This paper interprets clinical practice guideline for abdominal aortic aneurysm of American Society for Vascular Surgery in 2018.
By employing the nominal group technique, as per the process standard of the EQUATOR Collaboration Network, experts were selected through purposeful sampling. Two rounds of nominal group discussions were conducted, and the essential information of the utilization of the consensus method was extracted from the literature. After comparison, discussion, evaluation, and optimization, a list of 3 fields, 11 themes, 63 necessary items, and 28 supplementary items was eventually constructed to upgrade the standardization and rigor of the application of the consensus method in the future, assisting guideline developers to plan the consensus process.
In the formulation of the clinical question of traditional Chinese medicine clinical practice guidelines, even if the intervention elements (intervention or control) have an appropriate scope, guideline developers are still faced with a variety of interventions. By analyzing the difficulty and necessity of priority selection of intervention interventions, we propose the approach of extending expert evidence to the process of priority selection of intervention interventions, and further provide the methodology of expert evidence data collection table design, application, data presentation and expert decision-making method to provide references and guidance for guideline developers.
This study was an interpretation study based on the standard of AGREEⅡ. It analyzed methodological perspective of the International Evidence-Based Recommendations for Focused Cardiac Ultrasound determined by the International Conference on Focused Cardiac UltraSound (IC-FoCUS).
The clinical practice guideline on traditional Chinese medicine alone or combined with antibiotics for patients with acute upper respiratory infection in children was issued by China Association of Chinese Medicine in June 2017. Base on the evidence, consensus and experience, five manage groups, steering committee, consensus expert group, systematic review group, drafting group and secretary group, have promoted the project. The main work process refers to up-to-date clinical practice guideline definitions of institute of medicine and quick recommendations guide of guidelines international network and WHO. In order to provide readers with a better understanding of the guideline, the drafting process of guideline principle, main work process, and basis policy were described in detail in this paper. The guidelines’ scientific characteristics, accuracy and practicability were better exhibited in attempt to enhance its promotion and application.
ObjectiveTo summarize the evaluation tools for the implementation effect of clinical practice guidelines (CPGs), to inform and support the evidence-based development of a general tool for the evaluation of implementation effect of CPGs. MethodsSeven biomedical literature databases, including PubMed, Embase and CNKI, and two academic websites, were searched from establishment to June 2022. Theoretical and empirical research on the evaluation tools of the implementation effect of CPGs were included. Two researchers independently screened literature and extracted data according to the inclusion and exclusion criteria. Based on the Implementation Science RE-AIM theoretical framework, an evaluation framework and a list of alternative items of the implementation effect of the CPGs were initially drawn up by thematic synthesis methods. ResultsA total of 208 articles were included, and 8 mature evaluation tools related to the implementation effect of guidelines were selected. Current research on the evaluation of the implementation effect of CPGs mainly focused on single diseases, with concern of the cognition, attitude and compliance of users to CPGs, and the process of the implementation of CPGs and factors affecting the implementation effect of CPGs. There were limitations such as a lack of evaluation on the terminal effect of the implementation of CPGs, the rare use of mature theoretical frameworks, the use of single evaluation perspectives, and inclusion of limited evaluation dimensions. The initial proposed evaluation framework contains a list of alternative items with 6 primary indicators, 12 secondary indicators and 41 tertiary indicators. ConclusionCurrently, there is a lack of a comprehensive, multi-perspective, mature theory based, general tool for the evaluation of implementation effect of CPGs. The framework and the list of alternative items for the evaluation of implementation effect of CPGs based on the implementation science RE-AIM theory can inform and support the development of a tool for the evaluation of implementation effect of CPGs.
ObjectivesTo evaluate the reporting quality of clinical practice guidelines published in Chinese journals in 2015.MethodsCBM, CNKI, VIP and WanFang Data databases were searched to collect clinical practice guidelines published in Chinese journals from January, 2015 to December, 2015. Two reviewers independently screened literature, extracted data, and the reporting quality of clinical practice guidelines were evaluated by the Reporting Items for Practice Guidelines in Healthcare (RIGHT). Excel software was used for data analysis.ResultsA total of 74 clinical practice guidelines were included. It was found that among the seven domains of RIGHT, the reporting quality of basic information and background domains were acceptable. There were fewer problems in the domain of evidence and recommendation. There were many deficiencies in three domains, such as review and quality assurance, funding and the declaration/management of interests and other information.ConclusionsThe reporting quality of clinical practice guidelines published in Chinese journals in 2015 is low, and the full reporting rate of clinical practice guidelines need to be improved. It is suggested that guideline developers construct strict guidelines for the development and report the guidelines with international standard, thus improving the quality of the clinical practice guidelines.
Objective To assess the methodological quality of clinical guidelines and consensus of lupus nephritis, to collect the recommendations of each guideline, and to provide references for clinical decision-making. Methods PubMed, CNKI, and CBM databases and related websites such as NGC, NICE, GIN, SIGN, and Medive were electronically searched from January 2012 to December 2020 to collect the clinical guidelines and expert consensus for lupus nephritis. After consistency evaluation by four evaluators, the methodological quality of the included guidelines or expert consensus was evaluated using AGREE Ⅱ. The relevant recommendations, evidence level, and recommended strength of each guideline in treating lupus nephritis were summarized. Results A total of eight guidelines and two consensus statements were included. Among them, eight guidelines or consensus statements were level B (generally recommended guidelines), and two were level C (non-recommended guidelines). Relevant recommendations mainly gave the corresponding treatment scheme according to the pathological type of lupus nephritis. Conclusion The methodological quality of lupus nephritis guideline formulation in China needs to be improved. The included guidelines and consensus can provide reference for clinical decision-makers. However, higher-quality clinical practice guidelines for the Chinese population are needed to be developed in the future.