Conectar
The purpose of this study is to examine and evaluate the existing clinical practice guidelines and consensus statements regarding tracheostomy care for non-mechanically ventilated patients.
A systematic search of databases, and professional organisations was conducted from inception to 19 March 2023. Two appraisers evaluated each guideline using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research & Evaluation II (AGREE II) and the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) Critical Appraisal Checklist for Text and Opinion Papers.
No specific clinical guidelines exist on airway management in non-mechanically ventilated patients. Of 6318 articles identified, we included 12 clinical practice guidelines, and 9 consensus statements, which were from China, the US, the UK, South Korea, Australia, France and Belgium. The AGREE II scores in six domains are (1) the scope and purpose, 70.30%; (2) stakeholder involvement, 37.61%; (3) rigor of development, 33.97%; (4) clarity of presentation, 68.16%; (5) applicability, 44.23% and (6) editorial independence, 40.06%. The overall quality of evidence was level B. The summarised recommendations for clinical practice encompass the following six areas: airway humidification, management of the trach cuff, management of inner cannula, tracheostoma care, tracheostomy suctioning and management and prevention of common post-operative complications.
The overall quality of the clinical guidelines on non-ventilated tracheostomy care was moderate, and further improvements are needed in domains of stakeholder involvement, applicability, clarity of presentation and editorial independence. Recommendations on non-ventilated tracheostomy care are often embedded in the guidelines on ventilated tracheostomy. Specific clinical guidelines are needed to provide a standardised approach to tracheostomy care for non-ventilated patients.
Patients with non-ventilated tracheostomy need specialised airway management. Improving patient outcomes requires standardised protocols, patient involvement, quality evaluation, and interdisciplinary approaches.
The study reviewed clinical practice guidelines and consensus statements, therefore patient or public input was not needed.
To compare the effectiveness of non-pharmacological interventions in enhancing sleep quality in older people.
Sleep problems in older adults have become increasingly prominent. Sleep problems not only affect the health and quality of life of older people, but also the range of chronic diseases caused by sleep problems also impose a huge burden on social services and health care. Non-pharmacological interventions are an effective alternative to pharmacological therapies, but it is unclear which non-pharmacological therapies are most effective in enhancing sleep quality in older adults.
A systematic review and network meta-analysis based on PRISMA-NMA.
A total of seven databases were searched from the establishment of the database to March 2023. After literature screening and data extraction, the Cochrane Bias assessment tool 2.0 version of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) was used to evaluate literature quality. A network meta-analysis was performed to evaluate the relative efficacy of the non-pharmacological interventions on sleep quality.
A total of 71 RCTs involving nine non-pharmacological interventions were included. The results of the network meta-analysis showed that the joint intervention may be the most effective non-pharmacological intervention to enhance sleep quality in older adults.
This study confirms that non-pharmacological interventions can improve sleep quality in older adults. The use of non-pharmacological interventions can be promoted by healthcare professionals in the future to improve the quality of sleep and thus the physical and mental health of older people.
This evidence suggests that joint interventions may be most effective. Therefore, in the future, a combination of non-pharmacological interventions could be used to maximise their effectiveness in improving sleep quality in older people and promoting healthy aging.
No patient or public contribution is not applicable to this study.
FreshRSS 