Cates Jeffrey R, Young David N, Guerriero David J, Jahn Warren T, Armine Jesse P, Korbett Alan B, Bowerman Daniel S, Porter Robert C, Sandman Terry, King Robert A
Private practice of chiropractic orthopedics, Oregon, IL 61061, USA.
J Manipulative Physiol Ther. 2003 Jun;26(5):282-6. doi: 10.1016/S0161-4754(03)00010-1.
To evaluate the quality of Recommended Clinical Protocols and Guidelines for the Practice of Chiropractic (ICA guidelines) published by the International Chiropractors Association (ICA), August, 2000.
The Appraisal Instrument for Clinical Guidelines (Cluzeau instrument) was applied to the ICA guidelines by 10 independent experienced evaluators. An independent, global assessment was also made by each evaluator.
Mean scores (with 95% confidence limit) for each of the instrument's 3 dimensions were Rigor of Development, 27% (5.1); Context and Content, 18.3% (9.4); and Application, 2% (3.9). The unanimous global assessment was "not recommended as suitable for utilization in practice." Comparison of the ICA guideline scores with the Council on Chiropractic Practice's Clinical Practice Guideline No. 1, Vertebral Subluxation in Chiropractic Practice (CCP guidelines) scores and Guidelines for Chiropractic Quality Assurance and Practice Parameters (Mercy guidelines) Cluzeau instrument-based scores revealed that the ICA guidelines received slightly higher scores than the CCP guidelines but substantially lower scores than the Mercy guidelines for all dimensions.
The ICA guidelines were assessed as not suitable for utilization in chiropractic practice.
评估国际脊骨神经科学会(ICA)于2000年8月发布的《脊骨神经科学临床实践推荐方案与指南》(ICA指南)的质量。
10名独立且经验丰富的评估人员运用临床指南评估工具(Cluzeau工具)对ICA指南进行评估。每位评估人员还进行了独立的整体评估。
该工具3个维度各自的平均得分(含95%置信区间)分别为:制定严谨性,27%(5.1);背景与内容,18.3%(9.4);应用,2%(3.9)。一致的整体评估结果为“不建议在实践中使用”。将ICA指南得分与脊骨神经科学实践委员会的《脊骨神经科学实践中的脊椎半脱位临床实践指南》第1号(CCP指南)得分以及基于Cluzeau工具的《脊骨神经科学质量保证与实践参数指南》(Mercy指南)得分相比较,结果显示ICA指南在所有维度上的得分略高于CCP指南,但远低于Mercy指南。
ICA指南被评估为不适合在脊骨神经科学实践中使用。