影响危重患者生存的干预措施对健康相关生活质量的影响:一项系统综述

Ottavia Pallanch, Alessandro Ortalda, Paolo Pelosi, Nicola Latronico, Chiara Sartini, Gaetano Lombardi, Cristiano Marchetti, Nicolò Maimeri, Alberto Zangrillo, Luca Cabrini
{"title":"影响危重患者生存的干预措施对健康相关生活质量的影响:一项系统综述","authors":"Ottavia Pallanch, Alessandro Ortalda, Paolo Pelosi, Nicola Latronico, Chiara Sartini, Gaetano Lombardi, Cristiano Marchetti, Nicolò Maimeri, Alberto Zangrillo, Luca Cabrini","doi":"10.1186/s13054-022-03993-3","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Survival has been considered the cornerstone for clinical outcome evaluation in critically ill patients admitted to intensive care unit (ICU). There is evidence that ICU survivors commonly show impairments in long-term outcomes such as quality of life (QoL) considering them as the most relevant ones. In the last years, the concept of patient-important outcomes has been introduced and increasingly reported in peer-reviewed publications. In the present systematic review, we evaluated how many randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were conducted on critically ill patients and reporting a benefit on survival reported also data on QoL. All RCTs investigating nonsurgical interventions that significantly reduced mortality in critically ill patients were searched on MEDLINE/PubMed, Scopus and Embase from inception until August 2021. In a second stage, for all the included studies, the outcome QoL was investigated. The primary outcome was to evaluate how many RCTs analyzing interventions reducing mortality reported also data on QoL. The secondary endpoint was to investigate if QoL resulted improved, worsened or not modified. Data on QoL were reported as evaluated outcome in 7 of the 239 studies (2.9%). The tools to evaluate QoL and QoL time points were heterogeneous. Four interventions showed a significant impact on QoL: Two interventions improved survival and QoL (pravastatin in subarachnoid hemorrhage, dexmedetomidine in elderly patients after noncardiac surgery), while two interventions reduced mortality but negatively influenced QoL (caloric restriction in patients with refeeding syndrome and systematic ICU admission in elderly patients). In conclusion, only a minority of RCTs in which an intervention demonstrated to affect mortality in critically ill patients reported also data on QoL. Future research in critical care should include patient-important outcomes like QoL besides mortality. Data on this topic should be collected in conformity with PROs statement and core outcome sets to guarantee quality and comparability of results.</p>","PeriodicalId":92888,"journal":{"name":"Critical care (Houten, Netherlands)","volume":" ","pages":"126"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-05-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9075706/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Effects on health-related quality of life of interventions affecting survival in critically ill patients: a systematic review.\",\"authors\":\"Ottavia Pallanch, Alessandro Ortalda, Paolo Pelosi, Nicola Latronico, Chiara Sartini, Gaetano Lombardi, Cristiano Marchetti, Nicolò Maimeri, Alberto Zangrillo, Luca Cabrini\",\"doi\":\"10.1186/s13054-022-03993-3\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Survival has been considered the cornerstone for clinical outcome evaluation in critically ill patients admitted to intensive care unit (ICU). There is evidence that ICU survivors commonly show impairments in long-term outcomes such as quality of life (QoL) considering them as the most relevant ones. In the last years, the concept of patient-important outcomes has been introduced and increasingly reported in peer-reviewed publications. In the present systematic review, we evaluated how many randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were conducted on critically ill patients and reporting a benefit on survival reported also data on QoL. All RCTs investigating nonsurgical interventions that significantly reduced mortality in critically ill patients were searched on MEDLINE/PubMed, Scopus and Embase from inception until August 2021. In a second stage, for all the included studies, the outcome QoL was investigated. The primary outcome was to evaluate how many RCTs analyzing interventions reducing mortality reported also data on QoL. The secondary endpoint was to investigate if QoL resulted improved, worsened or not modified. Data on QoL were reported as evaluated outcome in 7 of the 239 studies (2.9%). The tools to evaluate QoL and QoL time points were heterogeneous. Four interventions showed a significant impact on QoL: Two interventions improved survival and QoL (pravastatin in subarachnoid hemorrhage, dexmedetomidine in elderly patients after noncardiac surgery), while two interventions reduced mortality but negatively influenced QoL (caloric restriction in patients with refeeding syndrome and systematic ICU admission in elderly patients). In conclusion, only a minority of RCTs in which an intervention demonstrated to affect mortality in critically ill patients reported also data on QoL. Future research in critical care should include patient-important outcomes like QoL besides mortality. Data on this topic should be collected in conformity with PROs statement and core outcome sets to guarantee quality and comparability of results.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":92888,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Critical care (Houten, Netherlands)\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"126\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-05-06\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9075706/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Critical care (Houten, Netherlands)\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1186/s13054-022-03993-3\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Critical care (Houten, Netherlands)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s13054-022-03993-3","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

生存一直被认为是重症监护病房(ICU)重症患者临床结果评估的基石。有证据表明,ICU幸存者通常表现出长期预后的损害,如生活质量(QoL),认为它们是最相关的。在过去的几年里,患者重要结果的概念已经被引入,并越来越多地在同行评议的出版物中报道。在本系统综述中,我们评估了有多少随机对照试验(rct)在危重患者中进行,并报告了生存获益和生活质量数据。从开始到2021年8月,在MEDLINE/PubMed、Scopus和Embase上检索了所有调查非手术干预措施显著降低危重患者死亡率的随机对照试验。在第二阶段,对所有纳入的研究进行结局生活质量调查。主要结果是评估有多少分析降低死亡率干预措施的随机对照试验报告了生活质量数据。次要终点是调查生活质量是否得到改善、恶化或没有改善。239项研究中有7项(2.9%)报告了生活质量数据作为评估结果。评估生活质量和生活质量时间点的工具是异构的。四项干预措施对生活质量有显著影响:两项干预措施改善了生存率和生活质量(普伐他汀治疗蛛网膜下腔出血,右美托咪定治疗非心脏手术后老年患者),两项干预措施降低了死亡率,但对生活质量产生了负面影响(再喂养综合征患者的热量限制和老年患者的系统ICU住院)。总之,只有少数显示干预措施影响危重患者死亡率的随机对照试验报告了生活质量数据。未来对重症监护的研究应该包括病人的重要结果,如生活质量和死亡率。关于该主题的数据应按照PROs声明和核心结果集收集,以保证结果的质量和可比性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Effects on health-related quality of life of interventions affecting survival in critically ill patients: a systematic review.

Effects on health-related quality of life of interventions affecting survival in critically ill patients: a systematic review.

Survival has been considered the cornerstone for clinical outcome evaluation in critically ill patients admitted to intensive care unit (ICU). There is evidence that ICU survivors commonly show impairments in long-term outcomes such as quality of life (QoL) considering them as the most relevant ones. In the last years, the concept of patient-important outcomes has been introduced and increasingly reported in peer-reviewed publications. In the present systematic review, we evaluated how many randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were conducted on critically ill patients and reporting a benefit on survival reported also data on QoL. All RCTs investigating nonsurgical interventions that significantly reduced mortality in critically ill patients were searched on MEDLINE/PubMed, Scopus and Embase from inception until August 2021. In a second stage, for all the included studies, the outcome QoL was investigated. The primary outcome was to evaluate how many RCTs analyzing interventions reducing mortality reported also data on QoL. The secondary endpoint was to investigate if QoL resulted improved, worsened or not modified. Data on QoL were reported as evaluated outcome in 7 of the 239 studies (2.9%). The tools to evaluate QoL and QoL time points were heterogeneous. Four interventions showed a significant impact on QoL: Two interventions improved survival and QoL (pravastatin in subarachnoid hemorrhage, dexmedetomidine in elderly patients after noncardiac surgery), while two interventions reduced mortality but negatively influenced QoL (caloric restriction in patients with refeeding syndrome and systematic ICU admission in elderly patients). In conclusion, only a minority of RCTs in which an intervention demonstrated to affect mortality in critically ill patients reported also data on QoL. Future research in critical care should include patient-important outcomes like QoL besides mortality. Data on this topic should be collected in conformity with PROs statement and core outcome sets to guarantee quality and comparability of results.

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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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