SCI晨读:干预措施对癌症患者反刍的影响:系统评价和荟萃分析

2021
07/19

+
分享
评论
NursingResearch护理研究前
A-
A+

本研究旨在检查干预措施对癌症患者反刍的影响。

SCI晨读:

干预措施对癌症患者反刍的影响:系统评价和荟萃分析

 

摘要

目标

本研究旨在检查干预措施对癌症患者反刍的影响。

设计

系统评价和荟萃分析。

数据源

在 6 个数据库(Scopus、Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL)、PsyArticles、CINAHL、PubMed 和 Web of Science)中检索了 2000 年 1 月至 2020 年 4 月期间发表的相关文章。

评价方法

纳入癌症个体反刍的干预相关实验研究(包括实验组和对照组)的结果。使用综合Meta分析进行数据分析。计算Hedges’ g 和 95% 置信区间 (CI) 以估计效果。此外,还创建了漏斗图并使用2检验分析了异质性。研究还使用了PRISMA。

结果

纳入8项研究,包括 856 名癌症患者。一半的研究 ( n  = 4) 是随机对照试验,其中六项进行了基于正念的干预。干预措施对癌症患者的反刍有显著影响(z = -2.356,Q = 167.663,p  < 0.001,2  = 95.825%)。效应大小为 -0.894(95% CI = [-1.638, -0.150])且具有统计学意义(p  < 0.001)。

结论

这些干预措施减少了癌症患者的反刍。应谨慎解释这些影响,因为存在高度异质性。然而,只有少数研究被纳入,研究结果强调了进一步研究的必要性。

影响

许多人可能会从以沉思为重点的干预措施中受益,尤其是基于正念的干预措施。护士应利用现有机会促进癌症相关反刍的最佳管理。

Abstract

Aim

This study aimed to examine the effects of interventions on rumination among individuals with cancer.

Design

A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Data Sources

Six databases (Scopus, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), PsyArticles, CINAHL, PubMed and Web of Science) were searched for relevant articles published between January 2000 and April 2020.

Review methods

The findings of experimental studies (including both experimental and control groups) related to interventions to effect rumination of individuals with cancer were included. Comprehensive meta-analysis was used to analyse the data. Hedges’ g and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were computed to estimate the effect. Additionally, funnel plots were created and heterogeneity was analysed using the I2 test. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) was used.

Results

Eight studies, which included a total sample of 856 individuals with cancer, were included. Half of the studies (n = 4) were randomised controlled trials, and six of them had conducted mindfulness-based interventions. The interventions had significant effects on rumination among individuals with cancer (z = −2.356, Q = 167.663, p < 0.001, I2 = 95.825%). The effect size was −0.894 (95% CI = [−1.638, −0.150]) and statistically significant (p < 0.001).

Conclusion

The interventions had reduced rumination among individuals with cancer. These effects should be interpreted with caution because there was a high level of heterogeneity. However, only a few studies were included, and the findings underscore the need for further research.

Impact

Many individuals are likely to benefit from rumination-focused interventions, especially mindfulness-based interventions. Nurses should utilise available opportunities to facilitate the optimal management of cancer-related rumination.



原文链接: 

https://doi.org/10.1111/jan.14916



THE

END


本文由作者自行上传,并且作者对本文图文涉及知识产权负全部责任。如有侵权请及时联系(邮箱:nanxingjun@hmkx.cn
关键词:
SCI,癌症,反刍,患者,干预,荟萃,分析,研究

人点赞

收藏

人收藏

打赏

打赏

我有话说

0条评论

0/500

评论字数超出限制

表情
评论

为你推荐

推荐课程


社群

精彩视频

您的申请提交成功

确定 取消
剩余5
×

打赏金额

认可我就打赏我~

1元 5元 10元 20元 50元 其它

打赏

打赏作者

认可我就打赏我~

×

扫描二维码

立即打赏给Ta吧!

温馨提示:仅支持微信支付!