微波治疗宫颈糜烂随机对照试验的质量评价

目的评价微波治疗宫颈糜烂随机对照试验的方法学质量和报告质量。方法通过计算机检索、手工检索,全面收集与微波治疗宫颈糜烂有关的随机对照试验,按照Cochrane协作网推荐的评价方法对纳入研究进行方法学质量评价,按照CONSORT清单项目进行研究报告质量评价。结果最终纳入文献11篇,其中随机对照试验3篇,半随机对照试验8篇。评价结果显示,纳入文献方法学质量和报告质量普遍较低,其中C级为10篇, CONSORT评分最高仅17分。结论以往的微波治疗宫颈糜烂随机对照试验研究存在不同程度的方法学质量缺陷,故其结论存在发生选择性偏倚、实施性偏倚、测量性偏倚以及减员性偏倚的高度可能性。而低的研究报告质量又会严重影响读者对研究结果真实性、重要性及实用性的正确理解和评价。因此期待设计严密、实施科学、报告完整的随机对照研究出现。

Quality Evaluation of Randomize Controlled Trials Involving Microwave Therapy for Cervical Erosion

Objective To evaluate the methodological and reporting qualities of randomize controlled trials involving MTC (microwave tissue coagulation) therapy for cervical erosion. Methods Through computer and handsearch, randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and/or quasi-randomized controlled trials (quasiRCTs) were collected. The methodological quality of the included studies was assessed using quality assessment criteria of Cochrane systematic review guideline, and the reporting quality was assessed using the CONSORT (Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials) checklist. Results Eleven clinical controlled trials (CCTs) were included. Three were RCTs and eight were quasi-RCTs. The methodological and reporting qualitiy of the included studies was generally low (10 trials ranked Level C, and the maximum CONSORT score was only 17). Conclusions The quality of the CCTs involving microwave therapy for cervical erosion is generally low with a high risk of biases. And the reporting of these trials is also incomplete. Therefore, more randomized controlled trials of high quality are required to provide reliable evidence.