Explore the vast range of titles available.

Out of office blood pressure measurements, using either home monitors or 24 hour ambulatory monitoring, is widely recommended for management of hypertension. Though validation protocols, meant to be used by manufacturers, exist for blood pressure monitors, there is scant data in the literature about the accuracy of home blood pressure monitors in actual clinical practice. We performed a chart review in the blood pressure assessment clinic at a tertiary care centre. We assessed the accuracy of home blood pressure monitors used by patients seen in the nephrology clinic in Ottawa between the years 2011 to 2014. We recorded patient demographics and clinical data, including the blood pressure measurements, arm circumference and the manufacturer of the home blood pressure monitor. The average of BP measurements performed with the home blood pressure monitor, were compared to those with the mercury sphygmomanometer. We defined accuracy based on a difference of 5 mm Hg in the blood pressure values between the home monitor and mercury sphygmomanometer readings. The two methods were compared using a Bland-Altman plot and a student's t-test. The study included 210 patients. The mean age of the study population was 67 years and 61% was men. The average mid-arm circumference was 32.2 cms. 30% and 32% of the home BP monitors reported a mean systolic and diastolic BP values, respectively, different from the mercury measurements by 5 mm Hg or more. There was no significant difference between the monitors that were accurate versus those that were not when grouped according to the patient characteristics, cuff size or the brand of the home monitor. An important proportion of home blood pressure monitors used by patients seen in our nephrology clinic were inaccurate. A re-validation of the accuracy and safety of the devices already in use is prudent before relying on these measurements for clinical decisions.

[...]to discard irrelevant studies, two authors (L.G. and M.-C.B.) screened all titles identified through the electronic databases search. [...]to select studies that met our inclusion criteria from the remaining articles, L.G. and M.-C.B. read abstracts and full texts using a study selection form built specifically for this purpose. [...]the results of this review support the development, assessment, and implementation of effective interventions targeting all workers with type 2 diabetes.

Background Contrast-induced acute kidney injury (CI-AKI) is defined as worsening of renal function after the administration of iodinated contrast material. In patients with cardiovascular disease, kidney disease, and/or diabetes, renin-angiotensin system blockers, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, diuretics, and metformin can increase the risk of CI-AKI when undergoing contrast imaging. Despite CI-AKI being the leading iatrogenic cause of acute kidney injury, there is a lack of sufficient scientific evidence supporting which drugs should be stopped, when they should be stopped, and when they should be resumed. The purpose of this systematic review is to assess (1) the effect of withholding medication before contrast procedures on the risk of CI-AKI and other clinical outcomes and (2) the incidence of adverse events occurring after withholding these drugs prior to contrast procedures. This protocol has been registered with PROSPERO, https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/display_record.asp?ID=CRD42016033178 . Methods An information specialist will assist in searching MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane Library databases to identify randomized controlled trials, observational studies, case reports, and case series. Relevant abstracts from professional society meetings and web-based registries of clinical trials will also be included. Studies included will compare patients aged ≥ 18 years instructed to continue taking the drugs of interest and those advised to stop taking them before undergoing contrast procedures. If these drugs are not withheld prior to contrast procedures, the studies must compare patients who are administered these drugs and those who are not before undergoing contrast procedures. Two reviewers will independently screen the titles and abstracts of the studies obtained from the search using pre-defined inclusion criteria and will then extract data from the full texts of selected studies. The quality of the studies will be assessed by two independent reviewers using the Cochrane Risk of Bias 2.0 tool for randomized trials and the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale for observational studies. Discussion This systematic review will provide a synthesis of current evidence on the discontinuation of drugs prior to contrast procedures and its effect on CI-AKI and other clinical outcomes. These findings will provide clinicians with guidelines and serve as a strong research base for future studies in this field. Systematic review registration PROSPERO CRD42016033178

Background Contrast-induced acute kidney injury is a common cause of iatrogenic acute kidney injury (AKI). Most of the published estimates of AKI after contrast use originate from the cardiac catheterization literature despite contrast-enhanced computed tomography (CT) scans being the more common setting for contrast use. This systematic review aims to summarize the current evidence about (1)the risk of AKI following intravenous (IV) contrast-enhanced CT scans and(2) the risk of clinical outcomes (i.e. death, hospitalization and need for renal replacement therapy) due to IV contrast-enhanced CT scans. Methods/Design A systematic literature search for published studies will be performed using MEDLINE, EMBASE and The COCHRANE Library databases. Unpublished studies will be identified by searching through grey literature. No language restriction will be applied. The review will consider all studies that have examined the association between IV contrast media and AKI. To be selected, the study should include two arms: one group of exposed patients who received IV contrast material before CT scans and one group of unexposed group who did not receive contrast material before CT scans. Two authors will independently screen titles and abstracts obtained from electronic databases, extract data and will assess the quality of the studies selected using the Cochrane's ‘Risk of Bias’ assessment tool for randomized trials and the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale for observational studies. A random-effects meta-analysis will be performed if there is no remarkable heterogeneity between studies. Discussion This systematic review will provide synthesis of current evidence around the effect of IV contrast material on AKI and other clinical outcomes. Results will be helpful for making evidence-based recommendations and guidelines for clinical and radiologic settings. Systematic review registration PROSPERO CRD42013003799 .

[..]to discard irrelevant studies, two authors (L.G. and M.-C.B.) screened all titles identified through the electronic databases search. [..]to select studies that met our inclusion criteria from the remaining articles, L.G. and M.-C.B. read abstracts and full texts using a study selection form built specifically for this purpose. [..]the results of this review support the development, assessment, and implementation of effective interventions targeting all workers with type 2 diabetes. 42 references