Nordic clinical guidelines for orthotic treatment of osteoarthritis of the knee: A systematic review using the AGREE II instrument

2019 ◽  
Vol 43 (5) ◽  
pp. 556-563 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gustav Jarl ◽  
Ulla Hellstrand Tang ◽  
Erika Nordén ◽  
Anton Johannesson ◽  
David Francis Rusaw

Background: High-quality clinical practice guidelines are necessary for effective use of resources both at an individual patient- and national-level. Nordic clinical practice guidelines recommendations for orthotic treatment of knee osteoarthritis vary and little is known about their quality. Objectives: The aim of the study was to critically evaluate the quality of clinical practice guidelines in orthotic management of knee osteoarthritis in the Nordic countries. Study Design: Systematic review. Methods: Four national clinical practice guidelines for treatment of knee osteoarthritis were assessed for methodological rigour and transparency by four independent assessors using the AGREE II instrument. Summary domain scores and inter-rater agreement (Kendall’s W) were calculated. Results: Domain scores indicate that many guidelines have not sufficiently addressed stakeholder involvement (average score: 55%), applicability (20%) and editorial independence (33%) in the development process. Inter-rater agreement for assessors indicated ‘good’ agreement for clinical practice guidelines from Finland, Norway and Sweden ( W = 0.653, p < 0.001; W = 0.512, p = 0.003 and W = 0.532, p = 0.002, respectively) and ‘strong’ agreement for the clinical practice guideline from Denmark ( W = 0.800, p < 0.001). Conclusion: Quality of clinical practice guidelines for orthotic treatment of knee osteoarthritis in the Nordic region is variable. Future guideline development should focus on improving methodology by involving relevant stakeholders (e.g. certified prosthetist/orthotists (CPOs)), specifying conflicts of interest and providing guidance for implementation. Clinical relevance The current review suggests that, for the Nordic region, there are areas of improvement which can be addressed, which ensure clinical practice guidelines are developed under stringent conditions and based on sound methods. These improvements would ensure knee osteoarthritis patients are receiving orthotic interventions based on appropriate guidance from published guidelines.

2014 ◽  
Vol 11 (6) ◽  
Author(s):  
Pieter F Fouche ◽  
Kristina Zverinova

IntroductionArrhythmias are a significant health burden in Australia, responsible for about 1% of deaths annually. The Australian Resuscitation Council (ARC) ‘Guideline 11.9 Managing Acute Dysrhythmias’ was designed to guide doctors, paramedics and nurses in the emergency management of arrhythmias. It is important to have high quality clinical practice guidelines to aid the treatment of these arrhythmias. The AGREE II tool utilised is widely used to asses clinical practice guidelines for quality. The objective of this study was to assess the quality of the ARC clinical practice guideline ‘Guideline 11.9 Managing Acute Dysrhythmias’.MethodsTwo raters assessed the six domains of quality of the ARC arrhythmia guideline using the AGREE II tool. The inter-rater agreement between the raters was measured with the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC 2, 1).ResultsInter-rater agreement was good at 0.73 (95% CI 0.45 to 0.88). Both raters assigned the ARC guideline 11.9 Managing Acute Dysrhythmias a score of three, for a combined score of three out of a possible seven on the AGREE II rating scale.ConclusionsThe use of the ARC guideline 11.9 Managing Acute Dysrhythmias is not recommended based on this assessment with the AGREE II tool. Emergency departments and prehospital systems should consider not using this arrhythmia guideline to guide their practice, but to look elsewhere for a higher quality guideline.


2020 ◽  
Vol 26 (2) ◽  
pp. 54-59
Author(s):  
Dongke Wang ◽  
Yang Yu ◽  
Yaolong Chen ◽  
Nan Yang ◽  
Heng Zhang ◽  
...  

2013 ◽  
Vol 22 (Suppl 1) ◽  
pp. 86.1-86
Author(s):  
R Licenik ◽  
K Klikova ◽  
D Osinova ◽  
S Doubravska ◽  
K Ivanova

2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Thanansayan Dhivagaran ◽  
Umaima Abbas ◽  
Fahad Butt ◽  
Luckshann Arunasalam ◽  
Oswin Chang

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


PLoS ONE ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 13 (9) ◽  
pp. e0203328 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dina Ayratova Lienhard ◽  
Lidiya Vacheslavovna Kisser ◽  
Liliya Eugenevna Ziganshina

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document