Em busca de evidência para a prática médica diária
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.11606/issn.2317-0190.v7i1a102252Palavras-chave:
Revisões Sistemáticas, Medicina Baseada em Evidência, Cochrane CollaborationResumo
O médico não tem tempo para estudar e manter-se atualizado na medida que seria necessário. No entanto, a medicina tem evoluído com uma velocidade espantosa e práticas atuais são substituídas por novas muito mais rapidamente nos últimos anos. O que fazer diante de problemas clínicos e questionamentos sobre eficácias de tratamentos? O médico tem várias opções, e uma delas é procurar as respostas em revisões da literatura. Entretanto, nem todas as revisões da literatura são bem feitas ou têm resultados confiáveis. A maioria representa a opinião pessoal dos autores e não há uma metodologia para a sua realização. Ultimamente, têm sido publicadas revisões sistemáticas da literatura, em que os autores delimitam uma questão específica para, então, buscar todos os estudos que respondam a essa pergunta. Uma revisão sistemática da literatura deve conter: objetivos, métodos, análise de qualidade de cada estudo incluído, resultados, conclusões e discussão. O médico precisa ter acesso a esses tipos de revisão e aprender a avaliar a sua qualidade. Um dos critérios recomendados é o que foi desenvolvido por Oxman e Guyatt. A Cochrane Collaboration tem desenvolvido métodos e técnicas para a realização de revisões com o mínimo de erros e opiniões pessoais, sendo, portanto, uma das maiores fontes de revisões da literatura de boa qualidade atualmente.
Downloads
Referências
Sackett DL, Haynes RB, Guyatt G, Tugwell P. Clinical epidemiology. A basic science for clinical medicine. 2nd ed. London: Little, Brown and Company; 1991.
Mulrow CD. The medical review article: state of the science. Ann Intern Med. 1987;106(3):485-488.
Silagy C. Developing a register of randomised controlled trials in primary care. BMJ. 1993;306(6882):897-900.
Davidoff F, Haynes B, Sackett D, Smith R. Evidence based medicine. BMJ. 1995;310(6987):1085-1086.
Smith TW, O'Keeffe JL, Christensen AJ. Cognitive distortion and depression in chronic pain: association with diagnosed disorders. J Consult Clin Psychol. 1994;62(1):195-198.
Lau J, Ioannidis JP, Schmid CH. Quantitative synthesis in systematic reviews. Ann Intern Med. 1997;127(9):820-826.
Hoehler FK, Tobis JS, Buerger AA. Spinal manipulation for low back pain. JAMA. 1981;245(18):1835-1838.
Guyatt GH, Rennie D. User's guides to the medical literature [editorial]. JAMA. 1993;270(17):2096-2097.
Oxman AD, Sackett DL, Guyatt GH. Users' guides to the medical literature. I. How to get started. The evidence-based medicine working group. JAMA. 19936;270(17):2093-2095.
Guyatt GH, Sackett DL, Cok DJ. Users' guides to the medical literature. II. How to use an article about therapy of prevention. A. Are the results of the study valid? The evidence-based medicine working group. JAMA. 1994;270(17):2598-2601.
Jaeschke R, Guyatt GH, Sackett DL. Users' guides to the medical literature. III. How to use an article about a diagnostic test. A. Are the results of the study valid? The evidence-based medicine working group. JAMA. 1994;271(5):389-391.
Jaeschke R, Guyatt GH, Sackett DL. Users' guides to the medical literature. III. How to use an article about a diagnostic test. B. What are the results and will they help me in caring for my patients? The evidence-based medicine working group. JAMA. 1994;271(9):703-707.
Levine M, Walter S, Lee H. Users' guides to the medical literature. IV. How to use an article about harm. The evidence-based medicine working group. JAMA. 1994;271(20):1615-1619.
Laupacis A, Wells G, Richardson WS, Tugwell P. Users' guides to the medical literature. V. How to use an article about prognosis. The evidence-based medicine working group. JAMA. 1994;272(3):234-237.
Oxman AD, Cook DJ, Guyatt GH. Users' guides to the medical literature. VI. How to use an overview. The evidence-based medicine working group. JAMA. 1994;272(17):1367-1371.
Richardson WS, Detsky AS. Users' guides to the medical literature. VII. How to use a clinical decision analysis. A. Are the results of the study valid? The evidence-based medicine working group. JAMA. 1995;273(16):1292-1295.
Richardson WS, Detsky AS. Users' guides to the medical literature. VII. How to use a clinical decision analysis. B. What are the results and will they help me in caring for my patients? The evidence-based medicine working group. JAMA. 1995;273(20):1610-1613.
Hayward RS, Wilson MC, Tunis SR. Users' guides to the medical literature. VIII. How to use clinical practice guidelines. A. Are the recommendations valid? The evidence-based medicine working group. JAMA. 1995;274(7):570-574.
Wilson MC, Hayward RS, Tunis SR. Users' guides to the medical literature. VIII. How to use clinical practice guidelines. B. What are the recommendations and will they help you in caring for your patients? The evidence-based medicine working group. JAMA. 1995;274(20):1630-1632.
Guyatt GH, Sackett DL, Sinclair JC. Users' guides to the medical literature. IX. A method for grading health care recommendations. The evidence-based medicine working group. JAMA. 1995;274(22):1800-1804.
Naylor CD, Guyatt GH. Users' guides to the medical literature. X. How to use an clinical reporting variations in the outcomes of health services. The evidence-based medicine working group. JAMA. 1996;275(7):554-558.
Naylor CD, Guyatt GH. Users' guides to the medical literature. XI. How to use an article about a clinical utilization review. The evidence-based medicine working group. JAMA. 1996;275(18):1435-1439.
Guyatt GH, Naylor CD, Juniper D. Users' guides to the medical literature. XII. How to use articles about health-related quality of life. The evidence-based medicine working group. JAMA. 1997;277(15):1232-1237.
Drummond MF, Richardson WS, O'Brien BJ. Users' guides to the medical literature. XIII. How to use an article on economic analysis of clinical practice. A. Are the results of the study valid? The evidence-based medicine working group. JAMA. 1997;277(19):1552-1557.
O'Brien BJ, Heyland D, Richardson WS. Users' guides to the medical literature. XIII. How to use an article on economic analysis of clinical practice. B. What are the results and will they help me in caring for my patients? The evidence-based medicine working group. JAMA. 1997;277(22):1802-1806.
Dans AL, Dans LF, Guyatt GH, Richardson WS. Users' guides to the medical literature. XIV. How to decide on the applicability of clinical trial results to your patient. The evidence-based medicine working group. JAMA. 1998;279(7):545-549.
Richardson WS, Wilson MC, Guyatt GH. Users' guides to the medical literature. XV. How to use an article about disease probability for differential diagnosis. The evidence-based medicine working group. JAMA. 1999;281(13):1214-1219.
Guyatt GH, Sinclair J, Cook DJ, Glasziou P. Users' guides to the medical literature. XVI. How to use a treatment recommendation. The evidence-based medicine working group. JAMA. 1999;281(19):1836-1843.
Barratt A, Irwig L, Glasziou P. Users' guides to the medical literature. XVII. How to use guidelines and recommendations about screening. The evidence-based medicine working group. JAMA. 1999;281(21):2029-2034.
Randolph AG, Haynes RB, Wyatt JC. Users' guides to the medical literature. XVIII. How to use an article evaluating the clinical impact of a computer-based clinical decision support system. JAMA. 1999;282(1):67-74.
Dickensin K, Scherer R, Lefebvre C. Identifying relevant studies for systematic reviews. BMJ. 1994;309(6964):1286-1291.
Oxman AD, Guyatt GH. Validation of an index of the quality of review articles. J Clin Epidemiol. 1991;44(11):1271-1278.
Moher D, Jadad AR, Nichol G. Assessing the quality of randomized controlled trials: an annotated bibliography of scales and checklists. Control Clin Trials. 1995;16(1):62-73.
Verhagen AP, de Vet HC, de Bie RA. The Delphi list: a criteria list for quality assessment of randomized clinical trials for conducting systematic reviews developed by Delphi consensus. J Clin Epidemiol. 1998;51(12):1235-1241.
Chalmers TC, Smith Junior H, Blackburn B. A method for assessing the quality of a randomized control trial. Controlled Clin Trials. 1981;2(1):31-49.
Jadad AR, Moore RA, Carrol D. Assessing the quality of reports of randomized clinical trials: is blinding necessary? Control Clin Trials. 1996;17(1):1-12.
Koes BW, Scholten RJ, Mens JM, Bouter LM. Efficacy of epidural steroid injections for low-back pain and sciatica: a systematic review of randomized clinical trials. Pain. 1995;63(3):279-288.
van Tulder MW, Koes BW, Bouter LM. Conservative treatment of acute and chronic nonspecific low back pain. A systematic review of randomized controlled trials of the most common interventions. Spine. 1997;22(18):2128-2156.
Watts RW, Silagy CA. A meta-analysis on the efficacy of epidural corticosteroids in the treatment of sciatica. Anaesth Intensive Care. 1995;23(5):564-569.
Carette S, Leclaire R, Marcoux S. Epidural corticosteroid injections for sciatica due to herniated nucleus pulposus. N Engl J Med. 1997;336(23):1634-1640.
Carette S, Marcoux S, Truchon R. A controlled trial of corticosteroid injections into facet joints for chronic low back pain. N Engl J Med. 1991;325(14):1002-1007.
Serrao JM, Marks RL, Morley SJ, Goodchild CS. Intrathecal midazolam for the treatment of chronic mechanical low back pain: a controlled comparison with epidural steroid in a pilot study. Pain. 1992;48(1):5-12.
Marks RC, Houston R, Thulbourne R. Facet joint injection and facet nerve block: a randomised comparison in 86 patients with chronic low back pain. Pain. 1992;49(3):325-328.
Bush K, Hillier S. A controlled study of caudal epidural injections of triamcinolone plus procaine for the management of intractable sciatica. Spine. 1991;16(5):572-575.
Downloads
Publicado
Edição
Seção
Licença
Copyright (c) 2000 Acta Fisiátrica
Este trabalho está licenciado sob uma licença Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
