - 0.87). The weighted mean difference for the percent change from baseline for bone mineral density with 5 mg daily for lumbar spine, femoral neck and trochanter was 4.54% (95%CI 4.12 - 4.97), p<0.01; 2.75% (95% CI 2.32 - 3.17), p<0.01; and 4.38% (95% CI 3.51 - 5.25), p<0.01 respectively. REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS: There is good evidence for the efficacy of risedronate in the reduction of both vertebral and non-vertebral fractures. In addition, there is evidence from randomized trials that risedronate is able to achieve this without increasing risk for overall withdrawals due to adverse effects.

Bone Density↗
PubMed2003

Etanercept for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis.

BACKGROUND: Etanercept is a soluble tumour necrosis factor alpha-receptor DMARD for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA). OBJECTIVES: To assess the efficacy and safety of etanercept for the treatment of RA. SEARCH STRATEGY: Five electronic databases were searched from 1966 to February 2003 with no language restriction. SELECTION CRITERIA: All randomized controlled trials (minimum 6 month duration) comparing three possible combinations 1) etanercept (10 mg or 25 mg twice weekly) with methotrexate (MTX) to MTX alone 2) etanercept to MTX, or 3) etanercept to placebo were eligible. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two reviewers extracted data and assessed the methodological quality of the trails. The American College of Rheumatology (ACR) core set of disease activity measures for RA clinical trials, radiographic, withdrawals and toxicity outcomes were analyzed. MAIN RESULTS: Three trials were included in this review. Two trials compared an experimental group who were started on etanercept compared to a control group; both groups had the same ongoing background therapy of nonsteroidals in both trials plus in one trial one group was on stable methotrexate. In these two trials the ACR 20, ACR 50 and ACR 70 response rates at 6 months were statistically significantly and clinically important with etanercept 25 mg subcutaneous injections (SC) twice weekly. Sixty-four percent of people receiving etanercept ache vied an ACR 20 response compared to 15% of controls and the number needed to treat (NNT) with etanercept is 2 people. Thirty-nine percent of those receiving etanercept achieved an ACR 50 response compared to 4% of taking control treatment and the NNT is three. Fifteen percent of people taking etanercept achieved an ACR 70 compared to 1% of controls with a NNT of 7 people. In the third trial of starting etanercept compared to starting methotrexate the number of participants who achieved an ACR 20, 50 or response at 6 and 12 months were not statistically significant for either etanercept dose. Etanercept treatment showed a statistically significantly and clinically important affect on joint damage as measured by the Sharp erosion score. Among participants who received etanercept 72% had no increase in their erosion score compared to 60% of participants in the methotrexate group. Withdrawal and toxicity results were acceptable. REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS: Etanercept 25 mg SC twice weekly was more efficacious than control treatment for ACR 20, 50 and 70 at 6 months, and over 12 months it slowed joint damage.

Antirheumatic Agents↗
PubMed2003

Calcium supplementation on bone loss in postmenopausal women.

BACKGROUND: Although calcium is one the simplest and least expensive strategies for preventing osteoporotic fractures calcium supplementation is nevertheless not without controversy (Kanis 1989; Nordin 1990). The Food and Drug Administration in the US has permitted a bone health claim for calcium-rich foods, and the NIH in its Consensus Development Process approved a statement that high calcium intake reduces the risk of osteoporosis. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of calcium on bone density and fractures in postmenopausal women. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched Cochrane Controlled Register, MEDLINE and EMBASE up to 2001, and examined citations of relevant articles and proceedings of international meetings. SELECTION CRITERIA: Trials that randomized postmenopausal women to calcium supplementation or usual calcium intake in the diet and reported bone mineral density of the total body, vertebral spine, hip, or forearm or recorded the number of fractures, and followed patients for at least one year were considered for inclusion. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Three independent reviewers assessed the methodologic quality and extracted data for each trial. For each bone density site (lumbar spine, total body, combined hip and combined forearm), we calculated the weighted mean difference in bone density between treatment and control groups using the percentage change from baseline. We constructed regression models in which the independent variables were year and dose, and the dependent variable was the effect size. This regression was used to determine the years across which pooling was appropriate. Heterogeneity was assessed. For each fracture analysis we calculated a risk ratio. MAIN RESULTS: Fifteen trials, representing 1806 participants, were included. Calcium was more effective than placebo in reducing rates of bone loss after two or more years of treatment. The pooled difference in percentage change from baseline was 2.05% (95% CI 0.24 to 3.86) for total body bone density, 1.66% (95% CI 0.92 to 2.39) for the lumbar spine at 2 years, 1.60% (95% CI 0.78 to 2.41) for the hip, and 1.91% (95% CI 0.33 to 3.50) for the distal radius. The relative risk of fractures of the vertebrae was 0.79 (95% CI 0.54 to 1.09); the relative risk for non-vertebral fractures was 0.86 (95% CI 0.43 to 1.72). REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS: Calcium supplementation alone has a small positive effect on bone density. The data show a trend toward reduction in vertebral fractures, but it is unclear if calcium reduces the incidence of non vertebral fractures.

Bone Density↗
PubMed2002

Systematic assessment of the quality of osteoporosis guidelines.

BACKGROUND: Numerous agencies have developed clinical practice guidelines for the management of postmenopausal osteoporosis. The study objective was to conduct a systematic assessment of the quality of osteoporosis guidelines produced since 1998. METHODS: Guidelines were identified by searching MEDLINE (1998+), the world wide web, known guideline developer websites, bibliographies of retrieved guidelines, and through consultation with content experts. Each guideline was then assessed by three independent appraisers using the 'Appraisal Instrument for Clinical Guidelines' (version 1) by Cluzeau. RESULTS: We identified 26 unique guidelines from 1998-2001 and 21 met our inclusion criteria. Of the 21 guidelines reviewed, 8 were developed by medical societies, 6 by national groups, 6 by government agencies, and 1 by an international group. Twelve of the guidelines were published, 7 were organizational reports, and 2 were accessible only from the web. Half or more of the 20 items assessing the rigor of guideline development were met by 15% (median quality score 23%, range 5-80%, (95% CI 16.5, 34.7)), 81% met at least half of the 12 items assessing guideline content and context (median score 58%, range 17-83%, (95% CI 50.8, 65.5)), and none met half or more of the items assessing guideline application (median score 0%, range 0-47%, (95% CI -0.5 to 12.6)). Eight guidelines described the method used to assess the strength of evidence, and in 6 there was an explicit link between recommendations and the supporting evidence. Ten guidelines were judged not suitable for use in practice, 10 were acceptable with modification, and one was acceptable for use without modification. CONCLUSION: The methodological quality of current osteoporosis guidelines is low, although their scores for clinical content were higher. Virtually no guidelines covered dissemination issues. Few guidelines were judged as acceptable for use in their current format.

Journal Article↗
PubMed2002

Exercise for preventing and treating osteoporosis in postmenopausal women.

BACKGROUND: Osteoporosis is a condition resulting in an increased risk of skeletal fractures due to a reduction in the density of bone tissue. Prevention of osteoporotic-related fractures is dependent on the ability to detect individuals with low bone mass, including those women who are asymptomatic. Treatment of osteoporosis involves the use of either anti-resorptive (e.g. estrogen and bisphosphonate) or bone formation agents (e.g. fluoride and PTH). The value of exercise as an intervention for the prevention of postmenopausal bone loss is a controversial subject. OBJECTIVES: To examine the effectiveness of exercise therapy at preventing bone loss and fractures in postmenopausal women. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Cochrane Musculoskeletal Group's specialised register, MEDLINE, EMBASE, Current Contents and the Cochrane Controlled Trials Registry up to January 2000 according to the methods suggested by Dickersin et al and Haynes et al and the Cochrane Handbook. We hand searched reference lists and consulted content experts. SELECTION CRITERIA: This review was proceeded by a peer reviewed protocol published in the Cochrane Library. Two reviewers independently selected all randomized controlled trials (RCTs) which met our predetermined inclusion criteria. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: The same two reviewers abstracted the data using predetermined forms and assessed trial quality using a validated assessment tool. For dichotomous outcomes (fractures), relative risks were calculated using fixed effects models. For continuous data, weighted mean differences (WMD) of the percentage change from baseline were calculated. Where heterogeneity existed (determined by a chi square test), a random effects model was used. MAIN RESULTS: Eighteen randomized controlled trials (RCTs) met the inclusion criteria. The trials had a mean methodological quality score of 2.53. Aerobics, weight bearing and resistance exercises were all effective on the BMD of the spine. The WMD for the combined aerobics and weight bearing program on the spine was 1.79 [95%CI (0.58, 3.01)]. The analyzed results showed walking to be effective on both BMD of the spine 1.31[95%CI (-0.03, 2.65) and the hip 0.92[95%CI (0.21, 1.64). Aerobic exercise was effective in increasing BMD of the wrist 1.22[95%CI (0.71, 1.74)]. REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS: Aerobics, weight bearing and resistance exercises are all effective in increasing the BMD of the spine in postmenopausal women. Walking is also effective on the hip. The quality of the reporting of the trials in the meta-analysis was low, in particular, in the areas of allocation concealement and blinding.

Exercise↗
PubMed2002

Infliximab for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis.

BACKGROUND: Infliximab is a human murine chimeric anti-tumour necrosis factor alpha monoclonal antibody recently approved for the treatment of refractory RA. OBJECTIVES: To assess the efficacy and safety of infliximab for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis. SEARCH STRATEGY: Electronic databases including Biological Abstracts, CINAHL, Current Contents, Dissertation Abstracts, EBM Reviews, HealthSTAR and MEDLINE were searched from 1966 to March 2002. Rheumatoid arthritis was searched as an exploded MESH heading. Infliximab was searched as a text word as it is not currently indexed. The search was not limited by language, year of publication or type of publication. The specific search strategy is shown below. SELECTION CRITERIA: All randomized controlled trials comparing infliximab 1, 3, 5 or 10 mg/kg with methotrexate(MTX) to MTX alone, or without MTX to placebo, with a minimum duration of 6 months and at least 2 infusions were eligible. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Data was extracted by 2 independent reviewers and the methodological quality of the trials was assessed using a validated assessment tool scale. Outcome variables included the ACR core set of disease activity measures for RA clinical trials and radiographic outcome data. Withdrawals and toxicity were also included. End of trial results were pooled. Continuous data were pooled using weighted mean differences and dichotomous data using relative risks. MAIN RESULTS: Two trials with a total of 529 patients met the inclusion criteria. Patients fulfilling the American Rheumatism Association 1987 RA diagnostic criteria were randomized to receive either infliximab 1mg/kg (with and without MTX), 3mg/kg(with and without MTX), 10mg/kg of infliximab (with and without MTX) or placebo infusion plus MTX. Infusions were given every 4 or 8 weeks. After 6 months ACR 20, ACR 50 and ACR 70 response rates were significantly improved in all infliximab doses compared to control. The number needed to treat with infliximab to achieve an ACR 20, 50 or 70 response in patients with refractory RA under specialist care ranged from 2.9 to 3.3 for ACR 20, 3.6 to 4.8 for ACR 50 and 5.9 to 12.5 for ACR 70 depending on the dose (3mg/kg or 10mg/kg given either every 4 or 8 weeks). Total withdrawals and withdrawals due to lack of efficacy were lower for all doses of infliximab versus controls. Withdrawals for adverse events and withdrawals for other reasons were not statistically significantly different for those receiving infliximab from control. REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS: Treatment with infliximab for 6 and 12 months significantly reduces RA disease activity and appeared to have an acceptable safety profile in these trials. Total radiographic scores improved, fewer patients showed radiographic progression, and more patients showed radiographic improvement with infliximab treatment at 12 months compared to controls. However, only 2 trials met the inclusion criteria, and these results are largely driven by the largest trial. The available efficacy and toxicity data is relatively short-term (6-12 months). In order to detect rare events that may be associated with infliximab, larger and longer term studies are required.

Antibodies, Monoclonal↗
PubMed2001

Influence of bone densitometry results on the treatment of osteoporosis.

BACKGROUND: Measurement of bone mineral density is widely used to diagnose osteoporosis. The objectives of this study are to determine how bone densitometry affects subsequent treatment of osteopenia and osteoporosis with either hormone replacement therapy or bisphosphonates and to examine clinical factors associated with starting either therapy after bone densitometry. METHODS: We conducted a prospective study involving women over 50 years of age who were referred to a tertiary care hospital for the first time to undergo bone density measurement using dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry (DXA). Baseline clinical data were collected through face-to-face interviews before the test. Subsequently, the scans were reviewed and categorized as showing no bone loss, osteopenia or osteoporosis, based on World Health Organization criteria. Three months after DXA, subjects were contacted by telephone to determine their understanding of the test results and any new treatments started or recommended since the scan. RESULTS: Of 383 women recruited at the time of their DXA, 335 (87.5%) completed the 3-month follow-up. Among those reached at follow-up, DXA results showed no bone loss in 119 (35.5%), osteopenia in 137 (40.9%) and osteoporosis in 79 (23.6%). The proportion of subjects with osteoporosis receiving either hormone replacement therapy or bisphosphonate therapy was 15.2% before the test, increasing to 63.3% after the scan. The following factors were independently associated with the initiation of either therapy: actual DXA result showing osteoporosis (odds ratio [OR] 7.2; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.7-30.3), compared with a normal scan; subjects' perception that their scan showed bone loss (osteopenia, or osteoporosis) (OR 13.5; 95% CI 4.0-45.5) or that they were unclear about the results (OR 5.4; 95% CI 1.6-18.8), compared with the perception that the results were normal; and discussion of the DXA results with a physician (OR 5.5; 95% CI 1.9-16.0). INTERPRETATION: The proportion of women with osteoporosis receiving hormone replacement therapy or bisphosphonate therapy increases after diagnosis with densitometry. However, communication by physicians so that patients understand their test results is a critical component in the initiation of therapy after bone densitometry.

Absorptiometry, Photon↗