Background Short-term exposure to outdoor fine particulate matter (particles with a median aerodynamic diameter <2.5 μm (PM₂.₅)) air pollution has been associated with adverse health effects. Existing literature reviews have been limited in size and scope. Methods We conducted a comprehensive, systematic review and meta-analysis of 110 peer-reviewed time series studies indexed in medical databases to May 2011 to assess the evidence for associations between PM₂.₅ and daily mortality and hospital admissions for a range of diseases and ages. We stratified our analyses by geographical region to determine the consistency of the evidence worldwide and investigated small study bias. Results Based upon 23 estimates for all-cause mortality, a 10 µg/m³ increment in PM₂.₅ was associated with a 1.04% (95% CI 0.52% to 1.56%) increase in the risk of death. Worldwide, there was substantial regional variation (0.25% to 2.08%). Associations for respiratory causes of death were larger than for cardiovascular causes, 1.51% (1.01% to 2.01%) vs 0.84% (0.41% to 1.28%). Positive associations with mortality for most other causes of death and for cardiovascular and respiratory hospital admissions were also observed. We found evidence for small study bias in single-city mortality studies and in multicity studies of cardiovascular disease. Conclusions The consistency of the evidence for adverse health effects of short-term exposure to PM₂.₅ across a range of important health outcomes and diseases supports policy measures to control PM₂.₅ concentrations. However, reasons for heterogeneity in effect estimates in different regions of the world require further investigation. Small study bias should also be considered in assessing and quantifying health risks from PM₂.₅.

Objectives/Hypothesis: To evaluate the existing level of evidence for tinnitus management strategies identified in the UK Department of Health's Good Practice Guideline.Study Design: Systematic review of peer‐reviewed literature and meta‐analyses.Methods: Searches were conducted in PubMed, Cambridge Scientific Abstracts, Web of Science, and EMBASE (earliest to August 2010), supplemented by hand searches in October 2010. Only randomized controlled trials that used validated questionnaire measures of symptoms (i.e., measures of tinnitus distress, anxiety, depression) were included.Results: Twenty‐eight randomized controlled trials met our inclusion criteria, most of which provide moderate levels of evidence for the effects they reported. Levels of evidence were generally limited by the lack of blinding, lack of power calculations, and incomplete data reporting in these studies. Only studies examining cognitive behavioral therapy were numerous and similar enough to perform meta‐analysis, from which the efficacy of cognitive behavioral therapy (moderate effect size) appears to be reasonably established. Antidepressants were the only drug class to show any evidence of potential benefit.Conclusions: The efficacy of most interventions for tinnitus benefit remains to be demonstrated conclusively. In particular, high‐level assessment of the benefit derived from those interventions most commonly used in practice, namely hearing aids, maskers, and tinnitus retraining therapy needs to be performed.

Background: Short-term exposure to NO₂has been associated with adverse health effects and there is increasing concern that NO₂is causally related to health effects, not merely a marker of traffic-generated pollution. No comprehensive meta-analysis of the time-series evidence on NO₂has been published since 2007.Objective: To quantitatively assess the evidence from epidemiological time-series studies published worldwide to determine whether and to what extent short-term exposure to NO₂is associated with increased numbers of daily deaths and hospital admissions.Design: We conducted a quantitative systematic review of 204 time-series studies of NO₂and daily mortality and hospital admissions for several diagnoses and ages, which were indexed in three bibliographic databases up to May 2011. We calculated random-effects estimates by different geographic regions and globally, and also tested for heterogeneity and small study bias.Results: Sufficient estimates for meta-analysis were available for 43 cause-specific and age-specific combinations of mortality or hospital admissions (25 for 24 h NO₂and 18 of the same combinations for 1 h measures). For the all-age group, a 10 µg/m³increase in 24 h NO₂was associated with increases in all-cause, cardiovascular and respiratory mortality (0.71% (95% CI 0.43% to 1.00%), 0.88% (0.63% to 1.13%) and 1.09% (0.75% to 1.42%), respectively), and with hospital admissions for respiratory (0.57% (0.33% to 0.82%)) and cardiovascular (0.66% (0.32% to 1.01%)) diseases. Evidence of heterogeneity between geographical region-specific estimates was identified in more than half of the combinations analysed.Conclusions: Our review provides clear evidence of health effects associated with short-term exposure to NO₂although further work is required to understand reasons for the regional heterogeneity observed. The growing literature, incorporating large multicentre studies and new evidence from less well-studied regions of the world, supports further quantitative review to assess the independence of NO₂health effects from other air pollutants.

Objectives Current musculoskeletal outcome tools are fragmented across different healthcare settings and conditions. Our objectives were to develop and validate a single musculoskeletal outcome measure for use throughout the pathway and patients with different musculoskeletal conditions: the Arthritis Research UK Musculoskeletal Health Questionnaire (MSK-HQ). Setting A consensus workshop with stakeholders from across the musculoskeletal community, workshops and individual interviews with a broad mix of musculoskeletal patients identified and prioritised outcomes for MSK-HQ inclusion. Initial psychometric validation was conducted in four cohorts from community physiotherapy, and secondary care orthopaedic hip, knee and shoulder clinics. Participants Stakeholders (n=29) included primary care, physiotherapy, orthopaedic and rheumatology patients (n=8); general practitioners, physiotherapists, orthopaedists, rheumatologists and pain specialists (n=7), patient and professional national body representatives (n=10), and researchers (n=4). The four validation cohorts included 570 participants (n=210 physiotherapy, n=150 hip, n=150 knee, n=60 shoulder patients). Outcome measures Outcomes included the MSK-HQ's acceptability, feasibility, comprehension, readability and responder burden. The validation cohort outcomes were the MSK-HQ's completion rate, test–retest reliability and convergent validity with reference standards (EQ-5D-5L, Oxford Hip, Knee, Shoulder Scores, and the Keele MSK-PROM). Results Musculoskeletal domains prioritised were pain severity, physical function, work interference, social interference, sleep, fatigue, emotional health, physical activity, independence, understanding, confidence to self-manage and overall impact. Patients reported MSK-HQ items to be ‘highly relevant’ and ‘easy to understand’. Completion rates were high (94.2%), with scores normally distributed, and no floor/ceiling effects. Test–retest reliability was excellent, and convergent validity was strong (correlations 0.81–0.88). Conclusions A new musculoskeletal outcome measure has been developed through a coproduction process with patients to capture prioritised outcomes for use throughout the pathway and with different musculoskeletal conditions. Four validation cohorts found that the MSK-HQ had high completion rates, excellent test–retest reliability and strong convergent validity with reference standards. Further validation studies are ongoing, including a cohort with rheumatoid/inflammatory arthritis.

Cognitive stimulation therapy (CST) is a well-established group psychosocial intervention for people with dementia. There is evidence that home-based programmes of cognitive stimulation delivered by family caregivers may benefit both the person and the caregiver. However, no previous studies have evaluated caregiver-delivered CST. This study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of a home-based, caregiver-led individual cognitive stimulation therapy (iCST) program in (i) improving cognition and quality of life (QoL) for the person with dementia and (ii) mental and physical health (well-being) for the caregiver. A single-blind, pragmatic randomised controlled trial (RCT) was conducted at eight study sites across the United Kingdom. The intervention and blinded assessment of outcomes were conducted in participants’ homes. Three hundred fifty-six people with mild to moderate dementia and their caregivers were recruited from memory services and community mental health teams (CMHTs). Participants were randomly assigned to iCST (75, 30-min sessions) or treatment as usual (TAU) control over 25 wk. iCST sessions consisted of themed activities designed to be mentally stimulating and enjoyable. Caregivers delivering iCST received training and support from an unblind researcher. Primary outcomes were cognition (Alzheimer’s Disease Assessment Scale–cognitive [ADAS-Cog]) and self-reported QoL (Quality of Life Alzheimer’s Disease [QoL-AD]) for the person with dementia and general health status (Short Form-12 health survey [SF-12]) for the caregiver. Secondary outcomes included quality of the caregiving relationship from the perspectives of the person and of the caregiver (Quality of the Carer Patient Relationship Scale) and health-related QoL (European Quality of Life–5 Dimensions [EQ-5D]) for the caregiver. Intention to treat (ITT) analyses were conducted. At the post-test (26 wk), there were no differences between the iCST and TAU groups in the outcomes of cognition (mean difference [MD] = −0.55, 95% CI −2.00–0.90; p = 0.45) and self-reported QoL (MD = −0.02, 95% CI −1.22–0.82; p = 0.97) for people with dementia, or caregivers’ general health status (MD = 0.13, 95% CI −1.65–1.91; p = 0.89). However, people with dementia receiving iCST rated the relationship with their caregiver more positively (MD = 1.77, 95% CI 0.26–3.28; p = 0.02), and iCST improved QoL for caregivers (EQ-5D, MD = 0.06, 95% CI 0.02–0.10; p = 0.01). Forty percent (72/180) of dyads allocated to iCST completed at least two sessions per week, with 22% (39/180) completing no sessions at all. Study limitations include low adherence to the intervention. There was no evidence that iCST has an effect on cognition or QoL for people with dementia. However, participating in iCST appeared to enhance the quality of the caregiving relationship and caregivers’ QoL. The iCST trial is registered with the ISRCTN registry (identified ISRCTN 65945963, URL: DOI 10.1186/ISRCTN65945963).

Background: Group cognitive stimulation therapy programmes can benefit cognition and quality of life for people with dementia. Evidence for home-based, carer-led cognitive stimulation interventions is limited.Objectives: To evaluate the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of carer-delivered individual cognitive stimulation therapy (iCST) for people with dementia and their family carers, compared with treatment as usual (TAU).Design: A multicentre, single-blind, randomised controlled trial assessing clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness. Assessments were at baseline, 13 weeks and 26 weeks (primary end point).Setting: Participants were recruited through Memory Clinics and Community Mental Health Teams for older people.Participants: A total of 356 caregiving dyads were recruited and 273 completed the trial.Intervention: iCST consisted of structured cognitive stimulation sessions for people with dementia, completed up to three times weekly over 25 weeks. Family carers were supported to deliver the sessions at home.Main outcome measures: Primary outcomes for the person with dementia were cognition and quality of life. Secondary outcomes included behavioural and psychological symptoms, activities of daily living, depressive symptoms and relationship quality. The primary outcome for the family carers was mental/physical health (Short Form questionnaire-12 items). Health-related quality of life (European Quality of Life-5 Dimensions), mood symptoms, resilience and relationship quality comprised the secondary outcomes. Costs were estimated from health and social care and societal perspectives.Results: There were no differences in any of the primary outcomes for people with dementia between intervention and TAU [cognition: mean difference –0.55, 95% confidence interval (CI) –2.00 to 0.90;p-value = 0.45; self-reported quality of life: mean difference –0.02, 95% CI –1.22 to 0.82;p-value = 0.97 at the 6-month follow-up]. iCST did not improve mental/physical health for carers. People with dementia in the iCST group experienced better relationship quality with their carer, but there was no evidence that iCST improved their activities of daily living, depression or behavioural and psychological symptoms. iCST seemed to improve health-related quality of life for carers but did not benefit carers’ resilience or their relationship quality with their relative. Carers conducting more sessions had fewer depressive symptoms. Qualitative data suggested that people with dementia and their carers experienced better communication owing to iCST. Adjusted mean costs were not significantly different between the groups. From the societal perspective, both health gains and cost savings were observed.Conclusions: iCST did not improve cognition or quality of life for people with dementia, or carers’ physical and mental health. Costs of the intervention were offset by some reductions in social care and other services. Although there was some evidence of improvement in terms of the caregiving relationship and carers’ health-related quality of life, iCST does not appear to deliver clinical benefits for cognition and quality of life for people with dementia. Most people received fewer than the recommended number of iCST sessions. Further research is needed to ascertain the clinical effectiveness of carer-led cognitive stimulation interventions for people with dementia.Trial registration: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN65945963.Funding: This project was funded by the National Institute of Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment (HTA) programme and will be published in full inHealth Technology Assessment; Vol. 19, No. 64. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further information.