At present a better way for the treatment of SARS is to search and apply the best evidence that comes from the same kind of diseases and symptoms in the past and include personal experiences of clinicians. The intervention should be adjusted with the development of basic research. In this paper the important of projects are predicted and necessity of randomized controlled trials are discussed emphasizing scientific value of case reports and case series for such disease. It is essential to well justify priority and integrate resources for the trials against SARS.
ObjectiveTo explore the practice of the evidence-based treatment strategy for cervical spinal cord injury. MethodsOne patient with cervical spinal cord injury was admitted to our hospital on January 3, 2013. We obtained medical evidences by searching databases and regulated the best treatment after evaluating the patient's comprehensive conditions. And then, the whole treatment strategy was fully implemented. Finally, the consequent results were evaluated. ResultsThe evidence-based medicine showed that the therapeutic targets were to save the residual function, prevent complications, and promote the recovery of neural function. Based on the real-time conditions of patient, we developed and practiced the evidence-based comprehensive rehabilitation programs, including absolute rest in bed, high-dose steroids, neurotrophic drugs, Chinese medicine rehabilitation and prevention of complications. After a follow-up of half a year, the patient obtained a good curative effect. The patient was saved from paralyzing. Moreover, the patient restored the capacity of standing, walking and a certain level of self-care ability. ConclusionFor the cervical spinal cord injury, treatment decision based on evidence-based medicine is more scientific, and it can ensure maximum benefit for the patients. Therefore, it is worthy of popularizing.
ObjectiveTo systematically review the adverse drug reactions (ADRs) caused by piperacillin. MethodsPubMed, EMbase, Web of Science, CNKI, WanFang Data and VIP databases were electronically searched to collect case reports on ADRs caused by piperacillin from inception to December 31, 2021. Two reviewers independently screened literature, extracted data and then a qualitative systematic review was performed. ResultsA total of 168 case reports involving 170 patients were included. The male to female ratio was 1.06∶1, and the median age was 54 year old. The statistical results showed that ADRs caused by piperacillin mostly involved the whole body (n=55), followed by the blood system (n=48), skin and soft tissue system (n=39) and nervous system (n=18). The most frequently reported cases were anaphylactic shock (n=29), followed by drug fever (n=19), rash (n=17) and thrombocytopenia (n=15). The most serious ADRs were anaphylactic shock (n=29) and bullous epidermal necrolysis (n=6). ConclusionCurrent evidence shows that ADRs caused by piperacillin mostly involved the whole body and the most serious ADRs are toxic epidermal necrolysis and anaphylactic shock.