Efficacy of searching in biomedical databases beyond MEDLINE in identifying randomised controlled trials on hyperbaric oxygen treatment

Introduction

Literature searches are routinely used by researchers for conducting systematic reviews as well as by healthcare providers, and sometimes patients, to quickly guide their clinical decisions. Using more than one database is generally recommended but may not always be necessary for some fields. This study aimed to determine the added value of searching additional databases beyond MEDLINE when conducting a literature search of hyperbaric oxygen treatment (HBOT) randomised controlled trials (RCTs).

Methods

This study consisted of two phases: a scoping review of all RCTs in the field of HBOT, followed by a a statistical analysis of sensitivity, precision, 'number needed to read' (NNR) and 'number unique' included by individual biomedical databases. MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Control Trials (CENTRAL), and Cumulated Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL) were searched without date or language restrictions up to December 31, 2022. Screening and data extraction were conducted in duplicate by pairs of independent reviewers. RCTs were included if they involved human subjects and HBOT was offered either on its own or in combination with other treatments.

Results

Out of 5,840 different citations identified, 367 were included for analysis. CENTRAL was the most sensitive (87.2%) and had the most unique references (7.1%). MEDLINE had the highest precision (23.8%) and optimal NNR (four). Among included references, 14.2% were unique to a single database.

Conclusions

Systematic reviews of RCTs in HBOT should always utilise multiple databases, which at minimum include MEDLINE, Embase, CENTRAL and CINAHL.

Rethinking cervical spine clearance in obtunded trauma patients: An updated systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Cervical spine injuries (CSI) are often challenging to diagnose in obtunded adult patients with blunt trauma and the optimal imaging modality remains uncertain. This study systematically synthesized the last decade of evidence to determine the type of imaging required to clear the c-spine in obtunded patients with blunt trauma.

METHODS

A systematic review with meta-analysis was conducted and reported using PRISMA 2020 guidelines. The protocol was registered on June 22, 2022 (PROSPERO CRD42022341386). MEDLINE (Ovid), EMBASE, and Cochrane Library were searched for studies published between January 1, 2012, and October 17, 2023. Studies comparing CT alone to CT combined with MRI for c-spine clearance were included. Two independent reviewers screened articles for eligibility in duplicate. Meta-analysis was conducted using a random-effect model. Risk of bias and quality assessment were performed using the ROBINS-I and QUADAS-2. The certainty of evidence was assessed using the GRADE methodology.

RESULTS

744 obtunded trauma patients from six included studies were included. Among the 584 that had a negative CT scan, the pooled missed rate of clinically significant CSI using CT scans alone was 6 % (95 % CI: 0.02 to 0.17), and the pooled missed rate of CSI requiring treatment was 7 % (95 % CI: 0.02 to 0.18). High heterogeneity was observed among included studies (I² > 84 %). The overall risk of bias was moderate, and the quality of evidence was low due to the retrospective nature of the included studies and high heterogeneity.

CONCLUSIONS

Limited evidence published in the last decade found that CT scans alone may not be sufficient for detecting clinically significant CSI and injuries requiring treatment in obtunded adult patients with blunt trauma.

IMPLICATIONS OF KEY FINDINGS

Clinicians should be aware of the limitations of CT scans and consider using MRI when appropriate. Future research should focus on prospective studies with standardized outcome measures and uniform reporting.

A comparative analysis of current out-of-hospital transfusion protocols to expert recommendations

Aim

This study aimed to compare current out-of-hospital transfusion (OHT) protocols in Canadian civilian critical care transport organizations (CCTO) to expert recommendations and explore the variability and potential benefits of standardizing OHT practices across Canada.

Methods

A comprehensive cross-sectional study was conducted, encompassing all seven Canadian CCTOs that provide OHT. The study assessed adherence to expert recommendations and examined specific aspects of the transfusion process, such as indications for transfusion and cessation criteria.

Results

The study found an 89% adherence to expert recommendations for OHT among Canadian CCTOs. It highlighted a strong alignment between current practices and recommendations, possibly attributed to collaborative frameworks like the CAN-PATT network. However, notable variability and ambiguity were observed in transfusion indications and cessation criteria. The study also emphasized the potential benefits of standardizing OHT practices, such as improved policy formulation, better interpretation of emerging literature, and evaluation of OHT efficacy.

Conclusion

This cross-sectional study assessed how Canadian CCTOs implement OHT practices compared to expert-recommended practices. The findings underscore the importance of structured protocols in trauma management. Given the consistency in OHT protocol adoption and the comprehensive approach across CCTOs, there's a solid foundation for managing trauma patients in prehospital and transport settings across Canada. As OHT practices continue to evolve, sustained efforts are vital to refine, adapt, and elevate patient care standards in trauma management.

Overcoming distance: an exploration of current practices of government and charity-funded critical care transport and retrieval organizations

BACKGROUND

For critically ill and injured patients, timely access to definitive care is associated with a reduction in avoidable mortality. Access to definitive care is significantly affected by geographic remoteness. To overcome this disparity, a robust critical care transport (CCT) or retrieval system is essential to support the equity of care and overcome the tyranny of distance. While critical care transport or retrieval systems have evolved over the years, there is no universally accepted system or standard, which has led to considerable variation in practices. The objective of this mixed-methods study was to identify and explore the current clinical, operational, and educational practices of government and charity-funded critical care transport and retrieval organizations operating across access- and weather- challenged geography.

METHODS

This study utilized a mixed-methods approach comprising a rapid review of the literature and semi-structured interviews with identified subject matter experts (SME).

RESULTS

A total of 44 articles and 14 interviews with SMEs from six different countries, 12 different services/systems, and seven operational roles, including clinicians (physician, paramedic, and nurse), educator, quality improvement, clinical governance, clinical informatics and research, operations manager, and medical director were included in the narrative analysis. The study identified several themes including deployment, crew composition, selection and education, clinical governance, quality assurance and quality improvement and research.

CONCLUSION

This mixed-methods study underscores the paucity of literature describing current clinical, operational, and educational practices of government or charity-funded CCT or retrieval programs operating across access- and weather- challenged geography. While many common themes were identified including clearly defined mission profiles, use of dedicated or specialized transport teams, central coordination, rigorous selection processes, service-sponsored graduate education, and strong clinical governance, there is little consensus and considerable variation in current practices. Further research is needed to identify and harmonize best practices within the CCT and retrieval environments.

Communicating effectively with patients about vaccination: A systematic review of randomized controlled trials

Background

Good communication between healthcare professionals and their patients is essential to enlighten the benefits and risks of vaccination. Despite the availability of effective vaccines, reluctance prevails, sometimes fuelled by sub-optimal communication leading to a lack of trust. An evaluation of the effectiveness of a communication strategy for which healthcare professionals are trained has yet to be carried out.

Objective

Systematic review of studies with a randomized controlled trial (RCT) to define and evaluate the impact of healthcare professionals' communication on patients' vaccine adherence.

Methods

We performed a structured search on Medline, Embase, CENTRAL, PsycINFO and CINAHL. The studies selected include those involving healthcare professionals authorized to administer vaccines according to Canadian guidelines. Primary outcomes include vaccination rate or vaccine hesitancy rate.

Results

Nine articles were included. Five studies (n=5) reported intervention effectiveness according to vaccine adherence. The results are largely represented by parental vaccine hesitancy for human papillomavirus (HPV) or childhood vaccination, while three studies (n=3) target the general population. The risk of bias relative to the studies is either low (n=7) or of some concern (n=2).

Conclusion

The effectiveness of communication varies according to the studies and knowledge acquired through training. Future studies will need to examine communication with healthcare professionals in order to establish a consensus on optimal and appropriate training.

The timing of booster sessions may not improve resuscitation skill retention among healthcare providers: a randomized controlled trial

Introduction

Booster sessions can improve cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) skill retention among healthcare providers; however, the optimal timing of these sessions is unknown. This study aimed to explore differences in skill retention based on booster session timing.

Methods

After ethics approval, healthcare providers who completed an initial CPR training course were randomly assigned to either an early booster, late booster, or no booster group. Participants' mean resuscitation scores, time to initiate compressions, and time to successfully provide defibrillation were assessed immediately post-course and four months later using linear mixed models.

Results

Seventy-three healthcare professionals were included in the analysis. There were no significant differences by randomization in the immediate post-test (9.7, 9.2, 8.9) or retention test (10.2, 9.8, and 9.5) resuscitation scores. No significant effects were observed for time to compression. Post-test time to defibrillation (mean ± SE: 112.8 ± 3.0 sec) was significantly faster compared to retention (mean ± SE: 120.4 ± 2.7 sec) (p = 0.04); however, the effect did not vary by randomization.

Conclusion

No difference was observed in resuscitation skill retention between the early, late, and no booster groups. More research is needed to determine the aspects of a booster session beyond timing that contribute to skill retention.

Impact of coaching on physician wellness: A systematic review

Physician wellness is critical for patient safety and quality of care. Coaching has been successfully and widely applied across many industries to enhance well-being but has only recently been considered for physicians. This review aimed to summarize the existing evidence on the effect of coaching by trained coaches on physician well-being, distress and burnout. MEDLINE, Embase, ERIC, PsycINFO and Web of Science were searched without language restrictions to December 21, 2022. Studies of any design were included if they involved physicians of any specialty undergoing coaching by trained coaches and assessed at least one measure along the wellness continuum. Pairs of independent reviewers determined reference eligibility. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tools for Randomized Controlled Trials (RCTs) and for Non-randomized Studies of Interventions (ROBINS-I). Meta-analysis was not possible due to heterogeneity in study design and outcome measures as well as inconsistent reporting. The search retrieved 2531 references, of which 14 were included (5 RCTs, 2 non-randomized controlled studies, 4 before-and-after studies, 2 mixed-methods studies, 1 qualitative study). There were 1099 participants across all included studies. Risk of bias was moderate or serious for non-RCTs, while the 5 RCTs were of lower risk. All quantitative studies reported effectiveness of coaching for at least one outcome assessed. The included qualitative study reported a perceived positive impact of coaching by participants. Evidence from available RCTs suggests coaching for physicians can improve well-being and reduce distress/burnout. Non-randomized interventional studies have similar findings but face many limitations. Consistent reporting and standardized outcome measures are needed.

Mapping multicenter randomized controlled trials in anesthesiology: a scoping review

BACKGROUND

Evidence suggests that there are substantial inconsistencies in the practice of anesthesia. There has not yet been a comprehensive summary of the anesthesia literature that can guide future knowledge translation interventions to move evidence into practice. As the first step toward identifying the most promising interventions for systematic implementation in anesthesia practice, this scoping review of multicentre RCTs aimed to explore and map the existing literature investigating perioperative anesthesia-related interventions and clinical patient outcomes.

METHODS

Multicenter randomized controlled trials were eligible for inclusion if they involved a tested anesthesia-related intervention administered to adult surgical patients (≥ 16 years old), with a control group receiving either another anesthesia intervention or no intervention at all. The electronic databases Embase (via OVID), MEDLINE, and MEDLINE in Process (via OVID), and Cochrane Central Register of Control Trials (CENTRAL) were searched from inception to February 26, 2021. Studies were screened and data were extracted by pairs of independent reviewers in duplicate with disagreements resolved through consensus or a third reviewer. Data were summarized narratively.

RESULTS

We included 638 multicentre randomized controlled trials (n patients = 615,907) that met the eligibility criteria. The most commonly identified anesthesia-related intervention theme across all studies was pharmacotherapy (n studies = 361 [56.6%]; n patients = 244,610 [39.7%]), followed by anesthetic technique (n studies = 80 [12.5%], n patients = 48,455 [7.9%]). Interventions were most often implemented intraoperatively (n studies = 233 [36.5%]; n patients = 175,974 [28.6%]). Studies typically involved multiple types of surgeries (n studies = 187 [29.2%]; n patients = 206 667 [33.5%]), followed by general surgery only (n studies = 115 [18.1%]; n patients = 201,028 [32.6%]) and orthopedic surgery only (n studies = 94 [14.7%]; n patients = 34,575 [5.6%]). Functional status was the most commonly investigated outcome (n studies = 272), followed by patient experience (n studies = 168), and mortality (n studies = 153).

CONCLUSIONS

This scoping review provides a map of multicenter RCTs in anesthesia which can be used to optimize future research endeavors in the field. Specifically, we have identified key knowledge gaps in anesthesia that require further systematic assessment, as well as areas where additional research would likely not add value. These findings provide the foundation for streamlining knowledge translation in anesthesia in order to reduce practice variation and enhance patient outcomes.