ObjectivesTo evaluate the level and variation of Chinese scholars' scientific research capability in the world by analysing the status of literature published on top-five global biomedicine journals by Chinese scholars in the past 10 years.MethodsLiterature published on NEJM, JAMA, BMJ, Lancet and PLoS Medicine from 2007 to 2016 were searched in PubMed database. Types of diseases were classified by using International Classification of Diseases (version 10) (ICD-10). Quantitatively analysis were used to classify the different authors, institutes, studies designs, quality of publication and variation.ResultsLiterature (56.4%) published on Lancet had the largest quantity among the top-five journals. Infectious and parasitic diseases, circulation system diseases, cancers, endocrine, nutrition and metabolic diseases and neuropsychiatric diseases were the top-five in disease categories list, accounting for 38.4%. In different study design, reviews (non-experimental research) and randomized controlled trials were the first and the second study types, separately.ConclusionsFor productivity of Chinese scholars’ diseases publications on top-five medical journals, the top-five specific diseases are from the top-five disease categories-infectious and parasitic diseases, circulation system diseases, cancer, endocrine, nutrition and metabolic diseases and neuropsychiatric diseases. The main study types are reviews, randomized controlled trials and cross-sectional studies.
ObjectivesTo construct a follow-up evaluation indicator system on the implementation of the WHO resolution of " Access to essential medicines” by systematic review, and to provide a methodological support for tracking the implementation of the resolution, with a view to providing evidence of decision-making to promote the accessibility of essential medicines and further promote and improve the national essential medicine policy. It also provides a methodological reference for investigating the implementation of other public health sector resolutions.MethodsPubMed, EMbase, The Cochrane Library, Web of Science, CBM, WanFang Data and CNKI databases and relevant international or national official websites of pharmaceutical administration department or academic organization were searched to collect studies on accessibility of WHO essential drugs from inception to February, 2016. Two researchers independently screened literature, extracted data, and qualitative analysis was used to sort out and screen the evaluation indicators for the implementation of the WHO resolution of "Access to essential medicines".ResultsA total of 60 relevant literatures, three guides and 19 progress reports of the World Health Assembly from official websites were included. Through the screening of indicators, we could get two parts: the indicators of measures to implement the resolution and the indicators of the results of the implementation of the resolution.ConclusionsThis study analyzes the implementation of the resolution of the health system in the progress report of the World Health Assembly 2013–2015, divides the implementation of the resolution into two parts: the implementation of the resolution and the results of the implementation of the resolution. An indicator system for establishing measures and evaluation the resolution has been found. Expert consultations will be further developed to establish the final indicators for the implementation of the "Access to essential medicines".
ObjectivesTo provide methodology support for the tracking assessment of specific resolution execution through evidence-based construction of tracking assessment index system for resolution execution of WHO essential medicine accessibility resolution, so as to further promote and improve the establishment of national essential medicine policies, and offer a methodology reference to survey and assess the resolution executions in other public health fields.MethodsA multi-disciplinary team was set up to preliminarily construct the index system by means of earlier system assessment index through index screening based on Delphi method. The weight of each index was determined by analytic hierarchy process.ResultsAfter two rounds of expert consultation, the index system available for resolution execution measures and results of WHO essential medicine accessibility were established, including 9 indexes of resolution execution measures. Meanwhile, the execution results of index contained 4 first class indexes, 13 second class indexes and 36 third class indexes. Each of the indexes obtained its own weight according to degree of importance.ConclusionsIn this study, the assessment index for resolution execution of essential medicine accessibility is established, however, the empirical research is still required to further verify the scientificity as well as feasibility of this index system.
Objective To explore the service contents of medication therapy management (MTM) for outpatient epileptic children by analyzing drug related problems (DRPs). Methods A cross-sectional study was adopted to analyze the status of DRPs in outpatient epileptic children in West China Second Hospital of Sichuan University. The focus group discussion method was adopted to formulate the specific service contents of MTM in outpatient epileptic children. Results A total of 2 754 cases of antiepileptic drug treatment were received in the pediatric clinic of West China Second Hospital of Sichuan University from October 1st, 2018 to December 31st, 2018, including 2 018 cases of monotherapy and 736 cases of combination therapy, involving 7 drugs and 10 specifications. The specifications in descending order of frequency of drug use were levetiracetam oral solution, levetiracetam tablets, sodium valproate oral solution, oxcarbazepine oral suspension, oxcarbazepine tablets, topiramate capsules, sodium valproate sustained-release tablets, lamotrigine tablets, magnesium valproate sustained-release tablets and carbamazepine tablets. We applied the Pharmaceutical Care Network Europe (PCNE) classification and found 718 DRPs, mainly focusing on drug selection and improper course of treatment. The specific service contents of MTM for children with epilepsy in the clinic included hospital pharmacy information services, medical teams established by pharmacists, doctors and nurses, child education and medication consultation, and medication follow-up for discharged children. In addition, specific measures to solve DRPs in outpatient epileptic children were designed from 2 aspects of disease management and medication education, and 3 aspects of drug prescription, dispensing, and usage. Conclusions There are various types of antiepileptic medications and treatment schemes for children, and DRPs are complicated. Therefore, MTM for children with epilepsy requires to be strengthened. In this study, the specific intervention contents of MTM for outpatient epileptic children are designed to carry out the follow-up empirical study to verify the effectiveness of MTM.
ObjectiveTo systematically review the efficacy of pidotimod in children.MethodsPubMed, The Cochrane Library, EMbase, CNKI, CBM, VIP and WanFang Data databases were searched online to collect randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on pidotimod in children from inception to January, 2018. Two reviewers independently screened literature, extracted data and assessed the risk of bias of included studies, then, meta-analysis was performed by using RevMan 5.3 software.ResultsA total of 310 RCTs involving 30 525 children were included. The results of meta-analysis showed that, compared with conventional therapy, conventional therapy combined with pidotimod could not improve the efficacy of children with respiratory infections (RR=1.78, 95%CI 0.99 to 3.20, P>0.05). However, pidotimod could significantly reduce the number of respiratory tract infection (MD=−2.79, 95%CI −3.12 to −2.46, P<0.05), shorten the time of respiratory tract infection (MD=−4.15, 95%CI −4.72 to −3.58, P<0.05), and the time of fever (MD=−1.47, 95%CI −1.77 to −1.17, P<0.05) in recurrent respiratory tract infection. Pidotimod could also reduce the time of fever (MD=−0.90, 95%CI −1.60 to −0.20, P<0.05) in children with mycoplasma pneumoniae pneumonia, the time of fever (MD=−1.51, 95%CI −1.91 to −1.11, P<0.05) in children with hand-foot-mouth disease, and reduce the incidence of anaphylactoid purpura followed up for 6 months (RR=0.42, 95%CI 0.30 to 0.61, P<0.05) in children with anaphylactoid purpura. However, there was no significant difference between two groups in the recurrence of asthma for 1 year follow-up (RR=0.80, 95%CI 0.60 to 1.06, P>0.05).ConclusionCurrent evidence shows that pidotimod may be effective for children with respiratory tract infection, asthma, hand-foot-mouth disease, could reduce disease relapse and relieve symptoms related to illness.
ObjectivesTo investigate the current status of the clinical applicability evaluation tools, and to provide some foundation for establishment of the clinical applicability evaluation index system.Methods7 databases, 6 guideline databases and 16 academic institutions and the administrative department of health website were systematically searched from inception to April 2019. Two reviewers independently screened literature, extracted data and then included the literature related to the applicability of clinical guidelines. The CPG clinical applicability evaluation index was initially prepared through the subject comprehensive method.ResultsA total of 19 articles were finally included. Among them, there were 4 evaluation tools for the clinical applicability of the guidelines, and 15 evaluation tools for the guideline clinical applicability evaluation items. Through combing and comparison, we found that these tools had differences in evaluators, evaluation fields and items.ConclusionsThe global guidelines for clinical applicability assessment tools have different kinds of problems, such as that the tools are not targeted, the indicators are not well-formed, and the methodological knowledge requirement of the evaluators is high. There is still a lack of guidelines for clinical applicability assessment tools from target users’ view.
ObjectivesTo establish a tool for evaluating clinical applicability of guidelines with the users of the guidelines as evaluators.MethodsThe research group formed a multidisciplinary team to establish an evidence- based tool for evaluating clinical applicability of guidelines through systematic evaluation and two rounds of Delphi expert consultation and external audit.ResultsThe established tool consisted: evaluator basic information (12 items); clinical applicability evaluation (12 items, including availability, readability, acceptability, feasibility and overall evaluation); and scoring scheme.ConclusionsThis study has established a tool for evaluating clinical applicability of guidelines with the users of the guidelines as evaluators and provides criteria and methods for evaluating clinical applicability of guidelines.