BackgroundMobile phone usage has been rapidly increasing worldwide. mHealth could efficiently deliver high-quality health care, but the evidence supporting its current effectiveness is still mixed.ObjectiveWe performed a systematic review of systematic reviews to assess the impact or effectiveness of mobile health (mHealth) interventions in different health conditions and in the processes of health care service delivery.MethodsWe used a common search strategy of five major scientific databases, restricting the search by publication date, language, and parameters in methodology and content. Methodological quality was evaluated using the Measurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews (AMSTAR) checklist.ResultsThe searches resulted in a total of 10,689 articles. Of these, 23 systematic reviews (371 studies; more than 79,665 patients) were included. Seventeen reviews included studies performed in low- and middle-income countries. The studies used diverse mHealth interventions, most frequently text messaging (short message service, SMS) applied to different purposes (reminder, alert, education, motivation, prevention). Ten reviews were rated as low quality (AMSTAR score 0-4), seven were rated as moderate quality (AMSTAR score 5-8), and six were categorized as high quality (AMSTAR score 9-11). A beneficial impact of mHealth was observed in chronic disease management, showing improvement in symptoms and peak flow variability in asthma patients, reducing hospitalizations and improving forced expiratory volume in 1 second; improving chronic pulmonary diseases symptoms; improving heart failure symptoms, reducing deaths and hospitalization; improving glycemic control in diabetes patients; improving blood pressure in hypertensive patients; and reducing weight in overweight and obese patients. Studies also showed a positive impact of SMS reminders in improving attendance rates, with a similar impact to phone call reminders at reduced cost, and improved adherence to tuberculosis and human immunodeficiency virus therapy in some scenarios, with evidence of decrease of viral load.ConclusionsAlthough mHealth is growing in popularity, the evidence for efficacy is still limited. In general, the methodological quality of the studies included in the systematic reviews is low. For some fields, its impact is not evident, the results are mixed, or no long-term studies exist. Exceptions include the moderate quality evidence of improvement in asthma patients, attendance rates, and increased smoking abstinence rates. Most studies were performed in high-income countries, implying that mHealth is still at an early stage of development in low-income countries.

Visceral leishmaniasis (VL) is a rare disease in solid-organ transplant (SOT) recipients. Therefore, little is known about the risk factors and disease behavior in the transplant setting. This multicenter, matched case-control study (1:2 ratio) was designed to determine the risk factors, clinical features and outcomes of VL among this population. Control and case subjects were matched by center, transplant type and timing. Thirty-six VL cases were identified among 25 139 SOT recipients (0.1%). VL occurred 5.7-fold more frequently in Brazil than in Spain, presenting a median time of 11 months after transplantation. High-dose prednisone in the preceding 6 months was associated with VL. Patients were diagnosed over 1 month after symptom onset in 25% of cases. Thirty-one patients (86%) were febrile upon diagnosis, 81% exhibited visceromegaly and 47% showed pancytopenia. Concomitant infection was common. Parasites were identified in 89% of patients; the remaining patients were diagnosed by serology. The majority of the patients received amphotericin B. Relapses occurred in 25.7% of cases, and the crude mortality rate was 2.8%. VL after SOT is related to the VL prevalence in the general population. Delayed diagnosis frequently occurs. Liposomal amphotericin is the most commonly used therapy; mortality is low, although relapses are common. Clinical Microbiology and Infection

No abstract

BackgroundDespite the promise of telemedicine to improve care for ischaemic heart disease, there are significant obstacles to implementation. Demonstrating improvement in patient-centred outcomes is important to support development of these innovative strategies.ObjectiveTo assess the impact of telemedicine interventions on mortality after acute myocardial infarction (AMI).MethodsArticles were searched in MEDLINE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Literatura Latino-Americana e do Caribe em Ciências da Saúde (LILACS), Base de Dados de Enfermagem (BDENF), Indice Bibliográfico Español en Ciencias de la Salud (IBECs), Web of Science, Scopus and Google Scholar, from January 2004 to January 2018. Study selection and data extraction were performed by two independent reviewers. In-hospital mortality (primary outcome), and door-to-balloon (DTB) time, 30-day mortality and long-term mortality (secondary outcomes) were assessed. Random effects models were applied to estimate pooled results.ResultsThirty non-randomised controlled and seven quasi-experimental studies were included (16 960 patients). They were classified as moderate or serious risk of bias by ROBINS-I (Risk Of Bias In Non-randomized Studies–of Interventions tool). In 31 studies, the intervention was prehospital ECG transmission. Telemedicine was associated with reduced in-hospital mortality compared with usual care (relative risk (RR) 0.63(95% confidence interval[CI] 0.55 to 0.72); I2 <0.001%). DTB time was consistently reduced (mean difference −28 (95% CI −35 to –20) min), but showed large heterogeneity (I2=94%). Thirty-day mortality (RR 0.62;95% CI 0.43 to 0.85) and long-term mortality (RR 0.61(95% CI 0.40 to 0.92)) were also reduced, with moderate heterogeneity (I2=52%).ConclusionsThere is moderate-quality evidence that telemedicine strategies, in particular ECG transmission, combined with the usual care for AMI are associated with reduced in-hospital mortality and very-low quality evidence that they reduce DTB time, 30-day mortality and long-term mortality.

Trastuzumab, a monoclonal antibody against the HER2 receptor, is a major breakthrough in the treatment of HER2+ breast cancer. However, its high molecular weight precludes it from crossing the intact blood-brain barrier, making the central nervous system a sanctuary to HER2+ breast cancer metastases. We prospectively assessed functional outcome and toxicity of administering trastuzumab directly into the cerebrospinal fluid of a patient with leptomeningeal carcinomatosis and brain metastases from HER2+ breast cancer that had already been treated with other intrathecal chemotherapy, with no benefit. Upon signed informed consent, weekly lumbar puncture with administration of trastuzumab 25mg was begun to a 44 year-old women with metastatic breast cancer (lymph node, bone, lung and liver involvement) previously treated with tamoxifen, letrozole, anthracyclines, taxanes, capecitabine, intravenous trastuzumab and lapatinib. She received 67 weekly administrations of intrathecal trastuzumab with marked clinical improvement and no adverse events. She survived 27 months after leptomeningeal carcinomatosis diagnosis.A complete leptomeningeal response, with no evidence of leptomeningeal metastasis at necropsy, was achieved. We believe that intrathecal trastuzumab administration should be prospectively evaluated to confirm clinical activity and optimize dose, schedule and duration of treatment.