Repository logo
Communities & Collections
Research Outputs
Fundings & Projects
People
Statistics
New user? Click here to register.Have you forgotten your password?
  1. Home
  2. CRIS
  3. Publication
  4. Quality of clinical practice guidelines about red blood cell transfusion
Details

Quality of clinical practice guidelines about red blood cell transfusion

Journal
Journal of Evidence-Based Medicine
ISSN
1756-5391
Date Issued
2018-12-03
Author(s)
SIMANCAS RACINES, DANIEL ALEJANDRO  
Facultad de Ciencias de la Salud Eugenio Espejo  
Nadia Montero‐Oleas
Facultad de Ciencias de la Salud Eugenio Espejo  
Robin W.M. Vernooij
Ingrid Arevalo‐Rodriguez
Facultad de Ciencias de la Salud Eugenio Espejo  
Paulina Fuentes
Ignasi Gich
HIDALGO OTTOLENGHI, JOSE RICARDO  
Facultad de Ciencias de la Salud Eugenio Espejo  
Maria José Martinez‐Zapata
Xavier Bonfill
Pablo Alonso‐Coello
DOI
10.1111/jebm.12330
URL
https://cris.ute.edu.ec/handle/123456789/793
Abstract
<jats:title>Abstract</jats:title><jats:sec><jats:title>Background</jats:title><jats:p>Red blood cell (RBC) transfusions are essential in health care. The quality of recommendations included in clinical practice guidelines (CPG), regarding this intervention, has not been systematically evaluated. This paper systematically assessed CPGs for RBC‐transfusion, to appraise their methodological quality, to explore changes in quality over time, and to assess the consistency of the hemoglobin threshold (HT) recommendations.</jats:p></jats:sec><jats:sec><jats:title>Methods</jats:title><jats:p>We searched for CPGs that included recommendations of RBC‐transfusion in generic databases, compiler entities, registries, clearinghouses and guideline developers. Three reviewers extracted data on CPGs characteristics and HT recommendations, independently appraised the quality of the studies using AGREE II and resolved disagreements by consensus.</jats:p></jats:sec><jats:sec><jats:title>Results</jats:title><jats:p>We examined 16 CPGs. Mean scores (mean ± SD) were: scope and purpose (59.4% ± 19.8%), stakeholder involvement (43.2% ± 22.6%), rigor of development (50% ± 25%), clarity of presentation (74.4% ± 12.6%), applicability (19.4% ± 18.8%), and editorial independence (41% ± 30%). Seven CPGs recommended a restrictive strategy for RBC transfusion; four CPGs gave a guarded statement considering an HT of 7 g/dL, as safe to prescribe an RBC transfusion. Eight CPGs did not provide an HT stating that RBC transfusions should not be prescribed by HT alone.</jats:p></jats:sec><jats:sec><jats:title>Conclusions</jats:title><jats:p>Only 3 out of the 16 evaluated CPGs were “recommended” by the independent evaluators. Four domains “stakeholder involvement,” “rigor of development,” applicability,” and “editorial independence” had serious shortcomings. Recommendations about the use of an HT for RBC‐transfusion were heterogeneous among guidelines. Greater efforts are needed to provide high‐quality CPGs in the RBC‐transfusion practice.</jats:p></jats:sec>

  • Accessibility settings
  • Privacy policy
  • End User Agreement
  • Send Feedback

Hosting & Support by

Built with DSpace-CRIS software - Extension maintained and optimized by 4science

Repository logo COAR Notify