Quality of Palliative Care Guidelines in Patients with Heart Failure: A Systematic Review of Quality Appraisal using AGREE II Instrument

OBJECTIVES: While the principles for developing clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) are well established, the quality of published guidelines is very diverse. The present study was conducted to evaluate the quality of existing CPGs in palliative care for heart failure patients. MATERIAL AND METHODS: The study was conducted according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-analyses. A systematic search was conducted in the Excerpta Medica Database, MEDLINE/PubMed, CINAHL databases and Guideline internet sites: National Institute for Clinical Excellence, National Guideline Clearinghouse, Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network, Guidelines International Network and National Health and Medical Research Council for CPGs published through April 2021. Criteria for including CPGs were: Containing palliative measures for patients with heart failure over 18 years old and preferably interprofessional guidelines that focus on only one dimension of palliative care or focus on diagnosis, definition and treatment were excluded from the study. After initial screening, five appraisers rated the quality of the final selection of CPGs using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation, 2(nd) edition (AGREE II). RESULTS: From 1501 records, seven guidelines were selected for analysis. The ‘scope and purpose’ and ‘clarity of presentation’ domains obtained the highest mean and ‘rigor of development’ and ‘applicability’ domains obtained the lowest mean scores. Three categories of recommendations were: (1) Strongly recommended (guidelines 1, 3, 6 and 7); (2) recommended with modifications (guideline 2) and (3) not recommended (guidelines 4 and 5). CONCLUSION: Clinical guidelines for palliative care in patients with heart failure were of moderate-to-high quality, with the main deficiencies occurring in the rigor of development and applicability domains. The results inform clinicians and guideline developers of the strengths and weaknesses of each CPG. To improve the quality of palliative care CPGs in the future, it is recommended that developers pay detailed attention to all domains of the AGREE II criteria. Funding agent: Isfahan University of Medical Sciences. (IR.MUI.NUREMA.REC.1400.123)