SEARCH · PubMed Health

Results for “Practice Guidelines as Topic”

Explore indexed PubMed citations for clinical trials, systematic reviews and public health research. Read source abstracts and follow each citation to its original PubMed record.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

30 records · Page 2Linked to original sources

PubMed2026

Nurse-led acute care post-operative interventions in adult cardiac surgery: a systematic review.

AIMS: The primary aim of this systematic review was to identify nurse-led clinical interventions evaluated in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) for adults who had undergone cardiac surgery. The secondary aim was to assess the effectiveness of these interventions on post-operative clinical and patient-reported outcomes during the acute inpatient phase. METHODS AND RESULTS: A systematic review was undertaken according to an a priori protocol using Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) methodology and PRISMA guideline for reporting. Eligible studies were RCTs of adult (≥18 years) cardiac surgery, nurse-led inpatient interventions implemented immediately post-surgery and prior to discharge. Six databases were searched from inception to June 2025. Of 2690 records, 19 RCTs were eligible, representing 13 countries, and 3142 participants. Risk of bias varied, with only two low-risk trials. Interventions were grouped into seven domains: behavioural support; temperature management and comfort strategies; pain and symptom management; wound care; infection prevention; respiratory and pulmonary function; and post-operative recovery, mobilization, and hydration. Across these domains, nurse-led interventions were generally feasible, safe, and positively affected patient comfort, physiological stability, symptom relief, and aspects of functional recovery. CONCLUSION: Nurse-led inpatient interventions contribute meaningfully to inpatient post-operative recovery in cardiac surgery, although the broader cardiac surgical nursing scope is underrepresented in RCTs. This review provides a foundation for developing further high-quality research, peer-reviewed interdisciplinary practice guidelines, and strengthening the scope and recognition of cardiac surgical nursing as a distinct specialty. REGISTRATION: PROSPERO-CRD420251063851.

Humans↗

PubMed2025

[Systemic treatment of breast cancer: professional guideline].

Over the years since the 4th Breast Cancer Consensus Conference, a substantial body of new evidence based on clinical trial results has been published, necessitating an update of the 2020 recommendations. This professional guideline primarily reflects the current ESMO, NCCN, ABC, and St. Gallen Consensus Conference statements and recommendations. From a didactic perspective, the text first addresses early-stage breast cancer, followed by locally advanced, locoregionally recurrent, and metastatic breast cancer. At the beginning of both the early-stage and metastatic breast cancer sections, we provide a summary of general principles relevant to the respective field, which apply to the subsequent subsections. Within these subsections, therapeutic options are discussed according to genomic subgroups. At the end of the recommendations, considerations for the management of certain rare clinical scenarios are summarized. The appendices cover, among other topics, multidisciplinary team (tumor board) requirements, recommended chemotherapy protocols, and the definition of menopause.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Mixed Methods Research on Family Caregiving for Stroke Survivors: A Methodological Systematic Review.

AIM: To examine how mixed methods research has been applied in studies of family caregiving for stroke survivors, focusing on key methodological components (rationale, design types, integration strategies, and use of joint displays). DESIGN: Methodological systematic review. METHODS: A systematic search of five databases yielded 17 studies. The extraction focused on mixed methods features (rationale, design, integration, joint displays), and quality was appraised using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool. DATA SOURCES: PubMed, CINAHL, Scopus, Web of Science, and PsycINFO were searched for relevant studies published from 2010 to 2025. RESULTS: The included studies addressed topics such as caregiver burden, coping, resilience, and intervention outcomes. Convergent and explanatory sequential designs predominated. Complementarity was the most frequent rationale for mixing methods. Integration occurred mainly through merging, with fewer instances of connecting or building. Three studies included joint displays to integrate the results. CONCLUSION: Mixed methods research is increasingly applied in family caregiving. To advance the field, researchers should strengthen integration during analysis and results and improve transparency in reporting key design features. IMPLICATIONS FOR THE PROFESSION AND/OR PATIENT CARE: Strengthening methodological rigour in mixed methods studies on stroke caregiving will improve the evidence base for nursing practice. Intentional and meaningful integration of qualitative and quantitative evidence can better inform effective interventions and support programs, ultimately enhancing care for stroke survivors and their families. IMPACT: This review evaluates how mixed methods research is applied in family caregiving studies. It identifies significant methodological gaps, including unclear reporting of design and limited use of advanced integration techniques. The recommendations provide practical guidance for researchers to improve reporting and integration, yielding richer evidence to inform interventions and policies that support family caregivers. REPORTING METHOD: The review followed the PRISMA 2021 guidelines for transparent reporting of systematic reviews. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: No patient or public involvement.

Humans↗

PubMed2025

Prenatal screening for trisomy 21 (Down syndrome) using first- and second-trimester biochemistry and nuchal translucency: A technical standard of the American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics (ACMG).

This technical standard was developed as a guide for laboratories performing prenatal screening for Down syndrome. It addresses 3 topics: second trimester (triple or quad), first trimester, including incorporation of nuchal translucency, and current directions in cell-free DNA screening. Analytic methods, clinical considerations, screening performance, guidelines for reporting second trimester, first trimester, integrated, contingent, and reflex screening tests for Down syndrome, are discussed. Individual laboratories are responsible for meeting the quality assurance standards described by the Clinical Laboratory Improvement Amendments, the College of American Pathologists, and other regulatory agencies, with respect to appropriate sample documentation, assay validation, general proficiency, and quality control measures.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

What's the meta now? More updates on the problems with systematic reviews.

BACKGROUND: Systematic reviews are intended to provide trustworthy evidence synthesis, yet previous iterations of this living review have identified numerous recurring problems in their conduct and reporting. This article presents the third version and second update of the living systematic review examining issues raised across the academic literature. METHODS: Using consistent eligibility criteria and methods from earlier versions, literature searches were updated to May 2025. Eligible meta-research and editorial articles describing problems with systematic reviews were analyzed to identify emerging themes. Additionally, four basic indicators of methodological quality of the included meta-research were presented across review versions. RESULTS: The update included 209 additional articles. Critically low methodological quality and absence of protocols remained among the most frequently reported issues in systematic reviews across disciplines and journals but notably in evidence underpinning clinical practice guidelines. Spin in abstracts and conflicts of interest continued to be common. Apparent improvements in reporting quality were inconsistent, with modest gains in some full-text reporting but persistent deficiencies in abstracts. Authorship diversity of systematic reviews improved in gender representation but remained geographically concentrated in high-income countries, and primary research included in reviews similarly lacked global representativeness. The issue of misalignment between systematic review evidence bases and global burden of disease bring the total number of problems with systematic reviews to 69. Emerging use of automation and artificial intelligence was variably reported. Descriptive comparison of meta-research articles over the three versions of this living review suggests a greater proportion meeting basic quality indicators in more recent updates. CONCLUSION: Across successive updates, problems with systematic reviews remain widespread and consistent rather than isolated. Incremental reporting improvements coexist with persistent concerns about transparency, bias, and representativeness. Future efforts should prioritize evaluating interventions and aligning research incentives to support genuinely trustworthy evidence synthesis.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Artificial intelligence enabled social robotic interventions (PARO) in Australian dementia care: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Although there is a growing body of research indicating that Personal Robot/Social Robot could be used in various aspects of care for individuals with dementia, little is known about how well these types of interventions work in an actual hospital setting in Australia. AIMS & OBJECTIVES: The objective of the present systematic review and meta-analysis is to assess the effectiveness of PARO-based socially assistive robotic intervention in terms of its effectiveness outcomes towards the reduction of dementia-related behavioural and psychological symptoms in Australian based healthcare settings. METHODS: A systematic search was conducted across five electronic databases, including MEDLINE (PubMed), EMBASE, CINAHL, PsycINFO, and the Cochrane Library, to identify randomised controlled trials (RCTs) investigating PARO-based socially assistive robotic interventions for dementia in Australian healthcare settings. This review was registered with PROSPERO (CRD420251251916) and followed the PRISMA 2020 guidelines. In addition, the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool (RoB 2) was used to evaluate the risk of bias across all studies. Pooled standardised mean differences (SMD) with 95 % confidence intervals (CI) were calculated for agitation, anxiety, and depression. Heterogeneity across studies was evaluated using the I2 statistic. RESULTS: Six RCTs involving 1444 participants were identified for inclusion in this review. AI-enabled socially assistive robotic interventions, specifically the PARO therapeutic robot, significantly reduced agitation and anxiety when compared to standard treatment or control conditions. The pooled analysis showed that agitation [SMD = -0.44 (95 % CI: -0.70, -0.18) p = 0.0008] and anxiety [SMD = -0.59 (95 % CI: -0.91, -0.27) p = 0.0003] were reduced significantly, while the decrease in depression [SMD = -0.44 (95 % CI: -0.95, -0.07) p = 0.09] scores was non-significant among dementia patients receiving PARO-based socially assistive robotic interventions as compared to the control. The overall risk of bias across all six studies was considered low to moderate. CONCLUSION: PARO-based socially assistive robotic interventions may provide preliminary evidence of effectiveness in reducing agitation and anxiety in individuals with dementia in Australian healthcare, but the evidence regarding the reduction of depression remains unclear. Therefore, additional high-quality trials with consistent methodology and extended follow-up will be necessary to determine both the short-term and long-term clinical efficacy and practicality of implementing these interventions into practice.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Exploring Professional Experiences in Caring for Vulnerable Migrants in an Italian Rural Reception Centre: A Qualitative Study Using Multidimensional Textual Analysis-Professional Experiences in Rural Migrant Care.

AIM: This study aims to explore the experiences, strengths, challenges, and potential improvements for professionals in managing the complex needs of vulnerable migrants (VM) in an Italian rural reception centre. METHODS: A qualitative study using semi-structured interviews was conducted in April 2024. Data were analysed using the Automatic Analysis of Textual Data, based on Fraire's seven-step model for Exploratory Multidimensional Data Analysis. DATA SOURCES: Data were collected from 16 professionals working in a rural reception centre in southern Italy. Interviews were conducted and analysed using AATD in April 2024. FINDINGS: The analysis identified two main dimensions of professionals' roles: balancing systemic responsibilities with personal engagement and managing immediate needs versus long-term integration goals. Professionals face significant challenges, such as resource scarcity, bureaucratic inefficiencies, and emotional fatigue, which impact their well-being and the quality of care provided to migrants. Resilience, adaptability, and multidisciplinary collaboration were identified as key strengths. CONCLUSION: The study highlights the dual nature of professionals' work in reception centres, requiring them to balance operational tasks with emotional involvement in migrant care. Targeted interventions and systemic reforms are necessary to support professionals and enhance the quality of care for vulnerable migrants, particularly in resource-constrained rural settings. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE AND/OR PATIENT CARE: This study underscores the importance of providing targeted support to professionals working in reception centres, including training in intercultural competence, stress management, and coping strategies. Policies should address systemic challenges and provide resources to enhance healthcare delivery and social integration programs. REPORTING METHOD: This study adhered to the EQUATOR guidelines for reporting qualitative research (COREQ). The findings were reported in compliance with these guidelines, ensuring methodological rigour and transparency. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: No patient or public contribution. IMPLICATIONS FOR THE PROFESSION AND/OR PATIENT CARE: This study highlights the critical need for targeted support and training for professionals working in reception centres, particularly in rural settings. To improve care for vulnerable migrants, professionals should receive training in intercultural competence, stress management, and coping strategies to better navigate the complex challenges they face. Furthermore, systemic changes are necessary to alleviate the pressures on reception centres, such as streamlining bureaucratic processes and enhancing healthcare infrastructure, particularly in rural areas where resources are limited. By addressing these needs, we can improve the well-being of both the professionals and the migrants they serve, fostering more effective support systems and better care outcomes. Additionally, fostering multidisciplinary collaboration and community engagement can contribute to more comprehensive and sustainable care models. PROTOCOL REGISTRATION: The Ethics Committee of the University of Rome Tor Vergata approved this study on 07/07/2021 (protocol registration number 160.21).

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Making patient-oriented decisions with collegial support as an anchor: Oncologists' experiences of late-line treatment selection in metastatic breast cancer.

BACKGROUND: Treatment guidelines support oncologists in treatment decision-making for patients with metastatic breast cancer (MBC). However, treatment decision-making is complicated by the rapid pace of therapeutic advances, the complexity of incorporating patient preferences, and the underrepresentation of diverse populations in clinical trials. This study explored oncologists' experiences of treatment selection in late-line MBC when evidence and guidelines provide limited guidance. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This qualitative study was conducted using a constructivist approach and involved individual interviews with twelve oncologists in Sweden. Participants had between five and forty years of experience in breast cancer care and worked within publicly funded healthcare across academic and regional hospitals. An inductive reflexive thematic analysis was used to identify themes, with attention to both manifest and latent meanings in the data. RESULTS: The overarching theme interpreted was: Making patient-oriented treatment decisions with collegial support as an anchor, reflecting how oncologists adapt their treatment decision-making to patient needs while relying on colleagues for professional stability. Four themes were elucidated: Offering to use professional knowledge and experience to decide; Inviting the patient to a dialogue to decide; Supporting the patient in making the final decision; and Turning to colleagues for advice and support. CONCLUSION: This study challenges the positivist evidence-based assumption that oncologists act as neutral facilitators who simply present treatment options for patients to choose. Instead, it positions oncologists as active decision-makers who clearly state their professional stance, retain responsibility for treatment decisions, and respect patient autonomy, moving beyond the traditional, dichotomized shared decision-making model. IMPLICATIONS TO PRACTICE: We argue that oncologists are active stakeholders in a value-led decision-making process and encourage them to clearly articulate the values underlying their recommendations. This approach enables patients to be addressed with full autonomy, while the ultimate responsibility for treatment decisions remains with the oncologist.

Humans↗

PubMed2025

American College of Rheumatology Guidance Statement for Diagnosis and Management of VEXAS Developed by the International VEXAS Working Group Expert Panel.

OBJECTIVE: Vacuoles E1 enzyme X-linked autoinflammatory somatic syndrome (VEXAS) is a recently identified rare genetic disorder associated with somatic mutations in the UBA1 gene. VEXAS presents with a combination of inflammatory and hematologic manifestations, leading to increased morbidity and mortality. METHODS: Given the variability in disease presentation and the limited number of studies to date, no clinical documents currently exist to provide guidance to health care providers about the management of VEXAS. To address this gap, we formed an international multidisciplinary panel of VEXAS experts. RESULTS: Through formalized meetings and a voting process, the group developed consensus clinical guidance considerations for the management of VEXAS. These considerations offer practical advice on several key topics: (1) clinical features of VEXAS, (2) UBA1 screening methods, (3) the diagnosis of myelodysplastic syndromes (MDSs) in patients with VEXAS, and (4) prognosis and management. The aim is to provide expert guidance on which patients to test, how to test for VEXAS, how to approach MDS in the context of VEXAS, and considerations for management. CONCLUSION: This work marks the first formal international consensus guidance for VEXAS and is intended to be used as a resource for clinicians seeking to understand the disease and its management.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Safety and Effectiveness of Direct Oral Anticoagulants Versus Low-Molecular-Weight Heparin for Cancer-Associated Thrombosis: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Cancer-associated thrombosis is a condition associated with high mortality rates, yet limited evidence exists regarding the safety and effectiveness of low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) and direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs), focusing on a fixed follow-up period based on clinical practice guideline recommendations. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to compare the safety and effectiveness of DOACs versus LMWH in patients with cancer-associated thrombosis over a 6-month follow-up period. METHODS: PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases were systematically searched up to 30 June, 2025. Recurrent venous thromboembolism, major bleeding, and all-cause mortality were pooled using a random-effects meta-analysis. RESULTS: Seven randomized controlled trials and 28 cohort studies were included in our systematic review. After applying the criteria for a 6-month follow-up period, five randomized controlled trials and 16 cohort studies with 49,824 patients were analyzed in the meta-analysis. In randomized controlled trials, DOACs showed a lower incidence of venous thromboembolism recurrence (relative risk [RR] 0.66, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.49-0.87) compared with LMWH, with a non-significant increase in major bleeding (RR 1.28, 95% CI 0.87-1.88) and no significant difference in all-cause mortality (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.86-1.18). Cohort studies demonstrated a lower incidence of venous thromboembolism recurrence (RR 0.69, 95% CI 0.62-0.76) with DOACs, a non-significant reduction in major bleeding (RR 0.85, 95% CI 0.68-1.07), and a lower risk of all-cause mortality (RR 0.47, 95% CI 0.31-0.72). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with cancer-associated thrombosis, DOACs demonstrated a decrease in recurrent venous thromboembolism without increasing the risk of all-cause mortality. A non-significant increase in the risk of major bleeding was recorded in randomized controlled trials, but not in cohort studies. DOACs may provide greater effectiveness for cancer-associated thrombosis compared with LMWH.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Teaching Acute Coronary Syndrome High-Risk ECG Interpretation and Clinical Decision-Making Through FOAMed Videos and Podcast Versus Print-Based Materials Among Emergency Care Providers: Randomized Controlled Mixed Methods Trial.

BACKGROUND: Accurate interpretation of high-risk acute coronary syndrome (ACS) electrocardiograms (ECGs) is essential for early diagnosis and timely reperfusion, yet substantial deficits persist across health care professions. Digital self-learning formats such as FOAMed (Free Open Access Medical Education) are widely used, but their effectiveness has rarely been evaluated for complex, high-risk ACS ECG patterns. Existing ECG education studies often focus on students or single professional groups and established ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) criteria, leaving newer guideline-recognized STEMI equivalents, selected emerging occlusion myocardial infarction (OMI)-related patterns, and interprofessional emergency care underrepresented. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to compare the effectiveness of FOAMed podcast and videos versus traditional print-based materials for teaching high-risk ACS ECG patterns and related clinical decision-making in emergency providers. METHODS: We conducted a prospective, interprofessional, controlled mixed methods trial across 5 training sites in Germany. Paramedics, prehospital emergency physicians, and emergency department clinicians received either a FOAMed multimedia module or print-based materials through concealed allocation; deviations from the intended 1:1 ratio resulted from participant no-shows. The intervention consisted of a 30-minute supervised self-learning session. In total, 103 participants were allocated to FOAMed (n=45) or print-based materials (n=58). Two coprimary outcomes were assessed: ECG interpretation accuracy and text-based ACS clinical decision-making. Secondary outcomes included subjective confidence, learning experience, and exploratory qualitative free-text responses. Outcome assessment was automated and blinded; mixed ANOVA was the primary analysis. The study was not prospectively registered because it assessed educational outcomes in health care professionals rather than patient health outcomes. RESULTS: All 103 participants completed the study. Both groups improved, with greater gains in the FOAMed group: ECG interpretation increased from 55% to 65.5% and text-based ACS clinical decision-making from 45% to 68%, versus 57% to 60% and from 47% to 63%, respectively, in the print-based group. Effect sizes were η²=0.055 for ECG interpretation and η²=0.044 for clinical decision-making. Exploratory subgroup analyses provided no evidence of differential effects across age, gender, or professional background and were likely underpowered. Qualitative responses (46 and 37 entries) provided contextual insights into perceived clarity, engagement, and practical relevance supporting the quantitative findings. CONCLUSIONS: This study is innovative in directly comparing a curated FOAMed multimedia module with selected print-based materials in an interprofessional emergency care population. It differs from existing research by focusing on subtle, emerging ischemic patterns and evaluating realistic, time-limited self-learning formats. The findings provide evidence that curated FOAMed resources can produce greater short-term improvements in ECG interpretation and text-based ACS clinical decision-making than traditional print-based materials in this setting. Although implications for clinical performance remain hypothetical, concise, high-quality digital modules may represent a practical supplement to structured continuing education in emergency care.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Ibuprofen versus acetaminophen for acute mild-to-moderate pain management in pediatric populations: a systematic review and meta-analysis of their efficacy.

UNLABELLED: Ibuprofen and acetaminophen are the most widely used analgesics in pediatric practice for the management of acute mild-to-moderate pain. Despite their widespread use, the comparative analgesic efficacy of these two agents in children remains a subject of ongoing debate, with existing evidence largely derived from heterogeneous clinical settings and small individual trials. Therefore, this study aimed to systematically review and meta-analyze randomized controlled trials comparing the analgesic efficacy of ibuprofen versus acetaminophen in pediatric populations with acute mild-to-moderate pain. A systematic literature search was conducted up to May 2026 in PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science. The review was conducted and reported in accordance with the PRISMA-Children and Adolescents (PRISMA-C) 2026 reporting guideline. Eligible studies were randomized controlled trials comparing ibuprofen with acetaminophen in children and adolescents (defined as individuals aged 0 to < 18 years) with acute pain, reporting at least one extractable efficacy outcome. Continuous outcomes were synthesized as standardized mean differences (Hedges' g) using random-effects models; dichotomous outcomes were pooled as risk ratios (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane RoB 2 tool and certainty of evidence was evaluated using the GRADE framework. Eight randomized controlled trials enrolling 1325 participants were included. Three pediatric trials contributed to the primary continuous pain outcome meta-analysis (n = 196 analyzable participants), yielding a pooled SMD of - 0.28 (95% CI - 0.57 to 0.00; p = 0.052; I2 = 0%), indicating a small effect favoring ibuprofen that did not reach conventional statistical significance. Given the small number of contributing studies (k = 3), the I2 statistic should be interpreted with caution as it has limited power to detect heterogeneity in this context. For the dichotomous pain freedom outcome (2 trials, n = 114), no significant difference was observed (pooled RR 1.03, 95% CI 0.53-1.99; p = 0.93; I2 = 0%). A prespecified sensitivity analysis including an adult soft-tissue injury trial attenuated the pooled effect toward the null (SMD - 0.15, 95% CI - 0.38 to 0.09; p = 0.23; I2 = 36.6%). Narrative synthesis of additional studies generally demonstrated comparable analgesic efficacy between the two agents across postoperative and outpatient pediatric settings. The overall certainty of evidence was rated as low for both primary outcomes, primarily due to imprecision and indirectness. CONCLUSION: Current evidence from randomized controlled trials does not demonstrate a superiority of ibuprofen over acetaminophen for acute mild-to-moderate pain management in children. Both agents appear to provide clinically meaningful analgesia across heterogeneous pediatric pain settings. The clinical choice between agents should be guided by individual patient factors, including contraindications to NSAIDs, the inflammatory nature of the pain etiology, and patient-specific characteristics. The low certainty of evidence underscores the need for adequately powered, methodologically rigorous trials to definitively establish the comparative efficacy of these two analgesics in the pediatric population. WHAT IS KNOWN: • Ibuprofen and acetaminophen are the two most widely used non-opioid analgesics for acute mild-to-moderate pain in children, and both are recommended as first-line agents by major international guidelines. • Prior meta-analyses in mixed pediatric-adult populations have suggested a modest analgesic advantage of ibuprofen over acetaminophen, but pediatric-specific evidence has remained limited and methodologically heterogeneous. WHAT IS NEW: • This systematic review and meta-analysis, restricted to randomized controlled trials in pediatric populations, found that ibuprofen showed a small effect favoring pain reduction compared with acetaminophen (SMD - 0.28, p = 0.052), although this did not reach conventional statistical significance. • The analgesic advantage of ibuprofen may be more pronounced in pain etiologies with a significant inflammatory component (e.g., fractures). At the same time, both agents appear broadly equivalent in most other acute pediatric pain settings, supporting individualized analgesic selection based on clinical context and patient-specific factors.

Humans↗