OBJECTIVE: This study provides a comprehensive overview of the knowledge structure and research hotspots regarding barriers and strategies for the implementation of clinical practice guidelines. METHODS: Publications on barriers and strategies for guideline implementation were searched for on Web of Science Core Collection from database inception to October 24, 2022. R package bibliometrix, VOSviewer, and CiteSpace were used to conduct the analysis. RESULTS: The search yielded 21,768 records from 3,975 journals by 99,998 authors from 3,964 institutions in 186 countries between 1983 and 2022. The number of published papers had a roughly increasing trend annually. The United States, the United Kingdom, and Canada contributed the majority of records. The University of Toronto, the University of Washington, and the University of Sydney were the biggest node in their cluster on the collaboration network map. The three journals that published the greatest number of relevant studies were Implementation Science, BMJ Open, and BMC Health Services Research. Grimshaw JM was the author with the most published articles, and was the second most co-cited author. Research hotspots in this field focused on public health and education, evidence-based medicine and quality promotion, diagnosis and treatment, and knowledge translation and barriers. Challenges and barriers, as well as societal impacts and inequalities, are likely to be key directions for future research. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first bibliometric study to comprehensively summarize the research trends of research on barriers and strategies for clinical practice guideline implementation. A better understanding of collaboration patterns and research hotspots may be useful for researchers. SPANISH ABSTRACT: http://links.lww.com/IJEBH/A247.

Background: To refine the methods of developing clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) for integrative ChineseWestern medicine (ICWM), promoting the formation of trustworthy, implementable recommendations that integrate the strengths of Chinese and Western medicine. Methods: Using a nominal group technique (NGT) approach, a multidisciplinary expert panel was established. The panel identified key methodological issues in ICWM-CPG development through literature review and iterative discussions, and formulated methodological proposals to address these issues. The final set of proposals was achieved through consensus among the panel members. Results: The collaborative effort resulted in the identification of five pivotal methodological issues and the subsequent establishment of 22 specific recommendations. These encompass strict adherence to renowned standards, such as those proposed by the Institute of Medicine (IOM) and Guidelines International Network (G -I -N), the employment of methodologies like the GRADE approach and RIGHT statement, the strategic constitution of a balanced development group, the adept identification of ICWM-focused clinical inquiries, the nuanced integration of diverse evidence sources, and the detailed crafting of transparent, implementable recommendations. Conclusions: This study concentrates on the most crucial and prevalent methodological issues in ICWM-CPG development, proposing a series of recommendations. These suggestions result from a multidisciplinary expert consensus, aiming to provide methodological guidance for ICWM-CPG developers, building upon the current foundational methodologies.

Background Molnupiravir has been considered a promising candidate for COVID-19. Its efficacy and safety in non-severe COVID-19 patients and the differences between patients with different risk factors need further evaluation. Methods We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials that allocated adult patients with non-severe COVID-19 to molnupiravir or a control. We used random-effects models, and conducted subgroup analyses and meta-regression for COVID-19 patients with high-risk factors. The GRADE approach was used to rate the certainty of evidence. Results Fourteen trials with 34 570 patients were included. Moderate- to low-certainty evidence showed that molnupiravir was associated with a reduction in the risk of hospitalization (relative risk [RR] = 0.63, 95% CI: 0.47-0.85), risk of mechanical ventilation (RR = 0.37, 95% CI: 0.19-0.72) and time to symptom resolution (mean differences [MD] = -2.91 days, 95% CI: -3.66 to -2.16). However, no significant differences were found in adverse events, all-cause mortality, rate of and time to viral clearance, or duration of hospitalization. For the rate of viral clearance, subgroup effects were found between trials with low and high risk of bias (P = 0.001) and between trials with male or female majority (P < 0.001). For admission to hospital, subgroup effects were also found between trials with & GE;50% and <50% of the participants being female (P = 0.04). Meta-regression showed a significant association between higher trial mean age and elevated risk of hospitalization (P = 0.011), and female majority and elevated risk of hospitalization (P = 0.011). Conclusions Molnupiravir was found to be effective in non-severe COVID-19, but the efficacy varied with age and sex.

Background: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is still a pandemic globally, about 80% of patients infected with COVID-19 were mild and moderate. Chinese herbal medicine (CHM) has played a positive role in the treatment of COVID-19, with a certain number of primary studies focused on CHM in managing COVID-19 published. This study aims to systematically review the currently published randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies (OBs), and summarize the effectiveness and safety of CHM in the treatment of mild/moderate COVID-19 patients. Methods: We searched 9 databases up to 19 March 2022. Pairs of reviewers independently screened literature, extracted data and assessed risk of bias. For overall effect, we calculated the absolute risk difference (ARD) of weighted averages of different estimates, and certainty of evidence was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluations (GRADE) system. Results: We included 35 RCTs and 24 OBs enrolling 16,580 mild/moderate patients. The certainty of evidence was very low to low. Compared with usual supportive treatments, most effect estimates of CHM treatments were consistent in direction. CHMs presented significant benefits in reducing rate of conversion to severe cases (ARD = 99 less per 1000 patients in RCTs and 131 less per 1000 patients in OBs, baseline risk: 16.52%) and mortality (ARD = 3 less per 1000 patients in RCTs and OBs, baseline risk: 0.40%); shortening time to symptom resolution (3.35 days in RCTs and 2.94 days in OBs), length of hospital stay (2.36 days in RCTs and 2.12 days in OBs) and time to viral clearance (2.64 days in RCTs and 4.46 days in OBs); increasing rate of nucleic acid conversion (ARD = 73 more per 1000 patients in OBs, baseline risk: 16.30%). No serious adverse reactions were found and the differences between CHM and usual supportive care were insignificant. Conclusion: Encouraging evidence showed that CHMs were beneficial in treating mild or moderate patients. CHMs have been proved to possess a safety profile that is comparable to that of usual supportive treatment alone. More rigorously designed clinical trials and mechanism studies are still warranted to further confirm the present findings.

Ethnopharmacological relevance: Traditional Chinese Medicine (TCM) represents a rich repository of empirically -developed traditional medicines. The findings call for more rigorous study into the efficacy, safety, and mechanisms of action of TCM remedies to strengthen the evidence base. Aim of the study: To systematically review the quality of insomnia clinical practice guidelines that involve TCM recommendations and to summarize the certainty of evidence supporting the recommendations, strength, and consistency of recommendations, providing valuable research references for the development of future insomnia guidelines. Materials and methods: We systematically searched PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, CNKI, Wanfang, Chinese Biomedical Literature Database, Chinese Medical Association, Chinese Sleep Research Society, Medsci, Medlive, British National Institute of Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE), and the International Guidelines Collaboration Network (GIN) for clinical practice guidelines on insomnia from inception to March 5, 2023. Four evaluators conducted independent assessments of the quality of the guidelines by employing the AGREE II tool. Subsequently, the guideline recommendations were consolidated and presented as evidence maps.Results: Thirteen clinical practice guidelines addressing insomnia, encompassing 211 recommendations (consisting of 127 evidence-based and 84 expert consensus recommendations), were deemed eligible for inclusion in our analysis. The evaluation results revealed an overall suboptimal quality, with the "scope and purpose" domain achieving the highest score (58.1%), while the "applicability" domain garnered the lowest score (13.0%). Specifically, it was observed that 74.8% (n = 95) of the evidence-based recommendations were supported by evidence of either very low or low certainty, in contrast to the expert consensus recommendations, which accounted for 61.9% (n = 52). We subsequently synthesized 44 recommendations into four evidence maps, focusing on proprietary Chinese medicines, Chinese medicine prescriptions, acupuncture, and massage, respectively. Notably, Chinese herbal remedies and acupuncture exhibited robust support, substantiated by high-certainty evidence, exemplified by interventions such as Xuefu Zhuyu decoction, spleen decoction, body acupuncture, and ear acupuncture, resulting in solid recommendations. Conversely, proprietary Chinese medicines needed more high-certainty evidence, predominantly yielding weak recommendations. As for other therapies, the level of certainty was predominantly categorized as low or very low. Recommendations about magnetic therapy, bathing, and fumigation relied primarily on expert consensus, needing more substantive clinical research evidence, consequently forming weak recommendations. Hot ironing and acupoint injection recommendations were weakly endorsed, primarily based on observational studies. Furthermore, interventions like qigong, gua sha, and moxibustion displayed a relatively limited number of clinical studies, necessitating further exploration to ascertain their efficacy.Conclusions: Our analysis revealed a need for substantial improvement in the quality of all the included guidelines related to insomnia. Notably, recommendations for Traditional Chinese Medicine (TCM) treatments predominantly rely on low-certainty evidence. This study represents a pioneering effort in the utilization of recommendation mapping to both present and identify existing gaps in the evidence landscape within TCM therapies, thus setting the stage for future research initiatives. The evidence supporting TCM therapy recommendations must be fortified to achieve a more substantial level of recommendation and higher certainty. Consequently, there exists a critical and pressing demand for high-quality clinical investigations dedicated to TCM, with a specific focus on ascertaining its long-term efficacy, safety, and potential side effects in the context of insomnia treatment. These endeavors are poised to establish a robust scientific foundation to inform the development of TCM therapy recommendations within the insomnia guidelines.

Background: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) continues to spread globally. Due to the higher risk of mortality, the treatment of severe or critical patients is a top priority. Traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) treatment has played an extremely important role in the fight against COVID-19 in China; a timely evidence summary on TCM in managing COVID-19 is crucial to update the knowledge of healthcare for better clinical management of COVID-19. This study aimed to assess the effects and safety of TCM treatments for severe/critical COVID-19 patients by systematically collecting and synthesizing evidence from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies (e.g., cohort). Methods: We searched nine databases up to 19th March 2022 and the reference lists of relevant publications. Pairs of reviewers independently screened studies, extracted data of interest, and assessed risk of bias. We performed qualitative systematic analysis with visual presentation of results and compared the direction and distribution of effect estimates for each patient's important outcome. We performed sensitivity analyses to observe the robustness of results by restricting analysis to studies with low risk of bias. Results: The search yielded 217,761 records, and 21 studies (6 RCTs and 15 observational studies) proved eligible. A total of 21 studies enrolled 12,981 severe/critical COVID-19 patients with a mean age of 57.21 years and a mean proportion of men of 47.91%. Compared with usual supportive treatments, the effect estimates of TCM treatments were consistent in direction, illustrating that TCM treatments could reduce the risk of mortality, rate of conversion to critical cases, and mechanical ventilation, and showed significant advantages in shortening the length of hospital stay, time to viral clearance, and symptom resolution. The results were similar when we restricted analyses to low-risk-bias studies. No serious adverse events were reported with TCM treatments, and no significant differences were observed between groups. Conclusion: Encouraging evidence suggests that TCM presents substantial advantages in treating severe/critical COVID-19 patients. TCM has a safety profile that is comparable to that of conventional treatment alone. TCMs have played an important role in China's prevention and treatment of COVID-19, which sets an example of using traditional medicine in preventing and treating COVID-19 worldwide.

Background: Barbed suture has been widely used in some surgical fields, and it has achieved good results, but the application in total knee arthroplasty is still controversial. Objective: Literature is collected for statistical analysis so as to provide evidence for the use of barbed suture in Total knee arthroplasty. Methods: We searched PubMed, the Cochrane library and EMBASE database for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) using barbed suture and conventional suture to close incisions after primary total knee arthroplasty, and the retrieval time was from July 2019 to the establishment of the database. Literature was screened according to inclusion and exclusion criteria, quality evaluation and data extraction were conducted for the final included literature, and statistical analysis was conducted using RevMan 5.3 software. Results: A total of six RCTs (826 knees) were included in our meta-analysis. The results showed that the re-negative conversion could shorten the wound closure time (MD –4.41, 95% CI −5.11 to −3.72, P < .00001) and reduce the wound closure total cost (MD –282.61, 95% CI –445.36 to –119.85, P = .0007) and acupuncture injury (RR 0.14, 95% CI 0.03–0.78, P = .02), and did not significantly increasing the incidence of complications (RR 0.80, 95% CI 0.05–0.96, P = .38) or suture breakages (RR 4.58, 95% CI 0.16−128.29, P = .37). There were no significant differences in ROM at postoperative 6 weeks and 3 months (MD −0.74, 95% CI −4.19 to 2.71, P = .67; MD −0.30, 95% CI −2.62 to 2.02, P = .80) and no significant differences in KSS at postoperative 6 weeks (MD –0.22, 95% CI –3.10 to 2.66, P = .88). Conclusions: Our study shows that barbed suture is a fast, low-cost, safe and effective suture method in total knee arthroplasty compared with traditional suture, we also need more literature and longer follow-up to confirm this conclusion.