ObjectivesTo assess the methodological quality of clinical practice guidelines of cervical cancer in China published from 2014 to 2018.MethodsCNKI, WanFang Data, CBM, VIP, Medlive.cn, the National Guideline Clearinghouse, PubMed, The Cochrane Library and EMbase were searched for cervical cancer clinical practice guidelines published in China from January 1st, 2014 to December 31st, 2018. Four reviewers searched and selected the literature independently according to the inclusion and exclusion criteria and assessed the methodological quality of the included guidelines by using AGREE Ⅱ.ResultsA total of 9 guidelines were included. The average score for each area was: scope and purpose 75.47%, stakeholders’ involvement 35.09%, the rigor of development 43.70%, clarity of presentation 87.74%, applicability 80.76%, and editorial independence 0%.ConclusionsThe quality of cervical cancer clinical practice guidelines in China requires further improvement.
Objective To evaluate the methodological quality and reporting quality of clinical guidelines and consensus on central venous catheters. Methods The PubMed, EMbase, Web of Science, CBM, WanFang Data, CNKI databases and Guidelines International Network, National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence, National Guideline Clearinghouse, Medive.cn websites were searched to collect clinical guidelines and consensus related to central venous catheters. The retrieval time was from the establishment of the database to October 2022. Two researchers independently screened the literature, extracted data and used evaluation tools AGREE Ⅱ and RIGHT to evaluate the quality of the included studies. Results A total of 34 central venous catheter guidelines and consensus were included. The average score for each field of AGREE II was 53.73% for scope and purpose, 39.26% for participants, 39.57% for rigor, 46.76% for clarity, 30.23% for application and 49.18% for editorial independence. Items 1a, 1b, 3, and 4 (100.00%) had the highest reporting rate in the RIGHT evaluation items, followed by items 19a (97.05%), 2/19b (94.11%), 20 (91.17%), 7b/11a (88.23%), and 7a (85.29%). The reporting rate of the remaining items was below 60%. Subgroup analysis results showed that the average score and RIGHT score of the guidance class in the four fields of AGREE Ⅱ (rigor, clarity, application and editorial independence) were higher than those of the consensus class. Guidelines and consensus formulated based on evidence-based medicine methods were higher than those formulated based on expert opinions or reviews in the three fields of AGREE II (rigor, application and editorial independence). The average scores of foreign guidelines and consensus in 6 fields and RIGHT scores of AGREE Ⅱ were higher than those of domestic guidelines and consensus. Conclusion The AGREE Ⅱ of 6 fields average score and RIGHT score in foreign guidelines are higher than those in domestic guidelines.
Objective To evaluate quality and current status of traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) guidelines and consensus, and to promote the improvements in the quality of guidelines and consensus. Methods A systematic collection of TCM guidelines and consensus published in medical journals in 2022 was conducted. We used scientific, transparent, and applicable ranking tools (STAR) for evaluation, analyzed the scoring rates (%), and assessed the quality level and influencing factors of guidelines and consensus through methods such as comparison and stratification. Results A total of 130 TCM guidelines and consensus were included. Guideline areas with higher scores included recommendations (65.3%), evidence (55.9%), and guideline development groups (54.2%). In the case of consensus, higher scores were observed in recommendations (38.7%), guideline development groups (37.0%), and funding (30.0%). The total score rate of TCM guidelines exceeded that of national guidelines, while the consensus rate was lower. Stratified analysis revealed statistical differences in guideline score rates among journals and issuing institutions, as well as significant differences in consensus score rates among journals, formulation institutions, subjects, and funding categories. Conclusion The quantity and quality of TCM guidelines and consensus are on a positive trajectory, with higher quality levels in guidelines than in consensus. The overall quality of TCM guidelines surpasses that of national guidelines, particularly emphasizing the scientificity of guideline formulation. However, the overall quality of consensus remains lower than that of the national consensus. Factors such as journals, formulation institutions, subjects, and funding categories are identified as potential influences on the quality of TCM guidelines and consensus.
Laparoscopy has become a commonly used approach to diagnosis and treatment of acute abdomen, and it has good diagnostic value and therapeutic effect in selective cases. It should be practiced by experienced surgeons in laparoscopic surgery and emergency abdominal surgery. Hemodynamic instability, severe abdominal distension, fecal peritonitis, and tumor perforation are contraindications to laparoscopy. In recent years, more and more acute abdominal diseases can be successfully treated by laparoscopy. Randomized controlled trials have proved the laparoscopic treatment in acute appendicitis, acute cholecystitis, peptic ulcer perforation, acute gynecological diseases was comparable to open surgery, and had advantages of fewer complications and faster postoperative recovery. The utilization of laparoscopy in other diseases such as blunt and penetrating abdominal trauma, small intestinal obstruction, and diverticulitis with perforation remains controversial, and needs more randomized controlled trials to investigate the feasibility of laparoscopic surgery.
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.
Objective To verify the applicability of AGREE-China and select high-quality clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) or consensus for the management of fragility fractures (FF) in China by evaluating their methodological quality. Methods CBM, CNKI, WanFang Data, VIP databases and related CPGs websites were electronically searched. Two reviewers independently screened literature, extracted data, and checked each other. Quality appraisal of CPGs or consensus were evaluated by AGREE Ⅱ and AGREE-China, and weighted Kappa value and intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC) were calculated to illustrate the consistency of the two tools. Results Nine CPGs and sixteen consensuses were included. Among the six domains in AGREE Ⅱ, "scope and purpose" domain (62.22%) scored higher than "clarity of presentation" domain (45.67%). The "stakeholder involvement" domain (34.89%) and "applicability" domain (38.17%) both exceeded 30%, while "rigor of development" domain (18.79%) and "editorial independence" domain (13.33%) were lower. Among the five domains in AGREE-China, "conflict of interest" domain (72.80%) was higher, followed by "usability/feasibility" domain (49.87%), while "scientificity/preciseness" domain (20.36%), "effectiveness/safety" domain (25.20%) and "economic efficiency" domain (14.40%) were lower. The weighted Kappa value of recommendations from the two tools was 0.694 (P<0.001), showing moderate consistency. ICC values of the same items and two evaluators were all greater than 0.85 (P<0.001) with high consistency. Three high-quality CPGs were consistently selected by the two tools. Conclusion AGREE Ⅱ holds high consistency with AGREE-China; however, AGREE-China is more suitable for the quality appraisal of Chinese CPGs or consensus. The methodological quality of CPGs or consensus for the management of FF in China needs to be further improved.
Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) developed rapidly since firstly introduced to clinical practice in 2002. In 2015, Experts Consensus for Transeatheter Aortic Valve Replacement (abbreviated as the Consensus) helped TAVR develop normatively and safely in China. This article interpreted the Consensus in combination of new evolutions of TAVR field: first, the indications of TAVR expand from inoperative and high risk patients to the intermediate risk patients; second, although the Consensus recommended pre-dilation with balloon of modest size, the necessity of pre-dilation is under debate; third, the Consensus pointed out main complications of TAVR, and the main strategies to avoid complications are careful pre-procedural analysis and development of new device; fourth, our experts had made outstanding contribution to TAVR in the treatment of patients with bicuspid aortic valve, which still has many problems to be solved urgently.
Retinopathy of prematurity (ROP) is a retinal angioproliferative disease that occurs in premature and low birth weight infants, and is the most common eye disease that causes blindness and low vision in infants. However, there is no systematic standardized guidance on the overall treatment strategy for ROP. Therefore, in order to standardize the treatment of ROP, the Ophthalmology Group of Pediatrics Society of Chinese Medical Association organized relevant domestic experts to put forward standardized opinions on the treatment of ROP in China after repeated discussion, so as to provide clinicians with reference and application in clinical practice.
Clinical practice guidelines are decision-making tools for bridging the gap between current best evidence and clinical practice. Studies have shown poor clinical applicability of existing guidelines, which may not be solved by improving the quality of guidelines alone. National medical management service guidance center is developing clinical practice guidelines of clinical evaluation system of construction projects, based on evidence-based method formulated by the target users of clinical guidelines evaluators’ applicability evaluation system of clinical practice guidelines. It aims to identify guidelines with high clinical applicability and provide the evaluation results of clinical applicability to developers and revisers of clinical guidelines, and then optimize the development and update, eventually improving the clinical applicability of guides and promote Chinese clinical guidelines in clinical application.
ObjectiveTo compare the recommended medicines from malignancy guidelines/consensuses with essential medicines from the 2023 World Health Organization Model List of Essential Medicines (WHO-EML) and the 2018 National Essential Medicine List (NEML) in differences and similarities. MethodsTen guideline databases/association websites including Guidelines International Network, and the American Cancer Society, etc. were systematically searched until July 2023. The latest guidelines/consensuses for ten malignant tumors were screened, including lung cancer, liver cancer, stomach cancer, and other cancers. Recommended medicines were extracted from guidelines/consensuses and compared with WHO and Chinese essential medicines. ResultsA total of 163 guidelines/consensuses were included, extracting 244 recommended medicines, 12 categories, mainly antineoplastic and immunomodulating agents (190 medicines, 10 subcategories). For the 244 recommended medicines, 29.92% (73/244) were included in WHO-EML and 23.36% (57/244) were included in NEML, among which 45 medicines were included both in WHO-EML and NEML, 27 in WHO-EML only, 11 in NEML only, and 161 in neither. ConclusionThe number of recommended medicines in WHO-EML/NEML for ten malignancies is low, and the number in NEML is even much lower than that in WHO-EML. When adjusting medicines for malignant tumors in NEML, reference can be made to specific guidelines/consensuses and WHO-EML to ensure timely inclusion of applicable medicines and strengthen the role of essential medicines in meeting basic medical needs and rational use.