Global priority setting for Cochrane systematic reviews of health promotion and public health research

Background: Systematic reviews of health promotion and public health interventions are increasingly being conducted to assist public policy decision making. Many intra-country initiatives have been established to conduct systematic reviews in their relevant public health areas. The Cochrane Collaboration, an international organisation established to conduct and publish systematic reviews of healthcare interventions, is committed to high quality reviews that are regularly updated, published electronically, and meeting the needs of the consumers.

Aims: To identify global priorities for Cochrane systematic reviews of public health topics.

Methods: Systematic reviews of public health interventions were identified and mapped against global health risks. Global health organisations were engaged and nominated policy-urgent titles, evidence based selection criteria were applied to set priorities.

Results: 26 priority systematic review titles were identified, addressing interventions such as community building activities, pre-natal and early infancy psychosocial outcomes, and improving the nutrition status of refugee and displaced populations.

Discussion: The 26 priority titles provide an opportunity for potential reviewers and indeed, the Cochrane Collaboration as a whole, to address the previously unmet needs of global health policy and research agencies.

It's in your hands : the value of handsearching in conducting systematic reviews of public health interventions

Background While there is an emerging evidence base in public health, the evidence can often be difficult to find. Indexing of journals in MEDLINE has assisted those conducting systematic reviews to more easily identify published studies. However, information technology and the processes associated with indexing are not infallible. Studies may not be correctly marked by study design which may mean they are missed in the electronic searching process. Handsearching for evidence of intervention effectiveness has therefore become a recognized tool in the systematic review process.

Methods Resources to guide handsearching activity currently are clinically focused, and may not be sensitive to the characteristics of public health studies where study terminology may differ. In response to this issue, the Cochrane Health Promotion and Public Health Field (the Field) developed and implemented a small study to recruit and support handsearchers from around the world to identify health promotion and public health trials and systematic reviews. A strategic framework was developed to recruit and support handsearchers to search six public health-related journals.

Results In total, 131 trials and 21 systematic reviews were identified. The greatest value of handsearching was found to be in supplement editions and abstract sections of journals

Conclusions The study focused exclusively on indexed journals with the intention that tools and methods developed could be used to explore the potential for handsearching in non-indexed journals and for unpublished studies. The findings from this study will continue to support handsearching efforts and in doing so contribute to high quality systematic reviews of public health interventions.

How systematic reviews can foster evidence-based clinical decisions : part II

In the prior issue, we spoke about what a systematic review is and where a clinician can find this important evidence for decision making (Fineout-Overholt et al. 2008). In this column, we will address what is involved in conducting a systematic review, and how critically appraising a systematic review informs clinicians of the best evidence available to make decisions that impact outcomes.

Systematic reviews: a social work perspective

Systematic reviews are gaining prominence and recognition as being an important methodological approach to dealing with ever growing amounts of research data, and recent years have seen the development of guidelines for both the conduct and reporting of systematic reviews. Initially systematic reviews came to prominence as a method for synthesising data emerging from Randomised Control Trials (RCTs) but increasingly the term “systematic review” is being used in regards to reviews of studies of a wide range of research designs. However, among Australian social workers, utilisation and conduct of systematic reviews has been limited. This paper will explore the question of what a systematic review is, introduce some of the key issues in undertaking such a review, and explore the implications of the emergence of systematic reviews from a social work perspective.

Criteria for the systematic review of health promotion and public health interventions

Systematic reviews of public health interventions are fraught with challenges. Complexity is inherent; this may be due to multi-component interventions, diverse study populations, multiple outcomes measured, mixed study designs utilized and the effect of context on intervention design, implementation and effectiveness. For policy makers and practitioners to use systematic reviews to implement effective public health programmes, systematic reviews must include this information, which seeks to answer the questions posed by decision makers, including recipients of programmes. This necessitates expanding the traditional evaluation of evidence to incorporate the assessment of theory, integrity of interventions, context and sustainability of the interventions and outcomes. Unfortunately however, the critical information required for judging both the quality of a public health intervention and whether or not an intervention is worthwhile or replicable is missing from most public health intervention studies. When the raw material is not available in primary studies the systematic review process becomes even more challenging. Systematic reviews, which highlight these critical gaps, may act to encourage better reporting in primary studies. This paper provides recommendations to reviewers on the issues to address within a public health systematic review and, indirectly, provides advice to researchers on the reporting requirements of primary studies for the production of high quality systematic reviews.

Nursing administration of medication via enteral tubes in adults : a systematic review

Background Enteral tubes are frequently inserted as part of medical treatment in a wide range of patient situations. Patients with an enteral tube are cared for by nurses in a variety of settings, including general and specialised acute care areas, aged care facilities and at home. Regardless of the setting, nurses have the primary responsibility for administering medication through enteral tubes. Medication administration via an enteral tube is a reasonably common nursing intervention that entails a number of skills, including preparing the medication, verifying the tube position, flushing the tube and assessing for potential complications. If medications are not given effectively through an enteral tube, harmful consequences may result leading to increased morbidity, for example, tube occlusion, diarrhoea and aspiration pneumonia. There are resultant costs for the health-care system related to possible increased length of stay and increased use of equipment. Presently what is considered to be best practice to give medications through enteral tubes is unknown.

Objectives The objective of this systematic review was to determine the best available evidence on which nursing interventions are effective in minimising the complications associated with the administration of medications via enteral tubes in adults. Nursing interventions and considerations related to medication administration included form of medication, verifying tube placement before administration, methods used to give medication, methods used to flush tubes, maintenance of tube patency and specific practices to prevent possible complications related to the administration of enteral medications.

Search strategy The following databases were searched for literature reported in English only: CINAHL, MEDLINE, The Cochrane Library, Current Contents/All Editions, EMBASE, Australasian Medical Index and PsychINFO. There was no date restriction applied. In addition, the reference lists of all included studies were scrutinised for other potentially relevant studies.

Selection criteria Systematic reviews of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and RCTs that compared the effectiveness of nursing interventions and considerations used in the administration of medications via enteral tubes. Other research methods, such as non-randomised controlled trials, longitudinal studies, cohort and case control studies, were also included. Exclusion criteria included studies investigating drug–nutrient interactions or the bioavailability of specific medications.

Data collection and analysis Initial consideration of potential relevance to the review was carried out by the primary author (NP). Two reviewers independently assessed study eligibility for inclusion. A meta-analysis could not be undertaken, as there were no comparable RCTs identified. All data were presented in a narrative summary.

Results There is very limited evidence regarding the effectiveness of nursing interventions in minimising the complications associated with enteral tube medication administration in adults. The review highlights a lack of high quality research on many important nursing issues relating to enteral medication administration. There is huge scope for further research. Some of the evidence that was identified included that nurses should consider the use of liquid form medications as there may be fewer tube occlusions than with solid forms in nasoenteral tubes and silicone percutaneous endoscopic gastronomy tubes. Nurses may need to consider the sorbitol content of some liquid medications, for example, elixirs, as diarrhoea has been attributed to the sorbitol content of the elixir, not the drug itself. In addition, the use of 30 mL of water for irrigation when administering medications or flushing small-diameter nasoenteral tubes may reduce the number of tube occlusions.

The effect pf diary foods on CHD: a systematic review of prospective cohort studies

There is interest in the degree to which fats in dairy foods contribute to CHD. We undertook a systematic review to investigate the effect of dairy  consumption on CHD using prospective cohort studies. A systematic search of electronic databases identified studies relating dairy food intake in adulthood to episodes or death from CHD, IHD and myocardial infarction. Included studies were assessed for quality based on study methodology, validity of dietary assessment, success of follow-up, standardised  assessment of CHD, IHD or myocardial infarction end points and  appropriateness of statistical adjustment. Data from twelve cohorts involving >280 000 subjects were included. Most studies had follow-up of >80 %, adjusted statistically for three or more confounders and used standard criteria to determine end points. About half the studies used a validated FFQ, administered the FFQ more than once or had follow-up of >20 years. Fewer than half the studies involved subjects representative of the general population. Four of the twelve cohorts found no association between dairy intake and CHD. Eight studies reported varying relationships between different dairy foods and CHD or differential associations based on race, sex or over time. Although dairy foods contribute to the SFA composition of the diet, this systematic review could find no consistent evidence that dairy food consumption is associated with a higher risk of CHD. This could be due to the limited sensitivity of the dietary assessment methods to detect an effect of a single food in a mixed diet on complex clinical outcomes.

Multidisciplinary team developed and implemented protocols to assist mechanical ventilation weaning : a systematic review of literature

Aim: The aim of this review was to determine if ventilation-weaning protocols developed and implemented by multidisciplinary teams (MDTs) reduced the duration of mechanical ventilation in adult intensive care patients compared to usual care.

Method: A systematic review was conducted to review published research studies from January 1999 to June 2009 to identify and analyse the best available evidence on MDT-based weaning protocols in adult intensive care patients. All relevant studies based on electronic searches of MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, the Cochrane Controlled Trials Registry and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews were included. Where possible data were pooled and a meta-analysis performed. A narrative synthesis of data was conducted to provide a critical appraisal of nonrandomised controlled trials included in the review.

Results: Three pre- and postinterventional studies were identified for inclusion in this review. Results show equivocal support for weaning protocols developed and implemented by MDTs for reducing duration of mechanical ventilation.

Conclusion: Communication and organizational processes must be addressed for multidisciplinary protocols to be effective. Due to methodological limitations of included studies, large randomised controlled trials are required to provide high-level evidence of the effects of MDT-based protocols on duration of mechanical ventilation.

To what extent do nurses use research in clinical practice? A systematic review

Background : In the past forty years, many gains have been made in our understanding of the concept of research utilization. While numerous studies exist on professional nurses' use of research in practice, no attempt has been made to systematically evaluate and synthesize this body of literature with respect to the extent to which nurses use research in their clinical practice. The objective of this study was to systematically identify and analyze the available evidence related to the extent to which nurses use research findings in practice.

Methods : This study was a systematic review of published and grey literature. The search strategy included 13 online bibliographic databases: Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE, CINAHL, EMBASE, HAPI, Web of Science, SCOPUS, OCLC Papers First, OCLC WorldCat, ABI Inform, Sociological Abstracts, and Dissertation Abstracts. The inclusion criteria consisted of primary research reports that assess professional nurses' use of research in practice, written in the English or Scandinavian languages. Extent of research use was determined by assigning research use scores reported in each article to one of four quartiles: low, moderate-low, moderate-high, or high.

Results : Following removal of duplicate citations, a total of 12,418 titles were identified through database searches, of which 133 articles were retrieved. Of the articles retrieved, 55 satisfied the inclusion criteria. The 55 final reports included cross-sectional/survey (n = 51) and quasi-experimental (n = 4) designs. A sensitivity analysis, comparing findings from all reports with those rated moderate (moderate-weak and moderate-strong) and strong quality, did not show significant differences. In a majority of the articles identified (n = 38, 69%), nurses reported moderate-high research use.

Conclusions : According to this review, nurses' reported use of research is moderate-high and has remained relatively consistent over time until the early 2000's. This finding, however, may paint an overly optimistic picture of the extent to which nurses use research in their practice given the methodological problems inherent in the majority of studies. There is a clear need for the development of standard measures of research use and robust well-designed studies examining nurses' use of research and its impact on patient outcomes. The relatively unchanged self-reports of moderate-high research use by nurses is troubling given that over 40 years have elapsed since the first studies in this review were conducted and the increasing emphasis in the past 15 years on evidence-based practice. More troubling is the absence of studies in which attempts are made to assess the effects of varying levels of research use on patient outcomes.

Interventions to promote cycling: a systematic review

Objectives To determine what interventions are effective in promoting cycling, the size of the effects of interventions, and evidence of any associated benefits on overall physical activity or anthropometric measures.

Design Systematic review.

Data sources Published and unpublished reports in any language identified by searching 13 electronic databases, websites, reference lists, and existing systematic reviews, and papers identified by experts in the field.

Review methods Controlled “before and after” experimental or observational studies of the effect of any type of intervention on cycling behaviour measured at either individual or population level.

Results Twenty five studies (of which two were randomised controlled trials) from seven countries were included. Six studies examined interventions aimed specifically at promoting cycling, of which four (an intensive individual intervention in obese women, high quality improvements to a cycle route network, and two multifaceted cycle promotion initiatives at town or city level) were found to be associated with increases in cycling. Those studies that evaluated interventions at population level reported net increases of up to 3.4 percentage points in the population prevalence of cycling or the proportion of trips made by bicycle. Sixteen studies assessing individualised marketing of “environmentally friendly” modes of transport to interested households reported modest but consistent net effects equating to an average of eight additional cycling trips per person per year in the local population. Other interventions that targeted travel behaviour in general were not associated with a clear increase in cycling. Only two studies assessed effects of interventions on physical activity; one reported a positive shift in the population distribution of overall physical activity during the intervention.

Conclusions Community-wide promotional activities and improving infrastructure for cycling have the potential to increase cycling by modest amounts, but further controlled evaluative studies incorporating more precise measures are required, particularly in areas without an established cycling culture. Studies of individualised marketing report consistent positive effects of interventions on cycling behaviour, but these findings should be confirmed using more robust study designs. Future research should also examine how best to promote cycling in children and adolescents and through workplaces. Whether interventions to promote cycling result in an increase in overall physical activity or changes in anthropometric measures is unclear.