2024/09/04 by Galvão, Cristina Maria, Ullman, Amanda, Mendes, Karina Dal Sasso +4
#Life Sciences #Medicine and Health Sciences
paper · doi:10.17605/osf.io/gt49b
Introduction: Systematic reviews represent an increasing number of published studies in the healthcare field, and nursing is no exception to this trend. While quantitative systematic reviews, with or without meta-analysis, are positioned at the top of the evidence pyramid, providing the highest level of evidence for clinical practice, it is evident that researchers still face challenges in properly conducting the method and all its stages. This often results in reviews that lack the appropriate methodological rigor and the reliability of the evidence. Objective: To analyze the methodological quality of quantitative systematic reviews that evaluated dressings applied to the insertion site of central venous access for the control and prevention of catheter-related infections in hospitalized patients. Method: This is an umbrella review of systematic effectiveness reviews conducted in the following databases: CDRS, CINAHL, EMBASE, JBI Database of Systematic Review and Implementation Reports, LILACS, PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science Core Collection. Additionally, a search in the grey literature will be conducted using Google Scholar and ProQuest Dissertations & Theses databases, along with a manual search of the reference lists of the included studies. Titles, abstracts, and full texts will be independently assessed by two reviewers to identify those that meet the eligibility criteria. The methodological quality of the reviews will be assessed using the Critical Appraisal tools for use in JBI Checklist for Systematic Review or the AMSTAR 2 tool. Expected Results: Based on the results obtained, it is expected to provide an overview of the quality of systematic reviews in the nursing field and the main weaknesses in the process of conducting this method. This study aims to contribute to the field by enabling the evaluation of systematic reviews in nursing, thereby aiding reviewers, editors, and authors in promoting significant methodological improvements in systematic reviews, especially in Brazil. Keywords: Systematic Review; Bandages; Infection Control; Cross Infection.