To save content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about saving content to .
To save content items to your Kindle, first ensure email@example.com
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
Use of second-generation antipsychotics (SGA) has increased in recent years; however, their use and effect on metabolic outcomes has been poorly characterised in population-level studies.
This study aimed to determine the associations between SGA use and metabolic indicators in a general population.
We used data from the Canadian Health Measures Survey, a cross-sectional survey of Canadian households. Participants were Canadians aged 3–79 years, living in one of the ten provinces. Several metabolic indicators were examined, including weight, body mass index, waist circumference, hypertension, diabetes and two definitions of metabolic syndrome.
The proportion of Canadians taking an SGA tripled over the study period. SGA use was significantly associated with hypertension (odds ratio 1.94, 95% CI 1.07–3.55) and abdominal obesity in adults, as defined by the National Cholesterol Education Program–Adult Treatment Panel III (odds ratio 2.62, 95% CI 1.45–4.71).
Evidence of metabolic dysfunction with SGAs is seen in the Canadian population, along with a rapid increase in prevalence of use since 2007.
Our primary objective was to understand the barriers and facilitators associated with the implementation of high-quality clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) for depression and anxiety in patients with dementia or Parkinson’s disease (PD). We conducted focus groups or interviews with participants experiencing dementia or PD, their caregivers, and physicians in Calgary, Alberta, and applied the theoretical domains framework and behaviour change wheel to guide data collection and perform a framework analysis. Thirty-three physicians and seven PD patients/caregivers participated. We report barriers and facilitators to the implementation of guideline recommendations for diagnosis, management, and the use of the guidelines. An overarching theme was the lack of evidence for depression or anxiety disorders in dementia or PD, which was prominent for anxiety versus depression. Patients noted difficulties with communicating symptoms and accessing services. Although guidelines are available, physicians have difficulty implementing certain recommendations due primarily to a lack of evidence regarding efficacy.
Previous research suggests a relationship between attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) and smoking, alcohol and illicit drug use, however most studies have focused on adolescents or young adults, or clinically ascertained samples.
To analyse population-based data on the relationship between ADHD and at-risk health behaviours in adolescents and adults.
Data were derived from a Statistics Canada population-based health survey. The association between the diagnosis of ADHD and smoking, alcohol use, and illicit drug use was examined.
Individuals with ADHD started smoking at a younger age. They consumed more alcoholic drinks on drinking days, and women with ADHD were more likely to engage in binge drinking. Women over the age of 25 and men with ADHD were more likely to meet alcohol-dependence lifetime criteria. People with ADHD were at a greater risk of drug misuse and dependence.
People with ADHD are more likely to partake in at-risk behaviours.
Background: Understanding the epidemiology of traumatic brain injury (TBI) is essential to shape public health policy, implement prevention strategies, and justify allocation of resources toward research, education, and rehabilitation in TBI. There is not, to our knowledge, a systematic review of population-based studies addressing the epidemiology of TBI that includes all subtypes. We performed a comprehensive systematic review and meta-analysis of the worldwide incidence of TBI. Methods: A search was conducted on May 23, 2014, in Medline and EMBASE according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. Abstracts were screened independently and in duplicate to identify original research. Study quality and ascertainment bias were assessed in duplicate using a previously published tool. Demographic data and incidence estimates from each study were recorded, along with stratification by age, gender, year of data collection, and severity. Results: The search strategy yielded 4944 citations. Two hundred and sixteen articles met criteria for full-text review; 144 were excluded. Hand searching resulted in ten additional articles. Eighty-two studies met all eligibility criteria. The pooled annual incidence proportion for all ages was 295 per 100,000 (95% confidence interval: 274-317). The pooled incidence rate for all ages was 349 (95% confidence interval: 96.2-1266) per 100,000 person-years. Incidence proportion and incidence rate were examined to see if associated with age, sex, country, or severity. Conclusions: We conclude that most TBIs are mild and most TBIs occur in males among the adult population. The incidence of TBI varies widely by ages and between countries. Despite being an important medical, economic, and social problem, the global epidemiology of TBI is still not well-characterized in the current literature. Understanding the incidence of TBI, particularly mild TBI, remains challenging because of nonstandardized reporting among neuroepidemiological studies.
Population-based prevalence and incidence studies are essential for understanding the burden of frontotemporal dementia (FTD).
The MEDLINE and EMBASE databases were searched to identify population-based publications from 1985 to 2012, addressing the incidence and/or prevalence of FTD. References of included articles and prior systematic reviews were searched for additional studies. Two reviewers screened all abstracts and full-text reviews, abstracted data and performed quality assessments.
Twenty-six studies were included. Methodological limitations led to wide ranges in the estimates for prevalence (point prevalence 0.01-4.6 per 1000 persons; period prevalence 0.16-31.04 per 1000 persons) and incidence (0.0-0.3 per 1000 person-years). FTD accounted for an average of 2.7% (range 0-9.1%) of all dementia cases among prevalence studies that included subjects 65 and older compared to 10.2% (range 2.8-15.7%) in studies restricted to those aged less than 65. The cumulative numbers of male (373 [52.5%]) and female (338 [47.5%]) cases from studies reporting this information were nearly equal (p=0.18). The behavioural variant FTD (bvFTD) was almost four times as common as the primary progressive aphasias.
Population-based estimates for the epidemiology of FTD varied widely in the included studies. Refinements in the diagnostic process, possibly by the use of validated biomarkers or limiting case ascertainment to specialty services, are needed to obtain more precise estimates of the prevalence and incidence of FTD.
Population-based prevalence and incidence studies are essential for understanding the societal burden of dementia with Lewy bodies (DLB).
The MEDLINE and EMBASE databases were searched to identify publications addressing the incidence and/or prevalence of DLB. References of included articles and prior systematic reviews were searched for additional studies. Two reviewers screened all abstracts and full-text reviews, abstracted data and performed quality assessments.
Twenty-two studies were included. Incidence rates ranged from 0.5 to 1.6 per 1000 person-years. DLB accounted for 3.2-7.1% of all dementia cases in the incidence studies. Point and period prevalence estimates ranged from 0.02 to 63.5 per 1000 persons. Increasing prevalence estimates were reported with increasing age. DLB accounted for from 0.3 to 24.4% of all cases of dementia in the prevalence studies.
DLB becomes more common with increasing age and accounts for about 5% of all dementia cases in older populations.
Updated information on the epidemiology of dementia due to Alzheimer’s disease (AD) is needed to ensure that adequate resources are available to meet current and future healthcare needs. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of the incidence and prevalence of AD.
The MEDLINE and EMBASE databases were searched from 1985 to 2012, as well as the reference lists of selected articles. Included articles had to provide an original population-based estimate for the incidence and/or prevalence of AD. Two individuals independently performed abstract and full-text reviews, data extraction and quality assessments. Random-effects models were employed to generate pooled estimates stratified by age, sex, diagnostic criteria, location (i.e., continent) and time (i.e., when the study was done).
Of 16,066 abstracts screened, 707 articles were selected for full-text review. A total of 119 studies met the inclusion criteria. In community settings, the overall point prevalence of dementia due to AD among individuals 60+ was 40.2 per 1000 persons (CI95%: 29.1-55.6), and pooled annual period prevalence was 30.4 per 1000 persons (CI95%: 15.6-59.1). In community settings, the overall pooled annual incidence proportion of dementia due to AD among individuals 60+ was 34.1 per 1000 persons (CI95%: 16.4-70.9), and the incidence rate was 15.8 per 1000 person-years (CI95%: 12.9-19.4). Estimates varied significantly with age, diagnostic criteria used and location (i.e., continent).
The burden of AD dementia is substantial. Significant gaps in our understanding of its epidemiology were identified, even in a high-income country such as Canada. Future studies should assess the impact of using such newer clinical diagnostic criteria for AD dementia such as those of the National Institute on Aging–Alzheimer’s Association and/or incorporate validated biomarkers to confirm the presence of Alzheimer pathology to produce more precise estimates of the global burden of AD.
Dementia is a common neurological condition affecting many older individuals that leads to a loss of independence, diminished quality of life, premature mortality, caregiver burden and high levels of healthcare utilization and cost. This is an updated systematic review and meta-analysis of the worldwide prevalence and incidence of dementia.
The MEDLINE and EMBASE databases were searched for relevant studies published between 2000 (1985 for Canadian papers) and July of 2012. Papers selected for full-text review were included in the systematic review if they provided an original population-based estimate for the incidence and/or prevalence of dementia. The reference lists of included articles were also searched for additional studies. Two individuals independently performed abstract and full-text review, data extraction, and quality assessment of the papers. Random-effects models and/or meta-regression were used to generate pooled estimates by age, sex, setting (i.e., community, institution, both), diagnostic criteria utilized, location (i.e., continent) and year of data collection.
Of 16,066 abstracts screened, 707 articles were selected for full-text review. A total of 160 studies met the inclusion criteria. Among individuals 60 and over residing in the community, the pooled point and annual period prevalence estimates of dementia were 48.62 (CI95%: 41.98-56.32) and 69.07 (CI95%: 52.36-91.11) per 1000 persons, respectively. The respective pooled incidence rate (same age and setting) was 17.18 (CI95%: 13.90-21.23) per 1000 person-years, while the annual incidence proportion was 52.85 (CI95%: 33.08-84.42) per 1,000 persons. Increasing participant age was associated with a higher dementia prevalence and incidence. Annual period prevalence was higher in North America than in South America, Europe and Asia (in order of decreasing period prevalence) and higher in institutional compared to community and combined settings. Sex, diagnostic criteria (except for incidence proportion) and year of data collection were not associated with statistically significant different estimates of prevalence or incidence, though estimates were consistently higher for females than males.
Dementia is a common neurological condition in older individuals. Significant gaps in knowledge about its epidemiology were identified, particularly with regard to the incidence of dementia in low- and middle-income countries. Accurate estimates of prevalence and incidence of dementia are needed to plan for the health and social services that will be required to deal with an aging population.
Background: The muscular dystrophies are a heterogeneous group of genetic muscle diseases with variable distribution of weakness and mode of inheritance.Methods: We previously performed a systematic review of worldwide population-based studies on Duchenne and Becker muscular dystrophies; the current study focused on the epidemiology of other muscular dystrophies using Medline and EMBASE databases. Two reviewers independently reviewed all abstracts, full-text articles, and abstracted data from 1985 to 2011. Pooling of prevalence estimates was performed using random-effect models.Results: A total of 1104 abstracts and 167 full-text articles were reviewed. Thirty-one studies met all eligibility criteria and were included in the final analysis. The overall pooled prevalence of combined muscular dystrophies was 16.14 (confidence interval [CI], 11.21-23.23) per 100,000. The prevalence estimates per 100,000 were 8.26 (CI, 4.99-13.68) for myotonic dystrophy, 3.95 (CI, 2.89-5.40) for facioscapulohumeral dystrophy, 1.63 (CI, 0.94-2.81) for limb girdle muscular dystrophy, and 0.99 (CI, 0.62-1.57) for congenital muscular dystrophies.Conclusions: The studies differed widely in their approaches to case ascertainment, and substantial gaps remain in the global estimates of many other types of muscular dystrophies. Additional epidemiological studies using standardized diagnostic criteria as well as multiple sources of case ascertainment will help address the economic impact and health care burden of muscular dystrophies worldwide.
The treatment of chronic daily headache (CDH) due to medication overuse remains a common and difficult problem. For selected patients refractory to outpatient management we have used a treatment protocol using dihydroergotamine (DHE) as introduced by Raskin, during a brief (typically 48 hours) in-patient stay. While many studies have documented the short-term efficacy of the DHE protocol, there are limited data on its long-term effects. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of the protocol on headache frequency and severity, analgesic use, absences from work, and quality of life, at three months post treatment and the present time.
A retrospective chart review of all patients admitted for the DHE protocol from 1991 to 1996 revealed 174 cases. Of these, 132 patients were interviewed by phone.
The DHE protocol was shown to decrease headache frequency, severity, headache medication use, and absences from work both at three months and the time of interview.
This study has the largest patient base and the longest follow-up period for the use of DHE for CDH. The results confirm that the DHE protocol is helpful in breaking the cycle of CDH, although the long-term outcomes of this study are more conservative than other studies have reported.
To provide an overview of the objectives and target population of the guideline, and to review the general principles of acute pharmacological migraine therapy.
A general literature review and several consensus groups were used to formulate an expert consensus for the general use of acute migraine medications.
The objective of the guideline is to assist the physician in choosing an appropriate acute migraine medication for an individual with migraine, and thereby to reduce migraine-related disability. The target population includes adults with episodic migraine (patients with migraine headache < 15 days/month). This guideline is intended primarily for physicians who treat patients with migraine. Other health professionals may also find this guideline helpful. Acute migraine therapy should be considered for the great majority of patients with migraine. A specific acute medication is chosen based on evidence for efficacy, tolerability, migraine attack severity, patient preference, and on the presence of co-existing disorders. General principles of acute migraine therapy include that the response of a patient to any given medication cannot be predicted with certainty, and that treatment early in the attack is generally more effective than treatment later once the migraine attack is fully developed. A suitable treatment approach (stratified or stepped approaches) and drug formulation (injection, tablet, wafer, powdered formulation, or nasal spray) should be chosen based on patient clinical features. Excessively frequent use of acute medications (medication overuse) should be avoided. Two or more acute medications can be combined if necessary.
This guideline provides evidence-based advice on the use of acute medications for migraine, and should provide useful guidance for acute migraine therapy to both health professionals and patients.
To assess the evidence base for drugs used for acute treatment of episodic migraine (headache on < 14 days a month) in Canada.
A detailed search strategy was employed to find relevant published clinical trials of drugs used in Canada for the acute treatment of migraine in adults. Primarily meta-analyses and systematic reviews were included. Where these were not available for a drug or were out of date, individual clinical trial reports were utilized. Only double-blind randomized clinical trials with placebo or active drug controls were included in the analysis. Recommendations and levels of evidence were graded according to the principles of the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) Working Group, using a consensus group.
Eighteen acute migraine medications and two adjunctive medications were evaluated. Twelve acute medications received a strong recommendation with supporting high quality evidence for use in acute migraine therapy (almotriptan, eletriptan, frovatriptan, naratriptan, rizatriptan, sumatriptan, zolmitriptan, ASA, ibuprofen, naproxen sodium, diclofenac potassium, and acetaminophen). Four acute medications received a weak recommendation for use with low or moderate quality evidence (dihydroergotamine, ergotamine, codeine-containing combination analgesics, and tramadol-containing combination analgesics). Three of these medications were NOT recommended for routine use (ergotamine, and codeine- and tramadol-containing medications), and strong recommendations were made to avoid use of butorphanol and butalbital-containing medications. Both metoclopramide and domperidone received a strong recommendation for use with acute migraine attack medications where necessary.
Our targeted review formulated recommendations for the available acute medications for migraine treatment according to the GRADE method. This should be helpful for practitioners who prescribe medications for acute migraine treatment.
The primary objective of this guideline is to assist the practitioner in choosing an appropriate acute medication for an individual with migraine, based on current evidence in the medical literature and expert consensus. It is focused on patients with episodic migraine (headache on < 14 days a month).
A detailed search strategy was used to find relevant meta-analyses, systematic reviews and randomized double-blind controlled trials. Recommendations were graded with the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) Working Group, using a consensus group. In addition, a general literature review and expert consensus were used for aspects of acute therapy for which randomized controlled trials are not available.
Twelve acute medications received a strong recommendation for use in acute migraine therapy (almotriptan, eletriptan, frovatriptan, naratriptan, rizatriptan, sumatriptan, zolmitriptan, ASA, ibuprofen, naproxen sodium, diclofenac potassium, and acetaminophen). Four received a weak recommendation for use (dihydroergotamine, ergotamine, codeine-containing combination analgesics, and tramadol-containing combination analgesics). Three of these were NOT recommended for routine use (ergotamine, and codeine- and tramadol-containing medications). Strong recommendations were made to avoid use of butorphanol and butalbital-containing medications. Metoclopramide and domperidone were strongly recommended for use where necessary. Our analysis also resulted in the formulation of eight general acute migraine treatment strategies. These were grouped into: 1) two mild-moderate attack strategies, 2) two moderate-severe attack or NSAID failure strategies, 3) three refractory migraine strategies, and 4) a vasoconstrictor unresponsive-contraindicated strategy. Additional strategies were developed for menstrual migraine, migraine during pregnancy, and migraine during lactation.
This guideline provides evidence-based advice on acute pharmacological migraine therapy, and should be helpful to both health professionals and patients. The available medications have been organized into a series of strategies based on patient clinical features. These strategies may help practitioners make appropriate acute medication choices for patients with migraine.
In our targeted review (Section 2), 12 acute medications received a strong recommendation for use in acute migraine therapy while four received a weak recommendation for use. Strong recommendations were made to avoid use of two other medications, except for exceptional circumstances. Two anti-emetics received strong recommendations for use as needed.
To organize the available acute migraine medications into acute migraine treatment strategies in order to assist the practitioner in choosing a specific medication(s) for an individual patient.
Acute migraine treatment strategies were developed based on the targeted literature review used for the development of this guideline (Section 2), and a general literature review. Expert consensus groups were used to refine and validate these strategies.
Based on evidence for drug efficacy, drug side effects, migraine severity, and coexistent medical disorders, our analysis resulted in the formulation of eight general acute migraine treatment strategies. These could be grouped into four categories: 1) two mild-moderate attack strategies, 2) two moderate-severe attack or NSAID failure strategies, 3) three refractory migraine strategies, and 4) a vasoconstrictor unresponsive-contraindicated strategy. In addition, strategies were developed for menstrual migraine, migraine during pregnancy, and migraine during lactation. The eight general treatment strategies were coordinated with a “combined acute medication approach” to therapy which used features of both the “stratified” and the “step care across attacks” approaches to acute migraine management.
The available medications for acute migraine treatment can be organized into a series of strategies based on patient clinical features. These strategies may help practitioners make appropriate acute medication choices for patients with migraine.
This article reviews the literature for evidence of a disorder of circadian rhythm and hypothalamic function in cluster headache. Cluster headache exhibits diurnal and seasonal rhythmicity. While cluster headache has traditionally been thought of as a vascular headache disorder, its periodicity suggests involvement of the suprachiasmatic nucleus of the hypothalamus, the biological clock. Normal circadian function and seasonal changes occurring in the suprachiasmatic nucleus and pineal gland are correlated to the clinical features and abnormalities of circadian rhythm seen in cluster headache. Abnormalities in the secretion of melatonin and cortisol in patients with cluster headache, neuroimaging of cluster headache attacks, and the use of melatonin as preventative therapy in cluster headache are discussed in this review. While the majority of studies exploring the relationship between circadian rhythms and cluster headache are not new, we have entered a new diagnostic and therapeutic era in primary headache disorders. The time has come to use the evidence for a disorder of circadian rhythm in cluster headache to further development of chronobiotics in the treatment of this disorder.