随机对照试验中术前周围神经阻滞的测试:一项范围审查方案。

IF 1.9 4区 医学 Q2 ANESTHESIOLOGY
Aurelien-Xuan Rosendal Bahuet, Mathias Therkel Steensbæk, Rasmus Linnebjerg Knudsen, Sina Yousef, Rikke Helene Frølund Bjulf, Anne-Sofie Linde Jellestad, Kai Henrik Wiborg Lange, Lars Hyldborg Lundstrøm, Anders Kehlet Nørskov
{"title":"随机对照试验中术前周围神经阻滞的测试:一项范围审查方案。","authors":"Aurelien-Xuan Rosendal Bahuet, Mathias Therkel Steensbæk, Rasmus Linnebjerg Knudsen, Sina Yousef, Rikke Helene Frølund Bjulf, Anne-Sofie Linde Jellestad, Kai Henrik Wiborg Lange, Lars Hyldborg Lundstrøm, Anders Kehlet Nørskov","doi":"10.1111/aas.70032","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Peripheral nerve blocks are widely used for anaesthesia in upper or lower limb surgery, but the methods used to assess their success vary substantially across randomised controlled trials. Standardised reporting of how peripheral nerve blocks are tested and how success is defined is essential for ensuring the validity and comparability of clinical research and correct clinical implementation of nerve blocks. This scoping review aims to map existing research practices and assess the extent to which trials provide reporting on peripheral nerve block evaluation.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This scoping review will adhere to guidelines from the Joanna Briggs Institute and the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR). A comprehensive search will be conducted on the PubMed database for trials published in peer-reviewed journals of anaesthesia from 2014 onward. An online tool will be used for screening and data extraction. Outcomes include the proportion of trials that report whether peripheral nerve blocks were tested, describe testing methods, define successful blocks, and report success rates.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The results of the review will be presented descriptively and with tables where appropriate.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>This protocol outlines a review exploring variability in the reporting of methods used to test peripheral nerve blocks. It aims to assist with the interpretation of clinical trials and possibly guide future research to facilitate comparison of findings between clinical trials.</p>","PeriodicalId":6909,"journal":{"name":"Acta Anaesthesiologica Scandinavica","volume":"69 5","pages":"e70032"},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11965968/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Testing of pre-operative peripheral nerve blocks in randomised controlled trials: A scoping review protocol.\",\"authors\":\"Aurelien-Xuan Rosendal Bahuet, Mathias Therkel Steensbæk, Rasmus Linnebjerg Knudsen, Sina Yousef, Rikke Helene Frølund Bjulf, Anne-Sofie Linde Jellestad, Kai Henrik Wiborg Lange, Lars Hyldborg Lundstrøm, Anders Kehlet Nørskov\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/aas.70032\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Peripheral nerve blocks are widely used for anaesthesia in upper or lower limb surgery, but the methods used to assess their success vary substantially across randomised controlled trials. Standardised reporting of how peripheral nerve blocks are tested and how success is defined is essential for ensuring the validity and comparability of clinical research and correct clinical implementation of nerve blocks. This scoping review aims to map existing research practices and assess the extent to which trials provide reporting on peripheral nerve block evaluation.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This scoping review will adhere to guidelines from the Joanna Briggs Institute and the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR). A comprehensive search will be conducted on the PubMed database for trials published in peer-reviewed journals of anaesthesia from 2014 onward. An online tool will be used for screening and data extraction. Outcomes include the proportion of trials that report whether peripheral nerve blocks were tested, describe testing methods, define successful blocks, and report success rates.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The results of the review will be presented descriptively and with tables where appropriate.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>This protocol outlines a review exploring variability in the reporting of methods used to test peripheral nerve blocks. It aims to assist with the interpretation of clinical trials and possibly guide future research to facilitate comparison of findings between clinical trials.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":6909,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Acta Anaesthesiologica Scandinavica\",\"volume\":\"69 5\",\"pages\":\"e70032\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-05-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11965968/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Acta Anaesthesiologica Scandinavica\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1111/aas.70032\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"ANESTHESIOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Acta Anaesthesiologica Scandinavica","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/aas.70032","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ANESTHESIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:周围神经阻滞广泛用于上肢或下肢手术麻醉,但在不同的随机对照试验中,评估其成功的方法差异很大。关于周围神经阻滞如何测试以及如何定义成功的标准化报告对于确保临床研究的有效性和可比性以及神经阻滞的正确临床实施至关重要。这篇范围综述的目的是绘制现有的研究实践,并评估试验提供周围神经阻滞评估报告的程度。方法:该范围评价将遵循乔安娜布里格斯研究所和范围评价扩展系统和荟萃分析首选报告项目(PRISMA-ScR)的指导方针。从2014年起,将在PubMed数据库中对发表在同行评议的麻醉期刊上的试验进行全面搜索。将使用在线工具进行筛选和数据提取。结果包括报告周围神经阻滞是否被测试、描述测试方法、定义成功的阻滞和报告成功率的试验比例。结果:审查的结果将在适当的情况下以描述性和表格的形式呈现。结论:本协议概述了一篇综述,探讨了用于测试周围神经阻滞的方法报告的可变性。它的目的是协助临床试验的解释,并可能指导未来的研究,以促进临床试验之间的结果比较。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Testing of pre-operative peripheral nerve blocks in randomised controlled trials: A scoping review protocol.

Background: Peripheral nerve blocks are widely used for anaesthesia in upper or lower limb surgery, but the methods used to assess their success vary substantially across randomised controlled trials. Standardised reporting of how peripheral nerve blocks are tested and how success is defined is essential for ensuring the validity and comparability of clinical research and correct clinical implementation of nerve blocks. This scoping review aims to map existing research practices and assess the extent to which trials provide reporting on peripheral nerve block evaluation.

Methods: This scoping review will adhere to guidelines from the Joanna Briggs Institute and the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR). A comprehensive search will be conducted on the PubMed database for trials published in peer-reviewed journals of anaesthesia from 2014 onward. An online tool will be used for screening and data extraction. Outcomes include the proportion of trials that report whether peripheral nerve blocks were tested, describe testing methods, define successful blocks, and report success rates.

Results: The results of the review will be presented descriptively and with tables where appropriate.

Conclusion: This protocol outlines a review exploring variability in the reporting of methods used to test peripheral nerve blocks. It aims to assist with the interpretation of clinical trials and possibly guide future research to facilitate comparison of findings between clinical trials.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.30
自引率
9.50%
发文量
157
审稿时长
3-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Acta Anaesthesiologica Scandinavica publishes papers on original work in the fields of anaesthesiology, intensive care, pain, emergency medicine, and subjects related to their basic sciences, on condition that they are contributed exclusively to this Journal. Case reports and short communications may be considered for publication if of particular interest; also letters to the Editor, especially if related to already published material. The editorial board is free to discuss the publication of reviews on current topics, the choice of which, however, is the prerogative of the board. Every effort will be made by the Editors and selected experts to expedite a critical review of manuscripts in order to ensure rapid publication of papers of a high scientific standard.
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信