Klinik für Innere Medizin II, Hämatologie und Internistische Onkologie, Universitätsklinikum Jena, Am Klinikum 1, 07747, Jena, Germany.
J Cancer Res Clin Oncol. 2020 Sep;146(9):2419-2425. doi: 10.1007/s00432-020-03238-2. Epub 2020 May 11.
Complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) is used by about half of all patients with cancer. Guidelines are an important tool to introduce evidence-based medicine into routine cancer care. The aim of our study was to assess methodology of the statements and recommendations concerning CAM.
A systematic assessment of all S3 guidelines published until November 2018 was done. Methodology of all statements and recommendations concerning CAM which were declared as evidence-based was evaluated with respect to international standards. According to the AMSTAR-2 instrument search strategy including filters, searched databases, restrictions to the research question and description of the included studies were examined. In case of adaptations from other guidelines, all underlying guidelines were examined as well.
After examining 212 guidelines, 82 evidence-based statements and recommendations regarding CAM could be identified. Four were derived by adaptation, 78 by a de-novo search. Only 11 of 78 (14%) fulfilled all assessment criteria. In 18 (19%) cases no information on search strategy was attainable in any document affiliated to the guideline, in 35 (45%) cases information on search strategy was superficial and in 54 (78%) cases the referred evidence was not presented in adequate detail.
Concerning CAM statements and recommendations within S3 guidelines quality of evidence processing has several shortcomings. Guideline adaptions often lack transparency and traceability.
约一半的癌症患者会采用补充和替代医学(CAM)。指南是将循证医学引入常规癌症治疗的重要工具。我们的研究旨在评估有关 CAM 的陈述和建议的方法学。
对截至 2018 年 11 月发布的所有 S3 指南进行了系统评估。根据国际标准,评估了所有声明为基于证据的有关 CAM 的陈述和建议的方法学。根据 AMSTAR-2 仪器,我们检查了搜索策略,包括筛选、搜索数据库、对研究问题的限制以及纳入研究的描述。对于来自其他指南的改编,我们也检查了所有基础指南。
在检查了 212 项指南后,我们确定了 82 项有关 CAM 的基于证据的陈述和建议。其中 4 项是通过改编得出的,78 项是通过重新搜索得出的。仅有 78 项中的 11 项(14%)符合所有评估标准。在 18 项(19%)情况下,任何与指南相关的文件中都无法获得有关搜索策略的信息,在 35 项(45%)情况下,搜索策略的信息很肤浅,在 54 项(78%)情况下,所提到的证据没有详细呈现。
S3 指南中有关 CAM 的陈述和建议在证据处理方面存在一些不足之处。指南改编往往缺乏透明度和可追溯性。