Systematic reviews showed insufficient evidence for clinical practice in 2004: What about in 2011? the next appeal for the evidence-based medicine age

Rationale and aim The aims of the Cochrane systematic reviews are to make readily available and up-to-date information for clinical practice, offering consistent evidence and straightforward recommendations. In 2004, we evaluated the conclusions from Cochrane systematic reviews of randomized controlled trials in terms of their recommendations for clinical practice and found that 47.83% of them had insufficient evidence for use in clinical practice. We proposed to reanalyze the reviews to evaluate whether this percentage had significantly decreased. Methods A cross-sectional study of systematic reviews published in the Cochrane Library (Issue 7, 2011) was conducted. We randomly selected reviews across all 52 Cochrane Collaborative Review Groups. Results We analyzed 1128 completed systematic reviews. Of these, 45.30% concluded that the interventions studied were likely to be beneficial, of which only 2.04% recommended no further research. In total, 45.04% of the reviews reported that the evidence did not support either benefit or harm, of which 0.8% did not recommend further studies and 44.24% recommended additional studies; the latter has decreased from our previous study with a difference of 3.59%. Conclusion Only a small number of the Cochrane collaboration's systematic reviews support clinical interventions with no need for additional research. A larger number of high-quality randomized clinical trials are necessary to change the 'insufficient evidence' scenario for clinical practice illustrated by the Cochrane database. It is recommended that we should produce higher-quality primary studies in active collaboration and consultation with global scholars and societies so that this can represent a major component of methodological advance in this context. © 2012 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Testing search strategies for systematic reviews in the Medline literature database through PubMed

Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo (FAPESP)

Mapeamento das evidências do grupo de odontologia da Colaboração Cochrane pra condutas em saúde

Pós-graduação em Bases Gerais da Cirurgia - FMB

Mapeamento das evidências das revisões sistemáticas do Grupo Anestesiologia da Colaboração Cochrane: entendendo seu valor para a prática clínica

Pós-graduação em Anestesiologia - FMB

A quantitative and qualitative evaluation of reports of clinical trials published in six Brazilian dental journals indexed in the Scientific Electronic Library Online (SciELO)

Introduction: Open access publishing is becoming increasingly popular within the biomedical sciences. SciELO, the Scientific Electronic Library Online, is a digital library covering a selected collection of Brazilian scientific journals many of which provide open access to full-text articles. This library includes a number of dental journals some of which may include reports of clinical trials in English, Portuguese and/or Spanish. Thus, SciELO could play an important role as a source of evidence for dental healthcare interventions especially if it yields a sizeable number of high quality reports. Objective: The aim of this study was to identify reports of clinical trials by handsearching of dental journals that are accessible through SciELO, and to assess the overall quality of these reports. Material and methods: Electronic versions of six Brazilian dental Journals indexed in SciELO were handsearched at www.scielo.br in September 2008. Reports of clinical trials were identified and classified as controlled clinical trials (CCTs - prospective, experimental studies comparing 2 or more healthcare interventions in human beings) or randomized controlled trials (RCTs - a random allocation method is clearly reported), according to Cochrane eligibility criteria. Criteria to assess methodological quality included: method of randomization, concealment of treatment allocation, blinded outcome assessment, handling of withdrawals and losses and whether an intention-to-treat analysis had been carried out. Results: The search retrieved 33 CCTs and 43 RCTs. A majority of the reports provided no description of either the method of randomization (75.3%) or concealment of the allocation sequence (84.2%). Participants and outcome assessors were reported as blinded in only 31.2% of the reports. Withdrawals and losses were only clearly described in 6.5% of the reports and none mentioned an intention-to-treat analysis or any similar procedure. Conclusions: The results of this study indicate that a substantial number of reports of trials and systematic reviews are available in the dental journals listed in SciELO, and that these could provide valuable evidence for clinical decision making. However, it is clear that the quality of a number of these reports is of some concern and that improvement in the conduct and reporting of these trials could be achieved if authors adhered to internationally accepted guidelines, e. g. the CONSORT statement.

Single crowns versus conventional fillings for the restoration of root filled teeth

BackgroundEndodontic treatment, involves removal of the dental pulp and its replacement by a root canal filling. Restoration of root filled teeth can be challenging due to structural differences between vital and non-vital root filled teeth. Direct restoration involves placement of a restorative material e.g. amalgam or composite directly into the tooth. Indirect restorations consist of cast metal or ceramic (porcelain) crowns. The choice of restoration depends on the amount of remaining tooth which may influence long term survival and cost. The comparative in service clinical performance of crowns or conventional fillings used to restore root filled teeth is unclear.ObjectivesTo assess the effects of restoration of endodontically treated teeth (with or without post and core) by crowns versus conventional filling materials.Search methodsWe searched the following databases: the Cochrane Oral Health Group's Trials Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE via OVID, EMBASE via OVID, CINAHL via EBSCO, LILACS via BIREME and the reference lists of articles as well as ongoing trials registries. There were no restrictions regarding language or date of publication. Date of last search was 13 February 2012.Selection criteriaRandomised controlled trials (RCTs) or quasi-randomised controlled trials in participants with permanent teeth which have undergone endodontic treatment. Single full coverage crowns compared with any type of filling materials for direct restoration, as well as indirect partial restorations (e.g. inlays and onlays). Comparisons considered the type of post and core used (cast or prefabricated post), if any.Data collection and analysisTwo review authors independently assessed trial quality and extracted data.Main resultsOne trial judged to be at high risk of bias due to missing outcome data, was included. 117 participants with a root filled premolar tooth restored with a carbon fibre post, were randomised to either a full coverage metal-ceramic crown or direct adhesive composite restoration. At 3 years there was no reported difference between the non-catastrophic failure rates in both groups. Decementation of the post and marginal gap formation occurred in a small number of teeth.Authors' conclusionsThere is insufficient evidence to support or refute the effectiveness of conventional fillings over crowns for the restoration of root filled teeth. Until more evidence becomes available clinicians should continue to base decisions on how to restore root filled teeth on their own clinical experience, whilst taking into consideration the individual circumstances and preferences of their patients.

Minerals in the nutrition of extremely low birth weight infants

Objective: To review the literature on the role of calcium, phosphorus and trace elements in the nutrition of extremely low birth weight infants, considering their importance for metabolism, bone mineralization and as dietary components. Sources of data: MEDLINE, the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews and books on nutrition were searched between 1994 and 2004. Original research studies and reviews were selected. Summary of the findings: Extremely preterm infants are frequently growth-restricted at hospital discharge as a consequence of difficulties in the provision of adequate nutrition. The long-term effects of this growth restriction need to be determined. There is a paucity of studies about the role of minerals, especially micronutrients, in the nutrition of extremely preterm infants. The principal focus of this review was on calcium and phosphorus metabolism, bone mineralization and parenteral and enteral supplementation. A critical evaluation of post-discharge nutrition and its influence upon growth and bone mineralization was presented. Selenium and zinc requirements and the role of selenium as an antioxidant with possible effects on free radical diseases of the preterm infant were discussed. Conclusions: Extremely preterm infants have low mineral reserves and, as a consequence, may have deficiencies in the postnatal period if they do not receive parenteral or enteral supplementation. More studies are needed to elucidate the actual requirements and the appropriate supplementation of micronutrients. There are controversies about the outcome and the influence of post-discharge nutrition on bone disease of prematurity. Copyright © 2005 by Sociedade Brasileira de Pediatria.

Interventions to promote the wearing of hearing protection

Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior (CAPES)

Enzyme replacement therapy for Anderson-Fabry disease.

Anderson-Fabry disease is an X-linked defect of glycosphingolipid metabolism. Progressive renal insufficiency is a major source of morbidity, additional complications result from cardio- and cerebro-vascular involvement. Survival is reduced among affected males and symptomatic female carriers. To evaluate the effectiveness and safety of enzyme replacement therapy compared to other interventions, placebo or no interventions, for treating Anderson-Fabry disease. We searched 'Clinical Trials' on The Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, EMBASE, LILACS and the Cystic Fibrosis and Genetic Disorders Group's Inborn Errors of Metabolism Trials Register (date of the most recent search: 11 September 2012). The original search was performed in September 2008.Date of the most recent search of the Cystic Fibrosis and Genetic Disorders Group's Inborn Errors of Metabolism Trials Register: 11 September 2012. Randomized controlled trials of agalsidase alfa or beta in participants diagnosed with Anderson-Fabry disease. Two authors selected relevant trials, assessed methodological quality and extracted data. Six trials comparing either agalsidase alfa or beta in 223 participants fulfilled the selection criteria.Both trials comparing agalsidase alfa to placebo reported on globotriaosylceramide concentration in plasma and tissue; aggregate results were non-significant. One trial reported pain scores, there was a statistically significant improvement for participants receiving treatment at up to three months, mean difference -2.10 (95% confidence interval (CI) -3.79 to -0.41); at up to five months, mean difference -1.90 (95% CI -3.65 to -0.15); and at up to six months, mean difference -2.00 (95% CI -3.66 to -0.34). There was a significant difference in pain-related quality of life at over five months and up to six months, mean difference -2.10 (95% CI -3.92 to -0.28) but not at other time-points. Neither trial reported deaths.One of the three trials comparing agalsidase beta to placebo reported on globotriaosylceramide concentration in plasma and tissue and showed significant improvement: kidney, mean difference -1.70 (95% CI -2.09 to -1.31); heart, mean difference -0.90 (95% CI -1.18 to -0.62); and composite results (renal, cardiac, and cerebrovascular complications and death), mean difference -4.80 (95% CI -5.45 to -4.15). There was no significant difference between groups for death; no trials reported on pain.Only one trial compared agalsidase alfa to agalsidase beta. There was no significant difference between the groups for any adverse events, risk ratio 0.36 (95% CI 0.08 to 1.59), or any serious adverse events; risk ratio 0.30; 95% CI 0.03 to 2.57). Six small, poor quality randomised controlled trials provide no robust evidence for use of either agalsidase alfa and beta to treat Anderson-Fabry disease.

Incentive spirometry for prevention of postoperative pulmonary complications in upper abdominal surgery

BackgroundThis is an update of a Cochrane Review first published in The Cochrane Library 2008, Issue 3.Upper abdominal surgical procedures are associated with a high risk of postoperative pulmonary complications. The risk and severity of postoperative pulmonary complications can be reduced by the judicious use of therapeutic manoeuvres that increase lung volume. Our objective was to assess the effect of incentive spirometry compared to no therapy or physiotherapy, including coughing and deep breathing, on all-cause postoperative pulmonary complications andmortality in adult patients admitted to hospital for upper abdominal surgery.ObjectivesOur primary objective was to assess the effect of incentive spirometry (IS), compared to no such therapy or other therapy, on postoperative pulmonary complications and mortality in adults undergoing upper abdominal surgery.Our secondary objectives were to evaluate the effects of IS, compared to no therapy or other therapy, on other postoperative complications, adverse events, and spirometric parameters.Search methodsWe searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library 2013, Issue 8), MEDLINE, EMBASE, and LILACS (from inception to August 2013). There were no language restrictions. The date of the most recent search was 12 August 2013. The original search was performed in June 2006.Selection criteriaWe included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of IS in adult patients admitted for any type of upper abdominal surgery, including patients undergoing laparoscopic procedures.Data collection and analysisTwo authors independently assessed trial quality and extracted data.Main resultsWe included 12 studies with a total of 1834 participants in this updated review. The methodological quality of the included studies was difficult to assess as it was poorly reported, so the predominant classification of bias was 'unclear'; the studies did not report on compliance with the prescribed therapy. We were able to include data from only 1160 patients in the meta-analysis. Four trials (152 patients) compared the effects of IS with no respiratory treatment. We found no statistically significant difference between the participants receiving IS and those who had no respiratory treatment for clinical complications (relative risk (RR) 0.59, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.30 to 1.18). Two trials (194 patients) IS compared incentive spirometry with deep breathing exercises (DBE). We found no statistically significant differences between the participants receiving IS and those receiving DBE in the meta-analysis for respiratory failure (RR 0.67, 95% CI 0.04 to 10.50). Two trials (946 patients) compared IS with other chest physiotherapy. We found no statistically significant differences between the participants receiving IS compared to those receiving physiotherapy in the risk of developing a pulmonary condition or the type of complication. There was no evidence that IS is effective in the prevention of pulmonary complications.Authors' conclusionsThere is low quality evidence regarding the lack of effectiveness of incentive spirometry for prevention of postoperative pulmonary complications in patients after upper abdominal surgery. This review underlines the urgent need to conduct well-designed trials in this field. There is a case for large RCTs with high methodological rigour in order to define any benefit from the use of incentive spirometry regarding mortality.

Intravenous versus inhalation anaesthesia for one-lung ventilation

BackgroundThis is an update of a Cochrane Review first published in The Cochrane Library, Issue 2, 2008.The technique called one-lung ventilation can confine bleeding or infection to one lung, prevent rupture of a lung cyst or, more commonly, facilitate surgical exposure of the unventilated lung. During one-lung ventilation, anaesthesia is maintained either by delivering an inhalation anaesthetic to the ventilated lung or by infusing an intravenous anaesthetic. It is possible that the method chosen to maintain anaesthesia may affect patient outcomes. Inhalation anaesthetics may impair hypoxic pulmonary vasoconstriction (HPV) and increase intrapulmonary shunt and hypoxaemia.ObjectivesThe objective of this review was to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of intravenous versus inhalation anaesthesia for one-lung ventilation.Search methodsWe searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL); The Cochrane Library (2012, Issue 11); MEDLINE (1966 to November 2012); EMBASE (1980 to November 2012); Literatura Latino-Americana e do Caribe em Ciencias da Saude (LILACS, 1982 to November 2012) and ISI web of Science (1945 to November 2012), reference lists of identified trials and bibliographies of published reviews. We also contacted researchers in the field. No language restrictions were applied. The date of the most recent search was 19 November 2012. The original search was performed in June 2006.Selection criteriaWe included randomized controlled trials and quasi-randomized controlled trials of intravenous (e. g. propofol) versus inhalation (e. g. isoflurane, sevoflurane, desflurane) anaesthesia for one-lung ventilation in both surgical and intensive care participants. We excluded studies of participants who had only one lung (i.e. pneumonectomy or congenital absence of one lung).Data collection and analysisTwo review authors independently assessed trial quality and extracted data. We contacted study authors for additional information.Main resultsWe included in this updated review 20 studies that enrolled 850 participants, all of which assessed surgical participants no studies investigated one-lung ventilation performed outside the operating theatre. No evidence indicated that the drug used to maintain anaesthesia during one-lung ventilation affected participant outcomes. The methodological quality of the included studies was difficult to assess as it was reported poorly, so the predominant classification of bias was 'unclear'.Authors' conclusionsVery little evidence from randomized controlled trials suggests differences in participant outcomes with anaesthesia maintained by intravenous versus inhalational anaesthesia during one-lung ventilation. If researchers believe that the type of drug used to maintain anaesthesia during one-lung ventilation is important, they should design randomized controlled trials with appropriate participant outcomes, rather than report temporary fluctuations in physiological variables.

Anticoagulant treatment for subsegmental pulmonary embolism

BackgroundAcute pulmonary embolism (PE) is a common cause of death, accounting for 50,000 to 200,000 deaths annually. It is the third most common cause of mortality among the cardiovascular diseases, after coronary artery disease and stroke.The advent of multi-detector computed tomographic pulmonary angiography (CTPA) has allowed better assessment of PE regarding visualisation of the peripheral pulmonary arteries, increasing its rate of diagnosis. More cases of peripheral PEs, such as isolated subsegmental PE (SSPE) and incidental PE, have thereby been identified. These two conditions are usually found in patients with few or none of the classic PE symptoms such as haemoptysis or pleuritic pain, acute dyspnoea or circulatory collapse. However, in patients with reduced cardio-pulmonary (C/P) reserve the classic PE symptoms can be found with isolated SSPEs. Incidental SSPE is found casually in asymptomatic patients, usually by diagnostic imaging performed for other reasons (for example routine CT for cancer staging in oncologic patients).Traditionally, all PEs are anticoagulated in a similar manner independent of the location, number and size of the thrombi. It has been suggested that many patients with SSPE may be treated without benefit, increasing adverse events by possible unnecessary use of anticoagulants.Patients with isolated SSPE or incidental PE may have a more benign clinical presentation compared with those with proximal PEs. However, the clinical significance in patients and their prognosis have to be studied to evaluate whether anticoagulation therapy is required.ObjectivesTo assess the effectiveness and safety of anticoagulation therapy versus no intervention in patients with isolated subsegmental pulmonary embolism (SSPE) or incidental SSPE.Search methodsThe Cochrane Peripheral Vascular Diseases Group Trials Search Co-ordinator searched the Specialised Register (last searched October 2013) and CENTRAL (2013, Issue 9). MEDLINE, EMBASE, LILACS and clinical trials databases were also searched (October 2013).Selection criteriaRandomised controlled trials of anticoagulation therapy versus no intervention in patients with SSPE or incidental SSPE.Data collection and analysisTwo review authors inspected all citations to ensure reliable selection. We planned for two review authors to independently extract data and to assess the methodological quality of identified trials using the criteria recommended in the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions.Main resultsNo studies were identified that met the inclusion criteria.Authors' conclusionsThere is no randomised controlled trial evidence for the effectiveness and safety of anticoagulation therapy versus no intervention in patients with isolated subsegmental pulmonary embolism (SSPE) or incidental SSPE, and therefore we can not draw any conclusions. Well-conducted research is required before informed practice decisions can be made.

Early light reduction for preventing retinopathy of prematurity in very low birth weight infants

BackgroundRetinopathy of prematurity (ROP) is a complex condition of the developing retinal blood vessels and is one of the leading causes of preventable childhood blindness. Several risk factors for ROP have been studied over the past 50 years. Among them, general immaturity (low birth weight and low gestational age) and prolonged oxygen therapy have been consistently related to disease onset. However, it is understood that the progression of the disease is multifactorial and may be associated with others risk factors, such as multiple gestation, apnoea, intracranial haemorrhage, anaemia, sepsis, prolonged mechanical ventilation, multiple transfusions and light exposure. Furthermore, the precise role of these individual factors in the development of the disease has not yet been well established.ObjectivesTo determine whether the reduction of early environmental light exposure reduces the incidence of retinopathy of prematurity (ROP) or poor ROP outcomes among very low birth weight infants.Search methodsWe searched the following databases: the Cochrane Neonatal Group Specialised Register, CENTRAL (The Cochrane Library), MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, HealthSTAR, Science Citation Index Database, CANCERLIT, the Oxford Database of Perinatal Trials and www.clinicaltrials.gov. We also searched previous reviews including cross-references, abstracts, conference and symposia proceedings, and contacted expert informants. This search was updated in October 2012.Selection criteriaRandomised or quasi-randomised controlled trials that reduced light exposure to premature infants within the first seven days following birth were considered for this review. We also considered cluster-randomised controlled trials.Data collection and analysisData on clinical outcomes including any acute ROP and poor ROP outcome were extracted by both review authors independently and consensus reached. We conducted data analysis according to the standards of the Cochrane Neonatal Review Group.Main resultsData from four randomised trials with a total of 897 participants failed to show any reduction in acute ROP or poor ROP outcome with the reduction of ambient light to premature infants' retinas. The overall methodological quality of the included studies was about evenly split between those in which the classification was unclear and those in which the studies were categorised as low risk of bias. There was no report on the secondary outcomes considered in this review: quality of life measures; and time of exposure to oxygen.Authors' conclusionsThe evidence shows that bright light is not the cause of retinopathy of prematurity and that the reduction of exposure of the retinas of premature infants to light has no effect on the incidence of the disease.