|
|
Quality assessment of systematic review / meta analysis of norepinephrine in shock treatment |
YAO Jin1 YAO Chong2 YANG Shuixin2 YAO Xiaoli3 |
1.Department of Pharmacy, Huzhou Central Hospital, Zhejiang Province, Huzhou 313000, China;
2.Drug Phase Ⅰ Clinical Trial Center, Huzhou Central Hospital, Zhejiang Province, Huzhou 313000, China;
3.Department of Emergency, Huzhou Central Hospital, Zhejiang Province, Huzhou 313000, China |
|
|
Abstract Objective To evaluate the methodological quality and reporting quality of the systematic review / meta analysis (SR/MA) of norepinephrine in shock treatment at home and abroad. Methods Wanfang Data Knowledge Service Platform, China Biomedical Literature Database, VIP Chinese Journal Service Platform, China National Knowledge Infrastructure Academic Literature Database and PubMed Literature Database were searched, and the retrieval time was from the inception to June 2020. The AMSTAR scale and the PRISMA checklist were used to evaluate the methodological quality and report quality of the final included literatures. Results Seven studies met the inclusion criteria. The average score of AMSTAR was (7.86±1.25) scores and the average score of PRISMA was (21.86±1.33) scores. The main problems were in the areas of early programme registration, other analyses, limitations and bias between research groups, and unreported funding sources. Conclusion At present, the SR/MA analysis of norepinephrine for shock at home and abroad is of good quality. However, further improvement of methodology and standardized reporting are needed in order to provide high-quality evidence for evidence-based decision-making.
|
|
|
|
|
[1] Girbes AR,Smit AJ. Use of dopamine in the ICU. Hope,hype,belief and facts [J]. Clin Exp Hypertens,1997,19(1/2):191-199.
[2] Vincent JL,Biston P,Devriendt J,et al. Dopamine versus norepinephrine:is one better? [J]. Minerva Anestesiol,2009,75(5):333-337.
[3] 熊俊,陈日新.系统评价/Meta分析方法学质量的评价工具AMSTAR[J].中国循证医学杂志,2011,11(9):1084-1089.
[4] Moher D,Liberati A,Tetzlaff J,et al.系统综述和荟萃分析优先报告的条目:PRISMA声明[J].中西医结合学报,2009,7(9):889-896.
[5] 陈敏,王海芳,王艳,等.多巴胺、去甲肾上腺素治疗感染性休克疗效比较的Meta分析[J].山东医药,2015(6):52-54.
[6] 王玉华,颊建臣,杨艳莉,等.多巴胺与去甲肾上腺素治疗感染性休克患者安全性的Meta分析[J].中国现代医学杂志,2014,24(7):51-55.
[7] 赵阳,王倩,臧彬.多巴胺与去甲肾上腺素治疗感染性休克疗效比较的系统评价[J].中国循证医学杂志,2012,12(6):679-685.
[8] 金光勇,林乐清,周梦露,等.去甲肾上腺素与多巴胺治疗心源性休克安全性的Meta分析[J].温州医科大学学报,2017,47(10):752-757.
[9] De Backer D,Aldecoa C,Njimi H,et al. Dopamine versus norepinephrine in the treatment of septic shock:a meta-analysis [J]. Crit Care Med,2012,40(3):725-730.
[10] 周飞虎,宋青.去甲肾上腺素与多巴胺对脓毒性休克应用疗效的Meta分析[J].中华危重病急救医学,2013,25(8):449-454.
[11] Rui Q,Jiang Y,Chen M,et al. Dopamine versus norepinephrine in the treatment of cardiogenic shock: A PRISMA-compliant meta-analysis [J]. Medicine(Baltimore),2017;96(43):e8402.
[12] 中国医师协会急诊医师分会,中国研究型医院学会休克与脓毒症专业委员会.中国脓毒症/脓毒性休克急诊治疗指南(2018)[J].中国急救医学,2018,38(9):741-756.
[13] 熊敏君,吕光宇,王晓源,等.氢化可的松联合乌司他丁治疗脓毒性休克的效果[J].中国医药导报,2019,16(32):111-114.
[14] 马林沁,张佳琪,刘艺,等.间羟胺与去甲肾上腺素对老年脓毒性休克患者疗效的比较[J].中华急诊医学杂志,2020,29(4):547-550.
[15] 曾卫华,杨春丽,贺慧为,等.去甲肾上腺素和多巴胺治疗脓毒性休克的对比研究[J].江西医药,2013,48(7):570-573.
[16] 利军保.去甲肾上腺素对重症脓毒性休克患者肾功能及血流动力学的影响[J].临床医学研究与实践,2020,5(6):57-58.
[17] 姚剑锋,江均贤.多巴胺及去甲肾上腺素对脓毒性休克患者血流动力学的影响[J].中国医药科学,2018,8(15):216-218.
[18] 骆琳,范鸿博,于健.脓毒性休克患者应用特利加压素联合去甲肾上腺素的临床疗效观察[J].实用休克杂志,2017,1(2):92-94.
[19] 丁凡,任义军,赵志明,等.《中华创伤骨科杂志》发表的Meta分析/系统评价的报告及方法学质量评价[J].中华创伤骨科杂志,2015,17(5):399-404.
[20] 葛龙,李雅睿,曾巧铃,等.发表于《中华儿科杂志》的系统评价/Meta分析的报告质量和方法学质量评价[J].中华医学图书情报杂志,2013,22(12):55-60.
[21] 王国豪,靳英辉,张磊,等.国内中医护理系统评价/Meta分析的报告质量与方法学质量评价[J].护理学杂志,2016,31(1):98-102.
[22] 郑洋,赵铁建.《广西中医药大学学报》发表的系统评价/Meta分析文献方法学质量评价[J].广西中医药大学学报,2017,20(4):100-102.
[23] 方晓,郝丽洁,王莹,等.《现代妇产科进展》发表的系统评价/Meta分析的方法学质量评价[J].现代妇产科进展,2016,25(3):239-240.
[24] 王秋华,刘兵兵,曹恒斌,等.复方丹参滴丸治疗冠心病心绞痛系统评价/Meta分析的方法学质量评价[J].浙江中西医结合杂志,2017,27(6):536-539.
[25] 黎丽群,刘洪武,龚潇坤,等.中医药治疗消化性溃疡的Meta分析再评价[J].中国医药导报,2019,16(36):127-131.
[26] Zhi X,Zhang Z,Cui J,et al. Quality of meta-analyses in major leading orthopedics journals:A systematic review [J]. Orthop Traumatol Surg Res,2017,103(8):1141-1146.
[27] 杨智荣,詹思延.PROSPERO:为非Cochrane系统评价全新打造的注册平台[J].中华医学杂志,2012,92(6):422-425. |
|
|
|