Evidence Summary for Nonpharmacological Management of Chemotherapy‐Induced Nausea and Vomiting

Li, Kexuan; Cai, Yuanyuan; Xie, Shu; Zhou, Yingshuyi; Dong, Jiaqian; Zhu, Qingbo; Zhang, Jiayu; Qiu, Xiuyue

doi:10.1155/2022/4741193

Cited by 5 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 14 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…There were many nonpharmacological management measures for CINV, which should be combined with the clinical situation and the patient’s wish, and follow the principle of individuation. [27] By applying the nausea-free ward model in this study, the results showed significant improvement in CINV in chemotherapy patients. This model emphasized multidisciplinary cooperation, continuous identification of deficiencies and improvement of patients’ CINV symptoms.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 87%

Establishing a nausea-free ward model to reduce chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting: A retrospective study

Wang,

Deng,

Huang

et al. 2024

Medicine

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The objective of this study was to establish a nausea-free ward model and evaluate the effect of an intervention procedure guided by this model on chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) in cancer patients. A total of 105 chemotherapy patients from March to September 2022 before the establishment of nausea-free ward in the Chongqing Jiulongpo District People’s Hospital were selected as the control group as well as 105 chemotherapy patients from March to September 2023 after the establishment of nausea-free ward as the intervention group. The intervention group was managed by comprehensive standardized CINV management on the basis of the control group. Finally, the Chinese Society of Clinical Oncology grading tool for nausea and vomiting and the Functional Living Index-Emesis were used to evaluate the effect. Under the intervention of the nausea-free ward model, the intervention group exhibited significantly lower ratings of nausea and vomiting compared to the control group (all P-value <.05). The nausea score, vomiting score, and total score of the intervention group were significantly lower than the control group (all P-value <.05). Our study found CINV symptoms and quality of life can be significantly improved by the application of the nausea-free ward model. The nausea-free ward model is instructive in clinical practice and can guide clinical work as well as bring management experience to clinical workers.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 87%

Establishing a nausea-free ward model to reduce chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting: A retrospective study

Wang,

Deng,

Huang

et al. 2024

Medicine

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…One study noted improved outcomes (stress reduction, improved coping, and sleep quality) using an integrative healthcare model that combined heartfulness meditation and care coordination (64). Though lacking data in CVS, studies suggest that acupuncture aimed at P6 or the Neiguan point is safe, improves symptoms in chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting, and is used by some patients (65).…”

Section: Review Articlementioning

confidence: 99%

Diagnosis and Management of Cyclic Vomiting Syndrome: A Critical Review

Frazier

Venkatesan

2023

Am J Gastroenterol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Cyclic vomiting syndrome (CVS) is a chronic disorder of gut-brain interaction characterized by recurrent disabling episodes of nausea, vomiting, and abdominal pain. CVS affects both children and adults with a prevalence of approximately 2% in the United States. CVS is more common in female individuals and affects all races. The pathophysiology of CVS is unknown and a combination of genetic, environmental, autonomic, and neurohormonal factors is believed to play a role. CVS is also closely associated with migraine headaches and likely have a shared pathophysiology. The diagnosis of CVS is based on the Rome criteria, and minimal recommended testing includes an upper endoscopy and imaging studies of the abdomen. CVS is frequently associated with anxiety, depression, and autonomic dysfunction. Patients with CVS commonly use cannabis therapeutically for symptom relief. By contrast, cannabinoid hyperemesis syndrome is believed to be a subset of CVS with chronic heavy cannabis use leading to hyperemesis. Due to the recalcitrant nature of the illness, patients often visit the emergency department and are hospitalized for acute CVS flares. Guidelines on the management of CVS recommend a biopsychosocial approach. Prophylactic therapy consists of tricyclic antidepressants (amitriptyline), antiepileptics (topiramate), and aprepitant in refractory patients. Abortive therapy consists of triptans, antiemetics (ondansetron), and sedation. Treatment of comorbid conditions is extremely important to improve overall patient outcomes. CVS has a significant negative impact on patients, families, and the healthcare system, and future research to understand its pathophysiology and develop targeted therapies is needed.

show abstract

Methodological components, structure and quality assessment tools for evidence summaries: a scoping review

Whitehorn,

Lockwood,

et al. 2024

JBI Evidence Synthesis

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: The objective of this review was to identify and map the available information related to the definition, structure, and core methodological components of evidence summaries, as well as to identify any indicators of quality. Introduction: Evidence summaries offer a practical solution to overcoming some of the barriers present in evidence-based health care, such as lack of access to evidence at the point of care, and the knowledge and expertise to evaluate the quality and translate the evidence into clinical decision-making. However, lack of transparency in reporting and inconsistencies in the methodology of evidence summary development have previously been cited and pose problems for end-users (eg, clinicians, policymakers). Inclusion criteria: Any English-language resource that described the methodological development or appraisal of an evidence summary was included. Methods: PubMed, Embase, and CINAHL (EBSCOhost) were systematically searched in November 2019, with no limits on the search. The search was updated in June 2021 and January 2023. Gray literature searches and pearling of references of included sources were also conducted at the same time as the database searches. All resources (ie, articles, papers, books, dissertations, reports, and websites) were eligible for inclusion in the review if they evaluated or described the development or appraisal of an evidence summary methodology within a point-of-care context and were published in English. Literature reviews (eg, systematic reviews, rapid reviews), including summaries of evidence on interventions or health care activities that either measure effects, a phenomena of interest, or where the objective was the development, description or evaluation of methods without a clear point-of-care target, were excluded from the review. Results: A total of 76 resources (n=56 articles from databases and n=20 reports from gray literature sources) were included in the review. The most common type/name included critically appraised topic (n=18) and evidence summary (n=17). A total of 25 resources provided a definition of an evidence summary: commonalities included a clinical question; a structured, systematic literature search; a description of literature selection; and appraisal of evidence. Of these 25, 16 included descriptors such as brief, concise, rapid, short, succinct and snapshot. The reported methodological components closely reflected the definition results, with the most reported methodological components being a systematic, multi-database search, and critical appraisal. Evidence summary examples were mostly presented as narrative summaries and usually included a reference list, background or clinical context, and recommendations or implications for practice or policy. Four quality assessment tools and a systematic review of tools were included. Conclusions: The findings of this study highlight the wide variability in the definition, language, methodological components and structure used for point-of-care resources that met our definition of an evidence summary. This scoping review is one of the first steps aimed at improving the credibility and transparency of evidence summaries in evidence-based health care, with further research required to standardize the definitions and methodologies associated with point-of-care resources and accepted tools for quality assessment. Supplemental digital content: A Chinese-language version of the abstract of this review is available at http://links.lww.com/SRX/A59, studies ineligible following full-text review http://links.lww.com/SRX/A60.

show abstract

Evidence Summary for Nonpharmacological Management of Chemotherapy‐Induced Nausea and Vomiting

Cited by 5 publications

References 14 publications

Establishing a nausea-free ward model to reduce chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting: A retrospective study

Establishing a nausea-free ward model to reduce chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting: A retrospective study

Diagnosis and Management of Cyclic Vomiting Syndrome: A Critical Review

Methodological components, structure and quality assessment tools for evidence summaries: a scoping review

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About