Suppr超能文献

术前和术后手术伤口护理干预的建议:Cochrane 综述的系统元评价。

Preoperative and postoperative recommendations to surgical wound care interventions: A systematic meta-review of Cochrane reviews.

机构信息

School of Nursing and Midwifery and Menzies Health Institute Queensland, Griffith University, Australia; Gold Coast University Hospital, Gold Coast Health, Gold Coast, Australia; School of Nursing and Midwifery, Royal College of Surgeons, Dublin, Ireland.

School of Nursing and Midwifery and Menzies Health Institute Queensland, Griffith University, Australia; Division of Surgery, Princess Alexandra Hospital, Metro South Health, Brisbane, Australia. Electronic address: https://twitter.com/RachelMWalker.

出版信息

Int J Nurs Stud. 2020 Feb;102:103486. doi: 10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2019.103486. Epub 2019 Nov 22.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

The increasing numbers of surgeries involving high risk, multi-morbid patients, coupled with inconsistencies in the practice of perioperative surgical wound care, increases patients' risk of surgical site infection and other wound complications.

OBJECTIVES

To synthesise and evaluate the recommendations for nursing practice and research from published systematic reviews in the Cochrane Library on nurse-led preoperative prophylaxis and postoperative surgical wound care interventions used or initiated by nurses.

DESIGN

Meta-review, guided by the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines.

DATA SOURCES

The Cochrane Library database.

REVIEW METHODS

All Cochrane Systematic Reviews were eligible. Two reviewers independently selected the reviews and extracted data. One reviewer appraised the methodological quality of the included reviews using A MeaSurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews 2 checklist. A second reviewer independently verified these appraisals. The review protocol was registered with the Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews.

RESULTS

Twenty-two Cochrane reviews met the inclusion criteria. Of these, 11 reviews focused on preoperative interventions to prevent infection, while 12 focused on postoperative interventions (one review assessed both pre-postoperative interventions). Across all reviews, 14 (63.6%) made at least one recommendation to undertake a specific practice, while two reviews (9.1%) made at least one specific recommendation not to undertake a practice. In relation to recommendations for further research, insufficient sample size was the most predominant methodological issue (12/22) identified across reviews.

CONCLUSIONS

The limited number of recommendations for pre-and-postoperative interventions reflects the paucity of high-quality evidence, suggesting a need for rigorous trials to address these evidence gaps in fundamentals of nursing care.

摘要

背景

涉及高风险、多病共存患者的手术数量不断增加,加上围手术期外科伤口护理实践的不一致性,增加了患者发生手术部位感染和其他伤口并发症的风险。

目的

综合评估和评价 Cochrane 图书馆中发表的系统评价中关于护士主导的术前预防和术后外科伤口护理干预措施的建议,这些干预措施是由护士实施或发起的。

设计

元综述,以系统评价和荟萃分析的首选报告项目为指导。

数据来源

Cochrane 图书馆数据库。

综述方法

所有 Cochrane 系统评价均符合入选标准。两名评审员独立选择了综述并提取了数据。一名评审员使用 A MeaSurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews 2 清单评估纳入综述的方法学质量。第二名评审员独立验证了这些评估。该综述方案已在系统评价前瞻性注册库中注册。

结果

22 项 Cochrane 综述符合纳入标准。其中,11 项综述侧重于预防感染的术前干预,而 12 项综述侧重于术后干预(一项综述评估了术前和术后干预)。在所有综述中,有 14 项(63.6%)至少提出了一项实施特定实践的建议,而有两项综述(9.1%)至少提出了一项不实施特定实践的建议。关于进一步研究的建议,各综述均认为样本量不足是最主要的方法学问题(12/22)。

结论

针对术前和术后干预措施的建议数量有限,反映了高质量证据的缺乏,这表明需要进行严格的试验来解决这些基本护理方面的证据空白。

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