Background:Pharmacotherapy provides an option for adults with overweight and obesity to reduce their bodyweight if lifestyle modifications fail. We summarised the latest evidence for the benefits and harms of weight-lowering drugs. Methods:This systematic review and network meta-analysis included searches of PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library (CENTRAL) from inception to March 23, 2021, for randomised controlled trials of weight-lowering drugs in adults with overweight and obesity. We performed frequentist random-effect network meta-analyses to summarise the evidence and applied the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation frameworks to rate the certainty of evidence, calculate the absolute effects, categorise interventions, and present the findings. The study was registered with PROSPERO, CRD 42021245678. Findings:14 605 citations were identified by our search, of which 132 eligible trials enrolled 48 209 participants. All drugs lowered bodyweight compared with lifestyle modification alone; all subsequent numbers refer to comparisons with lifestyle modification. High to moderate certainty evidence established phentermine-topiramate as the most effective in lowering weight (odds ratio [OR] of ≥5% weight reduction 8·02, 95% CI 5·24 to 12·27; mean difference [MD] of percentage bodyweight change -7·98, 95% CI -9·27 to -6·69) followed by GLP-1 receptor agonists (OR 6·33, 95% CI 5·00 to 8·00; MD -5·79, 95% CI -6·34 to -5·25). Naltrexone-bupropion (OR 2·69, 95% CI 2·10 to 3·44), phentermine-topiramate (2·40, 1·68 to 3·44), GLP-1 receptor agonists (2·22, 1·74 to 2·84), and orlistat (1·71, 1·42 to 2·05) were associated with increased adverse events leading to drug discontinuation. In a post-hoc analysis, semaglutide, a GLP-1 receptor agonist, showed substantially larger benefits than other drugs with a similar risk of adverse events as other drugs for both likelihood of weight loss of 5% or more (OR 9·82, 95% CI 7·09 to 13·61) and percentage bodyweight change (MD -11·40, 95% CI -12·51 to -10·29). Interpretation:In adults with overweight and obesity, phentermine-topiramate and GLP-1 receptor agonists proved the best drugs in reducing weight; of the GLP-1 agonists, semaglutide might be the most effective.

AIM: To evaluate the effectiveness of nurse-led care for obstructive sleep apnoea compared with physician-led care. BACKGROUND: The incidence of obstructive sleep apnoea is increasing worldwide. There is a need for cost-effective care models to ease off the pressure on tertiary care centres and divert care to the community. DESIGN: Systematic review and meta-analysis. DATA SOURCES: We searched major electronic databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, AMED, British Nursing Index, CINAHL, HMIC, PsycINFO, Health Business Elite and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials CENTRAL) from inception till December 2016 using a structured search strategy for all randomized trials evaluating nurse-led treatment interventions for adults with obstructive sleep apnoea compared with physician-led ones. We screened relevant articles against a predefined inclusion criterion. We applied no search limitations. REVIEW METHODS: We assessed the risk of bias as per Cochrane recommendations. We calculated weighted mean difference with 95% confidence intervals for continuous outcomes and used a random-effects model to meta-analyse data. RESULTS: We screened 309 articles and only four studies met our inclusion criteria. All studies used continuous-positive airway pressure as the main treatment strategy with similar compliance rate in both comparison groups. The scores of the Epworth Sleepiness Scale, the SF-36 questionnaires for vitality, physical function and the SF-36 mental health were all similar between the two groups. There was a significant heterogeneity in all meta-analyses (I2 > 92%). CONCLUSION: Nurse-led care for adults with obstructive sleep apnoea is non-inferior to physician-led care. More research is needed to standardize nurse-led interventions and evaluate their long-term effectiveness and cost-effectiveness.

AIM: To evaluate the effectiveness of nurse-led care for obstructive sleep apnoea compared with physician-led care. BACKGROUND: The incidence of obstructive sleep apnoea is increasing worldwide. There is a need for cost-effective care models to ease off the pressure on tertiary care centres and divert care to the community. DESIGN: Systematic review and meta-analysis. DATA SOURCES: We searched major electronic databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, AMED, British Nursing Index, CINAHL, HMIC, PsycINFO, Health Business Elite and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials CENTRAL) from inception till December 2016 using a structured search strategy for all randomised trials evaluating nurse-led treatment interventions for adults with obstructive sleep apnoea compared with physician-led ones. We screened relevant articles against a predefined inclusion criteria. We applied no search limitations. REVIEW METHODS: We assessed the risk of bias as per Cochrane recommendations. We calculated Weighted Mean Difference with 95% confidence intervals for continuous outcomes and used a random-effects model to meta-analyse data. RESULTS: We screened 309 articles and only four studies met our inclusion criteria. All studies used continuous-positive airway pressure as the main treatment strategy with similar compliance rate in both comparison groups. The scores of the Epworth Sleepiness Scale, the SF-36 questionnaires for vitality, physical function and the SF-36 mental health were all similar between the two groups. There was a significant heterogeneity in all meta-analyses (I2 >92%). CONCLUSION: Nurse-led care for adults with obstructive sleep apnoea is non-inferior to physician-led care. More research is needed to standardise nurse-led interventions and evaluate their long-term effectiveness and cost-effectiveness.