Evidence-based dentistry has been established for more than a decade, and described as ‘the conscientious, explicit and judicious use of current best evidence in making decisions about the care of individual patients＇. However, Orthodontic clinicians in China still tend to base their treatment protocols on the ‘it works in my hands＇evidence provided by their peers, mainly due to their weak experience in searching and applying clinical evidences. In this article, authors are willing to share their experience with their Chinese peers, and to promote the dissemination and application of evidence-based orthodontics in clinical practice.
1背景早在1987年英国爱丁堡皇家医院就开始着手研究快速的治疗流程分类系统给心肌梗塞的患者所带来的时间经济效益，就此对快速流程的研究正式拉开了序幕。到了20世纪90年代初，欧洲部分医院的急诊科首先从科室角度开始迅速推广快速流程； 同时涉及麻醉方面的流程效率改革和创新逐步兴起。20世纪90年代末麻醉专业从门诊麻醉模式、手术及麻醉前干预上，开始逐步提升快速流程的综合管理能力。正是在20世纪90年代末，快速流程的理念被正式提出，在当时它还有一个名称叫做多模式康复流程。这种理念随之在欧美国家流行起来，大量的临床实践不断在进行。1994年，美国Engelman等就提出了冠状动脉旁路“fast-track recovery”的概念，并建立了一套相应的快速康复程序，通过实践发现其的确能够加快患者的术后康复、缩短住院时间。至此快速流程作为一项高效的临床运作模式被正式纳入临床具体病种的应用中。从2001年至今，心脏外科及结直肠外科的快速流程已趋于成熟，并已成功地渗透到外科领域的多个环节……
Generative artificial intelligence (AI) technology plays a significant role in enhancing data application capabilities, improving disease diagnosis and treatment plans, and advancing health management, drug development, genetic analysis, and precision medicine. However, due to the diagnostic complexity, treatment diversity, and high technical demands of orthopedic diseases, the application of generative AI in orthopedics is still in its early exploration stage. This paper, based on the experience of applying generative AI, summarizes the concept, working principles, progress of application in orthopedics, as well as the existing shortcomings and optimization strategies, aiming to provide valuable insights for the application of generative AI in orthopedics clinical practice.
Guideline implementation with decision support checklist (GUIDES) aims to assist the self-reflection of evidence-based clinical decision support system (CDSS) related professionals to enhance the process monitor and continuous improvement of evidence-based CDSS. This paper interpreted the development process, target user, and assessment method of GUIDES, analyzed the practical value of GUIDES through a typical example, and then reflected on the GUIDES and current studies on evidence-based CDSS in China. It is expected to provide references for future studies.
Objective To investigate evidence retrieval, appraisal, and reevaluation during evidence-based clinical decision making in China. Also, to analyze the related factors, so as to find the problems in the course of evidence-based clinical decision making and put forward corresponding solutions. Methods We searched Chinese Biomedical Literature Disc (CBM) and China Journal Full-text Database (Medical sciences) of the China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI) to collect clinical evidence-based case reports. Relevant information was extracted from these reports by a selfdesigned investigation form.Then statistical analyses were performed. Results The search tools used in the course of evidence-based clinical decision making varied. The most frequently used were MEDLINE/PubMed (82.08%) and The Cochrane Library (60.38%). 30.63% of evidence-based case reports described the search strategy in detail, and 9.01% described how they modified their search strategy. All doctors evaluated the association between evidence and disease, but few of them integrated patient factors and relevant external factors when evaluating evidence. The scientific nature and validity of the evidence was evaluated in 74 evidence-based case reports (66.67%), and such evaluation was mainly based on the criteria of evidence grading (50.00%). Reevaluation was mentioned in 85.59% of evidence-based case reports. Conclusion In China, the application of evidence-based decision making varied in different clinical departments. Problems existed in the course of evidence retrieval, appraisal, and reevaluation. This revealed the low information diathesis level of doctors and their lack of evidence-based medicine knowledge. It is suggested that information education and evidence-based medicine education should be strengthened to improve doctors’ ability to use evidence-based clinical decision making. It is also recommended that the search tools, relevant search strategy, the modification of search strategy, and reevaluation on practice results of each case should be mentioned in evidence-based case reports.
ObjectiveTo investigate the influence of misplaced subclavian vein (SCV) catheter into the ipsilateral internal jugular vein (IJV) on transpulmonary thermodilution (TPTD) measurements and explore the possible mechanisms preliminarily.MethodsIn this prospective study, 408 patients in whom an SCV catheterization was indicated for TPTD monitoring were enrolled. A first set of TPTD measurements was collected at baseline in all patients (group 1, SCV catheters were correctly placed; group 2, SCV catheters were misplaced into the ipsilateral IJV). The parameters included mean transit time (MTt), downslope time (DSt), cardiac index (CI), global end-diastolic volume index (GEDVI) and extra-vascular lung water index (EVLWI). A second set of TPTD measurements was performed only in those with catheter misplacement immediately after the misplaced SCV catheters being corrected (Group 3). The differences in MTt, DSt, GEDVI and EVLWI between group 2 and 3 were recorded as ΔMTt, ΔDSt, ΔGEDVI and ΔEVLWI, respectively.ResultsGEDVI and EVLWI were significantly higher (all P<0.001) in group 2 than those in group 1, while CI was not significantly different (P>0.05) between these two groups. Multivariate logistic regression identified PaO2/FiO2 [adjusted odds ratio (OR) 1.492/10 mm Hg; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.180 - 1.884; P<0.001], GEDVI (OR=1.307/10 mL/m2, 95% CI 1.131 - 1.511; P<0.001) and EVLWI (OR=3.05; 95%CI 1.593 - 5.840; P<0.001) as the 3 independent factors associated with the misplacement of SCV catheter into the ipsilateral IJV. In group 2, GEDVI [(1041±122)mL/m2 vs. (790±102)mL/m2, P<0.001], EVLWI [(20.3±4.0)mL/kg vs. (10.3±2.3)mL/kg, P<0.001], CI [(3.6±1.2)L·min–1·m–2 vs. (2.9±1.0)L·min–1·m–2, P<0.001], MTt [(38.2±13.3)s vs. (30.8±9.4)s, P<0.001] and DSt [(18.9±7.2)s vs. (13.2±4.9)s, P<0.001)] were significantly higher than those in Group 3. Multiple regression analysis demonstrated that ΔEVLWI (R2=0.86, P<0.001) was negatively correlated with ΔMTt (coefficient±SE, –0.52±0.12; P<0.001) and positively correlated with ΔDSt (coefficient±SE, 1.45±0.17; P<0.001).ConclusionsDuring TPTD measurements, indicator injection through an SCV catheter misplaced into the ipsilateral IJV results in an overestimation of CI, GEDVI and EVLWI. The increase in DSt might be a key factor in explaining the overestimation of EVLWI in patients with misplaced SCV catheters. Given that the accurate measurements of GEDVI and EVLWI are of utmost importance for guiding resuscitation and decision-making regarding fluids administration, immediate repositioning is required if a misplacement is suspected and confirmed by the chest X-ray.
ObjectivesTo provide an overview of whether the clinical decision support system (CDSS) was effective in reducing medication error and improving medication safety and to assess the quality of available scientific evidence.MethodsPubMed, EMbase, The Cochrane Library, CBM, WanFang Data, VIP and CNKI databases were electronically searched to collect systematic reviews (SRs) on application of clinical decision support system in the medication error and safety from January, 1996 to November, 2018. Two reviewers independently screened literature, extracted data and then evaluated methodological quality of included SRs by using AMSTAR tool.g AMSTAR tool.ResultsA total of 20 SRs including 256 980 healthcare practitioners and 1 683 675 patients were included. Specifically, 16 studies demonstrated moderate quality and 4 demonstrated high quality. 19 SRs evaluated multiple process of care outcome: 9 were sufficient evidence, 6 were limited evidence, and 7 were insufficient evidence which proved that CDSS had a positive effect on process outcome. 13 SRs evaluated reported patient outcomes: 1 with sufficient evidence, 3 with limited evidence, and 9 without sufficient evidence.ConclusionsCDSS reduces medication error by inconsistently improving process of care measures and seldom improving patient outcomes. Larger samples and longer-term studies are required to ensure a larger and more reliable evidence base on the effects of CDSS intervention on patient outcomes.
Objective To investigate the decision-making situation of doctors in the township hospitals in Gaolan, Gansu province, and to discuss its scientificity and rationality. Methods Self-designed questionnaire was adopted to investigate the clinical decision-making situation of 108 doctors from 7 township hospitals in Gaolan county. The investigation contained three parts as follows: basic information of respondents, general information of clinical decision-making evidence, and comparison between respondents’ decision-making situation and current best clinical evidence. Results Among the total 108 questionnaires distributed, 89 valid were retrieved. The feedback showed that 79% of the doctors diagnosed and treated patients in accordance with medical textbooks; 53% took curative effect into consideration in the first place; 33% failed to consider patients’ willingness properly when making clinical decisions; and 52% made clinical therapy regimen for common diseases based on the evidence which was different from that in BMJ published Clinical Evidence. Conclusion While making clinical decisions, doctors in the township hospitals do not adequately refer to the best clinical evidence as their decision-making basis, and fail to take patients’ value and willingness into consideration properly. It is necessary to promote the concept of evidence-based medicine and spread the best evidence in the township health departments.