scholarly journals Appraisal of the Current Guidelines for Management of Malignant Left-Sided Colonic Obstruction Using the Appraisal of Guidelines Research and Evaluation II Instrument

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-9
Author(s):  
Paschalis Gavriilidis ◽  
Alan Askari ◽  
Nicola de’Angelis ◽  
Efstratios P. Gavriilidis ◽  
James Wheeler ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Guideline Development ◽  
Colonic Obstruction ◽  
High Quality ◽  
Agree Ii ◽  
Guideline Quality ◽  
Domain V ◽  
Domain I ◽  
Current Guidelines ◽  
Agree Ii Instrument

Introduction: Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the fourth leading cause of death with 1.4 million new cases occurring annually worldwide. High-quality clinical practice guidelines are needed to tailor high-quality individualized treatment. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the methodological quality of the current guidelines for the management of acute malignant left-sided colonic bowel obstruction. Methods: A systematic search of the literature was carried out using electronic databases. The Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE) II instrument was used to assess the quality of each guideline. Results: Search results returned a total of 14 guidelines appropriate for assessment. Both domain I (scope and purpose) and domain VI (editorial independence) were assessed with the same median score of 83%. The lowest scoring domain was domain V (applicability), scoring only 43%. The 2 guidelines that had the highest score were the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) and Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network (SIGN), each scoring 100%. However, there were significant variations in terms of quality. The NICE and New Zealand guidelines were voted unanimously for use unchanged, whilst 8 other guidelines were voted for use with modifications. Conclusion: Variation in guideline quality in CRC is a concern despite some clearly excellent published guidelines. All guidelines score poorly when it comes to describing how the guidelines could be applied. Lack of patient participation in guideline development is also a shortcoming that requires urgent redress.

scholarly journals The quality of guidelines in non-pharmacological prevention and management of chemotherapy-induced neuropathy: A review

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Shahin Salarvand ◽  
Simin Hemati ◽  
Payman Adibi ◽  
Fariba Taleghani
Keyword(s):  
Methodological Quality ◽  
Stakeholder Involvement ◽  
Common Adverse Effect ◽  
Adaptation Process ◽  
Medical Sciences ◽  
High Quality ◽  
Agree Ii ◽  
Pharmacological Prevention ◽  
Agree Ii Instrument

Chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy is a common adverse effect occurring in patients undergoing neurotoxic chemotherapy. However, there is no FDA-approved treatment option for it. Given the importance of clinical practice guidelines in this area, this study aimed to determine the methodological quality of extant CIPN guidelines. The study was done as part of the adaptation process of CIPN related CPGs at Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Iran. A systematic search of published CPGs about chemotherapy-induced CIPN in which the AGREE II instrument was applied for appraising CPGs of CIPN was performed. In general, amongst all of the AGREE II Instrument’s domains in the evaluated CPGs, the clarity of presentation and stakeholder involvement domains took favorable scores; and other domains obtained unfavorable and relatively favorable scores. The quality of cancer therapy-induced neuropathy CPGs needs to be improved and designing high-quality CPGs must be considered.

scholarly journals Applicability of the AGREE II Instrument in Evaluating the Development Process and Quality of Current National Academy of Clinical Biochemistry Guidelines

2012 ◽  
Vol 58 (10) ◽  
pp. 1426-1437 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrew C Don-Wauchope ◽  
John L Sievenpiper ◽  
Stephen A Hill ◽  
Alfonso Iorio
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Laboratory ◽  
Clinical Biochemistry ◽  
Guideline Development ◽  
Stakeholder Involvement ◽  
Laboratory Medicine ◽  
Quality Of Reporting ◽  
Agree Ii ◽  
Strongly Agree ◽  
Agree Ii Instrument

Abstract BACKGROUND Laboratory medicine practice guidelines (LMPGs) are an important part of clinical laboratory medicine. The Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation II (AGREE II) instrument has been developed to evaluate the process of practice-guideline development and the quality of reporting. We assessed the applicability of AGREE II in assessing the National Academy of Clinical Biochemistry (NACB) LMPGs. METHODS The NACB website was searched for all available LMPGs up to December 2011. Two independent appraisers used the AGREE II instrument to assess each LMPG identified by the search. Quality was assessed across 6 domains (scope and purpose, stakeholder involvement, rigor of development, clarity of presentation, applicability, and editorial independence), comprising a total of 23 items and 2 overall assessments, each scored on a 7-point scale (1, strongly disagree, to 7, strongly agree). All scores were expressed as AGREE II calculated percentages (100% indicates that all items scored 7 by all appraisers). RESULTS Eleven LMPGs were identified. All of the LMPGs provided some information seen as applicable to clinical practice by the appraisers. Only 5 of the LMPGs had overall scores ≥50%, with a median score of 42% (range: 8%–92%). Individual domain scores varied considerably from 0% to 100%. One guideline achieved a very high score on the instrument. CONCLUSIONS The AGREE II instrument is applicable and useful to evaluate LMPGs. All domains were evaluated as being useful to assess LMPGs, some were addressed well (e.g., clarity of presentation), whereas others could be improved (e.g., applicability).

scholarly journals Critical appraisal of clinical practice guidelines for the management of COVID-19: protocol for a systematic review

2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Thanansayan Dhivagaran ◽  
Umaima Abbas ◽  
Fahad Butt ◽  
Luckshann Arunasalam ◽  
Oswin Chang
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Clinical Practice ◽  
Clinical Practice Guidelines ◽  
Practice Guidelines ◽  
Healthcare Providers ◽  
World Health ◽  
High Quality ◽  
Agree Ii ◽  
Agree Ii Instrument

Abstract Background In December 2019, a novel coronavirus, severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 was identified as the cause of an acute respiratory disease, coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Given the lack of validated treatments, there is an urgent need for a high-quality management of COVID-19. Clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) are one tool that healthcare providers may use to enhance patient care. As such, it is necessary that they have access to high-quality evidence-based CPGs upon which they may base decisions regarding the management and use of therapeutic interventions (TI) for COVID-19. The purpose of the proposed study is to assess the quality of CPGs that make management or TI recommendations for COVID-19 using the AGREE II instrument. Methods The proposed systematic review will identify CPGs for TI use and/or the management of COVID-19. The MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, and Web of Science databases, as well as the Guidelines International Network, National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence, Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network, and the World Health Organization websites, will be searched from December 2019 onwards. The primary outcome of this study is the assessed quality of the CPGs. The quality of eligible CPGs will be assessed using the Appraisal of Guidelines, Research and Evaluation II (AGREE II) instrument. Descriptive statistics will be used to quantify the quality of the CPGs. The secondary outcomes of this study are the types of management and/or TI recommendations made. Inconsistent and duplicate TI and/or management recommendations made between CPGs will be compared across guidelines. To summarize and explain the findings related to the included CPGs, a narrative synthesis will also be provided. Discussion The results of this study will be of utmost importance to enhancing clinical decision-making among healthcare providers caring for patients with COVID-19. Moreover, the results of this study will be relevant to guideline developers in the creation of CPGs or improvement of existing ones, researchers who want to identify gaps in knowledge, and policy-makers looking to encourage and endorse the adoption of CPGs into clinical practice. The results of this review will be published in a peer-reviewed journal and presented at conferences. Systematic review registration International Prospective Register for Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO)—CRD42020219944

scholarly journals Systematic review of global clinical practice guidelines for neonatal hyperbilirubinemia

BMJ Open ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
pp. e040182
Author(s):  
Meng Zhang ◽  
Jun Tang ◽  
Yang He ◽  
Wenxing Li ◽  
Zhong Chen ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Clinical Practice ◽  
Clinical Practice Guidelines ◽  
Practice Guidelines ◽  
Guideline Development ◽  
Neonatal Hyperbilirubinemia ◽  
Average Score ◽  
Agree Ii ◽  
Agree Ii Instrument

ObjectiveHyperbilirubinemia is one of the most common clinical symptoms in newborns. To improve patient outcomes, evidence-based and implementable guidelines are required. However, clinical guidelines may vary in quality, criteria and recommendations among regions and countries. In this study, we aimed to systematically assess the quality of guidelines using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research & Evaluation (AGREE)-II instrument and summarise the specific recommendations for neonatal hyperbilirubinemia in order to provide suggestions for future guideline development.DesignSystematic review.InterventionsWe searched the PubMed, Embase, Medline and guideline databases for relevant articles on 10 April 2020. The studies were screened by two independent reviewers according to our inclusion criteria. Two reviewers independently extracted the descriptive data. Four appraisers assessed the guidelines using the AGREE-II instrument.ResultsOur systematic review appraised 12 clinical practice guidelines for the diagnosis and management of neonatal hyperbilirubinemia. The 12 guidelines achieved an average score of 36%–89%. The guidelines received the highest scores for clarity of presentation and lowest scores for rigour of development. Most recommendations for diagnosis were relatively consistent, but recommendations regarding risk factors, the initiating threshold of treatment and pharmacotherapy varied.ConclusionsOur study revealed that current guidelines vary in the quality of the developing process and are inconsistent with regards to recommendations. Future guidelines should afford more attention to the quality of methodologies in guideline development, and more qualified evidence is needed to standardise the initiating threshold of treatment for neonatal hyperbilirubinemia.

scholarly journals Rigorous Assessment of Guidelines on COVID-19-Related Thrombotic or Thromboembolic Disease: Implications for Clinical Practice of Prevention, Diagnosis, and Treatment

2021 ◽  
Vol 2021 ◽  
pp. 1-14
Author(s):  
Jingyi Liang ◽  
Zhufeng Wang ◽  
Jiaxing Xie ◽  
Hanwen Liang ◽  
Jiamin Liang ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
International Organizations ◽  
Web Of Science ◽  
Thromboembolic Disease ◽  
Diagnosis And Treatment ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
High Quality ◽  
Agree Ii ◽  
Clinical Recommendations ◽  
Current Guidelines

Purpose. Severe COVID-19 patients were prone to develop venous thromboembolism. Unfortunately, to date, there is no evidence of any effective medications for thromboembolism in COVID-19. The management of the disease relies on symptomatic and supportive treatments, giving rise to a variety of guidelines. However, the quality of methodology and clinical recommendations remains unknown. Materials and Methods. We searched Medline, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, websites of international organizations and medical societies, and gray literature databases. Four well-trained appraisers independently evaluated the quality of eligible guidelines and extracted recommendations using well-recognized guideline appraisal tools. Furthermore, recommendations were extracted and reclassified according to a composite grading system. Results. The search identified 23 guidelines that offered 108 recommendations. Guidelines scored average on AGREE II criteria, with Scope and Purpose and Clarity of Presentation highest. Only five (22%) guidelines provided high-quality recommendations. The existed clinical recommendations were inconsistent in terms of prophylaxis, diagnosis, and treatment of thromboembolic disease to some extent. Conclusion. Current guidelines for COVID-19 thromboembolism are generally of low quality, and clinical recommendations on thromboembolism are principally supported by insufficient evidence. There is still an urgent need for more well-designed clinical trials as evidence to prevent adverse events and improve prognosis during COVID-19 treatment.

scholarly journals Quality assessment of clinical guidelines for the treatment of obesity in adults: application of the AGREE II instrument

2018 ◽  
Vol 34 (6) ◽  
Author(s):  
Erika Cardoso dos Reis ◽  
Sonia Regina Lambert Passos ◽  
Maria Angelica Borges dos Santos
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Guidelines ◽  
Guideline Development ◽  
Stakeholder Involvement ◽  
Agree Ii ◽  
Canadian Guideline ◽  
Government Sector ◽  
The Government ◽  
Treatment Of Obesity ◽  
Agree Ii Instrument

There are various guidelines for the treatment of obesity, and thus the quality of these clinical guidelines has become a matter of concern. The objective was to describe and assess the quality of clinical guidelines for treatment of obesity in adults. We collected several studies, dated from 1998 to 2016, produced by different countries. The literature search included the National Guideline Clearinghouse (NGC), Guidelines International Network (GIN), PubMed (MEDLINE), Scopus, Web of Science, webpages of health institutions from different countries, and search sites, with the criterion: “clinical guidelines for treatment of obesity in adults and published until the 2016”. The guidelines were assessed with the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research & Evaluation (AGREE II), according to the domains of the instrument. The search identified 21 guidelines: nine from Europe, six from North America, three from Latin America, and one each from Asia and Oceania and a transnational association. The Australian guideline had the best assessment. Of the six guidelines with the highest scores, five had been elaborated by the government sector responsible for the country’s health. The domains “scope and purpose” and “clarity of presentation” had the highest score. Except for the Canadian guideline, the three guidelines drafted before the elaboration of AGREE II had the worst quality. In the domain “stakeholder involvement”, only four guidelines (Australia, Scotland, France, and England) mentioned patient participation. Guideline development and quality enhancement are ongoing processes requiring systematic appraisal of the guideline production process and existing guidelines.

scholarly journals Critical Appraisal of Clinical Practice Guidelines for the Management of COVID-19: Protocol for a Systematic Review

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Thanansayan Dhivagaran ◽  
Umaima Abbas ◽  
Fahad Rasool Butt ◽  
Luckshann Arunasalam ◽  
Oswin Chang
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Clinical Practice ◽  
Clinical Practice Guidelines ◽  
Practice Guidelines ◽  
Clinical Decision Making ◽  
Healthcare Providers ◽  
High Quality ◽  
Agree Ii ◽  
Agree Ii Instrument

Abstract BackgroundIn December 2019, a novel coronavirus, severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 was identified as the cause of an acute respiratory disease, coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Given the lack of validated treatments, there is an urgent need for the high-quality management of COVID-19. Clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) are one tool that healthcare providers may use to enhance patient care. As such, it is necessary that they have access to high-quality evidence-based CPGs upon which they may base decisions regarding the management and use of therapeutic interventions (TI) for COVID-19. The purpose of the proposed study is to assess the quality of CPGs that make management or TI recommendations for COVID-19 using the AGREE II instrument. Methods‌The proposed systematic review will identify CPGs for TI use and/or the management of COVID-19. MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL and Web of Science will be searched from December 2019 up to December 2020. The primary outcome of this study is the assessed quality of the CPGs. The quality of eligible CPGs will be assessed using the Appraisal of Guidelines, Research and Evaluation II (AGREE II) instrument. Descriptive statistics will be used to quantify the quality of the CPGs. The secondary outcomes of this study are the types of management and/or TI recommendations made. Inconsistent and duplicate TI and/or management recommendations made between CPGs will be compared across guidelines. DiscussionThe results of this study will be of utmost importance to enhancing clinical decision-making among healthcare providers caring for patients with COVID-19. Moreover, the results of this study will be relevant to guideline developers in the creation of CPGs or improvement of existing ones, researchers who want to identify gaps in knowledge, and policy-makers looking to encourage and endorse the adoption of CPGs into clinical practice. The results of this review will be published in a peer-reviewed journal and presented at conferences. Systematic Review ‌Registration‌ ‌International‌ ‌Prospective‌ ‌Register‌ ‌for‌ ‌Systematic‌ ‌Reviews‌ ‌(PROSPERO)‌ ‌—‌ ‌CRD42020219944

scholarly journals Evaluation of clinical practice guidelines (CPG) on the management of female chronic pelvic pain (CPP) using the AGREE II instrument

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Vishalli Ghai ◽  
Venkatesh Subramanian ◽  
Haider Jan ◽  
Jemina Loganathan ◽  
Stergios K. Doumouchtsis ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Surgical Management ◽  
Guideline Development ◽  
Stakeholder Involvement ◽  
Professional Organizations ◽  
Agree Ii ◽  
Behavioural Interventions ◽  
Recommended Treatment ◽  
Muscular Dysfunction ◽  
Health Related

Abstract Introduction and hypothesis Variations in guidelines may result in differences in treatments and potentially poorer health-related outcomes. We aimed to systematically review and evaluate the quality of national and international guidelines and create an inventory of CPG recommendations on CPP. Methods We searched EMBASE and MEDLINE databases from inception till August 2020 as well as websites of professional organizations and societies. We selected national and international CPGs reporting on the diagnosis and management of female CPP. We included six CPGs. Five researchers independently assessed the quality of included guidelines using the AGREE II tool and extracted recommendations. Results Two hundred thirty-two recommendations were recorded and grouped into six categories: diagnosis, medical treatment, surgical management, behavioural interventions, complementary/alternative therapies and education/research. Thirty-nine (17.11%) recommendations were comparable including: a comprehensive pain history, a multi-disciplinary approach, attributing muscular dysfunction as a cause of CPP and an assessment of quality of life. Two guidelines acknowledged sexual dysfunction associated with CPP and recommended treatment with pelvic floor exercises and behavioural interventions. All guidelines recommended surgical management; however, there was no consensus regarding adhesiolysis, bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy during hysterectomy, neurectomy and laparoscopic uterosacral nerve ablation. Half of recommendations (106, 46.49%) were unreferenced or made in absence of good-quality evidence or supported by expert opinion. Based on the AGREE II assessment, two guidelines were graded as high quality and recommended without modifications (EAU and RCOG). Guidelines performed poorly in the “Applicability”, “Editorial Independence” and “Stakeholder Involvement” domains. Conclusion Majority of guidelines were of moderate quality with significant variation in recommendations and quality of guideline development.

scholarly journals Critical appraisal and comparison of recommendations of clinical practice guidelines for treatment of schizophrenia in children and adolescents: a methodological survey protocol

BMJ Open ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (9) ◽  
pp. e038646
Author(s):  
Maíra Ramos Alves ◽  
Cristiane de Cássia Bergamaschi ◽  
Flávia Blaseck Sorrilha ◽  
Izabela Fulone ◽  
Silvio Barberato-Filho ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Practice ◽  
Children And Adolescents ◽  
Clinical Practice Guidelines ◽  
Practice Guidelines ◽  
Future Research ◽  
High Quality ◽  
Agree Ii ◽  
Ethical Approval ◽  
Over Time

IntroductionThe number of clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) have increased substantially mainly in the paediatric area of mental health. However, little is known about the quality or how recommendations for the treatment of disorders such as schizophrenia in children and adolescents have changed over time. The aim of this study will be to assess the quality of the development of CPGs for the treatment and management of schizophrenia in children and adolescents over time using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation II (AGREE II) tool and to compare the recommendations and interventions described in these documents.Methods and analysisCPGs will be identified using a prospective protocol through a systematic search of multiple databases (Medline, Embase, Health Systems Evidence, Epistemonikos, Lilacs, etc) and guideline websites from 2004 to December 2020. The quality of the guidelines will be assessed by three reviewers, independently using the AGREE II. CPGs will be considered of high-quality if they scored ≥60% in four or more domains of the AGREE II instrument. Non-parametric tests will be used to test for the change of quality over time. We will summarise the different evidence grading systems and compare the recommendations.Ethics and disseminationEthical approval is not required since it is a literature-based study. Future results of the research can be submitted for publication in scientific journals of high impact, peer reviewed and also published in national and international conferences. The results derived from this study will contribute to the improvement of health institutions and policies, informing about existing recommendation guidelines and about deficiencies and qualities found in those. This study may also identify key areas for future research. This study may guide the search and choice for high quality CPGs by health policy makers and health professionals and subsidise future adaptations.Protocol registration numberCRD42020164899.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document