Quality analysis of prior systematic reviews of carpal tunnel syndrome: an overview of the literature
ABSTRACT BACKGROUND: Carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS) is a common condition greatly affects patients’ quality of life and ability to work. Systematic reviews provide useful information for treatment and health decisions. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to assess the methodological quality of previously pu...
| Main Authors: | , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Associação Paulista de Medicina
2022-12-01
|
| Series: | São Paulo Medical Journal |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | http://www.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1516-31802022005031298&tlng=en |
| _version_ | 1797979976857812992 |
|---|---|
| author | Marcelo Cortês Cavalcante Vinicius Ynoe de Moraes Guilherme Ladeira Osés Luis Renato Nakachima João Carlos Belloti |
| author_facet | Marcelo Cortês Cavalcante Vinicius Ynoe de Moraes Guilherme Ladeira Osés Luis Renato Nakachima João Carlos Belloti |
| author_sort | Marcelo Cortês Cavalcante |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | ABSTRACT BACKGROUND: Carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS) is a common condition greatly affects patients’ quality of life and ability to work. Systematic reviews provide useful information for treatment and health decisions. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to assess the methodological quality of previously published systematic reviews on the treatment of CTS. DESIGN AND SETTING: Overview of systematic reviews conducted at the Brazilian public higher education institution, São Paulo, Brazil METHODS: We searched the MEDLINE and Cochrane Library database for systematic reviews investigating the treatment of CTS in adults. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) and measurement tool to assess systematic reviews (AMSTAR) were applied by two independent examiners. RESULTS: Fifty-five studies were included. Considering the stratification within the AMSTAR measurement tool, we found that more than 76% of the analyzed studies were “low” or “very low”. PRISMA scores were higher when meta-analysis was present (15.61 versus 10.40; P = 0.008), while AMSTAR scores were higher when studies performed meta-analysis (8.43 versus 5.59; P = 0.009) or when they included randomized controlled trials (7.95 versus 6.06; P = 0.043). The intra-observer correlation demonstrated perfect agreement (> 0.8), a Spearman’s correlation coefficient of 0.829, and an ICC of0.857. The inter-observer correlation indicated that AMSTAR was more reliable than PRISMA. CONCLUSION: Overall, systematic reviews of the treatment of CTS are of poor quality. Reviews with better-quality conducted meta-analysis and included randomized controlled trials. AMSTAR is a better tool than PRISMA because it has a better performance and should be recommended in future studies. REGISTRATION NUMBER IN PROSPERO: CRD42020172328 (https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/display_record.php?ID=CRD42020172328) |
| first_indexed | 2024-04-11T05:48:21Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-dccbfa70e8f34511859dbdf701618ccc |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 1806-9460 |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-04-11T05:48:21Z |
| publishDate | 2022-12-01 |
| publisher | Associação Paulista de Medicina |
| record_format | Article |
| series | São Paulo Medical Journal |
| spelling | doaj.art-dccbfa70e8f34511859dbdf701618ccc2022-12-22T04:42:10ZengAssociação Paulista de MedicinaSão Paulo Medical Journal1806-94602022-12-0110.1590/1516-3180.2021.1020.r2.10102022Quality analysis of prior systematic reviews of carpal tunnel syndrome: an overview of the literatureMarcelo Cortês Cavalcantehttps://orcid.org/0000-0003-1207-9185Vinicius Ynoe de Moraeshttps://orcid.org/0000-0002-4933-4007Guilherme Ladeira Oséshttps://orcid.org/0000-0002-9511-9156Luis Renato Nakachimahttps://orcid.org/0000-0003-1901-9820João Carlos Bellotihttps://orcid.org/0000-0003-3396-479XABSTRACT BACKGROUND: Carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS) is a common condition greatly affects patients’ quality of life and ability to work. Systematic reviews provide useful information for treatment and health decisions. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to assess the methodological quality of previously published systematic reviews on the treatment of CTS. DESIGN AND SETTING: Overview of systematic reviews conducted at the Brazilian public higher education institution, São Paulo, Brazil METHODS: We searched the MEDLINE and Cochrane Library database for systematic reviews investigating the treatment of CTS in adults. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) and measurement tool to assess systematic reviews (AMSTAR) were applied by two independent examiners. RESULTS: Fifty-five studies were included. Considering the stratification within the AMSTAR measurement tool, we found that more than 76% of the analyzed studies were “low” or “very low”. PRISMA scores were higher when meta-analysis was present (15.61 versus 10.40; P = 0.008), while AMSTAR scores were higher when studies performed meta-analysis (8.43 versus 5.59; P = 0.009) or when they included randomized controlled trials (7.95 versus 6.06; P = 0.043). The intra-observer correlation demonstrated perfect agreement (> 0.8), a Spearman’s correlation coefficient of 0.829, and an ICC of0.857. The inter-observer correlation indicated that AMSTAR was more reliable than PRISMA. CONCLUSION: Overall, systematic reviews of the treatment of CTS are of poor quality. Reviews with better-quality conducted meta-analysis and included randomized controlled trials. AMSTAR is a better tool than PRISMA because it has a better performance and should be recommended in future studies. REGISTRATION NUMBER IN PROSPERO: CRD42020172328 (https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/display_record.php?ID=CRD42020172328)http://www.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1516-31802022005031298&tlng=enEvidence-based medicineQuality controlCarpal tunnel syndromeQualitySystematics reviewsPRISMA |
| spellingShingle | Marcelo Cortês Cavalcante Vinicius Ynoe de Moraes Guilherme Ladeira Osés Luis Renato Nakachima João Carlos Belloti Quality analysis of prior systematic reviews of carpal tunnel syndrome: an overview of the literature São Paulo Medical Journal Evidence-based medicine Quality control Carpal tunnel syndrome Quality Systematics reviews PRISMA |
| title | Quality analysis of prior systematic reviews of carpal tunnel syndrome: an overview of the literature |
| title_full | Quality analysis of prior systematic reviews of carpal tunnel syndrome: an overview of the literature |
| title_fullStr | Quality analysis of prior systematic reviews of carpal tunnel syndrome: an overview of the literature |
| title_full_unstemmed | Quality analysis of prior systematic reviews of carpal tunnel syndrome: an overview of the literature |
| title_short | Quality analysis of prior systematic reviews of carpal tunnel syndrome: an overview of the literature |
| title_sort | quality analysis of prior systematic reviews of carpal tunnel syndrome an overview of the literature |
| topic | Evidence-based medicine Quality control Carpal tunnel syndrome Quality Systematics reviews PRISMA |
| url | http://www.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1516-31802022005031298&tlng=en |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT marcelocortescavalcante qualityanalysisofpriorsystematicreviewsofcarpaltunnelsyndromeanoverviewoftheliterature AT viniciusynoedemoraes qualityanalysisofpriorsystematicreviewsofcarpaltunnelsyndromeanoverviewoftheliterature AT guilhermeladeiraoses qualityanalysisofpriorsystematicreviewsofcarpaltunnelsyndromeanoverviewoftheliterature AT luisrenatonakachima qualityanalysisofpriorsystematicreviewsofcarpaltunnelsyndromeanoverviewoftheliterature AT joaocarlosbelloti qualityanalysisofpriorsystematicreviewsofcarpaltunnelsyndromeanoverviewoftheliterature |