Search

Introduction Venous thromboembolism (VTE) occurs in up to 40%–80% of patients after hip and knee arthroplasty. Clinical decision-making aided by guidelines is the most effective strategy to reduce the burden of VTE. However, the quality of guidelines is dependent on the strength of their evidence base. The objective of this article is to critically evaluate the quality of VTE prevention guidelines and the strength of their recommendations in VTE prophylaxis in patients undergoing hip and knee arthroplasty.Methods Relevant literature up to 16 March 2020 was systematically searched. We searched databases such as Web of Science, PubMed, EMBASE, Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health Literature, China National Knowledge Infrastructure and WanFang and nine guidelines repositories. The identified guidelines were appraised by two reviewers using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation II and appraised the strength of their recommendations independently. Following quality assessment, a predesigned data collection form was used to extract the characteristics of the included guideline.Results We finally included 15 guidelines. Ten of the included guidelines were rated as ‘recommended’ or ‘recommended with modifications’. The standardised scores were relatively high in the domains of Clarity of Presentation, and Scope and Purpose. The lowest average standardised scores were observed in the domains of Applicability and Stakeholder Involvement. In reference to the domains of Rigour of Development and Editorial Independence, the standardised scores varied greatly between the guidelines. The agreement between the two appraisers is almost perfect (intraclass correlation coefficients higher than 0.80). A considerable proportion of the recommendations is based on low-quality or very-low-quality evidence or is even based on working group expert opinion.Conclusions In summary, the majority of the recommendations are based on low-quality evidence, and further confirmation is needed. Furthermore, guideline developers should pay more attention to methodological quality, especially in the Stakeholder Involvement domain and the Applicability domain.

ObjectivesThis study aimed to identify those at high risk of poor mental health among nursing students and to examine the relationships and consistency among five mental health assessments.DesignA cross-sectional design with purposive sampling was used. Four mental health screening tools plus previous mental health history/information were conducted during June 2015 to October 2016.SettingA nursing major university in Taiwan.ParticipantsA total of 2779 participants aged between 19 and 45 years were recruited.Main outcome measuresFive mental health risks were identified: increased risk for ultra-high risk, putative prepsychosis states, high trait anxiety, high state anxiety with genetic risk and depression.ResultsOut of the 3395 collected questionnaire, 2779 (82%) were found valid and included in the study. 612 (22%) of the participants were identified to be at mental health risk. 12 of them appeared positive in four, 79 in three, 148 in two and 373 in one of the adopted mental health screening tools. 69 participants had the experience of seeking medical help due to mental health issues, and 58% of them were identified to be at risk of mental health during the screening. Trait and state anxiety scored the highest in correlation analysis (r(2620)=0.76, p