Department of Nursing, School of Health Sciences, University of Melbourne, Carlton, VIC, Australia.
BMC Med Res Methodol. 2022 Mar 21;22(1):75. doi: 10.1186/s12874-022-01555-3.
The need to mitigate the volume of unplanned emergency department (ED) presentations is a priority for health systems globally. Current evidence on the incidence and risk factors associated with unplanned ED presentations is unclear because of substantial heterogeneity in methods reporting on this issue. The aim of this review was to examine the methodological approaches to measure the incidence of unplanned ED presentations by patients receiving systemic anti-cancer therapy in order to determine the strength of evidence and to inform future research.
An electronic search of Medline, Embase, CINAHL, and Cochrane was undertaken. Papers published in English language between 2000 and 2019, and papers that included patients receiving systemic anti-cancer therapy as the denominator during the study period were included. Studies were eligible if they were analytical observational studies. Data relating to the methods used to measure the incidence of ED presentations by patients receiving systemic anti-cancer therapy were extracted and assessed for methodological rigor. Findings are reported in accordance with the Synthesis Without Meta-Analysis (SWiM) guideline.
Twenty-one articles met the inclusion criteria: 20 cohort studies, and one cross-sectional study. Overall risk of bias was moderate. There was substantial methodological and clinical heterogeneity in the papers included. Methodological rigor varied based on the description of methods such as the period of observation, loss to follow-up, reason for ED presentation and statistical methods to control for time varying events and potential confounders.
There is considerable diversity in the population and methods used in studies that measure the incidence of unplanned ED presentations by patients receiving systemic anti-cancer therapy. Recommendations to support the development of robust evidence include enrolling participants at diagnosis or initiation of treatment, providing adequate description of regular care to support patients who experience toxicities, reporting reasons for and characteristics of participants who are lost to follow-up throughout the study period, clearly defining the outcome including the observation and follow-up period, and reporting crude numbers of ED presentations and the number of at-risk days to account for variation in the length of treatment protocols.
减轻计划外急诊科(ED)就诊量是全球卫生系统的当务之急。由于目前在报告这一问题的方法上存在很大的异质性,因此当前关于与计划外 ED 就诊相关的发生率和风险因素的证据并不明确。本综述的目的是检查通过接受全身性抗癌治疗的患者来衡量计划外 ED 就诊发生率的方法学方法,以确定证据的强度并为未来的研究提供信息。
对 Medline、Embase、CINAHL 和 Cochrane 进行了电子检索。纳入了在 2000 年至 2019 年间以英文发表且在研究期间将接受全身性抗癌治疗的患者作为分母的论文。如果研究为分析性观察性研究,则符合纳入标准。提取并评估了与衡量接受全身性抗癌治疗的患者 ED 就诊发生率的方法相关的数据,并评估了方法的严谨性。研究结果按照无荟萃分析综合(SWiM)指南进行报告。
共有 21 篇文章符合纳入标准:20 项队列研究和 1 项横断面研究。总体偏倚风险为中度。纳入的研究在方法学和临床方面存在很大差异。方法学严谨性取决于方法的描述,例如观察期、失访、ED 就诊原因以及控制随时间变化的事件和潜在混杂因素的统计方法。
衡量接受全身性抗癌治疗的患者计划外 ED 就诊发生率的研究在人群和方法上存在很大差异。支持开发稳健证据的建议包括在诊断或治疗开始时招募参与者、充分描述支持经历毒性反应的患者的常规护理、报告整个研究期间失访患者的原因和特征、清楚地定义结局,包括观察和随访期、报告 ED 就诊的实际数量和处于风险中的天数,以解释治疗方案长度的变化。