Cirugia y cirujanos · 2016
[Guide to clinical practice for the diagnosis, treatment and rehabilitation of non-syndromic craniosynostosis on 3 levels of care].
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Castro Coyotl Dulce María, Rosas Huerta Xanath Olivia, Sánchez Vázquez José Juan, Díaz Sánchez Margarita Isabel, Rodríguez Peralta José Salvador, Tetitla Munive Juan Manuel, Peralta Porras María de Lourdes, Arellano Cruz Alejandra Janeth, Sosa García Jesús Ojino, Fareli González Christian Javier
Аннотация
INTRODUCTION: Craniosynostosis is a congenital anomaly resulting from the premature fusion of the cranial sutures changing growth patterns of the skull.
METHODOLOGY: Focus, scope, target population and clinical questions to be solved were defined. A systematic search for evidence in different databases (Medline, Embase, KoreaMed, Cochrane Library and the website of the World Health Organization) in stages was performed: clinical practice guidelines; systematic reviews, and clinical trials and observational studies; using MeSH, Decs and corresponding free terms, unrestricted language or temporality. Risk of bias was evaluated using appropriate tools (AMSTAR, Risk of Bias or STROBE). The quality of evidence was graduated using the GRADE system. Modified Delphi Panel technique was used to assign the recommendation's strength and direction, as well as the degree of agreement with it, taking into account the quality of evidence, balance between risks and benefits of interventions, values and preferences of patients and availability of resources.
RESULTS: There were 3,712 documents obtained by search algorithms; selecting 29 documents for inclusion in the qualitative synthesis. Due to heterogeneity between studies, it was not possible to perform meta-analysis.
CONCLUSIONS: We issued 7 recommendations and 8 good practice points, which will serve as support for decision-making in the comprehensive care of patients with craniosynostosis.
METHODOLOGY: Focus, scope, target population and clinical questions to be solved were defined. A systematic search for evidence in different databases (Medline, Embase, KoreaMed, Cochrane Library and the website of the World Health Organization) in stages was performed: clinical practice guidelines; systematic reviews, and clinical trials and observational studies; using MeSH, Decs and corresponding free terms, unrestricted language or temporality. Risk of bias was evaluated using appropriate tools (AMSTAR, Risk of Bias or STROBE). The quality of evidence was graduated using the GRADE system. Modified Delphi Panel technique was used to assign the recommendation's strength and direction, as well as the degree of agreement with it, taking into account the quality of evidence, balance between risks and benefits of interventions, values and preferences of patients and availability of resources.
RESULTS: There were 3,712 documents obtained by search algorithms; selecting 29 documents for inclusion in the qualitative synthesis. Due to heterogeneity between studies, it was not possible to perform meta-analysis.
CONCLUSIONS: We issued 7 recommendations and 8 good practice points, which will serve as support for decision-making in the comprehensive care of patients with craniosynostosis.