The Methodological Quality of Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses on the Effectiveness of Non-pharmacological Cancer Pain Management

2015 ◽  
Vol 16 (5) ◽  
pp. 781-791 ◽  
Author(s):  
Youngshin Song ◽  
Minhye Oh ◽  
Seyeon Park ◽  
Myouyun Park ◽  
Kyoungok Kim ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Pain Management ◽  
Cancer Pain ◽  
Systematic Reviews ◽  
Methodological Quality ◽  
Cancer Pain Management ◽  
Meta Analyses

scholarly journals Methodological Quality Assessment of Systematic Review or Meta-Analysis Using AMSTAR-2: the Long-Term Effectiveness or Efficacy of Opioids for Chronic Non-Cancer Pain

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Qian Li ◽  
Ke Deng ◽  
Xiaoyuan Jiang ◽  
Huan Tao ◽  
Hui Liu ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cancer Pain ◽  
Systematic Reviews ◽  
Methodological Quality ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Risk Of Bias ◽  
Cochrane Central Register ◽  
Cochrane Reviews ◽  
Meta Analyses

Abstract Background：Systematic review or meta-analysis, the strong study design of high quality evidence, give inconsistent conclusion of long-term effectiveness or efficacy of opioids for chronic non-cancer pain. We appraised the methodological quality of systematic reviews or meta-analyses. Methods: We found the relevant systematic reviews or meta-analyses by searching Medline, EMBASE, the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, the International prospective register of systematic reviews, Psyc ARTICLES/OVID, the Chinese Bio-Medical Literature Database, the China National Knowledge Infrastructure, and the Wan Fang Data and VIP Database on March 1st, 2019. The methodological quality was assessed by A Measurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews-2(AMSTAR-2). Spearman correlation analysis and non-parametric tests were used to assess the association between quality and factors. Results: Twenty-one systematic reviews or meta-analyses were included in our study. One has no individual study. In terms of methodological quality, twelve reviews were critically low in overall confidence, four reviews were low, two reviews were moderate, two reviews were high. When referring to the systematic reviews or meta-analyses of relatively better methodological quality with more credible results and conclusions, the effectiveness or efficacy of opioids was small to questionable. Cochrane reviews performed better than non-Cochrane reviews in establishing prior protocol (100% vs 17%, P<0.05), providing an excluded studies list (100% vs 50%, P<0.05) and taking risk of bias into account when interpreting the results of the review (100% vs 75%, P<0.05). There was a strong correlation (ρ=0.526, P<0.05) between the impact factor of systematic reviews or meta-analyses in published journals and methodological quality. Conclusion The methodological quality of the included systematic reviews or meta-analyses is far from satisfactory and needs improvement, especially in establishing prior protocol and justifying significant deviations from the protocol, providing an excluded primary studies list, reporting the funding information of primary studies, and assessing the potential impact of risk of bias on individual studies.

Cancer pain management

2014 ◽  
Vol 155 (3) ◽  
pp. 93-99
Author(s):  
Péter Heigl
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Pain Management ◽  
Pain Relief ◽  
Life Expectancy ◽  
Cancer Pain ◽  
Cancer Pain Management ◽  
Medical Activity ◽  
Short Summary ◽  
Adequate Quality

Pain is a significant and alarming symptom of cancer seriously affecting the activity and quality of life of patients. Recent research proved that inadequate analgesia shortens life expectancy. Therefore, pain relief is not only a possibility but a professional, ethical and moral commitment to relieve patients from suffering, as well as ensure their adequate quality of life and human dignity. Proper pain relief can be achieved with medical therapy in most of the cases and the pharmacological alternatives are available in Hungary. Yet medical activity regarding pain relief is far from the desired. This paper gives a short summary of the guidelines on medical pain management focusing particularly on the use of opioids. Orv. Hetil., 2014, 155(3), 93–99.

Implementing Guidelines for Cancer Pain Management: Results of a Randomized Controlled Clinical Trial

1999 ◽  
Vol 17 (1) ◽  
pp. 361-361 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stuart L. Du Pen ◽  
Anna R. Du Pen ◽  
Nayak Polissar ◽  
Jennifer Hansberry ◽  
Beth Miller Kraybill ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Decision Making ◽  
Pain Management ◽  
Cancer Pain ◽  
Symptom Management ◽  
Controlled Study ◽  
Cancer Pain Management ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Prospective Longitudinal

PURPOSE: Pain and symptom management is an integral part of the clinical practice of oncology. A number of guidelines have been developed to assist the clinician in optimizing comfort care. We implemented clinical guidelines for cancer pain management in the community setting and evaluated whether these guidelines improved care. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Eighty-one cancer patients, aged 37 to 76 years, were enrolled onto a prospective, longitudinal, randomized controlled study from the outpatient clinic settings of 26 western Washington–area medical oncologists. A multilevel treatment algorithm based on the Agency for Health Care Policy and Research Guidelines for Cancer Pain Management was compared with standard-practice (control) pain and symptom management therapies used by community oncologists. The primary outcome of interest was pain (Brief Pain Inventory); secondary outcomes of interest were all other symptoms (Memorial Symptom Assessment Scale) and quality of life (Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy Scale). RESULTS: Patients randomized to the pain algorithm group achieved a statistically significant reduction in usual pain intensity, measured as slope scores, when compared with standard community practice (P < .02). Concurrent chemotherapy and patient adherence to treatment were significant mediators of worst pain. There were no significant differences in other symptoms or quality of life between the two treatment groups. CONCLUSION: This guideline implementation study supports the use of algorithmic decision making in the management of cancer pain. These findings suggest that comprehensive pain assessment and evidence-based analgesic decision-making processes do enhance usual pain outcomes.

scholarly journals Quality of the Evidence Supporting the Role of Oral Nutritional Supplements in the Management of Malnutrition: An Overview of Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christine Baldwin ◽  
Rosemary Smith ◽  
Michelle Gibbs ◽  
C Elizabeth Weekes ◽  
Peter W Emery
Keyword(s):  
At Risk ◽  
Systematic Reviews ◽  
Methodological Quality ◽  
Hospital Readmissions ◽  
Nutritional Supplement ◽  
Measurement Tool ◽  
High Quality ◽  
Oral Nutritional Supplements ◽  
Meta Analyses

ABSTRACT There is considerable heterogeneity across the findings of systematic reviews of oral nutritional supplement (ONS) interventions, presenting difficulties for healthcare decision-makers and patients alike. It is not known whether heterogeneity arises from differences in patient populations or relates to methodological rigor. This overview aimed to collate and compare findings from systematic reviews of ONSs compared with routine care in adult patients who were malnourished or at risk of malnutrition with any clinical condition and to examine their methodological quality. Three electronic databases were searched to July 2019, supplemented with hand-searching. Data on all outcomes were extracted and review methodological quality assessed using A MeaSurement Tool for Assessment of systematic Reviews (AMSTAR). Twenty-two reviews were included, 11 in groups from mixed clinical backgrounds and 11 in specific clinical conditions. Ninety-one meta-analyses were identified for 12 different outcomes but there was discordance between results. Significant benefits of ONSs were reported in 4 of 4 analyses of energy intake, 7 of 11 analyses of body weight, 7 of 22 analyses of mortality, 10 of 17 analyses of complications (total and infectious), 1 of 3 analyses of muscle strength, 4 of 9 analyses of body composition/nutritional status, 2 of 14 analyses of length of stay, and 2 of 5 analyses of hospital readmissions. Ten reviews were high quality (AMSTAR scores 8–11), 9 moderate (AMSTAR scores 3–8), and 3 poor (AMSTAR scores 0–3). Methodological deficiencies were limitations to searches, poor reporting of heterogeneity, and failure to incorporate quality of evidence into any recommendations. Discordance between reviews was not markedly reduced when only high-quality reviews were considered. Evidence for the effects of ONS in malnourished patients or those who are at risk of malnutrition is uncertain, and discordance in results can arise from differences in clinical background of patients or the etiological basis of malnutrition.

scholarly journals A Critical Overview of Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses on Acupuncture for Poststroke Insomnia

2020 ◽  
Vol 2020 ◽  
pp. 1-7
Author(s):  
Jinke Huang ◽  
Manli Wu ◽  
Simin Liang ◽  
Xiaohui Qin ◽  
Min Shen ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Quality Assessment ◽  
Systematic Reviews ◽  
Methodological Quality ◽  
Acupuncture Treatment ◽  
Descriptive Analysis ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Evidence Quality ◽  
Meta Analyses ◽  
Quality Evidence

Objectives. Acupuncture has increasingly been used for insomnia relief after stroke. We aimed to evaluate the methodological quality and summarize the evidence regarding the effectiveness of acupuncture for poststroke insomnia (PSI) from systematic reviews/meta-analyses (SRs/MAs). Methods. Eight databases were searched from inception through August 23, 2020. SRs/MAs on acupuncture treatment for PSI were included. Methodological quality assessment was performed using Assessing the Methodological Quality of Systematic Reviews 2 (AMSTAR-2), and evidence quality assessment was performed using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE). Results. Six SRs/MAs on acupuncture treatment for PSI were included. The AMSTAR-2 showed that the methodological quality of all included SRs/MAs was rated as critically low. According to the evaluation results of GRADE, 38.9% (7/18) of outcomes were rated as very low-quality evidence, 22.2% (4/18) were low-quality evidence, and 8.9% (7/18) were moderate-quality evidence. Descriptive analysis results showed that acupuncture was an effective treatment modality for PSI. Conclusions. All included reviews indicated that acupuncture was more effective than the control group for the treatment of PSI, but the credibility of the results is limited owing to the generally low methodological and evidence quality of the included SRs/MAs. More high-quality evidence is needed to determine whether acupuncture is more effective than other treatments.

Assessing the Quality of Cancer Pain Management

1988 ◽  
Vol 4 (3) ◽  
pp. 9-15 ◽  
Author(s):  
E. Ann Mohide ◽  
Joan A. Royle ◽  
Maureen Montemuro ◽  
Patricia Porterfield ◽  
John F. Scott ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Pain Management ◽  
Cancer Pain ◽  
Cancer Pain Management

scholarly journals Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis in Spine Surgery—How Good Are They in Methodological Quality? A Systematic Review

2020 ◽  
pp. 219256822090681 ◽  
Author(s):  
Muthu Sathish ◽  
Ramakrishnan Eswar
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Spine Surgery ◽  
Systematic Reviews ◽  
Methodological Quality ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Eligibility Criteria ◽  
Cochrane Database ◽  
Critical Flaw ◽  
Meta Analyses

Study Design: Systematic review. Objectives: To assess the methodological quality of systematic reviews and meta-analyses in spine surgery over the past 2 decades. Materials and Methods: We conducted independent and in duplicate systematic review of the published systematic reviews and meta-analyses between 2000 and 2019 from PubMed Central and Cochrane Database pertaining to spine surgery involving surgical intervention. We searched bibliographies to identify additional relevant studies. Methodological quality was evaluated with AMSTAR score and graded with AMSTAR 2 criteria. Results: A total of 96 reviews met the eligibility criteria, with mean AMSTAR score of 7.51 (SD = 1.98). Based on AMSTAR 2 criteria, 13.5% (n = 13) and 18.7% (n = 18) of the studies had high and moderate level of confidence of results, respectively, without any critical flaws. A total of 29.1% (n = 28) of the studies had at least 1 critical flaw and 38.5% (n = 37) of the studies had more than 1 critical flaw, so that their results have low and critically low confidence, respectively. Failure to analyze the conflict of interest of authors of primary studies included in review and lack of list of excluded studies with justification were the most common critical flaw. Regression analysis demonstrated that studies with funding and studies published in recent years were significantly associated with higher methodological quality. Conclusion: Despite improvement in methodological quality of systematic reviews and meta-analyses in spine surgery in current decade, a substantial proportion continue to show critical flaws. With increasing number of review articles in spine surgery, stringent measures must be taken to adhere to methodological quality by following PRISMA and AMSTAR guidelines to attain higher standards of evidence in published literature.

scholarly journals Q-Coh: A tool to screen the methodological quality of cohort studies in systematic reviews and meta-analyses

2013 ◽  
Vol 13 (2) ◽  
pp. 138-146 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alexander Jarde ◽  
Josep-Maria Losilla ◽  
Jaume Vives ◽  
Maria F. Rodrigo
Keyword(s):  
Cohort Studies ◽  
Systematic Reviews ◽  
Methodological Quality ◽  
Meta Analyses
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document