Pre-clinical Pharmacology Laboratory (LAPEC), Physiology Department, Federal University of Sergipe, São Cristóvão, Sergipe, Brazil.
Eur J Clin Pharmacol. 2013 Jul;69(7):1343-50. doi: 10.1007/s00228-012-1439-7. Epub 2013 Feb 13.
To analyze the quality of research on the use of benzodiazepines (BZDs) in the emergency room by the elderly population through the Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) initiative.
A systematic review was carried out according to the following steps: (1) identification of studies, in which studies were selected from different combinations of the descriptors "elderly-aged," "benzodiazepines," and "emergency room" in the EMBASE-MEDLINE, SciELO, Scopus, and Web of Science databases; (2) evaluation of studies, in which the title, abstract, and full text of the studies were assessed; (3) evaluation of the methodological quality of the studies. The criteria used were those included in the STROBE recommendations.
At the end of the selection process, only six articles were identified which met the specific criteria. The sample sizes in these studies varied from 118 to 1,611 patients. More than half (4) of the studies did not describe the type of design used, whereas all collected demographic data and analyzed details on the use of BZDs, such as type administered and/or its relationship to the symptoms, were shown. No article fully complied with the STROBE criteria.
This review shows a lack of methodological quality in the studies performed to date that have evaluated the use of BZDs in elderly patients in emergency rooms. These findings should guide future research in this subject area, providing a more complete approach on aspects related to the use of medications by this specific population.
通过强化观察性研究的报告(STROBE)倡议,分析老年人在急诊科使用苯二氮䓬类药物(BZDs)的研究质量。
按照以下步骤进行系统评价:(1)研究识别,从 EMBASE-MEDLINE、SciELO、Scopus 和 Web of Science 数据库中不同组合的“老年”、“苯二氮䓬类药物”和“急诊科”描述符中选择研究;(2)研究评估,评估研究的标题、摘要和全文;(3)研究方法学质量评估。使用的标准是 STROBE 建议中包含的标准。
在选择过程结束时,仅确定了符合特定标准的六篇文章。这些研究的样本量从 118 到 1611 名患者不等。超过一半(4 篇)的研究没有描述所使用的设计类型,而所有研究都收集了人口统计学数据,并分析了 BZDs 的使用细节,例如给药类型和/或与症状的关系。没有一篇文章完全符合 STROBE 标准。
本综述表明,迄今为止评估急诊科老年患者使用 BZDs 的研究在方法学质量方面存在不足。这些发现应该指导该主题领域的未来研究,为该特定人群使用药物的相关方面提供更完整的方法。