BMC cardiovascular disorders · 2024
Preoperative visit-care for transcatheter aortic valve replacement: a review.
СтатьяСистематический обзорНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
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.
Tan JunYang, Wei GuanXing, Ma Fang, Yan Han, Wang XiTing, Hu QiuLan, Wei Wei, Yang MingFang, Bai YangJuan
Аннотация
AIM: The aim of this review is to evaluate and summarize the evidence for preoperative visit-care of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) and to provide evidence-based support for clinical intervention.
DESIGN: The review presents an evidence summary report, following the standard of the Fudan University Center for Evidence-based Nursing.
METHODS: Literature related to preoperative visit-care for transcatheter aortic valve replacement have been retrieved based on the "6S" pyramid model of evidence. The types of literature included systematic reviews, expert consensus, evidence summary, and guidelines.
DATA SOURCES: Up To Date, Cochrane Library, Joanna Briggs Institute, National Institute for Health and Care Excellence, Medlive, American Heart Association, Registered Nurses Association of Ontario, Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network, European Society of Cardiology, American College of Cardiology, PubMed, CINAHL, Wanfang database, VIP database, Chinese biomedical literature database, CNKI. The search period is limited to the time when each database was established until February 2024.
RESULTS: A total of 18 articles were included in this review, consisting of 1 systematic review, 1 evidence summary, 3 guidelines and 13 expert consensuses. This review summarized 30 pieces of the best evidence for preoperative visit-care for transcatheter aortic valve replacement, encompassing three evidence themes: multidisciplinary team collaboration, preoperative assessment, and preoperative education.
CONCLUSION: The study has established an ideal foundation of evidence for preoperative visit-care in TAVR. However, throughout the particular application process, it was crucial to assess the feasibility and relevance of the evidence in clinical practice by taking into account elements such as the application setting, recommendations from experts with diverse expertise, and the preferences of the patients.
DESIGN: The review presents an evidence summary report, following the standard of the Fudan University Center for Evidence-based Nursing.
METHODS: Literature related to preoperative visit-care for transcatheter aortic valve replacement have been retrieved based on the "6S" pyramid model of evidence. The types of literature included systematic reviews, expert consensus, evidence summary, and guidelines.
DATA SOURCES: Up To Date, Cochrane Library, Joanna Briggs Institute, National Institute for Health and Care Excellence, Medlive, American Heart Association, Registered Nurses Association of Ontario, Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network, European Society of Cardiology, American College of Cardiology, PubMed, CINAHL, Wanfang database, VIP database, Chinese biomedical literature database, CNKI. The search period is limited to the time when each database was established until February 2024.
RESULTS: A total of 18 articles were included in this review, consisting of 1 systematic review, 1 evidence summary, 3 guidelines and 13 expert consensuses. This review summarized 30 pieces of the best evidence for preoperative visit-care for transcatheter aortic valve replacement, encompassing three evidence themes: multidisciplinary team collaboration, preoperative assessment, and preoperative education.
CONCLUSION: The study has established an ideal foundation of evidence for preoperative visit-care in TAVR. However, throughout the particular application process, it was crucial to assess the feasibility and relevance of the evidence in clinical practice by taking into account elements such as the application setting, recommendations from experts with diverse expertise, and the preferences of the patients.