ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE To re-evaluate systematic review/meta-analysis of escitalopram in the treatment of depression， and to provide reference for clinical use of escitalopram. METHODS Retrieved from CNKI， Wanfang database， VIP， SinoMed， PubMed and the Cochrane Library， etc.， systematic review/meta-analysis of escitalopram in the treatment of depression were collected from the construction of the database to May 17， 2022. The literatures were screened according to the inclusion and exclusion criteria， the basic information of the included literatures was extracted， and the methodological quality， reporting quality and evidence quality of the included literatures were evaluated by using AMSTAR 2 scale， PRISMA statement， and GRADE system， respectively. RESULTS A total of 16 systematic reviews/meta-analyses were included. The results of efficacy comparison showed that escitalopram in the treatment of depression was superior to sertraline in improving the total effective rate， and was comparable to paroxetine， duloxetine and fluoxetine in improving cure rate. The results of safety comparison showed that the safety of escitalopram was higher than that of paroxetine and venlafaxine. The overall methodological quality evaluation of AMSTAR 2 scale was low， and all of them were rated as extremely low； main reason was the lack of many key items. PRISMA score was between 12 and 23 points. Among them， there were 5 literatures with scores ＞21 points， and the reports were relatively complete， 10 literatures with scores between 15 and 21 points， and the reports had certain defects， and 1 literature with scores ≤15 points， with serious information missing. The results of the grading of GRADE evidence showed that， of the 160 included outcome indicators， 69 were moderate evidence， 64 were low-level evidence， and 27 were very low-level evidence. CONCLUSIONS The total effective rate of escitalopram in improving depressive patients is not inferior to that of sertraline； compared with paroxetine， escitalopram is safer. However， the evidence level of the above conclusions is low.
ABSTRACT
OB JECTIVE To conduct overview of the systematic revi ew（SR）/meta-analysis for the effectiveness and safety of pharmacological interventions for hospitalized neconatal pain ， and to provide evidence-based reference for neonatal pain management. METHODS CNKI，CBM，Wanfang，VIP，PubMed，Embase，the Cochrane Library ，Web of Science ，CINAHL and Google Scholar were searched for SR/meta-analysis of pharmacological interventions for hospitalized neonatal pain. The search period was from Nov. 1st，2016-Nov. 1st，2021. After literature screening and data extraction ，AMSTAR 2 scale was used to evaluate the methodological quality of the included literature ，and GRADE method was used to assess the evidence quality of the outcome of the include d literature . A su mmary analysis was then conducted. RESULTS Totally 36 outcome indexes of 7 SR/ meta-analysis were included. Five studies were of moderate quality，and two were very poor according to AMSTAR 2 scale. GRADE results showed that among 36 outcome indexes，there were 7 moderate-quality indexes （19.44％），low-quality indexes （61.11％），and 7 critically-low-quality indexes （19.44％）. The main reason for downgrading the quality of evidence was impr ecision of results （71.74％）. CONCLUSIONS Opioids c an significantly reduce t he pain score of mechanically ventilated neonates but may increase hypotension. Acetaminophen can significantly reduce pain scores during eye examinations and postoperative morphine consumption with no adverse reaction report. However ，its analgesic effect on procedural pain is less than glucose and sucrose. Lidocaine and prilocaine and tetracaine may relieve venipuncture and lumbar puncture pain but lidocaine and prilocaine may increase the risk of adverse reaction. Clonidine can reduce neonatal mechanical ventilation pain with no adverse reaction report. It is suggested that neonatal pediatricians should use analgesic drugs selectively based on clinical judgment and pain assessment results.
ABSTRACT
@#Objective To identify the effectiveness of physical therapy on neuromuscular control dysfunction of chronic ankle instability (CAI). Methods CAI physiotherapy-related systematic reviews, meta-analysis, randomized controlled studies and case-controlled studies were systematically searched in PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane, PEDro, EBSCO and CNKI from October 1st, 2010 to October 1st, 2020. After quality assessment, the research evidence regarding certain intervention was then graded according to the Oxford Center for Evidence-based Medicine. Results A total of 20 articles were included. Intervention based on unstable plane exercise training could significantly improve lower limb balance control ability (Ⅰ A) and muscle strength (Ⅱ A) for CAI patients. The efficiency of exercise-based intervention could be further raised (Ⅱ C) with the aid of external equipment, but either the benefits in muscle reaction (Ⅲ C) or proprioception (Ⅱ D) was limited. Six sessions or more of manual therapy could be used to enhance the balance ability of the lower limbs (Ⅱ B), while taping failed to provide improvements in ankle proprioception in short period or immediately (Ⅰ A). Conclusion Unstable plane training-based therapeutic exercise and manual therapy could effectively enhance the neuromuscular control with high-quality evidence supporting, which can be primary interventions for CAI patients. Meanwhile, taping and other external devices could be used as adjunct methods to improve the efficiency of physiotherapy program, while there is currently no evidence to support the application of modality treatment in neuromuscular control of CAI.
ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE@#To overview the methodological quality, report quality and evidence quality of the systematic review (SR) of acupuncture for vascular cognitive impairment ( VCI ).@*METHODS@#The SRs regarding acupuncture for VCI were searched in PubMed, Cochrane Library, EMbase, CNKI, SinoMed, Wanfang and VIP databases. The retrieval period was from the establishment of the database to September 24, 2020. The report quality, methodological quality and evidence quality of the included SRs were evaluated by PRISMA statement, the AMSTAR 2 tool and the GRADE system.@*RESULTS@#A total of 22 SRs were included, including 102 outcome indexes. The methodological quality was generally low, with low scores on items 2, 5, 7, 10, 14, 15 and 16. The report quality was good, with scores ranging from 19 points to 24.5 points. The problems of report quality were mainly reflected in the aspects of structural abstract, program and registration, other analysis and funding sources. The level of outcome indexes of SRs was mostly low or very low, and the main leading factor was limitation, followed by inconsistency and inaccuracy.@*CONCLUSION@#Acupuncture for VCI is supported by low quality evidence of evidence-based medicine, but the methodological quality and evidence body quality of relevant SRs are poor, and the standardization is needed to be improved.
Subject(s)
Humans , Acupuncture Therapy , Cognitive Dysfunction/therapy , Databases, Factual , Research Report , Systematic Reviews as TopicABSTRACT
To overview of systematic reviews/Meta-analysis of Xingnaojing Injection(XNJ) in the treatment of intracerebral hemorrhage(ICH). The systematic reviews concerning XNJ in the treatment of ICH were retrieved from four Chinese databases, four English databases, Chinese Clinical Trial Registry and ClinicalTrail.gov, with the retrieval time set from their inception to September 2020. Following the independent screening and data extraction by two researchers, a measurement tool to assess systematic evaluation 2(AMSTAR 2) and grades of recommendation, assessment, development and evaluation(GRADE) system were used to evaluate the metho-dological, reporting and evidence qualities of the 10 included systematic reviews. The results showed that XNJ was superior to the wes-tern medicine or conventional treatment in improving the effective rate and National Institutes of Health stroke scale(NIHSS) score, Barthel index(BI), and Glasgow coma scale(GCS) score and Chinese stroke scale(CSS) score, and reducing the mortality and cerebral hematoma volume, without inducing obvious adverse reactions. In general, the methodological, reporting and evidence qualities of the 10 included systematic reviews were poor. The AMSTAR 2 scores showed that key items No. 2 and No. 16 failed to meet the stan-dard, resulting in poor methodological quality. There was only one outcome indicator graded by GRADE as intermediate quality, 43% indicators as low quality, 42% indicators as extremely low quality, and none as high quality. These available evidences have suggested that the methodological, reporting and evidence qualities of the systematic evaluation concerning XNJ for the treatment of ICH need to be improved. Most evidences support that XNJ was better than the western medicine or conventional treatment in the treatment of ICH, but the methodological quality and the reliability of outcome indicators in relevant systematic review were low. More high-quality studies are still required for further verification.
Subject(s)
Humans , Cerebral Hemorrhage/drug therapy , Drugs, Chinese Herbal , Meta-Analysis as Topic , Reproducibility of Results , Systematic Reviews as Topic , United StatesABSTRACT
To summarize and evaluate the efficacy and safety of Shenmai Injection in the treatment of viral myocarditis, shock, pulmonary heart disease, coronary heart disease, neutropenia and tumor chemotherapy, so as to provide supportive evidences for clinical rational use of Shenmai Injection. By searching literatures about studies on the systematic reviews on Shenmai Injection in treatment of viral myocarditis, shock, pulmonary heart disease, coronary heart disease, neutropenia and tumor chemotherapy from the main Chinese and English databases. Primary efficacy and safety outcome measures were selected for comparative analysis and summary, and the appraisal tool of AMSTAR 2 was used to evaluate the included studies.A total of 36 systematic reviews(published from 2005 to 2020) were included, involving viral myocarditis, shock, pulmonary heart disease, malignant tumor and coronary heart disease. The number of cases included in each type of the above diseases was 3 840, 2 484, 12 702, 28 036 and 27 082, respectively. The comparison results showed that, Shenmai Injection combined with conventional/western medicine treatment groups had better efficacy than conventional/western medicine groups alone in the prevention and treatment of the above five diseases. The main adverse reactions of Shenmai Injection reported in the included studies were facial flushing, rash, palpitation, etc., but the incidence was low and the general symptoms were mild, so no special treatment was needed. Therefore, the application of Shenmai Injection on the basis of conventional treatment or western medicine treatment had better prevention and treatment efficacy of the diseases. It was suggested that more multi-center and larger sample-size randomized controlled trials should be carried out in the future, and the relevant reporting standards should be strictly followed in systematic reviews, so as to improve the scientificity and transparency of the study.
Subject(s)
Humans , Drug Combinations , Drugs, Chinese Herbal , Pulmonary Heart Disease , Systematic Reviews as TopicABSTRACT
Objective To evaluate the methodological quality of the systematic evaluation literature of Shenfu injection in the treatment of heart failure with AMSTAR 2 statement.Methods Searching includes Chongqing VIP Database,China Knowledge Network Database,China Biomedical Literature Database.Wanfang Database,PubMed Database,Cochrane library database,search time limit from database construction to Dec 31 st,2017.Two evaluators independently screened the literature based on inclusion and exclusion criteria,and applied the AMSTAR 2 statement list to evaluate all the systematic review literatures included.Results A total of 9 articles were included in the study,and the average reporting rate is 43.75％.The low-reporting domains focused on the review protocols prior to the research,the types of the included studies,the list of excluded documents,the evaluation and causes of bias of risks and heterogeneity,and reports on funds and conflicts of interest.Conclusions The average reporting rate is low overall,indicating that the current reports of the systematic review has defects,which affects the credibility of the systematic review and the use of evidence.For the determination of clinical decision-making,it is recommended that researchers should follow the AMSTAR 2 statement to improve the methodological or reporting quality.