Edith B Waugh, Matthew J L Hare, David A Story, Lorena Romero, Mark Mayo, Heidi Smith-Vaughan, Jennifer R Reilly
{"title":"澳大利亚原住民与非原住民围手术期死亡率结果的差异:系统综述和计划荟萃分析协议。","authors":"Edith B Waugh, Matthew J L Hare, David A Story, Lorena Romero, Mark Mayo, Heidi Smith-Vaughan, Jennifer R Reilly","doi":"10.1186/s13643-024-02611-3","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Health inequities persist among First Nations people living in developed countries. Surgical care is pivotal in addressing a significant portion of the global disease burden. Evidence regarding surgical outcomes among First Nations people in Australia is limited. The perioperative mortality rate (POMR) indicates timely access to safe surgery and predicts long-term survival after major surgery. This systematic review will examine POMR among First Nations and non-First Nations peoples in Australia.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A systematic search strategy using MEDLINE, Embase, Emcare, Global Health, and Scopus will identify studies that include First Nations people and non-First Nations people who underwent a surgical intervention under anaesthesia in Australia. The primary focus will be on documenting perioperative mortality outcomes. Title and abstract screening and full-text review will be conducted by independent reviewers, followed by data extraction and bias assessment using the ROBINS-E tool. Meta-analysis will be considered if there is sufficient homogeneity between studies. The quality of cumulative evidence will be evaluated following the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) criteria.</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>This protocol describes the comprehensive methodology for the proposed systematic review. Evaluating disparities in perioperative mortality rates between First Nations and non-First Nations people remains essential in shaping the discourse surrounding health equity, particularly in addressing the surgical burden of disease.</p><p><strong>Systematic review registration: </strong>PROSPERO CRD42021258970.</p>","PeriodicalId":22162,"journal":{"name":"Systematic Reviews","volume":"13 1","pages":"208"},"PeriodicalIF":6.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11299354/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Disparities in perioperative mortality outcomes between First Nations and non-First Nations peoples in Australia: protocol for a systematic review and planned meta-analysis.\",\"authors\":\"Edith B Waugh, Matthew J L Hare, David A Story, Lorena Romero, Mark Mayo, Heidi Smith-Vaughan, Jennifer R Reilly\",\"doi\":\"10.1186/s13643-024-02611-3\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Health inequities persist among First Nations people living in developed countries. Surgical care is pivotal in addressing a significant portion of the global disease burden. Evidence regarding surgical outcomes among First Nations people in Australia is limited. The perioperative mortality rate (POMR) indicates timely access to safe surgery and predicts long-term survival after major surgery. This systematic review will examine POMR among First Nations and non-First Nations peoples in Australia.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A systematic search strategy using MEDLINE, Embase, Emcare, Global Health, and Scopus will identify studies that include First Nations people and non-First Nations people who underwent a surgical intervention under anaesthesia in Australia. The primary focus will be on documenting perioperative mortality outcomes. Title and abstract screening and full-text review will be conducted by independent reviewers, followed by data extraction and bias assessment using the ROBINS-E tool. Meta-analysis will be considered if there is sufficient homogeneity between studies. The quality of cumulative evidence will be evaluated following the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) criteria.</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>This protocol describes the comprehensive methodology for the proposed systematic review. Evaluating disparities in perioperative mortality rates between First Nations and non-First Nations people remains essential in shaping the discourse surrounding health equity, particularly in addressing the surgical burden of disease.</p><p><strong>Systematic review registration: </strong>PROSPERO CRD42021258970.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":22162,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Systematic Reviews\",\"volume\":\"13 1\",\"pages\":\"208\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":6.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-08-05\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11299354/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Systematic Reviews\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1186/s13643-024-02611-3\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Systematic Reviews","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s13643-024-02611-3","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
背景:生活在发达国家的原住民在健康方面仍然存在不平等。外科治疗在解决全球疾病负担的很大一部分方面起着关键作用。有关澳大利亚原住民手术效果的证据十分有限。围手术期死亡率(POMR)表明能否及时获得安全的手术治疗,并预示着重大手术后的长期存活率。本系统性综述将研究澳大利亚原住民和非原住民的围手术期死亡率:方法:采用MEDLINE、Embase、Emcare、Global Health和Scopus等系统性检索策略,找出包括在澳大利亚接受麻醉手术治疗的原住民和非原住民的研究。主要重点是记录围手术期的死亡率结果。标题和摘要筛选以及全文审阅将由独立审稿人进行,然后使用 ROBINS-E 工具进行数据提取和偏倚评估。如果研究之间有足够的同质性,将考虑进行 Meta 分析。累积证据的质量将按照建议、评估、发展和评价分级(GRADE)标准进行评估:本方案介绍了拟议系统综述的综合方法。评估原住民与非原住民围手术期死亡率的差异对于形成有关健康公平的讨论,尤其是在解决疾病的手术负担方面仍然至关重要:系统综述注册:PREMCORD42021258970。
Disparities in perioperative mortality outcomes between First Nations and non-First Nations peoples in Australia: protocol for a systematic review and planned meta-analysis.
Background: Health inequities persist among First Nations people living in developed countries. Surgical care is pivotal in addressing a significant portion of the global disease burden. Evidence regarding surgical outcomes among First Nations people in Australia is limited. The perioperative mortality rate (POMR) indicates timely access to safe surgery and predicts long-term survival after major surgery. This systematic review will examine POMR among First Nations and non-First Nations peoples in Australia.
Methods: A systematic search strategy using MEDLINE, Embase, Emcare, Global Health, and Scopus will identify studies that include First Nations people and non-First Nations people who underwent a surgical intervention under anaesthesia in Australia. The primary focus will be on documenting perioperative mortality outcomes. Title and abstract screening and full-text review will be conducted by independent reviewers, followed by data extraction and bias assessment using the ROBINS-E tool. Meta-analysis will be considered if there is sufficient homogeneity between studies. The quality of cumulative evidence will be evaluated following the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) criteria.
Discussion: This protocol describes the comprehensive methodology for the proposed systematic review. Evaluating disparities in perioperative mortality rates between First Nations and non-First Nations people remains essential in shaping the discourse surrounding health equity, particularly in addressing the surgical burden of disease.
期刊介绍:
Systematic Reviews encompasses all aspects of the design, conduct and reporting of systematic reviews. The journal publishes high quality systematic review products including systematic review protocols, systematic reviews related to a very broad definition of health, rapid reviews, updates of already completed systematic reviews, and methods research related to the science of systematic reviews, such as decision modelling. At this time Systematic Reviews does not accept reviews of in vitro studies. The journal also aims to ensure that the results of all well-conducted systematic reviews are published, regardless of their outcome.