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.
We searched randomized controlled trials, meta-analysis and systematic reviews from OVID-EBM Reviews which included ACP Journal Club, The Cochrane Library, and MEDLINE（1991 to 2005 ） to evaluate clinical effectiveness of pit and fissure sealants for caries. The resultsshowed that pit and fissure sealants were recommended to prevent caries of the occlusal surface. The effectiveness varied between the two types of sealants, in general, flowable resin composite had a more satisfactory retention than glass ionomer composite. Acid etch was helpful for less microleakage and more satisfactory retention. Mechanical air-abrasion with acid etch may have the best border seal, However, we were not sure of the effectiveness of Er：YAG laser, technique of dental drill preparation and splicing. More high quality clinical trials on pit and fissure sealants are still needed.
理论上,临床实践与临床对照试验的方法相互不断影响.恰当的试验设计应该能反映医生和病人的想法,反之,熟悉临床试验可以改进日常临床实践的方法.换句话说,每一种方法学的原则都源于临床实践.例如:随机化(带有建设性地怀疑是否形成真正的对照),独立性(对药品公司善意的不信任),知情同意(与患者共同分担不确定性),Ⅰ型错误(对单个试验不要错误地乐观),Ⅱ型错误(对单个试验不要错误地悲观),选择正确的判效指标(相关性比精确性重要),意向性治疗原则(重实效的分析)以及亚组分析的危险["我的前一个患者综合征"(the my-last-patient syndrome)].
Gordon Henry Guyatt(1953-)is a professor of Department of Clinical Epidemiology amp; Biostatistics and Department of Medicine in McMaster University. He has engaged in evidence-based clinical research and practice for about 20 years. In 1992, he first proposed the term “evidence-based medicine” in one of his articles published in JAMA. He is dedicated to bringing the wonderful idea of evidence-based medicine to bedside and systematically training clinicians from all over the world to acquire the basic skills for evidence-based clinical practice. His great contribution to evidence-based medicine is introduced in this article through demonstrating the development of evidence-based clinical practice.
Objective By means of evidence-based clinical practice, to find more effective treatment for a hepatitis B related nephritis patient with renal failure. Methods The following databases as Up to Date (May 2011), The Cochrane Library (Issue 5, 2011), PubMed (1978 to 2011) and CNKI (1978 to 2011) were searched to identify systematic reviews and randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of treating hepatitis B related nephritis with glucocorticoid, immunosuppressor or antiviral therapies, and the quality of collected clinical evidence was evaluated by using GRADEpro software. Results The glucocorticoid or combined immunosuppressors was not recommended for existing adverse effects and not acting on the remission of hepatitis B related nephritis and reduction of proteinuria. However, the antiviral therapy used alone was recommended for acting on the remission of hepatitis B related nephritis and the reduction of proteinuria. In view of adverse effects and expensive price of interferon, the nucleoside analogue antiviral agent was suggested. Considering the renal toxicity of adefovir and tenofovir, and possible drug-resistance of lamivudine, the entecavir (0.5 mg qd) was finally selected with patient’s agreement, and the supporting therapies such as lowering blood pressure, and protecting the kidney and liver were adopted continually. After one month treatment, 24-hour urinary protein got reduced, serum albumin got increased, kidney function got stable, and hepatitis B virus DNA quantity got reduced. Conclusion For treating hepatitis B related nephritis with kidney failure, entacavir can reduce 24-hour urinary protein, raise serum albumin, stabilize kidney function and reduce hepatitis B virus DNA in a short term, but its long-term efficacy still requires further studies.
As evidence-based practice (EBP) continues to be valued, the guideline implementation has become an important field for research and practice in health care. In order to better guide the guideline implementation in the field of health care, this paper combines the EBP experience gained from several EBP programs carried out in our hospital those years, in aim of exploring and sharing the methodology of guideline implementation in domestic clinical settings.
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.
Objective Through studying a diabetic patient accompanied with pancreatic cancer by means of evidence-based clinical practice, to find out the relationship between diabetes mellitus and cancer and whether the long-acting insulin glargine increases the risk of cancer or not, which is regarded as a disputable hot issue at present. Methods Such databases as The Cochrane Library (Issue 3, 2010), OVID-EBM Reviews (1991 to Sept. 2010), MEDLINE (1950 to Sept. 2010) and CNKI (2000 to Sept. 2010) were retrieved to collect high quality clinical evidence, and the best therapy was formulated in accordance with the willingness of patients themselves. Results Eight randomized controlled trials (RCTs), four meta-analyses and one RCT meta-analysis were included. The evidence indicated that: a) Diabetes mellitus was kind of related to the occurrence of malignancies; b) There was no evidence at present showing the relationship between long-acting insulin glargine and cancer; c) Strictly controlling of blood sugar did not increase the risk of tumorigenesis, but hyperglycemia causing cancer was proofless; and d) Whether the diabetic patient with cancer should stop taking long-acting insulin glargine or not should require suggestions from specialists rather than patients themselves. Conclusion No evidence at present shows that tumorigenesis is related to diabetes mellitus, long-acting insulin glargine and strict controlling of blood sugar. It is necessary to require more evidence to decide whether the therapy should be adjusted or not for the diabetic patient with cancer who is in the process of glargine therapy.