影响临床医生单克隆抗体和免疫检查点抑制剂制备与管理实践的因素:系统回顾。

IF 2.3 4区 医学 Q1 NURSING Seminars in Oncology Nursing Pub Date : 2024-04-01 DOI:10.1016/j.soncn.2024.151583
Angela Ballard , Carla Thamm , Theodora Ogle , Jane L. Phillips
{"title":"影响临床医生单克隆抗体和免疫检查点抑制剂制备与管理实践的因素:系统回顾。","authors":"Angela Ballard ,&nbsp;Carla Thamm ,&nbsp;Theodora Ogle ,&nbsp;Jane L. Phillips","doi":"10.1016/j.soncn.2024.151583","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Objectives</h3><p>In 30 years, monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) and immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICPIs) have enhanced cancer survival and quality of life. Limited knowledge exists regarding the long-term risks of repeated exposure, especially for cancer nurses, who prepare and administer them. This systematic review aimed to identify influences shaping clinicians' awareness and practices in the safe preparation and administration of mAbs and ICPIs.</p></div><div><h3>Data Sources</h3><p>This systematic review followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. The databases CINAHL, EMBASE, Joanna Briggs Institute, OVID, MEDLINE, and Cochrane were searched. Eligibility and risk of bias were assessed by four reviewers.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>Of 7301 identified studies, 481 duplicates were removed, and 6673 were excluded after title and abstract review. A full-text review was conducted on 147 studies; six studies were included. A narrative synthesis generated two themes: (1) ambiguity contributes to variation in handling practices and (2) continuing professional development (CPD) is vital but hard to implement without evidence.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>Lack of evidence regarding long-term risks and consensus creates uncertainty about the hazardous nature of unconjugated mAbs and ICPIs. Resulting in varied risk reduction strategies during preparation and administration, and inconsistent CPD. Protecting the long-term health of clinicians necessitates consensus on risk reduction strategies. This will be challenging without compelling evidence or international agreement on their hazardous classification.</p></div><div><h3>Implications for Nursing Practice</h3><p>In nursing, policy gaps and inconsistent CPD related to unconjugated mAbs and ICPIs may expose nurses to risks. Understanding the educational needs of nurses and global standardized guidelines are urgently needed.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":54253,"journal":{"name":"Seminars in Oncology Nursing","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0749208124000044/pdfft?md5=42a680dd14a67d12a701daa792df0fa8&pid=1-s2.0-S0749208124000044-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Influences Shaping Clinicians’ Monoclonal Antibody and Immune Checkpoint Inhibitor Preparation and Administration Management Practices: A Systematic Review\",\"authors\":\"Angela Ballard ,&nbsp;Carla Thamm ,&nbsp;Theodora Ogle ,&nbsp;Jane L. Phillips\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.soncn.2024.151583\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Objectives</h3><p>In 30 years, monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) and immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICPIs) have enhanced cancer survival and quality of life. Limited knowledge exists regarding the long-term risks of repeated exposure, especially for cancer nurses, who prepare and administer them. This systematic review aimed to identify influences shaping clinicians' awareness and practices in the safe preparation and administration of mAbs and ICPIs.</p></div><div><h3>Data Sources</h3><p>This systematic review followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. The databases CINAHL, EMBASE, Joanna Briggs Institute, OVID, MEDLINE, and Cochrane were searched. Eligibility and risk of bias were assessed by four reviewers.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>Of 7301 identified studies, 481 duplicates were removed, and 6673 were excluded after title and abstract review. A full-text review was conducted on 147 studies; six studies were included. A narrative synthesis generated two themes: (1) ambiguity contributes to variation in handling practices and (2) continuing professional development (CPD) is vital but hard to implement without evidence.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>Lack of evidence regarding long-term risks and consensus creates uncertainty about the hazardous nature of unconjugated mAbs and ICPIs. Resulting in varied risk reduction strategies during preparation and administration, and inconsistent CPD. Protecting the long-term health of clinicians necessitates consensus on risk reduction strategies. This will be challenging without compelling evidence or international agreement on their hazardous classification.</p></div><div><h3>Implications for Nursing Practice</h3><p>In nursing, policy gaps and inconsistent CPD related to unconjugated mAbs and ICPIs may expose nurses to risks. Understanding the educational needs of nurses and global standardized guidelines are urgently needed.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":54253,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Seminars in Oncology Nursing\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-04-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0749208124000044/pdfft?md5=42a680dd14a67d12a701daa792df0fa8&pid=1-s2.0-S0749208124000044-main.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Seminars in Oncology Nursing\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0749208124000044\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"NURSING\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Seminars in Oncology Nursing","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0749208124000044","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"NURSING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:30 年来,单克隆抗体 (mAbs) 和免疫检查点抑制剂 (ICPIs) 提高了癌症患者的生存率和生活质量。有关反复接触的长期风险的知识有限,尤其是对准备和使用这些药物的癌症护士而言。本系统性综述旨在确定影响临床医生安全配制和使用 mAbs 和 ICPIs 的意识和实践的因素:本系统综述遵循系统综述和荟萃分析首选报告项目(PRISMA)指南。检索了 CINAHL、EMBASE、Joanna Briggs Institute、OVID、MEDLINE 和 Cochrane 等数据库。由四位审稿人对资格和偏倚风险进行评估:在 7301 项已确定的研究中,481 项重复的研究被删除,6673 项研究在标题和摘要审查后被排除。对 147 项研究进行了全文综述,其中包括 6 项研究。叙述性综述产生了两个主题:(1)模糊性导致处理方法的差异;(2)持续专业发展(CPD)至关重要,但在没有证据的情况下难以实施:结论:缺乏有关长期风险和共识的证据,造成了未结合 mAbs 和 ICPIs 危险性的不确定性。结论:由于缺乏有关长期风险的证据和共识,导致人们对非结合 mAbs 和 ICPIs 的危害性质存在不确定性,从而导致在制备和用药过程中采取不同的降低风险策略,以及 CPD 不一致。要保护临床医生的长期健康,就必须就降低风险的策略达成共识。如果没有令人信服的证据或国际上对其危险性分类的一致意见,这将是一项挑战:在护理领域,与非结合 mAbs 和 ICPIs 相关的政策空白和不一致的 CPD 可能会使护士面临风险。迫切需要了解护士的教育需求和全球标准化指南。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Influences Shaping Clinicians’ Monoclonal Antibody and Immune Checkpoint Inhibitor Preparation and Administration Management Practices: A Systematic Review

Objectives

In 30 years, monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) and immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICPIs) have enhanced cancer survival and quality of life. Limited knowledge exists regarding the long-term risks of repeated exposure, especially for cancer nurses, who prepare and administer them. This systematic review aimed to identify influences shaping clinicians' awareness and practices in the safe preparation and administration of mAbs and ICPIs.

Data Sources

This systematic review followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. The databases CINAHL, EMBASE, Joanna Briggs Institute, OVID, MEDLINE, and Cochrane were searched. Eligibility and risk of bias were assessed by four reviewers.

Results

Of 7301 identified studies, 481 duplicates were removed, and 6673 were excluded after title and abstract review. A full-text review was conducted on 147 studies; six studies were included. A narrative synthesis generated two themes: (1) ambiguity contributes to variation in handling practices and (2) continuing professional development (CPD) is vital but hard to implement without evidence.

Conclusion

Lack of evidence regarding long-term risks and consensus creates uncertainty about the hazardous nature of unconjugated mAbs and ICPIs. Resulting in varied risk reduction strategies during preparation and administration, and inconsistent CPD. Protecting the long-term health of clinicians necessitates consensus on risk reduction strategies. This will be challenging without compelling evidence or international agreement on their hazardous classification.

Implications for Nursing Practice

In nursing, policy gaps and inconsistent CPD related to unconjugated mAbs and ICPIs may expose nurses to risks. Understanding the educational needs of nurses and global standardized guidelines are urgently needed.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Seminars in Oncology Nursing
Seminars in Oncology Nursing Nursing-Oncology (nursing)
CiteScore
3.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
68
审稿时长
45 days
期刊介绍: Seminars in Oncology Nursing is a unique international journal published six times a year. Each issue offers a multi-faceted overview of a single cancer topic from a selection of expert review articles and disseminates oncology nursing research relevant to patient care, nursing education, management, and policy development.
期刊最新文献
Table of Contents Masthead Instruments for Assessing Family Functioning in Adults Patients with Cancer: A Systematic Review of Measurement Properties. Development of a Scale to Assess Cancer Attitude in the Community. The Effect of Virtual Reality Distraction and Fatigue Training on Anxiety and Fatigue Levels in Children with Cancer: A Randomized Controlled Study.
×
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