guideline

Guideline
  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    暂无摘要。
    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
    急性低氧性呼吸衰竭(ARF)是住院的常见原因。高流量鼻氧(HFNO)越来越多地用作ARF患者的一线治疗,包括医疗病房。提供HFNO时,临床指导至关重要,和卫生服务使用当地卫生指导文件(LHGD)来实现这一目标。尚不清楚LHGD医院对HFNO的病房管理有何建议。这项研究检查了澳大利亚医院LHGD关于基于病房的HFNO管理的内容,以确定可能影响安全分娩的内容。2022年5月2日进行了范围审查,并于2024年1月29日进行了更新,以确定在澳大利亚两个州的医疗病房中向患有ARF的成年人提供HFNO的公立医院。提取并分析了有关HFNO起始的数据,监测,保养和断奶,和临床恶化的管理。在包括LHGD的26个中,五份文件引用了澳大利亚氧气指南。20个LHGD没有定义低氧血症的阈值水平,建议使用HFNO而不是常规氧疗。13在使用HFNO时没有提供目标氧饱和度范围。关于病房中最大吸入氧气水平和流速的建议各不相同。八个LHGD没有指定任何系统来识别和管理恶化的患者。五个LHGD没有为HFNO的断奶患者提供指导。在澳大利亚医院中,对于成人ARF患者的HFNO护理,LHGD存在很大差异。这些发现对高质量的交付,医院的安全临床护理。
    Acute hypoxemic respiratory failure (ARF) is a common cause for hospital admission. High-flow nasal oxygen (HFNO) is increasingly used as a first-line treatment for patients with ARF, including in medical wards. Clinical guidance is crucial when providing HFNO, and health services use local health guidance documents (LHGDs) to achieve this. It is unknown what hospital LHGDs recommend regarding ward administration of HFNO. This study examined Australian hospitals\' LHGDs regarding ward-based HFNO administration to determine content that may affect safe delivery. A scoping review was undertaken on 2 May 2022 and updated on 29 January 2024 to identify public hospitals\' LHGDs regarding delivery of HFNO to adults with ARF in medical wards in two Australian states. Data were extracted and analysed regarding HFNO initiation, monitoring, maintenance and weaning, and management of clinical deterioration. Of the twenty-six included LHGDs, five documents referenced Australian Oxygen Guidelines. Twenty LHGDs did not define a threshold level of hypoxaemia where HFNO use was recommended over conventional oxygen therapy. Thirteen did not provide target oxygen saturation ranges whilst utilising HFNO. Recommendations varied regarding maximal levels of inspired oxygen and flow rates in the medical ward. Eight LHGDs did not specify any system to identify and manage deteriorating patients. Five LHGDs did not provide guidance for weaning patients from HFNO. There was substantial variation in the LHGDs regarding HFNO care for adult patients with ARF in Australian hospitals. These findings have implications for the delivery of high-quality, safe clinical care in hospitals.
    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:本研究描述了接受或未接受指南一致的CI-NV预防的儿童和成人患者化疗引起的恶心和呕吐(CINV)控制率。
    方法:我们对2000年或以后发表的研究进行了系统的文献综述,这些研究评估了接受指南一致的患者的CINV控制与指南不一致CINV预防,并报告至少一个CINV相关患者结局。如果评估的指南不是公开可用的或不是由专业组织开发的,则排除研究。过度预防被定义为建议使用止吐剂用于比患者接受更高水平的化疗。
    结果:我们确定了7060篇引文,并检索了141篇出版物用于全文评估。其中,纳入了由六个组织制定的评估指南的21篇出版物(14项前瞻性研究和7项回顾性研究)。用于描述CINV终点和指南一致CINV预防定义的术语在研究中有所不同。纳入的研究在其指南一致性CINV预防的定义中没有解决过度预防(48%;10/21)或将其定义为指南不一致(38%;8/21)或指南一致性(3/21;14%)。11项纳入研究(52%;11/21)报告了在接受指南一致CINV预防的患者中至少一个CINV终点有临床意义的改善。十个报告了统计学上的显着改善。
    结论:该证据支持使用指南一致的预防来优化CINV控制。照顾癌症患者的机构应系统地调整CINVCPG,以便在当地实施,并常规评估CINV结果。
    OBJECTIVE: This study describes chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) control rates in pediatric and adult patients who did or did not receive guideline-consistent CINV prophylaxis.
    METHODS: We conducted a systematic literature review of studies published in 2000 or later that evaluated CINV control in patients receiving guideline-consistent vs. guideline-inconsistent CINV prophylaxis and reported at least one CINV-related patient outcome. Studies were excluded if the guideline evaluated was not publicly available or not developed by a professional organization. Over-prophylaxis was defined as antiemetic use recommended for a higher level of chemotherapy emetogenicity than a patient was receiving.
    RESULTS: We identified 7060 citations and retrieved 141 publications for full-text evaluation. Of these, 21 publications (14 prospective and seven retrospective studies) evaluating guidelines developed by six organizations were included. The terms used to describe CINV endpoints and definition of guideline-consistent CINV prophylaxis varied among studies. Included studies either did not address over-prophylaxis in their definition of guideline-consistent CINV prophylaxis (48%; 10/21) or defined it as guideline-inconsistent (38%; 8/21) or guideline-consistent (3/21; 14%). Eleven included studies (52%; 11/21) reported a clinically meaningful improvement in at least one CINV endpoint in patients receiving guideline-consistent CINV prophylaxis. Ten reported a statistically significant improvement.
    CONCLUSIONS: This evidence supports the use of guideline-consistent prophylaxis to optimize CINV control. Institutions caring for patients with cancer should systematically adapt CINV CPGs for local implementation and routinely evaluate CINV outcomes.
    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
    背景:去年,世界见证了大型语言模型(LLM)的采用。尽管使用LLM开发的产品有可能解决医疗保健中的可及性和效率问题,缺乏开发医疗保健LLM的可用指南,尤其是医学教育。
    目的:本研究的目的是确定并优先考虑为医学教育开发成功的LLM的推动者。我们进一步评估了这些确定的推动者之间的关系。
    方法:首先对现有文献进行叙述性回顾,以确定LLM开发的关键推动者。我们还收集了LLM用户的意见,以使用层次分析法(AHP)确定这些推动者的相对重要性,这是一种多准则决策方法。Further,总体解释结构模型(TISM)用于分析产品开发人员的观点,并确定这些推动者之间的关系和层次结构.最后,应用于分类(MICMAC)方法的基于交叉影响矩阵的乘法用于确定这些推动者的相对驱动和依赖能力。非概率目的抽样方法用于招募焦点小组。
    结果:AHP证明了LLM最重要的推动因素是可信度,优先级权重为0.37,其次是问责制(0.27642)和公平性(0.10572)。相比之下,可用性,优先级权重为0.04,显示出微不足道的重要性。TISM的结果与AHP的结果一致。专家观点和用户偏好评估之间唯一显著的区别是,产品开发人员指出,成本作为潜在的推动者最不重要。MICMAC分析表明,成本对其他促成因素有很大影响。焦点小组的输入被认为是可靠的,稠度比小于0.1(0.084)。
    结论:这项研究首次确定,优先考虑,并分析有效医学教育LLM的推动者之间的关系。根据这项研究的结果,我们开发了一个可理解的规范框架,名为CUC-FATE(成本,可用性,可信度,公平,问责制,透明度,和可解释性),用于评估医学教育中LLM的推动者。这项研究结果对医疗保健专业人员很有用,健康技术专家,医疗技术监管机构,和政策制定者。
    BACKGROUND: The world has witnessed increased adoption of large language models (LLMs) in the last year. Although the products developed using LLMs have the potential to solve accessibility and efficiency problems in health care, there is a lack of available guidelines for developing LLMs for health care, especially for medical education.
    OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to identify and prioritize the enablers for developing successful LLMs for medical education. We further evaluated the relationships among these identified enablers.
    METHODS: A narrative review of the extant literature was first performed to identify the key enablers for LLM development. We additionally gathered the opinions of LLM users to determine the relative importance of these enablers using an analytical hierarchy process (AHP), which is a multicriteria decision-making method. Further, total interpretive structural modeling (TISM) was used to analyze the perspectives of product developers and ascertain the relationships and hierarchy among these enablers. Finally, the cross-impact matrix-based multiplication applied to a classification (MICMAC) approach was used to determine the relative driving and dependence powers of these enablers. A nonprobabilistic purposive sampling approach was used for recruitment of focus groups.
    RESULTS: The AHP demonstrated that the most important enabler for LLMs was credibility, with a priority weight of 0.37, followed by accountability (0.27642) and fairness (0.10572). In contrast, usability, with a priority weight of 0.04, showed negligible importance. The results of TISM concurred with the findings of the AHP. The only striking difference between expert perspectives and user preference evaluation was that the product developers indicated that cost has the least importance as a potential enabler. The MICMAC analysis suggested that cost has a strong influence on other enablers. The inputs of the focus group were found to be reliable, with a consistency ratio less than 0.1 (0.084).
    CONCLUSIONS: This study is the first to identify, prioritize, and analyze the relationships of enablers of effective LLMs for medical education. Based on the results of this study, we developed a comprehendible prescriptive framework, named CUC-FATE (Cost, Usability, Credibility, Fairness, Accountability, Transparency, and Explainability), for evaluating the enablers of LLMs in medical education. The study findings are useful for health care professionals, health technology experts, medical technology regulators, and policy makers.
    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
    目的提供欧洲心脏病学会(ESC)和美国心脏病学会/美国心脏协会(ACC/AHA)指南之间心脏MRI适应症的全面头对头比较和时间分析,以确定共识和分歧的领域。材料与方法进行系统评价和荟萃分析。直到2023年5月发布的ESC和ACC/AHA指南对与心脏MRI相关的建议进行了系统筛选。使用χ2或Fisher精确检验比较了两个指南之间以及每个指南的较新版本与较旧版本之间的心脏MRI建议的建议类别(COR)和证据水平(LOE)。结果ESC指南包括109条关于心脏MRI的建议,行政协调会/AHA准则包括90项建议。ACC/AHA指南中CORI和LOEB的比例高于ESC指南(60%[54/90]对46.8%[51/109];P=.06和53%[48/90]对35.8%[39/109],分别为;P=0.01)。随着时间的推移,ESC指南中心脏MRI推荐数量的增加显着增加(ESC从63到109,ACC/AHA从65到90;P=0.03)。达成共识的主要领域是心力衰竭和肥厚型心肌病,虽然主要的分歧是瓣膜性心脏病,心律失常,和主动脉疾病。结论ESC指南包括更多与心脏MRI使用相关的建议,而ACC/AHA建议的COR和LOE较高。在两个指南中,心脏MRI建议的数量随着时间的推移显著增加,表明心脏MRI评估和治疗心血管疾病的作用日益增强。关键词:心血管磁共振,Guideline,欧洲心脏病学会,ESC,美国心脏病学会/美国心脏协会,ACC/AHA补充材料可用于本文。©RSNA,2024.
    Purpose To provide a comprehensive head-to-head comparison and temporal analysis of cardiac MRI indications between the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) and American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association (ACC/AHA) guidelines to identify areas of consensus and divergence. Materials and Methods A systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted. ESC and ACC/AHA guidelines published until May 2023 were systematically screened for recommendations related to cardiac MRI. The class of recommendation (COR) and level of evidence (LOE) for cardiac MRI recommendations were compared between the two guidelines and between newer versus older versions of each guideline using χ2 or Fisher exact tests. Results ESC guidelines included 109 recommendations regarding cardiac MRI, and ACC/AHA guidelines included 90 recommendations. The proportion of COR I and LOE B was higher in ACC/AHA versus ESC guidelines (60% [54 of 90] vs 46.8% [51 of 109]; P = .06 and 53% [48 of 90] vs 35.8% [39 of 109], respectively; P = .01). The increase in the number of cardiac MRI recommendations over time was significantly higher in ESC guidelines (from 63 to 109 for ESC vs from 65 to 90 for ACC/AHA; P = .03). The main areas of consensus were found in heart failure and hypertrophic cardiomyopathy, while the main divergences were in valvular heart disease, arrhythmias, and aortic disease. Conclusion ESC guidelines included more recommendations related to cardiac MRI use, whereas the ACC/AHA recommendations had higher COR and LOE. The number of cardiac MRI recommendations increased significantly over time in both guidelines, indicating the increasing role of cardiac MRI evaluation and management of cardiovascular disease. Keywords: Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance, Guideline, European Society of Cardiology, ESC, American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association, ACC/AHA Supplemental material is available for this article. © RSNA, 2024.
    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
    背景:近年来,外科研究中调查方法的使用激增,但是这些调查和报告的质量没有得到充分研究。
    方法:我们于2023年7月通过PubMed对外科调查文献(2022年1月至2023年7月)进行了全面审查。文章(1)报告了从调查中收集的数据,(2)发表在英文期刊上,(3)有针对性的调查对象在美国或加拿大,(4)包括与普外科有关的专业。我们使用调查研究报告清单(CROSS)指南评估了调查报告的质量。使用二分法(是或否)量表评估文章与CROSS的一致性。
    结果:最初的文献检索产生了481篇文章;根据纳入标准分析了57篇文章。平均有效率为37%(范围0.62%-98%)。大多数调查是以电子方式进行的(n=50,87.8%)。没有出版物遵守所有40个CROSS项目;平均而言,出版物满足了该研究适用项目的61.2%。文章最有可能遵守标题和摘要的报告标准(平均遵守99.1%),介绍(99.1%),和讨论(92.4%)。文章对与方法相关的项目的依从性最低(42.6%),对与结果相关的项目的依从性中等(76.6%)。只有五篇文章引用了CROSS指南或其他标准化调查报告工具(10.5%)。
    结论:我们的分析表明,用于调查研究的CROSS报告指南尚未被广泛采用。外科文献中报道的调查可能质量参差不齐。提高对指南的依从性可以改善外科医生进行的调查的发展和传播。
    BACKGROUND: The use of survey methodology in surgical research has proliferated in recent years, but the quality of these surveys and of their reporting is understudied.
    METHODS: We conducted a comprehensive review of surgical survey literature (January 2022-July 2023) via PubMed in July 2023. Articles which (1) reported data gleaned from a survey, (2) were published in an English language journal, (3) targeted survey respondents in the United States or Canada, and (4) pertained to general surgery specialties were included. We assessed quality of survey reports using the Checklist for Reporting Of Survey Studies (CROSS) guidelines. Articles were evaluated for concordance with CROSS using a dichotomous (yes or no) scale.
    RESULTS: Initial literature search yielded 481 articles; 57 articles were included in analysis based on the inclusion criteria. The mean response rate was 37% (range 0.62%-98%). The majority of surveys were administered electronically (n = 50, 87.8%). No publications adhered to all 40 CROSS items; on average, publications met 61.2% of items applicable to that study. Articles were most likely to adhere to reporting criteria for title and abstract (mean adherence 99.1%), introduction (99.1%), and discussion (92.4%). Articles were least adherent to items related to methodology (42.6%) and moderately adherent to items related to results (76.6%). Only five articles cited CROSS guidelines or another standardized survey reporting tool (10.5%).
    CONCLUSIONS: Our analysis demonstrates that CROSS reporting guidelines for survey research have not been adopted widely. Surveys reported in surgical literature may be of variable quality. Increased adherence to guidelines could improve development and dissemination of surveys done by surgeons.
    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
    为了告知由欧洲过敏和临床免疫学学会制定的临床实践指南建议,系统评价(SR)使用GRADE评估环境烟草烟雾(ETS)和主动吸烟对新发哮喘/反复喘息(RW)/低肺功能(LF)风险的影响,以及与哮喘相关的结果。只包括纵向研究,几乎都在燃烧香烟上,只有一个人评估电子烟和LF。根据第一个SR(67项研究),产前ETS会增加RW(中度确定性证据)的风险,并可能增加新发哮喘和低LF(低确定性证据)的风险.产后ETS会增加新发哮喘和RW(中度确定性证据)的风险,并可能影响LF(低确定性证据)。子宫内和产后合并ETS可能会增加新发哮喘的风险(低确定性证据),并增加RW的风险(中度确定性证据)。根据第二个SR(24项研究),ETS会增加严重哮喘急性发作的风险,并损害哮喘控制和LF(中度确定性证据)。根据第三项SR(25项研究),主动吸烟会增加重度哮喘加重和哮喘控制欠佳的风险(中度确定性证据),并可能影响哮喘相关生活质量和LF(低确定性证据).
    To inform the clinical practice guidelines\' recommendations developed by the European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology systematic reviews (SR) assessed using GRADE on the impact of environmental tobacco smoke (ETS) and active smoking on the risk of new-onset asthma/recurrent wheezing (RW)/low lung function (LF), and on asthma-related outcomes. Only longitudinal studies were included, almost all on combustion cigarettes, only one assessing e-cigarettes and LF. According to the first SR (67 studies), prenatal ETS increases the risk of RW (moderate certainty evidence) and may increase the risk of new-onset asthma and of low LF (low certainty evidence). Postnatal ETS increases the risk of new-onset asthma and of RW (moderate certainty evidence) and may impact LF (low certainty evidence). Combined in utero and postnatal ETS may increase the risk of new-onset asthma (low certainty evidence) and increases the risk of RW (moderate certainty evidence). According to the second SR (24 studies), ETS increases the risk of severe asthma exacerbations and impairs asthma control and LF (moderate certainty evidence). According to the third SR (25 studies), active smoking increases the risk of severe asthma exacerbations and of suboptimal asthma control (moderate certainty evidence) and may impact asthma-related quality-of-life and LF (low certainty 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
    背景亚临床甲状腺疾病通常是关于其临床意义的辩论主题,诊断测试的适当性和可能的治疗。本系统综述解决了亚临床甲状腺功能亢进症国际指南的变化,专注于诊断工作,治疗,和后续建议。方法遵循系统评价和荟萃分析(PRISMA)指南的首选报告项目,我们搜索了PubMed,Embase,和特定指南的数据库,并纳入了临床实践指南以及亚临床甲状腺功能亢进症的建议。提取了指南建议,并使用《研究与评估指南》(AGREE)II工具的选定问题进行质量评估。在筛选的2624条记录中,包括22条准则,2007年至2021年出版。指南质量通常是中等到低。诊断方法有很大不同,特别是在推荐的测试范围内。治疗开始取决于TSH水平,年龄,和合并症,但是关于定义精确合并症的详细程度各不相同。建议随访监测间隔为3至12个月。结论本综述强调了有关亚临床甲状腺功能亢进的(国际)国家指南中现有的变异性。在考虑诊断工作的指南中需要明确的建议,亚临床甲亢的治疗和随访。为了建立这一点,未来的研究应该集中在确定明确的和循证的干预阈值上.
    UNASSIGNED: Subclinical thyroid diseases are often the subject of debate concerning their clinical significance, the appropriateness of diagnostic testing, and possible treatment. This systematic review addresses the variation in international guidelines for subclinical hyperthyroidism, focusing on diagnostic workup, treatment, and follow-up recommendations.
    UNASSIGNED: Following the PRISMA guidelines, we searched PubMed, Embase, and guideline-specific databases and included clinical practice guidelines with recommendations on subclinical hyperthyroidism. Guideline recommendations were extracted, and quality assessment was performed using selected questions of the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research & Evaluation (AGREE) II instrument.
    UNASSIGNED: Of the 2624 records screened, 22 guidelines were included, which were published between 2007 and 2021. Guideline quality was generally intermediate to low. Diagnostic approaches differed substantially, particularly in the extent of recommended testing. Treatment initiation depended on TSH levels, age, and comorbidities, but the level of detail regarding defining precise comorbidities varied. Recommendations for monitoring intervals for follow-up ranged from 3 to 12 months.
    UNASSIGNED: This review underscores the existing variability in (inter)national guidelines concerning subclinical hyperthyroidism. There isa need for clear recommendations in guidelines considering diagnostic workup, treatment, and follow-up of subclinical hyperthyroidism. In order to establish this, future research should focus on determining clear and evidence-based intervention thresholds.
    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
    静脉血栓栓塞症(VTE)预防实施策略在一些住院和手术患者中得到了充分研究。尽管VTE与创伤患者的大量死亡率和发病率相关,预防创伤中VTE的实施策略似乎基于有限的证据。因此,我们对已发表的文献进行了系统评价和荟萃分析,这些文献涉及在住院创伤患者中积极实施VTE预防给药策略以及对VTE事件的影响.
    对成人住院创伤患者进行了系统评价和荟萃分析,以评估积极的VTE预防实施策略是否改变了接受VTE预防的患者比例,VTE事件,以及不良反应,如出血或肝素诱导的血小板减少症,以及住院时间和护理费用。一位学术医学图书馆员搜索了Medline,Scopus,和WebofScience,直到2022年12月。
    积极实施策略组的四项研究共有1723名患者(策略包括教育,提醒,人类和计算机警报,审计和反馈,预先打印的订单,和/或根本原因分析)和不积极实施策略组(指南创建和传播)中的1324项被纳入分析。通过积极实施策略接受VTE预防的患者比例较高(OR=2.94,95%CI(1.68至5.15),p<0.01)。VTE事件无显著差异。由于研究的偏倚和不一致,质量被认为较低。
    积极的实施策略似乎提高了接受VTE预防的重大创伤患者的比例。创伤需要进一步的实施研究,以确定有效,VTE预防的可持续策略和评估次要结局,如出血和费用。
    系统评价/荟萃分析,三级。
    CRD42023390538。
    UNASSIGNED: Venous thromboembolism (VTE) prophylaxis implementation strategies are well-studied in some hospitalized medical and surgical patients. Although VTE is associated with substantial mortality and morbidity in trauma patients, implementation strategies for the prevention of VTE in trauma appear to be based on limited evidence. Therefore, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of published literature on active implementation strategies for VTE prophylaxis administration in hospitalized trauma patients and the impact on VTE events.
    UNASSIGNED: A systematic review and meta-analysis was performed in adult hospitalized trauma patients to assess if active VTE prevention implementation strategies change the proportion of patients who received VTE prophylaxis, VTE events, and adverse effects such as bleeding or heparin-induced thrombocytopenia as well as hospital length of stay and the cost of care. An academic medical librarian searched Medline, Scopus, and Web of Science until December 2022.
    UNASSIGNED: Four studies with a total of 1723 patients in the active implementation strategy group (strategies included education, reminders, human and computer alerts, audit and feedback, preprinted orders, and/or root cause analysis) and 1324 in the no active implementation strategy group (guideline creation and dissemination) were included in the analysis. A higher proportion of patients received VTE prophylaxis with an active implementation strategy (OR=2.94, 95% CI (1.68 to 5.15), p<0.01). No significant difference was found in VTE events. Quality was deemed to be low due to bias and inconsistency of studies.
    UNASSIGNED: Active implementation strategies appeared to improve the proportion of major trauma patients who received VTE prophylaxis. Further implementation studies are needed in trauma to determine effective, sustainable strategies for VTE prevention and to assess secondary outcomes such as bleeding and costs.
    UNASSIGNED: Systematic review/meta-analysis, level III.
    UNASSIGNED: CRD42023390538.
    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
    背景:健康应用程序越来越被认为是增强医疗保健服务的重要工具。许多国家,特别是撒哈拉以南非洲地区,可以从使用健康应用程序支持自我管理中受益匪浅,从而有助于实现全民健康覆盖和第三个可持续发展目标。然而,在应用商店中发布的大多数健康应用都是未知或质量差的,这对患者安全构成了风险。监管标准和指南可以帮助解决这种风险并促进患者安全。
    目的:本综述旨在评估支持撒哈拉以南非洲循证最佳实践的健康应用的监管标准和指南,重点是自我管理。
    方法:应用了范围审查的方法学框架。在以下数据库中构建并应用了搜索策略,灰色文献来源,和机构网站:PubMed,Scopus,世界卫生组织(世卫组织)非洲指数,OpenGrey,世卫组织非洲图书馆区域办事处,ICTworks,世卫组织电子卫生政策目录,他的加强资源中心,国际电信联盟,卫生部网站,和Google。搜索范围为2005年1月至2024年1月。使用演绎性描述性内容分析对发现进行了分析。对政策分析框架进行了调整,并用于组织调查结果。用于利益相关者分析的报告项目工具根据关键利益相关者在管理自我管理的健康应用程序中的角色,指导识别和映射关键利益相关者。
    结果:该研究包括来自31个撒哈拉以南非洲国家的49份文件。虽然所有文件都与利益相关者识别和映射相关,只有3个监管标准和指南包含有关健康应用程序监管的相关信息。这些标准和指南主要旨在建立相互信任;促进融合,inclusion,和公平获得服务;并解决执行问题和协调不力。他们提供了有关系统质量的指导,软件获取和维护,安全措施,数据交换,互操作性和集成,相关利益相关者的参与,和公平获得服务。加强落实,这些标准突出了法律权威,协调活动,能力建设,需要监测和评估。一些利益相关者,包括政府,监管机构,资助者,政府间和非政府组织,学术界,和医疗保健界,被确定为在管理健康应用程序方面发挥关键作用。
    结论:健康应用程序在支持撒哈拉以南非洲的自我管理方面具有巨大潜力,但是缺乏监管标准和指导是一个主要障碍。因此,为了将这些应用程序安全有效地集成到医疗保健中,应该更加重视监管。向具有有效法规的国家学习可以帮助撒哈拉以南非洲建立更强大和反应更灵敏的法规体系,确保整个地区健康应用的安全和有益使用。
    RR2-10.1136/bmjopen-2018-025714。
    BACKGROUND: Health apps are increasingly recognized as crucial tools for enhancing health care delivery. Many countries, particularly those in sub-Saharan Africa, can substantially benefit from using health apps to support self-management and thus help to achieve universal health coverage and the third sustainable development goal. However, most health apps published in app stores are of unknown or poor quality, which poses a risk to patient safety. Regulatory standards and guidance can help address this risk and promote patient safety.
    OBJECTIVE: This review aims to assess the regulatory standards and guidance for health apps supporting evidence-based best practices in sub-Saharan Africa with a focus on self-management.
    METHODS: A methodological framework for scoping reviews was applied. A search strategy was built and applied across the following databases, gray literature sources, and institutional websites: PubMed, Scopus, World Health Organization (WHO) African Index Medicus, OpenGrey, WHO Regional Office for Africa Library, ICTworks, WHO Directory of eHealth policies, HIS Strengthening Resource Center, International Telecommunication Union, Ministry of Health websites, and Google. The search covered the period between January 2005 and January 2024. The findings were analyzed using a deductive descriptive content analysis. The policy analysis framework was adapted and used to organize the findings. The Reporting Items for Stakeholder Analysis tool guided the identification and mapping of key stakeholders based on their roles in regulating health apps for self-management.
    RESULTS: The study included 49 documents from 31 sub-Saharan African countries. While all the documents were relevant for stakeholder identification and mapping, only 3 regulatory standards and guidance contained relevant information on regulation of health apps. These standards and guidance primarily aimed to build mutual trust; promote integration, inclusion, and equitable access to services; and address implementation issues and poor coordination. They provided guidance on systems quality, software acquisition and maintenance, security measures, data exchange, interoperability and integration, involvement of relevant stakeholders, and equitable access to services. To enhance implementation, the standards highlight that legal authority, coordination of activities, building capacity, and monitoring and evaluation are required. A number of stakeholders, including governments, regulatory bodies, funders, intergovernmental and nongovernmental organizations, academia, and the health care community, were identified to play key roles in regulating health apps.
    CONCLUSIONS: Health apps have huge potential to support self-management in sub-Saharan Africa, but the lack of regulatory standards and guidance constitutes a major barrier. Hence, for these apps to be safely and effectively integrated into health care, more attention should be given to regulation. Learning from countries with effective regulations can help sub-Saharan Africa build a more robust and responsive regulatory system, ensuring the safe and beneficial use of health apps across the region.
    UNASSIGNED: RR2-10.1136/bmjopen-2018-025714.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

公众号