A systematic review of the quality of conduct and reporting of systematic reviews and meta-analyses in paediatric surgery.

OBJECTIVE: Our objective was to evaluate quality of conduct and reporting of published systematic reviews and meta-analyses in paediatric surgery. We also aimed to identify characteristics predictive of review quality. BACKGROUND: Systematic reviews summarise evidence by combining sources, but are potentially prone to bias. To counter this, the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) was published to aid in reporting. Similarly, the Assessing the Methodological Quality of Systematic Reviews (AMSTAR) measurement tool was designed to appraise methodology. The paediatric surgical literature has seen an increasing number of reviews over the past decade, but quality has not been evaluated. METHODS: Adhering to PRISMA guidelines, we performed a systematic review with a priori design to identify systematic reviews and meta-analyses of interventions in paediatric surgery. From 01/2010 to 06/2016, we searched: MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane, Centre for Reviews and Dissemination, Web of Science, Google Scholar, reference lists and journals. Two reviewers independently selected studies and extracted data. We assessed conduct and reporting using AMSTAR and PRISMA. Scores were calculated as the sum of reported items. We also extracted author, journal and article characteristics, and used them in exploratory analysis to determine which variables predict quality. RESULTS: 112 articles fulfilled eligibility criteria (53 systematic reviews; 59 meta-analyses). Overall, 68% AMSTAR and 56.8% PRISMA items were reported adequately. Poorest scores were identified with regards a priori design, inclusion of structured summaries, including the grey literature, citing excluded articles and evaluating bias. 13 reviews were pre-registered and 6 in PRISMA-endorsing journals. The following predicted quality in univariate analysis:, word count, Cochrane review, journal h-index, impact factor, journal endorses PRISMA, PRISMA adherence suggested in author guidance, article mentions PRISMA, review includes comparison of interventions and review registration. The latter three variables were significant in multivariate regression. CONCLUSIONS: There are gaps in the conduct and reporting of systematic reviews in paediatric surgery. More endorsement by journals of the PRISMA guideline may improve review quality, and the dissemination of reliable evidence to paediatric clinicians.

[Quality of Life after colectomy due to ulcerative colitis].

INTRODUCTION: A significant proportion of patients with ulcerative colitis (UC) undergo colectomy. The aim was to assess the quality of life (QOL) of these patients. MATERIAL AND METHODS: All patients with UC who underwent colectomy at The National University Hospital of Iceland or Akureyri Hospital 1995-2009 were included. 106 patients received three questionnaires. SF-36v2 and EORTC are standardised QOL-questionnaires. The third contained functional questions designed by the researchers. RESULTS: Eighty-three patients replied (78%), 45 men (54%) and 38 women (46%). Average age at operation was 45 years (10-91 years). Forty-four (53%) had ileostomy, 28 (34%) ileal pouch-anal anastomosis (IPAA) and 11 (13%) ileorectal anastomosis. Among patients who had the rectum removed 37% described changes in urinary habits and 46% in sexual life after surgery. Among patients with IPAA 75% admitted to faecal incontinence but this was mild according to Wexner's scale in 83% of the cases. According to SF-36v2 there was no significant difference in the QOL of colectomy patients compared to the general population. Patients generally felt good about their health, body image and weight and had mild symptoms according to EORTC QLQ-CR29. CONCLUSIONS: Urinary habits and sexual life were commonly affected after rectal removal. Faecal incontinence among IPAA-patients was much more common than expected. There was not much difference in quality of life compared to the general population. The results of the study are important for patient education and may aid them in their decision making since removing the colon or having a stoma does not seem to affect quality of life. Key words: Quality of life, ulcerative colitis, ileostomy, colectomy. Correspondence: Elsa B. Valsdottir, elsava@landspitali.is.