Objective A growing body of evidence suggests that individuals with eating disorders (EDs) have experienced deteriorating symptoms, increased isolation, and an increase in hospital admissions as a result of the COVID‐19 pandemic. Despite this, no systematic reviews have been conducted examining the COVID‐19 and ED peer‐reviewed literature. Therefore, this systematic review aimed to synthesize the impact of the COVID‐19 pandemic on individuals with EDs. Method Database searches of the peer‐reviewed literature were completed in the subsequent databases: CINAHL, Embase, MEDLINE, and PsycINFO (from November 2019 to October 20, 2021). All research reporting on the relationship between the COVID‐19 pandemic on individuals with EDs were included. Results Fifty‐three studies met the inclusion criteria, including 36,485 individuals with EDs. The pooled hospital admissions across the studies demonstrated on average a 48% (pre = 591, post = 876, n = 10 studies) increase in admissions during the pandemic compared to previous pre‐pandemic timepoints. In this review, 36% of studies ( n = 19) documented increases in eating disorder symptoms during the pandemic, this increase in eating disorder symptoms were documented in AN, BED, BN, and OFSED patients. Studies also demonstrated increases in anxiety ( n = 9) and depression ( n = 8), however patterns of change appeared to be diagnostic and timing specific (e.g., lockdowns). Discussion We found a large increase in the number of hospitalizations and an increase in ED symptoms, anxiety, depression, and changes to BMI in ED patients during the pandemic. However, these changes appeared to be diagnostic and timing specific. Many qualitative studies described deterioration in ED symptomatology due to decreased access to care and treatment, changes to routine and loss of structure, negative influence of the media, and social isolation. Future studies are needed to focus on pediatric populations, new ED diagnoses, and severity of illness at presentation. Public Significance The scientific literature suggests that individuals with eating disorders have experienced deteriorating symptoms, increased isolation, and an increase in hospital admissions as a result of the COVID‐19 pandemic. This study synthesized 53 articles and explored the impact of the COVID‐19 pandemic on patients with eating disorders. We found increases in eating disorder symptoms during the pandemic; this increase in eating disorder symptoms was documented in patients with common eating disorders including anorexia nervosa, binge‐eating disorder, bulimia nervosa, and other specified feeding and eating disorders. This review also demonstrated changes in body mass index (an index used to classify underweight, overweight, and obesity in adults) and increas...

Objective To compare methotrexate based disease modifying antirheumatic drug (DMARD) treatments for rheumatoid arthritis in patients naive to or with an inadequate response to methotrexate.Design Systematic review and Bayesian random effects network meta-analysis of trials assessing methotrexate used alone or in combination with other conventional synthetic DMARDs, biologic drugs, or tofacitinib in adult patients with rheumatoid arthritis.Data sources Trials were identified from Medline, Embase, and Central databases from inception to 19 January 2016; abstracts from two major rheumatology meetings from 2009 to 2015; two trial registers; and hand searches of Cochrane reviews.Study selection criteria Randomized or quasi-randomized trials that compared methotrexate with any other DMARD or combination of DMARDs and contributed to the network of evidence between the treatments of interest.Main outcomes American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 50 response (major clinical improvement), radiographic progression, and withdrawals due to adverse events. A comparison between two treatments was considered statistically significant if its credible interval excluded the null effect, indicating >97.5% probability that one treatment was superior.Results 158 trials were included, with between 10 and 53 trials available for each outcome. In methotrexate naive patients, several treatments were statistically superior to oral methotrexate for ACR50 response: sulfasalazine and hydroxychloroquine (“triple therapy”), several biologics (abatacept, adalimumab, etanercept, infliximab, rituximab, tocilizumab), and tofacitinib. The estimated probability of ACR50 response was similar between these treatments (range 56-67%), compared with 41% with methotrexate. Methotrexate combined with adalimumab, etanercept, certolizumab, or infliximab was statistically superior to oral methotrexate for inhibiting radiographic progression, but the estimated mean change over one year with all treatments was less than the minimal clinically important difference of 5 units on the Sharp-van der Heijde scale. Triple therapy had statistically fewer withdrawals due to adverse events than methotrexate plus infliximab. After an inadequate response to methotrexate, several treatments were statistically superior to oral methotrexate for ACR50 response: triple therapy, methotrexate plus hydroxychloroquine, methotrexate plus leflunomide, methotrexate plus intramuscular gold, methotrexate plus most biologics, and methotrexate plus tofacitinib. The probability of response was 61% with triple therapy and ranged widely (27-70%) with other treatments. No treatment was statistically superior to oral methotrexate for inhibiting radiographic progression. Methotrexate plus abatacept had a statistically lower rate of withdrawals due to adverse events than several treatments.Conclusions Triple therapy (methotrexate plus sulfasalazine plus hydroxychloroquine) and most regimens combining biologic DMARDs with methotrexate were effective in controlling disease activity, and all were gene...

Whether the lower risk of mortality associated with arteriovenous fistula use in hemodialysis patients is due to the avoidance of catheters or if healthier patients are simply more likely to have fistulas placed is unknown. To provide clarification, we determined the proportion of access-related deaths in a retrospective cohort study of patients aged $18 years who initiated hemodialysis between 2004 and 2012 at five Canadian dialysis programs. A total of 3168 patients initiated dialysis at the participating centers; 2300 met our inclusion criteria. Two investigators independently adjudicated cause of death using explicit criteria and determined whether a death was access-related. We observed significantly lower mortality in individuals who underwent a predialysis fistula attempt than in those without a predialysis fistula attempt in patients aged ,65 years (hazard ratio [HR], 0.49; 95% confidence interval [95% CI], 0.29 to 0.82) and in the first 2 years of follow-up in those aged $65 years (HR 0-24 months , 0.60; 95% CI, 0.43 to 0.84; HR 24+ months , 1.83; 95% CI, 1.25 to 2.67). Sudden deaths that occurred out of hospital accounted for most of the deaths, followed by deaths due to cardiovascular disease and infectious complications. We found only 2.3% of deaths to be access-related. In conclusion, predialysis fistula attempt may associate with a lower risk of mortality. However, the excess mortality observed in patients treated with catheters does not appear to be due to direct, access-related complications but is likely the result of residual confounding, unmeasured comorbidity, or treatment selection bias.

No abstract