scholarly journals Discontinuing benzodiazepines: best practices

2016 ◽  
Vol 25 (3) ◽  
pp. 214-216 ◽  
Author(s):  
G. Guaiana ◽  
C. Barbui

In July 2015, the Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technologies in Health (CADTH) released a Rapid Response report summary, with a critical appraisal, on discontinuation strategies for patients with long-term benzodiazepines (BDZ) use. The CADTH document is a review of the literature. It includes studies whose intervention is BDZ discontinuation. Also, clinical guidelines, systematic reviews and meta-analyses are included. What emerges from the CADTH guidelines is that the best strategy remains gradual tapering of BDZ with little evidence for the use of adjunctive medications. The results show that simple interventions such as discontinuation letters from clinicians, self-help information and support in general, added to gradual tapering may be associated with a two- to three-fold higher chance of successful withdrawal, compared with treatment as usual. We suggest possible implications for day-to-day clinical practice.

2016 ◽  
Vol 22 (2) ◽  
pp. 132-141 ◽  
Author(s):  
Katharine A. Smith ◽  
Andrea Cipriani ◽  
John R. Geddes

SummaryKeeping up to date with the best evidence on treatment interventions is an essential part of clinical practice, but it can seem an overwhelming task for busy clinicians. Systematic reviews and meta-analyses provide a useful and convenient summary of knowledge and form an essential part of an evidence-based approach to clinical practice. However, these reviews vary in methodology and therefore in the quality of the recommendations they provide. Clinicians need to feel confident in their skills of critical appraisal, so that they can assess the relative merits of systematic reviews. In this article we discuss the strengths and limitations of different types of evidence synthesis to enable the reader to feel more confident in assessing the scientific information to use in clinical practice.


2021 ◽  
Vol 12 ◽  
Author(s):  
Thomas Platz

Quality of healthcare can be improved when the best external evidence available is integrated in clinical decision-making in a systematic explicit manner. With the rapid expansion of clinical evidence, the opportunities for evidence-based high-quality healthcare increase. Paradoxically, the likelihood of any one person to get a complete and balanced picture of the evidence available decreases. This is especially true for rehabilitation interventions that are complex in nature and where clinical research is rather diverse. Given the complex nature of the evidence, there is a substantial risk of misinterpreting the complex information both at the level of individual sources (e.g., reports of clinical trials) and for aggregated data syntheses (e.g., systematic reviews and meta-analyses). These risks are inherent in these sources themselves and are in addition related to the methodological expertise necessary to make valid use of the evidence for clinical decision-making. Taken together, there is a great demand for systematic structured guidance from evidence to clinical decision. This methodology paper describes a structured process for the development and report of evidence-based clinical practice recommendations that uses systematic reviews and meta-analyses as evidence source. It provides a comprehensive framework with specific requirements for the development group, the formulation of the healthcare question addressed, the systematic search for the evidence, its critical appraisal, the extraction and the outcome-centered presentation of the evidence, the rating of its quality, strengths and weaknesses, any further considerations relevant for decision-making, and an explicit recommendation statement along with its justification, implementation, and resource aspects. The suggested methodology uses international standards in evidence synthesis, critical appraisal of systematic reviews, rating the quality of evidence, characteristics of recommendations, and guideline development as developed by Cochrane, GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation), AMSTAR (A MeaSurement Tool to Assess systematic Reviews), and AGREE (Appraisal of Guidelines for REsearch & Evaluation). An added distinctive feature of the methodology is to focus on the most up-to-date, most valid evidence and hence to support the development of valid practice recommendations in an efficient way. Practice recommendations generated by such a valid methodology would be generally applicable and promote evidence-based clinical practice globally.


2018 ◽  
Vol 49 (7) ◽  
pp. e51-e64 ◽  
Author(s):  
Trevor A. McGrath ◽  
Patrick M. Bossuyt ◽  
Paul Cronin ◽  
Jean‐Paul Salameh ◽  
Noémie Kraaijpoel ◽  
...  

Author(s):  
I. V. Borisov

The article provides a review of the literature on the assessment of the efficacy, safety and indications for the use of povidone iodine in modern clinical practice. The preservation of good sensitivity to the drug, despite its long-term use, as well as new opportunities associated with the effectiveness against biofilm forms of pathogens and viruses, in particular SARS-CoV-2, has been shown.


2019 ◽  
Vol 17 (4) ◽  
pp. 144-148
Author(s):  
Norma Cuellar

As part of National Association of Hispanic Nurses’ Strategic Plan, our organization focuses on the development of scholarship in our members. Scholarship is what moves nursing science forward and includes not only research but also teaching/education and clinical practice. Part of scholarship is identifying what is in the literature or what is the “evidence” which is detrimental to identifying the best practices for our Latino communities. This article is part of a scholarship development series that will run in Hispanic Health Care International. The purpose of this first article is to provide a background on how to conduct a review of the literature. The objectives of the article are to (1) define what a review of the literature is, (2) discuss various types of review articles that can be used for research, practice, or education, (3) identify the process of synthesizing evidence, (4) present standardized formats that can be used in writing a review, and (5) provide steps to begin the process of writing a review.


BMJ ◽  
2015 ◽  
Vol 350 (mar06 6) ◽  
pp. h1088-h1088 ◽  
Author(s):  
C. L. Vale ◽  
L. H. M. Rydzewska ◽  
M. M. Rovers ◽  
J. R. Emberson ◽  
F. Gueyffier ◽  
...  

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Samar Altoukhi ◽  
Clare L Whitehead ◽  
Greg Ryan ◽  
Jan Deprest ◽  
Luc Joyeux ◽  
...  

Abstract Background: Open spina bifida (OSB) is one of the most common congenital central nervous system defects and leads to long-term physical and cognitive disabilities. Open fetal surgery for OSB improves neurological outcomes and reduces the need for ventriculoperitoneal shunting, compared to postnatal surgery, at the expense of increased prematurity. It however confers significant morbidity to the mother in the index pregnancy and potential risks to future pregnancies. Fetoscopic surgery may prevent maternal morbidity yet the question remains whether the procedure is neuroprotective and reduces prematurity. Comparison of outcomes between different treatment options is challenging due to inconsistent outcome reporting. We aim to develop and disseminate a core outcome set (COS) for fetal OSB, to ensure that outcomes relevant to all stakeholders are collected and reported in a standardised fashion in future studies. Methods: The COS will be developed using a validated Delphi methodology. A systematic literature review will be performed to identify previously reported outcomes focused on prenatally diagnosed OSB. Outcomes assessed will include maternal (primary and subsequent pregnancies), fetal, neonatal and childhood to adolescence. In a second phase, semi-structured interviews with stakeholders will be performed to ensure representation of additional relevant outcomes that may not have been reported in the literature. We will include patients and parents, as well as health professionals involved in the care of these pregnancies and children (fetal medicine specialists, fetal surgeons, neonatologists/paediatricians, and allied health). Subsequently, an international group of key stakeholders will rate the importance of the identified outcomes using three sequential, online, rounds of a modified Delphi Survey. Final agreement on outcomes to be included in the COS, their definition and measurement will be achieved through a final face-to-face consensus meeting with all stakeholder groups represented. Dissemination of the final COS will be ensured through different media and relevant societies. Discussion: Development and implementation of a COS for fetal OSB will ensure consistent outcome reporting in future clinical trials, systematic reviews, and clinical practice guidelines. This will lead to higher quality research, better evidence-based clinical practice and ultimately improved maternal, fetal and long term childhood outcomes. Trial registration: Core Outcome Measures in Effectiveness Trials (COMET): 1187. International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO): CRD42018104880.


10.2196/22422 ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 22 (12) ◽  
pp. e22422
Author(s):  
Tomohide Yamada ◽  
Daisuke Yoneoka ◽  
Yuta Hiraike ◽  
Kimihiro Hino ◽  
Hiroyoshi Toyoshiba ◽  
...  

Background Performing systematic reviews is a time-consuming and resource-intensive process. Objective We investigated whether a machine learning system could perform systematic reviews more efficiently. Methods All systematic reviews and meta-analyses of interventional randomized controlled trials cited in recent clinical guidelines from the American Diabetes Association, American College of Cardiology, American Heart Association (2 guidelines), and American Stroke Association were assessed. After reproducing the primary screening data set according to the published search strategy of each, we extracted correct articles (those actually reviewed) and incorrect articles (those not reviewed) from the data set. These 2 sets of articles were used to train a neural network–based artificial intelligence engine (Concept Encoder, Fronteo Inc). The primary endpoint was work saved over sampling at 95% recall (WSS@95%). Results Among 145 candidate reviews of randomized controlled trials, 8 reviews fulfilled the inclusion criteria. For these 8 reviews, the machine learning system significantly reduced the literature screening workload by at least 6-fold versus that of manual screening based on WSS@95%. When machine learning was initiated using 2 correct articles that were randomly selected by a researcher, a 10-fold reduction in workload was achieved versus that of manual screening based on the WSS@95% value, with high sensitivity for eligible studies. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve increased dramatically every time the algorithm learned a correct article. Conclusions Concept Encoder achieved a 10-fold reduction of the screening workload for systematic review after learning from 2 randomly selected studies on the target topic. However, few meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials were included. Concept Encoder could facilitate the acquisition of evidence for clinical guidelines.


2020 ◽  
Vol 3 (2) ◽  
pp. 56-68
Author(s):  
Antika Maulida Rahayu ◽  
Andari Wuri Astuti ◽  
Fitria Siswi Utami

Latar belakang: Preeklamsia merupakan komplikasi kehamilan yang meningkatkan risiko 3-8% dari semua morbiditas ibu. Berdasarkan data World Health Organisation (WHO), angka kejadian preeklamsia di seluruh dunia berkisar 0,51%-38,4%, kejadian preeklamsia 7 kali lebih tinggi di negara berkembang. Frekuensi kejadian preeklampsia di Indonesia adalah 3-10% dari seluruh kehamilan. Tujuan Penelitian: untuk memberikan bukti terkini tentang pengalaman ibu dengan riwayat preeklamsia dalam kehamilan. Metode: Metode yang digunakan adalah scooping review yang terdiri dari tahapan-tahapan, yaitu: melakukan fokusing review dengan framework PEOS (Population, Exposure, Outcome dan Study Design), melakukan literature searching menggunakan databases yang relevan. Menyeleksi studi yang relevan menggunakan kriteria inklusi dan ekslusi; melakukan critical appraisal untuk menilai kualitas literature, melakukan data ekstraksi, menganalisis dan melaporkan hasil. PRISMA Flowchart (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses), digunakan untuk menggambarkan alur pencarian literature. Hasil: sebanyak 7 artikel masuk dalam kriteria inklusi dan kemudian dengan Grade A dan B di lanjutkan proses review. Analisis tematik digunakan untuk mengidentifikasi konsep-konsep kunci yang menghasilkan 4 tema yaitu: faktor penyebab preeklamsia, dampak preeklamsia, budaya masyarakat terkait preeklamsia, dan respon ibu yang mengalami preeklamsia. Simpulan: kelainan dalam kehamilan seperti preeklamsia yang sering terjadi di negara maju maupun di negara berkembang, di dalam penelitian di sebutkan bahwa mayoritas ibu dengan riwayat preeklamsia cenderung beresiko alami kelahiran prematur hingga perdarahan pasca melahirkan dan dapat menyebabkan kematian apabila terlambat penanganan pelayanan kesehatan.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document