Quality assessment of Clinical Practice Guidelines (CPG) for the diagnosis and treatment of inflammatory bowel disease using the AGREE II instrument: a systematic review
Journal
BMC Gastroenterology
ISSN
1471-230X
Date Issued
2022-11-05
Author(s)
R. Zambrano-Sánchez
P. Alvarez-Mena
D. Hidalgo
C. M. Escobar Liquitay
J. V. A. Franco
R. W. M. Vernooij
Abstract
<jats:title>Abstract</jats:title><jats:sec>
<jats:title>Background</jats:title>
<jats:p>The incidence and diagnosis of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) has increased considerably in recent years. Many clinical practice guidelines (CPG) have been developed for the management of this disease across different clinical contexts, however, little evidence exists on their methodological quality. Therefore, we aimed to systematically evaluate the quality of CPGs for the diagnosis and treatment of IBD using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE II) instrument.</jats:p>
</jats:sec><jats:sec>
<jats:title>Methods</jats:title>
<jats:p>We identified CPGs by searching databases (MEDLINE - PubMed, EMBASE, CINAHL, LILACS) and other sources of gray literature on January 2022. We included guidelines with specific recommendations for the diagnosis and treatment of IBD and evaluated them with the AGREE II instrument to assess their methodological quality. Six independent reviewers assessed the quality of the guidelines and resolved conflicts by consensus. We assessed the degree of agreement using the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) and change in quality over time was appraised in two periods: from 2012 to 2017 and from 2018 to 2022.</jats:p>
</jats:sec><jats:sec>
<jats:title>Results</jats:title>
<jats:p>We analyzed and evaluated 26 CPGs that met the inclusion criteria. The overall agreement among reviewers was moderate (ICC: 0.74; 95% CI 0.36 - 0.89). The mean scores of the AGREE II domains were: “Scope and purpose” 84.51%, “Stakeholder involvement” 60.90%, “Rigor of development” 69.95%, “Clarity of presentation” 85.58%, “Applicability” 26.60%, and “Editorial independence” 62.02%. No changes in quality were found over time.</jats:p>
</jats:sec><jats:sec>
<jats:title>Conclusions</jats:title>
<jats:p>The quality of the CPGs evaluated was generally good, with a large majority of the assessed guidelines being “recommended” and “recommended with modifications”; despite this, there is still room for improvement, especially in terms of stakeholder involvement and applicability. Efforts to develop high quality CPGs for IBD need to be further optimized.</jats:p>
</jats:sec>
<jats:title>Background</jats:title>
<jats:p>The incidence and diagnosis of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) has increased considerably in recent years. Many clinical practice guidelines (CPG) have been developed for the management of this disease across different clinical contexts, however, little evidence exists on their methodological quality. Therefore, we aimed to systematically evaluate the quality of CPGs for the diagnosis and treatment of IBD using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE II) instrument.</jats:p>
</jats:sec><jats:sec>
<jats:title>Methods</jats:title>
<jats:p>We identified CPGs by searching databases (MEDLINE - PubMed, EMBASE, CINAHL, LILACS) and other sources of gray literature on January 2022. We included guidelines with specific recommendations for the diagnosis and treatment of IBD and evaluated them with the AGREE II instrument to assess their methodological quality. Six independent reviewers assessed the quality of the guidelines and resolved conflicts by consensus. We assessed the degree of agreement using the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) and change in quality over time was appraised in two periods: from 2012 to 2017 and from 2018 to 2022.</jats:p>
</jats:sec><jats:sec>
<jats:title>Results</jats:title>
<jats:p>We analyzed and evaluated 26 CPGs that met the inclusion criteria. The overall agreement among reviewers was moderate (ICC: 0.74; 95% CI 0.36 - 0.89). The mean scores of the AGREE II domains were: “Scope and purpose” 84.51%, “Stakeholder involvement” 60.90%, “Rigor of development” 69.95%, “Clarity of presentation” 85.58%, “Applicability” 26.60%, and “Editorial independence” 62.02%. No changes in quality were found over time.</jats:p>
</jats:sec><jats:sec>
<jats:title>Conclusions</jats:title>
<jats:p>The quality of the CPGs evaluated was generally good, with a large majority of the assessed guidelines being “recommended” and “recommended with modifications”; despite this, there is still room for improvement, especially in terms of stakeholder involvement and applicability. Efforts to develop high quality CPGs for IBD need to be further optimized.</jats:p>
</jats:sec>