Effectiveness and safety of enhanced postoperative care units for non-cardiac, non-neurological surgery: a systematic review protocol.

IF 1.5 Q3 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES JBI evidence synthesis Pub Date : 2024-08-01 DOI:10.11124/JBIES-23-00439
Liem Tran, Cindy Stern, Philip Harford, Guy Ludbrook, Ashley Whitehorn
{"title":"Effectiveness and safety of enhanced postoperative care units for non-cardiac, non-neurological surgery: a systematic review protocol.","authors":"Liem Tran, Cindy Stern, Philip Harford, Guy Ludbrook, Ashley Whitehorn","doi":"10.11124/JBIES-23-00439","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>The proposed systematic review will evaluate the evidence on the effectiveness and safety of enhanced post-operative care (EPC) units on patient and health service outcomes in adult patients following non-cardiac, non-neurological surgery.</p><p><strong>Introduction: </strong>The increase in surgical procedures globally has placed a significant economic and societal burden on health care systems. Recognizing this challenge, EPC units have emerged as a model of care, bridging the gap between traditional, ward-level care and intensive care. EPC offers benefits such as higher staff-to-patient ratios, close patient monitoring (eg, invasive monitoring), and access to critical interventions (eg, vasopressor support). However, there is a lack of well-established guidelines and empirical evidence regarding the safety and effectiveness of EPC units for adult patients following surgery.</p><p><strong>Inclusion criteria: </strong>This review will include studies involving adult patients (≥18 years) undergoing any elective or emergency non-cardiac, non-neurological surgery, who have been admitted to an EPC unit. Experimental, quasi-experimental, and observational study designs will be eligible.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This review will follow the JBI methodology for systematic reviews of effectiveness. The search strategy will identify published and unpublished studies from the Cochrane Library, MEDLINE (Ovid), Embase (Ovid), and Scopus, as well as gray literature sources, from 2010 to the present. Two independent reviewers will screen studies, extract data, and critically appraise selected studies using standardized JBI assessment tools. Where feasible, a statistical meta-analysis will be performed to combine study findings. The certainty of evidence will be assessed using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology.</p><p><strong>Review registration: </strong>PROSPERO CRD42023455269.</p>","PeriodicalId":36399,"journal":{"name":"JBI evidence synthesis","volume":" ","pages":"1626-1635"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"JBI evidence synthesis","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.11124/JBIES-23-00439","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: The proposed systematic review will evaluate the evidence on the effectiveness and safety of enhanced post-operative care (EPC) units on patient and health service outcomes in adult patients following non-cardiac, non-neurological surgery.

Introduction: The increase in surgical procedures globally has placed a significant economic and societal burden on health care systems. Recognizing this challenge, EPC units have emerged as a model of care, bridging the gap between traditional, ward-level care and intensive care. EPC offers benefits such as higher staff-to-patient ratios, close patient monitoring (eg, invasive monitoring), and access to critical interventions (eg, vasopressor support). However, there is a lack of well-established guidelines and empirical evidence regarding the safety and effectiveness of EPC units for adult patients following surgery.

Inclusion criteria: This review will include studies involving adult patients (≥18 years) undergoing any elective or emergency non-cardiac, non-neurological surgery, who have been admitted to an EPC unit. Experimental, quasi-experimental, and observational study designs will be eligible.

Methods: This review will follow the JBI methodology for systematic reviews of effectiveness. The search strategy will identify published and unpublished studies from the Cochrane Library, MEDLINE (Ovid), Embase (Ovid), and Scopus, as well as gray literature sources, from 2010 to the present. Two independent reviewers will screen studies, extract data, and critically appraise selected studies using standardized JBI assessment tools. Where feasible, a statistical meta-analysis will be performed to combine study findings. The certainty of evidence will be assessed using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology.

Review registration: PROSPERO CRD42023455269.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
针对非心脏、非神经外科手术的术后强化护理病房的有效性和安全性:系统综述方案。
目的:本系统综述将评估增强型术后护理单元(EPC)对非心脏、非神经系统手术后的成人患者的疗效和安全性:这项拟议的系统性综述将评估增强型术后护理(EPC)单元对非心脏、非神经外科手术后成年患者的患者和医疗服务结果的有效性和安全性的证据:全球外科手术的增加给医疗保健系统带来了巨大的经济和社会负担。认识到这一挑战后,EPC病房作为一种护理模式应运而生,在传统的病房级护理和重症监护之间架起了一座桥梁。EPC 的优势包括更高的医护人员与患者比例、对患者的严密监测(如有创监测)以及获得关键干预(如血管加压支持)。然而,目前还缺乏关于术后成人患者使用 EPC 病房的安全性和有效性的既定指南和实证证据:本综述将包括涉及接受任何择期或急诊非心脏、非神经外科手术并已入住 EPC 病房的成年患者(≥ 18 岁)的研究。实验性、准实验性和观察性研究设计均符合条件:本综述将遵循 JBI 的有效性系统性综述方法。检索策略将从 Cochrane 图书馆、MEDLINE (Ovid)、Embase (Ovid) 和 Scopus 以及灰色文献来源中查找 2010 年至今已发表和未发表的研究。两名独立审稿人将筛选研究、提取数据,并使用标准化的 JBI 评估工具对所选研究进行严格评估。在可行的情况下,将进行统计荟萃分析以合并研究结果。证据的确定性将采用建议、评估、发展和评价分级(GRADE)方法进行评估:综述注册编号:PREMCORD42023455269。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
JBI evidence synthesis
JBI evidence synthesis Nursing-Nursing (all)
CiteScore
4.50
自引率
3.70%
发文量
218
期刊最新文献
Value-based outcome evaluation methods used by occupational therapists in primary care: a scoping review. Parents' and guardians' experiences of barriers and facilitators in accessing autism spectrum disorder diagnostic services for their children: a qualitative systematic review. Evidence on the accreditation of health professionals' education in the WHO Africa region: a scoping review protocol. Barriers and facilitators to designing, maintaining, and utilizing rare disease patient registries: a scoping review protocol. Supporting professional practice transition in undergraduate nursing education: a scoping review protocol.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1