Cargando…
A Critical Appraisal of Evidence- and Consensus-Based Guidelines for Actinic Keratosis
Actinic keratoses (AK) are common lesions of the skin that can be effectively treated with several lesion- and field-directed treatments. Clinical practice guidelines assist physicians in choosing the appropriate treatment options for their patients. Here, we aimed to systematically identify and eva...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
MDPI
2021
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7985770/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33617511 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/curroncol28010093 |
_version_ | 1783668318613274624 |
---|---|
author | Wessely, Anja Steeb, Theresa Heppt, Franz Hornung, Annkathrin Kaufmann, Matthias D. Koch, Elias A. T. Toussaint, Frédéric Erdmann, Michael Berking, Carola Heppt, Markus V. |
author_facet | Wessely, Anja Steeb, Theresa Heppt, Franz Hornung, Annkathrin Kaufmann, Matthias D. Koch, Elias A. T. Toussaint, Frédéric Erdmann, Michael Berking, Carola Heppt, Markus V. |
author_sort | Wessely, Anja |
collection | PubMed |
description | Actinic keratoses (AK) are common lesions of the skin that can be effectively treated with several lesion- and field-directed treatments. Clinical practice guidelines assist physicians in choosing the appropriate treatment options for their patients. Here, we aimed to systematically identify and evaluate the methodological quality of currently available guidelines for AK. Guidelines published within the last 5 years were identified in a systematic search of guideline databases, Medline and Embase. Then, six independent reviewers evaluated the methodological quality using the tools “Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation” (AGREE II) and “Recommendation EXcellence” (AGREE-REX). The Kruskal–Wallis (H) test was used to explore differences among subgroups and Spearman’s correlation to examine the relationship between individual domains. Three guidelines developed by consortia from Canada, Germany and the United Kingdom were eligible for the evaluation. The German guideline achieved the highest scores, fulfilling 65 to 92% of the criteria in AGREE II and 67 to 84% in AGREE-REX, whereas the Canadian guideline scored 31 to 71% of the criteria in AGREE II and 33 to 46% in AGREE-REX. The domains “stakeholder involvement“ and “values and preferences“ were identified as methodological weaknesses requiring particular attention and improvement in future guideline efforts. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-7985770 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2021 |
publisher | MDPI |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-79857702021-03-24 A Critical Appraisal of Evidence- and Consensus-Based Guidelines for Actinic Keratosis Wessely, Anja Steeb, Theresa Heppt, Franz Hornung, Annkathrin Kaufmann, Matthias D. Koch, Elias A. T. Toussaint, Frédéric Erdmann, Michael Berking, Carola Heppt, Markus V. Curr Oncol Article Actinic keratoses (AK) are common lesions of the skin that can be effectively treated with several lesion- and field-directed treatments. Clinical practice guidelines assist physicians in choosing the appropriate treatment options for their patients. Here, we aimed to systematically identify and evaluate the methodological quality of currently available guidelines for AK. Guidelines published within the last 5 years were identified in a systematic search of guideline databases, Medline and Embase. Then, six independent reviewers evaluated the methodological quality using the tools “Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation” (AGREE II) and “Recommendation EXcellence” (AGREE-REX). The Kruskal–Wallis (H) test was used to explore differences among subgroups and Spearman’s correlation to examine the relationship between individual domains. Three guidelines developed by consortia from Canada, Germany and the United Kingdom were eligible for the evaluation. The German guideline achieved the highest scores, fulfilling 65 to 92% of the criteria in AGREE II and 67 to 84% in AGREE-REX, whereas the Canadian guideline scored 31 to 71% of the criteria in AGREE II and 33 to 46% in AGREE-REX. The domains “stakeholder involvement“ and “values and preferences“ were identified as methodological weaknesses requiring particular attention and improvement in future guideline efforts. MDPI 2021-02-19 /pmc/articles/PMC7985770/ /pubmed/33617511 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/curroncol28010093 Text en © 2021 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). |
spellingShingle | Article Wessely, Anja Steeb, Theresa Heppt, Franz Hornung, Annkathrin Kaufmann, Matthias D. Koch, Elias A. T. Toussaint, Frédéric Erdmann, Michael Berking, Carola Heppt, Markus V. A Critical Appraisal of Evidence- and Consensus-Based Guidelines for Actinic Keratosis |
title | A Critical Appraisal of Evidence- and Consensus-Based Guidelines for Actinic Keratosis |
title_full | A Critical Appraisal of Evidence- and Consensus-Based Guidelines for Actinic Keratosis |
title_fullStr | A Critical Appraisal of Evidence- and Consensus-Based Guidelines for Actinic Keratosis |
title_full_unstemmed | A Critical Appraisal of Evidence- and Consensus-Based Guidelines for Actinic Keratosis |
title_short | A Critical Appraisal of Evidence- and Consensus-Based Guidelines for Actinic Keratosis |
title_sort | critical appraisal of evidence- and consensus-based guidelines for actinic keratosis |
topic | Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7985770/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33617511 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/curroncol28010093 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT wesselyanja acriticalappraisalofevidenceandconsensusbasedguidelinesforactinickeratosis AT steebtheresa acriticalappraisalofevidenceandconsensusbasedguidelinesforactinickeratosis AT hepptfranz acriticalappraisalofevidenceandconsensusbasedguidelinesforactinickeratosis AT hornungannkathrin acriticalappraisalofevidenceandconsensusbasedguidelinesforactinickeratosis AT kaufmannmatthiasd acriticalappraisalofevidenceandconsensusbasedguidelinesforactinickeratosis AT kocheliasat acriticalappraisalofevidenceandconsensusbasedguidelinesforactinickeratosis AT toussaintfrederic acriticalappraisalofevidenceandconsensusbasedguidelinesforactinickeratosis AT erdmannmichael acriticalappraisalofevidenceandconsensusbasedguidelinesforactinickeratosis AT berkingcarola acriticalappraisalofevidenceandconsensusbasedguidelinesforactinickeratosis AT hepptmarkusv acriticalappraisalofevidenceandconsensusbasedguidelinesforactinickeratosis AT wesselyanja criticalappraisalofevidenceandconsensusbasedguidelinesforactinickeratosis AT steebtheresa criticalappraisalofevidenceandconsensusbasedguidelinesforactinickeratosis AT hepptfranz criticalappraisalofevidenceandconsensusbasedguidelinesforactinickeratosis AT hornungannkathrin criticalappraisalofevidenceandconsensusbasedguidelinesforactinickeratosis AT kaufmannmatthiasd criticalappraisalofevidenceandconsensusbasedguidelinesforactinickeratosis AT kocheliasat criticalappraisalofevidenceandconsensusbasedguidelinesforactinickeratosis AT toussaintfrederic criticalappraisalofevidenceandconsensusbasedguidelinesforactinickeratosis AT erdmannmichael criticalappraisalofevidenceandconsensusbasedguidelinesforactinickeratosis AT berkingcarola criticalappraisalofevidenceandconsensusbasedguidelinesforactinickeratosis AT hepptmarkusv criticalappraisalofevidenceandconsensusbasedguidelinesforactinickeratosis |