Suppr超能文献

脊柱登记处的证据与实践。

Evidence and practice in spine registries.

作者信息

van Hooff Miranda L, Jacobs Wilco C H, Willems Paul C, Wouters Michel W J M, de Kleuver Marinus, Peul Wilco C, Ostelo Raymond W J G, Fritzell Peter

机构信息

a 1Sint Maartenskliniek, Nijmegen.

b 2 Dutch Institute for Clinical Auditing (DICA) , Leiden.

出版信息

Acta Orthop. 2015;86(5):534-44. doi: 10.3109/17453674.2015.1043174.

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

We performed a systematic review and a survey in order to (1) evaluate the evidence for the impact of spine registries on the quality of spine care, and with that, on patient-related outcomes, and (2) evaluate the methodology used to organize, analyze, and report the "quality of spine care" from spine registries.

METHODS

To study the impact, the literature on all spinal disorders was searched. To study methodology, the search was restricted to degenerative spinal disorders. The risk of bias in the studies included was assessed with the Newcastle-Ottawa scale. Additionally, a survey among registry representatives was performed to acquire information about the methodology and practice of existing registries.

RESULTS

4,273 unique references up to May 2014 were identified, and 1,210 were eligible for screening and assessment. No studies on impact were identified, but 34 studies were identified to study the methodology. Half of these studies (17 of the 34) were judged to have a high risk of bias. The survey identified 25 spine registries, representing 14 countries. The organization of these registries, methods used, analytical approaches, and dissemination of results are presented.

INTERPRETATION

We found a lack of evidence that registries have had an impact on the quality of spine care, regardless of whether intervention was non-surgical and/or surgical. To improve the quality of evidence published with registry data, we present several recommendations. Application of these recommendations could lead to registries showing trends, monitoring the quality of spine care given, and ultimately improving the value of the care given to patients with degenerative spinal disorders.

摘要

背景与目的

我们进行了一项系统评价和一项调查,以(1)评估脊柱登记处对脊柱护理质量以及对患者相关结局影响的证据,以及(2)评估用于组织、分析和报告来自脊柱登记处的“脊柱护理质量”的方法。

方法

为研究影响,检索了所有脊柱疾病的文献。为研究方法,检索仅限于退行性脊柱疾病。使用纽卡斯尔 - 渥太华量表评估纳入研究的偏倚风险。此外,对登记处代表进行了一项调查,以获取有关现有登记处的方法和实践的信息。

结果

截至2014年5月,共识别出4273篇独特参考文献,其中1210篇符合筛选和评估条件。未发现关于影响的研究,但识别出34项研究用于研究方法。这些研究中有一半(34项中的17项)被判定具有高偏倚风险。调查确定了25个脊柱登记处,代表14个国家。介绍了这些登记处的组织、使用的方法、分析方法以及结果的传播情况。

解读

我们发现缺乏证据表明登记处对脊柱护理质量产生了影响,无论干预是非手术和/或手术。为提高登记处数据发表的证据质量,我们提出了一些建议。应用这些建议可能会使登记处呈现趋势、监测所提供的脊柱护理质量,并最终提高给予退行性脊柱疾病患者的护理价值。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/7bae/4564774/7e1301e46917/ORT-86-534-g001.jpg

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验