The Experts below are selected from a list of 79179 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform

Mona Kanaan - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • Global impact of tobacco control policies on smokeless tobacco use: a systematic review protocol.
    BMJ open, 2020
    Co-Authors: Monika Arora, Aastha Chugh, Neha Jain, Masuma Pervin Mishu, Melanie Boeckmann, Suranji Dahanayake, Jappe Eckhardt, Sarah Forberger, Rumana Huque, Mona Kanaan
    Abstract:

    Introduction Smokeless tobacco (ST) was consumed by 356 million people globally in 2017. Recent evidence shows that ST consumption is responsible for an estimated 652 494 all-cause deaths across the globe annually. The WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (FCTC) was negotiated in 2003 and ratified in 2005 to implement effective tobacco control measures. While the policy measures enacted through various tobacco control laws have been effective in reducing the incidence and prevalence of smoking, the impact of ST-related policies (within WHO FCTC and beyond) on ST use is under-researched and not collated. Methods and analysis A systematic review will be conducted to collate all available ST-related policies implemented across various countries and assess their impact on ST use. The following Databases will be searched: Medline, EMBASE, PsycINFO, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, Scopus, EconLit, ISI Web of Science, Cochrane Library (CENTRAL), African Index Medicus, LILACS, Scientific Electronic Library Online, Index Medicus for the Eastern Mediterranean Region, Index Medicus for South-East Asia Region, Western Pacific Region Index Medicus and WHO Library Database, as well as Google search engine and country-specific government websites. All ST-related policy documents (FCTC and non-FCTC) will be included. Results will be limited to literature published since 2005 in English and regional languages (Bengali, Hindi and Urdu). Two reviewers will independently employ two-stage screening to determine inclusion. The Effective Public Health Practice Project’s ‘Quality Assessment Tool for Quantitative Studies’ will be used to record ratings of quality and risk of bias among studies selected for inclusion. Data will be extracted using a standardised form. Meta-analysis and narrative synthesis will be used. Ethics and dissemination Permission for ethics exemption of the review was obtained from the Centre for Chronic Disease Control’s Institutional Ethics Committee, India (CCDC_IEC_06_2020; dated 16 April 2020). The results will be disseminated through publications in a peer-reviewed journal and will be presented in national and international conferences. PROSPERO registration number CRD42020191946.

Zoe Fisher - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

Megan D. Morrison - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • Abuse and Misuse of Pregabalin and Gabapentin: A Systematic Review Update
    Drugs, 2020
    Co-Authors: Kirk E. Evoy, Sarvnaz Sadrameli, Jillian Contreras, Jordan R. Covvey, Alyssa M. Peckham, Megan D. Morrison
    Abstract:

    Background A 2017 systematic review (SR) identified 59 studies examining gabapentinoid (pregabalin and gabapentin) misuse/abuse. Evidence of gabapentinoid misuse/abuse has since grown substantially. Objective Update previous SR and describe new insights regarding gabapentinoid abuse. Methods A SR of PubMed was conducted to identify studies published from 7/29/2016–8/31/2020. Four searches were performed using the following terms: “gabapentin [MeSH] OR pregabalin [MeSH] OR gabapentinoid” AND one of the following substance misuse/abuse-related terms: “substance-related disorders [MeSH]”, “overdose”, “abuse”, or “misuse”. Clinicaltrials.gov and the Cochrane Library Database were searched to identify ongoing studies or similar SRs. Reference lists of included studies were reviewed to identify additional literature . All studies with novel data related to pregabalin and/or gabapentin abuse, misuse, or overdose conducted during the study period were included. Articles not written in English, review articles, and animal studies were excluded. Results Fifty-five studies were included (29 [52.7%] from North America, 17 [30.9%] Europe, 6 [10.9%] Asia, and 3 [5.5%] Australia). Forty-six observational studies and 10 case reports/series were included (one manuscript included both). Twenty (36.4%) studied gabapentin only, 18 (32.7%) pregabalin only, and 17 (30.9%) both pregabalin/gabapentin. These studies corroborate findings from the previous SR that gabapentinoids are increasingly abused or misused to self-medicate, that gabapentinoids can produce desirable effects alone but are often used concomitantly with other drugs, and that opioid use disorder is the greatest risk factor for gabapentinoid abuse. While the original SR identified the largest studies having been published in Europe, this review identified several more generalisable US studies that have subsequently been conducted. The most concerning finding was increased evidence of associated patient harm, including increased hospital utilisation and opioid-related overdose mortality risk. Conclusion Evidence suggests that gabapentinoid misuse/abuse represents a growing trend that is causing significant patient harm. Prescribers should exercise appropriate caution with use in high-risk populations and monitor for signs of misuse or abuse.

  • Abuse and Misuse of Pregabalin and Gabapentin: A Systematic Review Update.
    Drugs, 2020
    Co-Authors: Kirk E. Evoy, Sarvnaz Sadrameli, Jillian Contreras, Jordan R. Covvey, Alyssa M. Peckham, Megan D. Morrison
    Abstract:

    A 2017 systematic review (SR) identified 59 studies examining gabapentinoid (pregabalin and gabapentin) misuse/abuse. Evidence of gabapentinoid misuse/abuse has since grown substantially. Update previous SR and describe new insights regarding gabapentinoid abuse. A SR of PubMed was conducted to identify studies published from 7/29/2016-8/31/2020. Four searches were performed using the following terms: "gabapentin [MeSH] OR pregabalin [MeSH] OR gabapentinoid" AND one of the following substance misuse/abuse-related terms: "substance-related disorders [MeSH]", "overdose", "abuse", or "misuse". Clinicaltrials.gov and the Cochrane Library Database were searched to identify ongoing studies or similar SRs. Reference lists of included studies were reviewed to identify additional literature. All studies with novel data related to pregabalin and/or gabapentin abuse, misuse, or overdose conducted during the study period were included. Articles not written in English, review articles, and animal studies were excluded. Fifty-five studies were included (29 [52.7%] from North America, 17 [30.9%] Europe, 6 [10.9%] Asia, and 3 [5.5%] Australia). Forty-six observational studies and 10 case reports/series were included (one manuscript included both). Twenty (36.4%) studied gabapentin only, 18 (32.7%) pregabalin only, and 17 (30.9%) both pregabalin/gabapentin. These studies corroborate findings from the previous SR that gabapentinoids are increasingly abused or misused to self-medicate, that gabapentinoids can produce desirable effects alone but are often used concomitantly with other drugs, and that opioid use disorder is the greatest risk factor for gabapentinoid abuse. While the original SR identified the largest studies having been published in Europe, this review identified several more generalisable US studies that have subsequently been conducted. The most concerning finding was increased evidence of associated patient harm, including increased hospital utilisation and opioid-related overdose mortality risk. Evidence suggests that gabapentinoid misuse/abuse represents a growing trend that is causing significant patient harm. Prescribers should exercise appropriate caution with use in high-risk populations and monitor for signs of misuse or abuse.

Monika Arora - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • Global impact of tobacco control policies on smokeless tobacco use: a systematic review protocol.
    BMJ open, 2020
    Co-Authors: Monika Arora, Aastha Chugh, Neha Jain, Masuma Pervin Mishu, Melanie Boeckmann, Suranji Dahanayake, Jappe Eckhardt, Sarah Forberger, Rumana Huque, Mona Kanaan
    Abstract:

    Introduction Smokeless tobacco (ST) was consumed by 356 million people globally in 2017. Recent evidence shows that ST consumption is responsible for an estimated 652 494 all-cause deaths across the globe annually. The WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (FCTC) was negotiated in 2003 and ratified in 2005 to implement effective tobacco control measures. While the policy measures enacted through various tobacco control laws have been effective in reducing the incidence and prevalence of smoking, the impact of ST-related policies (within WHO FCTC and beyond) on ST use is under-researched and not collated. Methods and analysis A systematic review will be conducted to collate all available ST-related policies implemented across various countries and assess their impact on ST use. The following Databases will be searched: Medline, EMBASE, PsycINFO, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, Scopus, EconLit, ISI Web of Science, Cochrane Library (CENTRAL), African Index Medicus, LILACS, Scientific Electronic Library Online, Index Medicus for the Eastern Mediterranean Region, Index Medicus for South-East Asia Region, Western Pacific Region Index Medicus and WHO Library Database, as well as Google search engine and country-specific government websites. All ST-related policy documents (FCTC and non-FCTC) will be included. Results will be limited to literature published since 2005 in English and regional languages (Bengali, Hindi and Urdu). Two reviewers will independently employ two-stage screening to determine inclusion. The Effective Public Health Practice Project’s ‘Quality Assessment Tool for Quantitative Studies’ will be used to record ratings of quality and risk of bias among studies selected for inclusion. Data will be extracted using a standardised form. Meta-analysis and narrative synthesis will be used. Ethics and dissemination Permission for ethics exemption of the review was obtained from the Centre for Chronic Disease Control’s Institutional Ethics Committee, India (CCDC_IEC_06_2020; dated 16 April 2020). The results will be disseminated through publications in a peer-reviewed journal and will be presented in national and international conferences. PROSPERO registration number CRD42020191946.

Courtney Mlinar - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.