Cargando…

Quality assessment of clinical practice guidelines in Kenya using the AGREE II tool: a methodological review

OBJECTIVE: To assess the quality of available and accessible national Clinical Practice Guidelines (CPGs) in Kenya using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation II (AGREE II) tool. METHODS: We searched the websites of the Kenyan Ministry of Health, professional associations and conta...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Sagam, Caleb Kimutai, Were, Lisa M, Otieno, Jenifer A, Mulaku, Mercy N, Kariuki, Simon, Ochodo, Eleanor
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BMJ Publishing Group 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10335456/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37429677
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2023-074510
_version_ 1785071004096135168
author Sagam, Caleb Kimutai
Were, Lisa M
Otieno, Jenifer A
Mulaku, Mercy N
Kariuki, Simon
Ochodo, Eleanor
author_facet Sagam, Caleb Kimutai
Were, Lisa M
Otieno, Jenifer A
Mulaku, Mercy N
Kariuki, Simon
Ochodo, Eleanor
author_sort Sagam, Caleb Kimutai
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVE: To assess the quality of available and accessible national Clinical Practice Guidelines (CPGs) in Kenya using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation II (AGREE II) tool. METHODS: We searched the websites of the Kenyan Ministry of Health, professional associations and contacted experts in relevant organisations. Our scope was guidelines on maternal, neonatal, nutritional disorders, injuries, communicable and non-communicable diseases in Kenya published in the last 5 years until 30 June 2022. Study selection and data extraction were done by three independent reviewers with disagreements resolved via discussion or with a senior reviewer. We conducted a quality assessment using the online English version of AGREE II tool across six domains. Descriptive statistics were analysed using Stata software V.17. The primary outcome was the methodological quality of the included CPGs assessed by the AGREE II tool score. RESULTS: We retrieved 95 CPGs and included 24 in the analysis after screening for eligibility. The CPGs scored best in clarity of presentation and least in the rigour of development. In descending order, the appraisal scores (mean and CI) per domain were as follows: Clarity of presentation 82.96% (95% CI 78.35% to 87.57%) with all guidelines scoring above 50%. Scope and purpose 61.75% (95% CI 54.19% to 69.31%) with seven guidelines scoring less than 50%. Stakeholder involvement 45.25% (95% CI 40.01% to 50.49%) with 16 CPGs scoring less than 50%. Applicability domain 19.88% (95% CI 13.32% to 26.43%) with only one CPG scoring above 50%. Editorial independence 6.92% (95% CI 3.47% to 10.37%) with no CPG scoring above 50% and rigour of development 3% (95% CI 0.61% to 5.39%) with no CPG scoring at least 50%. CONCLUSION: Our findings suggest that the quality of CPGs in Kenya is limited mainly by the rigour of development, editorial independence, applicability and stakeholder involvement. Training initiatives on evidence-based methodology among guideline developers are needed to improve the overall quality of CPGs for better patient care.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10335456
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher BMJ Publishing Group
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-103354562023-07-12 Quality assessment of clinical practice guidelines in Kenya using the AGREE II tool: a methodological review Sagam, Caleb Kimutai Were, Lisa M Otieno, Jenifer A Mulaku, Mercy N Kariuki, Simon Ochodo, Eleanor BMJ Open Public Health OBJECTIVE: To assess the quality of available and accessible national Clinical Practice Guidelines (CPGs) in Kenya using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation II (AGREE II) tool. METHODS: We searched the websites of the Kenyan Ministry of Health, professional associations and contacted experts in relevant organisations. Our scope was guidelines on maternal, neonatal, nutritional disorders, injuries, communicable and non-communicable diseases in Kenya published in the last 5 years until 30 June 2022. Study selection and data extraction were done by three independent reviewers with disagreements resolved via discussion or with a senior reviewer. We conducted a quality assessment using the online English version of AGREE II tool across six domains. Descriptive statistics were analysed using Stata software V.17. The primary outcome was the methodological quality of the included CPGs assessed by the AGREE II tool score. RESULTS: We retrieved 95 CPGs and included 24 in the analysis after screening for eligibility. The CPGs scored best in clarity of presentation and least in the rigour of development. In descending order, the appraisal scores (mean and CI) per domain were as follows: Clarity of presentation 82.96% (95% CI 78.35% to 87.57%) with all guidelines scoring above 50%. Scope and purpose 61.75% (95% CI 54.19% to 69.31%) with seven guidelines scoring less than 50%. Stakeholder involvement 45.25% (95% CI 40.01% to 50.49%) with 16 CPGs scoring less than 50%. Applicability domain 19.88% (95% CI 13.32% to 26.43%) with only one CPG scoring above 50%. Editorial independence 6.92% (95% CI 3.47% to 10.37%) with no CPG scoring above 50% and rigour of development 3% (95% CI 0.61% to 5.39%) with no CPG scoring at least 50%. CONCLUSION: Our findings suggest that the quality of CPGs in Kenya is limited mainly by the rigour of development, editorial independence, applicability and stakeholder involvement. Training initiatives on evidence-based methodology among guideline developers are needed to improve the overall quality of CPGs for better patient care. BMJ Publishing Group 2023-07-10 /pmc/articles/PMC10335456/ /pubmed/37429677 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2023-074510 Text en © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2023. Re-use permitted under CC BY. Published by BMJ. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 Unported (CC BY 4.0) license, which permits others to copy, redistribute, remix, transform and build upon this work for any purpose, provided the original work is properly cited, a link to the licence is given, and indication of whether changes were made. See: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
spellingShingle Public Health
Sagam, Caleb Kimutai
Were, Lisa M
Otieno, Jenifer A
Mulaku, Mercy N
Kariuki, Simon
Ochodo, Eleanor
Quality assessment of clinical practice guidelines in Kenya using the AGREE II tool: a methodological review
title Quality assessment of clinical practice guidelines in Kenya using the AGREE II tool: a methodological review
title_full Quality assessment of clinical practice guidelines in Kenya using the AGREE II tool: a methodological review
title_fullStr Quality assessment of clinical practice guidelines in Kenya using the AGREE II tool: a methodological review
title_full_unstemmed Quality assessment of clinical practice guidelines in Kenya using the AGREE II tool: a methodological review
title_short Quality assessment of clinical practice guidelines in Kenya using the AGREE II tool: a methodological review
title_sort quality assessment of clinical practice guidelines in kenya using the agree ii tool: a methodological review
topic Public Health
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10335456/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37429677
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2023-074510
work_keys_str_mv AT sagamcalebkimutai qualityassessmentofclinicalpracticeguidelinesinkenyausingtheagreeiitoolamethodologicalreview
AT werelisam qualityassessmentofclinicalpracticeguidelinesinkenyausingtheagreeiitoolamethodologicalreview
AT otienojenifera qualityassessmentofclinicalpracticeguidelinesinkenyausingtheagreeiitoolamethodologicalreview
AT mulakumercyn qualityassessmentofclinicalpracticeguidelinesinkenyausingtheagreeiitoolamethodologicalreview
AT kariukisimon qualityassessmentofclinicalpracticeguidelinesinkenyausingtheagreeiitoolamethodologicalreview
AT ochodoeleanor qualityassessmentofclinicalpracticeguidelinesinkenyausingtheagreeiitoolamethodologicalreview