Cargando…
Systematic Review and Critical Evaluation of Quality of Clinical Practice Guidelines on Nutrition in Pregnancy
Objective: To report the quality and clinical heterogeneity of the published clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) on nutrition in pregnancy. Methods: MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, and ISI Web of Science databases were searched. The following aspects related to nutrition in pregnancy were addressed: specif...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
MDPI
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9778102/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36554014 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/healthcare10122490 |
_version_ | 1784856274177884160 |
---|---|
author | De Vito, Marika Alameddine, Sara Capannolo, Giulia Mappa, Ilenia Gualtieri, Paola Di Renzo, Laura De Lorenzo, Antonino D’ Antonio, Francesco Rizzo, Giuseppe |
author_facet | De Vito, Marika Alameddine, Sara Capannolo, Giulia Mappa, Ilenia Gualtieri, Paola Di Renzo, Laura De Lorenzo, Antonino D’ Antonio, Francesco Rizzo, Giuseppe |
author_sort | De Vito, Marika |
collection | PubMed |
description | Objective: To report the quality and clinical heterogeneity of the published clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) on nutrition in pregnancy. Methods: MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, and ISI Web of Science databases were searched. The following aspects related to nutrition in pregnancy were addressed: specific requirements during pregnancy, description of a balanced diet, weight gain, prevention of food-borne, nutrition in peculiar sub-groups of women, and maternal or perinatal outcomes. The assessment of the risk of bias and quality assessment of the included CPGs were performed using “The Appraisal of Guidelines for REsearch and Evaluation (AGREE II)” tool divided in six quality domains: scope and purpose, stakeholder involvement, rigor of development, clarity of presentation, applicability, editorial independence. Mean ± standard deviation (SD) was used to summarize the scores across all the guidelines per domain. The quality of each guideline was computed using the scoring system proposed by Amer et al. A cut-off of >60% was sued to define a CGP as recommended. Results: Eighteen CPGs were included. There was a substantial heterogeneity in the recommended dose for vitamins, folic acid, and micronutrient intake during pregnancy among the different published CPGs. 27.8% (5/18) of the CPGs recommended a daily intake of folic acid of 200 mcg, 38.8% (7/18) 400 mcg, 16.7% (3/18) 600 mcg while the remaining CPGs suggested dose between 400 and 600–800 mc per day. Adequate maternal hydration was advocated in the large majority of included CPGs, but a specific amount of water intake was not reported in 83.3% (15/18) cases. There was also significant heterogeneity in various other aspects of nutrition recommendation among the different CPGs, including gestational weight gain (55.5%), prevention of food-borne diseases in pregnancy (72.2%), nutrition in particular groups of pregnant women (83.3%), maternal and perinatal outcomes (72.2%). The AGREE II standardized domain scores for the first overall assessment (OA1) had a mean of 65% but only half scored more than 60%. Conclusion: The published CPGs on nutrition in pregnancy show an overall good methodology, but also a substantial heterogeneity as regard as different major aspects on nutrition in pregnancy. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-9778102 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | MDPI |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-97781022022-12-23 Systematic Review and Critical Evaluation of Quality of Clinical Practice Guidelines on Nutrition in Pregnancy De Vito, Marika Alameddine, Sara Capannolo, Giulia Mappa, Ilenia Gualtieri, Paola Di Renzo, Laura De Lorenzo, Antonino D’ Antonio, Francesco Rizzo, Giuseppe Healthcare (Basel) Review Objective: To report the quality and clinical heterogeneity of the published clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) on nutrition in pregnancy. Methods: MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, and ISI Web of Science databases were searched. The following aspects related to nutrition in pregnancy were addressed: specific requirements during pregnancy, description of a balanced diet, weight gain, prevention of food-borne, nutrition in peculiar sub-groups of women, and maternal or perinatal outcomes. The assessment of the risk of bias and quality assessment of the included CPGs were performed using “The Appraisal of Guidelines for REsearch and Evaluation (AGREE II)” tool divided in six quality domains: scope and purpose, stakeholder involvement, rigor of development, clarity of presentation, applicability, editorial independence. Mean ± standard deviation (SD) was used to summarize the scores across all the guidelines per domain. The quality of each guideline was computed using the scoring system proposed by Amer et al. A cut-off of >60% was sued to define a CGP as recommended. Results: Eighteen CPGs were included. There was a substantial heterogeneity in the recommended dose for vitamins, folic acid, and micronutrient intake during pregnancy among the different published CPGs. 27.8% (5/18) of the CPGs recommended a daily intake of folic acid of 200 mcg, 38.8% (7/18) 400 mcg, 16.7% (3/18) 600 mcg while the remaining CPGs suggested dose between 400 and 600–800 mc per day. Adequate maternal hydration was advocated in the large majority of included CPGs, but a specific amount of water intake was not reported in 83.3% (15/18) cases. There was also significant heterogeneity in various other aspects of nutrition recommendation among the different CPGs, including gestational weight gain (55.5%), prevention of food-borne diseases in pregnancy (72.2%), nutrition in particular groups of pregnant women (83.3%), maternal and perinatal outcomes (72.2%). The AGREE II standardized domain scores for the first overall assessment (OA1) had a mean of 65% but only half scored more than 60%. Conclusion: The published CPGs on nutrition in pregnancy show an overall good methodology, but also a substantial heterogeneity as regard as different major aspects on nutrition in pregnancy. MDPI 2022-12-09 /pmc/articles/PMC9778102/ /pubmed/36554014 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/healthcare10122490 Text en © 2022 by the authors. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/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 (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). |
spellingShingle | Review De Vito, Marika Alameddine, Sara Capannolo, Giulia Mappa, Ilenia Gualtieri, Paola Di Renzo, Laura De Lorenzo, Antonino D’ Antonio, Francesco Rizzo, Giuseppe Systematic Review and Critical Evaluation of Quality of Clinical Practice Guidelines on Nutrition in Pregnancy |
title | Systematic Review and Critical Evaluation of Quality of Clinical Practice Guidelines on Nutrition in Pregnancy |
title_full | Systematic Review and Critical Evaluation of Quality of Clinical Practice Guidelines on Nutrition in Pregnancy |
title_fullStr | Systematic Review and Critical Evaluation of Quality of Clinical Practice Guidelines on Nutrition in Pregnancy |
title_full_unstemmed | Systematic Review and Critical Evaluation of Quality of Clinical Practice Guidelines on Nutrition in Pregnancy |
title_short | Systematic Review and Critical Evaluation of Quality of Clinical Practice Guidelines on Nutrition in Pregnancy |
title_sort | systematic review and critical evaluation of quality of clinical practice guidelines on nutrition in pregnancy |
topic | Review |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9778102/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36554014 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/healthcare10122490 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT devitomarika systematicreviewandcriticalevaluationofqualityofclinicalpracticeguidelinesonnutritioninpregnancy AT alameddinesara systematicreviewandcriticalevaluationofqualityofclinicalpracticeguidelinesonnutritioninpregnancy AT capannologiulia systematicreviewandcriticalevaluationofqualityofclinicalpracticeguidelinesonnutritioninpregnancy AT mappailenia systematicreviewandcriticalevaluationofqualityofclinicalpracticeguidelinesonnutritioninpregnancy AT gualtieripaola systematicreviewandcriticalevaluationofqualityofclinicalpracticeguidelinesonnutritioninpregnancy AT direnzolaura systematicreviewandcriticalevaluationofqualityofclinicalpracticeguidelinesonnutritioninpregnancy AT delorenzoantonino systematicreviewandcriticalevaluationofqualityofclinicalpracticeguidelinesonnutritioninpregnancy AT dantoniofrancesco systematicreviewandcriticalevaluationofqualityofclinicalpracticeguidelinesonnutritioninpregnancy AT rizzogiuseppe systematicreviewandcriticalevaluationofqualityofclinicalpracticeguidelinesonnutritioninpregnancy |