Adherence of systematic reviews to Cochrane RoB2 guidance was frequently poor: a meta epidemiological study.

OBJECTIVES: To assess whether the use of the revised Cochrane risk of bias tool for randomized trials (RoB2) in systematic reviews (SRs) adheres to RoB2 guidance. METHODS: We searched MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Library from 2019 to May 2021 to identify SRs using RoB2. We analyzed methods and results sections to see whether risk of bias was assessed at outcome measure level and applied to primary outcomes of the SR as per RoB2 guidance. The relation between SR characteristics and adequacy of RoB2 use was examined by logistic regression analysis. RESULTS: Two hundred-eight SRs were included. We could assess adherence in 137 SRs as 12 declared using RoB2 but actually used RoB1 and 59 did not report the number of primary outcomes. The tool usage was adherent in 69.3% SRs. Considering SRs with multiple primary outcomes, adherence dropped to 28.8%. We found a positive association between RoB2 guidance adherence and the methodological quality of the reviews assessed by AMSTAR2 (p-for-trend 0.007). Multivariable regression analysis suggested journal impact factor [first quartile vs. other quartiles] was associated with RoB2 adherence (OR 0.34; 95% CI: 0.16-0.72). CONCLUSIONS: Many SRs did not adhere to RoB2 guidance as they applied the tool at the study level rather than at the outcome measure level. Lack of adherence was more likely among low and very low quality reviews.

[10 years of stagnant clinical research in the Italian academic context.] / Dieci anni di stagnazione della ricerca, non solo clinica, nel contesto accademico italiano.

This article is about current challenges to evidence-based medicine (EMB) in Italy. The authors, who share a 20-year commitment to the field of clinical research, discuss what they define as a phase of "stagnation" in practicing and teaching methods and research tactics, both in clinical and academic settings. Early success of EBM cultural movement was not persistent. The authors reason about how the teaching of EBM has remained a niche, concerning few professionals compared to the needs of the country. The authors identify some reasons that might have led to inconsistent attention to research methodology and address ways to strengthen the contribution of academic medicine to clinical research.

[Stories of ordinary beauty.] / Storie di ordinaria bellezza.

This story is a piece of a nurse's daily life, the encounter with a patient that will remain indelible for everyone during subsequent hospitalizations. His story has taught us, once again, how fundamental and helpful for everyone, not only for the patient, is the care relationship between the carers (doctors, nurses and support staff) and the patient.

[La rilevazione e il trattamento del dolore durante le procedure di emodinamica e elettrofisiologia: uno studio descrittivo multicentrico]. / Measurement and management of pain during coronary interventions and electrophysiology procedures: a multicentric descriptive study.

INTRODUCTION: Coronary interventions and electrophysiology procedures may be painful both during and shortly after the procedure. AIM: To assess the onset of pain and anxiety in patient undergoing coronary interventions and electrophysiology procedures; to describe the administration (frequency, timing, dosage and outcomes) of analgesics and anxiolytics before, during and after the procedure. METHODS: A descriptive multicenter study was carried out. Pain and anxiety were measured with a 10-point visual analogue scale (VAS) before, during, after the procedure and for the following 24 hours. Patient were asked to rate their satisfaction for the information received and pain control. RESULTS: Data on 230 patients were collected. The most performed procedure was the transradial coronary catheterization (68.7%). The pacemaker/defibrillator implantation resulted the most painful procedure (median 4, IQR 3-6) and also the most anxious (median 5, IQR 2-6). 13 Patients received an analgesic during the procedure for a low-to-severe pain; during the following 24 hours 34 patients (5 undergoing transradial coronary catheterization and 29 the implant of pacemaker/cardiac-defibrillator) suffered from severe pain and with the exception of 5, all requested pain relief. Satisfaction for pain control was inadequate for patients who underwent electrophysiology procedures and 55 patients would have needed more information on pain. CONCLUSION: Pain control and patient satisfaction may be improved, pre-procedural anxiety needs more attention and better information on the procedure should be provided.