Cargando…
What information can we gain from the quality appraisal of guidelines with physical activity recommendations for cancer patients?A systematic review using the AGREE II and AGREE-REX tools
PURPOSE: There has been growing amount of evidence supporting the benefits of physical activity (PA) on oncological patients’ cancer-related health outcomes. Although guidelines on cancer rehabilitation are widely available, the varying quality and practical applicability limited the clinical applic...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
2023
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9811039/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36598576 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00520-022-07567-5 |
_version_ | 1784863443575111680 |
---|---|
author | Zhou, Xue Yang, Yujie Li, Conghui Gu, Shanshan Hou, Weiqian Lai, Xigui Zhai, Liwen Zhu, Yi |
author_facet | Zhou, Xue Yang, Yujie Li, Conghui Gu, Shanshan Hou, Weiqian Lai, Xigui Zhai, Liwen Zhu, Yi |
author_sort | Zhou, Xue |
collection | PubMed |
description | PURPOSE: There has been growing amount of evidence supporting the benefits of physical activity (PA) on oncological patients’ cancer-related health outcomes. Although guidelines on cancer rehabilitation are widely available, the varying quality and practical applicability limited the clinical application of PA recommendations. To assist the future development of guidelines, in this systematic review, we evaluated the quality and applicability of current cancer rehabilitation guidelines with PA recommendations and synthesized PA recommendations for the oncological population. METHODS: A systematic search was conducted in PubMed, CINAHL, PEDro, EMBASE, and guideline repositories to identify guidelines with PA recommendations for cancer patients from 1 May 2016 to 1 June 2022. The quality of included guidelines was appraised using the tools “Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation II” (AGREE II) and AGREE-REX (Recommendation Excellence). PA recommendations were synthesized from the guidelines. RESULTS: Sixteen guidelines were extracted. The AGREE II domain “clarity of presentation” obtained the highest score, while “applicability” received the lowest, ranging from 33.33% to 98.58%. The AGREE-REX domains “values and preferences” and “implementability” generally scored lower and ranged from 45.83% to 74.17% and 55% to 88.33%, respectively. Eight high-quality guidelines were identified, and the included PA recommendations were extracted. CONCLUSION: There were some disparities in the quality of the included guidelines. Methodological weaknesses were commonly observed in domains “applicability,” “values and preferences,” and “implementability”; particular attention should be given to these domains when developing future guidelines. Furthermore, this analysis indicated that more rigorous, high-quality studies are needed to generate evidence for supporting PA recommendations and provide guidance on research gaps in the field of cancer rehabilitation. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s00520-022-07567-5. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-9811039 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2023 |
publisher | Springer Berlin Heidelberg |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-98110392023-01-04 What information can we gain from the quality appraisal of guidelines with physical activity recommendations for cancer patients?A systematic review using the AGREE II and AGREE-REX tools Zhou, Xue Yang, Yujie Li, Conghui Gu, Shanshan Hou, Weiqian Lai, Xigui Zhai, Liwen Zhu, Yi Support Care Cancer Review PURPOSE: There has been growing amount of evidence supporting the benefits of physical activity (PA) on oncological patients’ cancer-related health outcomes. Although guidelines on cancer rehabilitation are widely available, the varying quality and practical applicability limited the clinical application of PA recommendations. To assist the future development of guidelines, in this systematic review, we evaluated the quality and applicability of current cancer rehabilitation guidelines with PA recommendations and synthesized PA recommendations for the oncological population. METHODS: A systematic search was conducted in PubMed, CINAHL, PEDro, EMBASE, and guideline repositories to identify guidelines with PA recommendations for cancer patients from 1 May 2016 to 1 June 2022. The quality of included guidelines was appraised using the tools “Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation II” (AGREE II) and AGREE-REX (Recommendation Excellence). PA recommendations were synthesized from the guidelines. RESULTS: Sixteen guidelines were extracted. The AGREE II domain “clarity of presentation” obtained the highest score, while “applicability” received the lowest, ranging from 33.33% to 98.58%. The AGREE-REX domains “values and preferences” and “implementability” generally scored lower and ranged from 45.83% to 74.17% and 55% to 88.33%, respectively. Eight high-quality guidelines were identified, and the included PA recommendations were extracted. CONCLUSION: There were some disparities in the quality of the included guidelines. Methodological weaknesses were commonly observed in domains “applicability,” “values and preferences,” and “implementability”; particular attention should be given to these domains when developing future guidelines. Furthermore, this analysis indicated that more rigorous, high-quality studies are needed to generate evidence for supporting PA recommendations and provide guidance on research gaps in the field of cancer rehabilitation. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s00520-022-07567-5. Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2023-01-04 2023 /pmc/articles/PMC9811039/ /pubmed/36598576 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00520-022-07567-5 Text en © The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2022, Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law. This article is made available via the PMC Open Access Subset for unrestricted research re-use and secondary analysis in any form or by any means with acknowledgement of the original source. These permissions are granted for the duration of the World Health Organization (WHO) declaration of COVID-19 as a global pandemic. |
spellingShingle | Review Zhou, Xue Yang, Yujie Li, Conghui Gu, Shanshan Hou, Weiqian Lai, Xigui Zhai, Liwen Zhu, Yi What information can we gain from the quality appraisal of guidelines with physical activity recommendations for cancer patients?A systematic review using the AGREE II and AGREE-REX tools |
title | What information can we gain from the quality appraisal of guidelines with physical activity recommendations for cancer patients?A systematic review using the AGREE II and AGREE-REX tools |
title_full | What information can we gain from the quality appraisal of guidelines with physical activity recommendations for cancer patients?A systematic review using the AGREE II and AGREE-REX tools |
title_fullStr | What information can we gain from the quality appraisal of guidelines with physical activity recommendations for cancer patients?A systematic review using the AGREE II and AGREE-REX tools |
title_full_unstemmed | What information can we gain from the quality appraisal of guidelines with physical activity recommendations for cancer patients?A systematic review using the AGREE II and AGREE-REX tools |
title_short | What information can we gain from the quality appraisal of guidelines with physical activity recommendations for cancer patients?A systematic review using the AGREE II and AGREE-REX tools |
title_sort | what information can we gain from the quality appraisal of guidelines with physical activity recommendations for cancer patients?a systematic review using the agree ii and agree-rex tools |
topic | Review |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9811039/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36598576 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00520-022-07567-5 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT zhouxue whatinformationcanwegainfromthequalityappraisalofguidelineswithphysicalactivityrecommendationsforcancerpatientsasystematicreviewusingtheagreeiiandagreerextools AT yangyujie whatinformationcanwegainfromthequalityappraisalofguidelineswithphysicalactivityrecommendationsforcancerpatientsasystematicreviewusingtheagreeiiandagreerextools AT liconghui whatinformationcanwegainfromthequalityappraisalofguidelineswithphysicalactivityrecommendationsforcancerpatientsasystematicreviewusingtheagreeiiandagreerextools AT gushanshan whatinformationcanwegainfromthequalityappraisalofguidelineswithphysicalactivityrecommendationsforcancerpatientsasystematicreviewusingtheagreeiiandagreerextools AT houweiqian whatinformationcanwegainfromthequalityappraisalofguidelineswithphysicalactivityrecommendationsforcancerpatientsasystematicreviewusingtheagreeiiandagreerextools AT laixigui whatinformationcanwegainfromthequalityappraisalofguidelineswithphysicalactivityrecommendationsforcancerpatientsasystematicreviewusingtheagreeiiandagreerextools AT zhailiwen whatinformationcanwegainfromthequalityappraisalofguidelineswithphysicalactivityrecommendationsforcancerpatientsasystematicreviewusingtheagreeiiandagreerextools AT zhuyi whatinformationcanwegainfromthequalityappraisalofguidelineswithphysicalactivityrecommendationsforcancerpatientsasystematicreviewusingtheagreeiiandagreerextools |