Cargando…

A critical appraisal of the quality of adult dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry guidelines in osteoporosis using the AGREE II tool: An EuroAIM initiative

OBJECTIVES: Dual energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) is the most widely used technique to measure bone mineral density (BMD). Appropriate and accurate use of DXA is of great importance, and several guidelines have been developed in the last years. Our aim was to evaluate the quality of published guide...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Messina, Carmelo, Bignotti, Bianca, Bazzocchi, Alberto, Phan, Catherine M., Tagliafico, Alberto, Guglielmi, Giuseppe, Sardanelli, Francesco, Sconfienza, Luca Maria
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2017
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5438319/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28432574
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s13244-017-0553-6
_version_ 1783237731860611072
author Messina, Carmelo
Bignotti, Bianca
Bazzocchi, Alberto
Phan, Catherine M.
Tagliafico, Alberto
Guglielmi, Giuseppe
Sardanelli, Francesco
Sconfienza, Luca Maria
author_facet Messina, Carmelo
Bignotti, Bianca
Bazzocchi, Alberto
Phan, Catherine M.
Tagliafico, Alberto
Guglielmi, Giuseppe
Sardanelli, Francesco
Sconfienza, Luca Maria
author_sort Messina, Carmelo
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVES: Dual energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) is the most widely used technique to measure bone mineral density (BMD). Appropriate and accurate use of DXA is of great importance, and several guidelines have been developed in the last years. Our aim was to evaluate the quality of published guidelines on DXA for adults. METHODS: Between June and July 2016 we conducted an online search for DXA guidelines, which were evaluated by four independent readers blinded to each other using the AGREE II instrument. A fifth independent reviewer calculated scores per each domain and agreement between reviewers’ scores. RESULTS: Four out of 59 guidelines met inclusion criteria and were included. They were published between 2005 and 2014. Three out of four guidelines reached a high level of quality, having at least five domain scores higher than 60%. Domain 1 (Scope and Purpose) achieved the highest result (total score = 86.8 ± 3.7%). Domain 6 (Editorial Independence) had the lowest score (total score = 54.7 ± 12.5%). Interobserver agreement ranged from fair (0.230) to good (0.702). CONCLUSIONS: Overall, the quality of DXA guidelines is satisfactory when evaluated using the AGREE II instrument. The Editorial Independence domain was the most critical, thus deserving more attention when developing future guidelines. MAIN MESSAGES: • Three of four guidelines on DXA had a high quality level (>60%). • Scope/purpose had the highest score (86.8 ± 3.7%). • Editorial Independence had the lowest score (54.7 ± 12.5%). • Interobserver agreement ranged from fair (0.230) to good (0.702). ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s13244-017-0553-6) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5438319
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2017
publisher Springer Berlin Heidelberg
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-54383192017-06-06 A critical appraisal of the quality of adult dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry guidelines in osteoporosis using the AGREE II tool: An EuroAIM initiative Messina, Carmelo Bignotti, Bianca Bazzocchi, Alberto Phan, Catherine M. Tagliafico, Alberto Guglielmi, Giuseppe Sardanelli, Francesco Sconfienza, Luca Maria Insights Imaging Original Article OBJECTIVES: Dual energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) is the most widely used technique to measure bone mineral density (BMD). Appropriate and accurate use of DXA is of great importance, and several guidelines have been developed in the last years. Our aim was to evaluate the quality of published guidelines on DXA for adults. METHODS: Between June and July 2016 we conducted an online search for DXA guidelines, which were evaluated by four independent readers blinded to each other using the AGREE II instrument. A fifth independent reviewer calculated scores per each domain and agreement between reviewers’ scores. RESULTS: Four out of 59 guidelines met inclusion criteria and were included. They were published between 2005 and 2014. Three out of four guidelines reached a high level of quality, having at least five domain scores higher than 60%. Domain 1 (Scope and Purpose) achieved the highest result (total score = 86.8 ± 3.7%). Domain 6 (Editorial Independence) had the lowest score (total score = 54.7 ± 12.5%). Interobserver agreement ranged from fair (0.230) to good (0.702). CONCLUSIONS: Overall, the quality of DXA guidelines is satisfactory when evaluated using the AGREE II instrument. The Editorial Independence domain was the most critical, thus deserving more attention when developing future guidelines. MAIN MESSAGES: • Three of four guidelines on DXA had a high quality level (>60%). • Scope/purpose had the highest score (86.8 ± 3.7%). • Editorial Independence had the lowest score (54.7 ± 12.5%). • Interobserver agreement ranged from fair (0.230) to good (0.702). ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s13244-017-0553-6) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2017-04-21 /pmc/articles/PMC5438319/ /pubmed/28432574 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s13244-017-0553-6 Text en © The Author(s) 2017 Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.
spellingShingle Original Article
Messina, Carmelo
Bignotti, Bianca
Bazzocchi, Alberto
Phan, Catherine M.
Tagliafico, Alberto
Guglielmi, Giuseppe
Sardanelli, Francesco
Sconfienza, Luca Maria
A critical appraisal of the quality of adult dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry guidelines in osteoporosis using the AGREE II tool: An EuroAIM initiative
title A critical appraisal of the quality of adult dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry guidelines in osteoporosis using the AGREE II tool: An EuroAIM initiative
title_full A critical appraisal of the quality of adult dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry guidelines in osteoporosis using the AGREE II tool: An EuroAIM initiative
title_fullStr A critical appraisal of the quality of adult dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry guidelines in osteoporosis using the AGREE II tool: An EuroAIM initiative
title_full_unstemmed A critical appraisal of the quality of adult dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry guidelines in osteoporosis using the AGREE II tool: An EuroAIM initiative
title_short A critical appraisal of the quality of adult dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry guidelines in osteoporosis using the AGREE II tool: An EuroAIM initiative
title_sort critical appraisal of the quality of adult dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry guidelines in osteoporosis using the agree ii tool: an euroaim initiative
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5438319/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28432574
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s13244-017-0553-6
work_keys_str_mv AT messinacarmelo acriticalappraisalofthequalityofadultdualenergyxrayabsorptiometryguidelinesinosteoporosisusingtheagreeiitoolaneuroaiminitiative
AT bignottibianca acriticalappraisalofthequalityofadultdualenergyxrayabsorptiometryguidelinesinosteoporosisusingtheagreeiitoolaneuroaiminitiative
AT bazzocchialberto acriticalappraisalofthequalityofadultdualenergyxrayabsorptiometryguidelinesinosteoporosisusingtheagreeiitoolaneuroaiminitiative
AT phancatherinem acriticalappraisalofthequalityofadultdualenergyxrayabsorptiometryguidelinesinosteoporosisusingtheagreeiitoolaneuroaiminitiative
AT tagliaficoalberto acriticalappraisalofthequalityofadultdualenergyxrayabsorptiometryguidelinesinosteoporosisusingtheagreeiitoolaneuroaiminitiative
AT guglielmigiuseppe acriticalappraisalofthequalityofadultdualenergyxrayabsorptiometryguidelinesinosteoporosisusingtheagreeiitoolaneuroaiminitiative
AT sardanellifrancesco acriticalappraisalofthequalityofadultdualenergyxrayabsorptiometryguidelinesinosteoporosisusingtheagreeiitoolaneuroaiminitiative
AT sconfienzalucamaria acriticalappraisalofthequalityofadultdualenergyxrayabsorptiometryguidelinesinosteoporosisusingtheagreeiitoolaneuroaiminitiative
AT messinacarmelo criticalappraisalofthequalityofadultdualenergyxrayabsorptiometryguidelinesinosteoporosisusingtheagreeiitoolaneuroaiminitiative
AT bignottibianca criticalappraisalofthequalityofadultdualenergyxrayabsorptiometryguidelinesinosteoporosisusingtheagreeiitoolaneuroaiminitiative
AT bazzocchialberto criticalappraisalofthequalityofadultdualenergyxrayabsorptiometryguidelinesinosteoporosisusingtheagreeiitoolaneuroaiminitiative
AT phancatherinem criticalappraisalofthequalityofadultdualenergyxrayabsorptiometryguidelinesinosteoporosisusingtheagreeiitoolaneuroaiminitiative
AT tagliaficoalberto criticalappraisalofthequalityofadultdualenergyxrayabsorptiometryguidelinesinosteoporosisusingtheagreeiitoolaneuroaiminitiative
AT guglielmigiuseppe criticalappraisalofthequalityofadultdualenergyxrayabsorptiometryguidelinesinosteoporosisusingtheagreeiitoolaneuroaiminitiative
AT sardanellifrancesco criticalappraisalofthequalityofadultdualenergyxrayabsorptiometryguidelinesinosteoporosisusingtheagreeiitoolaneuroaiminitiative
AT sconfienzalucamaria criticalappraisalofthequalityofadultdualenergyxrayabsorptiometryguidelinesinosteoporosisusingtheagreeiitoolaneuroaiminitiative