The efficacy of probiotics as a therapeutic alternative for attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) remain unclear.

To investigate the effectiveness of probiotics for symptoms of ADHD and identify possible factors affecting their efficacy.

Randomised placebo-controlled trials were identified through searching major databases from inception to April 2023, using the main keywords ‘probiotics’ and ‘ADHD’ without limitation on languages or geographic locations. The outcome of interest included improvement in total symptoms of ADHD, symptoms of inattention and hyperactivity/impulsivity, and drop-out rate. Continuous and categorical data were expressed as effect sizes based on standardised mean differences (SMDs) and odds ratios, respectively, with 95% confidence intervals.

Meta-analysis of seven trials involving 379 participants (mean age 10.37 years, range 4–18 years) showed no significant improvement in total symptoms of ADHD (SMD = 0.25; P = 0.12), symptoms of inattention (SMD = 0.14; P = 0.3) or hyperactivity/impulsivity (SMD = 0.08; P = 0.54) between the probiotic and placebo groups. Despite non-significance on subgroup analyses, there was a large difference in effect size between studies using probiotics as an adjunct to methylphenidate and those using probiotics as supplementation (SMD = 0.84 v. 0.07; P = 0.16), and a moderate difference in effect size between studies using multiple strains of probiotics and those using single-strain regimens (SMD = 0.45 v. 0.03; P = 0.19).

Current evidence shows no significant difference in therapeutic efficacy between probiotics and placebos for treatment of ADHD symptoms. However, albeit statistically non-significant, higher therapeutic efficacies associated with multiple-strain probiotics or combining probiotics with methylphenidate may provide direction for further research.

Evaluating the association of water intake and hydration status with nephrolithiasis risk at the population level.

It is a cross-sectional study in which daily total plain water intake and total fluid intake were estimated together with blood osmolality, urine creatinine, urine osmolality, urine flow rate (UFR), free water clearance (FWC) and urine/blood osmolality ratio (Uosm:Bosm). The associations of fluid intake and hydration markers with nephrolithiasis were evaluated using multivariable logistic regression.

General US population.

A total of 8195 adults aged 20 years or older from the National Health and Nutritional Examination Survey 2009–2012 cycles.

The population medians (interquartile ranges, IQR) for daily total plain water intake and total fluid intake were 807 (336–1481) and 2761 (2107–3577) ml/d, respectively. The adjusted OR (95 % CI) of nephrolithiasis for each IQR increase in total plain water intake and total fluid intake were 0·92 (95 % CI 0·79, 1·06) and 0·84 (95 % CI 0·72, 0·97), respectively. The corresponding OR of nephrolithiasis for UFR, blood osmolality, Uosm:Bosm and urine creatinine were 0·87 (95 % CI 0·76, 0·99), 1·18 (95 % CI 1·06, 1·32), 1·38 (95 % CI 1·17, 1·63) and 1·27 (95 % CI 1·11, 1·45), respectively. A linear protective relationship of fluid intake, UFR and FWC with nephrolithiasis risk was observed. Similarly, positive dose–response associations of nephrolithiasis risk with markers of insufficient hydration were identified. Encouraging a daily water intake of >2500 ml/d and maintaining a urine output of 2 l/d was associated with a lower prevalence of nephrolithiasis.

This study verified the beneficial role of general water intake recommendations in nephrolithiasis prevention in the general US population.

The impact of the outbreak of severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) was enormous, but few studies have focused on the infectious and general health status of healthcare workers (HCWs) who treated patients with SARS.

We prospectively evaluated the general health status of HCWs during the SARS epidemic.The Medical Outcome Study Short-Form 36 Survey was given to all HCWs immediately after caring for patients with SARS and 4 weeks after self-quarantine and off-duty shifts. Tests for detection of SARS Coronavirus antibody were performed for HCWs at these 2 time points and for control subjects during the SARS epidemic.

Tertiary care referral center in Taipei, Taiwan.

Ninety SARS-care task force members (SARS HCWs) and 82 control subjects.

All serum specimens tested negative for SARS antibody. Survey scores for SARS HCWs immediately after care were significantly lower than those for the control group (P < .05 by the t test) in 6 categories. Vitality, social functioning, and mental health immediately after care and vitality and mental health after self-quarantine and off-duty shifts were among the worst subscales. The social functioning, role emotional, and role physical subscales significantly improved after self-quarantine and off-duty shifts (P < .05, by paired t test). The length of contact time (mean number of contact-hours per day) with patients with SARS was associated with some subscales (role emotional, role physical, and mental health) to a mild extent. The total number of contact-hours with symptomatic patients with SARS was a borderline predictor (adjusted R2 = 0.069; P = .038) of mental health score.

The impact of the SARS outbreak on SARS HCWs was significant in many dimensions of general health. The vitality and mental health status of SARS HCWs 1 month after self-quarantine and off-duty shifts remained inferior to those of the control group.

To determine risk factors for hemodialysis catheter-related bloodstream infections (HCRBSIs) and investigate whether use of maximal sterile barrier precautions would prevent HCRBSIs.

Tertiary-care medical center hemodialysis unit.

Open trial with historical comparison and case-control study of risk factors for HCRBSIs.

Prospective surveillance was used to compare HCRBSI rates for 1 year before and after implementation of maximal sterile barrier precautions. A case–control study compared 50 case-patients with HCRBSI with 51 randomly selected control-patients.

The HCRBSI rate was 1.6% per 100 dialysis runs (CI95, 1.1%–2.3%) in the first year and 0.77% (CI95, 0.5%–1.1%) in the second year (P = .0106). The most frequent cause of HCRBSI was MRSA in the first year (15 of 32) and MSSA in the second year (13 of 18). Ten MRSA blood isolates in the first year were identical by PFGE. Diabetes mellitus was a risk factor for HCRBSI. Age, gender, site of hemodialysis central venous catheter (CVC), other underlying diseases, coma score, APACHE II score, serum albumin level, and cholesterol level were not associated with HCRBSI and did not change between the 2 years. Hospital stay was prolonged for case-patients (32.78 ± 20.96 days) versus control-patients (22.75 ± 17.33 days), but mortality did not differ.

Use of maximal sterile barrier precautions during the insertion of CVCs reduced HCRBSIs in dialysis patients and seemed cost-effective. Diabetes mellitus was associated with HCRBSI. An outbreak of MRSA in the first year was likely caused by cross-infection via medical personnel.