ABSTRACT
Objective:To evaluate and summary the relevant evidence of emergency target blood pressure management in acute aortic dissection, so as to provide guidance for the evidence-based practice of emergency target blood pressure management.Methods:According to the "6S" evidence pyramid model, the evidence about emergency target blood pressure management of acute aortic dissection in various databases and professional association websites at home and abroad was retrieved, including clinical decision, guidelines, expert consensus, systematic evaluation, randomized controlled trial, cohort study, case series, etc. Two researchers used corresponding literature quality evaluation tools to evaluate the quality of the included literature, extracted and summarized the evidence of the literature above grade B.Results:A total of 22 articles were included in this study, including 6 clinical decisions, 5 guidelines, 7 expert consensus, 1 systematic evaluation, 1 randomized controlled trial, 1 cohort study and 1 case series, forming 37 best evidences, including 9 topics such as target value setting, management strategies, disease observation, medical history collection, monitoring methods, vasoactive drugs, non vasoactive drugs, auxiliary examination, health education.Conclusions:The summarized best evidence provides a reference for emergency medical staff to manage the emergency target blood pressure of acute aortic dissection. It is recommended that emergency medical staff follow the summarized best evidence to formulate an individualized target blood pressure management scheme for patients.
ABSTRACT
Objective:To search and summarize the best evidence of aromatherapy in alleviating chemotherapy-related nausea and vomiting in cancer patients, so as to provide reference for nursing staff to implement symptom management.Methods:All evidences on the application of aromatherapy in the relief of chemotherapy-related nausea and vomiting in cancer patients were searched from the guideline collaboration network, professional association websites, and well-known databases at home and abroad from July 2011 to July 2021. The literature quality evaluation tool was used to evaluate the quality of the included literature, and extracted evidence from the literature that met the quality requirements.Results:Ten articles were included at last, including 2 clinical practice guidelines, 1 clinical decision, 2 expert consensus, 1 evidence to summarize, and 1 system evaluation. A total of 11 best evidences of aromatherapy to relieve chemotherapy-related nausea and vomiting were obtained. They were from five aspects: intervention population, aromatherapy practitioners, effectiveness, aromatherapy administration route and adverse reactions.Conclusions:The available evidence indicates that either essential oil aroma therapy or oral aroma therapy has a certain efficacy in alleviating chemotherapy-related nausea and vomiting, and more clinical studies, systematic reviews, and other evidences are still needed to be clarified in the future to promote the normative application of aroma therapy.
ABSTRACT
Objective:To retrieve relevant evidence on exercise assessment and exercise training for children with congenital heart disease at home and abroad, and to summarize the best evidence to provide reference for clinical medical staff.Methods:UpToDate, National Guidelines Clearinghouse (NGC), Registered Nurses Association of Ontario (RNAO), Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network (SIGN), National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE), BMJ Best Practice, American Heart Association (AHA), Cochrane Library, Joanna Briggs Institute(JBI) Evidence-Based Health Care Center Database, PubMed, CINAHL, China Biomedical Literature Database, Yimaitong, Wangfang Database, CNKI were searched, related evidence on exercise assessment and exercise training for children with congenital heart disease. The search period was from the establishment of the database to March 2021. Clinical decision-making and recommended practice used retrospective evaluation methods for quality evaluation; guidelines used the 2012 version of the clinical guideline research and evaluation system (AGREE Ⅱ) for evaluation; systematic reviews used the systematic evaluation tool (AMSTAR) for evaluation; expert consensus used JBI (2016 version) evaluate the authenticity evaluation tools of opinions and consensus articles. Two researchers independently evaluated the literature, combined with the judgment of professionals, and extracted the literature data that met the standards.Results:A total of 15 documents were included, including 2 clinical decisions, 4 guidelines, 1 recommended practice, 5 systematic reviews, 3 expert consensus, and 22 best evidences. Including related personnel, exercise evaluation, exercise monitoring, exercise classification, exercise training, and exercise follow-up.Conclusions:This study summarizes the best evidence of exercise assessment and exercise training for children with congenital heart disease, and provides evidence-based evidence for clinical practice. It is recommended that children with congenital heart disease undergo exercise assessment and formulate a personalized exercise training program to promote the transformation of the best evidence into clinical practice.
ABSTRACT
RESUMEN: Las revisiones sistemáticas corresponden al máximo nivel de evidencia y son la principal herramienta para resolver incertidumbres clínicas(1). Sin embargo, dado sus características, presentan desventajas para su aplicación rápida y sencilla(2). Dado lo anterior es que se han creado nuevos formatos dentro de los que se incluyen los resúmenes estructurados de revisiones sistemáticas, dentro de los que se incluyen los Friendly Summary Of The Body Of Evidence (FRISBEE) (4). El proceso de elaboración de un FRISBEE comienza, como toda búsqueda de evidencia, con el planteamiento de una pregunta clínica estructurada y específica con la cual se desarrollará una búsqueda en la base de datos Epistemonikos que arrojará todas las revisiones sistemáticas atingentes. De ellas, se deben seleccionar las que respondan la pregunta clínica planteada y, a partir de ellas, se analizarán los estudios primarios de manera tal que se pueda obtener un resultado global de la evidencia, el grado de certeza de la misma, una conclusión y mensajes claves al respecto. El resultado final es un resumen de la evidencia en relación a una pregunta determinada que contempla la información contenida en todas las revisiones sistemáticas publicadas. Su utilidad e importancia está determinada debido a que facilitan la aplicabilidad clínica de la evidencia disminuyendo la complejidad de lectura e incorporando aspectos prácticos tanto para el clínico como el paciente.
ABSTRACT: Systematic reviews are the highest level of evidence and the main tool for resolving clinical uncertainties(1). However, due to their characteristics, their quick and easy application(2) presents disadvantages. That is why new formats have been created, comprising the structured summaries of systematic reviews, including the Friendly Summary Of The Body Of Evidence (FRISBEE) (4). The process of elaboration of a FRISBEE begins, like any search of evidence, with the approach of a structured and specific clinical question and the development of a search in the Epistemonikos database that will yield all the pertinent systematic reviews. Of these, those that answer the clinical question should be selected and, based on them, the primary studies will be analyzed to get a global result of the evidence, its degree of certainty, conclusions and key messages in this regard. The final result is a summary of the evidence related to a specific question that includes the information contained in all published systematic reviews. Its usefulness and importance is determined because it facilitates the clinical applicability of the evidence, decreasing the reading complexity and incorporating practical aspects for both the clinician and the patient.