Systematic review and evidence- based guidance ... - ECDC - Europa

Systematic review and evidence-based guidance on perioperative antibiotic prophylaxisTECHNICAL REPORTTable 11. Studies supporting Modality 3 and quality of evidenceAuthor and design ofstudyKritchevsky et al. 2008,RCTForbes et al. 2008, non-CBAVan Kasteren et al. 2005,non-CBAWeinberg et al. 2001,ITS studyHedrick et al. 2007; non-CBAQuality of study in respect to internal andexternal validity (Ranji et al. [23])N.A. 4Good 3Good 3Good 3Moderate 2Liau et al. 2010, non-CBA Moderate 2Pastor et al. 2009, non-CBAThompson et al. 2011,non-CBATrussell et al. 2001, non-CBAWebb et al 2006, non-CBAWhite et al. 2007; non-CBAYoung et al. 2011, non-CBAModerate 2Moderate 2Moderate 2Moderate 2Moderate 2Moderate 2Quality of evidence according to theGRADE approach* [24]* Quality of evidence according to the GRADE approach: 4=high quality, 3=moderate quality, 2=low quality, 1=very low qualityN.A. = not applicableModality 4To encourage appropriate duration and dosage of PAP one of the following should be implemented: a computerassisteddecision support system, an automatic reminder system, a patient checklist, or a time-out procedure.Table 12. Studies supporting Modality 4 and quality of evidenceAuthor and design ofstudyQuality of study in respect to internal andexternal validity (Ranji et al. [23])De Vries et al. 2010 Good 3Forbes et al. 2008, non-CBAGood 3Haynes et al. 2011, ITS Good 3Van Kasteren et al.2005, non-CBAWeinberg et al. 2001,ITS studyHedrick et al. 2007, non-CBALarochelle et al. 2011,non-CBALiau et al. 2010, non-CBAPastor et al. 2009, non-CBAThompson et al. 2011,non-CBATrussell et al. 2001, non-CBAWebb et al. 2006, non-CBAWhite et al. 2007; non-CBAYoung et al. 2011, non-CBAGood 3Good 3Moderate 2Moderate 2Moderate 2Moderate 2Moderate 2Moderate 2Moderate 2Moderate 2Moderate 2Quality of evidence according to theGRADE approach* [24]* Quality of evidence according to the GRADE approach: 4=high quality, 3=moderate quality, 2=low quality, 1=very low quality24