98%
921
2 minutes
20
Peer support, which is given by people with similar life experiences and experiential knowledge, has been shown to be effective for patients with diabetes and mental illness. However, the impact of such peer support on patients coping with heart failure remains indeterminate. The objective of this systematic review and meta-analysis is to scrutinize the potential benefits of peer support for patients with heart failure. We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating the effectiveness of peer support for patients with heart failure in contrast to those without peer support. We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE, Embase, WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, and ClinicalTrials.gov until October 2022. We pooled the data on mortality, readmission rate, and quality of life (QoL) as primary outcomes. The certainty of evidence was evaluated by the grading of recommendations assessment, development, and evaluation (GRADE) approach. We included three studies with 390 patients with heart failure. Peer support may have resulted in a slight increase in mortality (risk ratio (RR)=1.16, 95% confidence interval (CI)=0.61-2.21; low certainty of the evidence) and in a reduction in the readmission rate (RR=0.93, 95% CI=0.74-1.17; low certainty of the evidence). The evidence was very uncertain about the effect of peer support on QoL (standardized mean difference 2.03 higher in the intervention group, 95% CI=1.79 lower to 5.84 higher; very low certainty of the evidence). Despite that the certainty is low or very low, the extant data available evidence suggests that peer support may not yield substantial improvements in critical outcomes for patients with heart failure. Consequently, endorsing peer support for patients with heart failure currently seems unjustifiable.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10630709 | PMC |
http://dx.doi.org/10.7759/cureus.46751 | DOI Listing |
J Behav Health Serv Res
September 2025
Department of Counselor Education, Fairfield University, Fairfield, CT, USA.
This qualitative study explores what factors influence teaming in behavioral health settings, from the perspective of behavioral health providers. Twenty-four participants from a range of behavioral health professions engaged in semi-structured interviews. Using a grounded theory approach, data were analyzed, and a "prism" model was developed to capture the complexities of behavioral health providers' perceptions of factors influencing teaming in various mental health and/or substance use disorder treatment programs.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFBr J Sports Med
September 2025
School of Psychological Sciences, Monash University Faculty of Medicine Nursing and Health Sciences, Clayton, Victoria, Australia.
Objective: To report the prevalence of mental health symptoms and influencing factors in retired professional high contact team sport (HCTS) athletes.
Design: Mixed-methods systematic review.
Data Sources: PsycINFO, Embase, Medline, SPORTDiscus and Scopus were searched in July 2023 and March 2025.
BMJ Open
September 2025
Department of Gastroenterology, Hepatology, Infectious Diseases and Intoxication, University Hospital Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany.
Introduction: Combined vascular endothelial growth factor/programmed death-ligand 1 blockade through atezolizumab/bevacizumab (A/B) is the current standard of care in advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). A/B substantially improved objective response rates compared with tyrosine kinase inhibitor sorafenib; however, a majority of patients will still not respond to A/B. Strong scientific rationale and emerging clinical data suggest that faecal microbiota transfer (FMT) may improve antitumour immune response on PD-(L)1 blockade.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFBMJ Open
September 2025
School of Exercise and Health, Shanghai University of Sport, Shanghai, China
Introduction: Although emerging evidence supports the short-term efficacy of transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS), including repetitive TMS (rTMS) and theta-burst transcranial magnetic stimulation (TBS-TMS), and transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) for managing patients with chronic musculoskeletal pain (CMP), their clinical utility in managing CMP remains inconclusive. This uncertainty may arise from methodological limitations, including heterogeneity in treatment parameters such as stimulation targets and dosages. Additionally, safety profiles for these non-invasive brain stimulation interventions in patients with CMP remain insufficiently reported, with limited data on adverse events, cumulative risks and long-term safety outcomes.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFBMJ Open
September 2025
Nursing School, Ningxia Medical University, Yinchuan, Ningxia, China.
Background: Nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC) presents significant nutritional challenges during concurrent chemoradiotherapy, adversely affecting treatment outcomes and quality of life. Non-pharmacological interventions may help improve nutritional and immune status, reduce complications and enhance overall well-being. However, evidence of their effectiveness is scattered and inconsistent, and no systematic review has yet synthesised the evidence on their effectiveness.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF