Objective Our aim was to assess the safety of cyclooxygenase-2 (COX-2) inhibitors in the management of osteoarthritis (OA) in a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized, placebo-controlled trials. Methods A comprehensive literature search was undertaken in the databases MEDLINE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (Ovid CENTRAL) and Scopus. Randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group trials that assessed adverse events (AEs) with COX-2 inhibitors in patients with OA were eligible for inclusion. Two authors appraised titles, abstracts and full-text papers for suitability and then assessed the studies for random sequence generation, allocation concealment, blinding of participants and personnel, blinding of outcome assessment, incomplete outcome data and selective outcomes reporting. The primary outcomes of interest were gastrointestinal disorders, cardiac disorders, vascular disorders, nervous system disorders, skin and subcutaneous tissue disorders, hepatobiliary disorders, renal and urinary disorders, as well as overall severe and serious AEs, drug-related AEs and mortality. Secondary outcomes were withdrawals due to AEs (i.e. the number of participants who stopped the treatment due to an AE) and total number of AEs (i.e. the number of patients who experienced any AE at least once). Results Database searches identified 2149 records from which, after exclusions, 40 trials were included in the meta-analysis. The use of COX-2 inhibitors in OA was associated with a significant increased risk of drug-related AEs compared with placebo (relative risk (RR) 1.26, 95% CI 1.09–1.46; I² = 24%). The risk of upper gastrointestinal complications (including dyspepsia, gastritis and heartburn) was significantly increased with COX-2 inhibitors versus placebo (RR 1.19, 95% CI 1.03–1.38; I² = 0%), particularly for abdominal pain, which increased by 40% with COX-2 inhibitors (RR 1.40, 95% CI 1.08–1.80; I² = 0%). The risk of hypertension increased by 45% overall (RR 1.45, 95% CI 1.01–2.10; I² = 25%); however, when rofecoxib was removed from the analysis the risk of hypertension in the COX-2 inhibitor group was no longer significant (RR 1.21, 95% CI 0.80–1.83; I² = 20%). The overall risk of heart failure and edema was increased by nearly 70% with COX-2 inhibitors versus placebo (RR 1.68, 95% CI 1.22–2.31; 0%) and this level of risk did not change appreciably when rofecoxib was excluded (RR 1.67, 95% CI 1.21–2.29; 0%). Conclusions In our analysis, COX-2 inhibitors were associated with an increased risk of upper gastrointestinal AEs, especially abdominal pain. We also found an increased risk of cardiovascular AEs with COX-2 inhibitors, namely hypertension, heart failure and edema.

Context: Product placement strategies have been used to influence customers’ food purchases in food stores for some time; however, assessment of the evidence that these techniques can limit unhealthy, and promote healthy, food choices has not been completed. Objective: This systematic review aimed to determine how product placement strategies, availability, and positioning, in physical retail food stores located in high-income countries, influence dietary-related behaviors. Data Sources: From a search of 9 databases, 38 articles, 17 observational studies, and 22 intervention studies met the study inclusion criteria. Data Extraction: Two reviewers independently extracted data relating to study design, study population, exposures, outcomes, and key results. Each study was also assessed for risk of bias in relation to the research question. Data Analysis: Meta-analysis was not possible owing to heterogeneous study designs and outcomes. As recommended by Cochrane, results were synthesized in effect direction plots using a vote-counting technique which recorded the direction of effect and significance level according to the expected relationship for health improvement. Conclusions: The majority of studies showed that greater availability and more prominent positioning of healthy foods, or reduced availability and less prominent positioning of unhealthy foods, related to better dietary-related behaviors. A large number of results, however, were nonsignificant, which likely reflects the methodological difficulties inherent in this research field. Adequately powered intervention studies that test both the independent and additive effects of availability and positioning strategies are needed. Systematic Review Registration: PROSPERO registration no. 42016048826

Objective We aimed to assess the safety of opioids in the management of osteoarthritis (OA) in a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized, placebo-controlled trials. Methods A comprehensive literature search was undertaken in the MEDLINE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (Ovid CENTRAL), and Scopus electronic databases. Randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group trials that assessed adverse events (AEs) with opioids in patients with OA were eligible for inclusion. Two authors appraised titles, abstracts and full-text papers for suitability and then assessed the studies for random sequence generation, allocation concealment, blinding of participants and personnel, blinding of outcome assessment, incomplete outcome data and selective outcomes reporting. The primary outcomes of interest were gastrointestinal (GI) disorders, cardiac disorders, vascular disorders, nervous system disorders, skin and subcutaneous tissue disorders, renal and urinary disorders, respiratory, thoracic and mediastinal disorders, as well as overall severe and serious AEs and drug-related AEs. Secondary outcomes were withdrawals due to AEs (i.e. the number of participants who stopped the treatment due to an AE) and total number of AEs (i.e. the number of patients who experienced any AE at least once). Results Database searches identified 2189 records, from which, after exclusions, 17 papers were included in the meta-analysis. More disorders of the lower GI tract (constipation, fecaloma) were reported with both immediate-release (IR) and extended-release (ER) formulations of opioids versus placebo: IR opioids (relative risk [RR] 5.20, 95% confidence interval [CI] 3.42–7.89); ER opioids (RR 4.22, 95% CI 3.44–5.17). The risk of upper GI AEs increased fourfold with ER opioids compared with placebo (RR 4.03, 95% CI 0.87–18.62), and the risk of nausea, vomiting or loss of appetite increased four- to fivefold with both formulations: IR opioids (RR 3.39, 95% CI 2.22–5.18); ER opioids (RR 4.03, 95% CI 3.37–4.83). An increased risk of dermatologic AEs (rash and pruritis; IR opioids: RR 3.60, 95% CI 1.74–7.43; ER opioids: RR 7.87, 95% CI 5.20–11.89) and central nervous system disorders (dizziness, headache, fatigue, somnolence, insomnia; IR opioids: RR 2.76, 95% CI 1.90–4.02; ER opioids: RR 2.76, 95% CI 2.19–3.47) was found with all opioid formulations versus placebo. Conclusions Our results confirm that there are considerable safety and tolerability issues surrounding the use of opioids in OA, and support the recommendation of international and national guidelines to use opioids in OA after other analgesic options, and for short time periods.

Regular physical activity (PA) is associated with reduced risk of the development and progression of musculoskeletal, metabolic and vascular disease. However, PA declines with age and this can contribute to multiple adverse outcomes. The aims of this study were to describe the relationship between accelerometer-determined PA, body composition and sarcopenia (the loss of muscle mass and function with age). Seven-day PA was measured using the GENEactiv accelerometer among 32 men and 99 women aged 74–84 years who participated in the Hertfordshire Sarcopenia Study. We measured mean daily acceleration and minutes/day spent in non-sedentary and moderate-to-vigorous physical activity (MVPA) levels. Body composition was measured by dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry, muscle strength by grip dynamometry and function by gait speed. Sarcopenia was defined according to the EWGSOP diagnostic algorithm. Men and women spent a median (inter-quartile range) of 138.8 (82, 217) and 186 (122, 240) minutes/day engaging in non-sedentary activity but only 14.3 (1.8, 30.2) and 9.5 (2.1, 18.6) min in MVPA, respectively. Higher levels of PA were associated with reduced adiposity, faster walking speed and decreased risk of sarcopenia. For example, a standard deviation (SD) increase in mean daily acceleration was associated with an increase in walking speed of 0.25 (95% CI 0.05, 0.45) SDs and a reduction in the risk of sarcopenia of 35% (95% CI 1, 57%) in fully adjusted analyses. PA was not associated with hand grip strength. Community-dwelling older adults in this study were largely sedentary but there was evidence that higher levels of activity were associated with reduced adiposity and improved function. PA at all intensity levels in later life may help maintain physical function and protect against sarcopenia.

Objectives: Adolescent health behaviours do not support optimal development. Adolescents are reportedly difficult to engage in health behaviour improvement initiatives. Little is known about what adolescents value in relation to diet and physical activity or how best to target these in health interventions. This study explored adolescents’ values in relation to diet and physical activity and how these values can inform health intervention design. Design: Qualitative semi‐structured interviews explored adolescents’ lives, what they thought about diet and physical activity and what might support them to improve their health behaviours. Methods: A total of 13 group interviews were conducted with 54 adolescents aged 13–14 years, of whom 49% were girls and 95% identified as White British. Participants were recruited from a non‐selective secondary school in a large southern UK city. Inductive thematic analysis was used to identify key adolescent values. Results: Adolescents valued being with their friends, doing what they enjoyed and were good at; being healthy was important to them but only if achievable without compromising other things that are important to them. The need to be healthy was not aligned with adolescents’ basic psychological needs, nor their strongly held priorities and values. Conclusions: Health is not a motivating factor for adolescents; therefore, interventions designed solely to improve health are unlikely to engage them. Instead, interventions that align with the values and priorities specified by adolescents are more likely to be effective in supporting them to eat well and be more active.