Malnutrition is prevalent among hospitalized patients in developed countries, contributing to negative health outcomes and increased healthcare costs. Timely identification and management of malnutrition are crucial. The lack of a universally accepted definition and standardized diagnostic criteria for malnutrition has led to the development of various screening tools, each with varying validity. This complicates early identification of malnutrition, hindering effective intervention strategies. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to identify the most valid and reliable nutritional screening tool for assessing the risk of malnutrition in hospitalized adults. A systematic literature search was conducted to identify validation studies published from inception to November 2023, in the Pubmed/MEDLINE, Embase, and CINAHL databases. This systematic review was registered in INPLASY (INPLASY202090028). The risk of bias and quality of included studies were assessed using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies version 2 (QUADAS-2). Meta-analyses were performed for screening tools accuracy using the symmetric hierarchical summary receiver operative characteristics models. Of the 1646 articles retrieved, 60 met the inclusion criteria and were included in the systematic review, and 21 were included in the meta-analysis. A total of 51 malnutrition risk screening tools and 9 reference standards were identified. The meta-analyses assessed four common malnutrition risk screening tools against two reference standards (Subjective Global Assessment [SGA] and European Society for Clinical Nutrition and Metabolism [ESPEN] criteria). The Malnutrition Universal Screening Tool (MUST) vs SGA had a sensitivity (95% Confidence Interval) of 0.84 (0.73-0.91), and specificity of 0.85 (0.75-0.91). The MUST vs ESPEN had a sensitivity of 0.97 (0.53-0.99) and specificity of 0.80 (0.50-0.94). The Malnutrition Screening Tool (MST) vs SGA had a sensitivity of 0.81 (0.67-0.90) and specificity of 0.79 (0.72-0.74). The Mini Nutritional Assessment-Short Form (MNA-SF) vs ESPEN had a sensitivity of 0.99 (0.41-0.99) and specificity of 0.60 (0.45-0.73). The Nutrition Universal Screening Tool-2002 (NRS-2002) vs SGA had a sensitivity of 0.76 (0.58-0.87) and specificity of 0.86 (0.76-0.93). The MUST demonstrated high accuracy in detecting malnutrition risk in hospitalized adults. However, the quality of the studies included varied greatly, possibly introducing bias in the results. Future research should compare tools within a specific patient population using a valid and universal gold standard to ensure improved patient care and outcomes.

To compare the use of carbetocin and oxytocin in the prevention of postpartum hemorrhage after cesarean section. The present study was a prospective double-blind randomized controlled clinical trial performed in two university-based hospitals in Tehran, Iran. Two hundred and twenty women with the gestational age of more than 37 weeks, who needed cesarean operation, participated in the study. Patients were assigned to receive either a single 100 μg IV dose of carbetocin or a standard 30-international unit IV infusion of oxytocin during 2 h after delivery of placenta. The primary outcome measures were postpartum hemorrhage requiring additional uterotonic drugs, bleeding volume, and the hemoglobin drops. There were meaningful differences in carbetocin versus oxytocin group regarding the hemoglobin drops (1.01 versus 2.05, p = .01), bleeding volume (430.68 CC versus 552.6 CC, p < .001), uterine massages frequency (3.7 versus 4.26, p < .001), and uterine height at 2, 4, and 24 h (p < .001). Oxytocin side effects were significantly higher in comparison with the carbetocin except pruritus which was observed in 27% of patients in the carbetocin versus no cases in the oxytocin group. It may be concluded that carbetocin is a good alternative modality to conventional uterotonic agents such as oxytocin for the prevention of postpartum hemorrhage after cesarean sections. Registration ID in IRCT: NCT02079558.

Musculoskeletal disorders (MSD) are among the most frequent and costly occupational health problems with a rising prevalence globally. This systematic review with meta-analysis was conducted to know and evaluate the prevalence of MSD by anatomic location among hotel housekeepers (HHs) and cleaners. Electronic searches were conducted in PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, Dialnet Plus, PEDro and Cochrane Database for Systematic Reviews using a search strategy to identify cross-sectional studies reporting on the prevalence of MSD in HHs or cleaners. The risk of bias was assessed with Joanna Briggs Institute tool for systematic reviews. A random-effects model was used in the meta-analysis. Nineteen studies were included in the systematic review, nine of them in the meta-analysis (n = 2299). The study sample sizes ranged from 24 to 1043 participants. The Standardized Nordic Musculoskeletal Questionnaire was the most common tool used to assess MSD among both HHs and cleaners (9/19 of the included studies). The three most affected anatomic locations were the low back 53.9% (95% CI: 43.3-64.6), shoulders 41.4% (95% CI: 27.1-55.8), and wrists/hands 40.1% (95% CI: 24.5-55.7). HHs and cleaners have a high prevalence of MSD. Low back pain is the most prevalent MSD among both HHs and cleaners affecting up to one of two people.