烧伤病人消化道的选择性净化:系统综述协议。

IF 1.9 4区 医学 Q2 ANESTHESIOLOGY Acta Anaesthesiologica Scandinavica Pub Date : 2024-11-01 Epub Date: 2024-07-09 DOI:10.1111/aas.14498
Emma Atsuko Tsuchiya, Jacob Jensen-Abbew, Mette Krag, Morten Hylander Møller, Martin Risom Vestergaard, Christian Overgaard-Steensen, Marie Helleberg, Rikke Holmgaard, Johan Heiberg
{"title":"烧伤病人消化道的选择性净化:系统综述协议。","authors":"Emma Atsuko Tsuchiya, Jacob Jensen-Abbew, Mette Krag, Morten Hylander Møller, Martin Risom Vestergaard, Christian Overgaard-Steensen, Marie Helleberg, Rikke Holmgaard, Johan Heiberg","doi":"10.1111/aas.14498","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Nosocomial infections contribute significantly to mortality and morbidity in burn patients. Selective decontamination of the digestive tract is an infection prevention measure that has been shown to improve survival in mechanically ventilated intensive care unit (ICU) patients. It has been hypothesized that burn patients may benefit from selective decontamination of the digestive tract.</p><p><strong>Methods/design: </strong>We will conduct a systematic review with meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis of randomized clinical trials (RCTs) assessing the patient-important effects of selective decontamination of the digestive tract in burn patients, as compared with placebo or no intervention/standard of care. The primary outcome will be 30-day mortality. Secondary outcomes include serious adverse events, anti-microbial resistance, pneumonia, blood stream infections, ICU- and hospital-free days and 90-day mortality. We will search the following databases: CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE, BIOSIS, Web of Science and CINAHL and follow the recommendations provided by the Cochrane Collaboration and the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. The certainty of evidence will be assessed according to the GRADE approach: Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation.</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>There is clinical equipoise about the use of selective decontamination of the digestive tract in burn patients. In the outlined systematic review and meta-analysis, we will assess the desirable and undesirable effects of selective decontamination of the digestive tract in burn patients.</p>","PeriodicalId":6909,"journal":{"name":"Acta Anaesthesiologica Scandinavica","volume":" ","pages":"1549-1555"},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Selective decontamination of the digestive tract in burn patients: Protocol for a systematic review.\",\"authors\":\"Emma Atsuko Tsuchiya, Jacob Jensen-Abbew, Mette Krag, Morten Hylander Møller, Martin Risom Vestergaard, Christian Overgaard-Steensen, Marie Helleberg, Rikke Holmgaard, Johan Heiberg\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/aas.14498\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Nosocomial infections contribute significantly to mortality and morbidity in burn patients. Selective decontamination of the digestive tract is an infection prevention measure that has been shown to improve survival in mechanically ventilated intensive care unit (ICU) patients. It has been hypothesized that burn patients may benefit from selective decontamination of the digestive tract.</p><p><strong>Methods/design: </strong>We will conduct a systematic review with meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis of randomized clinical trials (RCTs) assessing the patient-important effects of selective decontamination of the digestive tract in burn patients, as compared with placebo or no intervention/standard of care. The primary outcome will be 30-day mortality. Secondary outcomes include serious adverse events, anti-microbial resistance, pneumonia, blood stream infections, ICU- and hospital-free days and 90-day mortality. We will search the following databases: CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE, BIOSIS, Web of Science and CINAHL and follow the recommendations provided by the Cochrane Collaboration and the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. The certainty of evidence will be assessed according to the GRADE approach: Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation.</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>There is clinical equipoise about the use of selective decontamination of the digestive tract in burn patients. In the outlined systematic review and meta-analysis, we will assess the desirable and undesirable effects of selective decontamination of the digestive tract in burn patients.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":6909,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Acta Anaesthesiologica Scandinavica\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"1549-1555\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Acta Anaesthesiologica Scandinavica\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1111/aas.14498\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/7/9 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"ANESTHESIOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Acta Anaesthesiologica Scandinavica","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/aas.14498","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/7/9 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ANESTHESIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:烧伤患者的死亡率和发病率与非医院感染有很大关系。对消化道进行选择性净化是一种预防感染的措施,已被证明可提高机械通气重症监护室(ICU)患者的存活率。据推测,烧伤患者可能会从消化道选择性净化中获益:我们将对随机临床试验(RCT)进行系统回顾、荟萃分析和试验序列分析,评估与安慰剂或无干预/标准护理相比,选择性消化道净化对烧伤患者的重要影响。主要结果是 30 天死亡率。次要结果包括严重不良事件、抗微生物耐药性、肺炎、血流感染、重症监护室和无住院日以及 90 天死亡率。我们将搜索以下数据库:CENTRAL、MEDLINE、EMBASE、BIOSIS、Web of Science 和 CINAHL。证据的确定性将根据 GRADE 方法进行评估:讨论:临床上对烧伤患者消化道选择性净化的使用存在分歧。在概述的系统综述和荟萃分析中,我们将评估烧伤患者消化道选择性净化的理想和不理想效果。
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
Selective decontamination of the digestive tract in burn patients: Protocol for a systematic review.

Background: Nosocomial infections contribute significantly to mortality and morbidity in burn patients. Selective decontamination of the digestive tract is an infection prevention measure that has been shown to improve survival in mechanically ventilated intensive care unit (ICU) patients. It has been hypothesized that burn patients may benefit from selective decontamination of the digestive tract.

Methods/design: We will conduct a systematic review with meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis of randomized clinical trials (RCTs) assessing the patient-important effects of selective decontamination of the digestive tract in burn patients, as compared with placebo or no intervention/standard of care. The primary outcome will be 30-day mortality. Secondary outcomes include serious adverse events, anti-microbial resistance, pneumonia, blood stream infections, ICU- and hospital-free days and 90-day mortality. We will search the following databases: CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE, BIOSIS, Web of Science and CINAHL and follow the recommendations provided by the Cochrane Collaboration and the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. The certainty of evidence will be assessed according to the GRADE approach: Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation.

Discussion: There is clinical equipoise about the use of selective decontamination of the digestive tract in burn patients. In the outlined systematic review and meta-analysis, we will assess the desirable and undesirable effects of selective decontamination of the digestive tract in burn patients.

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
CiteScore
4.30
自引率
9.50%
发文量
157
审稿时长
3-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Acta Anaesthesiologica Scandinavica publishes papers on original work in the fields of anaesthesiology, intensive care, pain, emergency medicine, and subjects related to their basic sciences, on condition that they are contributed exclusively to this Journal. Case reports and short communications may be considered for publication if of particular interest; also letters to the Editor, especially if related to already published material. The editorial board is free to discuss the publication of reviews on current topics, the choice of which, however, is the prerogative of the board. Every effort will be made by the Editors and selected experts to expedite a critical review of manuscripts in order to ensure rapid publication of papers of a high scientific standard.
期刊最新文献
Effect of intraoperative methadone in robot-assisted cystectomy on postoperative opioid requirements: A randomized clinical trial. Epidural analgesia versus systemic opioids for postoperative pain management after VATS: Protocol for a systematic review. Time from pain assessment to opioid treatment in the Danish emergency departments-A multicenter cohort study. Viscoelastic testing of fibrinolytic capacity in acutely infected critically ill patients: Protocol for a scoping review. Does cytochrome 2D6 genotype affect the analgesic efficacy of codeine after ambulatory surgery? Prospective trial in 987 adults.
×
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