Selection Bias

选择偏差
  • 文章类型: Letter
    本评论评估了题为“局部麻醉与镇静和全身麻醉治疗慢性硬膜下血肿”的系统综述和荟萃分析。“这项研究为麻醉技术在控制这种情况方面的有效性提供了有价值的见解,但存在局限性,包括选择偏差,病例间的异质性,缺乏标准化的协议,和回顾性设计。尽管有这些限制,该综述有助于理解慢性硬膜下血肿的治疗,但强调了未来研究解决这些缺陷的必要性.
    This critique evaluates the systematic review and meta-analysis titled \"Local anesthesia with sedation and general anesthesia for the treatment of chronic subdural hematoma.\" The study provides valuable insights into anesthesia techniques\' effectiveness in managing this condition but has limitations, including selection bias, heterogeneity among cases, lack of standardized protocols, and retrospective design. Despite these limitations, the review contributes to understanding chronic subdural hematoma management but underscores the need for future research to address these shortcomings.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

    求助全文

  • 文章类型: Systematic Review
    背景:许多流行病学研究和一些系统评价已经调查了职业性日光暴露与基底细胞癌(BCC)之间的关联。然而,以前的综述在纳入和排除的研究/风险估计以及选择偏倚风险(RoSB)评估方面存在若干缺陷.我们的目的是回顾以这些缺陷为重点的流行病学研究,并使用元(回归)分析来总结风险估计。
    方法:我们系统地检索了PubMed(包括MEDLINE)和Embase的流行病学研究。研究评估考虑了偏差风险评估的四个主要方面,即受试者的选择(选择偏差);暴露变量;结果变量;数据分析。
    结果:在56个确定的参考文献中,32个用于元(回归)分析。BCC的总体汇总风险估计,比较高/现在与低/无职业太阳能暴露为1.20(95%CI1.02-1.43);在数据分析方面没有重大缺陷的研究中,为1.10(95%CI0.91-1.33)。低RoSB和高RoSB的研究汇总了0.83(95%CI0.73-0.93)和1.95(95%CI1.42-2.67)的风险估计,分别。暴露和结果变量的定义与研究风险估计无关。在纬度相同或低于德国的人群中,RoSB较低的研究的汇总风险估计值为1.01(95%CI0.88-1.15)。
    结论:由于在低和高RoSB的研究中,职业日光暴露与BCC之间的关联不同,我们认为,目前的流行病学证据基础不允许得出正规户外工作者患BCC风险增加的结论.
    BACKGROUND: Numerous epidemiologic studies and a few systematic reviews have investigated the association between occupational solar exposure and basal cell carcinoma (BCC). However, previous reviews have several deficits with regard to included and excluded studies/risk estimates and the assessment of risk of selection bias (RoSB). Our aim was to review epidemiologic studies with a focus on these deficits and to use meta-(regression) analyses to summarize risk estimates.
    METHODS: We systematically searched PubMed (including MEDLINE) and Embase for epidemiologic studies. Study evaluation considered four main aspects of risk of bias assessments, i.e. Selection of subjects (selection bias); Exposure variables; Outcome variables; Data analysis.
    RESULTS: Of 56 identified references, 32 were used for meta-(regression) analyses. The overall pooled risk estimate for BCC comparing high/present vs. low/absent occupational solar exposure was 1.20 (95% CI 1.02-1.43); among studies without major deficits regarding data analysis, it was 1.10 (95% CI 0.91-1.33). Studies with low and high RoSB had pooled risk estimates of 0.83 (95% CI 0.73-0.93) and 1.95 (95% CI 1.42-2.67), respectively. The definitions of exposure and outcome variables were not correlated with study risk estimates. Studies with low RoSB in populations with the same latitude or lower than Germany had a pooled risk estimate of 1.01 (95% CI 0.88-1.15).
    CONCLUSIONS: Due to the different associations between occupational solar exposure and BCC among studies with low and high RoSB, we reason that the current epidemiologic evidence base does not permit the conclusion that regular outdoor workers have an increased risk of BCC.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    目的:阴性对照在观察性研究中被认为是减轻偏倚的重要工具。本范围审查的目的是总结目前的阴性对照方法(阴性对照暴露[NCE]和阴性对照结果[NCO])。
    方法:我们搜索了PubMed,WebofScience,EMBASE和Cochrane图书馆(截至2023年3月9日)关于阴性对照方法的文章。两名评审员独立和一式两份选择了符合条件的研究,并收集了相关数据。我们报告了总数和百分比,并对方法进行了叙述总结。
    结果:我们的综述共纳入了37篇相关方法学文章。这些出版物涵盖了NCE(n=11,29.8%),NCO(n=13,35.1%)或两者(n=13,35.1%),最专注于偏差检测(n=14,37.8%),偏倚校正(n=16,43.3%)和P值或置信区间(CI)校正(n=5,13.5%)。其余两篇文章(5.4%),一个讨论了偏差检测和P值orCI校准,另一个讨论了所有三个功能。对于偏差检测,NCE(NCO)和结果(暴露)感兴趣变量之间存在关联,这仅仅表明结果可能存在混杂偏差,选择偏差和/或信息偏差。对于偏差校正,然而,负控制法的算法需要更严格的假设,如秩保持,单调性和线性。
    结论:阴性对照可以用于偏倚检测,P值orCI校准,和偏差校正,其中使用阴性对照的偏倚校正是方法学上研究最多的。当前已知的方法需要一些严格的假设来检测或消除偏差。需要更多的方法学研究来优化阴性对照的使用。
    OBJECTIVE: Negative controls are considered an important tool to mitigate biases in observational studies. The aim of this scoping review was to summarize current methodologies of negative controls (both negative control exposure [NCE] and negative control outcome [NCO]).
    METHODS: We searched PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, and Cochrane Library (up to March 9, 2023) for articles on methodologies of negative controls. Two reviewers selected eligible studies and collected relevant data independently and in duplicate. We reported total numbers and percentages, and summarized methodologies narratively.
    RESULTS: A total of 37 relevant methodological articles were included in our review. These publications covered NCE (n = 11, 29.8%), NCO (n = 13, 35.1%), or both (n = 13, 35.1%), with most focused on bias detection (n = 14, 37.8%), bias correction (n = 16, 43.3%), and P value or confidence interval (CI) calibration (n = 5, 13.5%). For the two remaining articles (5.4%), one discussed bias detection and P value or CI calibration and the other covered all the three functions. For bias detection, the existence of an association between the NCE (NCO) and outcome (exposure) variables of interest simply indicates that results may suffer from confounding bias, selection bias and/or information bias. For bias correction, however, the algorithms of negative control methods need more stringent assumptions such as rank preservation, monotonicity, and linearity.
    CONCLUSIONS: Negative controls can be leveraged for bias detection, P value or CI calibration, and bias correction, among which bias correction has been the most studied methodologically. The current available methods need some stringent assumptions to detect or remove bias. More methodological research is needed to optimize the use of negative controls.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

    求助全文

  • 文章类型: Systematic Review
    前瞻性纵向研究主要得出以下结论:电子烟在卷烟启动过程中的因果作用与流行病学和其他研究得出的结论明显矛盾,表明卷烟使用量急剧下降与电子烟使用的传播并行。本系统综述探讨了这种差异的原因。
    方法:在2011年至2022年Medline数据库中确定的84篇有关青少年电子烟/香烟协会的出版物中,有23篇涉及22个从不吸烟者纵向子队列。
    结果:在不吸烟者(AOR:1.41至8.30)的子队列分析中报告了T1时电子烟实验与T2时香烟开始之间的联系。然而,研究排除了64.3%的T1电子烟实验者(由于双重用途)和74.1%的T2电子烟实验者。通过这项研究设计,电子烟仅占T2卷烟实验的5.3%,对结果和作者的结论的外部有效性提出了重大怀疑,即电子烟在人群水平上对卷烟的启动(Gateway效应)有重大影响。此子队列设计禁止突出任何分流效应,这是解释这两种产品之间竞争的最有可能的机制。
    结论:虽然戒烟仍然是最好的医疗选择,由于对纵向研究结果的误解而导致的电子烟的过度监管可能不利于公共卫生和烟草控制。
    Prospective longitudinal studies mainly conclude on a causal role of e-cigarettes in the initiation of cigarettes in flagrant contradiction with conclusions drawn from epidemiology and other studies showing a sharp decline in cigarette use in parallel with the spread of e-cigarette use. This systematic review explores the reasons for this discrepancy.
    Among 84 publications on e-cigarette/cigarette association in adolescents identified in the Medline database from 2011 to 2022, 23 concern 22 never-smoker longitudinal sub-cohorts.
    A link between e-cigarette experimentation at T1 and cigarette initiation at T2 is reported in sub-cohort analyses of never-smokers (AOR: 1.41 to 8.30). However, studies exclude 64.3% of T1 e-cigarette experimenters (because of dual-use) and 74.1% of T2 cigarette experimenters. With this study design, e-cigarettes contribute only to 5.3% of T2 cigarette experimentation, casting major doubt on the external validity of results and authors\' conclusions that e-cigarettes have a significant effect on the initiation of cigarettes (Gateway effect) at the population level. This sub-cohort design prohibits highlighting any Diversion effect, which is the most likely mechanism accounting for the competition between these two products.
    While nicotine abstinence remains the best medical option, over-regulation of e-cigarettes because of misinterpretation of longitudinal study results may be detrimental to public health and tobacco control.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Review
    背景:进行随机对照试验是不切实际的,另一种选择是进行观察性研究。然而,由于存在多种统计偏差的风险,从观测数据中做出有效的因果推断是具有挑战性的.2016年,Hernán和Robins提出了“目标试验框架”,作为最佳设计和分析观察性研究的指南,同时防止最常见的偏见。这个框架包括(1)明确定义一个关于干预的因果问题,(2)指定假设试验的方案,(3)解释如何使用观测数据来模拟它。
    方法:本范围审查的目的是确定和审查所有医学领域的试验模拟研究的所有明确尝试。Embase,搜索了Medline和WebofScience,以获取从数据库开始到2021年2月25日以英文发表的试验仿真研究。以下信息是从被认为有资格审查的研究中提取的:主题领域,他们利用的观察数据的类型,以及他们用来解决以下偏见的统计方法:(A)混杂偏见,(B)不朽的时间偏见,和(C)选择偏差。
    结果:搜索得出617项研究,其中38个我们认为有资格审查。在这38项研究中,最专注于心脏病学,传染病或肿瘤学,大多数使用电子健康记录/电子病历数据和队列研究数据。使用不同的统计方法来解决基线和选择偏差的混淆问题,主要取决于混杂因素(N=18/49,37%)和审查权重的逆概率(N=7/20,35%)。不同的方法被用来解决不朽的时间偏差,在随访开始时根据他们在该特定时间获得的数据(N=21,55%)将个体分配到治疗策略,使用序贯试验模拟方法(N=11,29%)或克隆方法(N=6,16%)。
    结论:可以利用不同的方法来解决(A)混淆偏差,(B)不朽的时间偏见,和(C)选择偏差。在处理观测数据时,如果可能的话,应使用“目标试验”框架,因为它为观察性研究提供了结构化的概念性方法.
    When conducting randomised controlled trials is impractical, an alternative is to carry out an observational study. However, making valid causal inferences from observational data is challenging because of the risk of several statistical biases. In 2016 Hernán and Robins put forward the \'target trial framework\' as a guide to best design and analyse observational studies whilst preventing the most common biases. This framework consists of (1) clearly defining a causal question about an intervention, (2) specifying the protocol of the hypothetical trial, and (3) explaining how the observational data will be used to emulate it.
    The aim of this scoping review was to identify and review all explicit attempts of trial emulation studies across all medical fields. Embase, Medline and Web of Science were searched for trial emulation studies published in English from database inception to February 25, 2021. The following information was extracted from studies that were deemed eligible for review: the subject area, the type of observational data that they leveraged, and the statistical methods they used to address the following biases: (A) confounding bias, (B) immortal time bias, and (C) selection bias.
    The search resulted in 617 studies, 38 of which we deemed eligible for review. Of those 38 studies, most focused on cardiology, infectious diseases or oncology and the majority used electronic health records/electronic medical records data and cohort studies data. Different statistical methods were used to address confounding at baseline and selection bias, predominantly conditioning on the confounders (N = 18/49, 37%) and inverse probability of censoring weighting (N = 7/20, 35%) respectively. Different approaches were used to address immortal time bias, assigning individuals to treatment strategies at start of follow-up based on their data available at that specific time (N = 21, 55%), using the sequential trial emulations approach (N = 11, 29%) or the cloning approach (N = 6, 16%).
    Different methods can be leveraged to address (A) confounding bias, (B) immortal time bias, and (C) selection bias. When working with observational data, and if possible, the \'target trial\' framework should be used as it provides a structured conceptual approach to observational research.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    临床试验参与者的选择和描述使医疗保健提供者能够确定研究结果对他们所服务人群的普遍性。试验参与者的有限多样性限制了基于证据的决策。
    确定不同参与者被纳入多发性硬化症(MS)患者康复干预临床试验的程度。
    我们使用MEDLINE对2002年1月以来发表的MS康复试验进行了范围审查,CINAHL,和WebofScience。Covidence被用来促进审查。文章选择需要随机对照设计,康复干预,和功能状态结果。提取的数据包括干预细节,结果,以及使用健康框架的社会决定因素进行参与者选择和描述。
    共纳入243项研究。运动干预和以损害为重点的结果是最常见的。大多数研究仅使用MS诊所进行招募。常见的排除标准是身体或精神合并症,残疾,年龄,和认知障碍。几乎所有试验都报告了参与者的年龄和性别;其他社会健康决定因素的报告是非典型的。
    MS康复试验使用了有限的招募方法,限制样品,并报告了很少的参与者描述符。需要进行更改以增强参与者的多样性和对参与者特征的描述。
    The selection and description of participants in clinical trials enables health care providers to determine generalizability of findings to the populations they serve. Limited diversity of participants in trials restricts evidence-based decision-making.
    To determine the extent to which diverse participants are being included in clinical trials of rehabilitation interventions for people with multiple sclerosis (MS).
    We conducted a scoping review of MS rehabilitation trials published since January 2002 using MEDLINE, CINAHL, and Web of Science. Covidence was used to facilitate the review. Article selection required randomized control design, a rehabilitation intervention, and a functional status outcome. Data extracted included details of intervention(s), outcomes, and participant selection and description using a social determinants of health framework.
    A total of 243 studies were included. Exercise interventions and impairment-focused outcomes were most common. Most studies used only a MS Clinic for recruitment. Common exclusion criteria were physical or mental comorbidities, disability, age, and cognitive impairment. Participant age and sex were reported for almost all trials; reporting of other social determinants of health was atypical.
    MS rehabilitation trials have used limited recruitment methods, restricted samples, and reported few participant descriptors. Changes are required to enhance participant diversity and the descriptions of participant characteristics.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    随机对照试验和观察性研究报道了关于他汀类药物对慢性阻塞性肺疾病(COPD)患者死亡率的潜在有益影响的相互矛盾的结果。我们对文献进行了系统检索,以回顾所有报告COPD患者使用他汀类药物相对死亡风险的观察性研究。关注潜在的偏见来源。我们确定了15项观察性研究,在2835个中,其中12个受到时间相关偏差和其他偏差的影响,其余3个受到混杂偏差的影响。由于缺乏对重要COPD相关因素的调整,所有15项研究也存在混杂偏倚。在所有15项研究中,与他汀类药物使用相关的死亡风险均降低(合并相对风险(PRR)0.66;95%CI:0.59-0.74)。在7项具有不朽时间偏差的研究中观察到减少(PRR0.62;95%:0.53-0.72),两个具有对撞机-分层偏差(PRR0.60;95%CI:0.45-0.80),一个具有时间窗口偏差(RR0.61;95%CI:0.38-0.98),一个具有不可估量的时间偏差(RR0.50;95%CI:0.40-0.62),和一个暴露错误分类(RR0.86;95%CI:0.72-1.03)。避免这些偏见的三项研究是,然而,受混杂偏差影响,PRR为0.77(95%CI:0.61-0.98)。总之,调查COPD患者他汀类药物使用和死亡率的观察性研究受到主要偏差的影响,其中许多可能会导致虚假的保护作用。需要精心设计的观察性研究仔细模拟随机试验,以解决关于他汀类药物对COPD患者死亡率的潜在有益益处的不确定性。
    Randomized controlled trials and observational studies have reported conflicting results on the potential beneficial effects of statins on mortality in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). We performed a systematic search of the literature to review all observational studies reporting relative risks of death with statin use in COPD, focusing on potential sources of bias. We identified 15 observational studies, out of 2835, of which 12 were affected by time-related and other biases and the remaining 3 by confounding bias. All 15 studies were also subject to confounding bias due to lack of adjustment for important COPD-related factors. The risk of death associated with statin use was reduced across all 15 studies (pooled relative risk (PRR) 0.66; 95% CI: 0.59-0.74). The reduction was observed in 7 studies with immortal time bias (PRR 0.62; 95%: 0.53-0.72), two with collider-stratification bias (PRR 0.60; 95% CI: 0.45-0.80), one with time-window bias (RR 0.61; 95% CI: 0.38-0.98), one with immeasurable time bias (RR 0.50; 95% CI: 0.40-0.62), and one with exposure misclassification (RR 0.86; 95% CI: 0.72-1.03). The three studies that avoided these biases were, however, affected by confounding bias resulting in a PRR of 0.77 (95% CI: 0.61-0.98). In conclusion, the observational studies investigating statin use and mortality in COPD are affected by major biases, many of which can result in spurious protective effects. Well-designed observational studies that carefully emulate randomized trials are needed to resolve this uncertainty regarding the potential beneficial benefits of statins on mortality in patients with COPD.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

    求助全文

  • 文章类型: Meta-Analysis
    随着气候变化产生广泛的健康影响,对气候因素与精神和行为障碍(MBDs)之间的关联的兴趣激增.现有的定量合成主要集中在热和高温暴露上,忽视其他气候因素的影响及其协同作用。本研究的目的是对气候暴露与综合心理和行为健康状况和特定精神障碍(例如,精神分裂症,痴呆症)。2022年4月11日至16日,使用WebofScience进行了系统搜索,Medline,ProQuest,EMBASE,PsycINFO,CINAHL,环境完整。筛选和资格筛选遵循基于人群的纳入标准,暴露,比较器,和结果指南。进行了偏见风险评估,首先为所有研究提供了叙事综合,当至少有三项针对特定暴露-结局对的研究可用时,进行随机效应荟萃分析.在对建议进行分级评估后,对证据的确定性进行了评估,开发和评估(GRADE)工具。搜索过程产生了7696个初步结果,我们从中确定了88项研究纳入审查集。报告的气候因素包括气温,太阳辐射/阳光,大气压力,降水,相对湿度,风向/风速,和热舒适指数。结果包括MBD发病率(例如,精神分裂症,情绪障碍,神经症),心理健康相关死亡率,和自我报告的心理状态。Meta分析显示,热浪(合并RR=1.05,95%CI=1.02-1.08)和极端高温(第99百分位数:合并RR=1.18,95%CI=1.08-1.29)与较高的MBD风险相关。极端寒冷,然而,与MBD风险无关。研究结果进一步确定了热指数增加之间的关联(即,表观温度)和MBD风险升高(合并RR=1.06,95%CI=1.03-1.12);具体而言,第99百分位数的高温与精神分裂症风险增加相关(合并RR=1.07,95%CI=1.01-1.12).偏见风险评估显示大多数研究具有低或中度低风险,虽然一些研究在混淆方面被评为很高,选择偏差,结果测量,和报告偏见。等级评估显示,热舒适指数和MBD的证据具有中等确定性,但与气温或日照时间有关的确定性较低。这些发现提请注意暴露措施的异质性以及考虑气象因素协同作用的热指数的实用性。讨论了线性假设和累积效应等方法论问题。
    As climate change exerts wide ranging health impacts, there is a surge of interest in the associations between climatic factors and mental and behavioral disorders (MBDs). Existing quantitative syntheses focus mainly on heat and high temperature exposure, neglecting the effects of other climatic factors and their synergies. The objective of this study is to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis of the evidence of associations between climatic exposure and combined mental and behavioral health conditions and specific mental disorders (e.g., schizophrenia, dementia). A systematic search was conducted April 11-16, 2022 using Web of Science, Medline, ProQuest, EMBASE, PsycINFO, CINAHL, and Environment Complete. Screening and eligibility screening followed inclusion criteria based on population, exposure, comparator, and outcome guidelines. Risk of bias assessment was performed, a narrative synthesis was first presented for all studies, and random-effect meta-analyses were performed when at least three studies were available for a specific exposure-outcome pair. Certainty of evidence was evaluated following the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) tool. The search process yielded 7696 initial results, from which we identified 88 studies to include in the review set. Climatic factors reported included air temperature, solar radiation/sunshine, barometric pressure, precipitation, relative humidity, wind direction/speed, and thermal index. Outcomes including MBD incidences (e.g., schizophrenia, mood disorders, neurotic disorders), mental health-related mortality, and self-reported psychological states. Meta-analysis showed that heatwaves (pooled RR = 1.05, 95 % CI = 1.02-1.08) and extreme high temperatures (99th percentile: pooled RR = 1.18, 95 % CI = 1.08-1.29) were associated with higher risk of MBD. Cold extremes, however, were not associated with MBD risk. The findings further identified an association between increases in a thermal index (i.e., apparent temperature) and elevated risk of MBD (pooled RR = 1.06, 95 % CI = 1.03-1.12); specifically, a 99th percentile high temperature was associated with increased schizophrenia risk (pooled RR = 1.07, 95 % CI = 1.01-1.12). Risk of bias assessment showed most studies to have low or moderately low risks, while a few studies were rated probably high in confounding, selection bias, outcome measurement, and reporting bias. GRADE evaluation revealed moderate certainty of evidence on thermal comfort index and MBD, but low certainty related to air temperature or sunshine duration. These findings call attention to the heterogeneity of exposure measures and the utility of thermal indices that consider the synergistic effects of meteorological factors. Methodological concerns such as the linearity assumption and cumulative effects are discussed.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

    求助全文

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    肩关节置换术后感染的最佳治疗方法存在争议。本系统综述的目的是分析治疗选择的偏倚,感染清除率,1期和2期修复手术治疗肩关节假体周围感染后的功能结局。
    按照系统审查和荟萃分析(PRISMA)指南的首选报告项目,分4个阶段进行了系统搜索策略。使用MEDLINE(PubMed)鉴定文章,Embase(Elsevier),与肩关节置换术后感染相关的布尔搜索词和Cochrane图书馆数据库。对包含的文章进行了质量分析,并提取数据以供使用。分析术前治疗选择偏倚,比较1期和2期翻修手术治疗肩关节周围感染的术后感染清除率和功能结局评分。
    总的来说,分析中包括163个1期肩部手术和289个2期肩部手术。痤疮杆菌是培养物最常见的生物(37%),其次是凝固酶阴性葡萄球菌(19%)。1期手术的总感染清除率为95.6%,2期手术的总感染清除率为85.2%。比较1期和2期翻修术前到术后的结果评分变化,Constant-Murley得分(CMS)提高了21.0分(1阶段)和22.8分(2阶段),美国肩肘外科医生(ASES)得分提高了26.2分比33.6分,单肩测试(SST)得分提高了3.5分,而不是6.4分,分别。总的来说,26项研究中有23项引用了选择1期和2期手术的原因,这是由于10项研究中的标准治疗方案,根据5中感染的时间(急性与亚急性与慢性),由于多种因素(年龄,合并症,术中外观,清创术的充分性,骨丢失)在6中,并且由于术前鉴定了2中的特定生物体。
    一阶段修订导致更高的感染清除率;然而,从术前评估到最终的术后随访,通过ASES和SST评分测量,2阶段的修订导致更大的功能改善。1和2阶段修订之间的决定是由于因素的组合,包括病原体类型,感染时间,术前临床检查的结果,病人自己的决定,外科医生的偏好,术中软组织/骨外观,这可能会对整体结果产生偏差。关于肩关节假体周围感染的1-2期治疗的决定,文献中没有达成共识。这是基于多种因素的组合。然而,两种治疗策略均可有效治疗假体周围肩关节感染.
    治疗级别III。有关证据级别的完整描述,请参阅作者说明。
    There is controversy regarding the optimal treatment for infection following shoulder arthroplasty. The purpose of this systematic review is to analyze the bias in treatment selection, infection clearance rates, and functional outcomes after 1 versus 2-stage revision surgery for periprosthetic shoulder infections.
    A systematic search strategy following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines was conducted in 4 phases. Articles were identified using MEDLINE (PubMed), Embase (Elsevier), and Cochrane Library databases with Boolean search terms related to infection after shoulder arthroplasty. Included articles were analyzed for quality, and data were extracted for use. Preoperative treatment selection bias was analyzed and postoperative infection clearance rates and functional outcome scores were compared between 1 and 2-stage revision surgery for periprosthetic shoulder infection.
    Overall, 163 1-stage shoulder procedures and 289 2-stage shoulder procedures were included in the analysis. Cutibacterium acnes was the organism most frequently grown on culture (37%) followed by coagulase-negative Staphylococcus (19%). The overall infection clearance rate was 95.6% for 1-stage and 85.2% for 2-stage procedures. In a comparison of the change in outcome scores from preoperatively to postoperatively between 1-stage and 2-stage revision, the Constant-Murley Score (CMS) improved 21.0 points (1-stage) versus 22.8 points (2-stage), the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) score improved 26.2 points versus 33.6 points, and the Simple Shoulder Test (SST) score improved 3.5 points versus 6.4 points, respectively. Overall, 23 of 26 studies cited a reason for selection of a 1 versus 2-stage procedure, which was due to standard treatment protocol in 10 studies, based on the timing of the infection (acute versus subacute versus chronic) in 5, due to a combination of factors (age, comorbidities, intraoperative appearance, adequacy of debridement, bone loss) in 6, and due to preoperative identification of a specific organism in 2.
    One-stage revisions resulted in higher infection clearance rates; however, 2-stage revisions resulted in greater functional improvement as measured with ASES and SST scores from the preoperative assessment to the final postoperative follow-up. The decision between 1 and 2-stage revisions is due to a combination of factors including pathogen type, timing of infection, findings on the preoperative clinical examination, the patient\'s own decision, the surgeon\'s preference, and the intraoperative soft-tissue/osseous appearance, which may have biased the overall results. There is no consensus in the literature on the decision between 1 and 2-stage treatment for periprosthetic shoulder infection, which is based on a combination of factors. However, both treatment strategies are effective in treating periprosthetic shoulder infection.
    Therapeutic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

    求助全文

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    在流行病学研究中,受药物影响的测量,例如,降压药降低了血压,很常见。根据研究问题以及受影响的测量是否是暴露,需要不同的处理药物的方法。结果,或者是个混血儿.本研究旨在回顾观察性研究中药物使用的处理。
    搜索PubMed在2015年至2019年期间发表在15种心脏病学高级期刊上的病因学研究。糖尿病,和流行病学。我们选择了分析血压的研究,葡萄糖,或脂质测量(无论是暴露,结果或混淆)通过线性或逻辑回归。两名审阅者独立记录了如何处理药物使用,并评估所使用的方法是否符合研究目标。我们报告了每个变量类别使用的方法(暴露,结果,混淆者)。
    共纳入127篇文章。大多数研究没有使用任何方法来解释药物使用(暴露58%,结果53%,和混淆45%)。限制(暴露22%,结果23%,和10%的混杂因素),或使用二元指标调整药物使用也经常使用(暴露:18%,结果:19%,混杂:45%)。没有采用先进的方法。在60%的研究中,由于研究目标报告含糊不清,因此无法判断方法的有效性。在28%的研究中使用了无效的方法,主要当受影响的变量是结果(36%)。
    许多研究模棱两可地陈述了研究目的,并使用无效的方法来处理药物使用。研究人员应该根据他们的研究问题考虑一种有效的方法论方法。
    In epidemiological research, measurements affected by medication, for example, blood pressure lowered by antihypertensives, are common. Different ways of handling medication are required depending on the research questions and whether the affected measurement is the exposure, the outcome, or a confounder. This study aimed to review handling of medication use in observational research.
    PubMed was searched for etiological studies published between 2015 and 2019 in 15 high-ranked journals from cardiology, diabetes, and epidemiology. We selected studies that analyzed blood pressure, glucose, or lipid measurements (whether exposure, outcome or confounder) by linear or logistic regression. Two reviewers independently recorded how medication use was handled and assessed whether the methods used were in accordance with the research aim. We reported the methods used per variable category (exposure, outcome, confounder).
    A total of 127 articles were included. Most studies did not perform any method to account for medication use (exposure 58%, outcome 53%, and confounder 45%). Restriction (exposure 22%, outcome 23%, and confounders 10%), or adjusting for medication use using a binary indicator were also used frequently (exposure: 18%, outcome: 19%, confounder: 45%). No advanced methods were applied. In 60% of studies, the methods\' validity could not be judged due to ambiguous reporting of the research aim. Invalid approaches were used in 28% of the studies, mostly when the affected variable was the outcome (36%).
    Many studies ambiguously stated the research aim and used invalid methods to handle medication use. Researchers should consider a valid methodological approach based on their research question.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

    求助全文

公众号