Stress ulcer prophylaxis versus placebo or no prophylaxis in adult hospitalised acutely ill patients: protocol for a systematic review with meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis

Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articleResearchpeer-review

Standard

Stress ulcer prophylaxis versus placebo or no prophylaxis in adult hospitalised acutely ill patients : protocol for a systematic review with meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis. / Marker, Søren; Perner, Anders; Wetterslev, Jørn; Barbateskovic, Marija; Jakobsen, Janus Christian; Krag, Mette; Granholm, Anders; Anthon, Carl Thomas; Møller, Morten Hylander.

In: Systematic Reviews, Vol. 6, 118, 24.06.2017.

Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articleResearchpeer-review

Harvard

Marker, S, Perner, A, Wetterslev, J, Barbateskovic, M, Jakobsen, JC, Krag, M, Granholm, A, Anthon, CT & Møller, MH 2017, 'Stress ulcer prophylaxis versus placebo or no prophylaxis in adult hospitalised acutely ill patients: protocol for a systematic review with meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis', Systematic Reviews, vol. 6, 118. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13643-017-0509-4

APA

Marker, S., Perner, A., Wetterslev, J., Barbateskovic, M., Jakobsen, J. C., Krag, M., Granholm, A., Anthon, C. T., & Møller, M. H. (2017). Stress ulcer prophylaxis versus placebo or no prophylaxis in adult hospitalised acutely ill patients: protocol for a systematic review with meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis. Systematic Reviews, 6, [118]. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13643-017-0509-4

Vancouver

Marker S, Perner A, Wetterslev J, Barbateskovic M, Jakobsen JC, Krag M et al. Stress ulcer prophylaxis versus placebo or no prophylaxis in adult hospitalised acutely ill patients: protocol for a systematic review with meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis. Systematic Reviews. 2017 Jun 24;6. 118. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13643-017-0509-4

Author

Marker, Søren ; Perner, Anders ; Wetterslev, Jørn ; Barbateskovic, Marija ; Jakobsen, Janus Christian ; Krag, Mette ; Granholm, Anders ; Anthon, Carl Thomas ; Møller, Morten Hylander. / Stress ulcer prophylaxis versus placebo or no prophylaxis in adult hospitalised acutely ill patients : protocol for a systematic review with meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis. In: Systematic Reviews. 2017 ; Vol. 6.

Bibtex

@article{d7aa844f40324a8c81cf6fe601739682,
title = "Stress ulcer prophylaxis versus placebo or no prophylaxis in adult hospitalised acutely ill patients: protocol for a systematic review with meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis",
abstract = "BACKGROUND: Stress ulcer prophylaxis is considered standard of care in many critically ill patients in the intensive care unit (ICU). However, the quality of evidence supporting this has recently been questioned, and clinical equipoise exists. Whether there is overall benefit or harm of stress ulcer prophylaxis in adult hospitalised acutely ill patients is unknown. Accordingly, we aim to assess patient-important benefits and harms of stress ulcer prophylaxis versus placebo or no treatment in adult hospitalised acutely ill patients with high risk of gastrointestinal bleeding irrespective of hospital setting.METHODS/DESIGN: We will conduct a systematic review of randomised clinical trials with meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis and assess use of proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) or histamine-2-receptor antagonists (H2RAs) in any dose, formulation and duration. We will accept placebo or no prophylaxis as control interventions. The participants will be adult hospitalised acutely ill patients with high risk of gastrointestinal bleeding. We will systematically search the Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, EMBASE, Science Citation Index, BIOSIS and Epistemonikos for relevant literature. We will follow the recommendations by the Cochrane Collaboration and the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) statement. The risk of systematic errors (bias) and random errors will be assessed, and the overall quality of evidence will be evaluated using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach.DISCUSSION: There is a need for a high-quality systematic review to summarise the benefits and harms of stress ulcer prophylaxis in hospitalised patients to inform practice and future research. Although stress ulcer prophylaxis is used worldwide, no firm evidence for benefit or harm as compared to placebo or no treatments has been established. Critical illness is a continuum not limited to the ICU setting, which is why it is important to assess the benefits and harms of stress ulcer prophylaxis in a wider perspective than exclusively in ICU patients.SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42017055676.",
keywords = "Journal Article",
author = "S{\o}ren Marker and Anders Perner and J{\o}rn Wetterslev and Marija Barbateskovic and Jakobsen, {Janus Christian} and Mette Krag and Anders Granholm and Anthon, {Carl Thomas} and M{\o}ller, {Morten Hylander}",
year = "2017",
month = jun,
day = "24",
doi = "10.1186/s13643-017-0509-4",
language = "English",
volume = "6",
journal = "Systematic Reviews",
issn = "2046-4053",
publisher = "BioMed Central",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - Stress ulcer prophylaxis versus placebo or no prophylaxis in adult hospitalised acutely ill patients

T2 - protocol for a systematic review with meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis

AU - Marker, Søren

AU - Perner, Anders

AU - Wetterslev, Jørn

AU - Barbateskovic, Marija

AU - Jakobsen, Janus Christian

AU - Krag, Mette

AU - Granholm, Anders

AU - Anthon, Carl Thomas

AU - Møller, Morten Hylander

PY - 2017/6/24

Y1 - 2017/6/24

N2 - BACKGROUND: Stress ulcer prophylaxis is considered standard of care in many critically ill patients in the intensive care unit (ICU). However, the quality of evidence supporting this has recently been questioned, and clinical equipoise exists. Whether there is overall benefit or harm of stress ulcer prophylaxis in adult hospitalised acutely ill patients is unknown. Accordingly, we aim to assess patient-important benefits and harms of stress ulcer prophylaxis versus placebo or no treatment in adult hospitalised acutely ill patients with high risk of gastrointestinal bleeding irrespective of hospital setting.METHODS/DESIGN: We will conduct a systematic review of randomised clinical trials with meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis and assess use of proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) or histamine-2-receptor antagonists (H2RAs) in any dose, formulation and duration. We will accept placebo or no prophylaxis as control interventions. The participants will be adult hospitalised acutely ill patients with high risk of gastrointestinal bleeding. We will systematically search the Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, EMBASE, Science Citation Index, BIOSIS and Epistemonikos for relevant literature. We will follow the recommendations by the Cochrane Collaboration and the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) statement. The risk of systematic errors (bias) and random errors will be assessed, and the overall quality of evidence will be evaluated using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach.DISCUSSION: There is a need for a high-quality systematic review to summarise the benefits and harms of stress ulcer prophylaxis in hospitalised patients to inform practice and future research. Although stress ulcer prophylaxis is used worldwide, no firm evidence for benefit or harm as compared to placebo or no treatments has been established. Critical illness is a continuum not limited to the ICU setting, which is why it is important to assess the benefits and harms of stress ulcer prophylaxis in a wider perspective than exclusively in ICU patients.SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42017055676.

AB - BACKGROUND: Stress ulcer prophylaxis is considered standard of care in many critically ill patients in the intensive care unit (ICU). However, the quality of evidence supporting this has recently been questioned, and clinical equipoise exists. Whether there is overall benefit or harm of stress ulcer prophylaxis in adult hospitalised acutely ill patients is unknown. Accordingly, we aim to assess patient-important benefits and harms of stress ulcer prophylaxis versus placebo or no treatment in adult hospitalised acutely ill patients with high risk of gastrointestinal bleeding irrespective of hospital setting.METHODS/DESIGN: We will conduct a systematic review of randomised clinical trials with meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis and assess use of proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) or histamine-2-receptor antagonists (H2RAs) in any dose, formulation and duration. We will accept placebo or no prophylaxis as control interventions. The participants will be adult hospitalised acutely ill patients with high risk of gastrointestinal bleeding. We will systematically search the Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, EMBASE, Science Citation Index, BIOSIS and Epistemonikos for relevant literature. We will follow the recommendations by the Cochrane Collaboration and the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) statement. The risk of systematic errors (bias) and random errors will be assessed, and the overall quality of evidence will be evaluated using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach.DISCUSSION: There is a need for a high-quality systematic review to summarise the benefits and harms of stress ulcer prophylaxis in hospitalised patients to inform practice and future research. Although stress ulcer prophylaxis is used worldwide, no firm evidence for benefit or harm as compared to placebo or no treatments has been established. Critical illness is a continuum not limited to the ICU setting, which is why it is important to assess the benefits and harms of stress ulcer prophylaxis in a wider perspective than exclusively in ICU patients.SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42017055676.

KW - Journal Article

U2 - 10.1186/s13643-017-0509-4

DO - 10.1186/s13643-017-0509-4

M3 - Journal article

C2 - 28646925

VL - 6

JO - Systematic Reviews

JF - Systematic Reviews

SN - 2046-4053

M1 - 118

ER -

ID: 184841963