Objectives To overview the systematic reviews/meta-analyses of safety of femoral nerve block (FNB) used as a postoperative analgesic technique in patients undergoing total knee arthroplasty (TKA). Methods We searched databases including The Cochrane Library, PubMed, EMbase, CNKI, WanFang Data, and VIP from inception to July, 2016. Two reviewers independently screened literature, extracted data and used AMSTAR to evaluate the methodological quality of the included studies. The major indexes used to evaluate the safety of FNB were the incidence rates of symptoms including nausea, vomiting, sedation, retention of urine, dizziness, pruritus, hypotension, falls, nenous thromboembolism and deep infection. Results A total of 12 systematic reviews/meta-analyses were included.They assessed the safety of FNB compared with local infiltration analgesia (LIA), periarticular multimodal drug injection (PMDI), epidural analgesia (EA), patient-controlled intravenous analgesia of opioids (PCA) and adductor canal block (ACB), respectively. The methodological quality of included studies were medium, with the scores between 3 to 10. The results of overview indicated that: FNB had lower incidence rates of nausea and vomiting compared with EA and PCA, but had higher than ACB. FNB had lower incidence rates of sedation and retention of urine compared with EA and PCA. FNB had lower incidence rates of dizziness compared with EA and PCA, and lower incidence rate of hypotension compared with EA. Conclusion Current evidence suggests that FNB is safer than EA and PCA. Due to the limited quantity and quality of the included studies, the above conclusions are needed to be verified by more high-quality studies.
ObjectiveTo evaluate the methodological bias and the reliability of the conclusions of systematic reviews (SRs) about traditional Chinese medicine for essential hypertension. MethodsWe comprehensively searched PubMed, EMbase, The Cochrane library (Issue 4, 2014), CBM, CNKI and WanFang Data to collect SRs of traditional Chinese medicine for essential hypertension from the establishment time of databases to April 30th, 2014. The AMSTAR tool was applied for methodological quality assessment of included studies, and the GRADE system was applied for evidence quality assessment of included outcomes of SRs. ResultsA total of 12 SRs involving 31 outcomes were included, of which 11 SRs focused on the comparison of therapeutic effects between traditional Chinese medicine combined with western medicine and western medicine alone. Nine SRs adopted Jadad tool to assess methodological quality of included original studies. The results of assessment using AMSTAR showed that, among 11 items, there were the most problems concerning Item 1 "Was an 'a prior' design provided?" (none of the 12 SRs provided it); followed by Item 11 "Were potential conflict of interest included?" (nine SRs didn't described it), and Item 6 "Were the characteristics of included studies provided" (six SRs didn't provided it). The results of grading showed that, 29 outcomes were graded as "low" or "very low" quality. The main factors contributed to downgrading evidence quality were limitations (31 outcomes), followed by imprecision (12 outcomes), and inconsistency (13 outcomes). ConclusionCurrently, the methodological quality of SRs about traditional Chinese medicine for essential hypertension was poor on the whole, with low quality of evidence as well as lack of enough attention to the end outcomes of patients with essential hypertension. Thus, physicians should apply the evidence to make decision about traditional Chinese medicine for essential hypertension with caution in clinical practice.
ObjectivesTo evaluate the methodological bias and the reliability of the conclusions of systematic reviews (SRs) of lanthanum carbonate in the treatment of chronic kidney disease with hyperphosphatemia. MethodsWe electronically searched databases including PubMed, EMbase, The Cochrane Library, PROSPERO, CNKI, CBM, WanFang Data and VIP to collect systematic reviews and meta-analysis about lanthanum carbonate in the treatment of chronic kidney disease with hyperphosphatemia from inception to August 31st, 2016. Two reviewers independently screened literature and extracted data, then AMSTAR tool was used to assess the methodological quality of included studies and the GRADE tool was used to grade the evidence quality of outcome measures included in the SRs. ResultsA total of eight relevant SRs were included and containing three main outcome measures. The assessment results of AMSTAR tool suggested that:four SRs were of high quality, and the other four were of medium quality. GRADE results showed:for serum phosphorus level, compared with placebo, the quality of the evidence of three SRs were medium, low and very low; compared with calcium carbonate or conventional phosphorus binder, four SRs were low, low, low and very low; compared with sevelamer, one SR was low. For serum calcium level, compared with placebo, the quality of the evidence of three SRs were high, medium and low, respectively; compared with calcium carbonate or conventional phosphorus binder, five SRs were low, low, low, very low and very low; compared with sevelamer, one SR was very low. For serum iPTH level, compared with placebo, the quality of the evidence of three SRs were medium, low and very low; compared with calcium carbonate or conventional phosphorus binder, five SRs were medium, low, low, very low and very low; compared with sevelamer, one SR was low. ConclusionAt present, methodological quality assessment for the treatment of hyperphosphatemia in chronic kidney disease with lanthanum carbonate is generally not high and the level of evidence for the conclusion is generally low. In drug safety, especially in the occurrence of adverse events of the digestive system is still controversial, and a large amount of high quality experimental is needed to demonstrate the safety of its long-term use. Clinicians need to be cautious in using these evidence to make clinical decisions.
ObjectiveTo evaluate the quality of methodology and evidence of the systematic reviews and meta-analyses (SRs/MAs) of acupuncture therapy for bronchial asthma. MethodsCNKI, CBM, VIP, WanFang Data, PubMed, The Cochrane Library and Web of Science databases were electronically searched to collect SRs/MAs of acupuncture therapy for bronchial asthma from inception to October 31, 2021. Four reviewers independently screened literature, extracted data, and applied the AMSTAR 2 to evaluate the quality of methodology of the included studies and the GRADE system to assess the certainty of evidence for outcomes. ResultsA total of 14 SRs/MAs were included and their main conclusions were that acupuncture therapy was beneficial in improving the clinical efficacy of bronchial asthma treatment. The evaluation of AMSTAR 2 showed that the methodological quality of all studies was all extremely low. The evidence grading of GRADE system showed that, in the total of 59 outcomes, 7 were graded as medium-level, 24 as low-level, 28 as extremely low-level, and none was graded as high-level. ConclusionThe current evidence shows the advantages of acupuncture therapy for bronchial asthma but the reliability of SRs/MAs is low. High-quality clinical studies are still needed to verify the efficacy of acupuncture therapy for bronchial asthma.
ObjectiveTo re-evaluate the systematic review and meta-analysis (SR/MAs) of the efficacy of robot-assisted pedicle screw placement. MethodsThe CNKI, VIP, WanFang Data, SinoMed, PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science databases were electronically searched to collect SR/MAs of robot-assisted pedicle screw placement from inception to April 28, 2023. Two reviewers independently screened literature, extracted data and then assessed the quality of reports, methodological quality, risk of bias, and the strength of evidence quality by using PRISMA, AMSTAR-Ⅱ, ROBIS, and GRADE tool. ResultsA total of 20 SR/MAs were included. The results of the included studies showed that robot-assisted pedicle screw placement was more accurate and had a lower number of complications compared with freehand pedicle screw placement. The quality of reports, methodology, and evidence for pedicle screw placement efficiency in all SR/MAs were low or extremely low, with a high risk of bias. The main reasons included high heterogeneity of included studies, unclear research methods and selection criteria, and missing key reporting processes. ConclusionRobot-assisted pedicle screw placement may have better clinical efficiency than traditional freehand pedicle screw placement. But the quality of relational SR/MAs is low.
ObjectiveTo overview the systematic reviews/meta-analyses (SRs/MAs) of efficacy and safety of dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors (DPP-4) in treatment of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM).MethodsDatabase including The Cochrane Library, PubMed, EMbase, CBM, WanFang Data and CNKI were searched from inception to December 2016 to collect SRs/MAs of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of DPP-4 for the treatment of T2DM. Two reviewers independently screened literature, extracted data, and evaluated the reporting and methodological qualities using the PRISMA checklist and the AMSTAR tool.ResultsTwenty-seven SRs/MAs of DPP-4 for the treatment of T2DM were included in this overview. The average score of AMSTAR was 7.04. The worst score were the item 1 (26 studies didn't provide an ‘a priori’ design), item 4 (10 studies didn't provide whether the status of publication used as an inclusion criterion?), item 10 and item 11 (15 studies didn't assess the likelihood of publication bias and the potential conflicts of interest). The PRISMA score ranged from 17.0 to 24.5. The main problems of reporting were protocol and registration, search, additional analyses and funding.ConclusionThe evidence shows that the reporting and methodological quality of the SRs/MAs of DPP-4 inhibitors for type 2 diabetes are not high.
ObjectiveTo overview the systematic reviews of the efficacy of cancer patient decision aids (PDAs) for treatment decision-making. MethodsThe PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, Embase, CINAHL, JBI, CNKI, VIP, CBM and WanFang Data databases were electronically searched to collect the systematic reviews relevant to the objective from inception to September 2023. Literature screening, data extraction, methodological quality assessment of the included literature, and summary and grading of the evidence were carried out independently by two researchers, and duplication of original studies in the included systematic evaluations was investigated using the corrected covered area (CCA). ResultsA total of 17 systematic reviews were included, of which 13 (76.47%) were low- or very low-quality studies. A total of 64 pieces of evidence were included, of which only 26 (40.62%) were of moderate quality, and the original studies included in the included literature had a low degree of overlap (CCA=0.05). The results of meta-analysis showed that PDAs could increase decision-related knowledge, reduce decision conflict and regret in cancer patients' treatment decision (P<0.05). However, there was no significant difference in decision satisfaction, anxiety or depression (P>0.05). ConclusionPDAs can improve cancer patients' knowledge related to treatment decision, reduce decision conflicts and regrets, and have no significant negative effects on decision preparation, satisfaction, anxiety, and depression. However, the existing systematic reviews are of low quality and limited to a few cancer types.
ObjectiveTo overview the systematic reviews on the timing of different surgical interventions for severe multidrug-resistant pulmonary tuberculosis patients.MethodsPubMed, EMbase, The Cochrane Library, CBM, WanFang Data and CNKI databases were searched for systematic reviews about the timing of different surgical interventions for severe multidrug-resistant pulmonary tuberculosis patients from inception to December, 2018. Two reviewers independently screened literature, extracted data, evaluated the reporting and methodological qualities using the PRISMA checklist and the AMSTAR tool. After re-extraction of individual RCT data from included systematic reviews, meta-analysis was performed by Stata10.0 software.ResultsA total of 11 systematic reviews were included. The average methodological quality score was 8.13 in AMSTAR , the reporting quality score was from 19.5 to 25 in PRISMA. Re-performed meta-analysis showed that, the total success rate of operation was 93.3% (95%CI 92.9 to 93.8), the failure rate was 3.7% (95%CI 3.3 to 4.0), the mortality rate was 2.0% (95%CI 1.8 to 2.2), and the loss rate was 1.0% (95%CI 0.8 to 1.2). The cure rates of different surgical methods were all over 80%, among which single lobectomy (98.47%) and compound lobectomy (98.94%) had the higher cure rates than others. For the time of different surgical interventions, cure rate could be improved obviously in patients receiving surgery treatment after 1 months (OR=1.58, 95%CI 1.29 to 1.94, P=0.000 12), 1-8months (OR=1.66, 95%CI 1.30 to 2.12, P=0.000 05) and 9-24 months (OR=1.48, 95%CI 1.15 to 1.90, P=0.002) of anti-tuberculosis therapy compared with 0 month.There were significant differences between two groups.ConclusionCurrent evidence shows that operation is an effective way for severe multidrug-resistant pulmonary tuberculosis. Operative opportunity should be selected after 1-24 months of anti-tuberculosis drug treatment when the operation time depending on whether the tuberculosis has turned negative or not. Operative mode should be decided by the location and the scope of the lesion, which ensures the maximum excision of lesions and retention of lung function.
ObjectiveTo summarize and evaluate the quality of methodology, report and evidence of the systematic reviews and meta-analyses (SRs/MAs) of acupuncture and moxibustion interventions for Parkinson's disease. MethodsEight databases including CNKI, WanFang Data, VIP, CBM, PubMed, EMbase, Cochrane Library and Web of Science were searched from inception to May 1, 2023. The quality of methodology, report and evidence involved in these studies were evaluated by AMSTAR 2, PRISMA and GRADE tool. ResultsA total of 28 SRs/MAs were included, and the findings of included studies showed that acupuncture and moxibustion had a clinical advantage for Parkinson's disease. The methodological quality of all studies was extremely low. Thirteen reports were relatively complete, 14 reports had certain flaws, and 1 report had relatively serious flaws. And of the 126 reports for seven outcomes, 1 was graded as high, 12 as moderate, 57 as low, and 56 as critically low. ConclusionThe current evidence shows that acupuncture and moxibustion have a certain clinical effect for Parkinson's disease, but the methodological quality and evidence quality of related SRs/MAs are low, and the standardization still needs to be improved. The efficacy of acupuncture and moxibustion in Parkinson's disease still needs to be verified by high-quality clinical studies in the future.
ObjectivesTo survey the systematic reviews of pharmacoeconomic evaluations.MethodsDatabases including The Cochrane Library, PubMed, EMbase (Ovid), NHS EED (Ovid), CENTRAL, Health Technology Assessment (HTA) Database, CNKI, WanFang Data, VIP and CBM were searched from inception to May 2018 to collect systematic reviews of pharmacoeconomic evaluations. Two reviewers independently screened literature and extracted data. Data statistics and frequency analysis were then conducted on the basic characteristics of included literatures, which involves the publication journal type and influencing factors (IF), disease type, quality assessment tool, etc. The amended AMSTAR scale was used to assess the methodological quality of pharm-SR.ResultsOne hundred and forty-three systematic reviews were included in the overview. The UK had a large number of publications (39.8%), which were mostly published in the Health Technology Assessment and Pharmacoeconomics. Among the included literatures, most were evaluated tumor related pharmacoeconomics systematic reviews (20.8%). They searched on average 7.42±4.00 databases. The British Medical Journal checklist (20.15%) and the Drummond checklist (19.40) were the main tools for quality evaluation. The methodological qualities of these studies were not high.ConclusionsThe evidence shows that the number of systematic reviews of pharmacoeconomic is increasing and research methodology is gradually unifying. However, the quality is still required to be further improved.