ObjectiveTo provide the best evidence for an old diabetic patient who combined with frailty syndrome with the goal of glycemic control, treatment strategy and their prognosis. MethodsPubMed, MEDLINE (Ovid), EMbase, The Cochrane Library (Issue 11, 2015) and CNKI were searched from their inception to Nov. 2015, to collect evidence about the management of glycemic control. Evidences were analyzed by the way of evidenced-based criterions. ResultsOne clinical guideline, one meta-analysis, three RCTs, seven cohort studies and four case-control studies were included. Evidence showed that compared with patient uncombined with frailty, old diabetic patients with frailty had a higher prevalence of dementia, cardiovascular diseases and death; Aggressive glycemic control could not reduce the prevalence of cardiovascular events and the risk of death, while it could increase the risk of falling. Glycemic control was more comprehensive which would be taken frailty into consideration. Diet rich in protein (especially leucine), resistance exercise and reasonable medications based on comprehensive geriatric assessment were proved benefit for the old diabetic patient. ConclusionThe incidence of cardiovascular events, hypoglycemia and mortality are increased in this old diabetic patient who combined with frailty. Maintaining HbA1c around 7.5% is reasonable and diet with enough calorie and rich in protein (especially leucine), resistance exercises should be recommended for the person.
The number of clinical guidelines developed and published in different countries is increasing worldwide. Too many guidelines do not remain in regular use, even though the aim is to implement them in clinical practice. The scientific validity and reliability of the guidelines need to be reviewed. Here is a case presented to show how to optimally use the evidence-based guideline to improve clinical decision making.
Objective To evaluate the rationality of drug treatment for cardiovascular diseases in aged people and the effects of evidence-based practice. Methods Descriptive study was conducted to compare the therapies for the patients suffering from cardiovascular diseases before and after evidence-based practice by investigating drug use during 1998-1999 (211 cases) and 2002-2003 (211 cases). Results Among antihypertensive drugs, the ACEIs and diuretics played a more important role than before. CCBs and ACEIs were still the most frequently used drugs, and drug combination was more common, comparing to that before evidence-based practice. Lipid lowering drugs and ACEIs were used more common in coronary heart disease. Quality of life of patients was more emphasized and combination use of anti-anxiety drugs was adopted. When treating heart failure, β-receptor blockers, aldadinc and ACEIs were more frequently used. Conclusions After evidence-based practice, drug use is much more based on evidence instead of experience and textbook. As a result, the rate of reaching ideal blood pressure is higher than before. The rate of rational drug use before and after evidence-based practice has increased from 42% to 78%, respectively.
ObjectiveIn order to summarize the best evidence, evaluate the efficacy and safety of interventions for the treatment of COVID-19, and provide practical guidance for medical workers, public health workers, and COVID-19 patients, we formulated the evidence-based practice points. MethodsWe followed the "Evidence-based practice points: methods and processes of development", with comprehensively considering the pros and cons of evidence, quality of evidence, public and patient preferences and values, cost of interventions, acceptability, and feasibility based on systematic reviews. Practice points Finally, 12 practice points were formed for non-severe, severe and critical COVID-19 patients. Non-severe: ① Consider Hanshiyi formula or Gegenqinlian pills for patients with nausea, vomiting and diarrhea; ② Consider Huashibaidu granules (decoration), Jinyinhua oral liquid, Jinhuaqinggan granules, Xuanfeibaidu granules (decoration), Lianhuaqingwen capsules (granules), or Reyanning mixture for patients with sore throat, fever, muscle aches or cough; ③ Consider Qingfeipaidu granules (decoration) for patients with nasal congestion, runny nose, cough, low-grade fever, aversion to wind and cold, and fatigue; ④ Consider Toujiequwen granules for patients with fever, chills, itchy throat, cough, dry mouth and throat, and constipation; ⑤ Consider Reduning injection or Xiyanping injection for patients with high fever, mild aversion to wind and cold, headache and body pain, cough, and yellow phlegm; ⑥ Consider molnupiravir, nirmatrelvir–ritonavir (Paxlovid), remdesivir or VV116 for patients within 5 to 7 days of the onset of symptoms and at high risk for progressing to severe disease. Severe: ① Consider Shenhuang granules or Xuebijing injection for patients with high fever, irritability, and thirst; ② Consider remdesivir used as soon as possible for patients with severe symptoms. Critical severe: Consider corticosteroids, IL-6 receptor inhibitors, and baricitinib for patients 7 days after the onset of symptoms.
Objective To evaluate the published case-reports of evidence-based practice(EBP) over three years,and to improve the quality of the papers and provide a recommended writing model. Methods Collecting the published 20 case-report of EBP and assessing their writing quality in 5 aspects according to the steps of EBP. Results Many Abstracts did not reflect entire context, and convey the overall information to readers, a formative structured Abstract should be taken. Most case-reports only involved with therapy,few diagnostic,harm and prognostic case-reports were republished,few EBP of surgery and other specialties, such as ENT,ophthalmology were mentioned.Searching strategies were not sufficiently described.Most authors only search The Cochrane Library and PubMed,while predigested sources were seldom used.Critical appraisal of evidence was difficult to each author,most papers were lack of appraisal or simply evaluated the validity of used evidence,and applicability of evidence was not clearly explained.All the papers did not conduct post evaluation.Conclusions Much needs to be done in improving the quality of published case-reporters of EBP,a standardized writing model should be recommended.
With vigorous development of the Evidence-Based Practice (EBP), systematic review as a reliable basis for decision making is becoming more and more important, especially in emergent and significant situation under the influence of various interferences. But there are many misunderstandings and fallacies in systematic review beyond medical field, which block the spread and application of systematic review in health system decisions. This paper takes the evidences of health intervention practice as examples, explores the functions of systematic review in health system decisions, tries to clarify these misunderstandings and fallacies, and so as to promote the development of systematic review.
Stroke is the leading cause of mortality and disability in China. Chinese medicine integrated with conventional medicine is current widely used in the prevention and treatment of stroke. A clinical practice guideline for application of integrative medicine in stroke was urgently required. This guideline was developed according to the World Health Organisation Handbook for Guideline Development and the Guideline Development Handbook for Diagnosis and Therapy of Integrative Medicine. The systematic reviews were conducted following the Cochrane handbook. The quality of evidence and strength of recommendations were evaluated using the GRADE approach. The reporting of guideline followed the RIGHT statement. A multi-disciplinary working team was established. Eleven research questions from 15 clinical questions were identified by questionnaire surveys, face-to-face meetings, and analysis by the working team. Fourteen recommendations regarding integrative medicine for ischaemic stroke, haemorrhagic stroke, and complications of stroke were formulated from systematic reviews of the benefits, harms, cost-effectiveness, quality of evidence, the values and preferences of patients and their family members, feedback on proposed recommendations from medical practitioners from a variety of disciplines, and a face-to-face consensus meeting. This guideline focuses on clinical treatments that are specific to integrative medicine for stroke and can be used by medical practitioners at all levels in medical institutions and rehabilitation facilities.