Cargando…

Assessing methodological quality of Russian clinical practice guidelines and introducing AGREE II instrument in Russia

BACKGROUND: There are multiple organisations in Russia that publish clinical practice guidelines (CPGs). The demand for CPGs and appreciation of their role in healthcare provision has been steadily growing. However, quality and methodology of development of CPGs have not been systematically addresse...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Lienhard, Dina Ayratova, Kisser, Lidiya Vacheslavovna, Ziganshina, Liliya Eugenevna
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Public Library of Science 2018
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6133363/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30204760
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0203328
_version_ 1783354494567841792
author Lienhard, Dina Ayratova
Kisser, Lidiya Vacheslavovna
Ziganshina, Liliya Eugenevna
author_facet Lienhard, Dina Ayratova
Kisser, Lidiya Vacheslavovna
Ziganshina, Liliya Eugenevna
author_sort Lienhard, Dina Ayratova
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: There are multiple organisations in Russia that publish clinical practice guidelines (CPGs). The demand for CPGs and appreciation of their role in healthcare provision has been steadily growing. However, quality and methodology of development of CPGs have not been systematically addressed. AIM: To analyse the quality of Russian-produced CPGs for surgical treatment of hepatic-pancreatic-biliary diseases. METHODS: We searched Russian databases for CPGs, published between 2013 and 2017. We identified 6 relevant documents that met our inclusion criteria. We approached four experts in the field with written and verbal instructions on the use of the AGREE II questionnaire. RESULTS: All six CPGs received the highest domain scores for the domain Clarity of Presentation (46%–80%). The lowest domain scores were for the domain Editorial Independence (6%-25%). Overall, the experts put the highest total sum scores to the CPG for treating chronic pancreatitis (70%), while the lowest total sum score was attributed to the CPG for treating acute cholangitis (22%). CONCLUSIONS: The overall quality of CPGs, as assessed by the four experts with the AGREE II instrument, was low. The highest scoring, best organized and most comprehensive and straightforward CPG was the one for chronic pancreatitis. The AGREE II instrument should be considered for use in Russia by guideline developers to assess existing CPGs and inform the creation of new guidelines.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6133363
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2018
publisher Public Library of Science
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-61333632018-09-27 Assessing methodological quality of Russian clinical practice guidelines and introducing AGREE II instrument in Russia Lienhard, Dina Ayratova Kisser, Lidiya Vacheslavovna Ziganshina, Liliya Eugenevna PLoS One Research Article BACKGROUND: There are multiple organisations in Russia that publish clinical practice guidelines (CPGs). The demand for CPGs and appreciation of their role in healthcare provision has been steadily growing. However, quality and methodology of development of CPGs have not been systematically addressed. AIM: To analyse the quality of Russian-produced CPGs for surgical treatment of hepatic-pancreatic-biliary diseases. METHODS: We searched Russian databases for CPGs, published between 2013 and 2017. We identified 6 relevant documents that met our inclusion criteria. We approached four experts in the field with written and verbal instructions on the use of the AGREE II questionnaire. RESULTS: All six CPGs received the highest domain scores for the domain Clarity of Presentation (46%–80%). The lowest domain scores were for the domain Editorial Independence (6%-25%). Overall, the experts put the highest total sum scores to the CPG for treating chronic pancreatitis (70%), while the lowest total sum score was attributed to the CPG for treating acute cholangitis (22%). CONCLUSIONS: The overall quality of CPGs, as assessed by the four experts with the AGREE II instrument, was low. The highest scoring, best organized and most comprehensive and straightforward CPG was the one for chronic pancreatitis. The AGREE II instrument should be considered for use in Russia by guideline developers to assess existing CPGs and inform the creation of new guidelines. Public Library of Science 2018-09-11 /pmc/articles/PMC6133363/ /pubmed/30204760 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0203328 Text en © 2018 Lienhard et al http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
spellingShingle Research Article
Lienhard, Dina Ayratova
Kisser, Lidiya Vacheslavovna
Ziganshina, Liliya Eugenevna
Assessing methodological quality of Russian clinical practice guidelines and introducing AGREE II instrument in Russia
title Assessing methodological quality of Russian clinical practice guidelines and introducing AGREE II instrument in Russia
title_full Assessing methodological quality of Russian clinical practice guidelines and introducing AGREE II instrument in Russia
title_fullStr Assessing methodological quality of Russian clinical practice guidelines and introducing AGREE II instrument in Russia
title_full_unstemmed Assessing methodological quality of Russian clinical practice guidelines and introducing AGREE II instrument in Russia
title_short Assessing methodological quality of Russian clinical practice guidelines and introducing AGREE II instrument in Russia
title_sort assessing methodological quality of russian clinical practice guidelines and introducing agree ii instrument in russia
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6133363/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30204760
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0203328
work_keys_str_mv AT lienharddinaayratova assessingmethodologicalqualityofrussianclinicalpracticeguidelinesandintroducingagreeiiinstrumentinrussia
AT kisserlidiyavacheslavovna assessingmethodologicalqualityofrussianclinicalpracticeguidelinesandintroducingagreeiiinstrumentinrussia
AT ziganshinaliliyaeugenevna assessingmethodologicalqualityofrussianclinicalpracticeguidelinesandintroducingagreeiiinstrumentinrussia