本文關(guān)鍵詞：WONCA研究論文摘要匯編——醫(yī)生記錄的血壓比護(hù)士的要高:系統(tǒng)評價及薈萃分析　出處：《中國全科醫(yī)學(xué)》2014年23期 　論文類型：期刊論文

  更多相關(guān)文章： WONCA 白大衣效應(yīng) 加權(quán)均數(shù)差 薈萃分析 醫(yī)學(xué)標(biāo)準(zhǔn) 會議摘要 評價員 隨機效應(yīng) 匯總數(shù)據(jù) 測量結(jié)果

【摘要】：背景致血壓升高的"白大衣效應(yīng)",醫(yī)生要大于護(hù)士。這也許能夠左右對護(hù)士主導(dǎo)高血壓管理及醫(yī)生臨床上過高評估或過度治療高血壓方面研究的解釋。目的量化醫(yī)生和護(hù)士血壓測量結(jié)果的差異。研究設(shè)計與場所系統(tǒng)評價及薈萃分析Medline,Central,CINAHL,EMBase數(shù)據(jù)庫、雜志、會議摘要等的檢索結(jié)果。方法由2位評價員選擇報道醫(yī)生測量成人平均血壓及同期護(hù)士測量成人平均血壓的研究并提取平均血壓,使用改良循證醫(yī)學(xué)標(biāo)準(zhǔn)評估測量血壓偏好風(fēng)險,用隨機效應(yīng)薈萃分析對結(jié)果進(jìn)行匯總。結(jié)果 1 899篇文獻(xiàn)中含15項研究(11項為高血壓,4項為伴發(fā)高血壓和血壓正常)。與醫(yī)生測量結(jié)果相比,護(hù)士測量的血壓要低〔收縮壓加權(quán)均數(shù)差=-7.0 mm Hg(1 mm Hg=0.133 kPa),95%CI(-4.7,-9.2);舒張壓加權(quán)均數(shù)差=-3.8 mm Hg,95%CI(-2.2,-5.4)〕;偏好風(fēng)險低的研究差異要小〔收縮壓加權(quán)均數(shù)差=-4.6 mm Hg,95%CI=(-1.9,-7.3);舒張壓加權(quán)均數(shù)差=-1.7 mm Hg,95%CI=(-0.1,-3.2)〕�；卺t(yī)生讀數(shù)的"白大衣高血壓"診斷的頻率比護(hù)士明顯要高〔OR=1.6,95%CI(1.2,2.1)〕。結(jié)論就血壓測量而言,護(hù)士的"白大衣效應(yīng)"比醫(yī)生要小。這種系統(tǒng)性的差異對高血壓診斷及處置具有啟示意義。注意:在匯總數(shù)據(jù)時要求同時使用護(hù)士及醫(yī)生測量的血壓。
[Abstract]:Background the "white coat effect" of blood pressure rise. Doctors are larger than nurses. This may influence the interpretation of nurse-led hypertension management and clinical overassessment or overtreatment of hypertension by doctors. Objective to quantify differences in blood pressure measurements between doctors and nurses. Research design and site system evaluation and meta-analysis Medline. Central / CINAHLU EMBase database, magazine. Methods the average blood pressure of adult was measured by two evaluators and the average blood pressure of adults was measured by nurses in the same period and the average blood pressure was extracted. The risk of blood pressure preference was evaluated by modified evidence-based medicine standard, and the results were summarized by random effect meta-analysis. Results there were 15 studies and 11 items of hypertension in 1 899 articles. Four items were associated with high blood pressure and normal blood pressure. The blood pressure measured by nurses should be low (systolic blood pressure weighted mean difference: -7.0 mm Hg(1 mm Hg=0.133 KPA 95 CI = -4.7 ~ (-9.2)); The weighted mean difference of diastolic blood pressure was 3.8mm HgC95C ~ (-2.2) ~ (-5.4) m ~ (-1); The difference of preference risk was small (systolic pressure weighted mean difference was -4.6 mm HgGN 95) and CIQ was -1.9 ~ (-7.3) ~ (-1) ~ (-1) ~ (-1) ~ (-1) ~ (-1) ~ (-7) ~ (3); The weighted mean difference of diastolic blood pressure (DBP) was -1.7 mm Hg ~ (95) CI ~ (-0.1). The frequency of diagnosis of "white coat hypertension" based on doctor's reading was significantly higher than that of nurses. Conclusion in terms of blood pressure measurement, the frequency of diagnosis was significantly higher than that of nurses. The "white coat effect" of nurses is smaller than that of doctors. This systematic difference is instructive for the diagnosis and management of hypertension.
【作者單位】： 中國石油天然氣集團公司中心醫(yī)院;
【分類號】：R544.1
【正文快照】： WONCA研究論文摘要匯編——醫(yī)生記錄的血壓比護(hù)士的要高:系統(tǒng)評價及薈萃分析@周淑新$中國石油天然氣集團公司中心醫(yī)院 @Clark CE @Horvath IA @Taylor RS背景致血壓升高的"白大衣效應(yīng)",醫(yī)生要大于護(hù)士。這也許能夠左右對護(hù)士主導(dǎo)高血壓管理及醫(yī)生臨床上過高評估或過度治療，

本文編號：1411619