SEARCH · Search PubMed

Results for “Outcomes disparities”

Search indexed PubMed citations on genomics, clinical trials, systematic reviews and public health. Explore titles, authors and supplied subject terms, then open the PubMed record.

SourceResearch connectionFrom yearThrough year

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

1,343 records · Page 25Linked to original sources

PubMed2026

Open Dialogue versus treatment as usual for adults presenting in crisis to mental health services in England (the ODDESSI Trial): a multisite cluster-randomised trial.

BACKGROUND: Open Dialogue is a person-centred, transdiagnostic model of mental health care that emphasises continuity, therapeutic relationships, and collaboration with the service user's social network. Open Dialogue is a service-wide approach to care involving network meetings with the service user, members of their social network, and usually two practitioners who support the network throughout the duration of care. In this cluster-randomised trial, we aimed to evaluate the clinical effectiveness of Open Dialogue versus treatment as usual for adults presenting in crisis to community mental health services in England. METHODS: This multicentre, parallel two-arm, cluster-randomised, controlled superiority trial was conducted in mental health services in five National Health Service trusts in London and the South of England. Clusters were defined at the level of primary care practices within service catchment areas. Participants were adults aged 18 years or older presenting in crisis to mental health services and registered with a practice within trial clusters. Randomisation was done at the cluster level (1:1), stratified by catchment area, and balanced on average general practice (GP) list size and Index of Multiple Deprivation (2015). The chief investigator, senior statistician, and assessors of the primary outcome were masked in the study. Participants either received Open Dialogue or treatment as usual, which refers to the functional team model currently implemented throughout English mental health services. The primary outcome was time (days) to first relapse following initial recovery from the index crisis censored at the end of the 2-year follow-up period. Participant-reported secondary outcomes were EuroQol Visual Analogue Scale, Social Provisions Scale, Lubben Social Network Scale, Questionnaire about the Process of Recovery, and the Client Satisfaction Questionnaire, measured at five timepoints over 2 years, and clinical measures were extracted from electronic health records. People with relevant lived experience were involved in the design and execution of the study. Fidelity to the model of care in Open Dialogue and treatment as usual, and adherence to the delivery of Open Dialogue, were measured prior to each site starting participant recruitment, then every 6 months thereafter until the final participant follow-up in that site. The trial was retrospectively registered (ISRCTN52653325) and is complete. FINDINGS: 185 general practices associated with six mental health Trusts across England were identified for screening. 105 practices were excluded, and 80 were included in cluster formation, forming 32 clusters that were randomly assigned (16 to treatment as usual and 16 to the Open Dialogue intervention). One mental health trust (two clusters) withdrew, resulting in five mental health trusts (30 clusters) participating in the trial. Between June 25, 2019, and Dec 9, 2021, 494 participants (266 [54%] female gender, 221 [45%] male gender, 341 [69%] White British) with a mean age of 38·1 years (SD 13·4) provided consent for study inclusion (223 in the treatment as usual group and 271 in the Open Dialogue group). Of these, 174 (78%) in the treatment as usual group and 225 (83%) in the Open Dialogue group recovered and had data enabling relapse determination; there was no significant difference between groups on the primary outcome of time to relapse following initial recovery (marginal hazard ratio 0·95 [95% CI 0·67-1·32]). For secondary outcomes, Open Dialogue was associated with significantly lower probabilities of psychiatric inpatient admission and re-referral to crisis care or secondary mental health services, and with improvements in self-rated recovery, health-related quality of life, and satisfaction with services. There were no significant differences in social network quality or size. There were 386 serious adverse events (281 in the treatment as usual group and 105 in the Open Dialogue group); 376 (97%) were deemed to be unrelated to the intervention. INTERPRETATION: Open Dialogue did not reduce time to first relapse compared with treatment as usual, the primary outcome, but it reduced acute inpatient bed use, improved service user reported outcomes and experience, and there were no significant safety concerns. Further investigation is required to determine whether Open Dialogue can enhance the effectiveness and acceptability of crisis care and continuing care in community mental health services. FUNDING: National Institute for Health Research.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Comparing Traditional Motor Speech Practice to Contextualized Speech Practice in Preschoolers With Childhood Apraxia of Speech.

PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to compare retention of real-word targets across practice conditions (contextualized vs. motor-only) within a modified integral stimulation treatment for preschoolers with childhood apraxia of speech (CAS). METHOD: A single-subject experimental design with alternating treatments was used with matched target sets randomly assigned to contextualized practice, motor-only practice, or no treatment. Three preschoolers with CAS completed 18 therapy sessions, each consisting of two 25-min blocks: one contextualized practice and one motor-only practice. Order of practice was randomized each visit. Changes in percent phonemes correct (PPC) and lexical stress accuracy, derived from blinded transcription, were explored with visual analysis and effect sizes (standardized mean difference, d statistic). RESULTS: Meaningful improvements (d > 1) were observed in PPC across words treated in contextualized practice for all three children immediately posttreatment and for two of three children at the 1-month follow-up. Meaningful improvements in the motor-only condition were observed in two of three children immediately posttreatment and at follow-up. No meaningful changes were observed in lexical stress across any conditions in any participant. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides preliminary support for the feasibility of a modified integral stimulation therapy that incorporates elements of linguistically grounded therapies (linguistic retrieval, recasts, expansions) that may facilitate target retention in some preschoolers with CAS. However, other elements should be explored in conjunction with integral stimulation to maximize clinical outcomes. SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIAL: https://doi.org/10.23641/asha.33228981.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Memantine Augmentation for Obsessive-Compulsive Symptoms in Bipolar Disorder: A Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: Obsessive-compulsive symptoms are frequently observed in patients with bipolar disorder and present a significant therapeutic challenge. This study evaluated the efficacy and safety of memantine as an adjunctive therapy for obsessive-compulsive disorder in patients with bipolar disorder. METHODS: In this randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial, 46 patients with bipolar disorder and obsessive-compulsive disorder, stabilized on quetiapine and lithium, were randomly assigned to receive either memantine (n = 23) or placebo (n = 23) for 6 weeks. RESULTS: The memantine group showed a significant reduction in Yale-Brown Obsessive-Compulsive Scale scores compared with the placebo group (Cohen d = 1.57 vs 0.42, P < 0.001). Nausea was the most common side effect, but overall adverse effects were minimal. CONCLUSION: Memantine appears to be a safe and effective adjunctive treatment for obsessive-compulsive disorder in patients with bipolar disorder, warranting further investigation.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Comparison of ultrasound-guided two-point block of the rhomboid intercostal vs. thoracic paravertebral for postoperative analgesia in patients undergoing three-port thoracoscopic surgery: a prospective, randomized, non-inferiority study.

BACKGROUND: The anesthetic characteristics of ultrasound-guided two-point rhomboid intercostal block (RIB) have not been fully established. This study compared the analgesic efficacy of ultrasound-guided two-point RIB with that of two-point thoracic paravertebral block (TPVB) for postoperative pain control and recovery in patients undergoing three-port thoracoscopic surgery. METHODS: Seventy patients aged 18-80 years scheduled for three-port thoracoscopic pulmonary resection were block-randomized in a 1:1 ratio to receive either TPVB or RIB. Both techniques were performed using 10 mL of 0.5% ropivacaine at each injection site. The primary outcome was the numerical rating scale (NRS) pain score at rest 24 h after surgery, with a predefined non-inferiority margin of Δ = 1. Secondary outcomes included NRS at rest and during coughing at 0.5, 2, 4, 12, 18, 24, and 48 h postoperatively, as well as the 24h postoperative Quality of Recovery-40 (QoR-40) score. RESULTS: The final analysis included 34 patients in the TPVB group and 34 in the RIB group. The mean difference in resting NRS scores at 24 h between the two groups was 0.088 (95% CI, -0.377 to 0.553), confirming the non-inferiority of RIB. However, the need for rescue analgesia was numerically greater in the RIB group than in the TPVB group (p = 0.045). The 24-h postoperative QoR-40 scores and cumulative sufentanil consumption within 48 h after surgery were comparable between the groups (both p > 0.05). CONCLUSION: Ultrasound-guided two-point RIB provided postoperative analgesia that was non-inferior to TPVB in patients undergoing three-port thoracoscopic surgery.

Adolescent↗

PubMed2026

Short-term aerobic exercise as an adjunct treatment for depression in acute geriatric psychiatry: Results of a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: This randomized controlled trial examined whether short-term aerobic exercise provided additional clinical benefit over an active control in older inpatients with depression in geriatric psychiatry. METHODS: 100 patients (mean age 76 years) were randomized to 2-week supervised aerobic ergometer training (intervention group, IG) or a flexibility program (control group, CG), both delivered in addition to treatment as usual (TAU). Adherence, training exposure and adverse events were recorded to assess feasibility. The primary outcome was clinical improvement measured with the Clinical Global Impression of Change (CGI). Secondary outcomes included depressive symptom severity assessed by the Beck Depression Inventory-II (BDI-II) and clinician-rated Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression (HAMD), physical activity, 6-min walk test (6MWT) performance, and fluoxetine-equivalent antidepressant dose (FLX). RESULTS: Thirty-nine participants attended at least 80% of sessions, with lower adherence in the IG. Weekly training duration differed between groups (74.0 ± 31.9 vs. 95.0 ± 25.3 min/week, p = .003). CGI did not differ between groups (IG: MD -0.31, 95% CI -0.67 to 0.05; p = .069). Depressive symptom severity decreased over time in both groups (p < .001), without significant between-group differences for HAMD (MD -0.22, 95% CI -2.55 to 2.12) or BDI-II (MD -0.62, 95% CI -3.68 to 2.45). 6MWT and FLX increased over time (both p < .001), without group differences (6MWT: MD -1.08 m, 95% CI -20.04 to 17.89; FLX: MD 5.69 mg/day, 95% CI -2.40 to 13.77). CONCLUSION: Short-term aerobic exercise was deliverable, but showed no additional clinical benefit over low-intensity flexibility during TAU. Further research should determine dose, duration and adherence for clinically relevant effects.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Oliceridine used for patient-controlled analgesia on postoperative quality of recovery in patients undergoing laparoscopic gynecological tumour resection: a randomized clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: Oliceridine, a novel biased μ-opioid receptor agonist, is widely used perioperatively, yet limited data exists regarding its impact on postoperative quality of recovery. This study investigated the effect of oliceridine-based patient-controlled intravenous analgesia (PCIA) on postoperative quality of recovery among patients undergoing laparoscopic gynecological tumour resection. METHODS: Ninety‑four female patients scheduled for elective laparoscopic gynecological tumour resection were included. Patients were randomized to two groups: oliceridine group (loading dose 1.5 mg, PCIA 0.55 mg/kg) or sufentanil group (loading dose 10 μg, PCIA 3 μg/kg). The primary outcome was the Quality of Recovery-40 (QoR-40) score on postoperative day 1. The secondary outcomes included the QoR-40 score, the numeric rating scale (NRS) pain score, the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale-Anxiety (HADS-A) score, the Fatigue, Resistance, Ambulation, Illness and Loss of weight (FRAIL) index and adverse events within 3 postoperative days. RESULTS: Higher QoR-40 scores were found in the oliceridine group on postoperative day 1 (182.9 ± 3.1 versus 177.5 ± 3.9, p < 0.001). Compared with the sufentanil group, the oliceridine group showed better QoR-40 scores within 3 days after operation. No significant differences were observed in NRS pain scores or HADS-A scores between the two groups (all p > 0.05). However, the median FRAIL score in the oliceridine group was lower on postoperative day 2 (p = 0.018). CONCLUSION: Oliceridine used in PCIA improves early postoperative recovery quality of patients undergoing laparoscopic gynecological tumour resection. It provides analgesic effect comparable to sufentanil and lowers incidences of postoperative frailty, nausea and vomiting. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Chinese Clinical Trial Registry, ChiCTR.org.cn, identifier: ChiCTR2400094271.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Multisensory stimulation for promoting development and preventing morbidity in preterm infants.

RATIONALE: Multisensory stimulation is a structured, developmentally appropriate intervention that provides simultaneous or sequential stimulation of two or more senses (e.g. tactile, auditory, visual, or vestibular) in a controlled and non-stressful manner, with the aim of supporting early neurodevelopment in preterm infants. It has the potential to enhance physiological regulation in preterm infants by stabilizing key functions, such as respiratory patterns, heart rate, and oxygen saturation; reducing the need for respiratory support; and improving feeding performance and sleep regulation. Targeted multisensory interventions have also been associated with improved neurodevelopmental outcomes, including enhanced psychomotor development and visual function. OBJECTIVES: To assess the benefits and harms of multisensory stimulation compared to any single sensory intervention or standard care on major neurodevelopmental disability, mortality, and growth in preterm infants. SEARCH METHODS: We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, Emcare, CINAHL, Epistemonikos, two trial registries, and conference abstracts up to 28 November 2025. We checked reference lists of included trials, and systematic reviews on sensory interventions. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: We included 18 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing multisensory stimulation in preterm infants with no intervention (placebo or standard care), and one RCT comparing multisensory stimulation with single-sense stimulation (tactile stimulation). OUTCOMES: Our critical outcomes were major neurodevelopmental disability at 18 to 24 months: cerebral palsy (CP), developmental delay, intellectual impairment, blindness, sensorineural deafness; death during initial hospitalization; and total weight gain (grams), assessed at discharge. When comparing multisensory stimulation with single-sense intervention, we also included weight gain during the intervention, an outcome added during the post-hoc analysis. Important outcomes were duration of hospital stay, of NICU stay, and of respiratory support; and time until full oral feeding. RISK OF BIAS: We used the Cochrane tool, RoB 2. SYNTHESIS METHODS: We conducted meta-analyses using fixed-effect models to calculate risk ratios (RR) for dichotomous data, and mean differences (MDs) for continuous data, each with its 95% confidence intervals (CIs). We assessed statistical heterogeneity by calculating the I2 statistic when we included more than two trials in a meta-analysis. We evaluated the certainty of evidence using GRADE. INCLUDED STUDIES: We included 19 trials (1554 newborn infants): 18 studies compared multisensory stimulation with standard care; one compared multisensory stimulation with single-sensory stimulation (tactile). In 10 studies, the primary aim was to assess the neurobehavioral outcomes of multisensory stimulation on preterm neo-nates. The other nine studies aimed to assess the impact of multisensory stimulation on weight gain during the intervention, weight gain until hospital discharge, length of neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) stay, length of hospital stay, time until full oral feeding, length of respiratory support, or a combination. In the abstract we report results for the critical outcomes only. We identified 13 ongoing studies. Four studies are awaiting assessment. SYNTHESIS OF RESULTS: Multisensory stimulation compared to standard care No studies reported on these major neurodevelopmental disabilities, assessed at 18 to 24 months' corrected age (CA): developmental delay, intellectual impairment, blindness, or sensorineural deafness. One study reported on rates of CP at 12 months of age. The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of multisensory stimulation on CP (RR 0.67, 95% CI 0.28 to 1.58; I² not applicable; 1 study, 18 participants; very low-certainty evidence). The evidence suggests that multisensory stimulation may result in little to no difference in death during initial hospitalization (RR 0.97, 95% CI 0.54 to 1.73; I² not applicable; 1 study, 395 participants; low-certainty evidence). Multisensory stimulation may increase total weight gain prior to discharge (MD 72.67, 95% CI 68.23 to 77.12; I² = 0%; 3 studies, 474 participants; low-certainty evidence). Multisensory stimulation compared to single-sense (tactile) stimulation No studies reported on major neurodevelopmental disability, assessed at 18 to 24 months' CA, or death during initial hospitalization. The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of multisensory stimulation compared to tactile stimulation on weight gain during the intervention (MD -175.00, 95% CI -376.60 to 26.60; I² not applicable; 1 study, 20 participants; very low-certainty evidence). The certainty of the evidence was low to very low across outcomes, primarily due to risk of bias, imprecision from small sample sizes and wide CIs, and in some cases, inconsistency. The evidence base was also limited by the lack of reporting of relevant outcomes and reliance on surrogate outcomes or shorter follow-up periods. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: The available evidence on multisensory stimulation in preterm infants is limited and of low to very low certainty. No included studies reported on major neurodevelopmental disabilities at 18 to 24 months' CA, which represented a critical outcome for this review. Evidence regarding the effect of multisensory stimulation on CP is very uncertain, as it is based on a single small study reporting a surrogate outcome at 12 months. Multisensory stimulation may result in little to no difference in mortality during the initial hospitalization. It may increase total weight gain prior to discharge. However, the clinical significance of this finding is uncertain, particularly given the low certainty of the evidence and the multifactorial nature of growth in preterm infants. The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of multisensory stimulation compared to single-sense (tactile) stimulation on weight gain during the intervention. The only included study did not report major neurodevelopmental disabilities at 18 to 24 months' CA, mortality during the initial hospitalization, or total weight gain prior to discharge, which represented the critical outcomes for this review. Overall, the current evidence does not allow firm conclusions about the effectiveness of multisensory stimulation in promoting development or preventing morbidity in preterm infants. Future studies on multisensory stimulation should use more rigorous designs, larger samples, and report interventions using the template for intervention description and replication (TIDieR) checklist to ensure transparency. They should also report essential outcomes, such as neonatal death, major neurodevelopmental disabilities, length of hospital and NICU stay, time to full oral feeding, duration of respiratory support, and weight gain, to better assess the long‑term effects of multisensory stimulation in preterm infants. FUNDING: This Cochrane review had no dedicated funding. REGISTRATION: Protocol available via DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD016073.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Effectiveness of kinesiologic tape in the management of postoperative trismus, discomfort, and edema in mandibular fractures: a randomized controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: This study compared kinesiologic taping (KT) with conventional elastic adhesive bandaging in managing postoperative morbidity following open reduction and internal fixation. STUDY DESIGN: In this prospective, randomized controlled trial conducted at KLE Dr Prabhakar Kore Hospital, 26 patients with unilateral mandibular fractures were allocated into two groups: Group 1 received an elastic adhesive bandage (n = 13) and Group 2 used KT (n = 13). Pain (Visual Analog Scale), facial swelling (standardized linear measurements), and maximum interincisal distance were recorded at baseline and on postoperative Days 2 and 5. Data were analyzed using repeated measures ANOVA and independent t tests (p < .05). RESULTS: The KT group showed significantly lower pain scores and reduced facial edema at Days 2 and 5 compared with controls (P < .05). Trismus improved in both groups without significant intergroup differences. No adverse effects were observed. CONCLUSIONS: KT is a safe and effective adjunct for reducing early postoperative pain and edema after mandibular fracture fixation.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Safety profiles of CAR-T cell therapy in systematic autoimmune diseases: a systematic review and analysis.

BACKGROUND: Chimeric antigen receptors (CARs)-T cell therapy is emerging as a potent approach for autoimmune diseases. However, its application in autoimmune conditions remains limited, and safety outcomes observed in malignancies can't reliably serve as a reference. Therefore, it's necessary to summarize the safety profiles in autoimmune diseases to provide evidence for future expanding trials. METHODS: A systematic review was conducted to analyze the CAR-T therapy safety in rheumatic diseases via database searches up to December 2025. Studies reporting safety data were included, while abstracts, reviews, and cases with malignancies were excluded. Factors associated with cytokine release syndrome (CRS) were analyzed using Firth's penalized logistic regression. RESULTS: This study included 38 studies, involving a total of 115 patients with autoimmune disease. Severe adverse events were rare. CRS and immune effector cell-associated neurotoxicity syndrome (ICANS) occurred in 70.4% and 4.3% of patients, respectively. Most CRS were low-grade. Multivariate analysis identified BCMA-targeted therapy and allogeneic CAR-T products may as independent factors associated with a reduced risk of CRS. Transient hematologic toxicity and hypogammaglobulinemia were frequently reported, with infections occurring in nearly half of the patients. However, prolonged cytopenia and severe infection were infrequent. CONCLUSION: Based on the current available evidence, CAR-T therapy appears to have a generally manageable safety profile in autoimmune diseases, supporting its potential as a promising treatment option for patients with relapsed or refractory autoimmune diseases. However, these findings remain preliminary, and further expanded studies are warranted in the future to provide higher-level evidence.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Impact on analgesia, diaphragmatic function, and recovery between erector spinae plane block versus superior trunk block in arthroscopic shoulder surgery: a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Effective analgesia and preservation of diaphragmatic function are key considerations in analgesia for shoulder surgery. The superior trunk block provides analgesia with reduced phrenic nerve involvement, while the erector spinae plane block offers minimal impact on diaphragm motion. This randomized controlled trial compared the analgesic efficacy, impact on diaphragmatic motion, and postoperative recovery between the two blocks. METHODS: Sixty patients undergoing arthroscopic shoulder surgery were randomized to receive either erector spinae plane block or superior trunk block. Primary outcomes were postoperative VAS and changes in diaphragmatic excursion. Secondary outcomes included Quality of Recovery-15 (QoR-15) scores, morphine-equivalent consumption, and the handgrip strength motor blockade. RESULTS: The superior trunk block resulted in significantly lower dynamic VAS at 1-h postoperatively (0.1 [0.0, 0.2] vs. 5.7 [4.0, 7.6]; p < 0.001) and reduced 24-h morphine consumption (7.8 [2.5, 15.0] mg vs. 12.7 [7.5, 17.3] mg; p = 0.038) compared to the erector spinae plane block. However, diaphragmatic excursion was better preserved in the erector spinae plane block group (8.37% ± 20.7% vs. -20.09% ± 22.2%; p < 0.001), with a lower incidence of partial hemidiaphragm paresis (3.3% vs. 46.7%; p < 0.001). At 24 h postoperatively, QoR-15 scores were higher in the superior trunk block group (p = 0.047), and no patient in either group developed handgrip motor blockade. CONCLUSIONS: Superior trunk block offers superior early postoperative analgesia and better overall recovery, while erector spinae plane block minimizes diaphragmatic impairment. However, the erector spinae plane block may represent an option only in carefully selected patients at high respiratory risk, acknowledging its significantly poorer early analgesic profile.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Pilot randomized trial of intermittent theta-burst stimulation versus H-Coil transcranial magnetic stimulation for treatment-resistant depression.

BACKGROUND: Intermittent theta burst stimulation (figure-8-coil iTBS) and H7-coil repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) are FDA-cleared treatments for major depression; yet their comparative effectiveness in treatment-resistant depression (TRD) has not been evaluated in randomized trials. This pilot randomized trial was designed to obtain preliminary comparative estimates and to explore whether baseline cognitive functioning relates to early remission. METHODS: Twenty-eight adults with TRD were randomized to six weeks of figure-8-coil iTBS delivered to the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC) (n = 15) or H7-coil rTMS delivered to the dorsomedial prefrontal cortex (DMPFC) (n = 13). The primary outcome was change in 17-item Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HRSD-17) score from baseline to week 6, analyzed with ANCOVA. Additional outcomes included response, remission, and symptom trajectories through week 18. Exploratory analyses examined the association between baseline cognitive functioning, such as executive functions and memory, and remission. RESULTS: Twenty-five participants completed all 30 sessions. Adjusted week-6 HRSD-17 scores did not differ between groups (mean difference -0.40, 95% CI -5.23 to 4.43; p=.865). Response rates were 40.0% for figure-8-coil iTBS and 50.0% for H7-coil rTMS (p>.60), and remission rates were identical across groups (20.0%). Remitters showed higher baseline executive functioning than non-remitters in exploratory analyses, although these associations were not confirmed in adjusted models. CONCLUSION: In this pilot trial, figure-8-coil iTBS and H7-coil rTMS showed symptom improvement, with no clear between-group differences. Exploratory findings suggest a potential signal involving executive functioning that warrants further investigation. These results inform the feasibility and design of larger comparative trials. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT05902312).

Adult↗

PubMed2026

Risk of mortality and complications in people with depressive disorder and co-occurring diabetes mellitus: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

AIMS: People with depressive disorder have increased premature mortality and higher rates of diabetes mellitus than general population. Evidence shows that diabetes may further increase their risk of premature death from diabetes-related complications, especially cardiovascular diseases (CVDs). Earlier studies examining depression-associated outcomes in diabetes patients have shown mixed results and were hindered by important limitations, especially the use of self-reported questionnaires to ascertain depression, causing misclassification bias by identifying subclinical symptoms or diabetes distress. Associations of depression with specific diabetes complications have not been systematically evaluated. This meta-analysis aimed to investigate the risk of mortality and complications among patients with depression and co-occurring diabetes (depression-diabetes group) relative to patients with diabetes-only (diabetes-only group), on their all-cause mortality rates, and if applicable cause-specific mortality rates, and occurrence of specific diabetes complications. METHODS: We systematically reviewed and quantitatively synthesized diabetes-related outcomes in patients with depression by searching Embase, MEDLINE, PsycInfo and Web-of-Science from inception to 20 December 2024, and included studies that examined mortality and complication outcomes in depression-diabetes group relative to diabetes-only group. Results were synthesized by random-effects meta-analytic models, with stratified-analyses (subgroup analyses and meta-regression) by study-level characteristics, including age, gender, study period, geographic region, follow-up duration and nature of diabetes sample. The study was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42024595145). RESULTS: Twenty-six studies were identified from nine geographic regions. Regarding mortality risk, depression-diabetes group exhibited increased risks of all-cause mortality (RR = 1.30 [95% CI: 1.21-1.39]) and CVD-specific mortality (1.15 [1.02-1.29]) relative to diabetes-only group. Regarding complication risk, depression-diabetes group showed increased risk of complications (1.28 [1.18-1.40]) relative to diabetes-only group, especially in incident-diabetes sample signifying advanced disease stage upon presentation, with stratified-analyses showing higher risk of metabolic complications (1.63 [1.33-1.99]) and cardiovascular complications (1.20 [1.11-1.29]), and lower likelihood of retinopathy (0.84 [0.76-0.94]), albeit comparable rates of cerebrovascular complications (1.36 [0.99-1.87]), nephropathy (1.09 [0.93-1.27]) and peripheral-vascular complications (0.97 [0.79-1.18]). Both overall mortality and complication risks were present in various regions and persisted over time. Heterogeneities were noted and could not be entirely explained by stratified analyses. CONCLUSIONS: Our study demonstrated that patients with depression and co-occurring diabetes were associated with elevated overall mortality risk and complication risk (particularly metabolic and cardiovascular-complications) than non-depressed counterparts, suggesting an overall poorer glycemic control that might eventually drive their earlier death. Comprehensive and multipronged interventions are needed for individualized risk estimation of diabetes-related outcomes, with consequent early interventions to minimize the avoidable physical morbidity and premature mortality in this vulnerable population.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

[Efficacy and safety of acute-phase transcutaneous auricular vagus nerve stimulation for herpes zoster-related pain in middle-aged and elderly patients with comorbid depression and anxiety].

Objective: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of transcutaneous auricular vagus nerve stimulation (taVNS) during the acute phase in middle-aged and elderly patients with herpes zoster (HZ) comorbid depressive and anxiety states. Methods: This was a randomized controlled trial. Forty middle-aged and elderly patients with acute-phase HZ who attended the Department of Dermatology at Xuanwu Hospital, Capital Medical University, from June 2024 to June 2025 were enrolled and randomly assigned in a 1∶1 ratio using a random number table to receive either taVNS (n=20) or sham stimulation (n=20) for 5 consecutive days. Both groups received antiviral therapy and on-demand rescue analgesia. Pain, anxiety/depression, and sleep quality were evaluated using the Visual Analog Scale (VAS), the 4-item Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-4), and the Insomnia Severity Index (ISI), respectively. The primary outcome was the incidence of subacute pain at 30 days post-rash onset. Secondary outcomes included cumulative analgesic consumption at 1 and 2 weeks after treatment, the changes from baseline (Δ values) in PHQ-4 and ISI scores at 2 weeks, and the incidence of postherpetic neuralgia (PHN) at 90 days post-rash onset. Results: In the taVNS group, 7 patients (35%) were female, with a mean age of (64.1±9.7) years; in the sham group, 10 patients (50%) were female, with a mean age of (61.5±8.5) years. There were no statistically significant differences between the two groups in baseline VAS, PHQ-4, or ISI scores (all P>0.05). The incidence of subacute pain was significantly lower in the taVNS group than in the sham group [5% (1/20) vs 35% (7/20), RD=-30.0% (95%CI:-52.1%--4.9%); RR=0.14 (95%CI: 0.02-1.06); P=0.044]. At 2 weeks after treatment, the Δ values of PHQ-4 and ISI in the taVNS group were significantly greater than those in the sham group. The proportion of patients taking Lofentadine and the cumulative Lofentadine consumption at weeks 1 and 2 were both lower in the taVNS group than in the sham group (all P<0.05). No serious adverse events occurred in either group, and the difference in PHN incidence between groups was not statistically significant (P>0.05). Conclusions: Acute-phase taVNS appears to be feasible and safe in middle-aged and elderly patients with HZ and comorbid depressive and anxiety, effectively reducing subacute pain and improving emotional and sleep outcomes.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Effectiveness of symptom map-based education in the management of premenstrual syndrome: a randomized controlled trial.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the effectiveness of a symptom map-based educational intervention for the non-pharmacological management of premenstrual syndrome (PMS), with a focus on symptom reduction among women with differing baseline symptom severity. METHODS: This randomized controlled study was conducted between May and December 2024. A total of 110 women meeting diagnostic criteria for PMS were randomly assigned to an intervention group (n = 55) or a control group (n = 55) using block randomization, and 101 participants completed follow-up assessments. The intervention comprised structured education based on a PMS symptom map and evidence-based self-care strategies. Outcomes included PMS symptom severity (Premenstrual Syndrome Scale), pain intensity (Visual Analog Scale), psychological symptoms (Depression Anxiety Stress Scale-21), and PMS-specific life satisfaction. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT06585475. RESULTS: Compared with the control group, women in the intervention group reported significantly lower pain (adjusted mean 4.21 vs. 6.81, p < .001) and stress levels (8.54 vs. 12.03, p < .001) at follow-up. The intervention was particularly effective in reducing PMS symptom severity and depressive symptoms among participants with higher baseline symptom burden. Improvements in PMS-specific life satisfaction were observed, with reductions in depressive symptoms contributing to this effect. CONCLUSION: A symptom map-based educational intervention is a clinically applicable, non-pharmacological approach for PMS management. This structured education appears especially beneficial for women with more severe baseline symptoms and may be integrated into routine gynecological care to support individualized symptom management.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Ibuprofen versus acetaminophen for acute mild-to-moderate pain management in pediatric populations: a systematic review and meta-analysis of their efficacy.

UNLABELLED: Ibuprofen and acetaminophen are the most widely used analgesics in pediatric practice for the management of acute mild-to-moderate pain. Despite their widespread use, the comparative analgesic efficacy of these two agents in children remains a subject of ongoing debate, with existing evidence largely derived from heterogeneous clinical settings and small individual trials. Therefore, this study aimed to systematically review and meta-analyze randomized controlled trials comparing the analgesic efficacy of ibuprofen versus acetaminophen in pediatric populations with acute mild-to-moderate pain. A systematic literature search was conducted up to May 2026 in PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science. The review was conducted and reported in accordance with the PRISMA-Children and Adolescents (PRISMA-C) 2026 reporting guideline. Eligible studies were randomized controlled trials comparing ibuprofen with acetaminophen in children and adolescents (defined as individuals aged 0 to < 18 years) with acute pain, reporting at least one extractable efficacy outcome. Continuous outcomes were synthesized as standardized mean differences (Hedges' g) using random-effects models; dichotomous outcomes were pooled as risk ratios (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane RoB 2 tool and certainty of evidence was evaluated using the GRADE framework. Eight randomized controlled trials enrolling 1325 participants were included. Three pediatric trials contributed to the primary continuous pain outcome meta-analysis (n = 196 analyzable participants), yielding a pooled SMD of - 0.28 (95% CI - 0.57 to 0.00; p = 0.052; I2 = 0%), indicating a small effect favoring ibuprofen that did not reach conventional statistical significance. Given the small number of contributing studies (k = 3), the I2 statistic should be interpreted with caution as it has limited power to detect heterogeneity in this context. For the dichotomous pain freedom outcome (2 trials, n = 114), no significant difference was observed (pooled RR 1.03, 95% CI 0.53-1.99; p = 0.93; I2 = 0%). A prespecified sensitivity analysis including an adult soft-tissue injury trial attenuated the pooled effect toward the null (SMD - 0.15, 95% CI - 0.38 to 0.09; p = 0.23; I2 = 36.6%). Narrative synthesis of additional studies generally demonstrated comparable analgesic efficacy between the two agents across postoperative and outpatient pediatric settings. The overall certainty of evidence was rated as low for both primary outcomes, primarily due to imprecision and indirectness. CONCLUSION: Current evidence from randomized controlled trials does not demonstrate a superiority of ibuprofen over acetaminophen for acute mild-to-moderate pain management in children. Both agents appear to provide clinically meaningful analgesia across heterogeneous pediatric pain settings. The clinical choice between agents should be guided by individual patient factors, including contraindications to NSAIDs, the inflammatory nature of the pain etiology, and patient-specific characteristics. The low certainty of evidence underscores the need for adequately powered, methodologically rigorous trials to definitively establish the comparative efficacy of these two analgesics in the pediatric population. WHAT IS KNOWN: • Ibuprofen and acetaminophen are the two most widely used non-opioid analgesics for acute mild-to-moderate pain in children, and both are recommended as first-line agents by major international guidelines. • Prior meta-analyses in mixed pediatric-adult populations have suggested a modest analgesic advantage of ibuprofen over acetaminophen, but pediatric-specific evidence has remained limited and methodologically heterogeneous. WHAT IS NEW: • This systematic review and meta-analysis, restricted to randomized controlled trials in pediatric populations, found that ibuprofen showed a small effect favoring pain reduction compared with acetaminophen (SMD - 0.28, p = 0.052), although this did not reach conventional statistical significance. • The analgesic advantage of ibuprofen may be more pronounced in pain etiologies with a significant inflammatory component (e.g., fractures). At the same time, both agents appear broadly equivalent in most other acute pediatric pain settings, supporting individualized analgesic selection based on clinical context and patient-specific factors.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Structured robotic colorectal training in a non-tertiary NHS hospital: a 502-case consecutive cohort implementation study.

Robotic-assisted colorectal surgery has expanded rapidly across NHS practice in the UK. Structured unit-wide training pathways are essential for safe technology adoption, yet published outcome data from non-tertiary hospitals remain limited. This study describes the implementation and feasibility of a unit-wide robotic colorectal program at a high-volume non-tertiary hospital, reporting outcomes across 502 consecutive resections performed by eight consultant surgeons and presenting these in the context of nationally published benchmarks. A retrospective cohort study of 502 consecutive robotic colorectal resections performed at York Teaching Hospital between May 2022 and December 2025. Eight consultant surgeons (A-H) participated in a structured four-phase training pathway incorporating simulation training, proctored cases, complexity-based case progression, and formal credentialing. Primary outcomes were 30-day mortality, unplanned return to theatre (RTT), and anastomotic leak (AL). Anastomotic leak was calculated using only patients who underwent anastomosis as the denominator. Procedure-stratified and individual surgeon outcomes with 95% confidence intervals were reported. Risk-adjusted cumulative sum (RA-CUSUM) analysis was performed to evaluate learning curves. Outcomes are presented descriptively alongside nationally published reference data; no formal statistical comparison against national benchmarks was performed. 502 robotic colorectal resections were performed. Mean patient age was 70.0 ± 11.3 years; 58.4% were male. Median ASA grade was III. The indication was malignancy in 89.2% of cases. Length of stay was non-normally distributed and is therefore reported using median and interquartile range in the revised analysis. Key outcomes: - 30-day mortality: 1.0% (5/502; 95% CI 0.4-2.3%) - Unplanned return to theatre (RTT): 5.2% (26/502; 95% CI 3.6-7.5%) - Anastomotic leak (AL): 3.3% (15/450; 95% CI 2.0-5.5%; denominator = patients with anastomosis) - 30-day unplanned readmission: 5.0% (25/502; 95% CI 3.4-7.2%) - Conversion to open surgery: 3.6% (18/502; 95% CI 2.3-5.6%) - Lymph node yield ≥12: 91.3% of cancer resections - R0 resection rate: 95.1% of cancer resections All primary outcomes fell within or below the published reference ranges used for descriptive context. RA-CUSUM trajectories were heterogeneous: no surgeon crossed the predefined upper control limit, but several curves showed later upward movement. Accordingly, the analysis is interpreted as safety surveillance rather than evidence of uniform performance improvement. RA-CUSUM monitoring showed that no surgeon crossed the predefined upper control limit; however, heterogeneous trajectories precluded a claim of uniform performance improvement.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

F-URS with FANS versus mPCNL for 2-3 cm UUTS: a RCT with a subgroup analysis of 2-2.5 cm stones.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the safety and efficacy of flexible ureteroscopy (f-URS) with a flexible and navigable suction ureteral access sheath (FANS) compared with mini-percutaneous nephrolithotomy (mPCNL) in the treatment of 2-3 cm upper urinary tract stones (UUTS), with a prespecified subgroup analysis for stones ≥2 to <2.5 cm. METHODS: This randomized controlled trial enrolled 326 patients with 2-3 cm UUTS between June 2023 and December 2025. Patients were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to undergo either f-URS with FANS or mPCNL. A prespecified subgroup analysis was conducted for stones measuring ≥2 to <2.5 cm. The primary outcomes were the immediate and 1-month stone-free rate (SFR). Secondary outcomes included the operative duration, decrease in haemoglobin, hospital stay, and complication rate. RESULTS: The baseline characteristics were comparable between the two groups. In the overall 2-3 cm cohort, the FANS group achieved immediate and 1-month SFRs comparable to those of the mPCNL group. Although the operative time was longer in the FANS group, it was associated with significantly less haemoglobin loss and a shorter hospital stay, with no significant difference in infection-related complications. Notably, in the subgroup of stones ≥2 to <2.5 cm, the FANS group demonstrated a non-inferior SFR at both time points, and the operative time was not significantly longer than that of the mPCNL group. CONCLUSION: For 2-3 cm UUTS, f-URS with FANS offers a SFR comparable to that of mPCNL, along with the advantages of reduced blood loss and shorter hospitalization. In the ≥2 to <2.5 cm subgroup, FANS shows comprehensive benefits over mPCNL. These findings support FANS as an effective alternative to mPCNL for 2-3 cm stones and a potentially preferred option for stones measuring 2-2.5 cm.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Nimodipine in animal models of demyelination relevant to multiple sclerosis: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Multiple sclerosis (MS) is the most common inflammatory neurodegenerative disease in which axonal injury, neuronal death, and demyelination occur. Treatment for MS relapses remains limited, which alleviates acute loss of function but has no impact on long-term disability. This study aimed to perform a systematic review of the effects of nimodipine on experimental demyelination models, including experimental autoimmune encephalomyelitis (EAE) and Cuprizone models in rodents. METHODS: This study was conducted following the PRISMA statement. A systematic search was performed in PubMed, Scopus, the Cochrane Library, and Google Scholar. The primary outcome was EAE clinical disease severity (peak clinical score and/or cumulative disease burden). Secondary outcomes included relapse activity (when reported), histological myelin outcomes, oligodendrocyte lineage markers, neuroaxonal injury markers, and inflammatory readouts. Risk of bias was assessed using the SYRCLE tool. RESULTS: Out of 4660 results, 5 studies were included in the systematic review (four EAE studies and one cuprizone model). Nimodipine was administered using heterogeneous regimens (oral, intravenous, intraperitoneal, subcutaneous, or osmotic pump delivery; 1-30 mg/kg/day). The included studies reported the variable effects of nimodipine on relapse-related outcomes, myelination, inflammatory processes, and neuroprotection in the EAE model of MS. Across EAE studies, nimodipine generally reduced clinical disease severity or cumulative burden, although relapse-related outcomes were inconsistent. CONCLUSIONS: Preclinical evidence suggests that nimodipine may attenuate disease severity and demyelination and may promote repair-related processes in rodent models relevant to MS. However, to evaluate the clinical applicability of nimodipine in MS patients, well-powered, transparently reported preclinical replication and early-phase clinical studies are required before clinical translation.

Animals↗