Clinical Practice Guidelines for the Prevention and Management of Pressure Injury in Critically Ill Patients Undergoing Prone Position Ventilation: A Systematic Review.

IF 5.8 3区 医学 Q1 DERMATOLOGY
Ya-Bin Zhang, Chun-Yan Han, Dan Ma, Rui Li, Ai-Bing Si, Shui-Yu Wang
{"title":"Clinical Practice Guidelines for the Prevention and Management of Pressure Injury in Critically Ill Patients Undergoing Prone Position Ventilation: A Systematic Review.","authors":"Ya-Bin Zhang, Chun-Yan Han, Dan Ma, Rui Li, Ai-Bing Si, Shui-Yu Wang","doi":"10.1089/wound.2024.0239","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b>Significance:</b> This systematic review was conducted to assess the quality of clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) on prevention and management of pressure injury (PI) in patients undergoing prone position ventilation (PPV) and summarize the recommendations based on the analyses of the CPGs. <b>Recent Advances:</b> We searched the PubMed, Cochrane library, Embase databases, guideline websites, professional association, quality standards, and Wound-Related Research Journals from January 1, 2010 to August 31, 2024. Included guidelines were those with recommendations for prevention and management of PI in patients undergoing PPV published in English. Four researchers independently assessed the eligible studies and extracted the data. Appraisal of Guidelines Research & Evaluation (AGREE II) instrument and the Reporting Items for Practice Guidelines in Healthcare checklist were used to assess the quality of the CPGs. <b>Critical Issues:</b> A total of 13 CPGs were included in this review. AGREE II demonstrated that the highest mean score was based on the scope and purpose and was 73.65 ± 10.91, whereas the lowest mean score was based on the editorial independence and was 49.79 ± 19.49. The scores of inter-rater agreements for AGREE-II quality appraisal ranged from 0.86 to 0.96. Recommendations for prevention and management of PI in patients undergoing PPV were inconsistent. <b>Future Directions:</b> The included CPGs were limited due to methodological issues and exhibited discrepancies in the coverage of important topics. Therefore, existing evidence should be used to propose identifiable recommendations and strengthen the rigor and standardization of guideline development in future research.</p>","PeriodicalId":7413,"journal":{"name":"Advances in wound care","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":5.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Advances in wound care","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1089/wound.2024.0239","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"DERMATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Significance: This systematic review was conducted to assess the quality of clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) on prevention and management of pressure injury (PI) in patients undergoing prone position ventilation (PPV) and summarize the recommendations based on the analyses of the CPGs. Recent Advances: We searched the PubMed, Cochrane library, Embase databases, guideline websites, professional association, quality standards, and Wound-Related Research Journals from January 1, 2010 to August 31, 2024. Included guidelines were those with recommendations for prevention and management of PI in patients undergoing PPV published in English. Four researchers independently assessed the eligible studies and extracted the data. Appraisal of Guidelines Research & Evaluation (AGREE II) instrument and the Reporting Items for Practice Guidelines in Healthcare checklist were used to assess the quality of the CPGs. Critical Issues: A total of 13 CPGs were included in this review. AGREE II demonstrated that the highest mean score was based on the scope and purpose and was 73.65 ± 10.91, whereas the lowest mean score was based on the editorial independence and was 49.79 ± 19.49. The scores of inter-rater agreements for AGREE-II quality appraisal ranged from 0.86 to 0.96. Recommendations for prevention and management of PI in patients undergoing PPV were inconsistent. Future Directions: The included CPGs were limited due to methodological issues and exhibited discrepancies in the coverage of important topics. Therefore, existing evidence should be used to propose identifiable recommendations and strengthen the rigor and standardization of guideline development in future research.

危重病人俯卧位通气压力损伤预防与处理临床实践指南:系统综述。
意义:本研究旨在评估俯卧位通气(PPV)患者压力损伤(PI)预防和管理临床实践指南(CPGs)的质量,并在CPGs分析的基础上总结建议。最新进展:我们检索了PubMed、Cochrane图书馆、Embase数据库、指南网站、专业协会、质量标准和伤口相关研究期刊,检索时间为2010年1月1日至2024年8月31日。其中包括以英文出版的关于PPV患者预防和管理PI的指南。四名研究人员独立评估了符合条件的研究并提取了数据。指南评估研究与评估(AGREE II)工具和医疗保健实践指南清单报告项目用于评估cpg的质量。关键问题:本综述共纳入13例cpg。AGREE II显示,基于范围和目的的平均得分最高,为73.65±10.91,而基于编辑独立性的平均得分最低,为49.79±19.49。协议- ii质量评价的评分范围为0.86 - 0.96。对于PPV患者预防和处理PI的建议并不一致。未来方向:由于方法学问题,纳入的cpg有限,并且在重要主题的覆盖范围中表现出差异。因此,在未来的研究中,应利用现有证据提出可识别的建议,并加强指南制定的严谨性和规范性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Advances in wound care
Advances in wound care Medicine-Emergency Medicine
CiteScore
12.10
自引率
4.10%
发文量
62
期刊介绍: Advances in Wound Care rapidly shares research from bench to bedside, with wound care applications for burns, major trauma, blast injuries, surgery, and diabetic ulcers. The Journal provides a critical, peer-reviewed forum for the field of tissue injury and repair, with an emphasis on acute and chronic wounds. Advances in Wound Care explores novel research approaches and practices to deliver the latest scientific discoveries and developments. Advances in Wound Care coverage includes: Skin bioengineering, Skin and tissue regeneration, Acute, chronic, and complex wounds, Dressings, Anti-scar strategies, Inflammation, Burns and healing, Biofilm, Oxygen and angiogenesis, Critical limb ischemia, Military wound care, New devices and technologies.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信