| Literature DB >> 31640688 |
Huayang Cai1, Hui Li2, Huizhen Zeng1, Danping Xu1, Wenwei Ouyang1, Aiping Lv3.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Clinical Practice Guidelines (CPGs) play an important role in clinical practice, and they require appropriate evaluation, especially in application. This study explores the application evaluation method of CPGs for Traditional Chinese Medicines (TCM). It uses the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) and clinical cases to evaluate the consistency between CPGs of TCM and clinical practice.Entities:
Keywords: Analytic hierarchy process; Angina pectoris; Application evaluation; Clinical practice guidelines; Traditional Chinese medicine
Year: 2019 PMID: 31640688 PMCID: PMC6805407 DOI: 10.1186/s12906-019-2683-5
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Complement Altern Med ISSN: 1472-6882 Impact factor: 3.659
Fig. 1Construction and weighting of the system
The value of RI of the 1–9 order average random consistency index
| n | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RI | 0 | 0 | 0.58 | 0.90 | 1.12 | 1.24 | 1.32 | 1.41 | 1.45 |
Traditional AHP Saaty weight method, and with conversion to consistency evaluation
| Traditional AHP Saaty Scale | Converted to consistency evaluation | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Importance on scale | Definition | Consistency degree between CPG and Clinical Practice(%) | Score in the system |
| 1 | Compared to B, A is of equal importance | 50 | 1 |
| 3 | Compared to B, A is slightly more important | 62.5 | 3 |
| 5 | Compared to B, A is more important | 75 | 5 |
| 7 | Compared to B, A is much more important | 87.5 | 7 |
| 9 | Compared to B, A is extremely important | 100 | 9 |
| 2, 4, 6, 8 | Compared to B, A is important with an intermediate value between the two judgments | – | 2, 4, 6, 8 |
| 1/3 | Compared to A, B is slightly more important | 37.5 | 1/3 |
| 1/5 | Compared to A, B is more important | 25 | 1/5 |
| 1/7 | Compared to A, B is much more important | 12.5 | 1/7 |
| 1/9 | Compared to A, B is extremely important | 0 | 1/9 |
| 1/2,1/4,1/6,1/8 | Compared to A, B is important with intermediate values between the two judgments | – | 1/2,1/4,1/6,1/8 |
Fig. 2System Questionnaires. AHP theory requires matrix consistency testing to exclude logic errors in questionnaires. This matrix consistency testing was performed, which 59 questionnaires passed and used to calculate the weight of the system. This matrix consistency testing which is one step of building AHP construction, is not the concept as testing the consistency between the CPGs and clinical practice
The weight of each index
| Index layer(level 3) | level 3 weight | Index layer (level 2) | level 2 weight | Index layer (level 1) | level 1 weight | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Western medicine diagnosis | 0.13214 | Western medicine diagnosis | 0.13214 | Diagnosis | 0.553124 | 1 |
| TCM diagnosis | 0.163026 | TCM diagnosis | 0.163026 | |||
| Syndrome classification | 0.115915 | Syndrome classification determination | 0.257958 | |||
| Syndrome key point | 0.14203 | |||||
| TCM decoction | 0.21166 | therapeutic principle | 0.290852 | treatment | 0.44931 | |
| TCM particular treatment | 0.079236 | |||||
| Recuperation and prevention | 0.158458 | recuperation and prevention | 0.158458 |
Basic biographical information for the 150 angina inpatients and overall consistency comparison
| Category | Number(Ratio) | consistency degree(%) |
|
| |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Gender (number) | male (%) | 77(51.33) | 41.92 ± 6.66 | −0.722 | 0.471 |
| female (%) | 73 (48.67) | 42.74 ± 7.24 | |||
| Age | age (year) | 68.43 ± 11.45 | |||
| Hospital stay | hospital stay (day) | 7.05 ± 2.53 | |||
| Western medicine diagnosis (number) | stable angina (%) | 85 (56.67) | 42.58 ± 7.02 | 0.523 | 0.602 |
| unstable angina (%) | 65 (43.33) | 41.98 ± 6.87 | |||
| PCI operation (number) | PCI surgery before hospitalization (%) | 39 (26.00) | 42.68 ± 6.99 | 0.207 | 0.814 |
| PCI surgery during hospitalization (%) | 41 (27.33) | 41.74 ± 6.26 | |||
| no PCI surgery (%) | 70 (46.67) | 42.45 ± 6.94 | |||
| CCS classification | class 1 | 9 | 44.28 ± 8.52 | 0.800 | 0.496 |
| class 2 | 54 | 41.25 ± 5.98 | |||
| class 3 | 26 | 42.56 ± 6.59 | |||
| class 4 | 61 | 42.87 ± 7.63 | |||
Consistency of each tertiary index
| Tertiary index | minimum | maximum | consistency (%) |
|---|---|---|---|
| TCM diagnosis (%) | 100.00 | 100.00 | 100.00 ± 0.00 |
| Western medicine diagnosis (%) | 100.00 | 100.00 | 100.00 ± 0.00 |
| Syndrome classification (%) | 25.00 | 50.00 | 38.25 ± 4.40 |
| Syndrome key point (%) | 12.50 | 62.50 | 34.17 ± 8.15 |
| TCM decoction (%) | 0.00 | 100.00 | 31.08 ± 23.64 |
| TCM particular treatment(%) | 0.00 | 87.50 | 7.92 ± 19.13 |
| Recuperation and prevention (%) | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 ± 0.00 |
Syndrome distribution among 150 cases
| Syndrome distribution | Syndrome classification | number | percentage (%) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Major Syndrome distribution among 150 cases | Qi deficiency, phlegm and blood stasis | 124 | 82.7 |
| Qi and yin deficiency, phlegm-blood stasis | 11 | 7.3 | |
| Qi deficiency, phlegm and heat block meridians | 7 | 4.7 | |
| Major Syndromes recommended in the CPG among the 150 cases | Heart blood stasis syndrome | 140 | 93.33 |
| Phlegm-turbidity blockage syndrome | 145 | 96.67 | |
| Qi and yin deficiency | 12 | 8.00 |
Comparison of overall consistency between qi deficiency, phlegm and blood stasis syndrome and non-qi deficiency, phlegm and blood stasis syndrome
| Syndrome classification | number | overall consistency (%) |
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Qi deficiency, phlegm and blood stasis | 124 | 41.30 ± 5.72 | −2.35 | 0.019 |
| Non qi deficiency, phlegm and blood stasis | 26 | 47.15 ± 9.83 |
TCM decoction distribution
| Primary TCM decoction | frequency | percentage (%) | |
|---|---|---|---|
| TCM decoction distribution | Wendan decoction | 64 | 42.7 |
| Gualou xiebai decoction | 31 | 20.7 | |
| Erchen decoction | 9 | 6.0 | |
| Shengmai san | 7 | 4.7 | |
| Frequency of TCM decoction recommendations | Gualou xiebai decoction | 31 | 20.7 |
| Shengmai San | 7 | 4.7 | |
| Shengmai san combined with gualou xiebai decoction | 3 | 2.0 | |
| Taohongsiwu decoction | 1 | 0.7 |
Relation between application of Wendan decoction and index “TCM decoction” consistency, overall consistency
| Main TCM decoction | “TCM decoction” consistency (%) | overall consistency (%) |
|---|---|---|
| Used Wendan decoction | 29.02 ± 11.75 | 40.06 ± 3.63 |
| Used other decoctions | 44.60 ± 27.03 | 46.77 ± 8.41 |
| Did not use TCM decoction | 0 ± 0 | 37.33 ± 2.41 |
|
| 64.002 | 47.716 |
|
| 0.000 | 0.000 |
TCM Particular treatment application of 150 cases
| Particular treatment (Non TCM decoction) | frequency | percentage (%) |
|---|---|---|
| Cinnamon and/or Xiebai external application | 86 | 57.3 |
| Auricular needle | 24 | 16.0 |
| Electrical stimulation | 4 | 2.7 |
| Other | 2 | 1.3 |
| Did not use Particular TCM therapies | 34 | 22.7 |
| Total | 150 | 100.0 |